Wexler, Gutierrez, Baldwin, Kucinich, and the People Call For Cheney Censure

Rep. Wexler Wants Cheney Impeachment Hearings

copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert

May I offer my sincerest gratitude to Representatives, Robert Wexler, Luis Gutierrez, and Tammy Baldwin.  These glorious members of the House Judiciary Committee, recently raised the volume on the issue of impeachment for Vice President Cheney.  The three invite us, the average citizen, to join them.  Please express your distress; sign the petition.  Call for Hearings. Without you the Vice President will continue to avoid an official and necessary censure.

Please sign the petition. Join Congressman Wexler’s Call For Cheney impeachment Hearings.

Please do not stop there.  Americans have seen what occurs when we are complacent.  For too long Congressman Dennis Kucinich spoke of what many thought obvious, and only a few listened.  

Throughout his term, Vice President, Richard B. Cheney acted on questionable  information.  He made decisions that many considered problematic.  Cheney “may” have committed numerous “high crimes and misdemeanors.”  However, no matter how many millions of Americans joined in the call to censure, the cry was hushed.  The mainstream media barely and rarely spoke of the measure.  Only a scant number of Representatives endorsed House Resolution 333, submitted by the Representative from Ohio.

As House leaders sat silent, Vice President Cheney continued to violate the doctrine known as the United States Constitution.  He did so without charge or challenge.  

For years, Richard B. Cheney declared the Executive Branch has “supreme” power.  Many scoffed; however, Congress initiated no formal action.  The Vice President did not stop doing as he pleased.  Complaints from the House and the Senate mounted; yet, Cheney remained safe from censure.

It seemed the Vice President’s skin, and his contempt for law, were impenetrable.  Richard B. Cheney refused and rebuffs accountability.

The Vice President prefers aggression and plans attacks against other Nation States.  Until now Congress, and the American people stood by.  Finally, the tide may have turned.  

Each day, Americans and Legislators discover much occurred within the White House walls over the last seven years.  We are increasingly certain the Vice President acted with dubious authority.  The more we learn, the more we realize a need to impeach Richard B. Cheney.  Representatives and House Judiciary Committee Members Robert Wexler, Luis Gutierrez, Tammy Baldwin, and the cyberspace community have stated their extreme concern.  However, just as Presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich realized during his campaign to hold Cheney accountable, the media would rather not address this state of affairs.

If we the people are to be served, if we are to honor the rights afforded us by the United States Constitution, we must do more than wait for Congress to act.  Our signature on a petition will not be enough to convince a reluctant House Speaker that it is time to embrace this cause.  I invite you to submit a Letter to the Editor of any and every newspaper.  For Representative Wexler alone, although he tried, cannot create the news storm necessary for impeachment.

I offer my own submission for your review.  Please request coverage.  Ask Journalist nationwide to report on more than this Administration wants us to hear.  I thank you for all that you are and all that you do.

If you wish to use my letter, without the links and signature, I offer a Portable Document Format [pdf] version.

  • Letter to the Editor, Call to Cover Cheney Impeachment Hearings.

  • Dearest Editorial Staff . . .

    I am aware of a troublesome campaign to ignore the call to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney.  I write to express my distress and to request coverage.

    On Florida Progressive Radio, Representative Robert Wexler spoke of what he and his colleagues experienced when they submitted an Op-Ed essay on the topic.  The major print media outlets did not publish this important treatise on impeachment.  The message was not muffled; it was ostensibly silenced.

    The mainstream media acted as though an investigation into the practices within the Oval Office, or the Office of the Vice President, were permanently “off the table.”  No matter the outcry from the masses, the media continues to dismiss the call.  

    Auspiciously, after the news organizations cast the cry for censure aside, Representative Wexler turned to the public.  The cyberspace community connected to the memorandum the Congressman and his colleagues wrote.  Those that surf the Web not only endorsed the crucial communication, Internet users garnered greater support for the proposition.  An ambitious online effort heralded the need for immediate impeachment hearings.  Within a short time, more than a hundred thousand signers stated they were in favor of a move to censure Vice President Dick Cheney.  

    Constitutional scholars have warned us.  The precedent we set when we overlook what an arrogant Administration does will forever damage our nation.  If Americans do not uphold democratic principles, we weaken our Constitution.

    For too long, Presidential aspirant Dennis Kucinich has been a lone Congressional voice.  On more than one occasion, Kucinich spoke of the need to censure Vice President Cheney.  In November 2007, Representative Kucinich presented a Privileged Motion on the floor of the House.  Even that bold overture received little press.  

    Nonetheless, some of his fellow Representatives considered the possibility.  With the introduction of new evidence, three prominent Representatives felt as though they too had reason to move forward with an investigation and hearings.  

    Representatives Robert Wexler (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), all Members of the House Judiciary Committee, considered the novel revelation offered by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan.  The Vice President and his staff purposefully gave then Press Secretary McClellan false information about the outing of Valerie Plame Wilson, a covert Central Intelligence agent.  Dick Cheney and his team intentionally chose to release erroneous reports to the American people.  This realization prompted the newly stated and amplified concern for impeachment.  

    Only after much protest from readers did the Miami Herald print an edited version of the original letter from the Representatives.  However, it seems that Florida publication and all other periodicals are happy to leave the issue behind.  We, the people are not willing to remain silent.

    The need to impeach is imperative.  I implore you.  I invite your newspaper to truly inform Americans.  Rather than encourage apathy, please tell the people, print, more than the White House wants us to know.

    Sincerely . . .

    Betsy L. Angert


    Dear friends, family, and familiars; I thank you all for your interest and participation in the process.  On behalf of Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Representatives, Robert Wexler, Luis Gutierrez, Tammy Baldwin, our country, and the Constitution may I extend my deepest appreciation for your thoughts, words, and deeds.  We can only hope that United, America will peacefully stand strong again.  We cannot know unless and until we begin to censure those that fight against us.  We are one, or were, the United States of America, a democratic nation, of, by, and for the people.  Together we can take our country back.

    References and Resources in Support of Impeachment Hearings . . .

    Impeachment Off The Table; On Center Stage

    Article I: Initiation & Continuation of Illegal War (Part 4)

    copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert

    John Conyers put impeachment on the table.  Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi said to place such a ‘distraction’ on the table is tantamount to treason.  Newly appointed, anointed Pelosi let it be known, there was business to be done and Democrats would do the deeds she deemed necessary.  These did not include prosecution of the President or his Vice.  Hence, Conyers removed censure from the agenda  He had other concerns.  His own appointment as Chair to the Judiciary Committee hinged on whether he honored the wishes of the recently selected Speaker.  

    Thus, Congressman Conyers declared . . .

    No Rush to Impeachment

    By John Conyers Jr.

    Washington Post

    Thursday, May 18, 2006; A23

    As Republicans have become increasingly nervous about whether they will be able to maintain control of the House in the midterm elections, they have resorted to the straw-man strategy of identifying a parade of horrors to come if Democrats gain the majority. Among these is the assertion that I, as the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, would immediately begin impeachment proceedings against President Bush.

    I will not do that. I readily admit that I have been quite vigorous, if not relentless, in questioning the administration. The allegations I have raised are grave, serious, well known, and based on reliable media reports and the accounts of former administration officials.

    But none of these allegations can be proved or disproved until the administration answers questions. For example, to know whether intelligence was mistaken or manipulated in the run-up to the Iraq war, we need to know what information was made available to — and actually read by — decision makers and how views contradicting the case for war were treated.

    We need to know the extent to which high-ranking officials approved of the use of torture and other cruel and inhumane treatment inflicted upon detainees. We need to know whether the leaking of the name of a covert CIA operative was deliberate or accidental, as well as the identity of those responsible.

    The administration’s stonewalling, and the lack of oversight by Congress, have left us to guess whether we are dealing with isolated wrongdoing, or mistakes, or something worse. In my view, the American people deserve answers, not guesses. I have proposed that we obtain these answers in a responsible and bipartisan manner.

    John Conyers professed we need answers.  He forgets there was no evidence of wrongdoing against Richard Milhous Nixon until an impeachment investigation was underway.  Most mused those in opposition to the Vietnam war wanted the President out.  However, as Elizabeth Holtzman, a member of the Judiciary Committee during the Nixon proceedings writes much is the same and more differs.  Subversion is similar.  Evidence is now more abundant.  Our own neglect may be our downfall.  Perhaps, past disregard for Democratic principles allowed for the eventuality of what we see today.  If we forego our responsibility to democracy again, what might occur in the future?  Let us assess what we know.

    Subverting Our Democracy

    A President can commit no more serious crime against our democracy than lying to Congress and the American people to get them to support a military action or war. It is not just that it is cowardly and abhorrent to trick others into giving their lives for a nonexistent threat, or even that making false statements might, in some circumstances, be a crime.

    It is that the decision to go to war is the gravest decision a nation can make, and in a democracy the people and their elected representatives, when there is no imminent attack on the United States to repel, have the right to make it. Given that the consequences can be death for hundreds, thousands or tens of thousands of people–as well as the diversion of vast sums of money to the war effort–the fraud cannot be tolerated. That both Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon were guilty of misleading the nation into military action and neither was impeached for it makes it more, not less, important to hold Bush accountable.

    Once it was clear that no weapons of mass destruction would be found in Iraq, President Bush tried to blame “bad intelligence” for the decision to go to war, apparently to show that the WMD claim was not a deliberate deception. But bad intelligence had little or nothing to do with the main arguments used to win popular support for the invasion of Iraq.

    First, there was no serious intelligence–good or bad–to support the Administration’s suggestion that Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda were in cahoots. Nonetheless, the Administration repeatedly tried to claim the connection to show that the invasion was a justified response to 9/11 (like the declaration of war against Japan for Pearl Harbor). The claim was a sheer fabrication.

    Second, there was no reliable intelligence to support the Administration’s claim that Saddam was about to acquire nuclear weapons capability. The specter of the “mushroom cloud,” which frightened many Americans into believing that the invasion of Iraq was necessary for our self-defense, was made up out of whole cloth. As for the biological and chemical weapons, even if, as reported, the CIA director told the President that these existed in Iraq, the Administration still had plenty of information suggesting the contrary.

    The deliberateness of the deception has also been confirmed by a British source: the Downing Street memo, the official record of Prime Minister Tony Blair’s July 2002 meeting with his top Cabinet officials. At the meeting the chief of British intelligence, who had just returned from the United States, reported that “Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD.

    But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” In other words, the Bush Administration was reported to be in the process of cooking up fake intelligence and facts to justify going to war in Iraq.

    During the Nixon impeachment proceedings, I drafted the resolution of impeachment to hold President Nixon accountable for concealing from Congress the bombing of Cambodia he initiated. But the committee did not approve it, probably because it might appear political–in other words, stemming from opposition to the war instead of to the President’s abuse of his warmaking powers.

    As Commander-In-Chief, President George W. Bush has used his influence and then some. He initiated, investigated, incited, inflicted, and inflated, all in an attempt to do as he desired.  Americans sat idly by, as did Congress.  Little has changed other than we know more about the manipulations.  Today, the table turns, tilts, or is hidden from view, and the Speaker continues to hedge.  

    Thankfully, The Culture Project and Presidential hopeful, Congressman Dennis Kucinich move forward.  The potential President Kucinich works tirelessly to ensure that censure is more than an option ignored.  Kucinich brings the issue to the floor of the House in the form of a priveledged Resolution.  The Culture Project takes the matter to center stage.

    Naomi Wolf, Jackson Browne, Lewis Lapham, Phoebe Snow, Michael Ratner, Bruce Fein, and Sam Shepard are among the many scholars, artists, and activists that ask Americans to authentically consider A Question of Impeachment.  

    This series is meant to inform and inspire great minds, those that have been fast asleep for too long.  

    The masses once actively participated in government.  Long ago, the media investigated and spoke to sources outside the White House.  Now, each hibernates, and the Administration obstructs justice.  The Constitution was torn to shreds.  Habeas corpus is no more.  Executive Powers are infinite; although, apparently, according to the Vice President there is no Executive Branch under Bush. As Americans sit silently, absorbed in apathy . . .

    [The] Culture Project brings crucial and timely concerns to the fore once again with a new, unique series that gathers some of the most brilliant and visionary minds of our time to explore and debate the case for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

    You may wish to review the full impeachment schedule, or tune in for just a few discussions.  The forum begins and ends in the month of December.  Might we, the people work as quickly in support of the Constitution or will we continue to ignore the provisions that ensure no President has, uses, and abuses absolute power?

    Sunday, December 2 ?12:00 p.m.  A screening of special cuts of New Home Movies from the Lower 9th Ward, Oscar-winner Jonathan Demme’s new documentary drawn from the stories of residents of New Orleans’ Lower 9th Ward after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

    Monday, December 3 ?7:00 p.m. Article III: Criminal Negligence and Hurricane Katrina. Participants include attorney Bruce Fein, journalist Lewis Lapham, actor and activist Alec Baldwin, New Orleans public housing organizer Sam Jackson, Judith Browne-Dianis, from the Advancement Project, and Tiffany Gardner from the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative. Performers include Bobby Cannavale, Callie Thorne, Tracie Thoms, Denis O’Hare, Jodie Markell, Bradley White, Nana Mensah, and Chris McKinney.

    Sunday, December 9 ?7:30 p.m.  Vanessa, Lynn, Corin, and Jemma Redgrave make a very special appearance to read Poems from Guantanamo: The Detainees Speak, a collection of poems written by detainees held in the US detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Marc Falkoff, attorney and editor of Poems from Guantanamo, will also be with us.

    Monday, December 10 ?7:00 p.m.  Article IV: Warrantless Surveillance. Participants include former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, attorney Joshua Dratel, attorney Shayana Kadidal of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Aziz Huq of NYU’s Brennan Center for Justice, and journalist Richard Valeriani. Performers include Kristen Johnston, Michael Mastro, Nana Mensah, Gerry Bamman, Chris McKinney, and Sarah-Doe Osborne.

    Sunday, December 16? CLOSING DAY 2:00 p.m. Article V: Expansion of Executive Power. Participants include Harper’s contributor and human rights attorney Scott Horton, author David Lindorff, and attorney Marjorie Cohn. Performers include Josh Hamilton, Tracie Thoms, Ned Eisenberg, Grace Zandarski, and Tom Bower.

    7:30 p.m. Closing celebration includes performance and commentary from John Nichols, author of The Genius of Impeachment, Jackson Browne, Jorie Graham, Naomi Wolf, Duncan Sheik and Steven Sater, Peter Matthiessen, Kathleen Chalfant, Aasif Mandvi, and others.

    Perchance, after each performance you, dear reader will reflect and realize, the time is now.  You may be encouraged to dream what some think absurd.  I invite you to explore.  Before you venture out on Election Day certain January 2009 is your last hope.  Please consider there are possibilities more profound and perhaps, if we are to preserve the Constitution, necessary.

    Sources and Censure . . .

  • The 110th Congress: A New Direction for America. Speaker Nancy Pelosi
  • The Culture Project.
  • No Rush to Impeachment, By John Conyers Jr. Washington Post. Thursday, May 18, 2006; Page A23
  • pdf No Rush to Impeachment, By John Conyers Jr. Washington Post. Thursday, May 18, 2006; Page A23
  • Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Cheney. Washington Post. April 24, 2007
  • Rep. Dennis Kucinich Privileged Resolution. November 6, 2007
  • The Impeachment of George W. Bush, By Elizabeth Holtzman.  The Nation. January 30, 2006
  • Impeach. Support Increases for Censure of Cheney and Bush

    Dennis Kucinich Move To Impeach V.P. Cheney Gains Support.

    copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert

    The quiet little man from Ohio is making gains.  His mission is not yet accomplished; nor is his objective vengeful.  Honesty and integrity are his vision.  Congressman Dennis Kucinich does not think the President of the United States governs the people, or presides over the public as a ruler might.  Presidential Candidate Kucinich believes in a higher moral standard.  He has faith the person that holds the office of President has the power to bring peace to this planet.  The former Mayor also holds that the Vice President must act with honor.  He asserts neither in our current Administration does.  The Congressman claims as do others that are joining him in expressing their concerns, we must work to impeach this George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

    John Conyers proposed impeachment of the President many months ago.  While the Congressman had support for the measure, House Resolution 635, [636 and 637] that movement languished under the weight of the idea we must wait, or not pursue that path for reasons that trouble the calm and peace seeking Congressman Kucinich. 

    Dennis Kucinich observes that the current White House focuses on defense, destruction, and a deliverance from “evil.”  This concentration does not benefit or befit a President and his or her Cabinet.  Yet, the Bush – Cheney clan contends they must lie, cheat, and steal to secure our shores.  The Congressman thinks not and has said so for quite some time.

    After months of appeals to an apathetic public, an extremely cautious Congress, or people that just feel powerless, there is a little bit of movement.  Today, in my own life two persons expressed a belief that the ?electability? factor they clung to may not serve us [citizens of the United States and the globe] well.

    Earlier eight of those in Congress that once stated President Bush and his pals had not committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” or at least they had not done so in a manner that might make a case for censure are now re-thinking their stance.  In April of this year, after delaying too long in the minds of many people, Dennis Kucinich called for impeachment.  This plan would not only introduce articles of impeachment against the President, this directive would address the transgressions of the man second-in command, Vice President Dick Cheney.

    Kucinich introduced three articles of impeachment against Cheney: The first accusing the vice president of deceiving the country by “fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify” an invasion of Iraq; the second accusing him of “purposefully” manipulating intelligence to Congress and the American public about a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda “despite all evidence to the contrary;” and the third for “threaten[ing] aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States.”

    In a synopsis, Kucinich wrote, “In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.  Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.”

    The progress is slow.  For Progressives it usually is.  However, we are patient people, at times too serene for our own good.

    BREAKING: Five US Reps Support Cheney Impeachment
    By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor, Atlanta Progressive News
    June 06, 2007

    (APN) ATLANTA – US Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) has become the fifth total co-sponsor of US Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s (D-OH) bill to impeach Vice President of the United States Dick Cheney, Atlanta Progressive News has learned. In addition to Kucinich, the additional three Members of Congress who have signed on to H. Res 333 are US Rep. Janice Schakowsky (D-IL), William Lacy Clay (D-MO), and Albert Wynn (D-MD).

    “This Administration has continued to erode the trust of the American people and enough is simply enough,” stated US Rep. Clarke in a press release issued first to Atlanta Progressive News.

    “H.Res. 333 was introduced to the House of Representatives by Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio on April 24, 2007, and asserts that the vice president manipulated intelligence to make the case for going to war with Iraq, falsified a connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda, and has threatened aggression against Iran,” US Rep. Clarke says.

    “When the American people voted on November 7th, they asked for a change in direction by electing the Democratic party in the House and Senate. I have heard the loud cries of my constituents, and they want accountability. My support of HRes 333 reflects the voices of the residents of central Brooklyn.”

    Congresswoman Clarke replaced US Rep. Major Owens (D-NY), who retired at the end of the 109th Session. US Rep. Owens had been one of the early supporters of Conyers? bill, H Res 635, which would have created a Select Committee to look into the possible grounds for impeaching President Bush.

    Congresswoman Clarke is her own woman and “does not follow the crowd,” her spokesperson said, adding that constituents had regularly lobbied her to co-sponsor this bill.

    “Vice President Dick Cheney is the architect of the Administration’s deception about the war. Cheney persistently and deliberately deceived the Congress and the American people about the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction and the alleged link between Saddam Hussein and the attack on September 11th. There should be a serious dialogue about the conduct of this Administration. Cheney should be held accountable for purposely misleading the American people. Despite the obvious lack of success on the ground, Vice President Cheney continued a barrage of propaganda claiming that we were winning the war and successfully rebuilding Iraq which is patently false. His statements and representations about the situation in Iraq amount to malfeasance for which he should be taken to task,” said Wynn in a press release prepared for Atlanta Progressive News.

    Impeachment activist Tracie Stern of Atlanta World Can’t Wait said the new co-sponsorships are exciting, but at the same time, the case for impeachment is so clear that these Members of Congress are actually just doing their duty.

    Those Members who do not co-sponsor H Res 333 are enabling the Bush Administration, Stern said, adding “People need to step on to the stage of history.”

    Sadly, few do participate as they might.  Many see the government as separate from themselves.  Americans forget the Constitution defines the authority within a democracy as of, by, and for the people.  We, the citizens of this country must make our directives and desires known.  America, we have work to do.  Let us be active and aware and play a part in our lives.  If we wish to bring peace, we must deplore destruction.  We need to disengage from those that bring harm to humans anywhere in the world.

    Do not forget when we assess the strife this country, this planet endures we cannot separate the parts from the whole.  George W. Bush and Richard Cheney are undeniably one.  Each has fostered global destruction, torture, and a lack of transparency.  If we impeach one we must indict the other.  We must remember.

    House Resolution 635.
    Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration?s intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.

    Out of respect for House Leader Nancy Pelosi and a desire to be appointed to the Judiciary Committee this Resolution was taken off the table by its author Representative John Conyers.  Nevertheless, there were brave souls that supported this measure.

    The 39 total co-sponsors of H Res. 635 were . . .

    US Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA), Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-PA), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA), Rep. Jackson, Jr., (D-IL), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN), Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI), Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), Rep. John Olver (D-MA), Rep. Major Owens (D-NY), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ), Rep. Martin Sabo (D-MN), Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA), Rep. Fortney Pete Stark (D-CA), Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Dianne Watson (D-CA), Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), and Rep. David Wu (D-OR).

    Let us not abandon hope or lose sight of our vision.  If we are to bring peace, prosperity, and form a more perfect union than we must work towards what we believe in.  Let us unite in our cause.  May our will be as strong as that of the Administration.  May we never forget, in a democracy the government is of, by, and for the people.  Without us, there is nothing but this awful mess.

    There is reason to believe we can bring about change.  Only months, ago Dennis Kucinich was a whisper, a voice in the wind.  This presentation illustrates what was our truth. We shall overcome.  We shall overcome . . .

    Dennis Kucinich Introduce H Res 333 to Impeach VP Cheney

    We can use nonviolent measures to bring about peace.  Let us lead the world in a manner that is consistent with our rhetoric.  “All we are saying, is give peach a chance.”  Support nonviolent actions.  Impeach the aggressors.

    I thank you for all that you do to help make America strong, the best, a truly tranquil superpower that promotes peace worldwide.

    Support Our Troops and Truth, Justice, and the American Way . . .

  • Raising the Issue of Impeachment, John Nichols.  The Nation. December 20, 2005
  • Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Cheney. CQ Transcript wire.  Washington Post. Tuesday, April 24, 2007; 6:09 PM
  • pdf Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Cheney. CQ Transcript wire.  Washington Post. Tuesday, April 24, 2007; 6:09 PM
  • At Last, Kucinich Begins His Quest for Impeachment, Mary Ann Akers.  Washington Post. April 24, 2007
  • BREAKING: Five US Reps Support Cheney Impeachment,By Matthew Cardinale. Atlanta Progressive News.  June 6, 2007
  • House Resolution 635.
  • Cheney; Comedy. A Rogue Nation, or Rebel Without a Cause

    ( – promoted by Betsy L. Angert)

    Countdown: Cheney Casts Himself Out

    copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert

    Updated, June 25, 2007
    Each day the Bush/Cheney Administration entertains us.  They offer new twists and turns in what is seen as a ?comedy of errors.?  Possibly this latest report is classified as ?comedy of the absurd.?  This week it was revealed that Vice President Dick Cheney is not part of the Executive Branch.  Indeed, he is above the law, at least that is what the Vice President’s office claims.

    Apparently, there are nuances within the definition of the Executive Branch that exclude the Vice President.  Literally, the term ?Vice President? is not contained in the description of this arm of the government.

    Executive Branch

    The power of the executive branch is vested in the President, who also serves as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.  The President appoints the Cabinet and oversees the various agencies and departments of the federal government.
    . . .
    To learn more about the Executive Branch please visit the President?s Cabinet page on the White House web site

    If we seek further understanding and travel to the designated page, we cannot help notice there, under the heading Cabinet Rank Members we see the esteemed Executive Richard B. Cheney.  If we journey further into the depths of cyberspace deliverance, we learn that the Vice President has been proudly proclaimed a policy decision-maker for decades.  He has held numerous positions within the White House, and served under Presidents since 1969.

    Nonetheless, this exclusive and exceptional public servant claims he is not part of the Cabinet and therefore need not abide by rules governing this group.  A man well-known for frequently invoking Executive Privilege when he does not wish to testify about the doings of his office claims he is not affiliated with the Branch of government that affords him rights under or above the law.

    Cheney claims a non-executive privilege
    He asserts he’s exempt from showing an agency how his office keeps secrets because he’s not fully part of the administration.
    By Josh Meyer
    Los Angeles Times
    June 22, 2007

    WASHINGTON ? For the last four years, Vice President Dick Cheney has made the controversial claim that his office is not fully part of the Bush administration in order to exempt it from a presidential order regulating federal agencies’ handling of classified national security information, officials said Thursday.

    Cheney has held that his office is not fully part of the executive branch of government despite the continued objections of the National Archives, which says his office’s failure to demonstrate that it has proper security safeguards in place could jeopardize the government’s top secrets.

    According to documents released Thursday by a House committee, Cheney’s staff has blocked efforts by the National Archives’ Information Security Oversight Office to enforce a key component of the presidential order: a mandatory on-site inspection of the vice president’s office.  At least one of those inspections would have come at a particularly delicate time ? when Cheney’s former chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and other aides were under criminal investigation for their suspected roles in leaking the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

    In an eight-page letter to Cheney on Thursday, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) also charged that Cheney or his top staffers tried to abolish the Information Security Oversight Office this year after its director tried repeatedly to force Cheney’s office to comply with the presidential order.

    Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride confirmed the vice president’s position Thursday but said she could not discuss the matter in detail, including whether Cheney or his aides tried to abolish the information security office.  “We are confident that we are conducting this office properly under the law,” McBride said.

    Nevertheless, there is information demonstrating that indeed, Mister Cheney and his cohorts wish to eliminate the Information Security Oversight Office.  The two administrative centers have been in conflict for years. The Oversight agency, a division of the National Archives, in accordance with the President?s policy, has attempted to gather information from the Vice President pertaining to what documents his office has deemed classified.  Mister Bush, in his infinite wisdom claimed the American people have the right to know what the ?executives? representing them have are doing; albeit if not in the present at least in the future.  Information must be preserved for posterity.

    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to further amend Executive Order 12958, as amended, it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12958 is amended to read as follows:
    “Classified National Security Information

    This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism.  Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their Government.  Also, our Nations progress depends on the free flow of information.  Nevertheless, throughout our history, the national defense has required that certain information be maintained in confidence in order to protect our citizens, our democratic institutions, our homeland security, and our interactions with foreign nations.  Protecting information critical to our Nations security remains a priority.

    The President?s office has abided by the rules and done as required by his law.  However, the Vice President never has.  Dick Cheney has resisted all attempts to retrieve the required information.

    Ultimately, the Information Oversight Office appealed the issue to the Justice Department.  That division has yet to rule on the case. 

    Nevertheless, Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Henry A. Waxman took action.  In the midst of this ?comedy,? Representative Waxman, Democrat of California, disclosed that documentation from the Richard Cheney?s office validates that this Vice has long endeavored to close the Oversight Office. 

    Admittedly, Congressman Waxman, is prominent among those Democrats wanting to investigate the Bush administration.  However, Representative Waxman states this issue is only one of many that cause him to  question the practices of this Administration.  His efforts towards resolving this quandary are separate from his other concerns.

    On Thursday, June 21, 2007 Chairman Waxman sent an eight page letter sent to the Vice President stating his alarm and his desire to resolve what surely must be a misunderstanding.

    Officials at the National Archives and the Justice Department confirmed the basic chronology of events cited in Mr. Waxman?s letter.

    The letter said that after repeatedly refusing to comply with a routine annual request from the archives for data on his staff?s classification of internal documents, the vice president?s office in 2004 blocked an on-site inspection of records that other agencies of the executive branch regularly go through.

    But the National Archives is an executive branch department headed by a presidential appointee, and it is assigned to collect the data on classified documents under a presidential executive order.  Its Information Security Oversight Office is the archives division that oversees classification and declassification.

    ?I know the vice president wants to operate with unprecedented secrecy,? Mr. Waxman said in an interview.  ?But this is absurd.  This order is designed to keep classified information safe.  His argument is really that he?s not part of the executive branch, so he doesn?t have to comply.? 

    Absurd, did Chairman Waxman say ?absurd??  This is beyond ridiculous.  This comedy is replete with the bizarre.  On June 23, 2007 the President himself stated that he too is exempt from his own law.

    The White House said Friday that, like Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, President Bush’s office is not allowing an independent federal watchdog to oversee its handling of classified national security information.

    An executive order that Bush issued in March 2003 ? amending an existing order ? requires all government agencies that are part of the executive branch to submit to oversight.  Although it doesn’t specifically say so, Bush’s order was not meant to apply to the vice president’s office or the president’s office, a White House spokesman said.

    Oh my.  I understand there is much inferred and implied in this writ.  I never truly thought disclosure was the intent, only the claim.  In this post-September 11 era, privacy for Federal officials is preserved.  Records are rescinded.  Nonetheless, I did see this small clause posited below repeated referrals to the Office of the President and his Vice.

    Sec. 1.7.  Classification Prohibitions and Limitations. (a) In no case shall information be classified in order to:

    (1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
    (2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
    (3) restrain competition; or
    (4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security.

    My mistake.  After re-reading that last line, I grasp the truer meaning.  In the Bush Administration, every action is taken as an effort to secure the nation.  Mister Bush often reminds us he and his Cabinet are protecting us, the people, from [a perceived] ?evil.?  Sadly or strangely, these Executives hear hatred in every utterance.  They see malice in all endeavors, excluding those executed by them, the executives in the White House . . .  or is it the Senate.  I am so confused. 

    Mister Cheney is President of the Senate is he not, or is he a member of the Cabinet?  Is the Presidential appointees part of the Executive Branch.  Might Vice President of the United States, Richard Cheney be  a rogue, a rebel . . . What of Mister Bush?  Where doe he stand, and does the law he wrote apply to him or his office?

    Perhaps Assistant Press Secretary Dana Perino can help me understand.  During a press conference on June 25, 2007 Miss Perino expounded.

    Q Dana, as long as we’re talking about branches of government, can you go back to Vice President Cheney again, the argument that he’s not part of the executive branch.  Does the President believe he’s part of the executive branch?

    MS. PERINO: I think that that is an interesting constitutional question, and I think that lots of people can debate it.  I think when we were talking about the EO from last week, we’ve gone over that several times.  You probably don’t want me to go over it again.  But the Vice President — any Vice President has legislative and executive functions.

    Every Vice President has legislative and executive functions.  The executive functions are given to him by the President.  For example, the Vice President’s paycheck comes from the Senate.  So these are — that’s an interesting constitutional question.  When we are talking about this EO, it is separate and apart from — the President and the Vice President oversee the executive agencies.  Supreme Court precedent shows that the Vice President and the President are not seen as an agency when it comes to executive orders.

    Q I know that’s your argument about an agency, but it’s very separate from the argument the Vice President is making.  And what is the President — what is the White House’s view of the argument the Vice President is making on whether or not he’s part of the executive branch?

    Q For one, I think — I mean, the information is clearly ?

    MS. PERINO: I’m not opining on it, because the President did not intend for the Vice President to be subject as an agency in that section of the EO.

    I understand; I think.  Dick Cheney works for those that pay him.  I thought the American public paid his salary.  Perhaps I am wrong.  Please help me dear reader.  Did the people not place Mister Cheney in the Executive Branch; was he not elected to serve as an Executive?  Tell me this all but a dream.  It must be.  For now I experience up is down, and down is out or above the law.  Were this all not so tragic this truly would be a comedy. 

    I as a citizen of this country, or correction, a person in the American audience can only hope I will awaken from this nightmare and discover the theatre is closed.

    Bush and Cheney; Comedy of the Absurd, of Errors, of the Executives . . .

  • Cheney claims a non-executive privilege By Josh Meyer.  Los Angeles Times. June 22, 2007
  • pdf Cheney claims a non-executive privilege By Josh Meyer.  Los Angeles Times. June 22, 2007
  • Executive Order Office of the Press Secretary. March 25, 2003
  • Representative Henry A. Waxman letter to Vice President, Dick Cheney. The Oversight Committee June 21, 2007
  • Bush claims oversight exemption too, The White House says the president’s own order on classified data does not apply to his office or the vice president’s.  By Josh Meyer.  Los Angeles Times. June 23, 2007
  • Bush claims oversight exemption too, The White House says the president’s own order on classified data does not apply to his office or the vice president’s.  By Josh Meyer.  Los Angeles Times. June 23, 2007
  • Press Briefing by Dana Perino. Office of the Press Secretary. June 25, 2007