NAVIGATION |
|
|
THE ALEX JONES
SHOW |
|
|
|
|
|
SERVICES |
|
|
|
|
|
ARCHIVES |
|
|
|
SPECIAL REPORTS |
|
|
|
|
LINKS |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| CONTACT |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| ADVERTISEMENTS
|
|
 |
| |
|
|
|
It's NOT Too Late To Impeach
George
Washington Blog
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Most Americans know that Bush, Cheney and the boys have
committed impeachable offenses.
But they assume it is "too late to impeach" them.
Are they right?
Well, in 1876, Secretary of War General William Belknap (who served in
the administration of Pres. Ulysses Grant), accused of accepting a bribe,
resigned just hours before the House was scheduled to consider articles
of impeachment. The
House went ahead and unanimously impeached him, and by a vote of 37-29
the Senate rejected the argument that Belknap’s resignation should
abort the case.
(Article continues below)
Indeed, numerous constitutional experts have stated that Bush and Cheney
can be impeached even after they are out of office (see this,
for example).
If articles of impeachment can be introduced even after Bush and Cheney
are out of office, it is obviously not too late to introduce them now,
while they are still in office.
What Good Would It Do?
Many people respond, "I know we can
do it, but what good would it
do?"
Well, for one thing, it could prevent war against Iran
or another Middle Eastern country.
And it might prevent a
false flag attack.
But there is another important reason to impeach. Impeachment was designed
to be a deterrent,
not just a punishment. The Founding Fathers included impeachment provisions
in the Constitution so that if a president tried to act like a king, Congress
could nip the tyrannical impulse in the bud, and tell all future presidents
"Don't try it . . . We'll stop you!"
Unless Bush, Cheney and the whole lot of them are impeached, Congress
will be ignoring
the wishes of the framers and instead be loudly saying to future administrations
"Go ahead . . . Bush and Cheney got away with it, and so can you".
As Professor Kalt of Michigan State University College of Law writes:
Structurally, impeachment is designed not just
to remove but to deter, and this effect would be severely undermined if
it faded away near the end of a term.
And see this
discussion with Constitutional scholar Bruce Fein.
Many rank-and-file Democrats have bought
Pelosi's line that impeachment would be a "distraction", and that we should
just focus on getting Obama elected.
Even putting aside the fact that a new
war or terror attack would help McCain, the issue of election fraud (could
McCain steal the election?), or the possibility that Bush might suspend
elections in case of a "national emergency", impeachment is arguably a
good
election strategy for Democrats.
In any event, even from a strictly selfish,
partisan perspective, the Democrats must learn the lesson that failing
to impeach Richard Nixon and hold him accountable enabled
Bush and Cheney to do what they've done. Unless the Democrats want to
face an even more tyrannical White
House in the future, they have to stand up and hold these guys accountable
NOW.
Get your exclusive Prison Planet.tv
membership today and enjoy a plethora of multimedia content as
well as access to live video streaming of The Alex Jones Show
- click
here to subscribe.
|
|
|
|