Vermont Votes to Impeach Bush/Cheney

[mc mark]

The Nation --

When Vermont Governor Jim Douglas, a Republican with reasonably close ties to President Bush, asked if there was any additional business to be considered at the town meeting he was running in Middlebury, Ellen McKay popped up and proposed the impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The governor was not amused. As moderator of the annual meeting, he tried to suggest that the proposal to impeach -- along with another proposal to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq -- could not be voted on.

But McKay, a program coordinator at Middlebury College, pressed her case. And it soon became evident that the crowd at the annual meeting shared her desire to hold the president to account.

So Douglas backed down.

"It became clear that no one was going home until they had the chance to discuss the resolutions and vote on them," explained David Rosenberg, a political science professor at Middlebury College. "And being a good politician, he allowed the vote to happen."

By an overwhelming voice vote, Middlebury called for impeachment.

So it has gone this week at town meetings across Vermont, most of which were held Tuesday.

Late Tuesday night, there were confirmed reports that 36 towns had backed impeachment resolutions, and the number was expected to rise.

In one town, Putney, the vote for impeachment was unanimous.

The articles --

We the people have the power -- and the responsibility -- to remove executives who transgress not just the law, but the rule of law.

The oaths that the President and Vice President take binds them to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." The failure to do so forms a sound basis for articles of impeachment.

The President and Vice President have failed to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution" in the following ways:

1. They have manipulated intelligence and misled the country to justify an immoral, unjust, and unnecessary preemptive war in Iraq.

2. They have directed the government to engage in domestic spying without warrants, in direct contravention of U.S. law.

3. They have conspired to commit the torture of prisoners, in violation of the Federal Torture Act and the Geneva Convention.

4. They have ordered the indefinite detention without legal counsel, without charges and without the opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention -- all in violation of U.S. law and the Bill of Rights.

When strong evidence exists of the most serious crimes, we must use impeachment -- or lose the ability of the legislative branch to compel the executive branch to obey the law.

George Bush has led our country to a constitutional crisis, and it is our responsibility to remove him from office.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070307/cm_thenation/1172344;_ylt=Ap4l.wIJTvGAHRaQgcB.ByMDW7oF

[DaDakota]

Austin Stands with you VERMONT !

DD

[hotballa]

I can't see how this is helpful in any way.

[jo mama]

its about time! this country cannot survive two more years of these criminals.

go vermont! new mexico is talking about it too.

is it true that if a certian number of states pass impeachment resolutions than congress will be forced to debate it?

the moment i knew there was real popular support for impeachment was when my 85 year old grandpa, a career airforce veteran of WWII, korea and vietnam and an early bush-supporter said that bush needs to be locked up.

its going to take a long time to repair the damage that these criminals have done to our country, if it can be done at all.

[jo mama]

aside from the already mentioned points such as iraq lies, domestic spying, torture and constitutional violations i would add...

1) white house spending 2.3 billion on fake news and propaganda. armstrong williams was just the tip of the iceberg. and we wont even get into bush planting gay male hookers in the white house press corp.

2) north american union and the destruction of our nation's sovereignty and bush's failure/unwillingness to control illegal immigration.

just the torture issue should be grounds for impeachment and even imprisonment. how can anybody who claims to be a christian still support someone who authorizes torture of other humans? whose former legal council claims that there is no law that prevents bush from sexually torturing children?

[mc mark]

I can't see how this is helpful in any way.

It might start to restore the standing of America in the eyes of the world and prove that we are a country under the rule of law.

[Trader_Jorge]

My goodness, libs are stupid.

[vlaurelio]

My goodness, libs are stupid.

thats all you can say?

[plcmts17]

My goodness, libs are stupid.
Why does tj hate Vermont?

[robbie380]

My goodness, libs are stupid.

and you are brilliant.

[robbie380]

I can't see how this is helpful in any way.


what does it matter? they are expressing their point of view.

[hotballa]

what does it matter? they are expressing their point of view.

as am I =)

[DonnyMost]

Austin Stands with you VERMONT !

DD

lol.

took the words right out of my mouth.

[rhester]

I don't think they would get a fair trial.

Most of their most serious crimes would be overlooked and media washed down.

The punishment if guilty would not be severe enough.

And they would end up rich and famous like Clinton with just some kind of slap on the hand.

Now if they got a fair trial that would shake the entire nation and the world.

[conquistador#11]

it is nice to hear about Vermont wanting to hold the administration accountable..
Unfortunately,i've lost faith in the system.Reagan and H.W got away with their dirty wars,now W. will too :(
The time will come when George Prescott,continues where his family tree left off :mad: something needs to be done to prevent these evil doers from running.

[jo mama]

My goodness, libs are stupid.

shouldnt you be arousing yourself w/ abu ghraib photos and videos right now texx? :D

are you able to claim all those tickets you bought to watch people get urineboarded as a tax write-off?

[Deckard]

Austin Stands with you VERMONT !

DD
Damn straight! They are defending the country, in a democratic way that harkens back to the 18th century, when we were trying to find justice within the British Empire, and finally, in local votes similar to these, found our way to freedom from tyranny. Nothing may come from this, but I honor it, and it is in the finest traditions of the Republic.


D&D. Vermont Rocks!

[The Real Shady]

I can't see how this is helpful in any way.

It reminds me of people who start online petitions to get VY drafted or JVG fired. It's cute, but just a waste of time.

[Deckard]

It reminds me of people who start online petitions to get VY drafted or JVG fired. It's cute, but just a waste of time.
That sounds like the line I hear from people who don't bother to vote in elections, and then raise hell about who gets elected. Democracy? Cute? God help us.



D&D. the Cutting Edge of Societal Devolution.

[The Real Shady]

That sounds like the line I hear from people who don't bother to vote in elections, and then raise hell about who gets elected. Democracy? Cute? God help us.



D&D. the Cutting Edge of Societal Devolution.

Do you really think that Bush or Cheney will get impeached? There are far more important issues to work on then something that will never happen.

[jo mama]

tradertexx, can you belive these stupid libs like republican senator chuck hagel talking about impeachment?

...stupid liberal republican senators!!! :mad:

http://www.esquire.com/features/chuckhagel0407

"The president says, 'I don't care.' He's not accountable anymore," Hagel says, measuring his words by the syllable and his syllables almost by the letter. "He's not accountable anymore, which isn't totally true. You can impeach him, and before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment. I don't know. It depends how this goes."

The conversation beaches itself for a moment on that word -- impeachment -- spoken by a conservative Republican from a safe Senate seat in a reddish state. It's barely even whispered among the serious set in Washington, and it rings like a gong in the middle of the sentence, even though it flowed quite naturally out of the conversation he was having about how everybody had abandoned their responsibility to the country, and now there was a war going bad because of it.

"Congress abdicated its oversight responsibility," he says. "The press abdicated its responsibility, and the American people abdicated their responsibilities. Terror was on the minds of everyone, and nobody questioned anything, quite frankly."

[jo mama]

Damn straight! They are defending the country, in a democratic way that harkens back to the 18th century, when we were trying to find justice within the British Empire, and finally, in local votes similar to these, found our way to freedom from tyranny. Nothing may come from this, but I honor it, and it is in the finest traditions of the Republic.


D&D. Vermont Rocks!

any real change in this country will have to start at the local level.

im pretty sure that if a certian number of states (5?) pass impeachment resolutions than congress must take it up. if that is the case than this is far from a meaningless resolution.

EDIT: here is some info on how states can initiate impeachment proceedings

http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/statebasis.html

According to the Jefferson Manual, a State Legislature can initiate impeachment through their Representative in the House. Section LIII on Impeachment, section 603 states :

"In the House there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion: ... by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State (III, 2469) ..."

The (III, 2469) refers to the Hinds Precedents, section 2469. It tells of how in 1903 the Florida legislature passed a bill to impeach a corrupt US District Judge named Charles Swayne. With the power of a joint resolution from his home state behind him, Mr. William B. Lamar, of Florida, claiming the floor for a question of privilege, said:

"Mr. Speaker, I believe that the impeachment of a civil officer by this House is a question of privilege. I have made a joint resolution adopted by the legislature of the State of Florida a part of the resolution which I desire to submit to this House for its adoption. In pursuance of this joint resolution of the legislature of the State which I have the honor in part to represent, I impeach Charles Swayne, judge of the northern district of the State of Florida, of high crimes and misdemeanors;"

The house voted to bypass the Judiciary Committee and ordered the investigation of Judge Swayne.

A House Representative can always initiate impeachment by introducing a resolution as a question of privilege. But after consultation with senior staff in the US House of Representatives, we have determined that a state can initiate impeachment without requiring that a Member introduce the resolution. This does not mean that a state can give a mandate to Congress to start impeachment. But it gives the states a mechanism by which impeachment may be initiated if acted upon by Congress.

Impeachment charges from a state can be sent to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The charges from a city should be marked with the word “Petition” at the top, and bear the authorizing signature of the Secretary of State from that state. The Speaker will route the petition through the Parliamentarian office to the Clerk. The Clerk must then note in the Congressional Journal that the charges were received. The charges will then be referred to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration.

The Judiciary Committee may then investigate the charges, draft Articles of Impeachment and submit them to the floor of the House for a vote. It is also possible that the Committee may ignore the charges. That will depend on the ever shifting political situation and cannot be predicted. But the fact that success is not guaranteed does not relieve the state legislature of their obligation to do whatever they possibly can to defend the United States Constitution according to their oath of office.

The Jefferson Manual LIII, Section 604 also states:

"A direct proposition to impeach is a question of high privilege in the House and at once supersedes business otherwise in order under the rules governing the order of business".

Note that in order to have Privilege, the proposition to impeach must be introduced by a Member, or by a House Committee. Read more about "privilege" and how it relates to impeachment.

[mc mark]

Congress abdicated its oversight responsibility," he says. "The press abdicated its responsibility, and the American people abdicated their responsibilities. Terror was on the minds of everyone, and nobody questioned anything, quite frankly."

That's not quite right.

From the beginning there were plenty of us questioning this war.

[Sishir Chang]

im pretty sure that if a certian number of states (5?) pass impeachment resolutions than congress must take it up. if that is the case than this is far from a meaningless resolution.

EDIT: here is some info on how states can initiate impeachment proceedings

http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/statebasis.html


Very interesting. I just skimmed some of the link and the PDF of Jefferson's manual which I hadn't heard about before but appears to be codifying Congressional rules. It sounds like a State legislature can enter charges through impeachment through their representatives so the number of states doesn't seem important since any state could do so. That doesn't necessarily mean though that charges will result in impeachment being taken up as it then goes through the same process as any other business.

In regard to this particular case though this sounds like impeachment charges being voted on by town meetings and not the Vermont Legislature. i don't know enough about how Vermont works so I don't know if these have any bearing on the Vermont Legislature which would need to compel their representatives to enter impeachment charges. That said constitutents could compel their congressional rep to enter impeachment charges by lobbying them and making that an issue in their reelection.

[Space Ghost]

This is equally ignorant as trying to impeach clinton. Clinton did something that was proven beyond a doubt that he was guilty... and im not saying he should have been tried. What I am saying is that the most they could possibly come up with is that Bush has ran this war poorly. 22 months people. And then you can go into the "Bush has ran this country into the ground" when the next president gets elect.

Until WE as a country accept that WE elected this guy as the president and WE will elect a president that will bring the country out of chaos in 22 months, nothing will get better. As long as WE have the mentality of, "Don't blame ME, I voted democratic/gore/ect ... " , big businesses/media/ect ... will always run this country.

To show how short minded people are, who exactly would take Bushes place for the remainder of the few months of presidency? Is that a better solution??

Instead of wasting time trying to get his guy out of office, spend time campaigning for your choice of candidate.

[mc mark]

Until WE as a country accept that WE elected this guy as the president and WE will elect a president that will bring the country out of chaos in 22 months, nothing will get better. .

Except WE didn't elect him. The Supreme Court did.

[CBrownFanClub]

Well, I guess Bush and Cheney can not be President of Vermont anytime soon.

[jo mama]

What I am saying is that the most they could possibly come up with is that Bush has ran this war poorly.

are you kidding me? the war has been ran poorly, but that isnt the issue. read the first post again and specifically the 4 points mentioned in the resolution.

To show how short minded people are, who exactly would take Bushes place for the remainder of the few months of presidency? Is that a better solution??

obviously if bush goes than co-president cheney goes too. they go hand-in-hand. literally - remember how bush refused to testify to the 9/11 commission unless cheney sat next to him?

[mc mark]

Well, I guess Bush and Cheney can not be President of Vermont anytime soon.


It's a start! ;)

[jo mama]

Except WE didn't elect him. The Supreme Court did.

i know. those damn liberal activist judges!

i love how conservatives supported the supreme court stepping in where they had no buisness. states rights my ass. :rolleyes:

[bnb]

Well...2004!

George had shown his colours by then. Y'all still didn't throw him out. And that's the bitch about democracy. Sometimes your guy doesn't get in.

[pirc1]

I certainly wanted a diffeent president in 2004, but I think it is a waste of money and energy to try to impeach Bush now. He has only 22 month left, the impeachment process could take that long and more things that needs to be done by congress will not get done because of all the impeachment hearings. Congress just need to check his power at every turn and make him a lame duck in the true sense of the term. The next president, be it a Republican or Democrat will move the nation forward again in 2008.

[Space Ghost]

The next president, be it a Republican or Democrat will move the nation forward again in 2008.

No, they won't. This is what people fail to realize. Our country is too divided right now. Whether it be republican or democrat, each side is going to do whatever they can to slander that person. If by some luck a democratic president wins, rest assure the republicans will be out to get them. For 6 years, the democrats had nothing to do but tear down the republicans. If its an all democratic party, the republicans will have nothing better to do than find fault at everything possible. You will have your trader_jorges who will find absolutely nothing good in a democratic president and McMarks who will believe the democratic president does absolutely no wrong.

The sooner democrats realize we still live in a conservative country and quit trying to bring up their agendas that do not belong in the federal arena, the better it will be for that party.

[CBrownFanClub]

You will have your trader_jorges who will find absolutely nothing good in a democratic president and McMarks who will believe the democratic president does absolutely no wrong.


Oh do not even...

The sooner democrats realize we still live in a conservative country and quit trying to bring up their agendas that do not belong in the federal arena, the better it will be for that party.

Links? Stats? Did that come off the top of your head? If the Bland Avenger could even make a contest of the 2004 elections, I can not see how you could paint this country with such a broad conservative brush.

Oh and I think impeaching Bush and Cheney is a waste of time; neuter them and focus on the future.

[plcmts17]

This is what people fail to realize. Our country is too divided right now. Whether it be republican or democrat, each side is going to do whatever they can to slander that person.

The sooner democrats realize we still live in a conservative country and quit trying to bring up their agendas that do not belong in the federal arena, the better it will be for that party.

Bravo! Bravo old chap. Rarely do you see someone prove their own point of the country being divided by being so divisive themselves in the same post.
Yes, if only the democrats and their followers only knew their place, then everything would run so much smoother.
The sooner you get your head out of your ***, the sooner.......you know what, on second thought why don't you keep it there. It'll be better for the rest of us.

[Space Ghost]

Links? Stats? Did that come off the top of your head? If the Bland Avenger could even make a contest of the 2004 elections, I can not see how you could paint this country with such a broad conservative brush.


as the saying goes, there are stats, damn stats, and lies. You contradict yourself ... How is it that Bush even won the election?? Micheal Dukakis could have beat Bush in 2004. When it comes to two piss poor candidates, people rely on their core values to vote. I don't need a liberal based "link" or "stat". Look at whats happening in the country and make your own opinion. If you rely on links and the media for your opinions and decision, then you give them your power. In the end, big businesses run this country. Quit fighting the parties, fight the influence.

[jo mama]

I don't need a liberal based "link" or "stat".

"statistics" have a liberal bias

[Space Ghost]

Yes, if only the democrats and their followers only knew their place, then everything would run so much smoother.


It have nothing to do about running smoother. The majority of the Democratic platform belongs in the state, not the federal court. I'll reassure you im tired of the crap that comes out of the republican party just as much as the democratic party. If the democrats want my vote, then tell me what you plan on doing for our country's problems. What are you going to do about this war? That is a federal problem. What are you going to do about health care. That is a federal problem. What are you going to do about the increasing problem of jobs being outsourced, less production being exported and the increase goods being imported and the dollar losing its value on the international market?? What about the shrinking middle class, and the increasing division between the poor and the rich?? What about global warming?? I know! BLAME BUSH!
In the grand scheme of things for the federal government, abortion, gay rights and stem cell research are quite minor. The states can handle these issues just as well.

[mc mark]

In the grand scheme of things for the federal government, abortion, gay rights and stem cell research are quite minor.

And yet it is the conservatives that use these wedge issues to win elections.

Oh and you're wrong about me finding no fault in democrats.

[vlaurelio]

If the democrats want my vote, then tell me what you plan on doing for our country's problems. What are you going to do about this war? That is a federal problem. What are you going to do about health care. That is a federal problem. What are you going to do about the increasing problem of jobs being outsourced, less production being exported and the increase goods being imported and the dollar losing its value on the international market?? What about the shrinking middle class, and the increasing division between the poor and the rich?? What about global warming??

did you vote for bush in 04 because you believed he can solve all those?

[Space Ghost]

And yet it is the conservatives that use these wedge issues to win elections.


If I have to choose a side, i lean towards republican/conservative. You're absolutely right. Either party is going to do whatever they can do to win. The problem is, nothing is getting accomplished. I want the democrats to give me a reason to vote for them. But when the question is asked, "what are you going to do for this country" and the response is to blame the current person in power for the problems, you're not going to get very many opposite party votes. Just as much as the democrats want change, so do the republicans. Quit tearing apart the republicans and telling us why we're wrong.

[CBrownFanClub]

The sooner democrats realize we still live in a conservative country and quit trying to bring up their agendas that do not belong in the federal arena, the better it will be for that party.

I would really like to pursue why you are so sure this is true. I know "facts" are a real inconvenience, but before I just believe something posted on a message board, i would love to get some sort of information to support the argument. Evidence is hard to put together, but things like - i dont know - science and law are founded on the idea of facts and proof. So before an entire party tears itself apart because - as you suggest - the country is opposed to their ideaology, some sort of proof or facts might be helpful. Just because some links and media articles are propoganda does not mean they all are, nor does it mean that "Facts" are inherently untruthful. That would appear to be your argument.

Now, one might argue that the person who argues that facts are lies might not be that reliable a source.

I never said the country is liberal, I dont believe that. I dont the the country is predominantly democrat. I thinks its close. I believe the results of the past two presidential election support this, seeing as though they were quite close.

[Space Ghost]

did you vote for bush in 04 because you believed he can solve all those?

I was not pro-bush or anti-bush... I was anti-kerry because he could not answer these questions. Even though I thought Bush was not good for the country, and a piss poor plan, at least he had a plan.

When it comes down to it, the best thing for this country happened... and that was a democratic house and senate to be elected.

[Sishir Chang]

The sooner democrats realize we still live in a conservative country and quit trying to bring up their agendas that do not belong in the federal arena, the better it will be for that party.

The same could be said for the Republicans.

At the moment neither party captures a majority of what the country wants and likely can't given how divided the country is. A liberal Democratic agenda no more reflects Kansas than a conservative Republican agenda represents California.

[Space Ghost]

I never said the country is liberal, I dont believe that. I dont the the country is predominantly democrat. I thinks its close. I believe the results of the past two presidential election support this, seeing as though they were quite close.

I believe you have answered your question here. The old cliche goes, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease". I do not believe any mainstream thought/stat that comes from CNN/Fox/ect ... to be gospel. You can make a stat say anything if you word it correctly.

I do not believe this country is predominately conservative, but there is still a strong conservative mindset. I do not have any hardcore evidence to suggest this, but just as you said, the last two elections have given evidence to this. I believe our country is more so in the middle, strongly swayed by what we see on the major news networks and only hear the "sqeaky wheel".



The same could be said for the Republicans.

At the moment neither party captures a majority of what the country wants and likely can't given how divided the country is. A liberal Democratic agenda no more reflects Kansas than a conservative Republican agenda represents California.

You're correct. The Republicans are far from being right.

And im not trying to debate whether abortion, gay rights, ect ... are right or not, I just believe they should be left up to the states. We complain that the federal government is too controlling, but we keep bringing everything to them when we don't get our way in the state supreme court...this goes for both parties. I believe when it comes presidental election time, and if both parties would agree to answer these items as state issues and not comment on them, and would concentrate on global issues regarding our country, we would have a very different election and more unity.

[Sishir Chang]

If the democrats want my vote, then tell me what you plan on doing for our country's problems. What are you going to do about this war? That is a federal problem. What are you going to do about health care. That is a federal problem. What are you going to do about the increasing problem of jobs being outsourced, less production being exported and the increase goods being imported and the dollar losing its value on the international market?? What about the shrinking middle class, and the increasing division between the poor and the rich?? What about global warming?? I know! BLAME BUSH!

The Democrats have put forward plans on all of those things. I won't say they are good plans or I agree with them but they have put out plans.

[weslinder]

The same could be said for the Republicans.

At the moment neither party captures a majority of what the country wants and likely can't given how divided the country is. A liberal Democratic agenda no more reflects Kansas than a conservative Republican agenda represents California.

Again, Federalism is the only answer to a country as large and diverse as ours. If only we had a system like that.

[weslinder]

the dollar losing its value on the international market??

I have a hypothesis about this, and I don't think there's much we can do about it. Hear me out:

The facts: Despite having the strongest economy in the world at one of it's highest growth rates in history, international bankers are selling dollars for Euros. This can't be fully explained by Federal Debt, because Europe as a whole is in even worse debt than the United States.

My hypothesis: The international bankers think that the United States (or at least multinational corporations) will convert to the Euro (if the US adopts it, it'll be renamed). They are converting dollars to Euros, devaluing the dollar, while pumping up the Euro. Eventually, this will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

[Dreamshake]

My goodness, libs are stupid.


Says the chickenhawk with the misused stupid quote in his signature. Talk about the pot calling the kettle. LOL.

[Sishir Chang]

Again, Federalism is the only answer to a country as large and diverse as ours. If only we had a system like that.

Actually we do. Its called the US Constitution. Too bad people don't pay as much attention to it. :(

[DaDakota]

Actually we do. Its called the US Constitution. Too bad the President doesn't pay as much attention to it. :(

There I fixed it for you.

DD

[rhester]

Since most of us are brainwashed to the Republican/Democrat dictatorship it will be hard to understand and examine the truth about our political parties- If you vote Republican or Democrat you are a part of the problem because these two parties both represent the same industrial/banker/political cartel.

Here is one place you should at least start to read-

http://www.democracyisnotfreedom.com/bipartisanmonopoly01.asp

[Sishir Chang]

There I fixed it for you.

DD

The current President has abused the Constitution but he's not alone. The growth of Federal power vs. the States is due to both parties.

[rodrick_98]

To show how short minded people are, who exactly would take Bushes place for the remainder of the few months of presidency? Is that a better solution??

correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't the speaker of the house 3rd in line?

[ryan17wagner]

Wait....we have a state named Vermont!?

[Deckard]

Wait....we have a state named Vermont!?
Yes, and it's beautiful! We went that way last summer, and ended up in the White Mountains of New Hampshire for a few days. During our travels, we zipped through part of Vermont. That whole area is groovy. :)



D&D. Chumps Abide!

[DCkid]

Yes, and it's beautiful! We went that way last summer, and ended up in the White Mountains of New Hampshire for a few days. During our travels, we zipped through part of Vermont. That whole area is groovy. :)



D&D. Chumps Abide!

Yes, just wenting skiing in Stowe, Vermont. Very beautiful state.

[Aceshigh7]

aside from the already mentioned points such as iraq lies, domestic spying, torture and constitutional violations i would add...

2) north american union and the destruction of our nation's sovereignty and bush's failure/unwillingness to control illegal immigration.

This is the one point I wholeheartedly agree with you on. Bush has been a complete joke where illegal immigration is concerned. I'd be all for impeaching him on this case. However, most of the democratic party in the house would need to be impeached as well. As well as Bill Clinton for his pathetic 8 years of doing nothing to secure our borders.

There are very few politicians in either party with the fortitude to fight illegal immigration. And that is one of the biggest failures of the government.