Kucinich`s Articles of Impeachment: A Three-Part Guide

More details on the move by Congressman Dennis Kucinich to Impeach George W. Bush.

(SALEM, Ore.) - Reprinted by permission from The Public Record (www.pubrecord.org)

It is entirely possible to be a reasonably well-informed citizen of the United States and not know that on June 9th 2008, Representative Dennis Kucinich (D. Ohio) took to the floor of the House of Representatives and spent over four hours reading thirty-five Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush.

Even worse, it is not merely possible, but likely, that the vast majority of people who have been more than willing to ignore or ridicule those charges have not read them. Or, if they have read them, they have found the allegations and citations so overwhelming they just switch off their minds. Perhaps surprisingly, I understand this phenomenon quite well.

I spent many years attempting to present complex and disturbing information to people in the context of criminal indictments and cases. And the truth is that legal documents are confusing to everyone, including lawyers. Much as I hate to admit it, for example, I have never been able to plow through our family will, so for all I know, our very meager estate has been designated by my husband to be held in trust for the care and feeding of ferrets.

But the House Judiciary Committee does not, of course, have the luxury of being so cavalier. For the past seven years, we have watched as evidence of President Bush’s deceit, contempt of Congress and abuse of power has piled up like rank seaweed on a beach. We cannot, in this summer of 2008, simply step around it and pretend it’s not there. There is a constitutional process to follow and we must follow it.

If the threat of terrorism is not a reason to disregard the constitution – and it is not – then surely neither is an election.

So I have decided to offer some help, a modest contribution in the one area I know best: the presentation of charges. It’s a Three-Part Guide to the Articles of Impeachment. There is nothing fancy here -- no sarcasm, no vitriol and no cynicism. Part I is a chart that itemizes the Articles of Impeachment with a subheading and a longer description. Part II is also a chart which itemizes U.S. and international laws that are implicated by the charges in the Articles of Impeachment. (Quite properly, not every impeachable offense is based on a specific legal violation.) In Part III, to come early next week, I will present an opening statement setting forth - just as a prosecutor would do before a trial -what the evidence would show with regard to these allegations.

Forward them around, if you would. At the very least – before we decide to ignore it --we should all clearly and unflinchingly apprehend the nature and scope of this executive misconduct and its consequent human misery and damage to our country.

Elizabeth de la Vega is a former federal prosecutor with more than 20 years of experience. During her tenure, she was a member of the Organized Crime Strike Force and chief of the San Jose Branch of the US attorney's office for the Northern District of California.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Henry Ruark June 29, 2008 12:32 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Outstanding --and outspoken ! - reference just found, which I recommend for your own evaluation: www.bestcyrano.org/THOMASPAINE/?p=769

Henry Ruark June 27, 2008 2:52 pm (Pacific time)

GoC et al: Au contraire, friend G/C ! Your intentional distortion to substitute YOUR choice of "OR" becomes most revealing since it also illuminates your shocking lack of sensitivity to what has now actually happened, is all over Internet and heavily documented by at least 15 national-source statements. IF you ID-self to Editor Tim for direct contact --something you have never done despite at least ten prior invitations-- will share all of them, and more accumulating today, with YOU or anyone else with open ID. Your comment compatible only with contempt for Constitution as last-resort safety-wall for all others in nation --which is force of sources-mentioned. Not worth further here, in deference to other honest user and sharer participants, but will still hope for you the same protections, if ever needed, that you are so ready to discard with unthinking denial of why impeachment now is more demanded than ever...and fact that at least five have been undertaken in similar late-tenure timing --a fact of which you are clearly ignorant.

Godsofchaos June 26, 2008 7:46 am (Pacific time)

"Or, if they have read them, they have found the allegations and citations so overwhelming they just switch off their minds."Salem News Or they remember that Bush is about to leave office and an impeachment trial is pointless.

Henry Ruark June 22, 2008 5:22 pm (Pacific time)

STS et al: Admire your kind approach, but must also advise you will find some completely unable to realize reality even when it bites back. If he had any facts to offer he would not find it necessary to resort to tell-tale talk, technique and tactics strongly demonstrated here and in other comments. We welcome all, but some are immediately so offensive they demand remediation to offset virus infection common from such invection and inflection, as from other commonly encountered diseases. Neocon nonentity has long ago proven its infective power as demonstrated by our common plight, now so evident to so many, yet overlooked, defended and further extended in impact by just such as this. As with some other vile diseases, there is no cure known to civilized man -- or woman, either !! But thank you for your kind and continuing insightful participation, as demonstrated here for some time.

Henry Ruark June 23, 2008 7:11 pm (Pacific time)

sts et al: You are citing the "unitary executive theory" (read IMPERIAL Presidency) main and only reason-for-being; that's the WHO if we allow any such precedent to stand. No matter time-left, nor lack of Congressional will, or any other delay-factor anyone can cite: If we do not follow Constitutional process NOW, when we EVER AGAIN do so, for any other merciless, remorseless leader OR cabal ? Favorite line of prosecutor for whom I chaired Grand Jury for 4 months was: "Murder is murder, and must be cleared or may become 'habitual'" --which makes the point strongly for me.

sts June 23, 2008 6:23 pm (Pacific time)

I do not mind 'change' even if it is against my desires. I do not mind mistakes, I make them myself. But hey, we have a Constitution. The Constitution not only has rules to be followed, but allows amendments to be made for changing times. Its perfect. But by breaking the Constitutional rules, and not using the perfection of the allowance of amendments, is downright wrong in my opinion. It is breaking the law, no matter how anyone wants to dress it up. And it is happening more and more every day. My concern comes from this. When the Constitution is ignored, WHO gets to make the rules? Bush? Obama? McCain? Our do nothing lieing Congress? Think about that.

Henry Ruark June 23, 2008 7:15 am (Pacific time)

Remis et al: Yours to John excellent guide, friend R. Would add only be sure you check both sides of record for whom broke what, when, and how often. Surprising how essential that is, right up there with WHY the "break" was done. Sometimes change, as you wisely point out, forces the break; sometimes it is obvious that the kind of untrustworthy motives you impply are really at work. Given the unforgiving,long and twisted public record of neocon deceit, due to their longpublicized attitude of "win at any cost, even betrayal", choice becomes clearer even without other parts of putrid public record.

Remis June 22, 2008 9:17 am (Pacific time)

John it is a long time till November and the candidates will be up and down over that time period. There may even be different candidates after the upcoming conventions. It is my hope that the tenor of debate will remain civilized, but when you start to see people called names because they are sharing an observation, then you know they are not happy with the way things are going for their candidate. Candidates will always be seen moderating their positions on different issues, and this is good, because things are changing all the time, but when you have a candidate break a promise, then you need to pay real close attention.

sts June 22, 2008 6:57 am (Pacific time)

John: I think every impeachment article is absolutely true and beyond approach, and that people who commit crimes should be accountable. I am not for one side or against another side, I just seek truth. If I am missing something, I would be open to any evidence you have that the words Dennis speaks are untrue. I have done much research, but maybe you know something I dont? I am always open to correction, but in this case, I dont see any evidence that these crimes were not committed. thanks

Henry Ruark June 21, 2008 7:55 pm (Pacific time)

John: Do not miss additional comment under preceding Op Ed "Mea Culpa". Are you perhaps suffering from extreme denial, as in denial-of-denial ? That can be particularly painful if you have permitted yourself to be profoundly propagandized (read brain-washed), demonstrated by irration allegiance to deep and dirty political nostrums over long periods of time. Has been known to result in extreme addiction to further crap-sensation even when treated with massive vote-massage.

Henry Ruark June 21, 2008 7:35 pm (Pacific time)

John et al: Your ignorance of reality is surpassed only by extent of failure in your crap-detector system. Unfortunately only remedy for those symptoms is new vote, rapidly approaching, in depth, intensity and new directions as never for past 50 years. Meantime try heavy shot of NeOxOdol, to which you can always add another depreciated dollar well demolished, if further relief needed. Donlt mind bad taste, if any, unavoidable due to perversion via inflationary distortions. OR, as last resort, take by mouth handful of overdrawn credit cards, but be sure to masticate thoroughly. Oh, pardon --"masticate" means chew --on this for instance. Enjoy !!

John June 21, 2008 3:28 pm (Pacific time)

I'm glad only democrats pay attention to this crap (spewing from other democrats)- The reason most people aren't listening to Kucinich's rants is because the crap he's spewing is only true to the far-left Bush haters. The sad part is that Obama may ride this crapolanche all the way to the whitehouse.

Henry Ruark June 21, 2008 1:28 pm (Pacific time)

STS et al: Dunno re fearful Congressmen but it makes some sense. Re Dems want allathatpower, one more reason for using the complete process Constitution puts into place --setting a precedent for its power prior to one for its impotence. "Off-table" earlier on might have slight justification; but NOT NOW, with Kucinich et al demanding Congress fulfill its responsibilities and act while "regime" is still "regiming" and not disappearing over the hill, until "new book" time; with precedent-set to avoid any "war crimes" consequences since 'Americans did not act".

sts June 21, 2008 11:23 am (Pacific time)

I cant find the link right now, but two different congressmen have stated that they will not impeach bush because they are afraid bush will attack iran, institute martial law, and suspend the election. The dems feel strong about winning the election this year, so, they are just waiting it out.I think the headline to this story was "I thought we did not negotiate with terrorists" Also, the reason the dems are not fighting bush's policies more, is because THEY want all that power when THEY get the white house.

Cindy June 21, 2008 10:03 am (Pacific time)

Bravo Salem-News! Once again, it seems this is the source where the news truly happens. I didn't recall reading anything about this on one of the major news sites, so I did a search. Nothing came up. How dare they selectively censure the news?

Keystone June 20, 2008 11:05 pm (Pacific time)

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security".

[Return to Top]

Kucinich`s Articles of Impeachment: A Three-Part Guide

Quick Links

DINING

MUST SEE SALEM

AUCTIONS - APPRAISALS

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

ONLINE SHOPPING

Advertise with Salem-News