Congressman calls for Bush impeachment
Posted on December 19, 2005
This is getting ridiculous.
U.S. Rep. John Lewis said Monday in a radio interview that President Bush should be impeached if he broke the law in authorizing spying on Americans.
The Democratic senator from Georgia told WAOK-AM he would sign a bill of impeachment if one was drawn up and that the House of Representatives should consider such a move.
Lewis is among several Democrats who have voiced discontent with Sunday night’s television speech, where Bush asked Americans to continue to support the Iraq War. Lewis is the first major House figure to suggest impeaching Bush.
“Its a very serious charge, but he violated the law,” said Lewis, a former civil rights leader. “The president should abide by the law. He deliberately, systematically violated the law. He is not King, he is president.”source
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) today asked four presidential scholars for their opinion on former White House Counsel John Dean’s statement that President Bush admitted to an “impeachable offense” when he said he authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans without getting a warrant from a judge.
Boxer said, “I take very seriously Mr. Dean’s comments, as I view him to be an expert on Presidential abuse of power. I am expecting a full airing of this matter by the Senate in the very near future.”
Today the President defended himself in a press conference..
So, consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution, I authorized the interception of international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations. This program is carefully reviewed approximately every 45 days to ensure it is being used properly. Leaders in the United States Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this program. And it has been effective in disrupting the enemy, while safeguarding our civil liberties.
We’re at war, and we must protect America’s secrets. And so the Justice Department, I presume, will proceed forward with a full investigation. I haven’t ordered one, because I understand there’s kind of a natural progression that will take place when this kind of leak emerges.
Michelle Malkin has a great roundup on this.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales: press briefing:
Another very important point to remember is that we have to have a reasonable basis to conclude that one party to the communication is a member of al Qaeda, affiliated with al Qaeda, or a member of an organization affiliated with al Qaeda, or working in support of al Qaeda. We view these authorities as authorities to confront the enemy in which the United States is at war with — and that is al Qaeda and those who are supporting or affiliated with al Qaeda.
What we’re trying to do is learn of communications, back and forth, from within the United States to overseas with members of al Qaeda. And that’s what this program is about.
The federal government has broad power to search people entering or leaving the United States, without a warrant, as you know if you’ve ever crossed one of our borders. So, tapping international phone calls — in the context of the GWOT — may well have been “reasonable” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.
The left think they have found a new mantra, and they obviously are not listening to any of this. It is absolutely ridicuolus for this senator to continue to play politics when our president has done nothing but his duty to protect Americans. Its time to wake up to the real world. The continuation of playing politics with such important issues while our Country faces real danger is damaging America, and putting citizens in danger. For these Congress members to call for an Impeachment reveals exactly what they are about, power and nothing more. They are putting aside the leaking of classified information, and thwarting the efforts of our President to do his job protecting America. They are doing nothing but playing politics in a time of war. They should be ashamed. Wake up! We are at war!
Others: Blogs for Bush
» Filed Under News, War On Terror
Trackback URL
Comments
14 Responses to “Congressman calls for Bush impeachment”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
What law was broken?
The Democrats continue to jump at whatever flies by to prove they can’t be trusted with national security. Good thing, as we’re still running a big deficit on conservative justices.
An Impeachment trial for going after terrorists? Bring it on.
No laws have been broken. Keep in mind what Echelon and Carnivore/Omnivore did and who was President when they were originally adopted. Echelon automatically scans all electronic communications for keywords. And when they are detected, the system monitors all communications from that source. So in a sense, all that President Bush’s authorization does is expand echelon and targets those who the government has identified as potential terrorists. So to answer your question Kender my friend, no laws have been broken.
sorry for not giving a pithy comment.
/rant
What exactly does this administration have to do before you hold them accountable for anything? Break into your house personally and steal something? Lying to provoke a war, spying on it’s own citizens, dropping bombs and executing while drooling like idiots over the Ten Commandments - how can you justify all this and still sleep at night? Unbelievable.
Only when they bust abortion protestors for racketeering are such tactics okay. Damn liberals!
Very interesting. Many folks seem to dismiss the “Authorization for Use of Military Force” bill which was signed into law on September 18th, 2001. It is a great read.
The political hacks want it like i have read about on other blogs this evening, something like this - “Catch the Jihadist’s, but don’t spy on them”. But, when Clinton was in office, all those liberal folks sure were on the other side of the issue. They just don’t get it. Everyone should remember who is spouting all this nonsense come election time, in all seats and races, and give someone else with a moral conscience an opportunity to defend our America.
Where to start? The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act did not, and could not, enact limits on the President’s constitutional authority.
Had the FISA attempted to do so, the efforts would be pre-empted by the 1972 Supreme Court decision in United States v. US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan et al, (407 U.S. 297).
In other words, the relevant Presidential authority had been upheld by the Supremes six years before FISA was enacted. But before or after, no act of congress can impact constitutional authority.
Hugh Hewitt has an excellent summary of this, “Presidential Power and the Surveillance of Foreign Powers Conspiring with U.S. Citizens,” which includes relevant Senate floor debate exchanges of Senators Hart, Holland and McClellan on the point, as well as Justice Jackson’s concurring opinion and about 16 pages of on-point footnotes:
http://www.hughhewitt.com
President Bush acted well within his authority, and he did so with scrupulous care to keep the Legislative Branch fully informed through their designated leaders and committees.
Whether congressional Democrats are displaying deliberate obtuseness for partisan effect, or are truly so uninformed and misinformed about their own areas of responsibility — they are walking parodies and should be thrown out of office if not tarred and feathered.
His authority?
Okay. Cite the law. And the Fourth Amendment doesn’t cover this.
And while he kept the legislative branch informed, that wasn’t the branch that counted, kids.
King Bastard …
U.S. Code: Title 50, 1801 Chapter 36, Subchapter I
subsection (b)(1) is the part that applies to foreigners; (b)(2) covers everybody.
Deleted due to profanity!
Okay Clarkslic, prove your THEORIES. Lying to provoke a war? You have proof of this lie? Before you go screaming about WMDs like the rest of the libs that ran out of material, keep in mind that was one of about 16 reasons why we went to war with Iraq. What is it about violating Gulf War Treaties that you libs can’t understand? As far as dropping bombs and executing, what do you expect? Oh, I forgot, Saddam killing millions of Kurds and making snuff films out of their children doesn’t qualifiy to you people. Cite the law that was broken, provide evidence that U.S. citizens were being illegally spied upon, or go fishing elsewhere.
The difference between a democracy (or a democratic republic) and a dictatorship, is that power is shared between branches of government in our democracy. No one, not a senator, not a judge, not the president has unlimited power. All must obey the law.
When a man says he is the law, as Mr. Bush has implied in stating “I broke the law and I’ll keep breaking the law.” he is in effect a dictator. The road to fascism is not trod in a single step, nor is the transistion from president to dictator. Allowing the president to put himself above, the law, destroys the law and we are nothing if not a nation of laws.
If the president needs the power, he must go to congress and they must create a law for him, if it does not conflict with the constitution. The constitution is the highest law of the land, it cannot be overuled by congress, or judges, or the president and if we let anyone including the president violate the consitution wihthout reprimand, we weaken the constitution for every citizen and risk destroying the freedoms that make this country great.
George Bush cannot get permission from congress to do what is illegal. I cannot speed, just by calling the police and telling them I intend to. It does grant immunity from the law. The law is clear, the president needs a warrant from a court. He may get a warrant retroactively (after the fact) if haste makes it so, but he still needs a warrant. He must tell the court who he is listening to. If the president is afraid to tell a secret court who he is listening to, I have a feeling it is his political enemies, rather than terrorist.
George Bush may accomplish what the terrorist cannot, he make take our freedoms, if we let him.
If you think anything is more important than your freedoms, including winning a war, than you are a fool, because you have won the war but lost your life and your childrens lives. You’ve have destroyed your own country. I would rather be dead than a slave, perhaps you need to reconsider exactly which path you think is the one that makes this country strong and free.
Well I guess Bush is okay then since nothing he’s done has conflicted with the law.