"The 35 Articles of Impeachment and the Case for Prosecuting George W. Bush"Why Impeach? | Lies | Uranium/Niger | Torture | Aluminum Tubes | Wiretaps | Subpoenas | Treaties | HJR114 | Talking Points |
Updated 12/8/06 PRINTABLE
These talking points argue that Bush has commited impeachable offenses.
Talking Point Rebuttals - Impeachable Offenses
- When they say "Bush has commited no crimes."
- When they say "Bush himself was misled by faulty intelligence on Iraq."
- When they say "Bush was authorized by Congress to invade Iraq so they are equally guilty."
- When they say "Iraq actually did have WMD. Several hundred shells were found."
- When they say "Bush was justified in using illegal wiretaps to fight terrorism."
- When they say that "Bush is opposed to torture and that Abu Ghraib was just some out of control soldiers."
- When they say "The kidnapping and torture of prisoners is justified to fight evil enemies."
When they say "Bush has commited no crimes."
- A President does not have to commit an ordinary criminal offense in order to be impeached. Governing in a way that undermines the Constitution or harming America is sufficient. But...
- Bush has actually violated several US laws including:
- Title 50 United States Code, Section 1805, the FISA law regulating wiretaps.
- Title 18 United States Code, Section 113C, the Federal Torture Act
- Title 18 United States Code, Section 371, conspiracy to defraud the United States Congress about Iraq
- According to the US Constitution, international treaties are part of the Supreme Law of the Land. Bush has violated:
- the UN Charter by invading Iraq,
- the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners and holding them without access to counsel.
- Here is an analysis of what constitutes an impeachable offense.
When they say "Bush himself was misled by faulty intelligence on Iraq."
- Bush asked the intelligence community for anything they could possibly provide that supported war with Iraq. Intelligence operatives reported that they knew any information that did not support Bush's agenda would be igniored.
- The July 2002 Downing Street Memo that detailed a meeting with Tony Blair, describes how Bush was intent on war with Iraq "justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD " but "the case was thin" so " intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy".
- In March of 2002, Joseph Wilson reported that there was no evidence Niger sold uranium to Iraq. Bush was warned repeatedly by the CIA and foreign intelligence that the documents of sale were probably forged and unreliable. But Bush used the story in his January 2003 State of the Union speech to scare the public.
- In October of 2002, the DOE concluded that the infamous aluminum tubes were unsuitable for use in uranium gas centrifuges and were probably intended for use in conventional rockets. But in his January 2003 State of the Union speech Bush said "Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
- Immediately after 9/11, Bush and Cheney started linking Iraq and 9/11 in so many speeches that a majority of Americans actually believed there was a connection despite a complete lack of evidence. Sadly 85% of US troops in Iraq still believe this is the reason they are there. Bush admitted that there was no connection in 2003 but continues to link them in his speeches.
- Bush setup a team in the Pentagon called the Office of Special Plans whose purpose was to distort intelligence to support justification for war.
- Bush set up WHIG, the White House Iraq Group, to mold public opinion on Iraq and to justify war.
- Senator John Rockefeller describes a Senate report saying that Bush misled Congress about Iraq.
- More details at http://www.impeachbush.tv/args/iraqlies.html
When they say "Bush was authorized by Congress to invade Iraq so they are equally guilty."
- They are probably referring to HJR114. The only reason Congress signed it is because they had been fooled by Bush into thinking Iraq was an imminent threat and was harboring Al Qaeda. This is called "fraud in the inducement". So the authorization was invalid. Read more...
- HJR114 specifically stated that it did not "supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution." The War Powers Resolution requires that existing international treaties be observed but Bush violated the UN Charter by invading Iraq. So Bush overstepped his authority.
- Bush was required by HJR114 to show that the threat could not be resolved by diplomacy. But diplomacy and the UN inspections were keeping Iraq safely under control. Bush misled Congress about the threat and, therefore, did not fulfill his commitments under HJR114, invalidating his authority.
When they say "Iraq did have WMD. Several hundred shells were found."
- They are probably referring to the 500 shells that were touted by Senator Rick Santorum as evidence of WMD. These were old degraded shells leftover from the war with Iran. Sarin and most other chemical weapons are highly reactive and, therefore, have a short shelf life. They were essentially useless as weapons. [WashPost]
When they say "Bush was justified in using illegal wiretaps to fight terrorism"
- Bush can immediately place a wiretap on anyone that he has a "reasonable suspicion" is connected with terrorism. He then has 72 hours to seek approval from the FISA court. For example, airplane bomber Dandeny Munoz-Mosquera was captured in 1991 by using an emergency wiretap that was legal under the 72 hour rule.
- The FISA court routinely approves warrants for suspected terrorists or al Qaeda members. They would have approved any legitimate for monitoring a suspected terrorist? Read more...
- Bush tries to justify their legality using very old court decisions. But the 1978 FISA law supersedes those decisions and make warrantless wiretaps illegal. There are no laws or resolutions that have overturned the FISA law.
- Bush claims that HJRes144, the resolution to defend against Iraq, places him above the law. But there is nothing in HJRes114 to suggest that.
When they say that Bush is opposed to torture and that Abu Ghraib was just some out of control soldiers, you can say:
- Bush worked with Alberto Gonzales to develop policies that allowed torture. Read more...
- Bush and Cheney fought hard against John McCain's attempts to pass anti-torture laws. When Bush signed the law he also issued a signing statement that gave him permission to torture.
- The soldiers at Abu Ghraib said they were instructed by military intelligence and officers to torture prisoners.
- The CIA has a system for transporting prisoners to foreign countries where they can be tortured. This could not be done without the highest level of authorization.
When they say the kidnapping and torture of prisoners is justified to fight evil enemies, you can say:
- We are only good guys if we act like good guys. If we kidnap and torture people then we become the kind of bad guys that we are supposedly fighting against.
- Torture is considered ineffective by professional interrogators. People will make up lies to stop being tortured.
- Torture is usually used for revenge or to intimidate and terrorize populations.
- If we kidnap and torture then more people will hate the USA, making us less secure.
- Kidnapping and torture are illegal under US and International Law.
- Many innocent people have been kidnapped and tortured since 9/11. Maher Arar, for example, simply worked with someone whose brother supported al Qaeda in 1997, long before 9/11. For that he spent a year in a small dark cell and was repeatedly beaten and tortured.
- Torture was not limited to the dramatic "ticking bomb" situation. Many thousands of prisoners were tortured. Remember the famous picture of the fellow with his arms spread and wires dangling from his body? He was arrested for carjacking, not terrorism.
