Any interest in impeachment?

I got the email below recently:

Dear Friends,

At the beginning of April, I submitted a guest commentary to the Asheville Citizen-Times on the need for impeachment of Bush and Cheney. I waited patiently for them to print it. Each week, I would gently inquire when or if they would print it.

Over the last ten years they have printed, to the best of my recollection, all the commentaries I have submitted. Some have been highly critical of the Bush administration; some have been about peace in general; and some have been about climate change and energy use.

Friday, I finally received this response:

There doesn't seem to be any interest, Kim. Sorry.

Is that true?

Are people not interested in integrity in our national government?

Are citizens not interested in defending the Constitution?

Are folks not interested in seeing justice served?

Heath Shuler refuses to respond to this issue. NGOs that deal with public policy have also been unwilling to deal with it.Something's happening here. What it is ain't exactly clear.What's at stake: Without impeachment, the precedent of the "unitary executive" will become established. Imagine President McCain (or Clinton or Obama) acting with total disregard for Congress. Do you think we can demonstrate that there is interest in impeachment?

PLEASE TAKE ACTION:

1. Send a letter to the editor of the Citizen-Times. (Need some ammo? See http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Impeachment_campaign.vp.html.) Keep it simple if you like, even one sentence. It doesn't matter if they print it; it will tell them that someone is interested in impeachment. (Even if you're against impeachment, send a message. Maybe we can have a debate in the newspaper.)

Go to http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage and, at the upper left of the screen, click on "Submit Letter to the Editor."

2. Ask your e-mail connections and other listservs to do the same (forward this message if you like.)

3. Send letters to other publications.

Meanwhile, I intend to send my unpublished commentary to every publication I can think of. If you'd like to read it, let me know I'll send it to you.

For peace, justice, and eco-solidarity,

Kim

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

AND HERE IS THE OP-ED PIECE (reprinted with permission):

Impeachment Is Not an “Option”

The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

--The United States Constitution

Human conduct is guided by mutually-accepted rules. Some are implicit and unwritten such as the cultural mores and customs that guide our social interactions. Others are formal and codified such as the bylaws of the garden club or the articles of incorporation for a business.

Without rules to guide human interactions, some activities would end in chaos (imagine a baseball game in which players disregard the Official Baseball Rules) or possible bodily harm and property damage (when a driver ignores the Rules of the Road).

Civilized society would degenerate into anarchy without rules of law. Nations are guided by their constitutions; conduct among nations is regulated by treaties and other international agreements. The U.S. Constitution has guided America for two centuries and become a model document for other emerging democracies; and our country is party to many international agreements including the United Nations Charter and the Geneva Conventions.

When people abide by the rules, we have order; and to have order, all people must abide by the rules. No one, even at the highest levels of government, is above the rule of law. Yet high officials do occasionally challenge the rules. Richard Nixon gained notoriety for acting on his belief that the law did not apply to him. He once said, “When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Nonetheless, he was forced to resign his office under the pressure of impending impeachment on charges of obstructing justice.

With a similar sense of exclusive privilege, President Bush attaches “signing statements” to new laws enacted by Congress, claiming they do not apply to him. But beyond this contempt for the process of our nation’s government, Bush and Cheney have flagrantly and frequently violated long-established rules: the Constitution and historic international treaties.

Enough evidence has been presented (even in the mainstream media for goodness sake!) to support a very strong case that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney have broken laws with reckless abandon. Warrantless wiretapping violates our Fourth Amendment right to be secure against unreasonable searches. Torture violates the Geneva Conventions. Divulging the identity of a covert U.S. agent is treason. Lying to Congress and the American people to promote an illegal (in violation of the United Nations Charter) invasion and occupation of Iraq has resulted in hundreds of thousands of lost lives and hundreds of billions of dollars of debt to pass along to our children. And this is just the beginning of a long list!

Impeachment is the Constitutional mechanism for holding federal officials accountable for their actions. It is the first step of a process that could lead to trial in the Senate and removal from office. Impeachment is not an option, it is a duty—note that the opening quotation says, “shall be removed,” not “might be removed,” nor “possibly could be removed,” nor “removed if the political climate is right.”

When rule breakers are not held to account, breaking the rules becomes acceptable. The great danger of failing to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for their misdeeds is that this administration’s actions would become precedent for all subsequent administrations. The mere thought that Bush-Cheney’s (mis)conduct could become the standard scares me more than any terrorist threat.

A number of House members are calling for impeachment; a bill has been introduced but it needs more support. To date, our member of Congress, Heath Shuler (who campaigned two years ago on accountability in government), has failed to respond when asked if he will hold Bush and Cheney accountable. Perhaps if more of his constituents would ask him to honor his campaign promise and his oath of office to defend the Constitution, he would take a favorable stance and help move the process forward.

You say, “Relax. They’ll be gone in January.” I say, “Wake up! Bring these serial abusers of our Constitution to justice! If someone abused your child, would you just relax and wait for them to go away? I think not!”

You say, “The Senate won’t convict.” I say, “Let them hear the evidence and feel the public pressure.”

You say, “It would be a distraction.” I say, “From what? What’s more important Congressional business than restoring the integrity of our government?”

For diehard supporters of the administration, look at it this way. Bush and Cheney have been maligned by the press, the pundits, and the public—poor George even gets booed at the national pastime! Let them clear their names. Let’s give them due process and a fair trial. (That’s more than they would do for us.)

Kim Carlyle is a member of Veterans for Peace. See more information on impeachment charges at http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Impeachment_campaign.vp.html and http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/.

(Photo is of me standing on a local bridge over I-240.)