Nonviolence: Twenty-Five Lessons from the History of a Dangerous Idea
A Force More Powerful: A Century of Nonviolent Conflict
Waging Nonviolent Struggle: 20th Century Practice and 21st Century Potential
A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr.
The 35 Articles of Impeachment and the Case for Prosecuting George W. Bush
The Trial of Donald Rumsfeld
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder
Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law
United States v. George W. Bush et al.
The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism
Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush
The Impeachment of George W. Bush: A Practical Guide for Concerned Citizens
The Case for Impeachment
Impeach the President: The Case Against Bush and Cheney
George W. Bush versus the U.S. Constitution: The Downing Street Memos and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Cover-ups in the Iraq War and Illegal Domestic Spying
Verdict and Findings of Fact
Impeach Bush: A Funny Li'l Graphical Novel About the Worstest Pres'dent in the History of Forevar
Pretensions to Empire: Notes on the Criminal Folly of the Bush Administration
The Twilight of Democracy: The Bush Plan for America
Foreclose on the White House
By David Swanson
If you've lost your house to a predatory lender and you ask your congress member to impeach Bush and Cheney for your loss, will they look at you like you're crazy? That depends entirely on how many of you are asking.
If there are not enough of you, they'll look at you like you're crazy for suggesting impeachment as a response to illegal wars, lies to Congress, misappropriation of funds, rewriting bills with "signing statements," warrantless spying, extra-legal detentions, torture, war crimes, refusal to comply with subpoenas, or just about anything else. The White House could make the occupation of Iraq permanent or ignore a major hurricane or expose an undercover agent as payback for a whistleblower, and you'd get the "You've got to be nuts" look for suggesting impeachment if there weren't enough of you. As a matter of fact, many of us already have.
But if the 81% of Americans who disapprove of the job Bush is doing as president were to demand his removal, he'd be out on his ear faster than you can rig an election, award a no-bid contract, or fire an honest prosecutor.
A different question, of course, is whether, in asking for impeachment as a response to losing your house, you really would be crazy. On what grounds, after all, could you really argue that Bush and Cheney stole your house?
Well, actually pretty solid ones in a lot of cases. They didn't do it single-handedly, but they did it. A one-month moratorium on foreclosures is a joke, but it illustrates what the White House could do if it wanted to. It could institute a 5-year moratorium on foreclosures. To not do so is arguably as gross a failure by the President to perform his duties as has been his response to Hurricane Katrina, his reaction to pre-9-11 warnings, or his sending troops into battle without body armor, all sins of omission for which constitutional experts much better informed than I have argued he should be impeached.
But Bush and Cheney have not just failed to respond to the immediate crisis. Their actions have largely created it. Whether you are convinced, as I am, that they deserve much of the blame for the growing recession, you would be hard-pressed to exculpate them in the area of mortgage industry regulation.
Bush appoints and oversees the Secretary of the Treasury and all of the federal financial regulators. Federal banking regulations tend to trump state and local measures. In fact, early in the Bush-Cheney years I spent a lot of time trying to pass bills to protect borrowers from predatory lenders, dishonest mortgage lenders who mislead people into loans with the goal of forcing them to refinance again and again, paying additional fees each time, with the ultimate outcome being foreclosure. This outcome was sought, not avoided, by these lenders who profit precisely by making "bad" lending decisions. Working at ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, I watched our members lobby successfully for local ordinances. However, in some cases the state legislatures stepped in and erased all local protections. Then a bill was proposed in Congress to ban all state and local protections in one fell swoop. That bill has not yet passed. Its leading proponent was Bush-Cheney crony, and now incarcerated former Congressman, Bob Ney.
Meanwhile, with Congress refusing to take serious protective action, but refraining from passing the destructive Ney Bill, the job of making the world safe for predatory lenders fell to federal regulators, including prominently the OCC (the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency). These Bush appointees have worked on our dime for seven years to strip us of our homes while protecting the abuses of mainstream corporate loan sharks.
But, even setting aside the question of who is to blame, the question of what can be done now to solve the problem leads straight to Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution. Asking the loan sharks to reform and monitor themselves is destined to end in disappointment. Asking Congress to pass bills to protect people from foreclosure, or to accomplish any other noble end, is destined to end in veto or signing statement. State attorneys general do not have the power the federal government has. But asking Bush to start regulating his friends, just when they're devising creative new ways to profit from the rapidly spreading misery of others, is never going to work. And, wherever "compassionate conservatism" may be hiding, it's not at Dick Cheney's house.
The current Congress is behaving as if it cannot and should not do anything major on any of the problems that face us for the next 11 months. But millions will lose their homes in that time. Hundreds of billions of dollars will be flushed down the Iraq Occupation in that time. Even the threat of impeachment greatly improved the Nixon administration prior to his departure. The House of Representatives is where we can insist on being represented. My recommendation is this. If you lose your house, move into your congress member's nearest office and live there until they agree to support the impeachment of the despots who are destroying our nation. Only one loan should be foreclosed, and that is the loan we made George W. Bush of our White House.
***
Note: While any mistakes in the above are mine alone, the general idea comes from an activist in California named Michael Blomquist, and credit is also owed to U.S. Senate candidate from Maine Laurie Dobson who has been connecting the issues of foreclosure and impeachment for months now.
www.VelvetRevolution.us
Time for the 81% to Take Back Our Country
Great riff of truth from Brother Swanson; time for the 81% of Americans to prove that We the People (not sheeple) love our country enough to cancel Boy George's stay in the Whitehouse. Now.
time to dump the Kool Aid
Oh Yeah!
Great statement David.
Great statement David.
Ken S.
Foreclosure
Great Post David. Nothing more needs to be said.
Two Wrongs Do Not Make A Right
No matter the many true and valid reasons that warrant the Impeachment of Bush, Cheney and the rest of the lying cabal, the Impeachment process calls for politicians to engage in the process, and that is where all the problems lie. If Congress did not support Bush, he could have been removed years ago, 9/11 was enough to have instigated an investigation, but all the evidence was then, and is now, still being ignored. There will never be any Impeachment process until there are honest and ethical people in Congress. That is a fact that has proven itself for man years, more so now during the period Bush has been illegally placed in the White House.
Those 81% of Americans need to follow the example of the Waller County students and march for the right to have political representation. Bush, and his Congress, because it has proven itself to be supportive of Bush, not the people, are the problem and the whole political system needs to be overhauled. It is the whole political system that is corrupt, Bush is just one manifestation of this political corruptness. One can keep on calling on Congress members to start Impeachment, but you will be forever calling upon them if they are part of the problem, not the solution to the problem. Nancy Pelosi and John Conyers being the most well known non representatives of the people and part of the problem. It is going to take the whole country united and active to bring about the change that is needed in American politics. The students of Waller County have set an example, it now needs to be followed by everyone else.
Brilliant
Wouldn't it be nice if all the people who have been harmed by the Bush regime would stop by to see him in March.
4Peace
here's how
http://resistinmarch.org
Opinion regarding Zoe Lofgren's stance on impeachment.
My opinion is that Zoe recognizes that this administration will stop at nothing to accomplish their agenda, especially derailing impeachment hearings. She does not want to be singled out or attacked without further support from other committee members. Given the seriousness of the allegations against the President and Vice President I am confident we all would share similar concerns if we were in her seat.
I believe if we can convince more committee members she will eagerly pursue impeachment hearings. "I" also believe it would be much easier to persuade her and other judiciary members to vote for impeachment hearings based on a NEW RESOLUTION. Although the existing resolution should be adequate; National security issues and Rove'ish propoganda would attempt to label the supporters as traitors.
The NEW RESOLUTION should include articles whereby no arguments could be made against impeachment hearings based upon national security concerns. A resolution citing Article II Section 3.4 of our Constitution; Caring for the faithful execution of law. One specific article for impeachment would involve not prosecuting loan and bank fraud which has led to our current, unconscionable housing and economic crises.
As referenced in your recent article: "Foreclose on the White House" 81% of Americans disapprove of Bush's work, but the majority of this overwhelming majority isn't aware impeachment resolutions are levitating above the table. Lets encourage our representatives to draft an impeachment resolution that is more closely aligned with this overwhelming majority.
What better campaign platform than the restoration of our Constitution!
Prior to our current housing crisis Congress had promulgated numerous laws to protect us and our financial markets from this unprecedented fraud of epic proportions. Unfortunately, it is not Congress' responsibility or within their abilities to prosecute those crimes. It is Congress' responsibility to remove from office those who neglected to care for the faithful execution of law.
The next administration and the 111th congress deserves to have a clean slate and proper accountability.
Very little effort or research is required to find that this administration specifically requested that "fraud for housing" not be prosecuted. This directive can only be linked back to the President and impeachment hearings can substantiate these claims. If this directive was issued from another public official than impeachment hearings should commence for them as well. The magnitude and cost of fraud for housing dwarfs that of fraud for profit. This extremely dangerous directive has over-inflated housing prices to unsustainable levels, unjustly enriched members of this administration and created financial panics across the globe. Unfortunately, the consequences of this President's unlawful and unconstitutional actions have only just begun. Millions of Americans are being financially and emotionally devastated from these crimes.
This administration has had great success inciting fear and persuading Americans to believe they need to be protected (mafia protection?). Within this group a vocal and substantial number of Americans rally to this administrations aid because the opposition to war, war crimes and impeachment supporters are painted as traitors or not supporting "OUR" troops. (The current resolutions focus mostly on "security" related articles for impeachment).
Unfortunately, the ignorant and counterproductive activists help define these portraits as they are the ones that usually make the evening news. These radicals often do more to support the opposition and slow our impeachment efforts. I too have been known to raise my voice, but I usually watch my words, especially in front of cameras.
Fortunately, I am extremely confident this administration will not be able to rally support in favor of white collar criminals, loan/bank fraud, destruction of; our currency, economy, etc.
I believe such a resolution could be drafted and/or find great support within Ron Paul's or Kucinich's supporters. Actually, any representative facing a tough election should reflect upon the success and popularity of those pursuing Nixon's impeachment. (Hint to all you representatives bcc'd no need to wait anymore you can start drafting the new resolution today). Who knows with all the "scandals" within the McCain camp Paul may get the impeachment bump and party's nod. Paul is the only fiscal conservative republican in the lot and this would support his many thoughtful arguments. The new impeachment resolution could be subtitled Operation Constitution for all the military enthusiasts.
The new resolution would rally mainstream America and consequently the judiciary committee towards impeachment hearings. In addition to Paul's and Kucinich supporters there are millions of supporters within Edward's, Dodd's and dare I say Huckabee's camp who are still politically impassioned. We should harness their energy to support the restoration of democracy and "truly" free market capitalism via impeachment hearings.
Perhaps even MoveOn will wake up to help restore our Constitution.
Let it be noted that I am also going to solicit Bravo, A&E, PBS and other networks to shoot a pilot for a program based on impeachment activists. Imagine activists auditioning for a limited number of seats at a conference table to discuss drafting a new resolution. We had some great footage last night. The program could air every night for 2-4 weeks. John Conyers, Robert Wexler, Ron Paul (token bi-partisan), Tammy Baldwin, Gutierrez, Weiner and Kucinich could be the panelists and Lofgren could be the host.
We could have America call in to vote for their favorite articles of impeachment. The show could be called Project Constitution. (I wish I was joking)
Back to Zoe and my opinion that she wants a better indication of support from her committee members.
My opinion is based on:
1)My attendence of the first meeting and her responses to our questions.
2)Zoe's subsequent statement on impeachment January 29, 2008.
http://lofgren.house.gov/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1878
"While politically I think that President Bush and Vice-President Cheney may be the worst in our nation's history, it is not yet clear that the President's or Vice-President's behavior meets the Constitutional standard for removal from office."
3)Zoe's reference to
1974 Judiciary Committee Report on the Constitutional Grounds for Impeachment (pdf)
Which is clearly an argument for impeachment hearings. I have uploaded my edited version with highlights, bookmarks and comments to:
http://impeachbush.meetup.com/404/files/ (1974ImpeachmentInquiryReport.pdf)
All Americans are encouraged to join this meetup group (FREE) and receive emails and other updates.
4)Zoe's Letter and recommendation to Conyers that hearings be held regarding the 1974 report
http://impeachbush.meetup.com/404/files/ (see LofgrenlettertoConyers...pdf) In the letter she also references the possibility of holding impeachment hearings for a judge (who could that be?) The judiciary committee should also hold hearings for impeachment hearings on our Treasury Secretary and others connected with the rampant fraud within our banking/financial markets. Call Dodd, Frank, Schumer and Cuomo for more info or I can be reached at 408-399-0590.
5)Comments from SVimpeach members who were present in the 2nd meeting on Friday, February 22, 2008.
I strongly believe impeachment hearings would have much more support within Congress and the pubic based on constitutional questions of not Caring for the faithful execution of law. (Banking law)
I will finish with the following thought/question.
What would be more devastating to our country?
Nuclear attack
Bankruptcy (USA)