Revision as of 02:43, 13 April 2006 view sourceNescio (talk | contribs)11,956 edits rv major disputed deletions by Merecat, please discuss before making such edits you know there is still debate on talk page!← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:44, 13 April 2006 view source Merecat (talk | contribs)2,799 edits In th elast few minutes, I have found many many errors in this article - cleanup is neededNext edit → | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{npov}} | {{npov}} | ||
{{cleanup}} | |||
{{main|Movement to impeach George W. Bush}} | {{main|Movement to impeach George W. Bush}} | ||
Revision as of 02:44, 13 April 2006
The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
You must add a |reason=
parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|reason=<Fill reason here>}}
, or remove the Cleanup template.
Proponents of the impeachment of current President of the United States, George W. Bush, assert that one or more of President Bush's actions qualify as "high crimes and misdemeanors" under which the president can constitionally be impeached.
This article presents a list of suggested rationales to impeach Bush, which have been offered by commentators, legal analysts, and Democrats. The points raised in this article are not to be viewed as a monolithic list, but as an assembly of discrete rationales which favour impeaching Bush that have been gathered from multiple sources. For example, The Center for Constitutional Rights, a civil rights legal advocacy non-profit organization based in New York, discusses some arguments in Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush.
Suggested reasons to impeach
NSA warrantless surveillance controversy
Main article: NSA warrantless surveillance controversyIn the context of the "war on terror", President Bush ordered wiretapping of certain international calls to and from U.S. without a warrant. Whether this is legal is currently debated, since the program appears to violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was adopted to remedy supposedly similar actions in the past (i.e. Operation Shamrock, Operation Minaret, Church Committee). Additionally, it allegedly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits unlawful searches and seizures - this includes electronic surveillance. These allegations have been advanced by articles published in The Christian Science Monitor and The Nation. In its defense, the administration has asserted that FISA does not apply as the President was authorized by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) and the presidential powers as Commander-in-Chief inherent in the Constitution (unitary executive theory), to bypass FISA. (See also: Separation of powers and rule of law.)
In January 2006, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service released two legal analyses concluding that "...no court has held squarely that the Constitution disables the Congress from endeavoring to set limits on that power. To the contrary, the Supreme Court has stated that Congress does indeed have power to regulate domestic surveillance... the NSA surveillance program... would appear to be inconsistent with the law." On February 13, 2006, the American Bar Association issued a statement denouncing the warrantless domestic surveillance program, accusing the President of exceeding his powers under the Constitution. Their analysis observes that the key arguments advanced by the Bush administration are not compatible with the law. Also five former FISA judges voiced their doubts as to the legallity of the program.
Some commentators, responding to the Bush administration's justification of the program, say that its interpretation of presidential power overthrows the Constitutional system of checks and balances and ignores other provisions of the Constitution mandating that the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" and vesting Congress with the sole authority "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces" and "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof." Elizabeth Holtzman, John Conyers, John Dean and Jennifer van Bergen from FindLaw assert that FISA has been violated and the claimed legal authority is invalid, constituting a felony and as such an impeachable offense.A detailed investigation into the matter seems to be averted.
Invasion of Iraq
Consitutionality of Invasion
Main article: Invasion of IraqThe case put forward by John Bonifaz in the book Warrior-King: The Case for Impeaching George W. Bush is the same as the grounds for his John Doe I v. President Bush lawsuit; namely, that Bush invaded Iraq without a clear Congressional declaration of war. The argument is that the Congressional resolution to authorize Bush to use military force in Iraq was unconstitutional because it "confers discretion upon the President to wage war", contrary to the War Powers Clause of the Constitution.
Justification for Invasion
Furthermore, the arguments put forward for the invasion of Iraq — the possession and development of weapons of mass destruction and active links to al Qaeda — have been found to be false, according to all official reports. . The Bush administration advocated that this was due to failure by the intelligence community. However, it has become clear that, prior to the invasion, these arguments had already been widely disputed, which had purportedly been reported to the U.S. administration. Until today, an in-depth investigation into the nature of these discrepancies has been frustrated. Supporters of impeachment argue that the administration knowingly distorted intelligence reports or ignored contrary information in constructing their case for the war. The Downing Street memo and the Bush-Blair memo are used to substantiate that allegation. Congressional Democrats sponsored both a request for documents and a resolution of inquiry. A report by the Washington Post on April 12, 2006, corroborates that view. It states that the Bush administration advocated that two small trailers which had been found in Iraq were "biological laboratories," despite evidence to the contrary.
- "The three-page field report and a 122-page final report published three weeks later were stamped "secret" and shelved. Meanwhile, for nearly a year, administration and intelligence officials continued to publicly assert that the trailers were weapons factories."
Activists charge that Bush committed obstruction of Congress, a felony under 18 U.S.C. 1001, both by withholding information which he ought to have communicated, and by supplying information, in his States of the Union speeches, that he should have known to be incorrect. This law is comparable to perjury, but it does not require that the statements be made under oath.
John Conyers, Robert Parry and Marjorie Cohn -professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, executive vice president of the National Lawyers Guild, and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists- asserts that this was not a war in self-defense but a war of aggression contrary to the U.N. Charter (a crime against peace) and therefore a war crime.
Geneva Conventions controversy
Main articles: Unlawful combatant and Combatant Status Review TribunalFollowing the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Bush administration advocated that suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban members would be designated as unlawful combatants. They suggested that, as such, they were not protected under the Geneva Conventions. To address the mandatory review by a "competent tribunal" as defined by article five of the Third Geneva Convention, Combatant Status Review Tribunals were established. The American Bar Association, Human Rights Watch, the Council on Foreign Relations and Joanne Mariner from FindLaw have dismissed the use of the unlawful combatant status as not compatible with U.S. and international law.
Representative John Conyers has advocated investigating the abuses to see if they violate the Geneva Conventions and are thus cause for impeachment, while Francis A. Boyle and Veterans For Peace hold that impeachment proceedings should be started.
Extraordinary rendition
Main articles: Extraordinary rendition and United Nations Convention Against TortureCritics have accused the CIA of rendering suspected terrorists to other countries in order to avoid U.S. laws prescribing due process and prohibiting torture, calling this "torture by proxy" and "torture flights". Alberto Gonzales explicitly testified to Congress that the administration's position was to extradite detainees to other nations as long as it was not "more likely than not" that they would be tortured, although he later modified that statement. However, the Convention against torture states:
- No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
Commentators, including the United Nations and Louise Arbour, have stated that, under international law, rendition as practiced by the U.S. government is illegal.
Treatment of detainees
As part of the war on terror several memos were written analyzing the legal position and possibilities in the treatment of prisoners. The memos, known today as the "torture memos," advocate enhanced interrogation techniques, but point out that refuting the Geneva Conventions would reduce the possibility of prosecution for war crimes. In addition, a new definition of torture was issued. Most actions that fall under the international definition do not fall within this new definition advocated by the U.S.
Several top military lawyers including Alberto J. Mora reported that policies equivalent to torture were officially handed down from the highest levels of the administration, and led an effort within the Department of Defense to put a stop to those policies and instead mandate non-coercive interrogation standards.
Notwithstanding the suggestion of official policy, the administration repeatedly assured critics that the publicised cases were incidents, and President Bush later stated that:
- "The United States of America does not torture. And that's important for people around the world to understand."
To address the multitude of incidents of prisoner abuse the McCain Detainee Amendment was adopted. However, in his signing statement President Bush made clear that he reserved the right to waive this bill if he thought that was needed.
Over the years numerous incidents have been made public and a UN report denounced the abuse of prisoners as tantamount to torture. Several legal analysts -such as Marjorie Cohn, Elizabeth Holtzman, Human Rights First- have advocated that writing these memos, not preventing or stopping the abuse could result in legal challenges involving war crimes under the command responsibility. These violations of US and international law could be an impeachable offense.
Allegedly leaking classified information
Allegedly leaking the identity of a CIA agent
In his 2003 State of the Union Address, President Bush cited British government sources in saying that Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium. He referred to what turned out to be falsified documents. After Ambassador Wilson wrote an article denouncing this assertion, the identity of his wife as CIA employee was made public. Wilson later made the allegation this was done to retaliate after his article. An investigation into this by Patrick Fitzgerald is ongoing. It has led so far to the indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby, though not for releasing any Plame information. However, the indictment does state:
- "Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community."
There are reports that an indictment of Karl Rove may be pending. Additionally, the litigation surrounding Libby has yielded court papers showing that Libby was ordered to disseminate classified information by his "superiors". It has been pointed out that, as Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff to the Vice President, Libby's only superiors were the President and the Vice President.
Allegedly declassifying for political purposes
On April 06, 2006, court papers were filed in the CIA leak grand jury investigation, stating that Libby had testified that President Bush authorized the disclosure of select portions of the then classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq. The position of the Bush administration is that a Presidentally authorized release of material is not a "leak" in the sense that Presidents are authorized to de-classiffy material and the release of de-classified material is not leaking. Some argue that this contradicts previous statements by Bush in which he made clear that leaking information is unacceptable. According to the court filings by Fitzgerald:
- “Defendant (Libby) testified that this July 8th meeting was the only time he recalled in his government experience when he disclosed a document to a reporter that was effectively declassified by virtue of the President’s authorization that it be declassified.”
Elizabeth de la Vega, Ray McGovern and Greg Mitchell have noted that the Bush Administration's asserted motivation — that this declassification was needed to counter misinformation spread by opponents of the Bush administration's casus belli — is odd, since only an obscure part of the NIE, which supports the claims advanced by the US government, has been released, while the rest of the report, in which the CIA in 2002 allegedly dismissed that claim as unlikely, is still classified. Bush's alleged misrepresentations on this point and his declassifying of information for allegedly a political purpose, is seen by some as impeachable offense.
Hurricane Katrina
The alleged responsibility of the George W. Bush administration in the mishandling of Hurricane Katrina has been used by Ramsey Clark, Francis Boyle, PopMatters, Green Party of Humboldt County and the Sunday Independent to suggest failure by the administration to adequately provide for the need of its citizens. Aside from these allegations of incompetence, how any Katrina related complaints rise to the level of an impeachable offense, has not been explained.
The administration, and its supporters, pointed out that the principal responsibility lies with the local authorities. Therefore any accusation of inadequate handling of the disaster should be addressed at the Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco.
Alleged abuse of power
Main article: Unitary executive theoryAs Commander-in-Chief in the war on terror, President Bush has asserted broad war powers to protect the American people. These have been used to justify policies connected with the war. Elizabeth Holtzman, John Dean, Elizabeth de la Vega, AlterNet, the St. Petersburg Times and the Santiago Times have claimed that Bush has exceeded constitutional or other legal limitations on such war powers.
The Bush administration denies this allegation by explaining that the President is only asserting his Constitutional duty as Commander-in-Chief to protect the country.
See also
References
- ^ The Constitution in Crisis; The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Coverups in the Iraq War John Conyers
- Arguments in general.
- Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment originally Web-posted by House Judiciary Committee member Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)
- The Impeachable Mr. Bush An Aggregation of High Crimes and Misdemeanors By Ralph Nader, CounterPunch, January 28 / 29, 2006
- The I-Word is Gaining Ground by Katrina vanden Heuvel, The Nation, December 27, 2005
- Bush's Last, Best Hope: the Democrats A Popular Groundswell for Impeachment By DAVE LINDORFF, CounterPunch, March 7, 2006
- Five Vermont Towns Vote to Impeach Bush Associated Press, March 7, 2006
- Plenty of opportunities to impeach Bush by Diane E. Dees, Mother Jones, April 05, 2006
- Raising the Issue of Impeachment by John Nichols, The Nation, December 20, 2005
- The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) is a non-profit legal and educational organization dedicated to protecting and advancing the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
- Impeaching George W. Bush By Onnesha Roychoudhuri, AlterNet, March 6, 2006.
- Wiretapping possibly illegal
- 'Specific' info on NSA eavesdropping? A new lawsuit may have what other cases don't: official records about those under surveillance By Brad Knickerbocker, The Christian Science Monitor, March 06, 2006
- What the President Ordered in This Case Was a Crime" by John Nichols, The Nation, January 23, 2006
- Watching What You Say Tim Shorrock, The Nation, March 2, 2006
- LEGAL AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING THE ACTIVITIES OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY DESCRIBED BY THE PRESIDENT U.S. Department of Justice, January 19, 2006
- Congressional Research Service
- American Bar Association
- AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ADOPTED BY THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES, February 13, 2006
- Lawyers Group Criticizes Surveillance Program Washington Post, February 14, 2006
- Former FISA judges
- Judges on Secretive Panel Speak Out on Spy Program By ERIC LICHTBLAU, The New York Times, March 29, 2006
- It’s Official… By Christy Hardin Smith, March 28th, 2006
- ^ Draft Impeachment Resolution Against President George W. Bush, 108nd Congress H.Res.XX, by Francis A. Boyle, professor of law, University of Illinois School of Law, January 17, 2003
- ^ The Impeachment of George W. Bush by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, January 11, 2006
- ^ Grounds for Impeachment by Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive,March 8, 2006
- Wiretapping probably impeachable offense
- An Impeachable Offense? Bush Admits Authorizing NSA to Eavesdrop on Americans Without Court Approval Democracy Now, December 19th, 2005
- George W. Bush as the New Richard M. Nixon: Both Wiretapped Illegally, and Impeachable; Both Claimed That a President May Violate Congress' Laws to Protect National Security By JOHN W. DEAN, FindLaw, December 30, 2005
- Is Clinton's history in Bush's future? by Rosa Brooks, Los Angeles Times, December 30, 2005
- Time for a Special Prosecutor Bush's NSA Spying Program Violates the Law By JENNIFER VAN BERGEN, CounterPunch, March 4 / 5, 2006
- Why Should Anyone Worry About Whose Communications Bush and Cheney Are Intercepting, If It Helps To Find Terrorists? By JOHN W. DEAN, FindLaw, February 24, 2006
- No official inquiry into wiretapping
- Constitutional challenge to invasion of Iraq
- Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Iraq's WMD Plans Were Preliminary CBS News, January 07, 2004
- Kay: No evidence Iraq stockpiled WMDs CNN, January 26, 2004
- See also Duelfer Report
- WMD in Iraq: Evidence and Implications By Joseph Cirincione, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, George Perkovich, with Alexis Orton, Carnegie Endowment Report, January 2004
- Link with Al Qaeda
- Levin Releases Newly Declassified Intelligence Documents on Iraq-al Qaeda Relationship Documents show Administration claims were exaggerated, by Carl Levin, April 15, 2005
- Another Iraq story gets debunked By Dave Zweifel, The Capital Times
- Bush Flatly Declares No Connection Between Saddam and al Qaeda The Memory Hole
- ^ Blowing Cheney's Cover Ray McGovern, April 10, 2006
- ^ Selectively disseminating information
- Why 'leaker in chief' charge harms the president By Linda Feldmann, The Christian Science Monitor, April 10, 2006
- Misrepresenting the facts surrounding Iraq
- The Impeachment of George W. Bush, by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, January 11, 2006
- A Firm Basis for Impeachment By Robert Scheer, AlterNet, July 18, 2003
- The Case for Impeachment By John Dean, FindLaw.com, June 11, 2003
- In Their Own Words: Iraq's 'Imminent' Threat Center for American Progress, January 29, 2004]
- Millions Protest Possible War with Iraq February 19, 2003
- Downing Street memo
- Another Iraq Memo Revealed: Colin Powell Opposed War Without Second U.N. Resolution Posted by Think Progress March 28, 2006
- The secret Downing Street memo SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY DAVID MANNING, The Times, July 23, 2002
- FOIA request
- Just hearsay, or the new Watergate tapes? By David Paul, Salon, June 06, 2005
- 52 House members file FOIA request seeking documents related to Downing Street minutes Raw Story, June 30, 2005
- "Biological laboratories"
- Lacking Biolabs, Trailers Carried Case for War By Joby Warrick, The Washington Post, April 12, 2006
- War of aggression
- War Crimes: Goose and Gander By Marjorie Cohn, Truthout, March 13, 2006
- Condi, War Crimes & the Press By Robert Parry, Consortiumnews.com, April 3, 2006
- Violating International Law
- TASK FORCE ON TREATMENT OF ENEMY COMBATANTS CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTION SECTION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES REPORT TO THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES RECOMMENDATION by AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
- U.S. Officials Misstate Geneva Convention Requirements by Human Rights Watch, January 28, 2002
- Findings Report: Enemy Combatants and the Geneva Conventions by the Council on Foreign Relations, December 12, 2002
- GUANTANAMERA: The Continuing Debate Over The Legal Status Of Guantanamo Detainees By JOANNE MARINER, FindLaw, March 11, 2002
- Impeachment for violating the Geneva Conventions
- Is There a Case for Impeachment? Harper's Magazine, Edited selections from a forum moderated by Sam Seder and featuring Representative John Conyers Jr., John Dean, Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, Lewis Lapham, and Michael Ratner, held March 2, 2006 at Town Hall in New York City.
- The Case for Impeachment - Why we can no longer afford George W. Bush by Lewis H. Lapham, Harper's Magazine, February 27, 2006.
- Rally to Support Rep. John Conyers and AfterDowningStreet.org by Mike Ferner, Veterans For Peace, June 16, 2005
- Torture by proxy
- Pentagon Memo on Torture-Motivated Transfer Cited By Ken Silverstein, The Los Angeles Times, December 08, 2005]
- Torture by Proxy The New Yorker, February 14, 2005
- Gonzales Defends Transfer of Detainees By R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post, March 8, 2005
- Legal position of rendition
- U.N. Blasts Practice of Outsourcing Torture by Thalif Deen, Inter Press Service
- No Exceptions to the Ban on Torture By Louise Arbour, The San Diego Union Tribune, December 07, 2005
- The Interrogation Documents: Debating U.S. Policy and Methods the memos written as part of the war on terror
- War crimes warning
- Memos Reveal War Crimes Warnings By Michael Isikoff, Newsweek, May 19, 2004
- Torture and Accountability by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, June 28, 2005
- US Lawyers Warn Bush on War Crimes By Grant McCool, Lawyers Against the War, Global Policy Forum, January 28, 2003
- US definition of torture
- Judge's anger at US torture by Richard Norton-Taylor and Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian, February 17, 2006
- Torture as National Policy By Dahr Jamail, Tomdispatch.com, March 9, 2006
- Torture as policy?
- Memorandum for Inspector General, Department of the Navy July 07, 2004
- THE MEMO -How an internal effort to ban the abuse and torture of detainees was thwarted by JANE MAYER, The New Yorker, February 20, 2006
- How the Pentagon Came to Adopt Criminal Abuse as Official Policy by Marty Lederman, February 20, 2006
- We don't torture
- The President says "We do not torture." We look at what has surfaced so far FactCheck.org, December 19, 2005
- The US has used torture for decades. All that's new is the openness about it Naomi Klein, The Guardian, December 10, 2005
- Fun Bits About American Torture In many ways, the U.S. is now just as inhumane and brutal as any Third World regime. Oh well? By Mark Morford, SF Gate, December 16, 2005
- U.S. Cites Exception in Torture Ban McCain Law May Not Apply to Cuba Prison, By Josh White and Carol D. Leonnig, Washington Post, March 3, 2006
- UN calls for Guantanamo closure BBC, Read the full UN report into Guantanamo Bay, February 16, 2006
- Accountability
- Fmr. NY Congresswoman Holtzman Calls For President Bush and His Senior Staff To Be Held Accountable for Abu Ghraib Torture Democracy Now, June 30th, 2005
- The Gonzales Indictment By Marjorie Cohn, Truthout, January 19, 2005
- The Quaint Mr. Gonzales By Marjorie Cohn, La Prensa San Diego Bilingual Newspaper, November 19, 2004
- The Impeachment of George W. Bush by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, January 11, 2006
- Command's Responsibility: Detainee Deaths in U.S. Custody in Iraq and Afghanistan Human Rights First
- Who is accountable for Army's descent into torture? By David R. Irvine and Deborah Pearlstein, Salt Lake Tribune, March 04, 2006
- Dahr Jamail Follows the Trail of Torture
- Plame's identity not known
- Office of Special Counsel all the material made public by Fitzgerald
- October 28, 2005 Indictment: US v Libby
- Libby: 'Superiors' Approved Leak CBS/AP, Feb. 9, 2006
- Bush authorized disclosure
- White House Declines to Counter Leak Claim By PETE YOST, Forbes, April 07, 2006
- Libby Says Bush Authorized Leaks By Murray Waas, National Journal, April 6, 2006
- Bush: Hands Possibly as Dirty as Scooter Libby's Flashback: Bush Impeachment Not Out of the Question April 6th, 2006
- Bush at Center of Intelligence Leak By Jason Leopold, Truthout, April 06, 2006
- The deception Bush can't spin Libby's testimony shows that Bush disclosed national secrets for political gain — and makes Bush's statements about finding the leaker ludicrous By Joe Conason, Salon, April 07, 2006
- Bush authorized leak of Iraq intelligence estimate, indicted ex-Cheney aide says RAW STORY, April 6, 2006
- Disclosure legal?
- The Truth About Lewis "Scooter" Libby's Statements to the Grand Jury Claiming the President Authorized a Leak of Classified Information The President and Vice President Are Not In the Clear Yet by John Dean, FindLaw, April 7, 2006
- Poof! Presidential Magic Turns National Secrets Into Judy Miller "Exclusive" by Arianna Huffington, April 06, 2006
- Did Bush ly?
- Did Bush Lie to Fitzgerald? By Robert Parry, Consortium News, April 07, 2006
- Memo to Sunday Talkers: Please Get the Answers the American People Cannot by Representative John Conyers, Jr., April 07, 2006
- Another White House is buying silence By Derrick Z. Jackson, The Boston Globe, April 8, 2006
- President Bush, 2003: 'Leaks of Classified Information Are a Bad Thing' By E&P Staff, Editor & Publisher April 06, 2006
- ^ Uncommon way of declassifying
- The Latest Plame Smear: Does Fred Hiatt Even Read the Washington Post? by Jane Hamsher, Huffington Post, April 10, 2006
- 'The Washington Post': At War With Itself The newspaper's editorial page on Sunday declared Scooter Libby's notorious 2003 gift to reporters "The Good Leak." On the same paper's front page two reporters thoroughly debunked the notion by Greg Mitchell, Editor & Publisher, April 10, 2006
- ^ Final Jeopardy By Elizabeth de la Vega, TomDispatch.com, April 09, 2006
- Lying impeachable
- Leaking, Lying and Burning Covert Agents from the Oval Office - The Impeachment Clock Just Clicked Forward By DAVE LINDORFF, CounterPunch, April 7--9, 2006
- The Leaker-in-Chief By William Rivers Pitt, Truthout, April 07, 2006
- Hurricane Katrina
- Ramsey Clark on Hurricane Katrina Ramsey Clarke, September 6, 2005
- POLITICS AND CULTURE/EAST AND WEST: Impeach George W. Bush by Robert R. Thompson, PopMatters, October 03, 2005
- Katrina, Bush and Cheney Grounds for Impeachment By FRANCIS BOYLE, September 16, 2005
- Greens Call for Impeachment of Bush and Accomplices for Crimes Against Humanity Due to the Preventable Deaths of Thousands in New Orleans Green Party of Humboldt County, August 1, 2005
- Hurricane Katrina Huffed and Puffed and Laid President Bush’s Incompetence Bare Sunday Independent, September 4, 2005
- Hurricane George
- The Impeachment of George W. Bush The Nation, January 30, 2006
- Responsibility Katrina
- THE MISERABLE RESPONSE TO KATRINA - How Emergency Management Failed New Orleans By Farhad Manjoo, Der Spiegel, September 7, 2005
- Brown puts blame on Louisiana officials CNN, September 28, 2005
- Former FEMA Director Brown Blames 'Dysfunctional Louisiana' for Katrina Response; Lawmakers Mock Him by LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer
- Reporting on Bush pre-Katrina briefing, NY Times, Wash. Post, USA Today entirely forgot Bush claim that no one anticipated levee breaches Media Matters, March 02, 2006
- Kathleen Babineaux Blanco
- Just days after Bush aide lied about Blanco in Wash. Post article, the Post noted Democrats' "harsh rhetoric," which "could create a backlash" Media Matters, September 08, 2005
- Brown blames Gov. Blanco By Stephen Dinan, THE WASHINGTON TIMES, September 28, 2005
- Abuse of Power
- The Impeachment of George W. Bush by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, January 11, 2006
- The Problem with Presidential Signing Statements: Their Use and Misuse by the Bush Administration By JOHN W. DEAN, FindLaw, January 13, 2006
- The Unitary Executive: Is The Doctrine Behind the Bush Presidency Consistent with a Democratic State? By JENNIFER VAN BERGEN, Findlaw, January 09, 2006
- How Much Authority Does the President Possess When He Is Acting as "Commander In Chief"? Evaluating President Bush's Claims Against a Key Supreme Court Executive Power Precedent By EDWARD LAZARUS, FindLaw, January 5, 2006
- The President Does Not Know Best By Elizabeth de la Vega, Tomdispatch.com. Posted January 19, 2006
- Impeaching George W. Bush Alternet, March 6, 2006
- If Judges Won't Stand Up to Bush, Who Will? Common Dreams, March 5, 2006
- IMPEACH BUSH: NO PRESIDENT IS ABOVE THE LAW, NOT IN CHILE, NOT IN THE U.S. The Santiago Times, Dec 21, 2005