Misplaced Pages

Efforts to impeach George W. Bush: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:38, 13 June 2007 editGoethean (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users40,562 edits gr← Previous edit Latest revision as of 20:23, 3 December 2024 edit undoSecretName101 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers127,869 edits →Political views and actions: improving 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Talks and activities of a possible impeachment of George W. Bush}}
{{POV}}
]
<!--Before adding a tag such as POV, AFD, etc.. please review the talk page discussions, including archives, which are very extensive involving scores of editors over the course of many months that have determined this articles content and title. It is also advisable to read the article in full, and discuss concerns on the talk page. -->
] calling for impeachment in March 2006]]
]''.]]] and ], present legal grounds for impeachment of Bush]]
] in support of impeaching both Bush and Vice President ] in July 2008]]
The '''movement to ] ]''' includes actions and commentary favoring the ] of ] ] ].


During the presidency of ], several American politicians sought to either investigate Bush for possible impeachable offenses, or to bring actual ] charges on the floor of the ] ]. The most significant of these efforts occurred on June 10, 2008, when Congressman ], along with co-sponsor ], introduced 35 ]<ref name="articles">{{Cite web|title=Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors. (2008 - H.Res. 1258)|url=https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/hres1258|access-date=2023-01-05|website=GovTrack.us|language=en}}</ref> against Bush to the U.S. House of Representatives.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/broward/blog/2008/06/impeach_bush_wexler_says.html|title=Impeach Bush, Wexler says|access-date=2008-06-10|publisher=South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com|date=June 10, 2008|first=Anthony |last=Man}}</ref> The House voted 251 to 166 to refer the impeachment resolution to the Judiciary Committee on June 11, where no further action was taken on it.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HE01258:@@@X |title=Bill Summary & Status - 110th Congress (2007 - 2008) - H.RES.1258 - All Congressional Actions - THOMAS (Library of Congress) |access-date=2009-01-26 |archive-date=2016-07-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160704221033/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HE01258:@@@X |url-status=dead }}</ref> Bush's presidency ended on January 20, 2009, with the completion of his second term in office, rendering impeachment efforts ].
Those who have voiced support for impeachment include ] and ] members of the ], various other ]s and government officials, ], ]s, ]s, organizations, members of the ] and a large segment of the American people and international community. <!--See the body of this article - this article is about calls to impeachment, and we report on who is doing so, some on the right included. The lead section is a summary of what is contained in the article.-->
The reasons they offer for Bush's impeachment include concerns about the ], legality, and ] of the ] ] of ] and the ] surrounding the ]'s ] of American citizens.


==Kucinich–Wexler impeachment articles==
]s have shown significant public support for impeachment, generally ranging between 26% and 42% of the respondents in favor. The ] ] has not considered the impeachment of President Bush and the ] has taken no action to do so. The ] leadership has indicated that they have no intention of impeaching Bush.
The Kucinich–Wexler impeachment resolution contained 35 ] covering the Iraq War, the ] affair, creating a case for war with Iran, capture and treatment of prisoners of war, spying and or wiretapping inside the United States, use of signing statements, failing to comply with Congressional subpoenas, the 2004 elections, Medicare, Hurricane Katrina, global warming, and 9/11.<ref name="articles" />


The 2003 invasion of Iraq was the most substantial portion of the articles of impeachment introduced by Kucinich and Wexler. Fifteen of the 35 articles directly relate to alleged misconduct by Bush in seeking authority for the war, and in the conduct of military action itself. Five other articles address allegations partially or tertiarily relating to the war, including the "outing" of Valerie Plame, treatment of prisoners (both in Iraq and from operations in Afghanistan and other countries), and building a case for Iran being a threat based in part on alleging Iranian actions in Iraq.
==Impeachment==
{{main|Impeachment in the United States}}
To impeach the President of the United States, a majority of the ] must agree to pass a resolution that alleges the President committed "]." This impeachment resolution is commonly called an "Article of Impeachment" and spells out in detail the charges against the President. The House of Representatives then exhibits these Articles of Impeachment to the ] since the U.S. Senate has the "sole Power" to "try all impeachments."


===Justification for invasion===
If the U.S. Senate, by ], finds the President "guilty" on any Article of Impeachment, then the President is removed from office and the Senate next votes on whether or not to disqualify him the ex-President from holding further office under the United States. Although already tried by the Senate, the ex-President is still liable to indictment and trial under regular criminal statues for any federal crimes he may have committed. If the U.S. Senate fails to reach a two-thirds majority for conviction, the President is acquitted and the trial is over.
{{further|Iraq and weapons of mass destruction|Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda|Downing Street memo|Bush-Blair memo|Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq|Bush-Aznar memo}}


The first four impeachment articles charge the president with illegally creating a case for war with Iraq, including charges of a propaganda campaign, falsely representing Iraq as responsible for 9/11, and falsely representing Iraq as an imminent danger to the United States.<ref name="articles" />
In the House, the ] is the typical committee to where impeachment resolutions are referred. The Judiciary Committee has formally reported to the full House of Representatives impeachment resolutions against four Presidents: ], ], ], and ]. Of those four Presidents, only Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached by the House. Both were acquitted by the Senate. President Nixon resigned after the Judiciary Committee recommended impeachment but before the full House considered the report. (Nixon resigned apparently after being told that his impeachment and conviction were near certainties by ] Senator ], a staunch conversative Senator who ].)


===Legitimacy of invasion===
The President's ] does not extend to ''"Cases of Impeachment"'' and thus a President cannot intervene in either the House impeachment or the Senate trial. Dispute exists about whether the Impeachment exception to the pardon power extends to cases brought in the regular court system after Senate conviction.
{{further|UN Charter|War of aggression|Jus ad bellum|Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq}}


Articles 5–8 and 12 deal with the invasion of Iraq and include charges that funds were misspent before the war, that the war was in violation of HJRes114, that Iraq was invaded without a war declaration, that the war is a violation of the UN Charter, and that the purpose of the war was to control the country's oil supplies.<ref name="articles" />
==Political views and actions==
===Democrats in Congress===


===Conduct of the Iraq War===
On ], ] House ] ] (D-CA) indicated she was not interested in pursuing impeachment and had taken it "off the table", reiterating this phrase on ], ]. <ref> by Charles Babington, ''Washington Post'', ] ]</ref><ref> by NANCY ZUCKERBROD, Associated Press, ] ]</ref>
{{further|2003 invasion of Iraq}}


Articles 9, 10, 11 and 13 deal with conduct of the war, including failing to provide troops with body armor, falsifying US troop deaths and injuries, establishing a permanent military base in Iraq, and creating a secret task force to develop energy and military policies with respect to Iraq and other countries. Articles 15 and 16 cover contractors in Iraq and charges that the president misspent money on contractors and provided them with immunity.
] of ], called for an investigation of the President in 2005.]] On ], ] Rep. ] (D-MI) assembled an unofficial meeting to discuss the ] and to consider grounds for impeachment. Dozens of members of Congress, former Ambassador ] and former ] analyst ] participated.<ref> By PAUL KORING, ], ] ]</ref>


===Valerie Plame===
On ] ], the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff, at Conyers' request, filed its report. Regarding this report, Conyers makes several allegations favoring impeachment on his .
{{further|Plame affair}}


Article 14 is about the revelation of the identity of CIA agent ].
Conyers filed a resolution on ] ] to create an investigative committee to consider impeachment. His resolution gained 38 co-sponsors before it expired at the end of the ]. He has not re-introduced a similar resolution for the ]. <ref> Sponsor: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. (introduced ] ])</ref>


===Treatment of detainees===
As of ] ], Conyers's current position regarding impeachment is "... rather than seeking impeachment, I have chosen to propose comprehensive oversight of these alleged abuses."<ref> By John Conyers Jr., Washington Post, ] ]</ref>
{{further|Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse|Bagram torture and prisoner abuse|United Nations Convention Against Torture|Geneva Conventions|Command responsibility|Hamdan v. Rumsfeld}}


Articles 17–20 concern the treatment of detainees, the "kidnapping" and detention of foreign nationals, and the use of torture.
On ] ], Sen. ] (D-CA) issued a press release,<ref> "Boxer Asks Presidential Scholars About Former White House Counsel's Statement that Bush Admitted to an 'Impeachable Offense'", ] ]</ref> saying that she had written four undisclosed legal scholars, asking if there were grounds for impeachment. In the press release, she cited the ], ], '']'' disclosure of Bush's authorization of the ] to monitor Americans without ]s. However, in a ], ], CNN interview with ], Boxer stated she was not ready to call for Bush's impeachment.


===Attempt to overthrow the government of Iran===
Rep. ] (D-GA) has said that the President should be impeached for authorizing the NSA's actions.<ref> "Congressman calls for Bush impeachment." The Associated Press</ref> <ref> "Rep. John Lewis Says No Justification for NSA Spying on American Citizens," ] ]</ref>
Article 21 claims that the president misled Congress and the American people about threats from Iran, and supported terrorist organizations within Iran, with the goal of overthrowing the Iranian government.

At another unofficial hearing convened by Conyers on ], ], Rep. ] (D-NY) called for the committee to explore whether Bush should face impeachment, stemming from his decision to authorize domestic surveillance without court review. The proceedings had no legal authority, as committee chairman, Rep. ], (R-WI), rejected Democrats' requests for an inquiry. <ref> "Call is out to impeach Bush, Dems are urged at unofficial hearing," Detroit Free Press, ] ]</ref>

] was the leading figure behind the resolution to impeach President Bush brought to the ] in May 2006 (see below). Ellison said “I absolutely know and can show that (the president) deserves it; he deserves to be impeached.”<ref>{{cite news| title=The Insurgent|author=Conrad Wilson|date=]|url=http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12284}} Retrieved ] ]</ref>

Ellison was elected to the ] in November 2006. During the campaign and when he was named to the ], Ellison repeatedly called for an investigation into a possible impeachment.<ref>{{cite news|title=Ellison compares Bush to Nixon|url=http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2006/08/mprs_tim_pugmir.shtml|publisher=Minnesota Public Radio|author=Tim Pugmire |date=]}} Retrieved ] ]</ref> <ref name="Trib 1-27">{{cite news|url=http://www.startribune.com/587/story/960880.html|title=Will Ellison pursue impeachment? Not for now, he says|date=]|author=Rob Hotakainen|publisher=Star Tribune}} Retrieved ] ]</ref> In support of his candidacy, he “received a $1,000 contribution from ImpeachPAC”.<ref name="Trib 1-27"/>

One of Ellison’s Republican counterparts from Minnesota, Rep. ], said “Ellison's views won't matter because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, has already said impeachment is ‘off the table.’ In all fairness to the gentleman from Minneapolis, he is a freshman member. I understand that he was endorsed by ImpeachPAC and supported financially. ... He probably feels that he made a commitment and he's got to make some noise, but so what?”<ref name="Trib 1-27"/> On ], ] Ellison later met with constituents, and listed new conditions for his support for impeachment hearings, such as verifiable facts and the backing of a majority of the American people. <ref>{{cite web|date=April 23, 2007|title="Impeachment Should Be on the Table": Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN)|author=Mikael Rudolph|url= http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_mikael_r_070422__22impeachment_should_.htm}}</ref>

On ] ] (the last day of the 109th Congress), then-Rep. ] (D-GA) submitted a resolution, , introducing articles of impeachment against President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice. The bill expired along with the 109th Congress.<ref name="impeachment_bill">{{cite news
| first = Ben
| last = Evans
| authorlink =
| author =
| coauthors =
| title = McKinney Introduces Bill to Impeach Bush
| url = http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/08/D8LT24S80.html
| format =
| work =
| publisher = Associated Press (''via'' breitbart.com)
| id =
| pages =
| page =
| date = ]
| accessdate =
| language =
| quote =
}}</ref>

===Republicans in Congress===

Senator ] (R-NB) has raised the possibility of impeachment but in an interview on ABC News' "This Week" on Sunday, March 25, 2007, Hagel explained, “I didn't call for it, I didn't predict it. What I was saying, I was laying out options here.”

Several weeks after ], one of the borderguards imprisoned for shooting an alleged drug dealer on the US-Mexico border, was assaulted in prison, Rep. ] (R-NM) said, ""I tell you, Mr. President, if ]] -- especially after this assault -- are murdered in prison, or if one of them lose their lives, there's going to be some sort of impeachment talk in Capitol Hill." <ref>{{cite web|date=February 08, 2007|title="GOP Lawmaker Warns of Impeachment in Border Agent Case": Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA)|author=Kevin Mooney|url= http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200702/NAT20070208c.html}}</ref>

In July 2006, Rep. ] (R-TX) stated on ]' radio show "I would have trouble arguing that he's been a Constitutional President, and once you violate the Constitution and be proven to do that I think these people should be removed from office."

===State Legislatures===

On ], ], the ] Senate passed a resolution calling for impeachment on a 16-9 vote, without debate.<ref> ''Vermont Senate: Impeach the president'' by ROSS SNEYD, Associated Press, ] ]</ref> <ref> ''Vermont Senate approves impeachment resolution'' by Nancy Remsen, Burlington Free Press, ] ]</ref> A similar resolution made its way through the Vermont House less than a week later, but was defeated 87-60.<ref> ''House likely to take up presidential impeachment resolution'' by Ross Sneyd, Burlington Free Press, ] ]</ref> <ref> ''House Rejects Impeachment Resolution'' by Nancy Remsen, Burlington Free Press, ] ]</ref>

As of June, 2007, eleven state legislatures have considered impeachment resolutions; only one (Vermont) has passed such a resolution. Impeachment resolutions in ] and ] were still pending votes; in the other eight states, resolutions have either been defeated or 'died' with the closure of the legislative session without ever coming to a vote. These states were: ] (the first state to consider such a measure, introduced ] ]), ], ], ], ], ], ], and ]<ref>http://impeachpac.org/resolutions-list</ref>


On ] ], the Illinois state legislature began to consider Resolution 125 (), which brought five specific charges against President Bush. <ref name="HJR0125"> ''Synopsis As Introduced'' found on the bill status page for HJR0125 at the .</ref> On ] ] over a dozen members of the Illinois house co-sponsored the bill, and referred it to the Rules Committee.

In April 2006, an impeachment proposal was introduced in the California state legislature. <ref> by David Swanson, ], ] ]</ref> On ] ], voters in San Francisco and Berkeley approved ballot measures calling for Bush and Cheney's impeachment. <ref name="PropJ">{{cite web| url=http://www.smartvoter.org/2006/11/07/ca/sf/meas/J |title=Proposition J |publisher=League of Women Voters of California Education Fund |date=] |accessdate=]}}</ref> <ref name="Alamedacounty">{{cite web| url=http://www.acgov.org/rov/current_election/index.htm |title=Election Results |publisher=Alameda County Registrar of Voters |accessdate=]|date=]}}</ref><ref name="SFBayprops">{{cite news |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/11/08/BAGF4M89MA1.DTL |title=Civic issues from sick leave to taxes |date=] |last=Knight |first=Heather |accessdate=] |work=San Francisco Chronicle}}</ref> Both measures call upon the ] and both houses of Congress to pursue impeachment proceedings.<ref name="BerkeleyPropH">{{cite web |url=http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/elections/measures/2006/Himpeach.htm |title=Measure H |publisher=City Clerk, City of Berkeley |accessdate=]}}</ref>

On ] ], then-State Rep. Keith Ellison (]-Minneapolis) and four other DFL state legislators proposed a "resolution relating to impeachment of President George W. Bush".<ref name="MN May">{{cite web|page=page 24|url=http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/cco/journals/2005-06/J0504101.pdf|date=] ]|title=Eighty-Fourth Session – 2006 One Hundred First Day|publisher=Record of the Minnesota House of Representatives}} Retrieved ] ]</ref> <ref>{{cite web|title=H.R. No. 24, as introduced: 84th Legislative Session (2005-2006) |date=] ]|publisher=Minnesota House of Representatives}}</ref>

On ] ] a resolution was introduced to the New Mexico Legislature.<ref name="AP">{{cite news|url=http://www.fox11az.com/news/topstories/stories/kmsb-20070125-famjc-impeachbushcheney.1af3f95d.html|title=Lawmakers call for Bush impeachment, NM|date=]|author=Deborah Baker|publisher=Associated Press}} Retrieved on ] ]</ref> <ref name="AP"/><ref name="New Mexican">{{cite news|title=2007 legislature: Impeachment bill faces early hurdles|publisher=The New Mexican|url=http://freenewmexican.com/news/55753.html|date=]|author=Steve Terrell}} Retrieved ] ]</ref> <ref>{{cite web|title=Pres Impeachment Intro'd In New Mex|date=]|publisher=FreeMarketNews.com|url=http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=32259}} Retrieved ] ]</ref>

The Democrats hold both chambers of New Mexico’s Legislature, but the resolution has been set to come before three different committee hearings. The ''New Mexican'' reported “That many committee assignments generally is thought of as the kiss of death for legislation. Not only are there three chances to kill a measure before it gets to a floor vote, it also increases the chance that time will run out in the 60-day session before a measure can make it through both chambers.”<ref name="New Mexican"/> Republican members told reporters that the were not taking the resolution seriously and cited the number of committee hearings as one of the reasons for their opinion.<ref name="New Mexican"/>

] ] ] introduced ] in February 2007 calling on Congress to investigate and consider the impeachment of President Bush.<ref>, Senator Oemig's website.</ref> <ref>, '']'', March 3, 2007.</ref>

===State Party Conventions===
On April 28, 2007, the California Democratic Convention passed a resolution for impeachment by a large margin.{{Fact|date=June 2007}} On May 19, 2007, the Massachusetts Democratic Convention passed a resolution to impeach Bush and Cheney nearly unanimously.{{Fact|date=June 2007}} On ] ] the New Mexico Democratic Party, at a convention in Albuquerque, adopted a plank to their platform saying “the Democratic Party of New Mexico supports the impeachment of George Bush and his lawful removal from office.” <ref>{{cite news|title=N.M. Dems Call For Bush's Exit|date=]|author=Jeff Jones|url=http://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/443722nm03-21-06.htm}} Retrieved ] ]</ref>

On ] ], the Vermont Democratic State Committee voted overwhelmingly to support JRH 15, a state legislative resolution supporting impeachment, calling for its passage as "appropriate action."<ref>, by Jason Szep, '']'', ] ].</ref><ref>, by Shay Totten & Christian Avard '']'', ], ].</ref><ref>, '']'' ].</ref>

===Local communities===

By ] ] a total of 39 towns in ] (up from just five towns in 2006) had passed resolutions calling on the U.S. Congress to file articles of impeachment against President Bush for misleading the nation on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and for engaging in illegal wiretapping. On May 17, 2007, the ] City Council passed a unanimous, non-binding resolution calling for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. The resolution was sponsored by Monica Conyers, wife of Rep. John Conyers.

As of June, 2007, a number of local community governments had passed similar impeachment resolutions, as follows<ref>http://impeachpac.org/resolutions-list</ref>

*California: 6 cities
*Illinois: 1 city (])
*Massachusetts: 17 townships
*Michigan: 2 cities (Detroit; ])
*New Hampshire: 1 township (])
*New York: 4 townships; 1 county (])
*North Carloina: 2 towns (]; ]}
*Ohio: 1 city (])
*Vermont: 39 townships
*Washington: 11 state legislative districts; 1 city (])

==Reported White House reaction==
The January 23-29 2006 issue of '']'', self-described as "a sister publication" of the '']'', included an article, "Impeachment hearings: The White House prepares for the worst." This article said administration sources regard Senate Judiciary Committee hearings into the ] as "a prelude to the impeachment process." An anonymous source criticized Congress, saying, "We will tell the American people that while we have done everything we can to protect them, our policies are being endangered by a hypocritical Congress."<ref> ], January 23-29, 2006</ref>

==Public opinion==
===2005 polls===

In October 2005, an anti Iraq war organization, ], commissioned a poll by the independent ] ],<ref></ref> which found that by a margin of 50% to 44% Americans say that President Bush should be impeached if he lied about the war in Iraq.<ref> ] ]</ref> A ] International poll from ] to ] ] confirmed this result by a margin of 53% to 42%. This was supported by 76% of ], 50% of ], and 29% of ]. A ] ] '']''-] poll found 55% of Americans believe the Bush administration "intentionally misled the public" in making its case for war.<ref> October 30-November 2, 2005</ref>

On ] ], ] released a poll that showed that 32% of the 1,000 Americans polled would support an impeachment of Bush and 35% would support an impeachment of Cheney.<ref> ]</ref>

===2006 polls===
A ] ] poll by ] showed that 42% of American adults favored impeaching Bush and 49% oppose this.<ref></ref>

A ] ] poll conducted by ]/Opinion Research Corp. indicated that 30% of the American people supported impeachment, and 69% were opposed. One percent had no opinion.<ref>, ] ]</ref> This support for impeachment was similar to the 29% who favored impeachment for ] during the height of the Lewinsky scandal.<ref></ref>

An ] '']'' poll found support for the impeachment of President Bush as follows: 28% felt that impeachment should be a "top priority", 23% a "lower priority", and 44% that it should not be done.<ref> By Marcus Mabry, '']'', ] ]</ref>

===2007 polls===

According to ], an InsiderAdvantage poll around May 1, 2007, found 39% of American voters to favor impeachment of George W. Bush and vice-president Dick Cheney.<ref>http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/15689</ref> Analyzing these numbers, ], who initiated the Clinton impeachment hearings, said that "this indicates the surprising depth of dissatisfaction with Bush."<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20610</ref>

===Online polls and surveys===

A number of organizations provide online voting and petitions regarding Bush/Cheney impeachment. The ] is ongoing and has garnered in excess of 480,000 votes, 88% in favor of impeachment. Democrats.com has an active online petition, , which has received more than 95,000 of its targeted 100,000 signatures.

] has not officially taken up the cause for Bush/Cheney impeachment; however, they have quietly initiated an online survey entitled . Ironically, MoveOn's reluctance to act more forcefully has led to yet another online petition, ''"It's Time for MoveOn to Start Talking about Impeachment"'', endorsed by such luminaries as ] and ], with more than 2,300 additional signatures.

===Media response to polls===
The major media have largely ignored these opinion polls and protests. However, several columnists have ]. ] on '']'' predicted on ] ] that "if the country, according to the polls, believes by a margin of 55 percent that President Bush misled us into war, the next logical step is impeachment and I think you’re going to hear that word come up and if the Democrats ever capture either house of Congress there are going to be serious proceedings against this administration."<ref>http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2005/cyb20051107.asp</ref>

When the '']''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s chief pollster Richard Morin was asked by readers why the ''Post'' has not polled on impeachment he responded, "This question makes me angry." According to ], the ''Washington Post'' asked about impeachment in a poll conducted a few days after the revelation of President Clinton's relationship with ] in 1998. Frank Newport, the director of the ] has said he would only run a poll on the subject if it starts to gain mainstream attention and not until then.<ref></ref>

===Rallies and marches===
]

An anti-Iraq war protest ] in ] on ] ] attracted over 100,000 people. The march among other things included calls for impeachment and for investigations leading to impeachment.<ref></ref>

On ] ], ] mobilized marches across the country that called for the ousting of Bush. <ref>http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=2&Itemid=3</ref><ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-110205closures_lat,0,7371129.htmlstory?coll=la-tot-promo&track=morenews</ref><ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/02/national/main1005030.shtml</ref><ref>http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyID=2005-11-03T010848Z_01_FOR303885_RTRUKOC_0_US-BUSH-PROTESTS.xml&archived=False</ref><ref>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/baycitynews/archive/2005/11/02/protest02.DTL</ref>

Rep. ] founded the ''Out of Iraq'' ] in the House of Representatives. It has 66 members (as of ] ]). An ''Out of Iraq'' event hosted by Rep. Waters in ], attracted 1200 supporters who loudly chanted "Impeach Bush" in response to a speaker explaining ].

On ] ], over 1000 people gathered in ]'s district, on ], to spell out the message .

On April 28, 2007, thousands of Americans in over 125 cities from North Pole, AK to Miami, FL gathered in protest to support impeachment of President Bush.

===Groups formed to support impeachment===
Numerous groups have been created to support impeachment. The website claims to have collected 897,200 signatures (as of ] ]) on a petition to impeach Bush, an increase of 26,413 in only eight days.

has taken steps to impeach George W. Bush, planning to add in ads in the New York Times to reach millions about future protest.{{Fact|date=June 2007}}

On ] ], The website mounted an effort<ref>http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/5950</ref> to support Representative Conyers' legislation to censure Bush and Cheney and to investigate the administration's lead-up to the Iraq war, in possible preparation to impeachment.

], a nonpartisan coalition of students and young people at law schools and universities nationwide, helped the cities of ] and ] put impeachment on their municipal ballots, and are working to help other cities pass city council resolutions.

==Advocates of impeachment==
===Organizations===
* advocates "do-it-yourself" impeachment initiation by U.S. citizens.<ref>Search on "memorial" in the in the (109th Congress)</ref><ref>See in the (109th Congress)</ref> <ref>history of Peck's , as well as the text of the memorial submitted, available from the </ref><ref>Peck precedent discussed in from the House recorded at Carnegie Mellon University's digital </ref>

*Even before Bush took office, on ] ], the ] organization was formed.

*On ] ], the ] voted unanimously to place Articles of Impeachment on the municipal ballot. The ballot initiative was based on the Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush by the ]. It was drafted by the ], and was lobbied for by . On ] ], the measure passed with a 68.9% majority.
*On ] ], Constitution Summer announced that the ] ], ], ], and ] had placed an initiative favoring impeachment on the San Francisco municipal ballot.

*The ] has drafted an impeachment resolution .

*On ] ], the ] passed a resolution 7-3 calling on the congressional delegates representing ] to impeach George W. Bush. The mayor of the city has said he does not know whether he will sign it, and in either case, it will remain a low priority for him even if he does.

*The ] passed a resolution calling for impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney at its national meeting on ] ].<ref>, ] ]</ref>

*At the most recent state convention, the ] called for the Impeachment of George Bush, ] and ].<ref> "Wisconsin Democratic Party calls for Impeachment of Bush, Cheney, & Rumsfeld"</ref>

*On ] ], the ] and the ] of ] called for impeachment of George W. Bush.<ref>, ] ]</ref>

*AfterDowningStreet, an organization begun by liberal activists ] and ] and constitutional attorney John Bonifaz, advocates a congressional Resolution of Inquiry into the ] and related evidence. <ref></ref>

*Impeach Central is dedicated to the impeachment of ] and ]. <ref></ref>

*United for Peace of Pierce County (WA) adopted statements calling for the impeachment of President Bush on April 21, 2005,<ref></ref> and again on May 19, 2005.<ref>[http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2814/29/</ref>

*] has .<ref>] ]: "] Call for Congressional Action to Remove George W. Bush from the Office of President of the United States"</ref>

*] sent a bus to ], emblazoned with the words "Impeachment Tour" in ].

*On ] ], the board of governors of the ] voted unanimously to investigate whether or not Bush has exceeded his constitutional authority by using ].<ref> in the '']'' "Bar group will review Bush's legal challenges"</ref>

*Tim Carpenter, president of ], has made statements supporting impeachment.<ref>http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_miriam_r_070504_group_places_impeach.htm</ref>

===Politicians and government officials===
*]'s 2004 presidential campaign also promoted the cause of a Bush impeachment.<ref> on www.votenader.org</ref> Nader also wrote an op-ed, (with ], director of ]) favoring impeachment.<ref> in the '']'', ] ]</ref>

*], former Congresswoman who served on the House Judiciary Committee that voted to impeach ], advocates impeaching Bush in her 2006 book, coauthored with Cynthia L. Cooper, ''The Impeachment of George W. Bush,''<ref>http://www.impeachbushbook.com</ref> and in numerous articles<ref>http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060130/holtzman</ref> and public appearances.

*], in his syndicated column, called for a bill of impeachment<ref>http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=8749</ref> in regards to issues with ].

*], a candidate for the ] House of Representatives seat has said he will campaign for impeachment against George W. Bush. Although Morrisseau is campaigning for the Republican nomination, he has previously run for public office only as a Democrat, and says he voted for ] for president in 2004.<ref>http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9546.htm</ref>

*], former assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the ] has repeatedly stated support for impeachment.<ref>http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts116.html</ref> <ref>http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=%20RO20070115&articleId=4456</ref>

*Former ] Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury ] has called for Bush's impeachment.<ref>http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2004_archives/000963.html</ref>

*{{note|vt}}On ] ], ] town meetings in ], ], ], ] and ] called for impeachment of the president, and instructed then-Rep. (now Senator) ] (I-VT) to pursue this end. After initially labelling the request as "impractical", Sanders added his name to Conyers' impeachment investigation bill.

===Legal and academic professionals===
*], former White House Counsel to President ], and convicted to serve four months in prison for obstruction of justice during the ] scandal, <ref>http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06091/678696-84.stm</ref> was an early advocate of a Bush impeachment.<ref>http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030606.html</ref><ref>http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/12/18/21310/392</ref>
*], United States ] under ], and lawyer for ] and Slobodan Milosevic, has set up a website, ].

*Constitutional Law Professor ] has written six draft articles of impeachment against Bush.<ref>http://www.counterpunch.org/boyle01172003.html</ref>

*Scholars ] (constitutional scholar and former deputy attorney general in the Reagan Administration) and ] (scholar at the American Enterprise Institute) argued on the ] ] ] show<ref>http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/05/12/19.php</ref> that Congress should consider impeachment.
*Constitutional lawyer ] has written a book on the case for impeaching Bush, is a co-founder of After Downing Street, and has spoken regularly in favor of impeachment.

*], a law professor at ] and a specialist in surveillance, spoke about Bush's admission that he authorized warrantless wiretaps and indicated that the authorization might be an impeachable offense. <ref>http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/12/22/impeach/index.html</ref>

*Attorney ] of the ] and journalist ] published a book in May 2006 entitled, '']'' (ISBN 0-312-36016-9).

===Musicians===
*One of the songs on ]'s latest album '']'', "No More Sorrow", contains lyrics critical of the President, such as "Your time has come to be replaced".
*]'s ] ] '']'' has songs titled "]" and "Lookin' For a Leader".
*] did a performance of his ] tour on ] at the ] in which "Impeach Bush Now" was written on the ].{{Fact|date=February 2007}}

===Media editorials and opinion pieces===
*The right-wing ] magazine ''The New American'' published an opinion piece on ] ] in favor of impeachment, titled “It's Not Just a Piece of Paper” in reference to the ]. <ref>http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_2932.shtml</ref>

*Radio personality and syndicated columnist ] wrote a column on ] ], calling for impeachment.<ref>http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/03/01/keillor/index.html</ref>

*], columnist formerly at the '']'' and currently at the '']'', and contributing editor of '']'', has repeatedly called for impeachment.<ref>http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=14873</ref><ref>http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=15300</ref><ref>http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=15346</ref><ref>http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=16045</ref>

*In an ] ] column, "Hold Bush Accountable," ], of the ''Washington Post'', accused Bush of impeachable offenses.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3933-2004Oct27.html</ref>

*On the September 11th, 2006 episode of ], Keith's Special Comment on that day, from Ground Zero, made reference to impeachment.

==Rationales for impeachment==
Proponents of impeaching President George W. Bush assert that one or more of his actions qualify as "high crimes and misdemeanors" under which the president can constitutionally be impeached.<ref name="Conyers">
Investigative Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff</ref><ref>Arguments in general.
*''The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office'' written by ] and ] details the legal and Constitutional reasons for an impeachment.
* originally Web-posted by ] member ] (D-Calif.)
* By ], ], January 28-29, ]
* by ], ], ] ]
* By DAVE LINDORFF, ], ] ]
* ], ] ]
* by Diane E. Dees, ], ] ]
* by John Nichols, ], ] ]</ref>

This section collates a ''list'' of pro-impeachment advocates' rationales as suggested by commentators, legal analysts, members of the ], the ]<ref> By Onnesha Roychoudhuri, ], ] ].</ref> and others. However, since impeachment is inherently political, and not a legal process, there is no exact definition of what constitutes an impeachable offense. Therefore, this list is not necessarily accurate. Simply stated, it is up to Congress to determine if something rises to the level of "]."


===NSA warrantless surveillance controversy=== ===NSA warrantless surveillance controversy===
{{see|NSA warrantless surveillance controversy|Rule of law|Separation of powers}} {{further|NSA warrantless surveillance controversy|Separation of powers}}


Articles 24 and 25 charge the president with illegally spying on American citizens, directing US telecom companies to create databases of citizens, and violating the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution.
In the context of the War on Terror, President Bush ordered the wiretapping of certain international calls to and from the U.S. without a warrant. Whether this is legal is currently debated, since the program appears to violate the ] (FISA), which was adopted to remedy similar actions in the past (e.g. ], ], ]). Additionally, it may violate the ] of the Constitution,<ref>Fourth Amendment
* by Laurence H. Tribe, Boston Globe, ] ]
* By Ivan Eland, ], ] ]</ref> which prohibits unlawful searches and seizures of US citizens, including electronic surveillance. These allegations have been advanced by articles published in The ] and ].<ref>Wiretapping possibly illegal
* By ], The ], ] ]
* by John Nichols, The Nation, ] ]
* Tim Shorrock, The Nation, ] ]</ref> In its defense, the administration has asserted that FISA does not apply as the President was authorized by the ] (AUMF) and the presidential powers as ] ], to bypass FISA.<ref> U.S. Department of Justice, ] ]</ref>
In ] the Supreme Court majority held that neither the AUMF nor the president's ] trumps explicit federal law, in this case the ]. Presumably the same would hold for FISA.


===Signing statements===
In January 2006, the ] released two legal analyses concluding that:
{{further|Signing statement#Controversy over George W. Bush's use of signing statements}}
:''"...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."''<ref>Congressional Research Service
Article 26 concerns the presidential use of signing statements.
* ] ]
* ] ]</ref>
In addition, the ], in ] ], issued a statement denouncing the warrantless domestic surveillance program, accusing the President of exceeding his powers under the Constitution. Their analysis opines that the key arguments advanced by the Bush administration are not compatible with the law.<ref>American Bar Association
* ADOPTED BY THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES, ] ]
* Washington Post, ] ]</ref> ] and five former ] judges, one of whom resigned in protest, have also voiced their doubts as to the legality of a program bypassing FISA.<ref name="Kris"> By PETE YOST</ref><ref name="FISAJudges">Former FISA judges
* By ERIC LICHTBLAU, The ], ] ]
* By Christy Hardin Smith, ] ]</ref>


===Congressional subpoenas===
Aside from these organisations, others (i.e. John Conyers, John Dean, Elizabeth Holtzman, and Jennifer van Bergen) have stated that the Bush administration's justification of the program, using its interpretation of ], 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." The Senate Committee voted along party lines, and decided a detailed investigation into the matter was unwarranted.<ref>No official inquiry into wiretapping
* By ], ], ] ]
*</ref>


Article 27 is about failing to comply with congressional subpoenas.
Former House member ] (who played a key role in House impeachment proceedings against President ]), ] (former counsel to the president) and ] from ] assert that by authorizing ], President Bush violated the ] without legal basis, constituting a felony and as such an impeachable offense.<ref name="Holtzman"> by ], The Nation, ] ] </ref><ref name="Progressive"> by Matthew Rothschild, ],] ]</ref><ref>Wiretapping probably impeachable offense
* ], ] ]
* By JOHN W. DEAN, FindLaw, ] ]
* by Rosa Brooks, ], ] ]
* By JENNIFER VAN BERGEN, CounterPunch, March 4-5, 2006
* By JOHN W. DEAN, FindLaw, ] ] </ref>


===2004 elections===
On ] ], the case, ] v. ], in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of ] ruled that the Bush administration’s program to monitor the phone calls and e-mails of Americans without warrants was unconstitutional and must be stopped.<ref>http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/26489prs20060817.html</ref> It was the first ruling by a federal court to strike down the controversial National Security Agency surveillance program. In the judge's ruling, ] dismissed the government’s argument that the president "has been granted the inherent power to violate not only the laws of the ] but the First and Fourth Amendments of the ], itself." In the conclusion of the ruling, Justice Warren was quoted from the case U.S. v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258 (1967) where he wrote:
{{further|2004 United States election voting controversies}}
:''"Implicit in the term ‘national defense’ is the notion of defending those values and ideas which set this Nation apart. . . . It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of . . . those liberties . . . which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile. Id. at 264."''<ref>http://www.aclu.org/images/nsaspying/asset_upload_file689_26477.pdf</ref>


Articles 28 and 29 charge the president with tampering with the 2004 elections and violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
In response to this decision, on ] ], the ] on Intelligence as both committees approved H.R. 5825, the "]." According to the ], that bill, authored by Representative ] (R-NM) would give the president unprecedented power and authorize the warrantless surveillance program conducted by the National Security Agency.<ref>http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/26802prs20060920.html</ref> Some civil liberties groups opposed the bill commenting that the new bill gives the president tacit approval to ignore the Constitution.<ref>http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/26802prs20060920.html</ref>


===Medicare===
It should be noted that President Bush did ] of his decision to authorize warrantless wiretapping at the time of the decision. However, none was totally informed, nor were they allowed to take notes or confer with others to assess the possible ramifications of this program.


Article 30 states "Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare."
===2003 invasion of Iraq===
{{see|2003 invasion of Iraq}}


===Katrina===
====Constitutionality of invasion====
{{further|Criticism of the government response to Hurricane Katrina}}
] argues for a Bush impeachment, alleging that the war against Iraq was undertaken without a declaration of war by Congress and is thus illegal.]]
{{see|United States Constitution}}


Article 31 concerns the supposed failure to plan and respond to Hurricane Katrina.
In February and March 2003, ] served as lead counsel for a coalition of US soldiers, parents of US soldiers, and Members of Congress in '']'',<ref></ref> a constitutional challenge to President Bush’s authority to wage war against ] absent a congressional ] or equivalent action. Bonifaz argued in court that the President’s planned first-strike ] violated the ] of the US Constitution.<ref> CNN</ref> As a corollary to his lawsuit, Bonifaz has argued publicly and in writing that Bush ought to be impeached for this. However, Bonifaz's lawsuit was dismissed in February 2003 and in March 2003 the dismissal was upheld on appeal. Regarding the dismissal, Attorney Bonifaz said:
:''"They’re not supposed to sideline... Courts cannot shirk from responsibility when it looks like a political battle."''<ref> By Kate A. Tiskus, The ], ] ]</ref>
Regarding the affirmation of the dismissal, the appeals court held:
:''"...the text of the October Resolution itself spells out justifications for a war and frames itself as an 'authorization' of such a war."''<ref></ref>


===Global warming===
Nevertheless, ] (professor of international law at the University of Illinois) also uses this argument as reason in his ''Draft Impeachment Resolution''.<ref name="Boyle">, 108nd Congress H.Res.XX, by ], professor of law, ] School of Law, ] ]</ref>


Article 32 charges the president with "Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global Climate Change."
====Justification for invasion====
{{see|Iraq and weapons of mass destruction|Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda|Downing Street memo|Bush-Blair memo|Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq}}


===9/11===
Furthermore, the arguments put forward for the ]<ref> by Andrea Lynn, the News Bureau of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign</ref> &mdash; the continued possession and development of weapons of mass destruction and active links to al Qaeda &mdash; have been found to be false, according to all official reports.<ref>Weapons of Mass Destruction
* ], ] ]
* ], ] ]
*See also ]
* By Joseph Cirincione, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, George Perkovich, with Alexis Orton, ], January 2004 </ref><ref>Link with Al Qaeda
* Documents show Administration claims were exaggerated, by ], ] ]
* By Dave Zweifel, The Capital Times
* ]</ref> A report by the Defense Department in 2007 conclusively stated the claimed working relationship with Al Qaeda did not exist. Or as the Washington Post described it:
<blockquote>"the intelligence community's prewar consensus that the Iraqi government and al-Qaeda figures had only limited contacts, and ... that reports of deeper links were based on dubious or unconfirmed information."<ref> By R. Jeffrey Smith, W@ashington Post, April 6, 2007</ref></blockquote> 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,<ref name="Ray_McGovern"> ], ] ]</ref> which had purportedly been reported to the U.S. administration. An in-depth investigation into the nature of these discrepancies by the ] has been frustrated. Or, as a ] editorial states:
:''Mr. ] (chairman of the Senate panel) tried to kill the investigation entirely, and after the Democrats forced him to proceed, he set rules that seem a lot like the recipe for a whitewash.''<ref> editorial, ''The ]'', ] ]</ref>
Supporters of impeachment argue that the administration knowingly distorted intelligence reports or ignored contrary information in constructing their case for the war.<ref name="Leaking">Selectively disseminating information
* By Linda Feldmann, The ], ] ]</ref><ref>Misrepresenting the facts surrounding Iraq
*, by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, ] ]
* By ], ], ] ]
* By ], FindLaw.com, ] ]
* ], ] ]]
* ] ] </ref> The Downing Street memo and the Bush-Blair memo are used to substantiate that allegation.<ref> Downing Street memo
* Posted by ] ] ]
* DAVID MANNING, ], ] ]
</ref> Congressional Democrats sponsored both a request for documents and a resolution of inquiry.<ref> ] request
* By David Paul, ], ] ]
* Raw Story, ] ]</ref> A report by the Washington Post on ] ], corroborates that view. It states that the Bush administration advocated that two small trailers which had been found in Iraq were "biological laboratories," despite the fact that U.S. intelligence officials possessed evidence to the contrary at that time.
:''"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."''<ref name="Trailers"> "Biological laboratories"
* By Joby Warrick, The Washington Post, ] ]</ref>


Articles 33, 34 and 35 concern 9/11, alleging that the president failed to respond to prior intelligence, obstructed post-9/11 investigations and endangered the health of 9/11 first responders.
====U.N. Charter====
{{see|UN Charter|War of aggression|Jus ad bellum|Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq}}


==Political views and actions==
By Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, Senate-ratified treaties such as the ] are "the supreme Law of the Land." ], ] and – professor at ], executive vice president of the ], and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the ] – assert that this was not a war in self-defense but a ] contrary to the ] (a ]) and therefore a ].<ref name="Conyers"/><ref name="Boyle"/><ref name="Progressive"/><ref>War of aggression
An early effort to impeach Bush was begun by ] administration Attorney General ].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://independent.gmnews.com/News/2003/0319/Front_Page/013.html |title=Ramsey Clark speaks out against war at college by josh davidson Staff Writer |website=independent.gmnews.com |access-date=17 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051217033130/http://independent.gmnews.com/News/2003/0319/Front_Page/013.html |archive-date=17 December 2005 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.democracynow.org/2005/1/21/former_u_s_attorney_general_ramsey|title=Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark Calls for Bush Impeachment|website=]}}</ref>
* By Marjorie Cohn, Truthout, ] ]
* By Robert Parry, ], ] ]
* By Jan Frel ]]</ref> Also, ] called the war in Iraq a violation of the UN Charter and therefore "illegal." A war of aggression refers to any war not initiated out of self-defence or sanctioned by the UN. Such a violation of international law would constitute an impeachable offense according to ], ], from ], Marcus Raskin and Joseph A. Vuckovich, from the ].<ref name="Boyle"/><ref>Iraq impeachable offense?
* by John W. Dean, CNN
* by Marcus Raskin and Joseph A. Vuckovich, ]</ref>


===Democrats in Congress===
In response to this, the administration, and its supporters, claim that the firing on US and UK airplanes in the ] alone constitutes an ].{{Fact|date=April 2007}}
<!-- Please keep these new additions to these sections in chronological order! -->
On June 16, 2005, Rep. ] (D-]) assembled an unofficial meeting to discuss the ] and to consider grounds for impeachment.
Conyers filed a resolution on December 18, 2005, to create an investigative committee to consider impeachment. His resolution gained 38 co-sponsors before it expired at the end of the ]. He did not reintroduce a similar resolution for the ].<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150318011840/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.res.635: |date=2015-03-18 }} ], retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment Sponsor: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. (introduced December 18, 2005)</ref>


] (D-MN) was the leading figure behind the resolution to impeach Bush brought to the ] in May 2006.<ref>{{cite news| title=The Insurgent|first=Conrad |last=Wilson|date=2006-12-08|url=http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12284 |access-date=January 27, 2007 }}</ref> Ellison was elected to the ] in November 2006. During the campaign and when he was named to the ], Ellison repeatedly called for an investigation into a possible impeachment.<ref>{{cite news|title=Ellison compares Bush to Nixon|url=http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2006/08/mprs_tim_pugmir.shtml|publisher=Minnesota Public Radio|first=Tim |last=Pugmire |date=2006-08-09 |access-date=January 27, 2007 }}</ref> In support of his candidacy, he "received a $1,000 contribution from ImpeachPAC".<ref name="Trib 1-27">{{cite news|url=http://www.startribune.com/587/story/960880.html |title=Will Ellison pursue impeachment? Not for now, he says |date=2007-01-25 |first=Rob |last=Hotakainen |publisher=Star Tribune |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070214092150/http://www.startribune.com/587/story/960880.html |archive-date=February 14, 2007 }} Retrieved January 27, 2007.</ref> Ellison would later note that his "opinions really have not changed over time, but the circumstances" regarding his position in Congress had, and he was a "step before impeachment".<ref>{{cite web|date=January 27, 2007|title=Impeach Bush? Not yet, says Dem|first=Rob|last=Hotakainen|url=https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2007/01/27/impeach-bush-not-yet-says-dem/}}</ref>
===Geneva Conventions controversy===
====Unlawful combatant status====
{{see|Unlawful combatant|Combatant Status Review Tribunal|Seton Hall study}}


At another ] convened by Conyers on January 20, 2006, Rep. ] (D-]) called for the committee to explore whether Bush should face impeachment, stemming from his decision to authorize domestic surveillance without court review.
Following the ], the Bush administration advocated that suspected ] and ] members would be designated as unlawful combatants. They suggested that, as such, they were not protected under the ]. To address the mandatory review by a "competent tribunal" as defined by , Combatant Status Review Tribunals were established. The ], ], the ] and ] from ] have dismissed the use of the unlawful combatant status as not compatible with U.S. and international law.<ref>Violating ]
* by AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
* by ], ] ]
* by the ], ] ]
* By JOANNE MARINER, FindLaw, ] ] </ref>
In ], a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court held that Common Article 3 (CA3) of the ] applies to detainees in the ]. Per the ], any US national who "commits a war crime shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... , and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death."


On May 10, 2006, House Minority Leader ] (D-]) indicated she was not interested in pursuing impeachment and had taken it "off the table", reiterating this phrase on November 8, 2006, after the election.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Babington|first=Charles|date=2006-05-12|title=Democrats Won't Try To Impeach President|newspaper=] |language=en-US|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/11/AR2006051101950.html|access-date=2023-01-05|issn=0190-8286}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|title=Pelosi Says Democrats Are Ready to Lead|author=NANCY ZUCKERBROD|newspaper=] |agency=Associated Press|language=en-US|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/08/AR2006110801789_pf.html|date=8 November 2006|access-date=2023-01-05|issn=0190-8286}}</ref> In July 2007, Pelosi stated that she "would probably advocate" impeaching Bush if she were not in the House nor Speaker of the House.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Berman|first=Ari|date=2007-07-31|title=Why Pelosi Opposes Impeachment|language=en-US|url=https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/why-pelosi-opposes-impeachment/|access-date=2023-01-05|issn=0027-8378}}</ref>
The US Congress passed the ] to provide a legal framework for the designation of ], their detention, and trial through ]. This was described as unconstitutional by several Senators during the floor debates, so it has not changed the views of those advocating impeachment on these grounds.


On December 8, 2006 (the last day of the 109th Congress), then-Representative ] (D-GA) submitted a resolution, H. Res. 1106. The bill expired along with the 109th Congress.<ref name="impeachment_bill">{{cite news
====Extraordinary rendition====
| first = Ben
{{see|Extraordinary rendition|United Nations Convention Against Torture}}
| last = Evans
<!-- Do not revert this edit. The point of this edit is that the CIA rendition program is proven fact. The dispute is over the intention of it. -->
| title = McKinney Introduces Bill to Impeach Bush
The CIA has "rendered" suspected terrorists, such as ], to other countries. Critics accuse them of doing this in order to avoid U.S. laws prescribing due process and prohibiting torture, calling this "torture by proxy" and "torture flights".<ref>Torture by proxy
| url = http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/12/08/national/w152917S79.DTL
* By Ken Silverstein, The ], ] ]
| agency = Associated Press
* ], ] ] </ref> 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.<ref> By R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post, ] ]</ref> However, the Convention against torture states:
| date = 2006-12-08
:''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.''
}}</ref>
Commentators, including the ] and ], have stated that, under international law, rendition as practiced by the U.S. government is illegal.<ref name="Conyers"/><ref>Legal position of rendition
* by Thalif Deen, Inter Press Service
* By ], The ], ] ] </ref> Conyers has called for investigating whether these violations of international and US law constitute an impeachable offense,<ref name="Conyers"/> whereas Boyle thinks it does, and included this in his ''Draft Impeachment Resolution''.<ref name="Boyle"/>


John Conyers brought up the subject of impeachment on the July 8, 2007, broadcast of ''],''<ref>{{Citation|title=Rep. Conyers on Impeachment|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT9266Xx5iM|language=en|access-date=2023-01-05}}</ref> stating:
A report, on ] ], by the ] concluded that the US should not send suspects to countries where they face a risk of torture, since that would violate international law.<ref name="UNCATreport">UN Committee against Torture report
<blockquote>We're hoping that as the cries for the removal of both Cheney and Bush now reach 46 percent and 58 percent, respectively, for impeachment, that we could begin to become a little bit more cooperative, if not even amicable, in trying to get to the truth of these matters.</blockquote>
* BBC, ] ]
* CBS News, ] ]</ref>


Presidential candidate ]'s major point in the ] on October 30, 2007, was that Bush and Cheney should be impeached for the ].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/01/wufo101.xml |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071103065017/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2007%2F11%2F01%2Fwufo101.xml |url-status=dead |archive-date=3 November 2007 |title=US presidential candidate insists he saw UFO |work=Telegraph |first=Alex |last=Spillius |location=Philadelphia |date=2 November 2007 |access-date=2008-10-27 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/politics/main3440466.shtml |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120721170952/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/politics/main3440466.shtml |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 21, 2012 |title=Poll: Vermont Wants Bush, Cheney Impeached, Nearly Two-Thirds Of State's Likely Voters Want President, VP Removed Before Term Ends |work=CBS News |date=November 1, 2007|access-date=2008-10-27}}</ref> On November 6, 2007, Kucinich introduced a ] in the House of Representatives.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071122/GJNEWS_01/711220060 |title=Dover NH, Rochester NH, Portsmouth NH, Laconia NH, Sanford ME |publisher=Fosters.com |first=Jason |last=Claffey |location=Durham |access-date=2008-10-27}}</ref>
====Treatment of detainees====
{{see|Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse|Bagram torture and prisoner abuse|United Nations Convention Against Torture|Geneva Conventions|Command responsibility}}


In November 2007, ], then a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, stated that he would move to impeach if President Bush were to bomb Iran without first gaining congressional approval.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071129/NEWS/71129018 |title=Biden: Impeachment if Bush bombs Iran |publisher=Seacoastonline.com |first=Adam |last=Leech |access-date=2008-10-27}}</ref> However, no such bombing occurred during the rest of Bush's term.
As part of the war on terror several memos<ref> the memos written as part of the war on terror</ref> 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.<ref>War crimes warning
* By Michael Isikoff, ], ] ]
* by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, ] ]
* By Grant McCool, ], ], ] ] </ref> 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.<ref>US definition of torture
* by Richard Norton-Taylor and Suzanne Goldenberg, The Guardian, ] ]
* By Dahr Jamail, ], ] ]</ref>


On June 9, 2008, Representative ] (D-Ohio), introduced a resolution, {{USBill|110|HRes|1258}}, to impeach president George W. Bush, which included 35 counts in the articles of impeachment. At the end of the evening on June 10, Kucinich offered a motion to refer HRes 1258 to the House Judiciary Committee. On June 11, the House voted 251-166 to send the resolution to the Committee.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HE01258:@@@L&summ2=m& |title=Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors |publisher=Thomas.loc.gov |access-date=2008-10-27 |archive-date=2015-07-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150718210105/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HE01258:@@@L&summ2=m& |url-status=dead }}</ref> The effort to impeach President Bush was not supported by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who believed the move would be "divisive and unlikely to succeed."<ref>{{Cite web|title=Kucinich effort to impeach Bush kicked into limbo - CNN.com|url=https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/11/kucinich.impeach.vote/|access-date=2021-02-11|website=www.cnn.com}}</ref>
Several top military lawyers including ] reported that policies allowing methods 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.<ref>Torture as policy?
* ] ]
* by JANE MAYER, The New Yorker, ] ]
* by Marty Lederman, ] ]</ref>


On July 14, 2008, Kucinich introduced a new impeachment resolution ({{USBill|110|HRes|1345}}) limited to a single count.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rollcall.com/news/-26571-1.html|title=Kucinich to Introduce Sole Impeachment Resolution|publisher=Roll Call|date=July 10, 2008|access-date=August 27, 2013}}</ref><ref>rtsp://video1.c-span.org/15days/e071008_kucinich.rm {{dead link|date=September 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes}}</ref>
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."''<ref>We don't torture
* ], ] ]
* ], ], ] ]
* By Mark Morford, SF Gate, ] ]
</ref>


===State-level Democratic party actions===
To address the multitude of incidents of prisoner abuse the ] was adopted. However, in his ] President Bush made clear that he reserved the right to waive this bill if he thought that was needed.<ref> McCain Law May Not Apply to Cuba Prison, By Josh White and Carol D. Leonnig, Washington Post, ] ]</ref>
On March 21, 2006, the New Mexico Democratic Party, at a convention in ], adopted a plank to their platform saying “the Democratic Party of New Mexico supports the impeachment of George Bush and his lawful removal from office.”<ref>{{cite news|title=N.M. Dems Call For Bush's Exit|date=2006-03-21 |first=Jeff |last=Jones |url=http://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/443722nm03-21-06.htm |access-date=2007-01-27}}</ref>


On March 24, 2007, the Vermont Democratic State Committee voted to support JRH 15, a state legislative resolution supporting impeachment, calling for its passage as "appropriate action."<ref>, by Shay Totten & Christian Avard '']'', March 6, 2007.</ref>
Over the years numerous incidents have been made public and a UN report denounced the abuse of prisoners as tantamount to torture.<ref> BBC, Read the full UN report into Guantanamo Bay, ] ]</ref> Representative ] has advocated investigating these abuses to see if they violate the Geneva Conventions and are thus cause for impeachment, while ], Elizabeth Holtzman and ] hold that violating these laws is grounds for impeachment.<ref name="Conyers"/><ref name="Boyle"/><ref name="Holtzman"/><ref name="Progressive"/><ref>Impeachment for violating the Geneva Conventions
* 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 ] ] at Town Hall in New York City.
* by Lewis H. Lapham, ], ] ].
* by Mike Ferner, ], ] ]</ref> An article in the Progressive supports the view that these alleged violations of US and international law could be an impeachable offense too.<ref name="Progressive"/>


On January 2, 2008, ], an 87-year-old, fourteen-term Democratic ], introduced New Hampshire House Resolution 24 in the State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee of the ].<ref name=NHdoc>{{Cite web|title=Bill Docket|url=http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bill_docket.aspx?lsr=2013&sy=2008&sortoption=&txtsessionyear=2008&txttitle=impeach|access-date=2023-01-05|website=www.gencourt.state.nh.us}}</ref> The resolution was "petitioning Congress to commence impeachment procedures" against Bush and Cheney for "high crimes and misdemeanors", including domestic spying, illegal detentions, signing statements, electioneering, the breaking of international treaties, and war crimes.<ref name=NHtext>{{Cite web|title=HR 0024|url=http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2008/HR0024.html|access-date=2023-01-05|website=www.gencourt.state.nh.us}}</ref> The bill further asserted that "section 603 of ] states that an impeachment may be set in motion by the United States House of Representatives by charges transmitted from the legislature of a state".<ref name=NHtext/>
Several legal analysts -such as ], ], ]- have advocated that writing the so-called "torture memos," not preventing or stopping the abuse could result in legal challenges involving ]<ref name="Boyle"/> under the command responsibility.<ref name="Conyers"/><ref>Accountability
* Democracy Now, ] ]
* By Marjorie Cohn, ], ] ]
*]-04/quaint.htm The Quaint Mr. Gonzales] By Marjorie Cohn, La Prensa San Diego Bilingual Newspaper, ] ]
* by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, ] ]
* ]
* By David R. Irvine and Deborah Pearlstein, Salt Lake Tribune, ] ]
*</ref> This view was confirmed when the ] ruled in ] that, contrary to what the Bush administration advocated, the ] (regarding the treatment of prisoners) applies to all detainees in the War on Terror and as such the ] used to try suspects were violating the law. The Court reaffirmed that those involved in mistreatment of detainees violate US and international law.<ref> Marjorie Cohn -professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, president-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists- '']'', ] ]</ref> ] contends that by ignoring the Geneva Conventions the US administration including President Bush, as ], is culpable for war crimes, and as such that constitutes an impeachable offense.<ref> By ], ''CounterPunch'', ] ]</ref>


On February 20, 2008, the bill was ruled "Inexpedient to Legislate" to pass by a 10 to 5 vote within committee, which passed the resolution on to the full House for a vote.<ref name=NHdoc/> The bill was ] in the New Hampshire House of Representatives on April 16, 2008.<ref name=NHdoc/> After three efforts to have the bill removed from the table were unsuccessful, it died on the table on September 24, 2008.<ref name=NHdoc/>
On ] ], the ] issued a report stating the USA should stop, what it concludes, is "ill-treatment" of detainees, since such treatment, according to the UN-report, violates international law. It also calls for cessation of the US-termed "]" techniques, as the UN sees these methods as a form of torture. The UN report also admonishes against ], the use of which, is considered to amount to torture as well and should be discontinued.<ref name="UNCATreport"/>


===House Republicans===
===Leaking of classified information===
On July 25, 2008, Rep. ] (]) said that Bush had not broken the law in his own interest. He further cited the ] of the Constitution and said that we should use "our own good judgment" regarding their intent on impeachment.<ref>{{cite news |title=User Clip: Mike Pence on impeachment cspan-July 25, 2008 {{!}} C-SPAN.org |url=https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4821207/user-clip-mike-pence-impeachment-cspan-july-25-2008 |access-date=November 25, 2019 |work=C-SPAN |date=July 25, 2008 |language=en-us}}</ref>
====Possible involvement in the CIA leak====
{{see|Yellowcake forgery|CIA leak scandal|CIA leak grand jury investigation}}


==Municipal and county resolutions endorsing impeachment==
In his 2003 ], President Bush cited British government sources in saying that ] was seeking uranium. He referred to what ultimately turned out to be ]. After Ambassador Wilson wrote an OpEd article in the ] denouncing the ] basis and other justifications for the ], the identity of his wife as a CIA employee appeared in media reports for the first time. Wilson later made the allegation her identity was leaked as personal retaliation against him for his pointing out misrepresentations regarding the uranium claim. An investigation into this by ] led to an indictment of ] on perjury charges and for obstructing the investigation into the release of Plame's covert status. Hence, nobody has been indicted for divulging the name of a covert agent. The actual first source of Plame's name to the media was ].<ref></ref>
By early 2006, numerous municipalities (large and small, and in various regions of the United States) had begun considering resolutions endorsing an impeachment of Bush.<ref>{{cite web |title=Towns draft resolutions for Bush impeachment |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna11746261 |website=NBC News |access-date=3 December 2024 |language=en |date=9 March 2006}}</ref> By June 2007, 79 municipal governments had adopted resolutions expressing their support for impeachments against Bush and other Bush administration officials.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Luhn |first1=Alec |title=Council to Discuss Bush Impeachment Madison Joins the 79 Muncipalities National Discussing Impeachment Resolutions of Bush's Administration. (First Edition) Seventy-Nine Municipalities Nationwide Have Adopted Impeachment Resolutions. (Second Edition) |url=https://madison.com/news/local/council-to-discuss-bush-impeachment-madison-joins-the-79-municipalities-nationwide-discussing-impeachment-resoltuions-of/article_1c02fa1a-d491-5192-9cb7-756758f3f857.html |website=Wisconsin State Journal |access-date=3 December 2024 |language=en |date=19 June 2007}}</ref>


Several county governments adopted resolutions expressing their support for an impeachment of Bush. Among the first to do this was ] in August 2007.<ref>Multiple sources:
At one point, Libby's indictment states:
*{{cite web |title=Dane County Board to vote on impeachment of Bush, Cheney |url=https://www.twincities.com/2007/08/11/dane-county-board-to-vote-on-impeachment-of-bush-cheney |website=Twin Cities |access-date=3 December 2024 |date=11 August 2007}}
:''"Prior to ] ], Valerie Wilson’s affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community."''<ref>Plame's identity not known
*{{cite web |title=Dane County / Board to vote on Bush impeachment |url=https://www.twincities.com/2007/08/11/dane-county-board-to-vote-on-bush-impeachment |website=Twin Cities |access-date=3 December 2024 |date=11 August 2007}}
* all the material made public by Fitzgerald
*{{cite web |title=Every Which Way But Wyndham |url=https://www.dailycardinal.com/article/2010/02/every-which-way-but-wyndham |website=The Daily Cardinal |access-date=3 December 2024 |language=en |date=February 14, 2010}}</ref>
*] ] Indictment: US v Libby]</ref>
The litigation surrounding Libby has yielded court papers showing that Libby was authorized and instructed to disseminate formerly classified information by his superiors.<ref> CBS/AP, ] ]</ref> No court papers have alleged that Bush or Cheney authorized the release of Plame's name. On ] ], ] reported Libby has testified that Bush and Cheney did not authorize the release of Plame's name.<ref> by ], ] ].</ref> Libby's position is that he did not leak Plame's name.


==Summary of impeachment resolutions introduced==
Libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice. A court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald during his sentencing hearing revealed that Plame was indeed a ].<ref>Valerie Plame was covert
{| class=wikitable
* By Joel Seidman, ], May 29, 2007
|+ Impeachment resolutions introduced in the ]
* By Dan Froomkin, Wwashington Post, May 29, 2007
! Resolution #
* by Jon Ponder, ], May. 30, 2007</ref>
! Date introduced
! Sponsor
! Number of co-sponsors
! Action called for
! Reason
! Actions taken
! Citation
|-
|
| December 18, 2005
| ] (D–MI)
| style="text-align: center"|38
| Launch of an ]
| Allegations against the Bush administration including, "intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics"
| Referred to ] on December 18, 2005
| <ref>{{cite web |title=H.Res.635 - Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.
|url= https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-resolution/635 |website=congress.gov |publisher=United States Congress |access-date=4 January 2023}}</ref>
|-
|
| December 8, 2006
| ] (D–GA)
| style="text-align: center"|0
| Impeachment of Bush
| {{small|Alleged "high crimes and misdemeanors" outlined in three articles of impeachment:
<br>{{Smalldiv|{{hidden| |
*Article I: "Failure to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution," in violation of ] by, "manipulating intelligence and lying to justify war"
*Article II: "Abuse of office and of executive privilege," in violation of his oath of office, through, "disregard for that oath by obstructing and hindering the work of Congressional investigative bodies and by seeking to expand the scope of the powers of his office," and additionally, failing to, "investigate or discipline those responsible for an ongoing pattern of negligence, incompetence and malfeasance to the detriment of the American people (including by Vice President ] and National Security Advisor ])
*Article III:"Failure to ensure the laws are faithfully executed," in violation of his duties under Article II, Section 3 of the United States Constitution by having, "violated the letter and spirit of laws and rules of criminal procedure used by civilian and military courts, and has violated or ignored regulatory codes and practices that carry out the law," in conduct including, "illegal domestic spying," that is, "in violation of the ]"
}}}}
| Referred to ] on December 8, 2006
| <ref>{{cite web |title=H.Res.1106 - Articles of Impeachment against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, for high crimes and misdemeanors. |url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-resolution/1106 |website=congress.gov |publisher=United States Congress |access-date=4 January 2023}}</ref>
|}


{| class=wikitable
====Declassifying for political purposes====
|+ Impeachment resolutions introduced in the ]
{{see|Invasion of Iraq|Iraq and weapons of mass destruction|Downing Street memo|Bush-Blair memo|Yellowcake forgery|Plame affair|CIA leak grand jury investigation}}
! Resolution #

! Date introduced
On ] ], court papers were filed in the ], stating that Libby had testified that President Bush authorized the disclosure of select portions of the then classified ] (NIE) on Iraq.<ref name="Leaking"/><ref>Bush authorized disclosure
! Sponsor
* By PETE YOST, ], ] ]
! Number of co-sponsors
* By ], ], ] ]
! Action called for
* ] ]
! Reason
* By Jason Leopold, Truthout, ] ]
! Actions taken
* By Joe Conason, Salon, ] ]
! Citation
* RAW STORY, ] ] </ref> 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-classify material and the release of de-classified material is not leaking.<ref name="Leaking"/><ref>Disclosure legal?
|-
* by John Dean, FindLaw, ] ]
|
* by ], ] ]</ref> Some argue that this contradicts previous statements by Bush in which he made clear that leaking information is unacceptable.<ref name="Leaking"/><ref>Questions regarding statements
| June 11, 2008
* By Robert Parry, Consortium News, ] ]
| ] (D–OH)
* by Representative John Conyers, Jr., ] ]
| style="text-align: center"|11
* By Derrick Z. Jackson, The ], ] ]
| Impeachment of Bush
* By E&P Staff, ] ] ]</ref> According to the court filings by Fitzgerald:
| Alleged "high crimes and misdemeanors" in violation of his oath of office outlined in 28 articles of impeachment
:''“Defendant (Libby) testified that this ] 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.”''<ref name="Court_filing">Uncommon way of declassifying
| Referred (by a vote of 251–166) to ] on June 11, 2008
* by ], ], ] ]
| <ref>{{cite web |title=H.Res.1258 - Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors.
* by Greg Mitchell, Editor & Publisher, ] ]</ref>
|url= https://www.congress.gov/bill/110th-congress/house-resolution/1258 |website=congress.gov |publisher=United States Congress |access-date=4 January 2023}}</ref>
], ] and ] have noted that the Bush Administration's asserted motivation &mdash; that this declassification was needed to counter misinformation spread by opponents of the Bush administration's ] &mdash; 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.<ref name="Ray_McGovern"/><ref name="Court_filing"/><ref name="NIE"> By Elizabeth de la Vega, TomDispatch.com, ] ]</ref> Bush's misrepresentations on this point and his allegedly declassifying of information for a political purpose, is seen by some as impeachable offense.<ref name="NIE"/><ref>Lying impeachable
|-
* By DAVE LINDORFF, CounterPunch, ]&mdash;] ]
|
* By William Rivers Pitt, Truthout, ] ]</ref>
| July 15, 2008

| ] (D–OH)
===Politicization of the United States attorney offices===
| style="text-align: center"|4
{{main|Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy|Bush White House e-mail controversy|Executive privilege|Saturday Night Massacre}}
| Impeachment of Bush

| "Deceiving Congress with fabricated threats of ] to fraudulently obtain support for ]"
In March 2007 it became known that eight ] were dismissed. The Bush administration has issued changing and contradictory statements about the timeline of the planning of the firings, persons who ordered the firings, and reasons for the firings.<ref>{{cite news|accessdate=2007-03-17 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/17/washington/17assess.html?ref=washington
| Referred (by a vote of 238–180) to ] on December 8, 2006
|title=With Shifting Explanations, White House Adds to Storm|author=Sheryl Gay Stolberg
| <ref>{{cite web |title=H.Res.1345 - Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors.
|date=], ] |work=New York Times}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|accessdate=2007-03-17 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Congress-Prosecutors.html
|url= https://www.congress.gov/bill/110th-congress/house-resolution/1345 |website=congress.gov |publisher=United States Congress |access-date=4 January 2023}}</ref>
|title=Republican Support for Gonzales Erodes
|}
|author=Associated Press
|work=New York Times
|date=], ]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|accessdate=2007-03-17 |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/16/AR2007031601046.html
|title=Accounts of Prosecutors' Dismissals Keep Shifting
|author=Dan Eggen
|work=Washington Post |page=A01
|date=], ]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|accessdate=2007-03-17
|url=http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16919399.htm
|title=U.S. Attorneys: A look at what's behind the U.S. attorney flap |author=Ron Hutcheson
|publisher=McClatchy Newspapers}}</ref> Congressmen investigating these dismissals stated that ] from ] officials contradicts internal Department memos and e-mails.<ref>{{cite news|accessdate=2007-03-20 |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/19/politics/main2583236.shtml |title=Dems' Strategy On Attorneys Takes Shape |author=Mike Allen |date=2007-03-20 | publisher=]}}</ref> Because of that, and the uncommon nature of these firings,<ref>Dismissal attorneys uncommon
* by ], ], March 19, 2007
* By ], The Washington Post, March 24, 2007
* ], Mar ch 14, 2007</ref> critics suggest ulterior motives. Among them ] and Cynthia L. Cooper wrote that: "we may be witnessing criminal acts of obstruction of justice at the highest levels of government."<ref name="HoltzmanCooper"> By Elizabeth Holtzman and Cynthia L. Cooper, The San Diego Union-Tribune, March 29, 2007</ref> They allege that the attorneys were fired as retribution for prosecuting ]s,<ref name="HoltzmanCooper"/> or for failing to prosecute enough ]s.<ref> By Mike Gallagher, ], April 15, 2007</ref> for non-existent ].<ref> By ], In These Times, April 18, 2007</ref> This supposed fraud led the New York Times to the following response:
<blockquote>"Last week, we learned that the administration edited a government-ordered report on voter fraud to support its fantasy. The original version concluded that among experts "there is widespread but not unanimous agreement that there is little polling place fraud." But the publicly released version said, "There is a great deal of debate on the pervasiveness of fraud." It's hard to see that as anything but a deliberate effort to mislead the public."<ref> The New York Times, April 2007 </ref></blockquote>

The article continues to suggest that emphasising voter-fraud facilitates regulations, such as ], which hinder the "poor, the elderly, minorities and other disenfranchised groups that tend to support Democrats." ] for ] concurs, commenting that it might be part of a scheme "to restrict voter turnout in key battleground states in ways that favor Republican political candidates."<ref> By ], ], April 19, 2007</ref> The same is implied by ] in ] where he reports that ], ]’ new attorney general, was involved in suppressing minority voters.<ref> by ], ], April 16, 2007</ref>

The investigation has drawn attention to the prosecution and subsequent conviction, during an ], of ] for corruption, which the ] immediately reversed because the prosecution's evidence was "beyond thin."<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=587510
|title=Ex-state official freed: Judge calls evidence she steered travel contract 'beyond thin'
|author=Steven Walters and John Diedrich
|date=] ]
|publisher=]
|accessdate=2007-04-07}}</ref> ] ] of Madison<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.madison.com/tct/news/index.php?ntid=128688
|title=Baldwin: Was freed state worker a victim of politics?
|author=Frederic J. Frommer
|date=] ]
|accessdate=2007-04-10}}</ref> and the ] are investigating this case.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/6956077.html
|title=U.S. Senators Review Georgia Thompson Case
|date=] ]
|author=Jenn Rourke
|publisher=]
|accessdate=2007-04-10}}</ref><ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/16/opinion/16mon4.html
|title=A Woman Wrongly Convicted and a U.S. Attorney Who Kept His Job
|author=Adam Cohen
|date=] ]
|publisher=]
|accessdate=2007-04-16}}</ref>

Commentators have further observed the possible connection with the ], which was discontinued after the chief prosecutor for ], and the instigator of the indictment, ] was unexpectedly demoted and removed from office.<ref name="HoltzmanCooper"/><ref>Guam
* by Ari Berman, The Nation, April 2, 2007
* By Matt Renner, Truthout, March 29, 2007
* by Eric Malone, ], April 8, 2007 </ref>

For the involvement in these alleged wrongdoings<ref> By Margaret Talev, ], April 17, 2007</ref> and the subsequent cover-up ], Elizabeth Holtzman, Cynthia L. Cooper, and ] have suggested that impeachment proceedings are warranted.<ref name="HoltzmanCooper"/><ref>Attorneygate
* by ], professor at ] and president of the ], CounterPunch Newsletter, April 12, 2007
* by Thom Hartmann, ], March 27, 2007
* by Larry Beinhart, ], April 3, 2007</ref>

===Hurricane Katrina===
{{see|Hurricane Katrina|Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina |Political effects of Hurricane Katrina}}

The alleged responsibility of the ] in the mishandling of Hurricane Katrina<ref> By John Solomon and Spencer S. Hsu, Washington Post, April 29, 2007</ref> has been used by ], ], ], and the ] to suggest failure by the administration to adequately provide for the need of its citizens. And as such they hold that the allegations of incompetence amount to an impeachable offense.<ref name="Boyle"/><ref>Hurricane Katrina
* Ramsey Clarke, ] ]
* by Robert R. Thompson, ], ] ]
* By FRANCIS BOYLE, ] ]
* , ] ]
* Sunday Independent, ] ]
*
* The Nation, ] ]</ref>

The administration, and its supporters, contend that the principal responsibility lies with the local authorities.<ref>Responsibility Katrina
* By Farhad Manjoo, ], ] ]
* CNN, ] ]
* by LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer
* Media Matters for America, ] ]</ref> Therefore, according to the President's supporters, any accusation of inadequate handling of the disaster should be addressed to Governor ].<ref>Kathleen Babineaux Blanco
* ], ] ]
* By Stephen Dinan, THE WASHINGTON TIMES, ] ] </ref>

Furthermore, the seizure of weapons in the aftermath of Katrina constitutes a violation of the second amendment.

===Abuse of power===
{{further|] and ]}}
President Bush has asserted broad executive powers, attributing them to his position as ] and to the ]. These have been used to justify policies connected with the war. Constitutional law expert ] attributes Bush's interpretation of the authority of the president to a series of legal memos by ], identifies this expansive interpretation as the common thread shared by the other Bush controversies, and indicates that this interpretation is based on combining the powers of all three branches of government in the single person of the President, and is therefore the diametric opposite of the text and the ]' intended meaning of the ].<ref>Glenn Greenwald, ''How Would a Patriot Act? Defending American Values from a President Run Amok'', Working Assets Publishing, 2006, ISBN 0-9779440-0-X</ref>

], ], ], ], the ] and the ] have claimed that Bush has exceeded constitutional or other legal limitations on such war powers.<ref name="Conyers"/><ref>Abuse of Power
* by Elizabeth Holtzman, The Nation, ] ]
* By JOHN W. DEAN, FindLaw, ] ]
* By JENNIFER VAN BERGEN, Findlaw, ] ]
* By EDWARD LAZARUS, FindLaw, ] ]
* By ], Tomdispatch.com. Posted ] ]
* Alternet, ] ]
* Common Dreams, ] ]
* The Santiago Times, ] ]</ref> The ''Draft Impeachment Resolution'' by Boyle advocates that this is an impeachable offense.<ref name="Boyle"/>

==Criticism of the impeachment movement==

Columnist ] of ] has suggested that proponents of impeachment are almost entirely left-wing bloggers, that Conyers had "already decided the conclusions he will reach" before the Judiciary Committee's investigation had even started, and that "interpretive structure of the report" indicates that it "is not the product of a real investigation."<ref> by Bryon York. ''National Review,'' August 7, 2006.</ref>

While noting that the latest poll "numbers show true trouble" for Bush-Cheney, columnist Matt Towery, in reporting the results of the May 2007 InsiderAdvantage poll, stated ''"Those few in the Democrat-controlled House who are advocating impeachment are on the fringe of political thought -- at least for now."'' He further opined that their rationale for impeachment "looks specious", and went on to say ''"It's not beyond consideration that what now seems silly political grandstanding could get much more serious, especially if the Iraq war continues to go badly, current scandals surrounding the attorney general or White House political adviser Karl Rove get worse, or new White House scandals emerge."''<ref> by Matt Towery. Townhall.com, May 8, 2007.</ref>


==See also== ==See also==
* ]
*]
* ]
*]
*] * ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* '']''
* ]
* '']''


==References== ==References==
{{reflist|2}} {{reflist|colwidth=30em}}


==Further reading== ==Further reading==
*], ''The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism,'' (2006) ISBN 1-59558-140-5 * ], ''Warrior King: The Case for Impeaching George Bush'', (2003) {{ISBN|1-56025-606-0}}
*], ''Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush'', (2006) ISBN 1-933633-08-5 * ] & ], ]: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office, (2006) {{ISBN|0-312-36016-9}}
*], ''Warrior King: The Case for Impeaching George Bush'', (2003) ISBN 1-56025-606-0 * Dennis Loo & Peter Phillips, Eds., ''Impeach the President: the Case Against Bush and Cheney'', (2006) {{ISBN|978-1-58322-743-5}}
*], '']: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush'', (2004) ISBN 0-316-00023-X * ], ''The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism'', (2006) {{ISBN|978-1-59558-140-2}}
* Elizabeth de la Vega, ''U.S. v. Bush'', (2006) {{ISBN|978-1-58322-756-5}}
*], ''Impeachment: A Handbook (Yale Fastback Series)'', (1998 Reissue) ISBN 0-300-07950-8
* ], ''Impeachment: A Handbook (Yale Fastback Series)'', (1998 Reissue) {{ISBN|0-300-07950-8}}
*], '']'', (2006) ISBN 0-9779440-0-X
* ], '']'', (2006) {{ISBN|0-9779440-0-X}}
* ] with Cynthia Cooper, ''The Impeachment of George W Bush'' A Practical Guide for Concerned Citizens, (2006) {{ISBN|1-56025-940-X}}
* ], ''Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law'', (2007) {{ISBN|0-9778253-3-7}}
* ], ''Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy'', (2007) {{ISBN|0-316-11805-2}}
* ], '']'', (2008) {{ISBN|978-159315-481-3}}


==External links== ==External links==
{{Wikisource|Representative Kucinich announced his intention to offer a privileged resolution|Congressional&nbsp;Record, Volume&nbsp;154, pp.&nbsp;H5088–H5107 (June&nbsp;9,&nbsp;2008)}}
*, '']'', ] ]
* , by Congressman ]. .
* ()
* (July 22, 2007)
* by John Dean
*
*, which reports a Zogby Poll which shows 42% of Americans agree that "if President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment?"
* an article in the ] ] issue of ''The Nation'' magazine * {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060318101931/http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060130/holtzman |date=2006-03-18 }} an article in the January 30, 2006, issue of ''The Nation'' magazine

*
{{Presidency of George W. Bush}}
*
{{Federal impeachment in the United States}}
*[http://www.impeachbush.org Group's web site where over 868,000 people have voted for the impeachment of the top characters of the Bush regime. Site includeds "Articles of Impeachment" and "Notes for the consideration of Impeachment" by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark
* by Garrison Keillor
*
*
*
*
*
*
*; Library Of Congress link to
*
*
*
*
*
* argument diagram at HonestArgument.com
*
*
*, links and more information from the wiki.
*, website showing examples of movements with pictures and support for impeachment process of the President and the Vice President


]
{{George W. Bush}}
] ]
] ]

Latest revision as of 20:23, 3 December 2024

Talks and activities of a possible impeachment of George W. Bush
A protester calling for the impeachment of Bush on June 16, 2005.
Window display in New Orleans calling for impeachment in March 2006
Man protesting in Albuquerque, New Mexico in support of impeaching both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney in July 2008

During the presidency of George W. Bush, several American politicians sought to either investigate Bush for possible impeachable offenses, or to bring actual impeachment charges on the floor of the United States House of Representatives Judiciary Committee. The most significant of these efforts occurred on June 10, 2008, when Congressman Dennis Kucinich, along with co-sponsor Robert Wexler, introduced 35 articles of impeachment against Bush to the U.S. House of Representatives. The House voted 251 to 166 to refer the impeachment resolution to the Judiciary Committee on June 11, where no further action was taken on it. Bush's presidency ended on January 20, 2009, with the completion of his second term in office, rendering impeachment efforts moot.

Kucinich–Wexler impeachment articles

The Kucinich–Wexler impeachment resolution contained 35 articles of impeachment covering the Iraq War, the Valerie Plame affair, creating a case for war with Iran, capture and treatment of prisoners of war, spying and or wiretapping inside the United States, use of signing statements, failing to comply with Congressional subpoenas, the 2004 elections, Medicare, Hurricane Katrina, global warming, and 9/11.

The 2003 invasion of Iraq was the most substantial portion of the articles of impeachment introduced by Kucinich and Wexler. Fifteen of the 35 articles directly relate to alleged misconduct by Bush in seeking authority for the war, and in the conduct of military action itself. Five other articles address allegations partially or tertiarily relating to the war, including the "outing" of Valerie Plame, treatment of prisoners (both in Iraq and from operations in Afghanistan and other countries), and building a case for Iran being a threat based in part on alleging Iranian actions in Iraq.

Justification for invasion

Further information: Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, Downing Street memo, Bush-Blair memo, Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and Bush-Aznar memo

The first four impeachment articles charge the president with illegally creating a case for war with Iraq, including charges of a propaganda campaign, falsely representing Iraq as responsible for 9/11, and falsely representing Iraq as an imminent danger to the United States.

Legitimacy of invasion

Further information: UN Charter, War of aggression, Jus ad bellum, and Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq

Articles 5–8 and 12 deal with the invasion of Iraq and include charges that funds were misspent before the war, that the war was in violation of HJRes114, that Iraq was invaded without a war declaration, that the war is a violation of the UN Charter, and that the purpose of the war was to control the country's oil supplies.

Conduct of the Iraq War

Further information: 2003 invasion of Iraq

Articles 9, 10, 11 and 13 deal with conduct of the war, including failing to provide troops with body armor, falsifying US troop deaths and injuries, establishing a permanent military base in Iraq, and creating a secret task force to develop energy and military policies with respect to Iraq and other countries. Articles 15 and 16 cover contractors in Iraq and charges that the president misspent money on contractors and provided them with immunity.

Valerie Plame

Further information: Plame affair

Article 14 is about the revelation of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame.

Treatment of detainees

Further information: Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse, Bagram torture and prisoner abuse, United Nations Convention Against Torture, Geneva Conventions, Command responsibility, and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld

Articles 17–20 concern the treatment of detainees, the "kidnapping" and detention of foreign nationals, and the use of torture.

Attempt to overthrow the government of Iran

Article 21 claims that the president misled Congress and the American people about threats from Iran, and supported terrorist organizations within Iran, with the goal of overthrowing the Iranian government.

NSA warrantless surveillance controversy

Further information: NSA warrantless surveillance controversy and Separation of powers

Articles 24 and 25 charge the president with illegally spying on American citizens, directing US telecom companies to create databases of citizens, and violating the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution.

Signing statements

Further information: Signing statement § Controversy over George W. Bush's use of signing statements

Article 26 concerns the presidential use of signing statements.

Congressional subpoenas

Article 27 is about failing to comply with congressional subpoenas.

2004 elections

Further information: 2004 United States election voting controversies

Articles 28 and 29 charge the president with tampering with the 2004 elections and violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Medicare

Article 30 states "Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare."

Katrina

Further information: Criticism of the government response to Hurricane Katrina

Article 31 concerns the supposed failure to plan and respond to Hurricane Katrina.

Global warming

Article 32 charges the president with "Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global Climate Change."

9/11

Articles 33, 34 and 35 concern 9/11, alleging that the president failed to respond to prior intelligence, obstructed post-9/11 investigations and endangered the health of 9/11 first responders.

Political views and actions

An early effort to impeach Bush was begun by Lyndon Johnson administration Attorney General Ramsey Clark.

Democrats in Congress

On June 16, 2005, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) assembled an unofficial meeting to discuss the Downing Street memo and to consider grounds for impeachment. Conyers filed a resolution on December 18, 2005, to create an investigative committee to consider impeachment. His resolution gained 38 co-sponsors before it expired at the end of the 109th Congress. He did not reintroduce a similar resolution for the 110th Congress.

Keith Ellison (D-MN) was the leading figure behind the resolution to impeach Bush brought to the Minnesota State House of Representatives in May 2006. Ellison was elected to the United States House of Representatives in November 2006. During the campaign and when he was named to the House Judiciary Committee, Ellison repeatedly called for an investigation into a possible impeachment. In support of his candidacy, he "received a $1,000 contribution from ImpeachPAC". Ellison would later note that his "opinions really have not changed over time, but the circumstances" regarding his position in Congress had, and he was a "step before impeachment".

At another unofficial hearing convened by Conyers on January 20, 2006, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) called for the committee to explore whether Bush should face impeachment, stemming from his decision to authorize domestic surveillance without court review.

On May 10, 2006, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) indicated she was not interested in pursuing impeachment and had taken it "off the table", reiterating this phrase on November 8, 2006, after the election. In July 2007, Pelosi stated that she "would probably advocate" impeaching Bush if she were not in the House nor Speaker of the House.

On December 8, 2006 (the last day of the 109th Congress), then-Representative Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) submitted a resolution, H. Res. 1106. The bill expired along with the 109th Congress.

John Conyers brought up the subject of impeachment on the July 8, 2007, broadcast of This Week with George Stephanopoulos, stating:

We're hoping that as the cries for the removal of both Cheney and Bush now reach 46 percent and 58 percent, respectively, for impeachment, that we could begin to become a little bit more cooperative, if not even amicable, in trying to get to the truth of these matters.

Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich's major point in the Democratic Presidential Debate on October 30, 2007, was that Bush and Cheney should be impeached for the Iraq War. On November 6, 2007, Kucinich introduced a resolution to impeach Vice President Cheney in the House of Representatives.

In November 2007, Joe Biden, then a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, stated that he would move to impeach if President Bush were to bomb Iran without first gaining congressional approval. However, no such bombing occurred during the rest of Bush's term.

On June 9, 2008, Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), introduced a resolution, H.Res. 1258, to impeach president George W. Bush, which included 35 counts in the articles of impeachment. At the end of the evening on June 10, Kucinich offered a motion to refer HRes 1258 to the House Judiciary Committee. On June 11, the House voted 251-166 to send the resolution to the Committee. The effort to impeach President Bush was not supported by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who believed the move would be "divisive and unlikely to succeed."

On July 14, 2008, Kucinich introduced a new impeachment resolution (H.Res. 1345) limited to a single count.

State-level Democratic party actions

On March 21, 2006, the New Mexico Democratic Party, at a convention in Albuquerque, adopted a plank to their platform saying “the Democratic Party of New Mexico supports the impeachment of George Bush and his lawful removal from office.”

On March 24, 2007, the Vermont Democratic State Committee voted to support JRH 15, a state legislative resolution supporting impeachment, calling for its passage as "appropriate action."

On January 2, 2008, Betty Hall, an 87-year-old, fourteen-term Democratic State Representative, introduced New Hampshire House Resolution 24 in the State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee of the New Hampshire House of Representatives. The resolution was "petitioning Congress to commence impeachment procedures" against Bush and Cheney for "high crimes and misdemeanors", including domestic spying, illegal detentions, signing statements, electioneering, the breaking of international treaties, and war crimes. The bill further asserted that "section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of Parliamentary Practice states that an impeachment may be set in motion by the United States House of Representatives by charges transmitted from the legislature of a state".

On February 20, 2008, the bill was ruled "Inexpedient to Legislate" to pass by a 10 to 5 vote within committee, which passed the resolution on to the full House for a vote. The bill was tabled in the New Hampshire House of Representatives on April 16, 2008. After three efforts to have the bill removed from the table were unsuccessful, it died on the table on September 24, 2008.

House Republicans

On July 25, 2008, Rep. Mike Pence (IN) said that Bush had not broken the law in his own interest. He further cited the Framers of the Constitution and said that we should use "our own good judgment" regarding their intent on impeachment.

Municipal and county resolutions endorsing impeachment

By early 2006, numerous municipalities (large and small, and in various regions of the United States) had begun considering resolutions endorsing an impeachment of Bush. By June 2007, 79 municipal governments had adopted resolutions expressing their support for impeachments against Bush and other Bush administration officials.

Several county governments adopted resolutions expressing their support for an impeachment of Bush. Among the first to do this was Dane County, Wisconsin in August 2007.

Summary of impeachment resolutions introduced

Impeachment resolutions introduced in the 109th U.S. Congress
Resolution # Date introduced Sponsor Number of co-sponsors Action called for Reason Actions taken Citation
H.Res. 635 December 18, 2005 John Conyers (D–MI) 38 Launch of an impeachment inquiry Allegations against the Bush administration including, "intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics" Referred to House Committee on Rules on December 18, 2005
H.Res.1106 December 8, 2006 Cynthia McKinney (D–GA) 0 Impeachment of Bush Alleged "high crimes and misdemeanors" outlined in three articles of impeachment:
  • Article I: "Failure to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution," in violation of his oath of office by, "manipulating intelligence and lying to justify war"
  • Article II: "Abuse of office and of executive privilege," in violation of his oath of office, through, "disregard for that oath by obstructing and hindering the work of Congressional investigative bodies and by seeking to expand the scope of the powers of his office," and additionally, failing to, "investigate or discipline those responsible for an ongoing pattern of negligence, incompetence and malfeasance to the detriment of the American people (including by Vice President Dick Cheney and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice)
  • Article III:"Failure to ensure the laws are faithfully executed," in violation of his duties under Article II, Section 3 of the United States Constitution by having, "violated the letter and spirit of laws and rules of criminal procedure used by civilian and military courts, and has violated or ignored regulatory codes and practices that carry out the law," in conduct including, "illegal domestic spying," that is, "in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act"
 Referred to House Committee on the Judiciary on December 8, 2006
Impeachment resolutions introduced in the 110th U.S. Congress
Resolution # Date introduced Sponsor Number of co-sponsors Action called for Reason Actions taken Citation
H.Res.1258 June 11, 2008 Dennis Kucinich (D–OH) 11 Impeachment of Bush Alleged "high crimes and misdemeanors" in violation of his oath of office outlined in 28 articles of impeachment Referred (by a vote of 251–166) to House Committee on the Judiciary on June 11, 2008
H.Res.1345 July 15, 2008 Dennis Kucinich (D–OH) 4 Impeachment of Bush "Deceiving Congress with fabricated threats of Iraq WMDs to fraudulently obtain support for an authorization of the use of military force against Iraq" Referred (by a vote of 238–180) to House Committee on the Judiciary on December 8, 2006

See also

References

  1. ^ "Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors. (2008 - H.Res. 1258)". GovTrack.us. Retrieved 2023-01-05.
  2. Man, Anthony (June 10, 2008). "Impeach Bush, Wexler says". South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com. Retrieved 2008-06-10.
  3. "Bill Summary & Status - 110th Congress (2007 - 2008) - H.RES.1258 - All Congressional Actions - THOMAS (Library of Congress)". Archived from the original on 2016-07-04. Retrieved 2009-01-26.
  4. "Ramsey Clark speaks out against war at college by josh davidson Staff Writer". independent.gmnews.com. Archived from the original on 17 December 2005. Retrieved 17 January 2022.
  5. "Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark Calls for Bush Impeachment". Democracy Now!.
  6. H.RES.635 - Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing Archived 2015-03-18 at the Wayback Machine torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment Sponsor: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. (introduced December 18, 2005)
  7. Wilson, Conrad (2006-12-08). "The Insurgent". Retrieved January 27, 2007.
  8. Pugmire, Tim (2006-08-09). "Ellison compares Bush to Nixon". Minnesota Public Radio. Retrieved January 27, 2007.
  9. Hotakainen, Rob (2007-01-25). "Will Ellison pursue impeachment? Not for now, he says". Star Tribune. Archived from the original on February 14, 2007. Retrieved January 27, 2007.
  10. Hotakainen, Rob (January 27, 2007). "Impeach Bush? Not yet, says Dem".
  11. Babington, Charles (2006-05-12). "Democrats Won't Try To Impeach President". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2023-01-05.
  12. NANCY ZUCKERBROD (8 November 2006). "Pelosi Says Democrats Are Ready to Lead". The Washington Post. Associated Press. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2023-01-05.
  13. Berman, Ari (2007-07-31). "Why Pelosi Opposes Impeachment". ISSN 0027-8378. Retrieved 2023-01-05.
  14. Evans, Ben (2006-12-08). "McKinney Introduces Bill to Impeach Bush". Associated Press.
  15. Rep. Conyers on Impeachment, retrieved 2023-01-05
  16. Spillius, Alex (2 November 2007). "US presidential candidate insists he saw UFO". Telegraph. Philadelphia. Archived from the original on 3 November 2007. Retrieved 2008-10-27.
  17. "Poll: Vermont Wants Bush, Cheney Impeached, Nearly Two-Thirds Of State's Likely Voters Want President, VP Removed Before Term Ends". CBS News. November 1, 2007. Archived from the original on July 21, 2012. Retrieved 2008-10-27.
  18. Claffey, Jason. "Dover NH, Rochester NH, Portsmouth NH, Laconia NH, Sanford ME". Durham: Fosters.com. Retrieved 2008-10-27.
  19. Leech, Adam. "Biden: Impeachment if Bush bombs Iran". Seacoastonline.com. Retrieved 2008-10-27.
  20. "Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors". Thomas.loc.gov. Archived from the original on 2015-07-18. Retrieved 2008-10-27.
  21. "Kucinich effort to impeach Bush kicked into limbo - CNN.com". www.cnn.com. Retrieved 2021-02-11.
  22. "Kucinich to Introduce Sole Impeachment Resolution". Roll Call. July 10, 2008. Retrieved August 27, 2013.
  23. rtsp://video1.c-span.org/15days/e071008_kucinich.rm
  24. Jones, Jeff (2006-03-21). "N.M. Dems Call For Bush's Exit". Retrieved 2007-01-27.
  25. Vermont: 36 towns call for impeachment probe of president, by Shay Totten & Christian Avard Vermont Guardian, March 6, 2007.
  26. ^ "Bill Docket". www.gencourt.state.nh.us. Retrieved 2023-01-05.
  27. ^ "HR 0024". www.gencourt.state.nh.us. Retrieved 2023-01-05.
  28. "User Clip: Mike Pence on impeachment cspan-July 25, 2008 | C-SPAN.org". C-SPAN. July 25, 2008. Retrieved November 25, 2019.
  29. "Towns draft resolutions for Bush impeachment". NBC News. 9 March 2006. Retrieved 3 December 2024.
  30. Luhn, Alec (19 June 2007). "Council to Discuss Bush Impeachment Madison Joins the 79 Muncipalities National Discussing Impeachment Resolutions of Bush's Administration. (First Edition) Seventy-Nine Municipalities Nationwide Have Adopted Impeachment Resolutions. (Second Edition)". Wisconsin State Journal. Retrieved 3 December 2024.
  31. Multiple sources:
  32. "H.Res.635 - Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment". congress.gov. United States Congress. Retrieved 4 January 2023.
  33. "H.Res.1106 - Articles of Impeachment against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, for high crimes and misdemeanors". congress.gov. United States Congress. Retrieved 4 January 2023.
  34. "H.Res.1258 - Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors". congress.gov. United States Congress. Retrieved 4 January 2023.
  35. "H.Res.1345 - Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors". congress.gov. United States Congress. Retrieved 4 January 2023.

Further reading

External links

George W. Bush
Presidency

Life and
legacy
Speeches
Elections
U.S. House
Gubernatorial
Presidential
Public image
Books
Popular
culture
Family
Federal impeachment in the United States
Federal impeachment in the United States • Federal impeachment trial in the United States
Article I of the United States Constitution (Impeachment Clause · Trial of Impeachment Clause)
Formal impeachments
Presidents
Supreme Court Justice
Other judges
Members of Cabinet
Congressperson
Efforts to impeach
Presidents
Other
Impeachment inquiries
In bold, impeachments leading to conviction. In italics, impeachments or attempts leading to resignation.
Categories: