In an explosive interview on PBS’ Bill Moyers Journal, William K. Black, a professor of economics and law with the University of Missouri, alleged that American banks and credit agencies conspired to create a system in which so-called “liars loans” could receive AAA ratings and zero oversight, amounting to a massive “fraud” at the epicenter of US finance.

read the full article >>

After a little over three months in office, you have accomplished so much, and have remained true to your stated ideal of being able to disagree without being disagreeable.  I have not approved of all of your decisions, but I appreciate your willingness to consider various opinions, and I am deeply grateful for the tremendous amount of time you have spent informing the public, and the care with which you have presented your views. I have never doubted that you are deeply committed to the good of your fellow citizens. I sense the deep respect you bear toward the American people, and feel as if am once more part of a living representative democracy after the past eight years of arbitrary and secretive rule.

My question for you is this: What are you doing to address the legal and constitutional violations by the previous administration? I realize that you have much to do, but the wrongdoing by the Bush administration was so extensive and was met with almost no opposition from Congress, that in a few years it will be all too easy for another imperial president to cite the history of our era in order to justify another war of opportunity or further erosions of our civil liberties.

The Bush administration violated our fundamental values as a people. They disregarded the constitutionally mandated division of power between the legislative and executive branches of government. They deceived the American people into supporting a catastrophic war and then violated the Geneva Conventions by the manner in which they prosecuted that war. They retaliated against critics like Ambassador Joe Wilson, Governor Don Seligman, and the U.S. Attorneys who refused to abuse their power to punish political opponents. With the complicity of Florida Governor Jeb Bush and Secretary of State Katherine Harris, members of the Bush administration may have systematically disenfranchised thousands of black voters in the 2000 and 2004 elections. Despite compelling evidence linking such an unthinkable betrayal of the American people to Bush operatives (most notably in BBC journalist Greg Palast’s exhaustively researched book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy), there has yet to be a full Justice Department investigation into these charges of election fraud.

Our leaders serve only by the consent of the governed, but it is not consent if it is granted on the basis of lies. Please make sure that these breaches of our trust do not go uninvestigated and unpunished. Our future depends on it.

With support and respect,

Lisa Moscatiello

Takoma Park, MD

=====

Dear Takoma Park Impeach Bush & Cheney supporter,

We — Thomas Nephew, Lisa Moscatiello, and Michelle Bailey — are writing to endorse Gordon Clark (Green Party) for Maryland’s 8th Congressional District seat in the House of Representatives. We’re confident that as the kind of independent thinker who has supported impeachment, you’ll be very impressed with Mr. Clark, who is opposing incumbent Chris Van Hollen (Democratic Party). For our part, all three of us will be voting for him on November 4th.

To learn more about Gordon Clark, visit his web site at www.clarkforcongress.net. While you’re there, be sure to check out his latest campaign video — a great two minute summary of why Gordon Clark is running for Congress.* There’s also a video of his recent debate with Republican Steve Hudson and Van Hollen legislative aide Bill Parsons (Van Hollen couldn’t attend because of the bailout bill vote).

The centerpiece of Clark’s campaign is a Green New Deal — an Apollo program, Manhattan Project, and Marshall Plan all rolled into one — to put America on the path to renewable energy independence. He also supports universal health care, opposes threatening war with Iran, and wants a complete withdrawal from Iraq; as you’ll see from an issues chart comparison, Chris Van Hollen falls short on these and other counts. There’s more, everything is well documented — and you’ll probably find yourself agreeing with Gordon Clark much more often than not.

There will be a Clark volunteer meeting today (Sunday, October 26th) from 4-6PM at 822 Gist Avenue, Silver Spring; to get in touch with the campaign, contact Sara Gilbertie at 860-233-4097 or sara@clarkforcongress.net, or visit the campaign web site at www.clarkforcongress.net.

What about Clark’s views on impeachment? Here’s what he told Internet radio host Chip Gibbons earlier this year:

CLARK: …it’s very clear to me that this administration is more corrupt and more deserving of impeachment than any administration in US history that I’m aware of. They have signalled their open contempt for Congress’s role in running our country and in legislation as recently as last February, when Congress passed … the Defense Authorization Bill, it had more money for the war in Iraq, of course, but as part of that they tried to pass a provision saying there would be no permanent bases in Iraq. And President Bush said publicly, “Well… thank you for the advice, we’ll do with that what we want to.” So on many occasions he has just signalled his willingness — the whole issue about presidential signing statements, you know the fact that President Bush has issued — geez, I’ve lost count but it’s over seven *hundred* of them, which again are specifically statements that used to be about small interpretations in pieces of legislation, they’ve now become a way of President Bush saying ‘I will ignore this law if I want to.’ So I think it’s very clear historically there has never been an administration more deserving of impeachment than this one and I’m delighted and proud that there are people like Representative Kucinich that are willing to do that. [...]
GIBBONS: If you were in Congress right now instead of Representative Van Hollen, would you be pursuing impeachment of George Bush?

CLARK: As I said, I think it’s a tough call in some ways. I’ll start off by saying: yes, I would. Given the record, I don’t think you can look at that and say, this shouldn’t be pursued. [...] If I were in the legislature right now, there’s no question that this administration has committed crimes that deserve impeachment and I would be forced to vote for it.

(The Takoma Park Impeach Bush & Cheney web site has a more complete transcript of Clark’s remarks.)

This is not an easy step for us. And we don’t think Chris Van Hollen is wrong on everything — he opposes torture, supports labor, and voted against the FISA Amendment Act, for example.

But that’s not enough. Van Hollen has preferred being the centrist chairman of the powerful Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) to being a full-throated representative of a progressive congressional district like ours. But even more seriously, Van Hollen has not lived up to his oath of office, which requires him to “protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Those enemies were Bush, Cheney, and administration figures like Gonzales, Rumsfeld, Addington and Yoo. Their crimes, again, were not petty failures to reveal a tawdry affair, but included lying to get us into a war; breaking solemn human rights treaties; unconstitutional and illegal warrantless electronic surveillance, using the Department of Justice as a political tool, using the pardon power to shield the administration from charges of wrongdoing, and issuing signing statements subverting duly passed legislation — just to skim the “highlights.”

No matter who is elected President on November 4th, the arguments the Bush/Cheney administration used to justify these crimes and subversions of the Constitution — and the tactics they used to get away with them — will be a recipe book for future unscrupulous presidents to wage disastrous wars, scoff at the rule of law, diminish civil liberties at home, and trample human rights abroad.

By joining the Democratic leadership in opposing impeachment, Van Hollen has helped strike a grave blow at the principles of accountability, checks and balances that are at the heart of our Constitution. Like other Democratic Party politicians, he was too concerned with short term thinking, and not concerned enough with joining fights that had to be fought. And like them, the same kind of misguided short term thinking led him to join in one capitulation after the other on other critical issues, most notably Iraq. Fundraising and the next election were apparently more important than checking a rogue executive branch.

Van Hollen has claimed that Congress engaged in “aggressive” oversight of the Bush administration. But the final results speak louder than words: at home, stonewalled investigations and ignored subpoenas are the pitiful, constitutionally disastrous legacy of the 110th Congress. Abroad, we’re still mired in a disastrous war — one so many of us believed the last election would bring to an end. Being a party leader isn’t just about collecting big checks or amassing millions of dollars, it’s about taking responsibility. Chris Van Hollen had a hand in these Democratic failures, and he, too, should be held accountable for them.

Therefore, we will vote against Chris Van Hollen — that’s what you do when you disagree with where your democracy is headed.

But we will also proudly vote for Gordon Clark as a strong progressive voice for a green energy future, for universal health care, and against military adventurism whether in Iraq, Iran, or elsewhere.

And we hope our fellow citizens in Maryland’s 8th Congressional District will, too. Clark for Congress on November 4th!

Sincerely,

Thomas Nephew
Lisa Moscatiello
Michelle Bailey

=====
* NOTE: I linked to an older video in the e-mail; the one shown is the latest and lasts about four minutes, not two.

“By design, those attacks put the American population into a state of intense fear of Islamic terrorism, far more than the 9/11 attacks alone could have accomplished.

Much more important than the general attempt to link the anthrax to Islamic terrorists, there was a specific intent — indispensably aided by ABC News — to link the anthrax attacks to Iraq and Saddam Hussein. In my view, and I’ve written about this several times and in great detail to no avail, the role played by ABC News in this episode is the single greatest, unresolved media scandal of this decade. News of Ivins’ suicide, which means (presumably) that the anthrax attacks originated from Ft. Detrick, adds critical new facts and heightens how scandalous ABC News’ conduct continues to be in this matter.”

Read the full article here >>

Related Coverage:

• NYT Changes Anthrax Story…As I Was Reading It!

The House Judiciary Committee held historic hearings on Friday about whether the White House overstepped its constitutional authority during the presidency of George W. Bush and whether or not such abuses would justify his impeachment. The hearing was billed as one on “Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations.” Although the title expressly did not include the word “impeachment,” several Democratic Congress members and witnesses used the opportunity to begin impeachment proceedings against the President and Vice President. We play highlights. [includes rush transcript]

Click photo below to read, listen to, or watch the whole story:

Watch Highlights on Democracy Now!

House Committee Considers the “I” Word
thenation.com | July 25, 2008

Hearing Videos

C-SPAN VIDEO LIBRARY – Has the video you can play and searchable transcript

Below videos Submitted by davidswanson on Sat, 2008-07-26 18:06.

Kucinich enters hearing to cheers:

Rep. Robert Wexler:

Rep. Steve King:

Rep. Jerrold Nadler:

Rep. Dennis Kucinich:

Bruce Fein:

Vincent Bugliosi:

Bruce Fein:

Vincent Bugliosi:

Vincent Bugliosi:

Rep. Baldwin:

More Videos here >>

(Washington)—Today House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. announced that, on July 25, the House Committee on the Judiciary will hold a hearing on the Imperial Presidency of George W. Bush and possible legal responses.

“Over the last seven plus years, there have been numerous credible allegations of serious misconduct by officials in the Bush Administration,” said Conyers. “At the same time, the administration has adopted what many would describe as a radical view of its own powers and authorities. As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I believe it is imperative that we pursue a comprehensive review commensurate to this constitutionally dangerous combination of circumstances. Next Friday’s hearings will be an important part of that ongoing effort.”

The Committee is expected to examine a range of legal and legislative responses to allegations of administration misconduct and their expansion of executive branch power.

Since the beginning of the 110th Congress, the Committee has conducted extensive oversight into allegations of misconduct by the administration, including: (1) improper politicization of the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorneys offices, including potential misuse of authority with regard to election and voting controversies; (2) misuse of executive branch authority and the adoption and implementation of the so-called unitary executive theory, including in the areas of presidential signing statements and regulatory authority; (3) misuse of investigatory and detention authority with regard to U.S. citizens and foreign nationals, including questions regarding the legality of the administration’s surveillance, detention, interrogation, and rendition programs; (4) manipulation of intelligence and misuse of war powers, including possible misrepresentations to Congress related thereto; (5) improper retaliation against administration critics, including disclosing information concerning CIA operative Valerie Plame, and obstruction of justice related thereto; and (6) misuse of authority in denying Congress and the American people the ability to oversee and scrutinize conduct within the administration, including through the use of various asserted privileges and immunities.

The July 25 hearing will be held at 10:00 a.m. in room 2141 of the Rayburn House Office Building. Additional information, including witness participation, will be announced next week.

I was curious where Mr. Clark stands on impeachment, accountability, and the dream of a healthy constitutional democracy in the United States. Via his website, I just got through listening to an interview he gave on June 13th on the (quite excellent) BlogTalkRadio news show “Radio Resistance,” hosted by Chip Gibbons. The Clark interview begins at around 32:30 minutes*; the key part, for me, is here:

GIBBONS, “RADIO RESISTANCE” (at around 44:52): If you were in Congress right now instead of Representative Van Hollen, would you be pursuing impeachment of George Bush?

CLARK: As I said, I think it’s a tough call in some ways. I’ll start off by saying: yes, I would. [...] If I were in the legislature right now, there’s no question that this administration has committed crimes that deserve impeachment and I would be forced to vote for it.

(All emphases are mine.)

The first eight minutes or so of the interview — which you should listen to as well — introduce Clark, and give him a chance to develop the connections he (quite rightly) sees between the U.S. oil-based economy, our deadly, costly adventure in Iraq, and the global warming crisis — what I sometimes think of as “the cliff we’re driving off issues.” Then interviewer Chip Gibbons turned to the “getting our hands on the steering wheel issues” of accountability, impeachment, and Congress’s supine behavior versus the Bush administration:

RR (at around 40:23): Why do you believe Congress has failed to hold George Bush accountable in any way for any of his actions? Whether it be the war in Iraq or the authorization of torture or the warrantless wiretapping or any of the numerous things he’s done that are …

CLARK: …bad!

RR: … that require some accountability.

CLARK: …very, very bad, yes, and require some accountability… Well, it doesn’t seem to me that Congress itself is terribly accountable. When you consider the extraordinary rate that incumbents get returned to office and that challenges that anyone who is running against an incumbent faces, that’s part of the problem. I think overall — and I certainly know members of Congress who are good people — but I think the biggest problem overall is that you’re talking about two political parties, both the Democrats and Republicans, who are essentially feeding from the same trough. And it’s very unlikely that you’re going to get a Democratically controlled Congress which is acting like a true opposition party when in fact an awful lot of their campaign finance funding comes from the same industries or sectors that Republican politicians get it from.

I also think that part of what’s going on is that Democrats don’t want to set any precedents that they themselves might get caught in later on. You know, who knows what skeletons other people have in their closets, so they don’t push too hard.

This is something, by the way, when I worked with Public Citizen in their CongressWatch division, I followed ethics abuses and corruption in Congress, so as you can imagine we kept very, very busy. And basically, members of Congress had an unspoken agreement with eachother for years that they were not going to file any ethics complaints against eachother, for all the corruption that was clearly going on. And the whole reason they had that agreement is they knew if one of them filed a corruption charge, well then someone else would file an ethics complaint in return. So they rather agreed, ‘we like the system the way it is, let’s not complain about eachother,’ and I think that type of thinking writ large is why you have a supposed opposition Congress controlled by Democrats that really is absolutely failing to hold President Bush accountable or the Bush administration generally accountable for any of the *criminal* activities — not just bad policies, but some of the outright criminal activites that they’ve been pursuing for the past several years.

RR: What do you think of Congressman Kucinich’s 35 articles of impeachment against George Bush?

CLARK: What, only 35?

RR: Well they take 5 hours to read, because they read them in to the record, it took 5 hours to read, I think if there were any more, the House.. reader person, I don’t know what she’s called, would …

CLARK: right

RR: …explode.

CLARK: And I was actually only joking, Chip, when I said ‘only 35.’

RR: oh.

CLARK: I think impeachment is… there’s more than one side to the issue in terms of whether politically you move ahead with it, but it’s very clear to me that this adm is more corrupt and more deserving of impeachment than any administration in US history that I’m aware of. They have signalled their open contempt for Congress’s role in running our country and in legislation as recently as last February, when Congress passed … the Defense Authorization Bill, it had more money for the war in Iraq, of course, but as part of that they tried to pass a provision saying there would be no permanent bases in Iraq. And President Bush said publicly, “Well… thank you for the advice, we’ll do with that what we want to.” So on many occasions he has just signalled his willingness — the whole issue about presidential signing statements, you know the fact that President Bush has issued — geez, I’ve lost count but it’s over seven *hundred* of them, which again are specifically statements that used to be about small interpretations in pieces of legislation, they’ve now become a way of President Bush saying ‘I will ignore this law if I want to.’ So I think it’s very clear historically there has never been an administration more deserving of impeachment than this one and I’m delighted and proud that there are people like Representative Kucinich that are willing to do that.

RR (at around 44:52): If you were in Congress right now instead of Representative Van Hollen, would you be pursuing impeachment of George Bush?

CLARK: As I said, I think it’s a tough call in some ways. I’ll start off by saying: yes, I would. Given the record, I don’t think you can look at that and say, this shouldn’t be pursued. For what it’s worth, I do think it’s a challenging issue because I think it represents a division in this country which goes simply beyond holding people accountable. And when I look at other places in the world where there’ve been deep seated conflicts, whether you’re talking about apartheid in South Africa, or Pinochet’s regime in Chile, that the people who tried to reconcile later — and that’s the word, they tried to bring about reconciliation — they were very careful sometimes about who got blamed or whether they in fact tried to punish people for what happened, realizing that sometimes punishment can make some of the old wounds raw again, and actually result in backlashes and deepened divisions rather than reconciliation. So as a nonviolent activist, I think that actually plays a part in here. If I were in the legislature right now, there’s no question that this administration has committed crimes that deserve impeachment and I would be forced to vote for it.

Not all exactly what I would have said (impeachment is a nonviolent process). But very good all the same, and I welcome the fact that Mr. Clark has gone on the record supporting Bush and Cheney’s impeachment.

[by Thomas Nephew; ABRIDGED FROM newsrackblog.com]

=====
* The first part of the show is also well worth your time: Gibbons interviews Adam Kokesh of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) and “Winter Soldier.” In the part I caught, Kokesh noted that they mainly shopped press releases to newspapers read by soldiers, rather than the New York Times, so that their numbers have doubled since the “Winter Soldier” conference earlier this year.

You can use the easy Blue America tool I did to contact your own Senators; it connects you with the right office, provides a brief bit of phone coaching, a script, and a place to record what happened. (Via “Get FISA Right”, which also recommends a Electronic Freedom Foundation tool, which is about the whole FISA bill.

Graphic and button via firedoglake, where you’ll find a lot of good links to Chris Dodd, Glenn Greenwald, and others.

(– Thomas Nephew)