Impeach Bush for Peace

Rep. Conyers Promises Post-election Impeachment Hearings

2008-11-10T07:13:00.000-08:00

While speaking on the topic of impeachment Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) promised that after the November 4 elections, he would pursue legal actions against the Bush administration. Conyers is in a unique position to initiate impeachment. As the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee (the body which would be responsible for initiating impeachment), he has been the sole obstacle to impeachment occurring ever since he and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA, Speaker of the House) took Impeachment "off the table."

However, now it appears that Conyers will be pushing impeachment. At the "Take Back America Conference", Conyers replied, "Yes, you have my word on that." He then shook the hand of a questioner resolutely. The congressman was speaking in a panel, "The Republic Against the Rogue Presidency." Conyers described what was keeping him from pursuing impeachment. He said that he wanted to wait until Obama was elected, as he feared that impeachment would become an election issue.

Please write to Congressman Conyers and thank him for finally pursuing accountability:
Rep. John Conyers
John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Website
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax

Also please contact your own Congressperson and ask them to support Conyers in finally holding the Bush Administration accountable.
Congressional Switchboard (just give switchboard your zip):
1-800-828-0498.

Go to Original Article

Call for Obama's Impeachment

2008-10-14T16:08:00.000-07:00

Jodin Morey, Cofounder of Impeach for Peace speaks at the RNC Free Speech Stage -- So I'm here to talk to you about impeachment, and I know what you're thinking "Bush is almost out of office." But this isn't about Bush. The underlying problem does not end with him, it preceded him, and it will endure after him.

I'm here today to advocate for impeachment as an ever-present value in YOUR life. We should see impeachment as a cherished tool that balances power between us and government. We should never have allowed government, or media to convince us impeachment is extreme or divisive. We need to alter our thinking about impeachment to coincide with that of early presidents and the founders of our nation. James Madison was proud that the Constitution made impeachment of a power abusing president "easy.”

Since I've been alive, almost every president who has been in office has abused their power in such a way as to warrant impeachment.
We should impeach George W. Bush.
We should have impeached Reagan.
We should have impeached Bush Sr,
we should have impeached Clinton , but NOT for his lying about a blowjob, but rather for military actions overseas. The media of course largely ignored Clinton's abuse of power in Yugoslavia and Mogadishu.
And anyone who believes that the next president will magically remain within his constitutional restrictions is fooling themselves.

If you don't support impeachment now, when will you? When it's time to impeach McCain?
When it's time to impeach Obama?
Will you once again accuse the impeachment movement of being divisive? Or INSTEAD will you recognize the corrupt GOVERNMENT for being divisive? Will you once again ask for impeachment to wait until we've won the next midterm elections, and after those elections will you then say that it's too late? Will you once again believe what the media tells you about the likelihood of impeachment, or will you fight for a cause because it's right. And believe that today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. If you only fight for the causes that the media tells you are possible, how does that make you special or a visionary? How does that make you courageous or bring meaning to your life?

You've seen that bumper sticker that reads, “I'm already against the NEXT war?” Well, I'm already in favor of impeaching the NEXT PRESIDENT!” Until we do, and continue doing it with every president that abuses their power, they won't stop. And why should they? They've got a pretty good deal going. Presidents can do whatever they want and get away with it.

That's the weird thing about accountability. No one forces it upon themselves. Our founding fathers knew that. Jefferson once said, “In questions of power let no more be said of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."

What happens when you create a powerful office in which the officers are not accountable to the public? Politicians who are unsavory gravitate towards it. We are asked to trust the president with the power to spy on us. But a presidency that demands trust attracts untrustworthy presidents. It's easy to fix the problem, our founding fathers knew the solution: Checks balances, and transparency. When you turn on the cellar light, the roaches scurry. But congress has learned that WE don't care about accountability as much as the LOBBYISTS care about the status quo. After all, if we turn on the light of transparency, the roaches known as lobbyist will be caught in the act as well.

So, instead, the president breaks the law, and congress fiddles. It seems so obvious when you think about it that one should impeach a criminal president. Think of any other criminal. Say a rapist. What if a judge were to stop prosecuting rapists because he said that doing so was divisive, or that their crime was in that past and that we should be looking forward instead. That's what our congress has done, except instead of raping a person our president has raped a country and congress refuses to prosecute. As a result a million are dead, millions more are displaced, and future presidents will feel free to rape countries as they wish., until we start impeaching them.

Until then, our democracy will continue deconstructing until there is no democracy left. We'll slide slowly into totalitarianism while singing “Land of the free and Home of the Brave.” But when we're not brave enough to stand up to our presidents, we lose that freedom. If everyone who thought Bush should have been impeached would have called their congressperson, we'd be in a different kind of country today. You could still do it right now. Even if it doesn't result in Bush's impeachment, it will let congress know that the public is behind impeachment in principle when a president goes haywire. Maybe then they'll start holding presidents accountable.

But it's always easy to come up with reasons not to do something, or why something might fail. And that pessimism can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. We can go the way of societies like Nazi Germany who were too pessimistic or distracted to do the right thing when there was still time to do it. We seem willing to do that with the environment. But can we afford that luxury? What will it take to motivate good people to turn off their TV and make the difference that's necessary?

Let me leave you with a hopeful thought. Because I believe we will eventually start impeaching presidents freely. We'll have to. So imagine the presidency we'll have one day when they fear impeachment. When so many before them have been impeached, and imprisoned that they fear the power of the people. A presidency with so much transparency, oversight, and accountability that they know they can't step too far out of bounds. Imagine the kind of politician who would never run for such an office. Do you think Cheney would wish to work there? Imagine the kind of president that office will attract.

A president who isn't afraid to have the people see what she's doing.
A president who preserves and restores our civil liberties.
A president so proud of her work that she won't claim executive privilege.
A president who identifies with citizens, not corporations.
A president who doesn't fear our free speech.
A president with the interests of the people paramount in her mind.
A president the founding fathers envisioned was possible only after they mandated the use of impeachment.

[Video] Ray McGovern (former CIA) on Impeachment at the RNC

2008-10-07T10:15:00.002-07:00

Ray McGovern is a retired CIA officer turned political activist. McGovern was a Federal employee under seven U.S. presidents over 27 years, presenting the morning intelligence briefings at the White House for many of them. He speaks here on troubles with our democracy and the importance of impeachment.

[Video] Debra Sweet at RNC Speaking on Impeachment

2008-10-07T10:15:00.001-07:00

Debra Sweet is the National Director of World Can't Wait. World Can't Wait is organizing people living in the United States to take responsibility to stop the whole disastrous course led by the Bush administration. World Can't Wait seeks to create a political situation where the Bush administration's program is repudiated, where Bush himself is driven from office, and where the whole direction he has been taking U.S. society is reversed.

Impeaching the Next President

2008-09-19T17:00:00.000-07:00

Jodin Morey, Cofounder of Impeach for Peace speaks at the RNC Free Speech Stage -- So I'm here to talk to you about impeachment, and I know what you're thinking "Bush is almost out of office." But this isn't about Bush. The underlying problem does not end with him, it preceded him, and it will endure after him.

I'm here today to advocate for impeachment as an ever-present value in YOUR life. We should see impeachment as a cherished tool that balances power between us and government. We should never have allowed government, or media to convince us impeachment is extreme or divisive. We need to alter our thinking about impeachment to coincide with that of early presidents and the founders of our nation. James Madison was proud that the Constitution made impeachment of a power abusing president "easy.”

Since I've been alive, almost every president who has been in office has abused their power in such a way as to warrant impeachment.
We should impeach George W. Bush.
We should have impeached Reagan.
We should have impeached Bush Sr.
we should have impeached Clinton , but NOT for his lying about a blowjob, but rather for military actions overseas. The media of course largely ignored Clinton's abuse of power in Yugoslavia and Mogadishu.
And anyone who believes that the next president will magically remain within his constitutional restrictions is fooling themselves.

If you don't support impeachment now, when will you? When it's time to impeach McCain?
When it's time to impeach Obama?
Will you once again accuse the impeachment movement of being divisive? Or INSTEAD will you recognize the corrupt GOVERNMENT for being divisive? Will you once again ask for impeachment to wait until we've won the next midterm elections, and after those elections will you then say that it's too late? Will you once again believe what the media tells you about the likelihood of impeachment, or will you fight for a cause because it's right. . And believe that today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. If you only fight for the causes that the media tells you are possible, how does that make you special or a visionary? How does that make you courageous or bring meaning to your life?

You've seen that bumper sticker that reads, “I'm already against the NEXT war?” Well, I'm already in favor of impeaching the NEXT PRESIDENT!” Until we do, and continue doing it with every president that abuses their power, they won't stop. And why should they? They've got a pretty good deal going. Presidents can do whatever they want and get away with it.

That's the weird thing about accountability. No one forces it upon themselves. Our founding fathers knew that. Jefferson once said, “In questions of power let no more be said of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."

What happens when you create a powerful office in which the officers are not accountable to the public? Politicians who are unsavory gravitate towards it. We are asked to trust the president with the power to spy on us. But a presidency that demands trust attracts untrustworthy presidents. It's easy to fix the problem, our founding fathers knew the solution: Checks balances, and transparency. When you turn on the cellar light, the roaches scurry. But congress has learned that WE don't care about accountability as much as the LOBBYISTS care about the status quo. After all, if we turn on the light of transparency, the roaches known as lobbyist will be caught in the act as well.

So, instead, the president breaks the law, and congress fiddles. It seems so obvious when you think about it that one should impeach a criminal president. Think of any other criminal. Say a rapist. What if a judge were to stop prosecuting rapists because he said that doing so was divisive, or that their crime was in that past and that we should be looking forward instead. That's what our congress has done, except instead of raping a person our president has raped a country and congress refuses to prosecute. As a result a million are dead, millions more are displaced, and future presidents will feel free to rape countries as they wish., until we start impeaching them.

Until then, our democracy will continue deconstructing until there is no democracy left. We'll slide slowly into totalitarianism while singing “Land of the free and Home of the Brave.” But when we're not brave enough to stand up to our presidents, we lose that freedom. If everyone who thought Bush should have been impeached would have called their congressperson, we'd be in a different kind of country today. You could still do it right now. Even if it doesn't result in Bush's impeachment, it will let congress know that the public is behind impeachment in principle when a president goes haywire. Maybe then they'll start holding presidents accountable.

But it's always easy to come up with reasons not to do something, or why something might fail. And that pessimism can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. We can go the way of societies like Nazi Germany who were too pessimistic or distracted to do the right thing when there was still time to do it. We seem willing to do that with the environment. But can we afford that luxury? What will it take to motivate good people to turn off their TV and make the difference that's necessary?

Let me leave you with a hopeful thought. Because I believe we will eventually start impeaching presidents freely. We'll have to. So imagine the presidency we'll have one day when they fear impeachment. When so many before them have been impeached, and imprisoned that they fear the power of the people. A presidency with so much transparency, oversight, and accountability that they know they can't step too far out of bounds. Imagine the kind of politician who would never run for such an office. Do you think Cheney would wish to work there? Imagine the kind of president that office will attract.

A president who isn't afraid to have the people see what she's doing.
A president who preserves and restores our civil liberties.
A president so proud of her work that she won't claim executive privilege.
A president who identifies with citizens, not corporations.
A president who doesn't fear our free speech.
A president with the interests of the people paramount in her mind.
A president the founding fathers envisioned was possible . only after they mandated the use of impeachment.

[Video] Violent Police Deny Free Speech at the RNC

2008-09-15T00:43:00.000-07:00

The following describes my experience as a protester being mistreated by the St. Paul police during the RNC. My name is Jodin Morey, and I'm a Cofounder of Impeach for Peace.The police abuse I'll describe includes the use of concussion grenades, pepper spray, rubber bullets, and batons.

I joined the Poor People’s Economic Human Rights Campaign in a march from Mears Park On September 2, 2008 at 4 p.m. Having heard that some peaceful protesters had been arrested the day before, I was concerned about joining this march. I had been the one to reserve a one-hour slot on the protest stage at 1 p.m. on the following day. National speakers had come from around the country (Ray McGovern, John Nichols and Debra Sweet from the World Can't Wait). The St. Paul Park and Rec. had made it clear the stage would only be available if I were physically present with my driver’s license at the time reserved. I therefore had decided to join the march with the idea of being extremely cautious to avoid any interactions with the police that could result in my arrest.

I was dressed as a Guantanamo Bay detainee to protest the denial of habeas corpus as a human right. There were speeches that went on for a very long time. The organizers spoke about human rights and the need for housing, education, and health care. There was a scuffle between the police and some of the protesters during these speeches, but I was not in a location to see what occurred.

Before we began the march, the main organizer had each of us raise our right hands and repeat after her that we would behave peacefully and non-violently. She also stressed that this was important because there were children in the march, and some of them were hers. I saw the organizers intercept some people wearing black bandanas over their faces and black clothing and told them they were welcome to join the march but only if they promised to be peaceful and non-violent. They told the leaders of the march that they were going to be peaceful.

The march then began, and it was extremely long. It felt as if it were about a five-mile march. All along the march we were shouting slogans like, “Stop the war on the poor,” “If they say cut back, we say fight back,” and others. We went by the St. Paul Capitol where we stopped and invited people who were rallying there to join us. (I found out later that these people were gathered to listen to the band Rage against the Machine). We then continued to the Xcel Energy Center. The march came to a halt in free speech zone just outside the Xcel Energy Center. For those of you unaware, the free speech zone consists of a tall fence separating the public from the Xcel Energy Center in front of which is a buffer zone populated by riot police in front of which is another high fence.

Next, the lead organizer got on the shoulders of another marcher and through a bullhorn announced to the protesters that she was going to deliver a citizen’s arrest to the doors of the Xcel Energy Center for crimes against humanity. She made us raise our right hands again and promise that we would stay right where we were and to be peaceful. Everyone I could see raised their hands and repeated the promise back to her. Then she went to the free speech gate that separated us from the front doors of the Xcel Energy Center. She spoke through her bullhorn to the nearest police officer, who was dressed in riot gear.

She told that officer that she wanted to deliver a message to the people at the RNC. She told the officer she was not violent. She expressed that she did not want him to shoot or taze her. She expressed that she wanted to deliver her message to the delegates and was looking for his help in doing that. She suggested to the officer that he could deliver the citizen’s arrest, or that he could escort her to the RNC, or that he could bring someone from the RNC to receive the arrest warrant from her. But, of course, the police officer on the other side of the gate refused to respond at all, and she settled on just placing her message through the gate and asking the officer to have someone come and get it. She informed the officer that it was only a piece of paper and an American Flag so that the officer wouldn’t confuse her actions as anything but peaceful. Prior to sliding the citizen’s arrest through the gate, she asked the police officer if it was ok that she slide the message through the fence, but he did not respond. She delivered the citizen’s arrest and then she left the gate and the march was apparently over at that point.

People started to disperse. As the march had been long, many people were tired. At least 100 people remained in the free speech zone to rest and hang out. Nearly everyone sat down and quietly chatted amongst themselves. I sat down with them, took out my cell phone, and made a couple of calls. I removed my Guantanamo Bay hood at this point and left it off for the rest of the evening. I was sitting with my back against the free speech zone fence along west 5th Street. Then the person next to me borrowed my cell phone and made a call. We were not protesting or being rowdy, nor were we waving any signs or banging on the fence.

About 15 minutes after we sat down, we saw police gathering outside one end of the free speech zone (near the corner of west 6th Street and Main). The riot police opened the gates, came in, and started marching towards us in a line. Some protesters who had been closer to the police officers when they entered the free speech zone called back to the rest of us. They informed us of the officers’ message that we were engaged in an unlawful assembly. However, I only learned this through word of mouth. The officers did not announce it over a bullhorn. I found their accusation odd because we were in a free speech zone that the city had specifically set up so that we could gather to protest the RNC.

I took a picture of the police line-up. As the police came toward us I asked the officers closest to me why they were pushing us out of the free speech zone. While I was asking them this, they were shoving their batons forward in unison and shouting, “Move, move, move!” I was backing up as they were asking us to do. I told them I was moving but was curious how this could be an unlawful assembly since this cage was set up specifically for protesting the RNC. I also made the point that we had been behaving peacefully. They refused to answer me except to say, “It’s an unlawful assembly.” I kept questioning them, “By what criteria did you determine this to be an unlawful assembly?” They would not answer me. I kept moving.

I took a picture of an interaction between the riot police and some people (I believe they were with Code Pink.) They had a bicycle that was chained to a tree, and they were attempting to free it. The police were attempting to stop them by shoving at them with their batons. The bicyclists did eventually free their bikes and rode away. A protester next to me suddenly was pepper sprayed. I did not see them do anything aggressive. They were close to a police officer, but I wasn’t watching at the moment just prior to the spraying. I took a picture of him being helped by the other protesters to decontaminate his eyes.

We then heard loud explosions occurring behind us, which drew our attention. Many of us continued backing up down 7th Street towards St. Peter as directed by the police, which was where the explosions were taking place. As we approached St. Peter (near Mickey’s Diner), we were met by more riot police who had their guns trained on us. That caused me to stop in my tracks and raise my hands above my head. Those around me then saw what appeared to be the concussion grenades detonating at the northwest corner of 7th Street and St. Peter. Upon exploding, the grenades were ear piercing, released a lot of smoke, and produced light flashes. I was not sure why they were setting off the grenades. We were trapped at this point, between two rows of riot police. Protesters in the crowd were expressing concerns over which way we were supposed to go. After a short while, the police officers moved allowing a small space to open at the northwest corner of the intersection (near where the grenades had been detonated). One police officer approached us and pointed towards the opening and indicated that we could either leave in that direction or be arrested. I (and many others) very quickly obliged and walked through the opening, not wishing to get arrested.

Given how the police officer directed me, I was under the impression that I was in an appropriate place. I started to slowly wander away in the general direction that the police officer had originally directed me. At this point, the Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate, Michael Cavlan passed by me, also heading north. He asked if I was ok, and we exchanged disbelief at how the police were behaving. I also got out my cell phone to let my friends, who might be worried about me, know that I was ok. I feared that if they’d heard about this incident in the news, they’d be worried.

I called one of my friends and was talking to them when all of the sudden I heard bullets firing from behind me where the police were lined up. I also heard ricocheting around me, letting me know that they were firing towards me. At this point instinct kicked in, and I started running out of fear. I informed my friend who still on the phone with me that I had to go because I was being shot at. I left the cell phone connected to my friend as I ran so that they could be a witness if necessary. A few seconds after I started running I felt an impact on the left side of my back. It felt like someone had punched me. I did not stop to check how I was because I was still trying to get away. Then I saw in front of me another line of riot police who ordered me to get on the ground.

I dove to the ground on the west sidewalk of St. Peter somewhere between West 7th and Exchange Street. Several police barked an order not to move, while pointing their weapons at me. I let go of my cell phone and Guantanamo hood so that they would not mistake them for weapons and placed my hands beside me on the sidewalk. I said, “I am not moving, I am not moving.” I lay there for a little while and then I heard someone walk up beside me. I then heard what sounded like a camera shutter going off a few times before that person wandered off again. I believe that it must have been a police officer taking my picture, as the reporters were not being treated any differently from the protesters. If there had been a reporter around me when the bullets were fired, I believe they would not have been able to freely move in the area with out the police addressing them.

A few moments later, an officer in riot gear approached me and told me I could get up. As I got to my feet, the officer asked me if I was ok. I replied, “I don’t know.” I obviously had not checked my back yet, as I was not able to move while on the ground. I also was not sure if shock had caused me to underestimate the possible damage to my back. But the officer must not have been terribly concerned about my well-being because he told me to continue north on St. Peter without checking out my back. I believe they must of known they shot me. The reason I say this is because they ordered me to the ground, took a picture of me, and asked me how I was. After asking me how I was, however, he showed in his response a clear lack of concern for my well-being. The only other motive I can ascribe to his having asked me how I was is a possible desire to relieve themselves of liability for having injured me with the hope that I would say I was okay When I did not say I was okay, he did not choose to continue the conversation, perhaps because he did not want to open up the conversation to my having been hurt.

I asked if I could pick up my cell phone, not realizing he had already picked it up. He held it out and said he didn’t know if it is was mine. I also asked if I could “get my hat” (Guantanamo hood) but he said he also did not know if that was mine so I did not pursue it further. The police were extremely intimidating with their guns pointed at me and barking out orders. I felt that if I engaged in any type of conversation with them, I was risking being maced or having them hit me with their batons. So, instead of getting badge numbers or inquiring into how I’d later obtain my stuff, I abandoned my things and walked north with my hands above my head. Reporters were videotaping my walk and had possibly been recording my interactions with the police.

I arrived at an intersection where the protesters and reporters were gathered at the location (around 10th Street) that seemed consistent with where the policed wanted us to be. Once there I checked my back by just touching it and seeing if it hurt. From what I could tell, I didn’t seem seriously hurt. I asked a reporter to borrow her cell phone so I could let my friend know that I was safe. I assumed that they were pretty worried about me after my previous phone call.

After I got of the phone, within a minute or two, once again I heard a ruckus and everyone started to run away from the spot closest to the police towards the north again. The police apparently again were trying to move us by the use of tear gas or pepper spray without first giving us an audible warning. I did not stick around in an attempt to find out exactly what was happening. Instead I tried to get out of the area once again by heading north. When I reached 11th Street, I turned the corner to the east and removed my Guantanamo Bay jumpsuit. I did this in case the police had any residual negative feelings about me and might associate it with the suit. Then, as I continued eastward, I saw another line of officers and therefore asked someone near me if it was safe to head in that direction. The person indicated that the police were rounding people up and that it as not safe to go that way. I backtracked to St. Peter and attempted to cross the bridge over 94 to the north. Once I was clearly away from all the activity, I checked my back more thoroughly and saw that I had a red spot where the bullet had hit. It was obvious at this point that the bullet had been some non-lethal version (rubber bullet). Luckily, I was then able to get to my car and drive home.

I’m still unsure how citizens were supposed to express their free speech during the RNC if not in the free speech zone set up by the city. I’m also not sure how someone in the U.S. is supposed to avoid police brutality if the police aren’t expected to give individuals who they are about to abuse, fair warning of how to avoid that abuse by following whatever directives they feel are necessary. I am in talks with the ACLU, however. They have preliminarily agreed to work with me on a lawsuit.

[Video] RNC Police Intimidation and Unlawful Arrests

2008-09-11T08:42:00.000-07:00

On the evening of September 4th, 2008 -- the final day of the RNC -- peaceful protesters (including an Impeach for Peace organizer) were denied access to the free speech zone, harassed, herded onto the Marion Street Bridge, and arrested.

[Audio] Peaceful RNC Protester in Guantanamo Suit Shot with Rubber Bullet

2008-09-02T22:20:00.000-07:00

Impeach for Peace Cofounder, Jodin Morey, was shot with a rubber bullet while peacefully protesting in the RNC's Free Speech Cage in St. Paul, MN. Here's his audio story:

Here's some video:

End of March, citizens arrest speech by march organizer.

Cop who march organizer had been speaking to..

Citizens arrest delivery by march organizer.

Police violently vacating free speech zone for "unlawful assembly?"

Protesters harassed while obtaining bike

Protester Pepper Sprayed

After this, things got too wild for me to consider taking pictures...

RNC Protest Stage Schedule

2008-09-02T07:29:00.000-07:00

IfP/VfP/WCW on the RNC Protest Stage

St. Paul, Minnesota -- Sept. 2, 2008 -- On the third day of the RNC (Wed, Sept. 3rd), Impeach for Peace will be taking the Protest Stage at 1pm and World Can't Wait will have the stage at 4pm.
So far, the list of speakers includes:

Ray McGovern, is a retired CIA officer turned political activist. McGovern was a Federal employee under seven U.S. presidents over 27 years, presenting the morning intelligence briefings at the White House for many of them.

.
.

John Nichols: Author of "The Genius of Impeachment." Nichols writes about politics for The Nation magazine as its Washington correspondent. He is a contributing writer for The Progressive and In These Times and the associate editor of the Capital Times, the daily newspaper in Madison, Wisconsin. His articles have appeared in the New York Times, Chicago Tribune and dozens of other newspapers.

Sylvester Spoon, Cofounder of Patriots for Corporate Rights. An organization which advocates for the Iraq War, the coming Iran War, corporate rights, and defends the practice of torturing. They have had many protests against impeachment, and support rallies for President Bush around the Twin Cities.

.

Debra Sweet is the National Director of World Can't Wait. World Can't Wait is organizing people living in the United States to take responsibility to stop the whole disastrous course led by the Bush administration. World Can't Wait seeks to create a political situation where the Bush administration's program is repudiated, where Bush himself is driven from office, and where the whole direction he has been taking U.S. society is reversed.

Ann Wright, a Colonel in the U.S. Army and a career diplomat who resigned in protest the day before the war began.

Jodin Morey: Cofounder of Impeach for Peace (ImpeachforPeace.org), a grassroots, nonpartisan organization based in Minnesota with chapters in twelve states throughout the country working to achieve the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney and holding them and future elected officials fully accountable under the Rule of Law.

Other speakers such as Scott Ritter (United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998), and members of the Glassbead Collective may also speak.

Join us outside the Xcel Energy Center for these great speakers, and to learn how we move forward from here towards accountability in government and restoring our civil liberties and freedoms! The stage is on W. 7th St. between W 5th and 6th Street. It’s easiest to get there by coming from the North on St. Peter, and heading West on 7th St. Parking is easiest just North of the State Capitol Building.

--

Jodin Morey

Cofounder: Impeach for Peace

RNC Planners Sued By Impeachment Group

2008-08-12T16:45:00.000-07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

St. Paul, Minnesota -- August 12, 2008 -- Impeach for Peace (IfP), along with others looking to demonstrate at the Republican National Convention (RNC), filed a lawsuit Friday with the help of the ACLU of Minnesota in Ramsey County District Court demanding our right to free speech. Plaintiffs include: Jodin Morey and Mikael Rudolph of Impeach for Peace, Colleen and Ross Rowley, and Ron Deharporte.

Impeach for Peace is a grassroots, nonpartisan organization based in Minnesota with chapters in twelve states throughout the country working to achieve the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney and holding them and future elected officials fully accountable under the Rule of Law.

The RNC is having their election year convention in St. Paul, Minnesota at the Xcel Energy Center. During this event, the St. Paul Police have decided to relegate most speech activities in what they call the ‘Primary Event Area’ to an inadequate ‘Designated Public Assembly Area’ or free speech zone. The ‘Primary Event Area’ remains to be fully defined by the police, making it impossible for people to know where in St. Paul they can exercise their rights to freedom of expression and assembly. At the convention, members of congress, mayors, governors, the President and Vice-President of the United States are expected to be in attendance. This provides IfP and other potential demonstrators with a unique opportunity to express their political messages to these governmental officials.

The lawsuit alleges that the St. Paul City Council and police have created guidelines for the RNC which restrict free speech to areas that are “inadequate and unacceptably small.”

The ACLU also alleges that the City Council/Police denied IfP their due process rights as stipulated in the Minnesota State Constitution by failing to give notice of their plans regarding free speech restrictions, which would have allowed for public comment and a public hearing.

The ACLU also contends that the City Council/Police has also reserved the right to modify the guidelines at any time in ways that the ACLU contends are in violation of the Minnesota State Constitution.

The lawsuit seeks to have the guidelines declared by the court to be in violation of IfP’s free speech rights, to have the Primary Event Area and the Designated Public Assembly Area clearly defined and officially released to the public, and to have the Designated Public Assembly Area include additional areas that are within sight and sound of the convention.

John Choi, the St. Paul city attorney has said "These two [lawsuits] represent an attempt by the plaintiffs to get another bite at the apple in state court." He continued that the city has afforded "unprecedented access and accommodations for the protesters."

Mr. Choi is incorrect regarding IfP’s “bite at the apple,” as the plaintiffs on this lawsuit have not previously been a plaintiff in a lawsuit regarding their free speech rights at the RNC. There was a previous lawsuit with different plaintiffs, but it dealt primarily with a march planned, not the specifics of the Designated Public Assembly Area.

Secondly, while Mr. Choi and Impeach for Peace may differ as to what is an acceptable amount of restriction on free speech, these differences could have been worked out if the city had engaged in its constitutional due process requirements.

Those interested in IfP’s plans for the RNC, are invited to attend a meeting at Joe’s Garage on the north side of Loring Park in Minneapolis on Sunday, August 17, at 4 p.m.

For more information please contact Jodin Morey, Cofounder of Impeach for Peace, at 612.328.1451.

# # #

Additional Contact Information:
organizer@impeachforpeace.org
minneapolis@impeachforpeace.org
http://impeachforpeace.org

[Audio] DIY Impeachments Give Kucinich "Encouragement to hang in there"

2008-07-26T08:05:00.001-07:00

Impeach for Peace sent Dennis Kucinich a huge box of Do-It-Yourself Impeachment Petitions from citizens across the country on July 14th, which in Kucinich's words along with other efforts gave him "a great deal of encouragement to hang in there." Regarding the Do-It-Yourself Petitions, Kucinich mentions:
"I just got a box of petitions yesterday, a full box that weighs about 25 pounds of petitions from all over the country of people who are demanding that the House take action."
Kucinich spoke on Alex Jones' Radio Show on July 23rd about the upcoming congressional committee hearing on Bush's abuses of power, and what efforts lead to the forming of that committee. He credits efforts like this ours with "opening the door" which gave us "for the first time a chance to talk about impeachment in front of a congressional committee."

Sign the petition here.

Fax Your Rep: History Favors The Impeaching Party

2008-07-15T11:23:00.000-07:00

Download the printable version here.
Here are the fax numbers of the House Judiciary Members (the committee considering impeachment):
Ranking Member: Lamar Smith (TX) 202-225-8628
James Sensenbrenner (WI) Phone (202) 225-5101
Howard Coble (NC) (202) 225-8611
Elton Gallegly (CA) (202) 225-1100
Bob Goodlatte (VA) (202) 225-9681
Steve Chabot (OH) (202) 225-3012
Chris Cannon (UT) (202) 225-5629
Baldwin (202) 225-6942 has supported impeachment hearings.
Berman (202) 225-3196
Boucher (202) 225-0442
Cohen (202) 225-5663
Conyers (202) 225-0072
Davis (202) 226-9567
Delahunt (202) 225-5658
Ellison (202) 225-4886
Fenney (202) 226-6299
Forbes (202) 226-1170
Franks (202) 225-6328
Gohmert (202) 226-1230
Gutierrez (202) 225-7810
Issa (202) 225-3303
Jackson Lee (202) 225-3317
Johnson (202) 226-0961
Jordan (202) 226-0577
Keller (202) 225-0999
King (202) 225-3193
Lofgrin (202) 225-3336
Lungren (202) 226-1298
Nadler (202) 225-6923
Nadler brooklyn (718) 996-0039
Pence (202) 225-3382
Sanchez (202) 226-1012
Schiff (202) 225-5828
Scott (202) 225-8354
Sherman (202) 225-5879
Sutton (202) 225-2266
Wasserman Schultz (202) 226-2052
Waters (202) 225-7854 has supported impeachment hearings.
Watt (202) 225-1512
Weiner (202) 226-7253
Wexler (202) 225-5974 has supported impeachment hearings.

Here is where you can get the fax number for your own representative.

Minnesota: Impeach or Else Rally, March 17th

2008-02-27T18:24:00.000-08:00

Impeach or Else Rally

Monday, March 17th, 2008
3pm
St Paul Capitol Building

It is now undeniable that the Federal Government has failed us completely. We have asked our representatives to hold the Bush Administration accountable. Instead, they have blocked the Impeachment movement all over our country.

As we approach the anniversary of the illegal Iraq invasion, we have not given up on the idea of holding the criminals in the Bush Administration or those who enable them accountable. There is something that you can do. It is now time for Plan B.

Impeach for Peace researched a method for impeaching the President or Vice President using a little known and rarely used part of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives ("Jefferson's Manual"). This document actually empowers individual states to initiate the impeachment process. All that's required is that the MN House and Senate pass an impeachment resolution.

So spread the word, tell your friends, your family, your coworkers, your allies. We will hold a rally Monday, March 17th, on the steps of the Capitol Building in St Paul. When we are finished with the rally, we will storm the Capitol Building. We shall demand that the Minnesota House and Senate immediately pass a resolution calling for the Impeachment of George W Bush and Dick Cheney (Contact them yourself Now and demand Impeachment!). Our message will be clear to those inside. If you, as a representative do not support this and treat it with all the urgency it deserves, then you will face opposition in the next election cycle. The message that you will face will be simple, direct and clear. It will be that you refused to honor your Oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution from All Enemies, Foreign and Domestic. That instead you, by your refusal to start impeachment actually defend the criminals in the Bush Administration and continue the illegal occupation in Iraq. We will actively work against your reelection to the MN State Legislature, regardless of your party affiliation. We will make this very personal. This is how we will ensure that you listen to the demands of We the People, instead of the lobbyists who fund your campaigns. Oh and before you try and give us excuses, we have done our homework. We already know that according to the Constitution, an impeachment resolution is virtually the only thing that the Governor is unable to veto.

We can do this, we must do this. The future of our children and our democratic republic depends on it. What we need is YOU showing up and demanding accountability. Let us know if you're planning on coming.

For more information:
Contact Mike
Protest Organizer
Impeach for Peace
(612) 327-6902

Go to Your State's Caucus/Primary

2008-01-10T22:23:00.000-08:00

This is is to encourage all of us to go to our state's caucuses/primaries. Have you ever complained about having to choose between the lesser of evils? Do something about it! If we are to ensure that we needn't impeach more political servants, then it starts with ensuring that we have respectable politicians from which to vote. Caucus and ensure that at least one of the political candidates chosen is one for which you'd actually wish to vote. Ensure that the presidential candidate and any other political candidates being chosen at your state's caucus believes in accountability.

Also, come to your caucus prepared to introduce an impeachment resolution. You can base yours on this one introduced in Alaska (change the state and any other relavent details). This way, you can cause impeachment to become part of your party platform!

Here are links to the major parties' websites. Chose the state you're in, and from there find out about your state's caucus/primary process.

Republican Party

Green Party

Democratic Party

Holiday Impeachment Cards

2007-11-26T07:14:00.000-08:00

Seasons Greetings!
This holiday season you can give your friends and family the gift that keeps on giving. You can help them deck the halls of congress with colorful impeachment petitions! Impeach for Peace has created holiday impeachment cards that allow your friends and family to initiate the impeachment process. Impeach for Peace created the Holiday Impeachment image, and researched a company that will allow you to send jumbo sized postcards along with a personalized message using your web browser. The first card you send is free! The cost of sending additional holiday greetings ranges from $1.11 to $1.87/card depending on how many you send. (Impeach for Peace receives no funds from these holiday greetings.)

Great for Christmas, Quanza, Haunakha, or Solstice.

To send your festive holiday greetings, follow these instructions. To learn more about this legal method of initition impeachment, as well as how this method has been used in the past,click here.

• Go to: http://www.amazingmail.com/signup.php

• Click the "Sign-up" button near the bottom of their webpage.

• Click on this link -->http://ImpeachforPeace.org/images/DIYPostcard.jpeg

*You should now have a second browser window open showing the image that will appear on the holiday greeting.*

• Use your browser's "Save As" function to save this image to your computer (depending on the browser/computer, you can right/left click the image to get this function, or use the pull down menu titled "File").

• Return to the amazingmail browser window and click on the "Start a Postcard Mailing" link located at the upper left-hand corner.

• Click on the right arrow button located next to the words "5.5 x 11.5." (This is the Jumbo card)

• Click on the "Choose File" button, located in the middle column.

• Locate the image you saved on your computer.The file name should be "DIYPostcard.jpg"

• Click the right arrow button next to the word "Continue." (Be very patient, this website can be extremely slow to respond)

• After the file is done uploding, showing will be a preview of the card. Click on the "Continue" button.

• Click on the right arrow button next to the words "Leave the Image Area Blank"

• Type a message to your friends/family introducing them to the DIY Impeachment. For example:

Happy Holidays!
What better gift to give this holiday season than the restoration of our democracy? Over this past year, Bush has become an even greater threat to our Constitution. Lucky for us, the rules of the US House of Representatives allow for individual citizens like you and I to initiate the impeachment process directly! Just follow the instructions on the reverse side of this card. This process was successfully used to impeach in the past. For more information about this memorial (or how to give your own gift of impeachment), go to ImpeachforPeace.org.
Have a merry impeachment this season!

• Format your text however you'd like it and click the "Continue" button.

*On this page you can either import the addresses of the individuals to whom you would like to send your card, or your can add them individually.*

• To import addresses, click on the right arrow key next to the words "Import Addresses" and follow the directions.

• To add addresses individually, click on the right arrow key next to "Add a New Address."
Fill in the contact information for the recipient and click "Save."
Repeat the previous two steps until all of your recipients have been added.
Then click the "Continue" button.

• Choose the correct return address in this window and click "Continue."

• Click on the right arrow button next to the words "Leave the Accent Image Blank."

• Choose the date you would like for the postcard to be mailed, and click "Continue."

• Choose the postage type, and click "Continue."

• Click the box that reads "I have reviewed the PDF file and would like to send my mailing," and click "Continue."

• On this "Purchase Cards" screen, click "Continue" .

• Fill in your billing information and click "Continue."

• On the "Confirm Purchase" page, click "Continue."

Congratulations for spreading holiday cheer and restoring our democracy!

[Video] Minneapolis Rally to Stop Impeachment, Encourage Torture

2007-11-18T21:47:00.000-08:00

From Patriots for Corporate Rights, a pro-Bush organization -- We gathered again publicly in support of our beloved President George W. Bush! About a dozen loyal Bushies gathered in Uptown Minneapolis in front of the Walker Library from 11:30 am to around 3 in the afternoon.

Here's video of our pro-war, pro-torture, anti-U.S. Constitution rally, chanting such things as:
"Give up your rights!,Abolish Congress, abolish the Courts, the Unitary Executive is all we need, TRUST BUSH!, TRUST BUSH!, TRUST BUSH!" and "Two, Four, Six, Eight, We Want a Police State!".

Moonbats like the people at ImpeachForPeace.org (home of the Commie Pinko "Do-It-Yourself Impeachment") are trying to impeach this great man. They don't understand that our President needs to be able to arrest, detain indefinitely, and torture Americans and members of other less worthy nations. They fail to grasp that our Commander in Chief must be allowed to preemptively invade any country He decides may be a threat to our own - or just have resources that can benefit the multi-national corporations he represents! In short, they doubt that our Chief Executive is above the law!

Our first rally in February and was so succesfull (http://corporaterights.org/blog/?p=3), Patriots for Corporate Rights came together again in support of this wonderful Administration! We're also attempting to stop the impeachment resolution currently in the House Judiciary that is threatening to impeach Cheney. We succesfully expressed our outrage at those who would dare to enforce laws that our President has decided are not important!

Malcolm Bosman & William Bernard Lyon
http://CorporateRights.org

[Audio] Kucinich's Impeachment Call To Action. Please Help Him!

2007-10-26T08:50:00.000-07:00

In this audio clip, Rep. Dennis Kucinich describes the process of how he'll force the issue of impeachment on the floor of the U.S. House. He does this to inform the public so that the public can assist in the process. The likely scenario is that a congressperson will immediately make a parliamentary move to 'table' the motion. The vote on whether to 'table' the impeachment motion WILL BE THE IMPORTANT VOTE. If the motion is tabled, it's dead. So, Kucinich is calling on every citizen (yes, that means you) to contact their representative to tell them to vote NOT to table the impeachment motion, but to let it be discussed on the floor of the U.S. House! Call Congress Toll Free at 800 828 0498.

St. Paul Does Nothing, Bush's Impeachable Crimes Continue...

2007-09-29T13:47:00.000-07:00

'All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing'

The following describes Impeach for Peace's (IfP) attempt to encourage Rep. Betty McCollum to sign H. Res. 333 calling on the impeachment of Richard B. Cheney. Specifically, this describes my attempt to pressure her congressional district to pass a resolution calling on Rep. McCollum to co-sign 333.

This event is yet another example of what is wrong with the Democratic Party. The Democrats have shown over and over again how they are unwilling to stand up for what is right. I could blame it on their fear of what right wing media might think. I could blame it in this case on “Minnesota nice.” I could blame it on their pursuit of the politically moderate vote (although this assumes that the politically moderate and the right wing media don't favor accountability). Whatever their reason, the result is behaving exactly how the current Republican Party would have them act. Voters on the left side of the spectrum see those who are part of the Democratic machinery as being spineless. And, for whatever reason, those who are part of that machinery don’t care, or are unaware of the bold actions they need to take. Their political base, therefore, are not inspired to show up and vote for them -- and who can blame them. Much of the base either fails to vote at all or split the progressive vote by voting for the Green Party. I could accuse J.P. Barone (Chariperson of McCollum's Congressional District) of purposefully leaving the impeachment resolution off the agenda, but there is no way to know. What I do know is that J.P. Barone is part of the problem. He is obviously more interested in supporting the Democratic Party than supporting the needs of the people that Party is supposed the represent. His actions subsequently accomplish neither. Somehow when people become part of the Democratic machinery, they lose sight of where their allegiance should lie. I am not sure what the solution to this is, but, at least for my part, it’s holding them accountable.

Let's start back in June when DFL (Democratic Farm Labor, i.e., Democratic Party Minnesota) 5th Congressional District nearly unanimously voted on a similar resolution calling on their Representative, Keith Ellison, to sign 333. Subsequent to the passage of that resolution, Rep. Ellison did co-sign 333. This encouraged me to attempt to replicate our success in my own district. Granted, we should not have to go to such lengths to get our representatives to honor their oaths of office.

So I wrote an e-mail to the chairperson of the DFL 4th Congressional District, J.P. Barone. He informed me that guests were welcome to speak at their executive committee meetings, and the next one was on August 21, 2007. Many members of Impeach for Peace came to the meeting in support of the resolutions that I had created. I presented the resolutions and gave a speech about the need for local action, given the lack of oversight of the Bush administration being conducted at the national and state level. I told them how the 5th Congressional District had passed a similar resolution. I also noted that there exists a majority support in the nation and 76% support among Democrats. After I was done with my presentation, J.P. Barone immediately expressed his lack of interest in passing such a resolution. He expressed concern over whether their committee had jurisdiction and also whether the 4th Congressional District should be passing this type of resolution, given his view that the 4th Congressional Districts function is to act as a cheerleader for the Democratic candidates. His last area of concern was whether or not passing such a resolution would be strategic in getting Democratic candidates elected in 2008. He did concede that there is little doubt in his mind as to the existence of impeachable offenses. What followed was a debate amongst the committee members primarily around whether or not they had jurisdiction to pass such a resolution. They suggested waiting until January and starting from square one with the caucus process. I expressed that, “Rome was burning,” and that the situation demanded more immediate action. I also suggested that the super majority support among Democrats empowered them to act on their behalf. Ultimately, when they voted whether or not to consider the measure themselves or to refer the resolution to the larger central committee, they voted against considering it but to have the central committee consider it in September. The central committee meeting comprises a larger group of members than the executive committee.

September 17, 2007, I arrived at the central committee meeting (of which J.P. Barone is also Chair). I again gave my presentation, and J.P. Barone mentioned his reasons why the resolution might not be appropriate. Once again, a debate among the members ensued with similar arguments as in the executive committee meeting. One of the members who was more familiar with procedure assured the committee that they did indeed have jurisdiction to pass such a resolution and also expressed a belief that it is the committee's responsibility to pressure their representative on issues. While people fell on various sides of the issue, one concern that came up during the debate was that the resolution had not been listed in the agenda for the meeting. It was expressed by a member that, had it been listed, many members who were not present may have shown up. Another member remarked that it was not IfP’s fault that the resolution had not been on the agenda since I had gone to the trouble of passing it by the executive committee the previous month, and that the resolution should not pay the consequence for this failure. The secretary spoke out defending himself, stating that he had sent out the agenda, but that his role is to pass along the agenda as given to him by the Chairperson, J.P. Barone. At this point, J.P. Barone admitted that he had not put it in the agenda but dismissed the inaction as an oversight. When it came down to the vote, they decided to first vote on whether their committee wished to consider the matter at all. The vote was nine members in favor, nineteen members opposed and three abstaining. It was revealed after the vote that at least two of the members had voted against the resolution because it had not been on the agenda. I also do not know how many members may have shown up to vote had they been informed by the agenda of this topic's consideration. I asked J.P. Barone if the measure could be reconsidered at the next meeting, given its failure to appear on the agenda. Despite his firm insistence that a parliamentary procedure be strictly followed up until this point, J.P. Barone unilaterally decided, “No, it had already been voted on.”

Now, despite my efforts, I am forced to live in a district that has become complicit in the crimes of the Bush administration. However, my pursuit in getting Rep. Betty McCollum to sign H. Res. 333 is not over. Stay tuned.

Jodin Morey
Cofounder, Impeach for Peace

[Video/Oped] Iraq: It's Nancy Pelosi's War

2007-09-28T09:54:00.000-07:00

When asked about her position on impeachment, Nancy Pelosi responded, "I've always said impeachment's off the table. This is President Bush's war, it's Vice President Cheney's war, and now it's become the war of the Republicans in congress."

Some might see her response as including a non sequitur. What does insisting that Bush and the Republicans own an unjustified illegal war have to do with impeachment being off the table? However, for those of us who have been following the Democratic leadership's justifications for failing to hold this administration accountable, it makes perfect sense. Pelosi and the Democratic leadership believes that by leaving Bush/Cheney in office, and by continuing 'their' war, they'll drive down Republican support and win the elections in 2008. In other words, Pelosi doesn't hold Bush/Cheney accountable because that might stop the war in Iraq. And the war in Iraq is a good political tool for winning elections.

Therefore, I submit that by failing to pursue accountability, the rule of law, constitutional reinstitution, and subsequently the end to the Iraq war, Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic leadership now own this war.

Pelosi Has Put Impeachment Back on the Congressional Table

2007-09-20T02:24:00.000-07:00

According to the U.S. House Congressional Record on August 3, 2007...

The SPEAKER presented a petition [...] of the Town of New Salem, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Link

Also, back in July 26, 2007 ....

Also, a petition of the City of Middletown Common Council, New York, relative to Resolution No. 167.07 calling on the Congress of the United States to formally and properly investigate these charges and determine if impeachment is warranted, and if found to be so warranted to vote to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Link

Also, back in July 19, 2007 ....

The SPEAKER presented a petition of the Town of Great Barrington, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution petitioning the Congress of the United States to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
[...]
Also, a petition of the Town of Leyden, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution calling on the Congress of the United States to investigate the charges and vote to impeach President George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney as provided in the Constitution of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
[...]
Also, a petition of the Delaware County Democratic Committee, New York, relative to a Resolution to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
[...]
Also, a petition of the Town of Stockbridge, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution calling on the Impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a petition of the Town of Colrain, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a petition of the Town of Shutesbury, Massachusetts, relative to a petition to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Link

Also, back in June 13/20 ....

Also, a petition of the Town of Lanesborough, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary. on the Judiciary.

Also, a petition of the City Council of Oberlin, Ohio, relative to Resolution No. R07-06 petitioning the Congress of the United States initiate impeachment proceedings of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary. on the Judiciary.

Also, a petition of the Town of Whately, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Link

Also, a petition of the Town of Woodstock, New York, relative to Resolution No. 171-07 requesting an investigation of the activities of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney to the end that they may be impeached and removed from office; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a petition of the Town of Shelburne, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution calling upon the United States House of Representatives to investgate charges and vote to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a petition of the Town of Colrain, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution calling upon the United States House of Representatives to investigate charges and vote to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a petition of the Town of Leverett, Massachusetts, relative to a Resolution requesting the investigation of the activities of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney to the end that they may both be impeached and removed from office; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Link

SO WHAT'S THE HOLD UP! Why only for New York, Ohio, Delaware, and Massachusetts? Why none for her own State California, which I know has been screaming for impeachment. And why none for me? I sent her a petition to put in the congressional record. Actually, I know of millions that have been sent in! Contact Pelosi and tell her to follow through with the process. Congressional Switchboard:
1-800-828-0498.

[Video] Student Tasered for Asking Kerry about Impeachment

2007-09-19T07:56:00.001-07:00

"As the person who filmed this event. I would like to say that although Andrew may appear to be a conspiracy theorist, he still was accosted by the police after Senator Kerry said he wanted to hear the question. If Accent Speakers Bureau had allowed all those standing in line to ask questions, this never would have happened. Unless of course the police would have stepped in anyway."

[VIDEO] Comparing Bush's & Nixon's War Progress Speeches

2007-09-16T02:51:00.000-07:00

This video Compares Bush's September 13, 2007 speech on the Iraq War with Nixon's November 1969 Speech on the Vietnam War. Courtesy of http://ImpeachforPeace.org

Minneapolis City Council Member Remington exhorts colleagues to pass impeachment resolution

2007-09-07T16:09:00.000-07:00

downtownjournal.com
Time to impeach Bush and Cheney
By Ralph Remington

It is high time that all progressive elected officials who take their jobs seriously demand impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

This president and his vice president have condoned illegal wiretapping, readings of private e-mails and phone calls, and spying on the American people under the guise of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They've used surveillance to kidnap people and throw them into dungeons abroad without any political or legal accountability. They have condoned torture at both Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. They have been implicated in the outing of a CIA officer in retaliation for the exposure of going to war under false premises. They have ignored Congressional authority on several occasions. They lied to the American public about the reasons for taking our sons and daughters, mothers, and fathers to war. They have spent over $700 billion on a war in a time when over 45 million Americans are without health care; while at the same time cutting the benefits of veterans who have returned from fighting their "War of Choice".

They have established a presidency and executive branch that does not respect the rule of law. Bush is, in fact, sneering at the American people and in effect saying, "I am King". Together Bush and Cheney have flouted the agreement of transparency with the American people.

Our cities, counties, and states are vulnerable because we have allowed a virtual king to be created in Washington, D.C. If we now have a king at the head of our democratically elected government then we elected officials, on the local, state and national levels are defunct. Our purpose and our jobs are nothing more than ceremonial.

Congress has allowed the Executive branch of our government to overreach, in the name of politics and fear over what impact impeachment proceedings will have on the upcoming elections in '08. This is not what our founders intended. It doesn't matter if we're approaching an election year or not. We cannot allow the Executive branch to take on more power than it has ever had. This is doubly important as we approach a new election because our new executive leaders will inherit more expansive powers than any other President or Vice President in the history of the United States of America; powers that the founders never intended for them to have, be they Democrat or Republican.

Politicians and political staff are even getting confused. People are refusing to oppose Bush because they wrongly think that they've taken an oath to the President. When former White House counsel, Harriet Meirs, didn't appear before Congress she cited executive privilege. But what she and others fail to realize is that they haven't taken an oath of loyalty to the president regardless of what he does, they've taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Those are two entirely different things. Bush and Cheney have blatantly obstructed a congressional investigation.

And, finally, the commutation of Scooter Libby speaks to a cover-up of gigantic proportions. We should all be out in the streets. As musician Gil Scott Heron said, "The revolution will not be televised". Bush and Cheney should be impeached for political crimes perpetrated in combination.

As John Nichols from The Nation Magazine recently stated, "Nancy Pelosi is disregarding her oath of office. She should change course now." The Judiciary Committee should begin impeachment proceedings as soon as possible.

We in city council and at the state legislature should not disregard our oaths. There are some who say that this doesn't have anything to do with local government. They are missing the point. If the president, as the leading representative of our democracy is an outlaw and we, other elected officials, allow that state of affairs to continue, we are also outlaws. The Minneapolis City Council needs to construct a resolution to recommend impeachment immediately, before it's too late. Our own collective integrity demands it!

(Original Article)

Click Here to Pressure the Other Minneapolis City Council Members to Impeach

BREAKING: Kucinich (D-OH) to Submit Your Impeachment Petitions into the Congressional Record

2007-08-02T12:49:00.000-07:00

In a meeting Thursday, July 26th, 2007, members of ImpeachForPeace.org and After Downing Street met with Congressman Dennis Kucinich in his Washington DC office to present the Congressman with thousands of "Do It Yourself Impeachments" collected over the past few months. DIY Impeachment Memorials are actually a little known and rarely used part of the Rules of the House of Representatives ("Jefferson's Manual"), which empowers individual citizens to initiate the impeachment against any federal official themselves. These Memorials support the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney.

During our meeting, Congressman Kucinich agreed to place all signers of the DIY Impeachment Memorials specifically referencing Cheney into the Congressional record. Rep. Kucinich also agreed to enter into the record the names of signers of regular petitions to impeach Cheney. Because there is a limit to the number of pages that a representative can submit to the Congressional Record each day, Rep. Kucinich stated he will continue to submit petitions every day until all the names are submitted. The most powerful statement for impeachment is the submission of a Memorial, however, so if you have not yet sent a Memorial for the impeachment of Vice President Cheney to ImpeachForPeace.org, please do so! Go to http://impeachforpeace.org/ImpeachNow.html and download the Memorial. Then send it to the address listed on the cover letter.

"Jefferson's Manual" is an interpretive guide to parliamentary procedure, and is included (along with the Constitution) in the bound volumes of the Rules of the House of Representatives. It is ratified by each congress (including the current one), and has been updated continuously through the history of our democracy. The section covering impeachment lists the acceptable vehicles for bringing impeachment motions to the floor of the House.

Before the House Judiciary Committee can put together the Articles of Impeachment, someone must initiate the impeachment procedure. Most often, this occurs when members of the House pass a resolution. Another method outlined in the manual, however, is for individual citizens to submit a memorial for impeachment.

Since then, Kucinich held a press conference informing the public of this.

Enter your name into the Congressional Record

For more on the DIY Impeachment process, see this YouTube video

Help Final Push to Impeachment

2007-07-08T10:12:00.001-07:00

It's time! ImpeachForPeace.org is traveling to Washington DC at the end of this month to deliver thousands of Do-It-Yourself Impeachment Memorials to
key representatives in the House!

Support for impeachment is building. As of this writing, 14 reps are supporting Dennis Kucinich's resolution to impeach Dick Cheney (H. Res. 333).

Even if you've sent them to your congressperson before, Click here to send us your DIY Memorials before we go.

You may not realize that the only thing standing between where we are today and a nationally televised impeachment investigation is the House Judiciary passing this resolution, which is currently awaiting consideration in their
committee. The head of this committee, John Conyers, has said recently that he supports the national impeachment movement.

All we need to push it over the edge is public support, and that's where we come in.

Video of our trip will be posted on our website shortly upon our return. We'll let you know when it's up!

Click here to be a part of this!

Here's a funny video about this unique strategy

[Breaking] Rep. KEITH ELLISON (D-MN) SIGNS IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTION 333

2007-06-29T13:06:00.001-07:00

ImpeachforPeace.org
by Mikael Rudolph with Jodin Morey

An aide called www.ImpeachforPeace.org from the offices of Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) this morning saying that Rep. Ellison has cosigned House Resolution 333 as authored by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) calling for impeachment hearings to commence against Vice President Richard B. Cheney.

Members of ImpeachforPeace had met with Rep. Ellison in April at which time he had said that "Impeachment Should Be on the Table", but that he needed to hear clearly from his consituents as to their will in this matter before cosigning the impeachment bill authored by the Representative Kucinich who he described as "a good friend".

Rep. Ellison's signature, along with that of Rep. James McDermott (D-WA), who also added his name to the resolution this week, brought the number of cosigners of H. Res. 333 to ten. Ellison is notably the second member of the House Judiciary Committee to cosign, along with Maxine Waters (D-CA). The HJC is where the bill sits for now, waiting for enough citizen support and pressure to be brought to a vote. A vote resulting in a simple majority of the 38 members of the HJC would initiate impeachment hearings in the House of Representatives against Vice President Cheney for lying to lead us into the invasion and occupation of Iraq, among other charges.

Resolutions in support of H. Res. 333 and calling for Rep. Ellison to cosign were resoundingly passed at the Minnesota 5th District Democratic Farmer-Labor Party Central meeting last week after a presentation by ImpeachforPeace.

Tens of thousands of Minneapolis citizens - constituents of Rep. Ellison - had roared their approval as black-hooded, orange clad 'detainees' in chains preceded the ImpeachforPeace.org banner in both the May Day and the Pride Festival Parades.

A stack of single page Do-It Yourself Impeachment Memorials over a foot and a half tall was collected at the ImpeachforPeace table during the Pride Festival in Loring Park last weekend alone. DIY Impeachment Memorial forms are available to be downloaded, filled out and mailed to IFP and IFP members will be hand delivering thousands of completed forms to the HJC in July.

It is the view of ImpeachforPeace that the Bush Administration has many times over proven themselves to be domestic enemies to the U. S. Constitution and that Rep. Ellison has simply honored his oath to 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States against enemies both foreign AND DOMESTIC' by adding his name to this resolution.

It is also the view of ImpeachforPeace that those civil servants at every level of our government from City Council and Mayor up through State Congress and the U.S. Congress who have yet to make a public stand against the Bush Administration from their citizen-appointed seat of power are in violation of their oaths of office until they do.

To view a partial list of impeachable offenses committed by and still being committed by Vice President Dick Cheney and others in the Bush Administration, visit the IFP Evidence Page.

Contact your Representative today to express your view on impeachment by calling the Capital Switchboard at: (202) 224-3121

Minneapolis Citizens: Help us Impeach Bush, City Council

2007-06-17T17:30:00.000-07:00

A CALL TO ACTION BY WE THE PEOPLE

Dear Minneapolis citizens,
Please take 2 minutes to contact your city councilperson and ask him/her to support and pass a resolution for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. During the June 13th forum with speakers from ImpeachforPeace.org, Cam Gordon, Green Party City Councilman explained the strategic process for making it more feasible to get the Impeachment Resolution on the City Council agenda. If we inundate the city council with phone calls and emails every day, they will realize there is a strong grassroots movement of constituents behind this issue. Until then, they will simply believe that there are more important things to deal with (like the victimization of the poor).

Resolutions have already passed in 75 cities, 23 statewide and national political committees, the state legislature in Vermont and has been introduced in 9 state legislatures and 17 state legislatures are considering introducing impeachment resolutions.
Some local elected officials may claim that this is a federal issue, but the policies made by the current administration are reducing our LGA (Local Government Aid) which we see affecting our local services.
Including unfunded promises made for Medicare, Social Security, and Federal retirement programs, US taxpayers now have a total debt of $59 TRILLION. That's $516,000 for every US household. (USA Today)

Here is the contact info for city council people:
Minneapolis City Council contact information
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/council/

WARD 1, Paul Ostrow, 612-673-2201, paul.ostrow@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
WARD 2, Cam Gordon, 612-6730-2202, cam.Gordon@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
WARD 3, Diane Hofstede, 612-673-2203, diane.hofstede@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
WARD 4, Barbara Johnson, 612-673-2204, barbara.johnson@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
WARD 5, Don Samuels, 612-673-2205, don.samuels@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
WARD 6, Robert Lilligren, 612-673-2206, robert.lilligren@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
WARD 7, Lisa Goodman, 612-673-2207, http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/contact/email-form-goodman.asp
WARD 8, Elizabeth Glidden, 612-673-2208, http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/contact/email-form-glidden.asp
WARD 9, Gary Shiff, 612-673-2209, http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/contact/email-form-schiff.asp
WARD 10, Ralph Remington, 612-673-2210, ralph.remington@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
WARD 11, Scott Benson, 612-673-2211, scott.benson@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
WARD 12, Sandy Colvin Ray, 612-673-2212, http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/contact/email-form-roy.asp
WARD 13, Betsy Hodges, 612-673-2213, http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/contact/email-form-hodges.asp

We also need organizations and businesses to sign a letter of support for the Impeachment resolution. They can be mailed to:
City Hall
ATTN: Minneapolis City Council
350 S. 5th St.
Rm #307
Minneapolis, MN 55415

Here are the 10 reasons for impeachment:
Ten Reasons to Impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney
I ask Congress to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney for the following reasons:

1. Violating the United Nations Charter by launching an illegal "War of Aggression" against Iraq without cause, using fraud to sell the war to Congress and the public, misusing government funds to begin bombing without Congressional authorization, and subjecting our military personnel to unnecessary harm, debilitating injuries, and deaths.

2. Violating U.S. and international law by authorizing the torture of thousands of captives, resulting in dozens of deaths, and keeping prisoners hidden from the International Committee of the Red Cross.

3. Violating the Constitution by arbitrarily detaining Americans, legal residents, and non-Americans, without due process, without charge, and without access to counsel.

4. Violating the Geneva Conventions by targeting civilians, journalists, hospitals, and ambulances, and using illegal weapons, including white phosphorous, depleted uranium, and a new type of napalm.

5. Violating U.S. law and the Constitution through widespread wiretapping of the phone calls and emails of Americans without a warrant.

6. Violating the Constitution by using "signing statements" to defy hundreds of laws passed by Congress.

7. Violating U.S. and state law by obstructing honest elections in 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.

8. Violating U.S. law by using paid propaganda and disinformation, selectively and misleadingly leaking classified information, and exposing the identity of a covert CIA operative working on sensitive WMD proliferation for political retribution.

9. Subverting the Constitution and abusing Presidential power by asserting a "Unitary Executive Theory" giving unlimited powers to the President, by obstructing efforts by Congress and the Courts to review and restrict Presidential actions, and by promoting and signing legislation negating the Bill of Rights and the Writ of Habeas Corpus.

10. Gross negligence in failing to assist New Orleans residents after Hurricane Katrina, in ignoring urgent warnings of an Al Qaeda attack prior to Sept. 11, 2001, and in increasing air pollution causing global warming.
Source: Democrats.com

Here is a copy of the resolution we want placed on the agenda and considered for a vote:

Resolution to Impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney

WHEREAS, George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney conspired with others to
defraud the United States of America by intentionally misleading Congress
and the public regarding the threat from Iraq in order to justify a war in violation of Title 18 United States Code, Section 371; and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has admitted to ordering the National Security
Agency to conduct electronic surveillance of American civilians without
seeking warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, duly constituted by Congress in 1978, in violation of Title 50 United States
Code, Section 1805; and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney conspired to commit the
torture of prisoners in violation of the "Federal Torture Act" Title 18 United States Code, Section 113C, the UN Torture Convention and the Geneva Convention, which under Article VI of the Constitution are part of the "supreme Law of the Land"; and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney acted to strip American citizens of their constitutional rights by ordering indefinite detention without access to legal counsel, without charge and without the opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the President of a U.S. citizen as an "enemy combatant", all in subversion of law; and

WHEREAS, In all of this George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have acted in a manner contrary to their trust as President and Vice President, subversive of constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of ________(insert your City/Town/State)___________ and of the United States of America; and

WHEREAS, Petitions from the country at large may be presented by the Speaker of the House according to Clause 3 of House Rule XII;

Be it resolved that George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrant

impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States;

Be it resolved further by the City of _________ , That our senators and representatives in the United States Congress be, and they are hereby, requested to cause to be instituted in the Congress of the United States proper proceedings for the investigation of the activities of the
George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney, to the end that they may be impeached and removed from such office.

Be it resolved further, That the Clerk of the City of _________ be, and is hereby, instructed to certify to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, under the seal of the City of _____________, a copy of this resolution and its adoption by the City of _________, as a petition, and request that this petition be delivered to the Office of the Clerk and entered in the United States Congressional Journal. The copies shall be marked with the word "Petition" at the top of the document and contain the original authorizing signature of the ____(insert "Town Clerk" or whomever signs for the City)_____.

For grassroots democracy,
Danene Provencher
Green Party of MN Politics Co-Chair
--------------
As a follow-up to our wildly successful impeachment Town Hall meeting with Minneapolis City Council Members Cam Gordon and Elizabeth Glidden, we're attending the Minneapolis City Council Meeting Friday, June 29th.

ImpeachForPeace.org is asking you to show up at the Minneapolis City Council (350 S 5th St, Rm 317) at 8:30am. We suggest you wear impeachment shirts, buttons, etc. Signs are also aloud. Some people might wish to demonstrate outside the building, while others will likely want to attend the meeting itself. Cam Gordon mentioned that any disruption of the meeting might lead to those disruptors being removed from the meeting. Even so, ImpeachForPeace.org organizers did overhear some people speak of civil disobedience by standing up during the proceedings and loudly expressing their desire for the council to pass an impeachment resolution.

For details, contact Jodin Morey of Impeach for Peace:
use our contact page:
http://impeachforpeace.org/comments.htm

Impeach for Peace in Indiana...

2007-05-18T09:47:00.000-07:00

A new chapter of Impeach for Peace is forming in Indiana. Wish to join the movement? Contact this chapter and let them know you're interested in taking action!

Green Party Pressures its own in MN on Impeachment

2007-05-18T09:46:00.000-07:00

From Michael Cavlan, Green Party Candidate for U.S. Senate from Minnesota (IfP does not endorse any political candidates running for office).
-----------------
IFPer's,

This is a copy of the email currently being posted on a variety of Green Party listserves. The national and Minnesota Green Parties have passed resolutions calling for Cheney and Bush's Impeachment.

Greens are now contacting Cam Gordon to carry forward a Resolution for Impeachment to the Minneapolis City Council, thereby reflecting the will of the Green party membership in Minnesota.

Cam's office phone # contact and e-mail are included. Please feel fee to contact Councilmember Cam Gordon yourself and have friends and allies also contact him on this issue.

Feel free to spread [this] around and have as many people contact him as possible. Minneapolis residents preferably and constituents of Ward Two (Riverside, Seward) would be preferable. If you have any contacts in the Somali community, that would be nice. I will work on my contacts.

Thank You

Michael Cavlan
Mineapolis Minnesota
--------------------------------------------------
Greens for impeachment,
The discussion for impeachment is appreciated and I also advocate that Cam Gordon submit a resolution for impeachment to the Mpls City Council. Unfortunately our opinions on some listserver may not be enough and we need to contact Cam directly to insist that he represent the Greens on this issue. Note that the GP at the national level supports impeachment (http://www.gp.org) as does now the GP state level who recently passed a resolution on this (exact wording below):

Impeachment of Bush-Cheney:
Be it resolved that the Green Party of Minnesota calls for the impeachment of President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Spread Cam's contact info to all of the impeachment groups and other Greens and progressives who may want to help "lobby" Cam. Afterall, we supported him financially and with volunteer efforts to help him get elected and now we want him to represent US on a grassroots level. Time to blaze the trail and get this on the council's agenda.
---------------------------------------------------
Cam's Contact info:
Cam.Gordon@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
612-673-2202

Presidential Candidate Mike Gravel Supports Impeachment

2007-05-01T22:15:00.000-07:00

Presidential Candidate Mike Gravel Supports Impeachment

I had the privilege of meeting Presidential candidate and former Alaskan Senator Mike Gravel at the National Impeachment Summit in New York earlier this year. At that time, he was considering his position on impeachment, and his campaign said they would inform me of his position as it was formulated.

Today, I spoke with Gravel's Press Secretary and received a statement. He said, "Senator Gravel does support impeachment in the event that any wrongdoing has occurred at the executive level of President or Vice President. At this time the senator's focus is firmly on the Iraq war, stopping the torture, and bringing the troops home now."

Gravel's position is further clarified by this statement from his campaign's website, "Senator Gravel supports a congressional inquiry into whether or not George Bush has indeed overstepped his authority as president and broken the law. The inquiry would focus on the accumulation of any and all evidence that indicates wrongdoing and could then be used in criminal proceedings against the president."

These statements were made despite his failure, during the recent presidential debate, to raise his hand when asked if he or any of the other presidential candidates were "willing to enter into Congressman Kucinich's effort to impeach Vice President Cheney."

George Bush and Condoleezza Rice have stated that they will ignore the Congress regarding the war, and that they plan on remaining in Iraq through their term in office. Also, historically it's been shown that a President can find funds for war despite a lack of designated war funding from Congress. It's Impeach for Peace's position that in light of these facts, the only path towards brining our troops home is through the accountability that is impeachment. So, I applaud Gravel's statements in support of impeachment, and hope that his focus on bringing the troops home leads him to become an even louder proponent of peace through justice.

Mike Gravel's Campaign Website can be found at:
http://www.gravel2008.us

-Jodin Morey
Co-founder: Impeach for Peace
Author of the Do-It-Yourself Impeachment

"Impeachment Should Be on the Table": Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN)

2007-04-23T02:10:00.001-07:00

~ Ellison at his swearing in ceremony (reuters)

Exclusive for ImpeachforPeace.org by Mikael Rudolph

Four members of ImpeachforPeace.org met with the Honorable Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN 5th) in his Minneapolis offices Saturday morning, April 22nd to discuss the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Early in the meeting, Ellison made clear that his opinion hasn't changed since he introduced a Resolution for the impeachment of President Bush as a Minnesota State Legislator by saying: "Impeachment should be on the table".

In Washington D.C. attending sessions of Congress during the week, Ellison regularly travels home to be with his wife Kim and four children each weekend, taking some time to meet with his constituents as well.

~ from the Ellison Campaign Website

Running a bit late, Ellison explained that he had just gotten a haircut because he "wanted to look good for our meeting", turning his head side to side to show off his barber's work. One member of IFP quipped: "It was well worth the wait".

As everyone settled into their chairs and the laughter subsided, the mood quickly grew more serious as the topic of Ellison's vote for the Veterans’ Health & Iraq War Accountability Supplemental was discussed, which some in the local and national peace movement felt was a betrayal of Ellison's commitment to seeking an immediate end to the Iraq War. A sharply critical letter from an IFP member not present was read and a framed graphic called "The Impeachment Casualty Candle" was set up on the table as a reminder to everyone present of the ultimate price already paid by so many of our troops and the high stakes still facing many American families, not to mention Iraqi families:

~ Graphic courtesy Sgt. Daniel Fearn, "The Impeachment Grunt"

(IFP website reader's responses to his vote on the 'Supplemental' can be found in the comments following this article of March 27th, 2007: War Critic Rep. Ellison (D-MN) Explains 'Yes' Vote on War Funding Supplemental)

Ellison heard the criticism and handled it well, acknowledging and empathizing with the frustrations and anger of those who want the war over and our troops home immediately yet he made it clear that many in the Peace Movement had communicated to him that they understood and supported the strategy of confronting and isolating what even the President's own Intelligence Agencies have identified as failed Iraq policies by passing a bill with a plan to end the war at some point.

Ellison called House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) who had gathered just enough of a consensus among fellow House Democrats to pass the measure, "a remarkable leader" who is quickly proving herself to be a gifted "cat herder" of the various caucuses in the Democratic Party.

The topic quickly shifted to impeachment, with Rep. Ellison affirming that he is "with the impeachment movement", yet making clear that in order for him to consider supporting impeachment hearings, the charges spoken into the Congressional Record must be strongly grounded in verifiable facts and evidence as well as understood by and backed by the majority of the American people.

Not eager to be assailed by the radical right's bevy of partisan media shills as "the poster child for loonie leftists", Ellison said that the most important thing he and his fellow members of Congress need from constituents is that they "keep the drumbeat up" for impeachment.

Ellison named fellow Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) as "a good friend", saying "we talk every day" during the week in Washington. With Kucinich reputedly poised to introduce Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney this week, Ellison was measured in his commitment to join Kucinich. He made clear that he was supportive of the idea, but not if it only becomes a symbolic gesture. Ellison is only interested in seeing impeachment proceedings actually becoming a reality.

Stressing that he had not yet seen what specific charges Kucinich is intending to bring up against the Vice President, Ellison, formerly a criminal defense attorney, seemed as committed to guaranteeing the habeas corpus for Cheney that the Vice President regularly denies others.

Looking at his blackberry, Ellison said "maybe I'll give Dennis a call this weekend".

Noting that he has an activist's heart, when asked what efforts and strategies in support of impeachment might be most effective, Ellison suggested ... (Read More)

VIDEO-Pro-War Organization Celebrates Torture, Opposes Impeachment

2007-04-21T23:27:00.000-07:00

Patriots for Corporate Rights (corporaterights.org) believe they are celebrating America by "standing up against moonbats who dare to dissent and protest torture and the war." They also obviously oppose impeachment.

VIDEO-Feel Like I'm Fixin' To Die Rag

2007-04-19T07:09:00.000-07:00

ImpeachforPeace.org put together this mock celebration of war, whose real aim is to point out the autrocity of the war in Iraq. It's put to a version of the "Vietnam Song," which was redone by Chumbawamba under the title, "Feel Like I'm Fixin' To Die Rag." Chumbawamba was kind enough to give IfP permission to use their music in connection with this video. It ends with a call to action for everyone to send in a "Do-It-Yourself Impeachment." It only takes a few minutes, but may help stop this presidency, and this war.

Articles of Impeachment To Be Filed On Cheney

2007-04-17T08:13:00.000-07:00

Washington Post -- Looks like he's reached his boiling point.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), the most liberal of the Democratic presidential candidates in the primary field, declared in a letter sent to his Democratic House colleagues this morning that he plans to file articles of impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney.

Kucinich has made ending the war in Iraq the central theme of his campaign. He has even taken aim at the leading Democratic presidential candidates in the field for their votes on authorizing the war.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach the president, vice president and "all civil Officers of the United States" for "treason, bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." (More)

Kucinich ALSO says he's pursuing impeachment of Bush! Well let's help him out. Sacks and sacks of mail are about to arrive in Dennis Kucinich's office initiating impeachment via the House of Representative's own rules. This legal document is as binding as if a State or if the House itself passed the impeachment resolution (H.R. 635).

Kucinich says he is building his case for impeachment, and is working to build the support of his peers in Congress. He says he intends to impeach. He said he needs us to keep building the groundswell of support for impeachment all over the country. He asks that we send him copies of all the resolutions passed in various States, local Legislative Districts, County Districts and of any petitions with signatures, so that he can present them to the floor of the House. He said he felt that our framing the issue of impeachment in terms of the Constitution is a principled choice, and ultimately more effective than just acting on anger. Here's video of Kucinich addressing the impeachment issue:

Let's answer Kucinich's call with a petition that has it's precedent in history, and it's legitimacy in the Rules of the House of Representatives.

There's a little known and rarely used clause of the "Jefferson Manual" in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.

That's where we come in. In addition to a House Resolution (635), or the State-by-State method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.

You can initiate the impeachment process and simultaneously help Kucinich to follow through with the process. Do-It-Yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in. We're not only having you send them to Dennis now, but also to Impeach for Peace. That way, we can collect them all in one place, and deliver them all simultaneously (with cameras rolling) in July. Be a part of history.

Help Kucinich Impeach Bush

Minneapolis April 28 Impeachment Event - With Canoes

2007-04-16T23:03:00.001-07:00

Help us with ImpeachForPeace.org's Minneapolis A-28 event! We will spell out "IMPEACH" with canoes on Saturday morning, April 28th, and again with bedsheets that evening. Be a part of this effort to tell the world that the Twin Cities are serious about impeachment!

To participate in the first event, gather at 10:30 a.m. at the Lake Calhoun Pavilion at 3000 Calhoun Parkway East in Minneapolis. Allow time to find parking. Wear light colored/bright colors to stand out from the lake water. Be on time!

To pay for canoe rental, we’ll need your help. It costs $10 per hour to rent a canoe, and we hope to have two people per canoe. (It may take us as much as two hours, which means the cost may be as much as $10 per person.)

Also, if you know anyone who lives at Lake Place or Lake Calhoun Beach Club Apartments, please contact us! We need to use a lakefront, top floor apartment as a vantage point from which to take a photograph.

Then, that evening, show up at Riverside Park at 7:00 p.m. This is the West side of the Mississippi riverbank, beneath the Route 122 bridge near the UofM Campus.
Here's the Map

We'll need 65 twin bedsheets (preferably white) and as many flashlights as you can carry to form the word "IMPEACH" and underlight the sheets so that they're visible to the jets landing at the airport and the cameras capturing the image.

In order to do this, we’ll need 85 people in the morning and 150 in the evening to commit in advance to these nationally important events! Sign up here:
http://volunteerforchange.org/org/show/547

You won't regret helping to contribute to the restoration of law and the constitution!

Help Kucinich to Impeach Bush

2007-04-03T01:25:00.000-07:00

Kucinich says he's pursuing impeachment? Well let's help him out. Sacks and sacks of mail are about to arrive in Dennis Kucinich's office initiating impeachment via the House of Representative's own rules. This legal document is as binding as if a State or if the House itself passed the impeachment resolution (H.R. 635).

Kucinich says he is building his case for impeachment, and is working to build the support of his peers in Congress. He says he intends to impeach. He said he needs us to keep building the groundswell of support for impeachment all over the country. He asks that we send him copies of all the resolutions passed in various States, local Legislative Districts, County Districts and of any petitions with signatures, so that he can present them to the floor of the House. He said he felt that our framing the issue of impeachment in terms of the Constitution is a principled choice, and ultimately more effective than just acting on anger. Here's video of Kucinich addressing the impeachment issue:

Let's answer Kucinich's call with a petition that has it's precedent in history, and it's legitimacy in the Rules of the House of Representatives.

There's a little known and rarely used clause of the "Jefferson Manual" in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.

That's where we come in. In addition to a House Resolution (635), or the State-by-State method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.

You can initiate the impeachment process and simultaneously help Kucinich to follow through with the process. Do-It-Yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in. We're not only having you send them to Dennis now, but also to Impeach for Peace. That way, we can collect them all in one place, and deliver them all simultaneously (with cameras rolling) in July. Be a part of history.

Help Kucinich Impeach Bush

Bush's Impeachable Offenses, Part 5 -- Signing Statements, Freedoms, etc.

2007-04-02T08:26:00.000-07:00

The following is the final installment in a series enumerating the impeachable offenses of George W. Bush. That is, until another major impeachable offense becomes known.

ILLEGAL USE OF SIGNING STATEMENTS.

Charge:

George W. Bush has attached signing statements to more than 100 bills before signing them, within which he has made over 1,100 challenges to provisions of laws passed by Congress. This figure exceeds the total number of such challenges by all previous presidents combined, and Bush has used this practice to exempt himself, as President of the United States, from enforcing or from being held accountable to provisions of the said laws. By declining to veto bills, and instead attaching signing statements challenging laws passed by Congress, he has violated Article 1, Section 7 and Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. These articles of the Constitution dictate that the president has the option of signing or vetoing a bill, and upon signing the bill to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."

March 20, 2001 - Jan. 12, 2007
Bush issues at least 126 signing statements challenging over 1,149 laws (Christopher Kelley, Ph.D). The exact number of signing statements is unknown as the administration refuses to release this information. Examples of signing statements include:
March 9, 2006: Bush signed the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, which contained requirements for congressional oversight of executive use of the act's powers. In a statement immediately following the signing ceremony, however, it was revealed that Bush "did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers." (Boston Globe, March 24, 2006) Subsequently, by the FBI's own admission they abused this power given to them. "As many as 600 of these violations could be 'cases of serious misconduct' involving the improper use of 'national security letters' to compel telephone companies, banks and credit institutions to produce records." (Washington Post, March 21, 2007)

Dec. 5, 2005 & Jan. 6, 2006: Two Detainee Treatment (Torture) Acts were signed into law accompanied by a signing statement. Part of the signing statement read, ''The executive branch shall construe [the law] in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President . . . as Commander in Chief." When asked about the statement, a senior administration official said "the president intended to reserve the right to use harsher methods in special situations involving national security." David Golove, a New York University law professor who specializes in executive power issues, said "The signing statement is saying 'I will only comply with this law when I want to, and if something arises in the war on terrorism where I think it's important to torture or engage in cruel, inhuman, and degrading conduct, I have the authority to do so and nothing in this law is going to stop me." (Boston Globe, Jan. 4, 2006)

Days after the disaster, Bush looks on.
Oct. 4, 2006: In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Congress passed a law setting minimum standards for the job of FEMA Director. This was in direct response to the botched job done by Michael Brown, Bush's choice to lead the agency, who had been a politically connected hire with no prior experience in emergency management. The law said the president must nominate someone who has "a demonstrated ability in and knowledge of emergency management" and "not less than five years of executive leadership." At the signing ceremony, Bush signed the bill without any hint of objection, but included a signing statement saying the law "purports to limit the qualifications of the pool of persons from whom the president may select the appointee in a manner that rules out a large portion of those persons best qualified by experience and knowledge to fill the office. The executive branch shall construe section 503(c)(2) in a manner consistent with the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. " (Boston Globe, Oct. 6, 2006)
Two senator's responded to Bush's signing statement in a letter, "We were dismayed ... by the `signing statement' in which you express your intention to disregard provisions in the law intended to protect against further mistakes such as those that plagued the 2005 hurricane response." (Boston Globe, Oct. 12, 2006)

READ MORE ...

Graduate Student to Walk from Chicago to D.C. Calling for Peace Through Impeachment of Bush & Cheney

2007-04-01T23:18:00.000-07:00

Mikael Rudolph - ImpeachforPeace.org
April 2nd, 2007

Mario Penalver, a graduate student in the Humanities Program at the University of Chicago, is walking the seven hundred miles from Chicago, Illinois to Washington D.C. to demand an end to the Iraq War and in protest of the impending attack on Iran. Penalver calls for this to be done through the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney as the chief architects of these acts of aggression in violation of international treaties and for other crimes, misdemeanors and abuses of office.

In an e-mail to World Can't Wait and Impeach for Peace last week, Peñalver said:

"There must be some basic understanding amongst us, as organizers, as leaders of impeachment, as to why all our actions must face the doors of the White House. I could state that understanding in my own words. But I would rather begin with the words of one far greater than I, one whose method has proven itself in the history of civil rights. "I'm here," Martin Luther Kind said from a Birmingham jail, "because injustice is here."

Marching to DC is the pinnacle of our efforts because that is where our voices have stopped. Our efforts, in protest - in letter-writing campaigns, in our optimism at the polls - have stopped at the doors of the White House, in which stands one man with his ears covered and his mind set on defiance of the national conscience. How can we continue in our local processes, when those processes, in and of themselves, find no resolve where they matter most?"

Peñalver has committed to embark on his quest on Thursday, June 21st and arrive in our nation's capital by Friday, September 21st.

In accordance with an idea from impeachment activist Sgt. Daniel Fearn through ImpeachforPeace.org, Mr. Peñalver will be carrying with him a small rock, which he will place in a location to be determined near the White House - possibly in the Constitutional Gardens as a memorial to the Constitution of the United States. It is Peñalver's assertion that the Constitution - the citizen rights of which were suspended by Patriot Acts I & II and the Military Commissions Act - is dead. Anyone wishing to meet Mario Peñalver in Washington D.C. and lay a stone with his on September 21st is invited and encouraged to do so.

One stone is insignificant. Piles of stones, or cairns, historically indicate important locations established at critical times. If a hundred people join him, it will be a pile. If a hundred thousand add their rock, a monumental mound will be established.

Anyone wishing to host Mr. Peñalver along the way, providing him with lodging, food, water and other necessities or to arrange for a press conference or speaking engagement along the route can contact ImpeachforPeace.org at: minneapolis@ImpeachforPeace.org

Here is a rough travel route, subject to change as speaking engagements are arranged: March People Mario

Travel progress updates of Mario Peñalver's pilgrimage will be available online at March People Path.

Mario Peñalver's personal statement:

WHY WASHINGTON?

While faced with the threat of unparalleled destruction and the onslaught of a second war, our efforts against the Bush administration require more than failed attempts and variations of the same old thing. So far, four years later, our demands for the war’s end have gone unheeded. Four years have past, and still, our demands for the war’s end have gone unheeded.

There must be some basic understanding amongst us, as organizers, as leaders of impeachment, as to why all our actions must face the doors of the White House. We could state that understanding in our own words, but we would rather begin with the words of one far greater than us. "I'm here," Martin Luther King wrote from a Birmingham jail, "because injustice is here."

Marching to DC is the pinnacle of our efforts because that is where our voices have stopped. Our efforts—in protest, in letter-writing campaigns, in our optimism at the polls—have stopped at the doors of the White House, in which stands the only man between us, and troop withdrawal. How can we continue in our local processes when those processes, in and of them selves, find no resolve where they matter most?

Part of the answer is in the question. We must understand as organizations, from those dealing with domestic violence to those fighting drug use in our urban slums, from those defending public schools to those fighting global warming, that all of these fights are fights against a common foe. A ramshackle school, is a vote against Bush. A victim of domestic violence or drug abuse, is a vote against Bush. A melted glacier and a flooded city, are a vote against Bush. Another dead soldier, another country fallen, another occupied city, are votes against Bush.

More importantly (and to answer the other half of the question), when we realize that it is a common foe in the way of our separate ends, we cannot also continue in our actions if these actions show little positive effect on the problem. We have a tumor in our Body. It’s lied, it’s stolen, it’s avoided the subject, it’s ducked our demands, it is hidden from accountability… It’s fighting and fighting and killing and killing, and it won’t stop, until surgeons come—with precision and diligence—to open the body, and remove it.

Tumors don’t respond when you ask them to. They don’t stop when you demand it. They don’t respond kindly to words. You can hope, pray, write a letter, make a statement, list your demands, sign a petition, wave a flag, spell your name in the sand. But these are not the jobs of surgeons.

We are surgeons, the same surgeons who stood in the streets of Birmingham when its black churches were on fire. The same surgeons who stood in a phalanx before the British army and demanded “India for the Indians.” The same surgeons who stood in the ancient Temple of Jerusalem and refused to obey the self-righteous demands of the Pharisees. We are surgeons whose only faculty is to face the root of injustice that plagues our every corner of the nation. It cannot be fought and dealt with when we remain in the periphery of symptom. We are destined to face the source of symptom, and so our every effort, our every occupation, must face that source until it is uprooted and removed.

That is why we must leave behind our fractured interests for the sake of a common foe. That is why we must go to Washington. Not a single act of ours outside that end will ever lead to victory so long as it remains outside.

We, organizers of the national “March of the People,” believe our president is still in office because he knows some how that his opponents will not succeed in the task of unity. Some how, we think he’d wager money on the fact that liberal (or so-called “liberal”) America will remain as it always has been since the early days of the Iraq War: inconsistent, disconnected, and indecisive. While its surgeons remain fractured in their means and ends, busy fighting weeds and rarely pulling roots, our tumor grows, until one day when there is nothing left to take.

Some believe the issue of the president is different from other issues. We’ve been told that we need to look towards other interests besides the removal of our president. As the argument goes, we are faced with one of many problems in the fight of injustice, so why choose this one, over, say, financial disparities, homophobia, or a fight against cancer. We, students have degrees to finish: What about those?

But avoiding our common effort to redirect the billions spent in waging Bush’s war, we avoid the common fact that if billions were NOT spent on that war, we could afford support for the poor, a fight against hate-crimes, better research for cancer. And as for our degrees, we could finally afford them. In 2003 the military budget for this country was over $355 billion dollars. Today that budget will reach 482. Now forgive us when we say that the Bush policy of “more money, more guns” is a policy that also tells us something else: what Bush thinks of domestic violence victims, cancer research, or our fights for urban renewal.

You know what we think Bush is saying when he spends nearly half a trillion dollars on the military? We think he’s telling us exactly where we can put that degree of ours.

It is impossible for us to see any injustice in our country and not see the face of incompetence and deceit in the highest seat of office. This is the connection that is made when we walk to the Capital. By walking there, we pass through the ruins of infection left by the man who disregards his people. It is high time we banded together, to remind our president that no person, even the president, is beyond the Voice of the People.

As organizers of the longest march in American history, we recognize that there are those who will be unable to join a march of such time and distance, whether for financial reasons, or due to physical limitations of any kind. To those who must stay at home, we ask for their participation in a national strike, a means by which they can join in camaraderie with their fellow protesters and force upon our leaders the Voice of the People, a voice long forgotten since the beginning of the Iraq War. It is also an effective means by which we can put a non-violent pressure on the man standing between us and peace.

We are here, above all else, to end the bloodshed and the disillusionment of the political system. When it so happens that standing between us and that goal is one man, we as organizers feel obligated to do everything in our power to remove that one man. All else, we say, is just detail.

~ Mario Peñalver

Missouri & Texas Introduce Impeachment Bills

2007-03-30T00:55:00.000-07:00

TEXAS:
Yellow Rose Peace Bus -- "Texas State Representative Lon Burnam introduced HCR. No. 154: Submitting charges to the United States House of Representatives constituting proof that the president of the United States has violated his oath of office."

MISSOURI:
Rep. Nasheed, Jamilah sponsored and Rep. Jeanette Mott Oxford cosponsored a bill calling for the impeachment of George Bush.

Contact these reps before they become dug-in on a position:

Missouri:
SPEAKER-Rod Jetton
156-R
(573) 751-5912
Rod.Jetton@house.mo.gov
_________________________
Joe Aull
(573) 751-2204
Jim Avery
(573) 751-2150
Brian Baker
(573) 751-2175
Judy Baker
(573) 751-1169
Carl Bearden
(573) 751-2949
Walt Bivins
(573) 751-9766
Craig C. Bland
(573) 751-2124
John L. Bowman
(573) 751-4726
Ellen Brandom
(573) 751-5471
Rachel L. Bringer
(573) 751-9818
Jason Brown
(573) 751-6593
Michael R. Brown
(573) 751-7639
Mark J. Bruns
(573) 751-0665
John P. Burnett
(573) 751-3310
Ron Casey
(573) 751-4787
Maria Chappelle-Nadal
(573) 751-4265
Nathan Cooper
(573) 751-1443
Robert Wayne Cooper
(573) 751-1119
Shannon Cooper
(573) 751-1484
Michael George Corcoran
(573) 751-0855
Stanley Cox
(573) 751-9774
Jane Cunningham
(573) 751-1186
Mike Cunningham
(573) 751-3819
Shalonn "KiKi" Curls
(573) 751-3158
Bruce Darrough
(573) 751-9760
Michael Daus
(573) 751-6736
Cynthia Davis
(573) 751-9768
David Day
(573) 751-1446
Bill Deeken
(573) 751-2412
Tom Dempsey
(573) 751-1141
Charles Denison
(573) 751-2210
Mike Dethrow
(573) 751-1066
Bob Dixon
(573) 751-9809
Margaret Donnelly
(573) 751-0100
Curt Dougherty
(573) 751-6535
Gary Dusenberg
(573) 751-1487
Talibdin El-Amin
(573) 751-2198
Edgar G. H. Emery
(573) 751-2165
Doug Ervin
(573) 751-2238
Sally Faith
(573) 751-1452
Joe Fallert
(573) 751-7735
Kathlyn Fares
(573) 751-1285
Barney Joe Fisher
(573) 751-5388
Timothy Flook
(573) 751-1218
Michael Frame
(573) 751-4822
Ward Franz
(573) 751-1455
Doug Funderburk
(573) 751-2176
Tony George
(573) 751-2135
Jason Grill
(573) 751-4066
Jeff Grisamore
(573) 751-1456
Jim Guest
(573) 751-0246
Belinda Harris
(573) 751-2398
Jeff Harris
(573) 751-9753
Esther Haywood
(573) 751-4468
Steve Hobbs
(573) 751-9458
Steve Hodges
(573) 751-4085
Jason R. Holsman
(573) 751-6607
Theodore Hoskins
(573) 751-0169
Rodney R. Hubbard
(573) 751-2383
Leonard Hughes
(573) 751-1501
Steve Hunter
(573) 751-5458
Allen Icet
(573) 751-1247
Connie "LaJoyce" Johnson
(573) 751-7605
Kenneth Jones
(573) 751-2134
Timothy W. Jones
(573) 751-0562
Van Kelly
(573) 751-2205
Gayle Kingery
(573) 751-4039
Sam Komo
(573) 751-6625
Fred Kratky
(573) 751-4220
Will Kraus
(573) 751-1459
J. C. Kuessner
(573) 751-2112
Sara Lampe
(573) 751-1460
Jim Lembke
(573) 751-2315
Paul LeVota
(573) 751-9759
Albert Joseph Liese
(573) 751-1832
Scott A. Lipke
(573) 751-6662
Tom Loehner
(573) 751-1344
Beth Low
(573) 751-4485
Jenee' M. Lowe
(573) 751-2437
B.J. Marsh
(573) 751-0136
Bob May
(573) 751-5713
Rebecca Payne McClanahan
(573) 751-4042
Michael McGhee
(573) 751-1462
Tim Meadows
(573) 751-1311
Kate Meiners
(573) 751-9469
Danielle Moore
(573) 751-5226
Brian Munzlinger
(573) 751-7985
Scott Muschany
(573) 751-1544
Bob Nance
(573) 751-1468
Jamilah Nasheed
(573) 751-4415
Brian D. Nieves
(573) 751-0549
Jerry Nolte
(573) 751-1470
Charlie Norr
(573) 751-4082
Robert F. Onder, Jr., M.D.
(573) 751-3572
Jeanette Mott Oxford
(573) 751-4567
Sam Page
(573) 751-9762
Michael Parson
(573) 751-1347
David Pearce
(573) 751-2272
Darrell Pollock
(573) 751-4451
Dr. Charles R. Portwood
(573) 751-9765
Bryan Pratt
(573) 751-8636
John Quinn
(573) 751-2917
Paul Quinn
(573) 751-4028
Ron Richard
(573) 751-2173
Edward Robb
(573) 751-1471
Brad Robinson
(573) 751-2317
Jeff Roorda
(573) 751-2504
Martin T. Rucker
(573) 751-9460
Marilyn Ruestman
(573) 751-9801
Don Ruzicka
(573) 751-4077
Ray Salva
(573) 751-5701
Therese Sander
(573) 751-6566
David Sater
(573) 751-1480
Luke Scavuzzo
(573) 751-4072
Robert Schaaf
(573) 751-2183
Rodney Schad
(573) 751-2077
Dwight Scharnhorst
(573) 751-4392
Ed Schieffer
(573) 751-9459
Charles Schlottach
(573) 751-6668
Vicki Schneider
(573) 751-2433
Shane Schoeller
(573) 751-2948
Sue Schoemehl
(573) 751-9804
Tom Self
(573) 751-3971
Tom Shively
(573) 751-4065
Ryan Silvey
Trent Skaggs
(573) 751-2199
Jason Smith
(573) 751-1688
Joe Smith
(573) 751-2250
Michael Spreng
(573) 751-9628
Neal C. St. Onge
(573) 751-5568
Bryan P. Stevenson
(573) 751-7082
Rachel Storch
(573) 751-1400
Rick Stream
(573) 751-4069
Mike Sutherland
(573) 751-2689
Terry Swinger
(573) 751-2264
Mike Talboy
(573) 751-1309
Mike Thomson
(573) 751-9465
Kevin Threlkeld
(573) 751-0538
Steven Tilley
(573) 751-1488
Tom Todd
(573) 751-4095
Jim Viebrock
(573) 751-2381
Thomas Villa
(573) 751-0438
Michael Vogt
(573) 751-9472
Maynard Wallace
(573) 751-2042
Regina Walsh
(573) 751-6845
Juanita Head Walton
(573) 751-5538
Jay Wasson
(573) 751-1503
Don Wells
(573) 751-1490
Raymond 'Ray' Weter
(573) 751-2565
James Whorton
(573) 751-1649
Edward Wildberger
(573) 751-9755
Kevin Wilson
(573) 751-9781
Larry Wilson
(573) 751-1167
Terry L Witte
(573) 751-9614
Dennis Wood
(573) 751-2492
Billy Pat Wright
(573) 751-1494
Robin Wright-Jones
(573) 751-6800
Patricia M. Yaeger
(573) 751-0220
Brian Yates
(573) 751-0907
Terry Young
(573) 751-9851
Jake Zimmerman
(573) 751-4163
Clint Zweifel
(573) 751-5365

Texas:
House Committee on State Affairs (Where the resolution currently is sitting)
Chair: Rep. David Swinford
(512) 463-0470
EMAIL
Vice Chair: Rep. Ken Paxton
(512) 463-0356
EMAIL
Budget & Oversight Chair: Rep. Corbin Van Arsdale
(512) 463-0661
EMAIL
Rep. Wayne Christian
(512) 463-0556
EMAIL
Rep. Byron Cook
(512) 463-0730
EMAIL
Rep. Jessica Farrar
(512) 463-0620
EMAIL
Rep. Dan Flynn
(512) 463-0880
EMAIL
Rep. Tan Parker
(512) 463-0688
EMAIL
Rep. Marc Veasey
(512) 463-0716
EMAIL

Nationwide Impeachment Actions on April 28!

2007-03-23T11:46:00.000-07:00

There will be protests in towns and cities all over the country. And everywhere people will be using signs, their bodies, chalk, or anything else they can think of to spell out IMPEACH! We invite everybody to start thinking about the most creative, spectacular, beautiful, and clever ways they can come up with to spell it out. This is a spin-off of the BeachImpeach project on the shores of San Francisco where over 1,100 people spelled out "Impeach!" Find out what is going on in your town, or start your own project. You can do it with as little as 7 people, or as many as you can gather. Be a part of history and this media grabbing call to defend our constitution through impeachment.

7 people can paint 7 boxes white with a black letter on each one to spell "IMPEACH!" Attach some sticks so you can lift them overhead. 7 people then carry the letters around. You can then add that to a march, or just wander through your downtown area drawing attention, and getting out the message in a creative way.

Find the pre-existing events here:
http://volunteerforchange.org/org/show/547

Start your own action:
http://a28.org/participate.htm

Find out more:
http://a28.org/

Impeach Bush

Do-It-Yourself Impeachments: Send Tuesday

2007-03-19T00:46:00.000-07:00

Our next wave of Do-It-Yourself Impeachments are due. This time we're sending them to Republican Representative and Presidential Candidate Ron Paul. He's spoken in favor of impeachment. Here's a clip of his most recent comments about impeachment. While he shies away from calling for it directly, he does speak in favor of impeachment investigations.
If you're unfamiliar with the DIY Impeachment method, IfP has researched a method for impeaching the president using a little known and rarely used part of the Rules of the House of Representatives ("Jefferson’s Manual"). This document actually empowers individual citizens to initiate the impeachment process themselves.

"Jefferson's Manual" is an interpretive guide to parliamentary procedure, and is included (along with the Constitution) in the bound volumes of the Rules of the House of Representatives. It is ratified by each congress (including the current one), and has been updated continuously through the history of our democracy. The section covering impeachment lists the acceptable vehicles for bringing impeachment motions to the floor of the House.

Before the House Judiciary Committee can put together the Articles of Impeachment, someone must initiate the impeachment procedure. Most often, this occurs when members of the House pass a resolution. Another method outlined in the manual, however, is for individual citizens to submit a memorial for impeachment.

After learning this information, Minnesotan and Impeach for Peace member (Jodin Morey) found precedent in an 1826 memorial by Luke Edward Lawless which had been successful in initiating the impeachment of Federal Judge James H. Peck. Impeach for Peace then used this as a template for their "Do-It-Yourself Impeachment." Now any citizen can download the DIY Impeachment Memorial and submit it, making it possible for Americans to do what our representatives have been unwilling to do. The idea is for so many people to submit the Memorial that it cannot be ignored.

Go to the document at our website, fill in your relevant information in the blanks (Name/State), print it out, sign it, and send in your memorial on Tuesday the 20th. There's also extra credit for sending a DIY Impeachment to your own representative.

That's right — to make a big impact, we're having everyone send it in on the same date (Over 500,000 downloads so far representing over 1.6 million mailings). We hope to flood the congress with sacks of mail and cause a newsworthy event to further pressure them to act on the memorials. Although, it's important to keep in mind that in the 1830 precedent, impeachment resulted as a result of a single memorial. Yours might be the one.
Here's where to find the DIY Impeachment (Also en español.)

Our next wave, which we currently plan on delivering in July is going to be a little different. We're asking everyone to mail them to IfP. We'll then video tape one of our members hand delivering them to Washington. Stay tuned...

Bush's Impeachable Offenses, Part 4 - War Crimes

2007-02-26T05:04:00.000-08:00

The following is a chronological account of the actions taken by the U.S. Military under the leadership of George W. Bush as Commander-in-Chief that lead to multiple violations of the Geneva convention and U.S. Military Code.

Charge

	George W. Bush has conspired to commit the torture of prisoners in violation of the "Federal Torture Act" Title 18 United States Code, Section 113C, the U.N. Torture convention and the Geneva Convention, which under Article VI of the Constitution are part of the "supreme Law of the Land;" George W. Bush has conspired to deny due process to prisoners of war, indiscriminantly bomb cities, transfer prisoners of war from an occupied territory, and planned, prepared, initiated and waged of a war of aggression in violation of U.S. Military Code section 2441, Geneva convention (I Art 3, II Art 18, Art 19, III Art 13, Art 17, Art 33, Art 34, Art 49, IV Art 3), and the 1945 Nuremberg Principles articles 6(a) and (b);

General Geneva Violations:

The U.S. Military Code specifies that it is a crime to violate the Geneva convention:
"Whoever, ... commits a war crime, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, ... and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death. ... Definition: As used in this section the term 'war crime' means ... a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949 [or acts] prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907 ... " (Section 2441: U.S. Military Code on War Crimes)

1945 Nuremberg Principles:
After WWII, the U.S. led the formation of the ‘Nuremberg Principles,’ which form the United Nations Charter. Every country in the world is bound by that Charter.
Defines as a crime: "Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;"(Nuremberg Principles, 1950)

January 25, 2002
White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales writes a memo urging President George Bush to declare the war in Afghanistan exempt from the Geneva convention. In the memo, the White House lawyer references a 1996 law passed by Congress, known as the War Crimes Act, that law banned any Americans from committing war crimes - defined in part as "grave breaches" of the Geneva convention. The memo warns that the law applies to "U.S. officials" and that punishments for violators "include the death penalty." [PDF of Gonzales memo] (Newsweek, May 17, 2004)
Subsequent to January 25, 2002
Secretary Powell writes a memo arguing that Alberto Gonzales’ attempt to declare the war in Afghanistan exempt from the Geneva convention undermines more than a century of U.S. policy and practice.
"It will reverse over a century of U.S. policy and practice in supporting the Geneva conventions and undermine the protections of the law of war for our troops, both in this specific conflict and in general. ... It may provoke some individual foreign prosecutors to investigate and prosecute our officials and troops. ... We will be challenged in international fora (UN Commission on Human Rights; World Court; etc.)." (Powell memo)
March 19, 2003
Bush declares pre-emptive war in Iraq which constitutes a "grave breach" of the Geneva convention as Iraq posed no "imminent threat" to the U.S.
"Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms against persons except in self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting their authority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives. In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life." (United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva, Fall 1990)

TORTURE

Geneva Convention:
"Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission ... causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity."

"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."

"Prisoners of war shall enjoy complete latitude in the exercise of their religious duties, including attendance at the service of their faith, on condition that they comply with the disciplinary routine prescribed by the military authorities."

"The following acts are and shall remain prohibited ... cruel treatment and torture; ... Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; "

"Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory ... are prohibited, regardless of their motive."
(Geneva Convention, 1949)

October 11 , 2002
Department of Defense writes a memo which authorizes interrogation tactics for use at Guantanamo including using dogs to induce stress, stripping and shaving prisoners, and stress positions. Also included is a memo with an analysis of how the interrogators at Guantanamo (GTMO) became more willing to conduct extreme interrogation techniques.
"The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) has not adopted specific guidelines regarding interrogation techniques for detainee operations at GTMO."
"Compounding this problem is the fact that there is no established clear policy for interrogation limits and operations at GTMO, and many interrogators have felt in the past that they could not do anything that could be considered 'controversial.'" Diane Beaver, LTC, USA, Staff Judge Advocate

Department of Defense approved: "The use of stress positions ... Use of the isolation facility for up to 30 days ... Extensions beyond the initial 30 days must be approved ... Depravation of light and auditory stimuli ... The detainee may also have a hood placed over his head during transportation and questioning. ... The use of 20 hour interrogations. ... Removal of all comfort items (including religious items) ... Removal of clothing. ... Forced grooming (shaving of facial hair etc.) ... Using detainees individual phobias (such as fear of dogs) to induce stress. ... The use of scenarios designed to convince the detainee that death or severely painful consequences are imminent for him and/or his family. ... Exposure to cold weather or water. ... Use of a wet towel and dripping water to induce the misperception of suffocation." (Torture memos)
October 25, 2002
Memo written by a U.S. Army General in response to the torture memo put out by the Department of Defense.
"I am particularly troubled by the use of implied expressed threats of death of the detainee or his family." James T. Hill, General, U.S. Army Commander (Torture memos)

(Click here to read the rest...)

Bush Leaked on our CIA Agents...

2007-02-07T02:16:00.000-08:00

Bush illegally leaked 'cherry picked' information from a classified National Intelligence Estimate. Bush subsequently feigned ignorance of his involvement, keeping the public and the investigators from seeking accountability.

George W. Bush authorized the leaking of classified national secrets in violation of executive order 13292 to further a political agenda, exposing an unknown number of covert U.S. intelligence agents to potential harm and retribution while simultaneously refusing to investigate the matter;

March 25, 2003
President Bush signs an executive order amending (among other things) the legal method for declassifying information. After the administration released classified information, they claimed the release was legal because it had already been disclosed by the media. Ironically, the following quote from the president's own executive order eliminates this defense:
"Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information."

The following quotes from the executive order reveal that the process for declassifying information requires a procedure. Contrary to some people's speculation, a president can not simply declassify information via announcement to the media. One requirement is that they inform the head of the related agency (in this case, the CIA) of the planned disclosure:
"the following [declassification instructions] shall appear on the face of each classified document ... the date or event for declassification, ... the date that is 10 years from the date of original classification, ... [or] the date that is up to 25 years from the date of original classification ..."

"Prior to public release, all declassified records shall be appropriately marked to reflect their declassification"

"In some exceptional cases, however, the need to protect such information may be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure of the information ... When such questions arise, they shall be referred to the agency head or the senior agency official. That official will determine, as an exercise of discretion, whether the public interest in disclosure outweighs the damage to the national security that might reasonably be expected from disclosure." (F.A.S.)

Prior to July 6, 2003
President George W. Bush authorizes Lewis Libby (a former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney) to leak information from a classified intelligence report to a New York Times reporter, as revealed in Libby's sworn testimony to a federal grand jury in a 39-page Fitzgerald filing on April 5, 2006.
"Vice President advised defendant that the President specifically had authorized defendant to disclose certain information in the NIE." (Fitzgerald filing)

( READ MORE )

Got Fascism?

2007-02-01T08:07:00.000-08:00

Impeach Bush

Bush's Impeachable Offenses, Part 2

2007-01-29T15:54:00.001-08:00

The President ordered the NSA to spy on citizens without a warrant

BY IFP's Jodin Morey

ILLEGAL SPYING

George W. Bush has admitted to ordering the National Security Agency to conduct electronic surveillance of U.S. civilians without seeking warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, duly constituted by Congress in 1978, in violation of Title 50 United States Code, Section 1805.

(More)

Video: Do-It-Yourself Impeachment

2007-01-28T12:45:00.000-08:00

Video: Do-It-Yourself Impeachment

Pro-war, Pro-Torture Rally....

2007-01-23T02:21:00.001-08:00

Concerned about dissenters who want to hand this nation over to the terrorists by stopping the war?

Worried that Democrats and disaffected Republicans will impeach the President and end torture as we know it?

Patriots for Corporate Rights invites you to join up with other concerned citizens on Friday, February 9th, between 4:00 and 7:00 p.m. We will gather in Minneapolis at Lagoon & Hennepin, Uptown (in front of the library), to celebrate our nation’s willingness to go to war and to torture people in order to preserve freedom here and abroad.

Bring a sign or a friend. Be a part of the movement opposing dissent in our nation!

The following rally is a tactic. The idea is to get people to wake up and see the ridiculousness of supporting war and torture, which is what they are inadvertently doing by being complacent. It becomes harder to put the fact that our nation is actually torturing people out of your mind when there are people standing up in defense of the right to do it. And if the population isn't outraged when they see us, media reports on the lack of that outrage can be an effective way of getting our message across as well.

We’re betting that signs like “Dissent is unpatriotic,” "3,000 Soldiers is worth it" and “War is good for business” will show the true colors of Bush and his supporters. This kind of dissent is in the tradition of groups like The Yes Men (http://www.theyesmen.org/). This could motivate progressive thinkers who might otherwise have stayed at home to take action, make people sitting on the fence think about the issue and realize how ridiculous pro-Bush people are being, and give us more media attention, as the media is fairly accustomed to anti-war protests.

Reactions to news of our rally?
"i agree. i mean, they behead us on tv and declare their unwavering hate and lust for killing americans. if it saves innocent american lives, i'm not opposed to torturing some bad guys."
Here's a link to the comment on Reddit.com

Bush's Impeachable Offenses: Part 1

2007-01-21T22:10:00.000-08:00

ILLEGAL WAR

The following is a chronological account of the actions of

President George W. Bush leading U.S. illegally to war with Iraq.

Fall, 1999
Before his presidency, Bush reveals his interest in invading Iraq.
Author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz recounts Bush's comment that: "One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief... My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it... If I have a chance to invade, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it." Herskowitz states that "Bush expressed frustration in a lifetime as an underachiever in the shadow of an accomplished father. In aggressive military action, he saw the opportunity to emerge from his father's shadow," (Russ Barker, GNN.tv, October 28, 2004).
Early 2001
CIA informes the Bush administration that the "aluminum tubes," later to be used as evidence of a nuclear WMD program, were probably not intended for that purpose.
In the article, CIA officials and a senior administration official tell us that Rice's staff had been told in 2001 that Energy Department experts believed the tubes were most likely intended for small artillery rockets, and not a nuclear program. (New York Times, Octbober 3, 2004)
March, 2002
Despite his later claims that he had not yet decided to attack Iraq, Bush indicates his intention to do so.
Bush states to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice and three U.S. Senators: "Fuck Saddam. We're taking him out," (Time Magazine, March 24, 2003).
March, 2002
Prior to Congress' October 11th authorization of the Iraq invasion, Bush initiates war in Iraq's No Fly Zone.
Bush ordered the tonnage of bombs being dropped on Iraq from 0 in March 2002 and 0.3 in April 2002 to between 7 and 14 tons per month in May-August, reaching a pre-war peak of 54.6 tons in September (New Statesman, May 30, 2005).

The UN established No Fly Zones in 1991 (in UN resolution 688) and 1992. Accordingly, it is illegal for the allied pilots (U.K. & U.S.) to bomb within the NFZs except to prevent humanitarian crises between the Sunis and the Shias or in self-defense. To constitute self-defense, "there must be more than 'a threat'. There has to be an armed attack, actual or imminent. The development of posession of nuclear weapons does not in itself amount to an armed attack; what would be needed would be clear evidence of an imminent attack" (Declassified British Foreign Office legal advice: March 2002).
July 23, 2002
During a meeting of top U.S. and U.K. officials regarding a possible attack on Iraq, foreign policy aide Matthew Rycroft makes the following observations about Bush's comments (Declassified U.K. Downing Street Documents: March 8 - July 23, 2002).
- "It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided."
- "There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."
- “Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.
- In reference to illegal bombings begun in May: "The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime."
- “There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.”
- “The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record.”
- “No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.”
August 10, 2002
Bush claims publicly that he has no imminent war plan or timetable for war with Iraq, despite clear indications to the contrary in the Downing Street memo and despite having previously initiated bombing in the NFZs (Transcript, Ridgewood Country Club in Waco, TX).
September 19, 2002
President Bush sends the Iraq Resolution to Congress requesting authorization to use military force against Iraq (White House Video & Transcript).
October 16, 2002
Congress grants authorization to go to war with Iraq in order to "enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq," or to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq." Subsequently, Bush failed to meet either of these conditions for war.(Congress' Authorization to go to War)
February 2002 - January 28, 2003
Numerous sources advising the Bush Administration debunk allegations that Niger sold "yellow-cake" uranium, used in the construction of WMDs, to Iraq. However, in Bush's subsequent State of the Union Address to Congress, he claims that the sale did occur. Misleading Congress is a crime.(CNN, March 14th, 2003)
- February 2002
  Cheney requests that the uranium sales story be investigated, and Ambassador Wilson is sent to Niger to do so. (New York Times, July 6, 2003)
- February 2002
  Ambassador Owens-Kirkpatrick informs Wilson that she had already informed Washington that the allegations of uranium sales to Iraq were false. (New York Times, July 6, 2003)
- March 9th, 2002
  Wilson's report is given to the White House. The report concludes there was no evidence that the uranium sale had occurred, and that it would be extremely unlikely for it to have taken place. (Time, Jul. 21, 2003)
- Early October, 2002
  CIA Director George Tenet argues “to White House officials, including Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley,” that the Nigerian uranium claim should not be included in Bush's October 7th speech because the allegation is based on only one source. (WashingtonPost & Truthout.org, July 23, 2003)
- Fall, 2002
  The former head of CIA covert operations in Europe and a 26-year veteran of the agency, Tyler Drumheller, states that the allegations did not hold together. According to Drumheller, the CIA informed the White House that "the Africa story is overblown" and "the evidence is weak.'" Drumheller also reports that the Bush Administration had intelligence from Saddam Hussein's inner circle indicating that Iraq "had no active weapons of mass destruction program." Bush's speech writers took the uranium reference out of the October 7th speech (CBS, April 23, 2006), though they would add it back in to subsequent speeches.
- December, 2002
  Director General of the IAEA Mohamed ElBaradei sends a letter to the White House and the National Security Council warning senior officials that he believes the documents were forgeries and should not be cited by the administration as evidence that Iraq was actively trying to obtain WMDs. ElBaradei receives no written response to his letter, despite repeated follow-up calls he makes to the White House, the NSC and the State Department (Couterbias, January 27, 2006).
- January 12, 2003
  The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research expresses "concerns to the CIA that the documents pertaining to the Iraq-Niger deal were forgeries" and notes that it may already have informed intelligence agencies of this (Declassified State Department Memo to the Undersecretary).
- January 17, 2003
  The State Department tells the CIA that the intelligence reports upon which the uranium claims were based were forgeries (Declassified State Department Memo to the Undersecretary).
- January 28, 2003
  Despite having been informed numerous times to the contrary, Bush claims in his State of the Union Address to Congress that "the British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" (White House Video & Transcript).
January 28, 2003
Bush misleads congress about chemicle WMDs
Bush claims in his State of the Union address to Congress that Iraq is pursuing and has vast stockpiles of checmical weapons. In this speech, he leaves out key words used by his intelligence agency which modify the assertions he puts forth. These modifications would have cast doubt on his assertions, and the removal of these modifyers amounts to misleading congress. An analysis of these changes to the intelligence reports was made by John W. Dean, a FindLaw columnist, and a former counsel to the President. (FindLaw, July 18, 2003)
January 31, 2003
The New York Times and The Guardian reports that a secret memo reveals that President Bush and Prime Minister Blair agreed to invade Iraq even without U.N. backing (NYTimes, March 27, 2006; The Guardian, Feb. 3rd, 2006):
- "Mr Bush made it clear the US intended to invade whether or not there was a second UN resolution and even if UN inspectors found no evidence of a banned Iraqi weapons programme."
- "The diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning", Bush told Blair.
- The memo is also said to reveal that President Bush suggested "flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft planes with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours," in order to provoke Saddam to shoot on them, therefore putting Iraq in breach of United Nations resolutions.
March 6, 2003
Bush indicates he hasn't decided to take military action, and is open to a peaceful resolution.
"I've not made up our mind about military action. [sic] Hopefully, this can be done peacefully...” (George W. Bush, White House Press Conference White House Video & Transcript)
March 7, 2003
United Nations Chief Weapons Inspector (Hans Blix) report on WMDs. Shows Iraq was cooperating with weapons inspectors, and presence of WMDs could not be confirmed. Inspector indicated more time was needed as Iraq was becoming increasingly forthcoming, and much progress was being made. A prediction of months (not weeks or years) was needed. Bush is to later pull these inspectors from Iraq and claim Saddam "wouldn't let them in." (CNN, March 7, 2003)
March 8, 2003
Bush indicates he is attempting to avoid war with Iraq:
“We are doing everything we can to avoid war in Iraq.” (George W. Bush Radio Address, White House Video & Transcript)
March 17, 2003
Bush advises U.N. weapons inspectors to leave Iraq Immediately. (Address to Nation, White House Video & Transcript)
March 17, 2003
Bush indicating publically, a willingness to work with the United Nations and respect it's mission:
"America tried to work with the United Nations to address this threat because we wanted to resolve the issue peacefully. We believe in the mission of the United Nations." (George W. Bush, in Address to the Nation, White House Video & Transcript)
March 18, 2003
Bush Letter to Congress prior to revealing the ongoing war:
"[A]cting pursuant to the Constitution and [the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002] is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001." (White House, March, 2003)
March 19, 2003
Bush reveals ongoing war with Iraq and increases intensity. War announced despite Iraq not having been shown to be a threat to the U.S., and without a resolution from the U.N. Security Council. These conditions were required by Congress' authorization to go to war. (White House Video & Transcript)
July 14, 2003
Bush lying to public about his confidence about WMDs and the status of weapons inspectors prior to the war:
"The larger point is, and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power, along with other nations, so as to make sure he was not a threat to the United States and our friends and allies in the region..." (George W. Bush, Photo Op in the Oval Office, White House Video & Transcript)
September 17, 2003
This shows that Bush knew about the lack of connection between Iraq and 9/11, a connection he implied existed in his letter to Congress.
"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the Sept. 11." (White House Transcript and Video)
July 29, 2004
(Declassified CIA-commissioned report on pre-war intelligence)
- "Some in the Intelligence Community and elsewhere hold the view that intense policymaker demands in the run-up to the war constituted inappropriate pressure on intelligence analysts."
- "Despite the pressure, however, the Intelligence Community remained firm in its assessment that no operational or collaborative relationship existed [between Iraq and al-Qa'ida]. In the case of Iraq's possession of WMD, on the other hand, analytic judgments and policy views were in accord, so that the impact of pressure, if any, was more nuanced and may have been considered reinforcing."

Keith Ellison Demands Impeachment [Audio]

2007-01-17T21:19:00.000-08:00

Here is Audio of Keith Ellison (who is currently serving as the first Muslim member of the U.S. House of Representatives) calling for Bush's Impeachment in no uncertain terms at an Impeach for Peace event.

Keith Ellison Demands Impeachment [AUDIO]

More deatils about the Impeach for Peace event.

Bush starts war against Iran...

2007-01-17T00:09:00.000-08:00

NYT: 'Newly revealed orders' issued by Bush show US opened front against Iran in Iraq

Monday's New York Times reports that "newly revealed orders issued by President Bush" show that, along with fighting insurgents and "tamping down sectarian warfare" in Iraq, "a third front has opened - against Iran."
(more)

Impeach For Peace helps NM start the impeachment process!!

2007-01-16T02:33:00.002-08:00

On Jan. 7th, the office of New Mexico State Senator Jerry Ortiz y Pino contacted IFP in order to consult us on some of the deeper aspects of the process of impeachment in an effort to start the resolution process in their State. We sent them information regarding historical precedent, the rules of the U.S. House of Representatives, and a copy of another State's draft resolution, and let them know we would offer any additional support they need. Then, on Jan. 12th the news broke that Senator Ortiz was pursuing the legislation. We certainly hope the information IFP provided helped in encouraging the Senator, and will continue to supply any addtional support we can. We also encourage any other State representative to contact IFP regarding any possible future impeachment resolutions. Congratulations New Mexico!

More:
http://www.democracyfornewmexico.com/democracy_for_new_mexico/2007/01/draft_of_impeac.html

The Nation Demands Impeachment Monday (Jan 15), Help us...

2007-01-08T03:17:00.001-08:00

It only takes a moment to help convince Nancy Pelosi to Impeach Bush/Cheney..

Pelosi most likely said impeachment was "off the table" to remove any appearance of conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as a result of the coming impeachment.

What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she is forced to join the impeachment movement in the future.

Sacks and sacks of mail are about to arrive in Nancy Pelosi's office initiating impeachment via the House of Representative's own rules this Monday January 15th. This legal document is as binding as if a State or if the House itself passed the impeachment resolution (H.R. 635).

There's a little known and rarely used clause of the "Jefferson Manual" in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.That's where we come in. In addition to a House Resolution (635), or the State-by-State method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.

You can initiate the impeachment process and simultaneously help to convince Pelosi to follow through with the process. Do-It-Yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in. Be a part of history.

http://ImpeachForPeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

Impeachment Good for Republicans and Democrats

2006-12-19T21:46:00.000-08:00

Impeachment Good for Republicans and Democrats

A debate is raging as to whether the U.S. should impeach George W. Bush, but it’s not a partisan debate. Democrats and Republicans fall on both sides of the issue. Members of both parties opposing impeachment seem to be worried that pursuing impeachment will hurt their chances in the 2008 presidential elections and beyond. Given that the argument seems to be turning on whether impeachment is good for winning elections, it seems odd that so many members of both parties are in agreement about opposing it. Obviously, one of the parties will get a political bump.

While few reasonable people can doubt that Bush has done more than enough to warrant impeachment from a constitutional perspective, it looks like some Democrats and Republicans won’t be motivated to impeach until they can see why it’s good for their political futures. Therefore I'm going to put aside the fact that holding Bush accountable for his numerous crimes is the ethical thing to do. I’m also going to put aside the way impeachment massively increases the chance of Congress undoing his rubberstamped legislative damage, and that impeachment is the only way to deter future presidents from continuing from where Bush leaves off. That’s right — even ignoring all this, impeachment is still a good idea, and for both parties.

Democrats, up until now, you've had a Republican majority in the Congress. When people criticized the government, you could claim with some credibility that there was nothing you could do about it. But now you have both houses of Congress. The people voted to put you in office in good measure not because your party expressed a coherent and positive vision for America’s future, but because they were concerned about the overwhelming amount of government corruption that’s been going on under Republican control. If you fail to hold this president accountable now, you're out of excuses. People will look back and say that both parties were complicit, corrupt, and opportunistic — and they'll be right. You only maintain the moral high ground if you defend the Constitution in contrast to the Republican controlled Congress. Members of Congress, it might be good to remember that this was the oath you swore to when you took office. If you fail in this, the public will see you as no different from those you replaced, and you will lose your precious elections. Ten years from now, when your child asks you what you did to stop Bush's systematic destruction of the foundations of our democracy, you'll have to say, "Well, nothing, honey. We had an election to win." Actually, you may want to make sure you tell them in person, to avoid the wiretap surveillance.

And Republicans, you're like the football coach who pridefully refuses to pull a player off the field after everyone else can plainly see the need. The sooner you pull the man, the more highly respected you'll be. The longer you wait, the more you tie your party's future to the corruption and incompetence that has already been attributed to this administration.

If we look to history, we find that elections subsequent to presidential impeachment have consistently favored parties that have pursued impeachment. So whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat, it’s time to join together on impeachment. All who do will reap the spoils. Those who do not will be subject to the judgment of history.

Jodin Morey
D. Larkin Corvin
ImpeachForPeace.org

Kucinich wants to know: Impeach Bush/Cheney?

2006-12-12T03:43:00.000-08:00

 Presidential hopeful, Kucinich is asking for your guidance...

A friend of Impeach For Peace and a major Activist in portland sent us the following...

"My NW Kucinich contact tells me Dennis {Kucinich} is going to throw his hat into the ring tomorrow for the presidency. I told him to tell Dennis he'd be wiser to hold off for a month or two and on Jan. 3 hopper the same bill Cynthia McKinney did Friday and he'd have at least 1,000,000 folks behind him. The K-man said: 'OK. Get the word out to your impeachment people to tell their subscribers to write Dennis a message saying just that.'
Kucinich's email: dkucinich@aol.com
Let's go, Gang!!!"

Holiday Impeachment Cards...

2006-12-04T01:29:00.000-08:00

This holiday season, you can help your friends and family deck the halls of congress with colorful impeachment petitions! Impeach for Peace has created holiday impeachment cards that allow your friends and family to initiate the impeachment process. We created the image, and researched a company that will allow you to send jumbo sized postcards along with a personalized message using your web browser. To learn more about this method of inititiating impeachment, go to: http://ImpeachForPeace.org/HolidayImpeachNow.html

Soon, Santa will be delivering sacks and sacks of mail to Nancy Pelosi initiating impeachment via the House of Representative's own rules. This legal document is as binding as if a State or if the House itself passed the impeachment resolution (H.R. 635). What better gift to give this holiday season than the restoration of our democracy? Truly the gift that keeps on giving. Over this past year, Bush has become an even greater threat to our Constitution. Lucky for us, the rules of the US House of Representatives allow for individual citizens like you and I to initiate the impeachment process directly! This process was successfully used to impeach in the past.

Be a part of history and have a merry impeachment this season!

Cartoon: Bush Tortures another Dissident...

2006-11-27T00:29:00.000-08:00

(POST ELECTION UPDATE) Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...

2006-11-10T02:46:00.000-08:00

• If we impeach Bush, we’ll get President Cheney!
Initiating the impeachment process will lead to an investigation that will implicate lots of people in the Bush administration who are guilty of committing crimes, including Cheney.

In addition, no matter who we get to replace Bush, we’ll be showing those in power that anyone who breaks the law will be held accountable.

• Promoting impeachment will seem too “extreme.”
Demanding that crimes be investigated is NOT extreme. Some previous impeachment attempts were considered extreme because they were pursued for actions that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is what the impeachment tool is meant to be used for. Nixon's impeachment, however, was bipartisan.

• We should wait to impeach...
Wait to impeach? We've waited 3 or more years too long already. We had enough evidence to impeach years ago. Remember, an impeachment only means you have enough evidence to warrant a trial, just like an indictment. Our congress people didn't take an oath to bipartisanship. They took an oath to the Constitution. Besides which, our troops, Iraqi civilians, and our own civil liberties are all waiting for this.

• Before we impeach, we should get some legislation passed...
And with unconstitutional Presidential Signing Statements, veto power, and the power of "Commander in Chief" at his disposal, how do you think Congress is going to get ANYTHING accomplished without first impeaching Bush?

If your tire blows while you're driving, do you stop to fix it? Or do you continue driving on your rim because to stop would take too much time?

• It hurts the democracy to go through a presidential impeachment. And Bush is a lame duck anyway.
Holding government officials accountable for their actions strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it.

Sometimes reprimanding a child (president) doesn't make the family (Washington) a happy place. But you still have to do it so the child and his siblings (future presidents) learn about accountability. Impeachment is horribly UNDERUSED, which is part of why there's so much corruption at the top. Politicians must learn to fear it. People think things are better because we improved the make-up of our law-making body, Congress. But Bush is BREAKING LAWS. So, it doesn't matter how many laws Congress passes if they don't serve their OVERSIGHT duties as well by impeaching. They swore to defend the Constitution. What are laws without enforcement?

Besides, Bush can still do a lot of damage. Our troops, Iran, and our Supreme Court are all endangered so long as he remains in office. Waiting until Bush is out of office will leave us complicit in any further crimes he commits. The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that the death toll from a "tactical" nuclear weapon of the kind Bush is contemplating using in Iran would be at minimum 3 million men, women, and children. The path of death would stretch across country boundaries into India.

Perhaps worst of all, we set a terrible precedent by allowing Bush to stay in office after he's broken so many laws. Impeachment will stop future presidents from using Bush's actions as justification for even more lawbreaking and erosion of civil liberties.

• I'm a Democrat/Republican. If we support impeachment it will lower the chances of my party winning in 2008.
So, your party would rather win elections than do what's right for the country? I hope you're wrong. I also hope the public is willing to throw additional support to any party that holds our elected officials accountable for their actions.

• Impeachment will never happen. The Republicans will block it.
Well, all we need is a majority of support in the House. And 2/3rds vote in the Senate to remove Bush from office will happen once the evidence gets aired on CSPAN. The political pressure will become too great.

Today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. Republican Congress members will realize that tying their political future to Bush reduces their chances of getting elected. Remember, one way or another, Bush is gone by 2009— but members of Congress may retain their offices beyond that date. Bush's poll numbers are extremely low, and most Americans support impeachment. This is a bipartisan movement. This means that if we make the pressure unbearable for Members of Congress, they'll turn on him to keep their own seats (like they did with Nixon). It's already starting to happen. While many Members of Congress have behaved unethically in the last few years, it's important to understand that this is related to their warped view of what's in their self-interest. Let's wake them up to their true self-interest (impeaching the president), by showing them our support for impeachment.

And even if we only impeach, and the Senate fails to do their duty and remove him from office, it will only implicate the Senators who fail to do their sworn Constitutional duty.

• But Speaker of the House Pelosi said that Impeachment was "off the table."
Pelosi most likely said this to remove any appearance of conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as a result of the coming impeachment. What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she joins the impeachment movement in the future.

• But the public doesn't support impeachment.
Newsalert: Newsweek's recent poll shows 51% support for Impeachment. Not to mention that support for Bush's impeachment is more than it was before Nixon's investigation.

• You're just angry at what happened to Clinton
Impeachment is a nonpartisan issue. It's not about Clinton, Lincoln, or any other president. Some previous impeachment attempts were considered a waste of time because they were pursued for things that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is what the Impeachment tool was intended for. The argument that we can't impeach Bush because there are previous presidents who also did bad things is the same as the argument you might hear from your child that you shouldn't punish him because the neighbor's kid did the same thing and didn't get punished. We don't want a presidential rush to the lowest common denominator. We have a duty to hold THIS president to the Constitution.

• If we don't support our president, we aid the terrorists.
We support terrorism when we fail to deal with its root causes (poverty, lack of education, support of dictatorships, etc.). We also support it by enabling a president who creates breeding grounds for terrorists — like Iraq has now become, thanks to our invasion and occupation.

Middle Eastern countries are upset with the oppressive international policies of the past and current administration. We might develop more healthy relationships with these countries if we appeared to learn from our mistakes by impeaching a president who has been so instrumental in that oppression.

• Impeachment is the wrong approach. Our government is tyrannical, and needs to be violently overthrown through a popular revolution.
What makes you think that if our government fell today, the U.S. population would replace it with something better? Violent revolutions are bloody business, and there’s absolutely no guarantee that even with the best of intentions the resulting new government would be an improvement over the current one. Indeed, it could be much worse. This is because revolution only makes sense once the people understand the problem. Thanks to a complicit media, most people don't have the information they need to fully understand what’s currently happening in the U.S., so before we can create positive change, we must help them to understand the situation we're in. We don't do that by pushing them away with what appears to be extremism. We must use skillful means to reveal the tyranny of this administration (and government in general). We can do this by making reasonable demands (for instance, that suspicious activities become subject to investigation). Each time we're denied, more and more people will see the injustice (especially when we take to the streets each time!). Slowly we’ll get enough people on board to create the changes we need, whether our goal is gradual repair of the system or revolution. But either way, the path is the same: First, we try to change the system. When the system shows itself to be tyrannical and unwilling to change, the people will move closer to revolution. If instead, the system allows the demanded changes, then we’ve won a victory — and maybe the theory that the system is hopelessly tyrannical is flawed. The real point is that political change is a process, and we need to have the resolve to see it through. Demanding immediate perfection is unrealistic and counterproductive, and too easily turns into a cop-out for failing to do the hard work of creating meaningful change.

Side note:
Some Democratic Members of Congress have indicated that they're not currently pursuing Bush's impeachment. While this is upsetting, they percieve it to be in their (and the Democratic Party's) political best interest, at least until the political pressure builds. There are other reasons they're waiting as well, and one of those things is us. They (as well as Republican members) need us to legitimize their support for the process. Having millions of ImpeachForPeace.org's "Do-It-Yourself Impeachment" arrive at their door is one powerful tool toward making that happen.

Take a moment, and help convince Nancy Pelosi to Impeach..

2006-11-08T05:17:00.000-08:00

It only takes a moment to help convince Nancy Pelosi to Impeach Bush/Cheney..

Pelosi most likely said impeachment was "off the table" to remove any appearance of conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as a result of the coming impeachment.

What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she joins the impeachment movement in the future.

Sacks and sacks of mail are about to arrive in Nancy Pelosi's office initiating impeachment via the House of Representative's own rules. This legal document is as binding as if a State or if the House itself passed the impeachment resolution (H.R. 635). There's a little known and rarely used clause of the "Jefferson Manual" in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.That's where we come in. In addition to a House Resolution (635), or the State-by-State method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.

You can initiate the impeachment process and simultaneously help to convince Pelosi to follow through with the process. Do-It-Yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in. Be a part of history.

http://ImpeachForPeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...

2006-09-19T02:36:00.000-07:00

Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...
• If we impeach Bush, we’ll get President Cheney!
Initiating the impeachment process would lead to an investigation that would implicate lots of people in the Bush administration who are guilty of committing crimes, including Cheney.

In addition, no matter who we get to replace Bush, we’ll be showing those in power that anyone who breaks the law will be held accountable.

• We should wait to promote impeachment until after Democrats gain majority status after the November elections, or else we'll seem too “extreme.”
The best way to get congress members in favor of impeachment elected is to shine a light on Bush’s crimes and the Republican Party’s (and many of the Democrats') complicity in them. Demanding impeachment is one effective way of doing that. (We need a majority in congress of people supporting impeachment in order to get subpoena power. This will allow us to finally investigate the crimes that this administration has been committing, which will lead, in turn, to impeachment.)

Secondly, demanding that crimes be investigated is NOT extreme.

Waiting until November, besides reducing the chances of getting impeachment friendly politicians elected, will also leave us complicit in any further crimes Bush commits. The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that the death toll from a "tactical" nuclear weapon of the kind Bush is contemplating using in Iran would be at minimum 3 million men, women, and children. The path of death would stretch across country boundaries into India.

Also, there's no guarantee that impeachment friendly politicians will gain majority status after the November elections. So our strategy shouldn't rely upon it.

• Impeachment will never happen. The Republicans will block it.
Today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. All we need is for a few Republican Congress members to realize that tying their political future to Bush reduces their chances of getting elected. Remember, one way or another, Bush is gone by 2009— but members of Congress may retain their offices beyond that date. Bush's poll numbers are extremely low, and most Americans support impeachment. This is a bipartisan movement. This means that if we make the pressure unbearable for Members of Congress, they'll turn on him to keep their own seats (like they did with Nixon). It's already starting to happen. While many Members of Congress have behaved unethically in the last few years, it's important to understand that this is related to their warped view of what's in their self-interest. Let's wake them up to their true self-interest (impeaching the president), by showing them our support for impeachment now!

Finally, making sure you can look back and be proud of your opposition to this tyranny is priceless.

• It hurts the democracy to go through a presidential impeachment.
Holding government officials accountable for their actions strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it.

• If we don't support our president, we aid the terrorists.
We support terrorism when we fail to deal with its root causes (poverty, lack of education, support of dictatorships, etc.). We also support it by enabling a president who creates breeding grounds for terrorists — like Iraq has now become, thanks to our invasion and occupation.

Middle Eastern countries upset with the oppressive international policies of the past and current administration might think better of the U.S. if we appeared to learn from our mistakes by impeaching a president who has been so instrumental in that oppression.

• Impeachment is the wrong approach. Our government is tyrannical, and needs to be overthrown through a popular revolution.
What makes you think that if our government fell today, the American population would replace it with something better? Revolutions are bloody business, and there’s absolutely no guarantee that even with the best of intentions the resulting new government would be an improvement over the current one. Indeed, it could be much worse. For that matter, revolution only makes sense once the people understand the problem. Thanks to a complicit media, most people don't have the information they need to fully understand what’s currently happening in America, so before we can create positive change, we must help them to understand the situation we're in. We don't do that by pushing them away with what appears to be extremism. We must use skillful means to reveal the tyranny of this administration (and government in general). We can do this by making reasonable demands (for instance, that suspicious activities become subject to investigation). Each time we're denied, more and more people will see the injustice (especially when we take to the streets each time!). Slowly we’ll get enough people on board to create the changes we need, whether our goal is gradual repair of the system or revolution. But either way, the path is the same: First, we try to change the system. When the system shows itself to be tyrannical, the people will move closer to revolution. Of course, if the system changes favorably, then we’ve won a victory — and maybe the theory that the system is hopelessly tyrannical is flawed. The real point is that political change is a process, and we need to have the resolve to see it through. Demanding immediate perfection is unrealistic and counterproductive, and too easily turns into a cop-out for failing to do the hard work of creating meaningful change.

Side note:
Some Democratic Members of Congress have indicated that they're not currently pursuing Bush's impeachment. While this is upsetting, they percieve it to be in their (and the Democratic Party's) political best interest, at least until the political pressure builds. There are other reasons they're waiting as well, and one of those things is us. They (as well as Republican members) need us to legitimize their support for the process. Having millions of ImpeachForPeace.org's "Do-It-Yourself Impeachment" arrive at their door is one powerful tool toward making that happen.

DIY Impeachment

2006-06-16T04:39:00.000-07:00

Impeach Bush yourself! This is much more than just a petition.

There's a little known and rarely used clause of the in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.

That's where we come in. In addition to the State-byState method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.

You can initiate the impeachment process yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information in the blanks (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in.

http://ImpeachForPeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

More information on the precedent for submitting an impeachment
memorial, and the House Rules on this procedure, can also be found at
the above address.

If you have any doubts that Bush has committed crimes warranting
impeachment, read this page: http://ImpeachForPeace.org/evidence/

If you're concerned that impeachment might not be the best strategy
at this point, read the bottom of this page: http://ImpeachForPeace.org/