IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTION INTRODUCED TODAY

[Jim O'Bryan]

For Immediate Release:
Contact: Joe Benny (216) 228-8850

IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTION INTRODUCED IN HOUSE WITH READING BY CLERK TODAY

Kucinich, the bill’s author, will move to refer in his quest to get hearing before Committee on the Judiciary

WASHINGTON, D.C. - A single Article of Impeachment of President Bush, which alleges that Mr. Bush sent the nation to war under the false pretenses, will be brought to the floor of the House this afternoon. Its sponsor, U.S. Representative Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH), will rise to refer the bill to the Committee on the Judiciary. Kucinich has long been pressing for Impeachment hearings. He previously introduced 35 articles relating to President Bush and three articles relating to the Vice President.

Kucinich, under the rules of the House governing questions of privilege, read the Impeachment resolution before the House last week. Today the Clerk will officially read it into the record as a bill, it will be given a number and then will be subject to parliamentary motions. If Kucinich is successful, the bill will be referred to committee rather than tabled. Last week Speaker Pelosi, for the first time, indicated an interest in committee hearings on President Bush's abuse of executive power, including the issues that Kucinich raised.

"If it is tabled, I will bring another Impeachment resolution back this week," said Kucinich. "Our Constitution is being destroyed. We are losing our nation to a war based on lies. I am determined to get this bill to committee for a hearing," he said. "The President has conducted the affairs of the nation in a manner which cries out for justice and it is the Constitutional obligation of Congress to check his wanton abuses of U.S. and international law. We have troops whose lives were put on the line because the President told them Iraq was a threat to the United States and it was not. The loss of lives of our troops and of innocent Iraqi civilians is a direct result of the lies this president told to Congress. He must be held accountable."

The Article of Impeachment alleges that President Bush falsely told the nation that it had no other choice to go to war because Iraq was an imminent threat in possession of weapons of mass destruction, and that the President had repeatedly implied that Iraq had abetted al Qaeda in its devastating attack of 9/11. Kucinich, in his Article, cited documents which assert the White House knew the statements were false at the time they were made.

###



.

[Bret Callentine]

You're right, Iraq represented no threat whatsoever, I'm sure that several hundred tons of yellow cake uranium that just got moved to Canada was just for decoration.

I'm interested in knowing what information Dennis has that can prove that the president lied. Secret tapes? a diary perhaps? Does he actually have any physical evidence that spans the considerable gap between BEING WRONG and DELIBERATELY MISLEADING congress.

[Jim O'Bryan]

You're right, Iraq represented no threat whatsoever, I'm sure that several hundred tons of yellow cake uranium that just got moved to Canada was just for decoration.

I'm interested in knowing what information Dennis has that can prove that the president lied. Secret tapes? a diary perhaps? Does he actually have any physical evidence that spans the considerable gap between BEING WRONG and DELIBERATELY MISLEADING congress.

Bret

Canada?

I believe it is called congressional hearings, and the "truth" that has trickled out since then.

I truly believe that Iraq posed no threat to the USA, as they we contained, and only had the ability to hurt their own, when we would supply Sadaam with USA made weapons, and targeting information.

As for Afghanistan, another country that offered no ability to hurt the USA, was singled out because "Usama" had bases there. This would be like declaring war against Canada because of someone hiding in the north woods.

The FACTS are poppy fields no planted with record crops after being illegal and destroyed by the Taliban for almost a decade. And the pipeling to the Caspian Sea, which GWB assured us, the war had nothing to do with!

Of course to make sure the right people made the right amount of money, the pipeline will have to be destroyed and rebuilt.

.

[Bret Callentine]

yes Canada...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/

As for hearings. Once again, can you fill me in on what facts you're referring to which suggest that the President Lied instead of simply being wrong. And remember, personal opinion as to the Presidents motives really doesn't count for much in a criminal hearing, and hearsay rarely gets it done either.

I'm not suggesting that Bush is or isn't a criminal, I'm asking for some indication as to how Dennis thinks he will prove his case.

[Bryan Schwegler]

The one thing that bothers me about Kucinich is he seems to care more about "the show" than actually getting anything of substance done.

[Brad Hutchison]

...the considerable gap between BEING WRONG and DELIBERATELY MISLEADING congress.

I think this is an important issue that many people are unwilling to consider. The latter is what so many want to believe as a reason to hate the president, when the former is probably more likely. Not that having poor intelligence isn't something to fault the administration for, I just get tired of all the people that popped up in 2000 claiming Bush somehow "stole" the election from Gore in Florida, and believe everything since has been a conspiracy...

[Valerie Molinski]

I see nothing wrong with holding hearings on potential wrong doings. Why are people so offended about this? The President led us into a war that 'seems' to be based on misleading and cooked intel. These people work for him and he, as their boss, bears responsibility in this just as much as anyone else.

It needs to be investigated. Why is he above reproach? Many other people have had to answer to lesser 'mistakes' or lapses of judgement in our country's history. I don't see why this is any different.

[Ryan Salo]

So glad our tax dollars pay for such quality work.

Good old Dennis is fighting for us here at home.



"Dump Dennis"

www.lakewoodrepublicans.org

[sharon kinsella]

America is our home Ryan.

Bush is the president and he lied.

Dennis has every right to introduce the legislation and do you really want to get into the waste of tax dollars?

The Republicans talk about smaller government and add more and more layers.

They lower taxes for the rich.

And gut the middle class.

Dennis is doing the right thing. Bush hasn't.

[Bret Callentine]

Once again. If you can confidently say "BUSH LIED". Then I'm assuming that you have some sort of incriminating evidence that supports that conclusion.

If that is the case, I'd love to have the hearings. If, instead, your assertion is based only on opinion, then get over it.

And don't go with the "well they impeached Clinton for less" argument. The Clinton trial actually had tangable evidence (taped phone conversations, a blue dress, etc.).

[Bryan Schwegler]

Dennis has every right to introduce the legislation and do you really want to get into the waste of tax dollars?

The problem is that this is a complete waste of tax money. Even IF the Congress voted to go along with him (which they won't), an impeachment proceeding would take longer than the 5 months Bush has left in office, thereby making the entire process pointless.

This is just typical Dennis grand standing and him putting on a show. The man does nothing of substance, doesn't really do anything for our district, and cares more about seeing his name in print than truly accomplishing anything.

I get some people may think he's a nice guy, but that doesn't make him an effective legislator.

As for the rest of what you wrote...I 100% agree.

[Bret Callentine]

Well, I'm not sure I'm ready to throw him totally under the bus. But the problem is that Kucinich only gets national attention for crap like the Impeachment proposal, while things like this (http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/07/_the_problems_133057_potential.html) only get local coverage.

[sharon kinsella]

Bret - Prove he didn't lie.

Where are the weapons of WMD?

[Bret Callentine]

Prove he DIDN'T lie?

Are you kidding me?

I'm sorry, I must have hit my head. I thought we were innocent until proven guilty in this country. You want me to prove that he didn't do something? If that's the case, then why not ask him to prove that he's not a pedophile, or prove that he didn't personally cause New Orleans to flood. Heck, can he prove he wasn't the second shooter on the grassy knoll?

Even if that were a valid argument, the bigger problem is that you'd have just as hard a time proving his innocence as you would his guilt. That's the point. You don't go to trial to try to find evidence, you provide evidence in order to convene a trial.

Once again, I'll ask, and I'm being perfectly honest here. Is there anything out there in the way of physical, tangable, non-hearsay evidence that would even remotely suggest a convictable crime has been committed?

And as for WMD. What would you call 550 metric tons of yellow cake uranium?

[sharon kinsella]

Uranium.

It ain't goin nowhere without a bomb.

And just where is Osama Bin Laden - Maybe Dubya thinks he's in Iran now or wait, maybe Pakistan.

Oh yeah, didn't that uranium go to Canada?

Wow.