It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

former U.S. Attorney General: Impeach Bush & Co.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2003 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Articles of Impeachment

of

President George W. Bush

Vice President Richard B. Cheney

Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld

and

Attorney General John David Ashcroft


The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors. --Article II, Section 4 of The Constitution of the United States of America

Acts which require the impeachment of President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld; and Attorney General John David Ashcroft include:

1) Ordering and directing a proclaimed "pre-emptive", or "first strike" war of aggression against Afghanistan causing thousands of deaths indiscriminately, a major proportion non combatants, leaving millions homeless and hungry and installing a government of their choice in Kabul.

2) Authorizing daily intrusions into the airspace of Iraq by U.S. military aircraft in violation of the sovereignty of Iraq and aerial attacks on facilities and persons, on the soil of Iraq, killing hundreds of people indiscriminately, initially falsely claiming self defense though over a period of eleven years not a single U.S. aircraft has been struck or damaged by gunfire from Iraq, but later admitting the targeting of defense installations in Iraq, as war preparations they ordered progressed.

3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilians facilities and locations where civilian casualties are unavoidable.

4) Threatening Iraq with proclaimed "pre-emptive", or "first strike" attack and a war of aggression by overwhelming force and military superiority including specific threats to use nuclear weapons while engaged in a massive military build-up in nations and waters surrounding Iraq.

5) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently proclaiming an intention to change its government by force while preparing to assault Iraq in a war of aggression.

6) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions of governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

7) Authorizing, directing and condoning bribery and coercion of governments and individuals to cause them to act in violation of their duty and the law, including to maintain and tighten enforcement of economic sanctions against Iraq which continue to increase the death rate of infants, children and elderly persons; to attack and kill designated groups, or persons; to permit use of land, facilities, territorial waters, or air space for U.S. attacks on Iraq; to vote, abstain in a vote, or publicly proclaim support for a U.S. or U.N. attack on Iraq; to defect from Iraq, or to falsely accuse it of weapons concealment to break down opposition to a U.S. war of aggression; and to reject ratification of the Treaty creating an International Criminal Court, or reject its jurisdiction over the United States.

8) Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda about the conduct of foreign governments and individuals and acts by U.S. government personnel; manipulating the media and foreign governments with false information; concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment concerning acts, intentions and possession, or efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction in order to falsely create a climate of fear and destroy opposition to U.S. wars of aggression and first strike attacks by the U.S.

9) Violations and subversions of the Constitution of the United States of America in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in "pre emptive" wars, first strike attacks and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and other nations by assuming powers of an imperial executive who is not accountable to law and usurping powers of the Congress, the Judiciary and the people of the United States to prevent interferences with the unlawful executive exercise of military power and economic coercion against the international community.

10) Violations and subversions of the Charter of the United Nations and international law in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in wars and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and others and usurping powers of the United Nations and the peoples of its nations by bribery, coercion and other corrupt acts and by rejecting, violations and frustrating compliance with treaties in order to destroy any means by which international law and institutions can prevent, affect, or adjudicate the exercise of U.S. military and economic power against the international community.

Ramsey Clark
Former Attorney General of the United States of America
January 15, 2003

Excerpts from Ramsey Clark's address to the half a million demonstrators at the January 18th National March on Washington to Stop the War on Iraq:



The U.S. Constitution provides the means for preventing George W. Bush from engaging in a war of aggression against Iraq, and from advancing a first strike potentially nuclear preemptive war. It's called impeachment.

High Crimes and Misdemeanors
Impeachment is the direct constitutional means for removing a President, Vice President or other civil officers of the United States who has acted or threatened acts that are serious offenses against the Constitution, its system of government, or the rule of law, or that are conventional crimes of such a serious nature that they would injure the Presidency if there was no removal.

A Constitutional Imperative
Impeachment appears six times in the U.S. Constitution. The Founders weren't concerned with anything more than with impeachment because they had lived under King George III and had in 1776 accused the king of all the things that George W. Bush wants to do: Usurpation of the power of the people; Being above the law; Criminal abuse of authority.

Power Remains in the Hands of the People
Impeachment is the means by which We The People of the United States and our elected representatives in Congress can prevent further crimes by the President and the human catastrophe they threaten and force accountability for crimes committed.

Save the Constitution, the U.N., and Countless Human Lives
Congressional proceedings for impeachment can bring about open, fearless consideration of the most dangerous acts and threats ever committed by an American President. If courageously pursued, they can save our Constitution, the United Nations, the rule of law, the lives of countless people and leave open the possibility of peace on earth.

The Time for Action is Now
Each of us must take a stand on impeachment now, or bear the burden of having failed to speak in this hour of maximum peril.

votetoimpeach.org...




posted on Feb, 13 2003 @ 03:11 PM
link   
All the work I put into a reply and I wiped out with one wrong push of button.

Oh well.
Most of thi is rubbish.Afaghanistan was after they attacked us.When have we ever targeted civillians?
Our Planes regulate a no-fly zone.An agreement signed at the end of the Gulf War.And our planes are fired at all the time.Yet another breech by Saddam.
And as far as overwhelming force is concerned,what are we supposed to do.Go in there with two soldiers and a hand grenaide.Would that make everybody happy?
The rest is BS with little or no proof.

[Edited on 02/7/03 by nyeff]



posted on Feb, 13 2003 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Sorry about your post; I've started typing things in an email, then copying over, just for that very reason. But on what you did write, you're wrong on:

1) Afganistan didn't attack us

2) Carpet bombing has a way of being indescriminate, you know? Gotta love them Daisy Cutters!

3) There is not now or ever was an UN sactioned No fly zone.

4) the breech is on the US/UK side; a sovreign nation has a right to defend it's airspace.

"BS & no proof" !?!?! You need look no further than my posts on every subject listed where you'll find links ( not that NewsMax - Drudge - Faux News crap either, the real stuff!
) to chronical the crimes.



posted on Feb, 13 2003 @ 03:54 PM
link   


Afganistan didn't attack us

They harbored the terrorists that did,and did nothing to stop them.The carptet bombing was primarily over tora bora.The caves where the terrorist lived.Not in cities.



3) There is not now or ever was an UN sactioned No fly zone.

Here you go.....
Operation Northern Watch
Operation Northern Watch (ONW) is a Combined Task Force (CTF) charged with enforcing the no-fly zone north of the 36th parallel in Iraq and monitoring Iraqi compliance with UN Security Council resolutions 678, 687, and 688. The northern no-fly zone is not an aggression against Iraq or a violation of its sovereignty, it is a necessary and legitimate measure to limit Iraq's aggressive air activities.

The ONW coalition partners -- the United States, United Kingdom, and Turkey -- provide approximately 45 aircraft and more than 1,400 personnel to support Operation Northern Watch. The joint U.S. force includes soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines from the Navy, Army, Air Force and Marine Corps, all operating as part of the United States European Command.

ONW is headquartered at Incirlik Air Base, Turkey (link is .mil restricted). The co-commanders of the operation are Brigadier General Robin E. Scott USAF and Brigadier General Levent Turkmen AGAR TAF.



posted on Feb, 13 2003 @ 04:39 PM
link   
There is no UN provision, including Resolution 688, calling for the continuous bombing of Iraq. that we have set up ONW is in no way a testament to it's legality.

But for the sake of thread drift, here's the topic as I posted on the NO FLY issue.

xmb.abovetopsecret.com...

[Edited on 13-2-2003 by Bout Time]



posted on Feb, 13 2003 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Just for the record BT>.Dasiy Cutters are not or considered "carpet bombing." rather a special munition that has a specific purpose.....as a matter of fact it was first designed to clear foilage in Vietnam to create LZ..Another point is that its not delivered by a bomber,,,rather a cargo transport..at least it was when i was on active duty..

Just a FYI

Boomslang



posted on Feb, 13 2003 @ 08:52 PM
link   
BT, no-fly zone: That's the problem with the UN. They pass a resolution stating the kurds should be protected and they leave it at that. No backbone. The US/UK (and didn't the French patrol for a while also) patrol these zone, putting their lives at risk to protect the Kurds and Shiias yet the UN can't make that 'law' - yet it's indeed providing for what their resolution called for. And if our airmen need to take out a sam site to protect themselves, I say go for it. The UN isn't going to help them.



posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Actually, Afghanistan did *not* attack us...Not as a *soverign nation*. However, Bush is initiating war with them *as* a soverign nation.

Those terroists may be sanctioned & supported by the Afghan government, but they are *not* (diplomatically-in-an-official-manner) representing the soveriegn nation of Afghanistan...Bush *does* (supposedly) represent the US *as a soverign nation* as he declares his war against the principles of his nation's Constitution.

Besides, didn't the US government send our nation's intelligence people over there to *train troops in terrorist tactics" some years ago? Maybe Bush thinks he's trying to clean up the mistakes made by past administrations, but he's also making *more* of a mess with the *methods* he's using to do it.


[Edited on 14-2-2003 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Back on the impeachment thing ( go to the NO FLY thread linked above to beef over that issue Bob!!
)

You can reach your state's Rep from this page via an online form:

www.votetoimpeach.org...



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Will the world see bush impeached for some reasons I really doubt it.
Daddys connections will buy him his and his cronies their freedom while the every day solider will take the brunt of Bushs crimes, well I can only hope like the rest of the free world.




Excerpts from:

We, the people demand the impeachment of George W Bush

"Bush can run, but he cannot hide from the Constitution" "The election does not pardon the President for past, or future "high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Impeachment is Imperative

A Campaign of Deceit and False Propaganda

More than 100,000 Dead Based on a Lie

The U.S. has employed torture, including torture to death, rape and sexual assault and humiliation, as approved and ordered policy from Afghanistan and Guantanamo to Iraq, inflicted on thousands of prisoners, many, if not most, without any evidence of wrongful conduct. An admitted 37 human beings have been murdered while being held in captivity by the United States under these conditions.

Nearly 500,000 have voted to impeach. Help us increase that number into millions the Congress cannot ignore.

Every American should choose whether to vote for impeachment entirely on the facts, straight up, or down, without political, or partisan fear, or favor. We owe this to the country, its future, the Constitution and our common heritage.

Impeachment is Required Now.

Impeachment now is the only way we, the American people, can promise ourselves and the world that we will not tolerate crimes against peace and humanity by our government. Knowing what we know, to wait longer is to condone what has been done and risk more.

Sincerely, Ramsey Clark Link



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I sent my impeachment related concerns to my congressman and the reply I got back from the mail server had a freaking trojan attached to it. As far as Afghanistan harboring terrorist Osama Bin Laden, if you will recall they offered to extridite him before we started bombing them, if we could provide one shred of evidence that he was involved in 9-11. AS a matter of fact we turned down numerous offers of his extridition from several countries. To beat it all, two months before the 9-11 attack on the WTC, the CIA was meeting with Bin Laden in an american hospital in Dubai, and the man that wired the 9-11 ring leader $100,000 was meeting with intelligence committee senators the morning of 9-11.
Back to the subject, nice post Bout Time, ther ei s alawyer that is offering to help any representative with legal expenses and services if they floor articles of impeachment against Bush. I personally would like to see Bush/Cheney dragged off to the Hague and let them see what international accountibility is all about.



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 05:31 PM
link   
*shakes head sadly*

You poor dejected people, Bush will not be impeached. If we had wanted to impeach him, we wouldn't have elected him again.

As long as the left continues to prove (with topics like this one) how far out of touch with reality they really are, they will continue to lose more and more power. Those of you who continue to spread hate and division everywhere (again, with topics like this one) just hasten the day when the left has no power instead of having just a little.

Reelecting Bush wasn't so much about Bush as it was about rejecting what John Kerry represented and the philosophy behind it.



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Take a look at ALL of the information about 911, not just the mainstream media info that leads us all to believe it was Bin Laden who orchestrated 911. Bush and his merry group of corporate raider/thugs have profited immensely since 911, as has Israeli thug Ariel Sharon. The REAL evidence points in the direction of American/Israeli complcity, period!

If the excuse for invading Afghanistan was because they harbored "terrorists", this falls apart when one examines the REAL evidence of 911, not just the government propaganda. The attacks on both Afghanistan and Iraq had everything to do with natural resources(oil mainly) and little to do with anything else. If Congress will not impeach a president for lying about wars that take thousands of innocent lives as well as our own brave troops and drains our already depleted treasury of billions more, then we don't have a Congress! Instead, we have a bunch of political spineless cowards and whores!



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Here we go..another 4 years of misery and lets impeach and nothing will be done-
Lots of talk and no action. No body would dare! The lord is not impeacheable, dont you know....



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Umm, personally I think that the title of this post "former U.S. Attorney General: Impeach Bush & Co" is very misleading and implying that Ashcroft is calling for the impeachment. Bad Boy.


MR. MOD, PLEASE CHANGE THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD TO A MORE APPROPRIATE TITLE. Thank you.

[edit on 11-11-2004 by TrueAmerican]



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 05:49 PM
link   
For those out there that think Bush"s "victory" in the election was a popular mandate for him, think again! Despite a multitude of reports of voter intimidation, suppression, machine malfunction and just plain illegal actions against voters, Kerry still had a larger popular vote than Bush. I seem to think that Bush's followers would exonerate him if he commited a crime on national television! Truly concerned and truly patriotic Americans do not seek to use revelations of impropriety as a partisan tool as the Republicans have to such a great extent since Bush's "election" in 2000.

Unfortunately, anyone who cries foul nowadays is branded as a malcontented liberal and sadly enough this distracts from the content of the issues that are being addressed. Any candidate, Democratic, Republican or what-have-you, who uses voter fraud and intimidation in an election, should be disqualified in this nation, a nation that is supposedly a democracy and actually trying to export that democracy violently to Middle East nations(or so they say!).

Republicans will get a tremendous amount of support and credit from EVERY American if and when they stop protecting candidates who have commited crimes against the Consitution and start acting once again like the great party they used to be, playing by the rules of democracy and not the rules of fascism and intimidation!



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 06:24 PM
link   
I wonder how many votes Bush would've had to win by for you depressed people to admit that he won. What if he had won by 10 million more votes? 20 million?

How about some of you putting a number on this? How many votes would it have taken to convince you?



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 06:38 PM
link   
But why haven't they been filed?? If the populace could do this wouldn't these have to filed and where would they be filed?



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
I wonder how many votes Bush would've had to win by for you depressed people to admit that he won. What if he had won by 10 million more votes? 20 million?

How about some of you putting a number on this? How many votes would it have taken to convince you?


real votes or virtual machine generated votes? i personally only trust the paper ballot and human counters to be fair, accurate and secure.



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bout Time
Ramsey Clark
Former Attorney General of the United States of America
January 15, 2003

Dude, you would be better off posting stuff by Jeff Spicoli. At least Spicoli has some credibility left -- and more brain cells than Clark, based on their behavior.

I must hope that you don't really know who Ramsey Clark is. If you had followed his antics since he lost that AG gig, I find it hard to believe you would have quoted him here.

Ramsey Clark is, among other questionable things, basically a stooge for the Worker's World Party, which is legendary for using lies and treachery to spread their dubious and discredited messages.
:shk:

I mean dude, George Clinton (still keepin' it surreal for the gloryhallastoopid and the digitally deranged) is more politically relevant than Ramsey Clark!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join