No Vice President is Above the Law

For the first time since the Bush administration took office, three members of the House Judiciary Committee, Robert Wexler (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), are calling for hearings on the impeachment of Vice President Richard Cheney.

Their position, while courageous, is not surprising. What is surprising is that it took this long for members of Congress to invoke impeachment, and that even now, they do so against enormous political resistance and cynical indifference from the media.

No serious student of the Constitution would question that sufficient grounds exist to impeach both President Bush and Vice President Cheney. The Constitution provides that an Executive who puts himself above the law and abuses the powers of his office may be impeached, a point confirmed in the impeachment proceedings against President Nixon, for abuses such as illegal wiretapping.

There is little serious debate about whether Bush administration actions -- wiretapping without court approval (violating the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act), authorizing and facilitating mistreatment of detainees (violating U.S. treaties and criminal laws), starting the Iraq war on a basis of lies, exaggerations and misstatements (an abuse of power) -- meet the Constitutional standard.

So why hasn't a majority of Congress supported it? Twenty members co-sponsored Rep. Dennis Kucinich's resolution calling for the impeachment of Cheney, but bucked their leadership to do so. Democratic leaders took impeachment "off the table," apparently fearing it could hurt their chances in 2008.

Does the leadership defend the administration, contend that its actions are unimpeachable, or argue they don't rise to the level of abuse for which Nixon was impeached? Remarkably, no. They publicly say there is no time, and that impeachment proceedings would distract the Congress from other work and divide the country.

These arguments are laughable compared to the imperative to uphold the constitution. And even on their own terms, they are specious. Let's take them one at a time:

Insufficient Time

In the case of Nixon, the House officially instructed the Judiciary Committee to act in early February, 1974; the Committee finished voting on Articles of Impeachment on July 29, less than six months later. No presidential impeachment proceeding had taken place for almost 100 years, so the Committee had to start from scratch, analyzing the constitution and developing procedures for the impeachment inquiry. Now the relevant legal spade work is done and a road map for proper impeachment proceedings exists, Congress could probably conduct them even faster than in 1974.

Distracting Congress

During Watergate, the House Judiciary Committee conducted the impeachment inquiry. It didn't deter the rest of the House and the entire Senate from getting their work done, even with a war on. Even the Judiciary Committee also worked on other matters during impeachment, just as the Senate did during its trial of President Clinton.

Dividing the Country

Nixon's impeachment united the American people. The process was bi-partisan, demonstrating this wasn't just a Democratic ploy to undo an election. The fairness of the process, the seriousness of purpose, the substantial evidence all gave the public a strong sense that justice had been done. This reinvigorated the shared value that the rule of law and preservation of democracy are more important than any president or party.

Currently, this value is expressing itself in grass roots impeachment movements across America. The Vermont Senate, several state Democratic parties and many municipal governments have adopted resolutions supporting impeachment -- more state legislatures would have acted except for pressure not to from Democrats in Washington. Multiple polls show a majority of Americans supporting the impeachment of Cheney (a November 13 American Research Group poll says 70 percent of Americans believe Vice President Cheney abused his office), and slightly less then a majority supporting the impeachment of Bush.

The Democratic leadership tactic of stonewalling this widespread public sentiment is itself divisive, leading at least half the country to frustration, disaffection and shaken faith in our democracy. Only a sober, serious airing of evidence in hearings would heal the split.

When Nixon's impeachment process began, he had recently been re-elected with one of the largest landslides in history. No one made the calculation about whether impeachment was a political winner for Congress. Public opinion simply forced Congress's hand after Nixon fired Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. After the House Judiciary conducted impartial hearings and voted on impeachment, Congress's approval soared. Republicans were swamped in the November 1974 elections.

Whether or not they bring electoral rewards in 2008, impeachment proceedings are the right thing to do. Regardless of outcome, they will help to curb the serious abuses of this administration, and send a strong message to future administration: the Constitution means what it says - no president or vice president is above the law.

Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman served on the House Judiciary Committee during Nixon's impeachment. She co-authored the 1973 special prosecutor statute, and co-wrote (with Cynthia L. Cooper) the 2006 book, The Impeachment of George W. Bush.

Comments

[spamonwry]

The current majority Democratic Party, and the formerly majority Republicans, have used impeachment so little that it's laughable. It is not only the president or vice-president who are subject to impeachment: cabinet members, federal judiciary, etc., are all subject to impeachment. When you have corrupt judges on the Supreme Court (Roberts, Scalia, Alito) who lied to the Senate during their confirmation hearings, and who corruptly (Scalia) caused a losing presidential candidate to be declared the winner (GWB), it's glaringly obvious that impeachment should be a much, much more-used option than our Congress uses. "We The People" elect these politicos to determine fitness for office of all of the Judiciary branch, and much of the Executive Branch. The Senate confirmation process is, and has been for a long time, a simple rubber-stamp process. Even an obvious criminal like Gonzalez, or an idiot like Thomas, can get confirmed without problem.

Taking "impeachment off the table" by Speaker Pelosi was simply a cave-in; of course, since all of the Democratic politicians have been eavesdropped by the White House, they had no choice.

The Democrats seem to be afraid to wield power; the Republicans have no restraint & take their power to the Nth degree (as the saying goes, it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission).

The Repubs will steal 2008, too. The structure is firmly in place & will be set in motion by August 2008 to "fix" every critical state, including California (ballot initiative to award Electoral College vote by district results rather than winner-take-all - possible loss of 25 Democratic Electoral college votes).

[situationcritical]

We democrats really need to consider voting people like Pelosi, Reid and Feinstein out of office on the next go 'round.

They've done a miserable job to date.

What's worse, they performed miserably in incremental, tiny, little baby steps which kept us under the delusion that it was the fault of the republican senate majority or this reason or that reason.

But the truth is, regardless of the repub senate majority, these dems have no spine, take no courageous or bold strokes to restore the constitution.

I mean, come on...can you believe that Feinstein last month siding with the Bush Admin.?

Repubs stoop to new lows every day to get what they want, but Pelosi and Reid et. al, refuse to fight fire with fire. They can't even be bothered to fight fire with water.

Yeah, let's focus on ousting more repubs from office, but there are quite a few democrats who need to be replaced by democrats who are passionate about our freedom (that's freedom, singular, as opposed to freedoms, as in nucular) and our constitution.

[hopeless277]

This one is. He's practically his own country. Get used to it. I have a feeling that come fall 2008, the elections are going to have to be 'postponed'. Cheney ain't goin' nowhere.

[planetfotheApes]

The problem is not Dick Cheney, but the entire system. We've been changed from a constitutional republic to a communist/fascist state.

Whenever power is allowed to centralized a piece of shit like Cheney ascends from the sewer to seize power.

This is what is so amazing about today's mindless, childlike liberals. The Founding Fathers warned us and 20th century history shows us over and over that centralized government is the greatest threat we face.

200 million civilians have been killed by their government, outside of war, in the 20th century. Knowing all this, the mindless, childlike liberal actually fights to place a Red China, USSR like system here.

There is little difference between communism, socialism and fascism. All are far left. Bush is one of the most leftest president we have ever had.

If you want to know what a right wing candidate is, look at Ron Paul. He will kill the military industrial complex and bring America peace. He will fight the war on terror by not terrorizing people of the Middle East, rather than installing a dictatorship in America to "protect" us.

As a minority I must ask the mindless, childlike liberal to stop helping me. Your socialist policies have turned my community for poor to a war zone. Everything the mindless childlike liberals touch, turns to shit.

Minorities need freedom and the expectation of self reliance, not the racist, "you can't make it on your own" mindless, liberal babble.

Centralized power is the problem. That centralization was installed by the mindless liberals not Dick Cheney.

[hark]

It ought to be obvious by now that no one is ever going to do anything about any of the crimes committed by the Cheney/Bush gang.

[drkazmd65]

Exactly,

Dennis Kucinich, and those other 19 Congressmen/women that signed onto his bill early on need to be aplauded - and in the case of Congressman Kucinich Promoted!

The simple FACT that Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, and the rest of the rabble that allege to be the Democratic House leadership haven't fallen in line with the move to Impeach Cheney illustrates that they are part of the problem - not the solution.

They all need to go home in January '09 (if not sooner) and try to actually make a living NOT being in Government.

[davedave]

very very bad behavior must be discouraged or it will be allowed to spread.

bullies and spoiled children that have bad behaviors rewarded are encouraged and others see they are successful. they emulate...

the carrot of bipartisanship is ineffective, the stick of impeachment must be applied.

this is consequence NOT punishment!

d

[Macready]

Thank you so much for posting. I have emailed copies to all both my Congressmen and Senators. They desperately need to be kicked into action on this.

I am totally disgusted by Congress . . . reid and pelosi are the most disgusting excuses for leaders that I can imagine.

America is doomed unless impeachment happens but my guess is that we have for the most part a bunch of complicit and irresponsible jackasses who wouldn't know the Constitution from a Marvel comic.

And as for the MSM . . . what a joke.

[Jennifer]

They must impeach, to save our democracy from corporatism (fascism). Remember 1930s Germany!

[Sundialsvc4]

Let's look at the Constitution... the "supreme law of the land"... what does it say?

(1) "Any civil officer" ...

(2) "SHALL be impeached ..."

This is not politics: this is a criminal proceeding; a Grand Jury and a Tribunal.

Does a Grand Jury have the legal right to delay or to avoid investigation, or the handing down of an indictment? Legally, though I'm not a lawyer, "no."

What would happen if they did? Just what's happened now: by refusing to indict, the Grand Jury could shield anyone it pleased from any possibility of indictment... therefore prosecution. Such a Grand Jury (hence, such a Congress) would therefore be AIDING AND ABETTING said crimes.

What faces us today as a nation, I believe, is the world's largest organized crime. All three branches are heavily involved, and they're cross-ruffing one another. Stealing hundreds of billions from all of us; creating a huge, festering septic infection that is devastating the country.

Will .. the .. country .. enforce .. its .. "supreme" .. law? Or is it really "just a -x- piece of paper" after all?

[TommyMcCarthy]

I've been an admirer of Liz Holtzman's since I was just a kid in NY. Glad to see her posting here.
Ms. Pelosi and St.-Harry-The -Mild wasted the opportunity presentsed to them last Nov. in favor of what can only be called a "stall" strategy.

i.e. do absolutely NOTHING until the '08 election. Unfortunately, here on the eve of the primaries....... JUST in terms of strategy... i think in may now in fact be too late for impeachment.

Not that I can't admire the efforts of the democratic congressional leadership as a excersise in pure politics.
It takes some skill to do absolutely NOTHING...Zip, Zero, Nada, in the current political climate and still appear to have a pulse................................tm

[realitytrumpsbull]

Impeachment is Serious Business. Basically,
when someone's impeached, be it the dog catcher
or King George IV, you're basically calling them
a lying crapsack, but in nicer language.

IG BushCo has been fly-by-night from the get-go.
They took what was a promising stab at a
debt-free United States and rammed it so far
and so fast into debt that we may never get out
and the interest on that debt now rivals the
'defense' budget. I say defense that way because
I think it's horsecrap the way our military's
being used to thug down on other countries
whose only real crime was having oil deposits
that Cheney was after. I think that Cheney,
moreso than Bush, should be handed his hat
because, quite frankly, the man's a conflict
of interest on two legs. How so? Halliburton,
that's how so. Halliburton OIL services.
If I read it correctly, he did not stop
recieving monetary compensation from Halliburton
until 2006.

I think these guys are dirty, I think Congress
knows they're dirty, I think the whole business
with the middle east is dirty, dirty filthy
with hundreds of billions in oil money, and
as long as we've got government by oil company
then we've got perpetual dependency ON that
oil.

This is the 21st century, a time when we can
either quite literally have a rocket ride
back to the stone age, or we can become
Enlightened and part company with the Old Ways,
kind of an 'up or down' moment in global
history, here, and frankly I think that
attempting to process foreign countries
into forced business partners is Not The Right
Answer, and it's time for a house cleaning,
and hopefully, both House and Senate are
'doing the jobs that americans elected them to
do', taking copious notes and preparing to
do business on the People's behalf, on this
one. Yes, oil profits are nice, but not
having a diesel-powered police state is even
NICER. Little plastic hitler hats and private
corporate armies...what kind of country do
YOU want?
http://www.impeachbush.org

[WASanford]

While I hate to nit pick, I believe that Nixon resigned before the house could vote to impeach him. Otherwise, I totally agree with your post.
Every congressperson, senator, president, and other constitutional officers take an oath to "serve and protect the constitution." If they fail to live up to that oath, we could well find ourselves living under a dictatorship.
I raise hell with my representatives and senators. I've heard all of the excuses Elizabeth Holtzman listed above, but they haven't stoped me. Go to Waxler's "Waxler wants impeachment.org" (I think) and sign his petition. A couple hundered thousands of us do that, we just might be able to pull it off.

[Malarcus]

I'm not sure when, exactly, you think Congress will have time for impeachment hearings? We've got the holiday season in full gear and the accompanying lobbyist-paid-for trips to Vail, and then we have the second round- yes, that's "second round"- of Congressional hearings investigating steroid use in Major League Baseball. After that, it's a couple other piles of bullshit, acquiescence and cowardice. After that, it's the election. There is simply no time.

[whimsicalpig]

While I prefer democrats to republicans, just imagine what a mess Pelosi and Reid could make of an impeachment

What if they blundered and caved and Bush/Cheny were acquited?

Might it not be better to let history unravel the facts and judge their actions without the possible asterisk of an acquital?