Friday, December 21, 2007

There's hope (for impeachment) in the Judiciary Committee yet

There is interest in impeaching Cheney in the House Judiciary Committee (of which NC Rep. Mel Watt is a member) after all.  Representative Robert Wexler of Florida recently started a petition for impeachment hearings against Cheney (see www.wexlerwantshearings.com).  Within 24 hours more than 30,000 people had signed, and 121,179 after 5 days.  Now the goal is 250,000.  A recent poll reveals that 54% of Americans are for impeaching Cheney, and I think that will rise when the official voices in Congress and editorial departments begin to highlight his crimes.  If I remember right, 49% are for impeaching Bush currently, but I expect all of the top Administration officials are about equally guilty.  Unfortunately the head of the Committee, Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, formerly a leader on impeachment in the House, has now cynically fallen in line with Pelosi's line, and was again arguing against it on Democracy Now! Thursday.  Maybe he has honestly reevaluated the case and changed his mind about the strategy of impeachment, but I still find his change of heart suspicious.  Hopefully Wexler and two others in the Judiciary Committee will be more resolute and successful than Conyers.      
 
Some outlets in the dominant media are refusing to publish an op-ed by Rep. Wexler and two other members of the Committee, Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI).  This is from the campaign:   
 
"More on the Media Blackout
 
The New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, USA Today, and Boston Globe have all rejected our op ed (though the Miami Herald just put an edited version in its "Letters to the Editor" section). We have heard from the editors of some of these publications and they are telling us that they are getting overwhelmed with phone calls and letters of complaint. (Well done everybody!)
 
In short - we need to keep the pressure on if this news will spread far beyond the Netroots community."
 
Here is the original notice from Rep. Wexler's site: 
 
Wexler Calls For Cheney Impeachment Hearings

Congressman Robert Wexler, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, is calling upon Congress to immediately schedule impeachment hearings for Vice President Richard Cheney.

Wexler - "For the sake of history, and in order to be faithful to our Constitutional obligations, the Judiciary Committee must immediately convene impeachment hearings to determine whether the official actions of Vice President Cheney constitute 'High Crimes and Misdemeanors' and require that he be impeached. Each day we fail to act is a validation of the misdeeds of the Vice President and damages the credibility of the Democratic Party."

The full text of the Letter:

As a person who supports holding this Administration accountable for their deceptive actions, you may be interested to know about the recent votes in the House regarding H.Res. 333, "Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors."

I share your belief that Vice President Cheney must answer for his deceptive actions in office, particularly with regard to the preparations for the Iraq war and the revelation of the identity of covert agent Valerie Plame Wilson as part of political retribution against her husband. That is why I voted against the motion to table debate on H.Res. 333. Along with only 85 other Democrats, I opposed tabling the measure and supported beginning immediate debate and a vote on the Cheney impeachment resolution. The vote on tabling the Kucinich resolution was rejected, and the House subsequently voted to refer the matter to the Judiciary Committee.

Vice President Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration have demonstrated a consistent pattern of abusing the law and misleading Congress and the American people. We see the consequences of these actions abroad in Iraq and at home through the violations of our civil liberties. The American people are served well with a legitimate and thorough impeachment inquiry. I will urge the Judiciary Committee to schedule impeachment hearings immediately and not let this issue languish as it has over the last six months.

Only through hearings can we begin to correct the abuses of Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration; and, if it is determined in these hearings that Vice President Cheney has committed High Crimes and Misdemeanors, he should be impeached and removed from office. It is time for Congress to expose the multitude of misdeeds of the Administration, and I am hopeful that the Judiciary Committee will expeditiously begin an investigation of this matter.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions or concerns. I sincerely appreciate your input and hope that you will feel free to contact me anytime I may be of assistance to you.

With warm regards,

Congressman Robert Wexler

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Bill Clinton in Wake County Thursday

I saw in the Herald-Sun today that President Bill Clinton is going to be at private events to raise money for Hillary Clinton's presidential bid Thursday, at the Brier Creek Country Club.  The cost is $1000 dollars per person, or $2300 per person for the cozier reception.  It is not exactly comparable, but I notice that the Republicans' event Wednesday at the Hope Valley Country Club for their current two candidates against Rep. Price in next year's election is $15 dollars per person.  
 
Bush and Co., and their enablers (like Hillary Clinton, Pelosi, Reid, Dole, Burr, and very distantly, Reps. Price, Miller, and Etheridge), should be the main targets of protest now, as Rove was at Duke on the third, but should Clinton get off so easily?  He committed more acts of aggression around the world than Bush has so far, though Bush's acts are graver.  Even worse than Clinton's bombing of a vital medical plant in Sudan, most of the 13 years of sanctions against Iraq were under Clinton's watch.  I think the usual estimate is that 1.5 million Iraqis died because of those sanctions, in addition to the sanctions' effect on the health and education of the survivors.  There is also what happened in Waco, Texas.     
 
The Clinton and Bush administrations are even more alike in corruption and conspiracy around terrorist attacks in the US if The Secret Life of Bill Clinton, written by a British journalist, is true.  That book alleges, among other things, that the Clintons were involved in the drug trade in Arkansas, that Vince Foster was murdered for political reasons (if I recall that part correctly, but it was argued that he was murdered and it was covered up, including by the Kenneth Starr investigation), and that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) knew the Oklahoma City Bombing was going to occur, did not prevent it (possibly they were outfoxed), and have now covered it up.  Government complicit in 9/11 would be even worse if true, because of the magnitude and the deliberate exploitation for a predetermined agenda, but both are horrific crimes against the American people and complicit should destroy confidence in the security apparatus of the executive branch.  I am less knowledgeable about the resulting security crackdowns in the 90's, but Oklahoma City provided Clinton with his own "Patriot Act" moment.  Just as Bush and Co. face potential prosecution for war crimes, Clinton and Co. (and Tony Blair) might also at some point, in their own international court even, at least in a more just world.       

Thursday, December 06, 2007

Impeachment debate rescheduled to 1/15

Coalition for the Constitution
       243 Flemington Rd, 
Chapel Hill, NC  27517-5637
www.impeachbushcheney.net

     

NEWS AND CALENDAR ALERT:  December 3, 2007
More info: John Heuer, [ ] ; Heu93 at aol dot com; Al McSurely, [ ] ;lawyers at mcsurely dot com


Historic Fein-Tomasky Debate on Impeachment Re-Scheduled to January 15, 2008.

     The Coalition for the Constitution has re-scheduled the Historic Debate between Republican Constitutional Attorney Bruce Fein and liberal journalist Michael Tomasky until Tuesday, January 15, 2008.

       Mr. Fein worked in Pres. Reagan's Justice Department, and helped draft the articles of impeachment against Pres. Clinton. He has always been an advocate for the United States Constitution and, recently, for charging (impeaching) Pres. Bush and V. Pres. Cheney for their multiple violations of it.  Bill Moyers featured Fein on his PBS program. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07132007/profile.html.

       His opponent in the debate, liberal journalist Michael Tomasky is the Editor of Guardian America.  He recently wrote a much-quoted Washington Post essay that said impeachment is the stupidest thing Democrats could do.  

       Fein, who has been ill, and the Coalition for the Constitution agreed this morning to re-scheduling the historic debate.  W. Hodding Carter III, UNC Professor of Leadership and Public Policy will serve as debate moderator on January 15, 2008.  

         The historic debate had been set for December 11th at the Chapel Hill Town Hall.  But due to the high level of local and regional interest in the Debate, the Coalition for the Constitution has decided to find a larger auditorium and more sponsors.  The Debate is modeled after the historic Lincoln-Douglas debates 150 years ago.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Change for the better may be coming on Durham Library room fees

There are signs that the recently imposed Durham County Library meeting room fees will soon be modified or reduced.  
 
The County Commissioners asked the Library administration to develop a plan for fees in May.  Apparently this was initially done to make up for reduced income from overdue book fines, which have also been changed, without any increase in County budgeting.  The actual policy was approved by the Commissioners at the September 10th meeting, apparently unanimously.  The fees were going to be $50 dollars for non-profit use for up to 4 hours and $100 dollars for more than 4 hours, and double these fees for for-profit use.  For-profit use has actually been allowed all along, but it had to be open to the public and I think non-commercial.  Some small rooms would stay free, and now there is free space at all of the libraries save Southwest.  The new fees do not seem to be popular in the system and, after public complaints, the fees for non-profits were halved.  Initially the Library expected to make $30,000 dollars a year from the fees, but now they expect half that, and I think the figure for lost overdue books income was around $240,000 dollars (last year's figure), so the administration is not very concerned about getting extra funds from the fees.  The rationale for the fees is now room maintenance.  I still think the rooms are pretty clean, but there have been some cleaning issues and recent (and short-lived) floor replacements.  The administration doesn't actually know the statistics for room usage, but is in the process of finding out for some short period.        
 
The Durham People's Alliance (www.durhampa.org) has been lobbying against the fees and sent letters to the County Commissioners and Library Board of Trustees a few weeks ago, requesting a public forum on the fees.  As a result there was a meeting between PA representatives and "Skip" Auld and Ken Berger Monday afternoon, and the PA is planning to speak at the Board of Trustees meeting on the 11th.  Anyone can request to speak at a Board meeting, but the agenda is not posted online.  The Board has been asked to make new recommendations to the Commissioners, and the administration seems to want to reduce or eliminate the fees.  The sliding scale, based on an organization's budget, which the Library came up with earlier, is considered too much of a hassle to administer.  The old refreshments fee might be restored, instead of the fees.  It would help if organizations could solicit donations at the meetings, to pay the room fee, which is not currently allowed.  The administration seems to be sympathetic, believing that the libraries should be centers in the community and means to increase the availability of information.
 
Some other issues came up, like future plans and how decisions are made about removing worn or little used books.  Apparently the various libraries are behind in going through their collections, and there is more change in the collections than I thought, but that is because these are not academic research libraries.                  

Thursday, November 22, 2007

Two NC impeachment updates

Bruce Fein vs. Michael Tomasky: A Debate On the Question of Impeachment

When: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 - 7pm

Where: Chapel Hill Town Hall

Who: Bruce Fein versus Michael Tomasky; moderated by Hodding Carter III

Sponsored by the Coalition for the Constitution and the Grassroots Impeachment Movement. Co-Sponsorships available

++++++

We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.

—Edward R. Murrow
 
 
Rep. Price's reply on impeachment
 
Below is the reply I received to an email I sent in support of HR 799.  I don't have a copy of my message to post, but it was a short email stating some of the crimes I think Cheney and Bush are guilty of committing and my worry that they have set in motion the end of what real democracy we have left, asking what else can be done short of impeachment, and saying that how Price voted on the bill will be at the front of my mind when he is next up for re-election. 
 
Price seems to acknowledge that Cheney most likely has committed impeachable offenses, but he says impeachment would be a diversion and would fail.  I can't believe that everything that has turned up since Bush and Cheney gained power is not "an accumulation of evidence of impeachable offenses."  Impeachment proceedings should be supported, even if there aren't enough votes, in my opinion.  And since the offenses relate to Iraq, national defense, energy policy, etc., I would think impeachment proceedings would support the Democrats' push for reforms, by showing what our current situation really is. Possibly it would severely divide those who don't support Bush and Cheney, but if crimes were committed, and nothing else will resolve them, and prevent the next president from continuing them, what choice is there?  I think the idea that impeachment proceedings are intractably slow is a lie, and impeachment is necessary to reveal the Administration's crimes and prevent following administrations from repeating them, so impeachment is very necessary, despite the increasingly late hour.  If the Democratic Party as a whole won't do its duty as the opposition, what should be done to pressure them or create an alternative that will act?     
 
November 20, 2007 
 
Dear Mr. [ ]:
 
Thank you for contacting me in support of impeaching Vice President Cheney.
 
On November 6, 2007, Rep. Dennis Kucinich offered a privileged resolution on the House floor to impeach Vice President Cheney, H. Res. 799. I voted against a motion to table the resolution, which would have prevented any further activity related to it. After the tabling motion failed by a vote of 162-251, the House approved a motion to refer the resolution to the Judiciary Committee for further consideration, which I supported.
 
No one is more frustrated with Bush Administration abuses of power than I, and Vice President Cheney has played a significant role in nearly all of them. I continue to adamantly work to shine a bright light on such abuses, and I believe the Democratic Congress has begun to turn the tide on several issues. For instance, the resignation of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez was a direct result of congressional investigations into the politically-motivated firings of U.S. Attorneys.
 
While I understand the reasoning of impeachment advocates, I do not view impeachment as the right course to pursue at present. The machinations of the impeachment process take a significant amount of time, and it is uncertain if they could even be completed before a new administration is inaugurated in January 2009. In addition, impeachment proceedings should only be initiated after the accumulation of significant evidence of impeachable offenses. While I believe the Vice President likely engaged in behavior that could be considered impeachable, such evidence will only be brought to light through the investigations and oversight activities in which House and Senate committees are currently engaged.
 
Even if articles of impeachment were passed by the House - a questionable assumption - there is currently no chance that the Senate could reach the two-thirds threshold needed to convict and remove. The tradeoffs are therefore enormous. This all-consuming process would prevent nearly all other legislative initiatives from proceeding. It would consume media attention, which we are already struggling to get for our battles on Iraq, children's health coverage, and a progressive energy policy. And it would also have serious political and social consequences, needlessly creating greater national division just as large majorities of the population are forming in support of a new direction abroad and at home.
 
I will continue to fight against the abuses of the Bush Administration, and to closely monitor the progress of congressional investigations regarding the actions of Administration officials, keeping your concerns in mind. Again, thank you for contacting me, and please continue to keep in touch.


Sincerely,
DAVID PRICE
Member of Congress
PS: Please sign up for periodic updates on issues, events and town hall meetings at http://price.house.gov/contact/email_updates.shtml .
*** MY OFFICE IS USING AN ELECTRONIC MAIL RESPONSE SYSTEM THAT WILL FACILITATE EMAIL COMMUNICATION WITH CONSTITUENTS. PLEASE NOTE, HOWEVER, THAT I CANNOT GUARANTEE THE INTEGRITY OF THE TEXT OF THIS MESSAGE UNLESS IT HAS BEEN SENT TO YOU DIRECTLY FROM MY CONGRESSIONAL EMAIL ACCOUNT: nc04ima at MAIL dot HOUSE dot GOV ***
***PLEASE NOTE - THIS IS A SEND ONLY ACCOUNT. DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, PLEASE VISIT MY WEB SITE AT http://price.house.gov/contact/contact_form.shtml ***

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Update on HR 799 - call Watt!

I called Mel Watts' Washington office today. The two staffers I spoke to seemed to listen well, but staffers are like that.  I was told that the bill will probably be voted on after Thanksgiving.  Let's inundate the House Judiciary Committee with comments!  I'll have to think about whether to recommend that we should thank Price for his votes.  He opposed immediately tabling the bill in the House, but is sending it to the Judiciary Committee anything other than a way to bury it without holding the shovel?

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

There's still time for the impeachment bill

Judging by past experience, the impeachment bill is dead, but there is still hope, and there is a local Democrat (Watt) who can be pressured to support it.  This message is from the NC Progressive Democrats of America 
 
Impeachment back on the table:  The House Judiciary Committee now has the bill introduced by Rep. Kucinich.  Impeachment activists are asked to call all members of this committee and ask them to sign on to impeachment and investigate the crimes of Dick Cheney.  The bill has been re-introduced as H.R. 799.  One member of the Judiciary Committee is Representative Mel Watt from NC Congressional District 12. He is a Democrat.   His number is 202-225-1510 – please call and ask him to sign on and investigate HR 799.

Congressional Democrats again bury impeachment legislation

Last Tuesday, the Democrats in Congress (and of course the Republicans) again attempted to bury impeachment legislation.  Are we ready to say yet that most of them are as guilty as Bush, since they have not stopped the War, and Bush-Cheney's other criminal policies, but also do not support impeachment?  I might consider something short of impeachment, but they have done little and I don't hear them loudly denoucing Bush-Cheney's crimes, and the media won't clearly say they are criminal.  The original bill was H.R. 333, but the vote was on bill House Resolution 799. 
 
The summary of actions, from thomas.loc.gov:
 
ALL ACTIONS:
11/6/2007 2:35pm:
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H12783-12786, H12786-12788 ; text of measure as introduced: CR H12783-12785)
11/6/2007 2:54pm:
Mr. Hoyer moved to table the measure.
11/6/2007 4:02pm:
On motion to table the measure Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 162 - 251 (Roll no. 1037). (consideration: CR H12785-12786)
11/6/2007 4:02pm:
Mr. Hoyer moved to refer to Judiciary.
11/6/2007 4:22pm:
The previous question on the motion was agreed to by recorded vote: 218 - 194 (Roll No. 1038). (consideration: CR H12787)
11/6/2007 4:31pm:
On motion to refer Agreed to by recorded vote: 218 - 194 (Roll no. 1039).
11/6/2007:
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

TITLE(S):  (italics indicate a title for a portion of a bill)

    ***NONE***


COSPONSOR(S):

***NONE***


COMMITTEE(S):

 
To understand this, see this USA Today article, reprinted on www.commondreams.org.  I am amazed that Price and other NC Democrats were against Hoyer's motion to prevent a vote on the bill, if I am understanding the procedures and votes correctly.  Yet then Price voted to bury it in the Judiciary Committee, where chair Rep. Conyers has stopped advocating impeachment, now that the Democrats have Congress.  As it says below, the bill is not dead, but I assume it is unlikely to come out again, barring something drastic like the occupation of the Capitol steps until they do.   
 

House Tied In Knots Over Resolution To Impeach Cheney

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, is trying to impeach Vice President Cheney for what he describes as "high crimes and misdemeanors" before the invasion of Iraq. 1106 10 1

Right after the proposal was read on the House floor this afternoon, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer stepped forwarded and tried to convince lawmakers to table the bill.

"Impeachment is not on our agenda. We have some major priorities. We need to focus on those," Hoyer told Fox News.

Update at 3:39 p.m. ET: We thought that the vote to table was over — the clock said 0:00 — but lawmakers are still switching things around and Kucinich is within a few votes of getting his bill to come up for a vote.

Update at 3:43 p.m. ET: At least 149 Republicans have voted in favor of considering the impeachment resolution. Hoyer's motion, which would have blocked a vote, looks like its going to fail by at least 31 votes.

Update at 3:53 p.m. ET: The 15-minute vote began at 2:53 p.m. ET. It's been an hour, and they're still voting. The tally stands at 170-242 right now. Hoyer needed 218 votes to push the bill off the agenda. He's 72 votes short.

Update at 4:02 p.m. ET: Hoyer's motion failed 251-162. (Roll Call) The House is now voting on whether to vote on whether the resolution should be sent to the Judiciary Committee.

Update at 4:25 p.m. ET: The vote to decide to vote (yes, you read that correctly) just ended. By a 218-194 margin, the House has to vote on whether to send the resolution to the Judiciary Committee. That's happening right now.

Update at 4:30 p.m. ET: Perhaps we should pause to explain. When most Republicans unexpectedly — and on orders of GOP leadership, the AP is reporting — switched sides and voted against tabling the measure, they essentially forced Democrats to keep talking about it on the floor. Tabling the measure would have killed it.

Debate over Cheney's impeachment is in direct opposition to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's wishes. She has repeatedly said an impeachment of Cheney or President Bush is off the table. Thus, failing to table this measure is a essentially a jab in Pelosi's ribs.

"We're going to help them out, to explain themselves," Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, told the AP of the impeachment's supporters. "We're going to give them their day in court."

Update at 4:32 p.m. ET: The House just voted, 218-194, to send the resolution to the Judiciary Committee. That should end today's debate — but it does keep the resolution at least technically alive.

© 2007 USA Today

 
The text of the bill, laying out the charges against Cheney:
 
Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to... (Introduced in House)

HRES 799 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 799

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

November 6, 2007

Mr. KUCINICH submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


RESOLUTION

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors.

    Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

    Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Article I

    In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

      (1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction:

        (A) `We know they have biological and chemical weapons.' March 17, 2002, Press Conference by Vice President Dick Cheney and His Highness Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Crown Prince of Bahrain at Shaikh Hamad Palace.

        (B) `. . . and we know they are pursuing nuclear weapons.' March 19, 2002, Press Briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem.

        (C) `And he is actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time . . .' March 24, 2002, CNN Late Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (D) `We know he's got chemicals and biological and we know he's working on nuclear.' May 19, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (E) `But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons . . . Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.' August 26, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at VFW 103rd National Convention.

        (F) `Based on intelligence that's becoming available, some of it has been made public, more of it hopefully will be, that he has indeed stepped up his capacity to produce and deliver biological weapons, that he has reconstituted his nuclear program to develop a nuclear weapon, that there are efforts under way inside Iraq to significantly expand his capability.' September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (G) `He is, in fact, actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.' September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (H) `And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.' March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

      (2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.

        (A) Vice President Cheney and his Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby, made multiple trips to the CIA in 2002 to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives accounts.

        (B) Vice President Cheney sought out unverified and ultimately inaccurate raw intelligence to prove his preconceived beliefs. This strategy of cherry picking was employed to influence the interpretation of the intelligence.

      (3) The Vice President's actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002, and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002, vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President's actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.

        (A) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate stated `Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program INR is unwilling to speculate that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result INR is unable to predict that Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.'.

        (B) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate also stated that `Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR's assessment, highly dubious.'.

        (C) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate references a Department of Energy opinion by stating that `INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose.'.

    The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,800 United States service members; the loss of more than 1 million innocent Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

    In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article II

    In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

      (1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda:

        (A) `His regime has had high-level contacts with Al Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to Al Qaeda terrorists.' December 2, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at the Air National Guard Senior Leadership Conference.

        (B) `His regime aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against us.' January 30, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to 30th Political Action Conference in Arlington, Virginia.

        (C) `We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the Al Qaeda organization.' March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (D) `We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the '90s, that it involved training, for example, on biological weapons and chemical weapons . . .' September 14, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (E) `Al Qaeda had a base of operation there up in Northeastern Iraq where they ran a large poisons factory for attacks against Europeans and U.S. forces.' October 3, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney at Bush-Cheney '04 Fundraiser in Iowa.

        (F) `He also had an established relationship with Al Qaeda providing training to Al Qaeda members in areas of poisons, gases, and conventional bombs.' October 10, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to the Heritage Foundation.

        (G) `Al Qaeda and the Iraqi intelligence services have worked together on a number of occasions.' January 9, 2004, Rocky Mountain News interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (H) `I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi Government.' January 22, 2004, NPR: Morning Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (I) `First of all, on the question of--of whether or not there was any kind of relationship, there clearly was a relationship. It's been testified to; the evidence is overwhelming.' June 17, 2004, CNBC: Capital Report interview with Vice President Cheney.

      (2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including:

        (A) A classified Presidential Daily Briefing ten days after the September 11, 2001, attacks indicating that the United States intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that there was `scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda'.

        (B) Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, which challenged the credibility of information gleaned from captured al Qaeda leader al-Libi. The DIA report also cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy: `Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.'.

        (C) A January 2003 British intelligence classified report on Iraq that concluded that `there are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network'.

    The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,800 United States service members; the loss of more than 1 million innocent Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

    In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

    Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article III

    In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:

      (1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:

        (A) `For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.' March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.

        (B) `But we've also made it clear that all options are on the table.' January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (C) `When we--as the President did, for example, recently--deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.' January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.

        (D) `But I've also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.' February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.

      (2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:

        (A) `I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.' Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

        (B) Iran indicated its `full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council'. IAEA Board Report, February 22, 2007.

        (C) `. . . so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.' Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.

      (3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:

        (A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.

        (B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.

        (C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.

        (D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian Government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the State Department has branded it a terrorist organization.

        (E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.

      (4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S. Constitution's adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force.

        (A) Article VI of the United States Constitution states, `This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.' Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States.

        (B) The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, `All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.' The threat of force is illegal.

        (C) Article 51 lays out the only exception, `Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.' Iran has not attacked the United States; therefore any threat against Iran by the United States is illegal.

    The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.

    In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

    Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
      And this article from the Chicago Tribune provides some insight into why the Democratic leadership doesn't want to enforce US laws that Bush and Cheney are violating: 

        Cheney Impeachment Ready For A Vote: To Table It

        by Matthew Hay Brown

        It now looks as if Rep. Dennis Kucinich's effort to impeace Vice President Dick Cheney will finally come to a vote today - but not the vote for which supporters have been hoping.

        With Democrats averse to opening an intramural debate on an issue that divides their base, party leaders are expected to nip the measure in the bud this afternoon. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters this morning that he would move to table the measure when Kucinich introduces it.

        "[House Speaker Nancy Pelosi] and I have both said impeachment is not on our agenda," Hoyer told reporters. "That does not make a judgment on that issue."

        Hoyer's motion appears likely to pass - an outcome that would further alienate an antiwar left already frustrated with a lack of progress by congressional Democrats on changing U.S. policy on Iraq.

        "We are in a serious Constitutional crisis," Joseph A. Palermo, a professor of history at California State University, Sacramento, wrote this morning on the Huffington Post. "Democrats were elected to Congress to put the brakes on the Bush-Cheney juggernaut. … [Kucinich's bill] is a long overdue measure coming from a Democrat who has the guts to stand up for the United States Constitution."

        Kucinich, who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination, has gathered 21 co-sponsors for the articles of impeachment that he first introduced in April. Seeing war with Iran on the horizon, the Ohio congressman now plans to reintroduce the measure this afternoon as a privileged resolution.

        Kucinich alleges that Cheney misled Congress and the American public into the war in Iraq, and is trying now to mislead lawmakers and voters into a war with Iran.

        "The Vice President is cherry-picking intelligence and selectively using facts in a manner that does not portray the complete picture," Kucinich said today in a statement. "The best option to prevent an unnecessary war with Iran is to impeach the Vice President, the lead cheerleader of the war."

        Hoyer did not address the substance of the measure.

        "This administration has approximately 12 months, 14 months to go," the Maryland Democrat said. "We have very important issues that we are focusing on: Change of policy in Iraq. Children's health care. Energy independence. Educational access. Investing in health care. Securing our borders and our ports. We have some major priorities. We believe that we need to pursue those policies, focusing on those policies."

        House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, whose panel has jurisdiction over impeachment proceedings, has described the impeachment effort as a potential disruption.

        "If the speaker were to let this thing out of the box, considering the number of legislative issues we have pending," the Michigan Democrat told Fox News, "it could create a split that could affect our productivity for the rest of the Congress."

        © 2007 The Chicago Tribune

        Of course this is a judgement on the issue, or will be taken that way (which the Republicans want, but I am not bothered by, because the Democratic Party got itself into the mess of betraying its base), and, while the Democrats have made some progress since last year's election, I don't see very much progress on Iraq, etc., and so we need impeachment.  I await Price's explanation in response to an email I sent last week. 

      Monday, November 12, 2007

      Loose Change - the Final Cut screening Tuesday

      The third, final, and "substantially different" version of Loose
      Change, a documentary on why the official story of 9/11 is fatally
      flawed and what may have happened in reality, will be shown at Duke
      Tuesday evening, the date having been moved from tonight.

      When: Tuesday, November 13, 2007
      Time: 8:00pm - 11:00pm
      Location: Duke Coffee House & online at LooseChange911.com
      Street: Duke's East Campus, Crowell Building, behind Wilson and next to Epworth
      City/Town: Durham, NC

      Sunday, November 04, 2007

      Impeachment up for vote this week!

      Below is a summary of Ohio Congressman (and Democratic presidential candidate) Dennis Kucinich's bill in the House of Representatives to begin an impeachment trial of Cheney.  I have heard that Tuesday the House will either take the next step, or kill the bill, like the earlier proposals.  Contact your representative and show your support for this bill if you agree that Cheney (and Bush) are criminals and cannot be allowed to continue to subvert the rule of law and the Constitution, not to mention possibly start a war with Iran before they leave office, and leave US soldiers to die for imperialist geopolitics and corporate greed in Iraq and elsewhere.  The Progressive Democrats of America have a set of flyers about this bill, and there should be lots of updates at  www.afterdowningstreet.org.  
       
      For those in the 4th Congressional District of NC, you can contact Rep. David Price online at price.house.gov and by phone and mail at:
       

      Washington, D.C.
      U.S. House of Representatives
      2162 Rayburn Building
      Washington, DC 20515
      Phone: 202.225.1784
      Fax: 202.225.2014

      Chapel Hill
      88 Vilcom Center
      Suite 140
      Chapel Hill, NC 27514
      Phone: 919.967.7924
      Fax: 919.967.8324

       
      Durham
      411 W. Chapel Hill Street
      NC Mutual Building, 6th Floor
      Durham, NC 27701
      Phone: 919.688.3004
      Fax: 919.688.0940
       
      Raleigh
      5400 Trinity Road
      Suite 205
      Raleigh, NC 27607
      Phone: 919.859.5999
      Fax: 919.859.5998
       
      In the last primary, I voted for pro-impeachment candidate Kent Kanoy instead of Price.  At the moment I can't recall if I voted for someone other than Price in the election.  Price is probably the most liberal congressman in North Carolina, for example authoring a bill to bring contractors under control in Iraq, but then he does anti-progressive things like defend Israel's aggression against Lebanon and not even support censuring Bush for his crimes, if I recall his vote correctly.  I think I will say his vote on this bill is going to be very influential when I decide who to vote for the next time his seat is open.  A few years ago I told John Edwards that he was a warmonger I could not and did not vote for, and I have doubts that he has changed enough that I could vote for him if he is the Democratic candidate for president in '08.     
       
      H.RES.333
      Title: Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
      Sponsor: Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] (introduced 4/24/2007)      Cosponsors (21)
      Latest Major Action: 5/4/2007 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.

      Jump to: Summary, Major Actions, All Actions, Titles, Cosponsors, Committees, Related Bill Details, Amendments

      SUMMARY AS OF:
      4/24/2007--Introduced.

      Impeaches Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

      Sets forth articles of impeachment stating that Vice President Cheney: (1) has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, to justify the use of the U.S. Armed Forces against Iraq in a manner damaging to U.S. national security interests; and (2) has openly threatened aggression against Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and has done so with the U.S. proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining U.S. national security.


      MAJOR ACTIONS:

        ***NONE***


      ALL ACTIONS:
      4/24/2007:
      Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
      5/4/2007:
      Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.

      TITLE(S):  (italics indicate a title for a portion of a bill)

        ***NONE***


      COSPONSORS(21), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]:     (Sort: by date)

      Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 8/1/2007 Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1] - 7/24/2007
      Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-11] - 6/6/2007 Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 5/1/2007
      Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 8/4/2007 Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 6/28/2007
      Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 7/12/2007 Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 7/12/2007
      Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 8/4/2007 Rep Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [GA-4] - 6/28/2007
      Rep Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. [MI-13] - 9/7/2007 Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 6/7/2007
      Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 7/10/2007 Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 7/10/2007
      Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 8/1/2007 Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 5/1/2007
      Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 9/27/2007 Rep Waters, Maxine [CA-35] - 6/12/2007
      Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] - 10/16/2007 Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 6/7/2007
      Rep Wynn, Albert Russell [MD-4] - 5/10/2007

      COMMITTEE(S):
      RELATED BILL DETAILS:

        ***NONE***

      AMENDMENT(S):

      ***NONE***

      Sunday, September 30, 2007

      October 10th: What happened to government by the people?

      The next Triangle Socialist Forum discussion, on electoral reform issues, will be Wednesday, October 10th at 7pm at the Chapel Hill Public Library (100 Library Dr.).  Why does the political system favor business interests and what can be done to give the public more control and choice? I'm hoping that someone from the Triangle Greens can participate to talk about how the system is rigged against third parties, especially in this state.  Possibly Democracy NC, a non-partisan election reform advocacy organization, will take up our invitation, and I also let the Bill of Rights Defense Committees know about the forum.  As with the discussion of class in America last month, this is a huge topic and we can only scratch the surface, so we will probably be revisiting this topic again soon.     

      Thursday, September 20, 2007

      Another Library fee update

      Apparently the room fees have been changed again.  According to an article on the front of the Herald-Sun Metro section Wednesday, the fees are now $25 dollars for non-profit use of larger meeting rooms (but $50 for the Main Library's Auditorium), and double that for for-profit use. I think the rooms covered are the same as what was in the original press release I posted, and there will be free rooms at the Main, East, North, Parkwood, and Stanford L Warren libraries (but not at Southwest).  Refreshments are prohibited in the free rooms now.  As I said before, I think the County Commissioners need to explain why this is being done and the aim should be to make services as cheap or free as possible for the public.  It is an improvement for some relatively large rooms to remain free for use, and the reduced fee is also better.  I am posting this on both of my blogs because it is relevant for people in Durham and it affects the impeachment movement in Durham, which meets at a library.  
       
      On a different note, I blogged about the new State amphibian a while back (on Durham Spark), and the NC Herpetological Society now has an online poll soliciting opinions on the State frog and salamander, at www.ncherps.org. 

      Tuesday, September 18, 2007

      Durham Library fee update

      I have received more information about the Durham Library
      room fees, which were implemented September 4th.  The 
      Durham People's Alliance contacted the County
      Commissioners and the Library Board of Trustees asking
      about the policy and why they think fees are necessary.  
      The PA might do more after its next
      coordinating committee meeting later this month.  The
      Library's advisory Board seems to be in favor of free use, but
      the County Commissioners, or some of them, seem to
      feel that the fees are needed for expenses associated
      with the rooms, and the Commissioners originated this
      idea.  There might be further changes, and there
      was a working meeting on the 4th.  
      Some rooms are still free.  I still think this
      is a bad idea and cannot be justified by the charges
      to use spaces in the Durham Public Schools, but it is an
      improvement to leave smaller spaces free (at least for
      now). A press release was sent out August 7th, but
      irresponsibly ignored by the media.  The part below is on
       the room fee:

             # # #


             News Release


             Date:  Aug. 7, 2007

             FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

             CONTACT:  Jana A. Alexander

             560-0151 or jalexander at durhamcountync dot gov

             Durham County Library Policies Change Sept. 4

             . . . Meeting Rooms
      During the process to create the library's
      2007-2008 budget, the Durham Board of County
      Commissioners directed the library to implement fees
      for meeting rooms.  In the past, community
      organizations could use meeting rooms free of charge
      if they were not serving refreshments.  The library
      charged a nominal fee of $25 for meeting room use if
      the organization served refreshments; the fee was for
      facilities maintenance.

      Durham County Library will continue providing some
      free meeting rooms.  However, effective Sept. 4, 2007,
      the library will charge nonprofit organizations a flat
      rate of $50 for booking one of the library system's
      large meeting rooms for up to four hours.  The fee for
      commercial enterprises and for-profit organizations
      will be $100 for meetings that last four hours or
      less.  There will not be a separate fee for
      refreshments.

      The meeting spaces that will require a fee include
      the Main Library auditorium (capacity 150) and the
      meeting rooms at North and East regional libraries
      (capacity 100), Parkwood Branch Library (capacity 40),
      Southwest Branch Library (capacity 50) and Stanford L.
      Warren Branch (capacity 75).

      The spaces that will remain available to the community
      free of charge include Main Library's third-floor
      conference room (capacity 40); and the study/tutoring
      rooms at East and North regional libraries (capacity
      8), Parkwood Branch Library (capacity 12); and
      Stanford L. Warren Branch Library (three rooms, with
      capacities of 2, 2 and 6).

      "Throughout its history, Durham County Library
      facilities have been popular meeting places for a
      number of community organizations," said [Skip] Auld.  "The
      new fee will help us to better maintain our
      facilities."


      Late breaking information:  The City Council seems to
      be considering changes to its position (stated in a 2003 resolution) of ignoring
      immigration status except for those charged with serious crimes,
      but the consensus is said to be to modify it, not repeal it. 
      This might have come up at the Council meeting earlier in the evening.

      Tuesday, August 14, 2007

      Support impeachment Monday in Chapel Hill

      Monday, Aug. 20th at 2:45; Chelsea Theater

      Timberlyne Shopping Center; Chapel Hill;

      Near the corner of Weaver Dairy Rd and M. L. K. Boulevard. 

      Members of GRIM* & guests will meet to prep for an upcoming celebration. Everyone is encouraged to attend and bring friends. 

      We plan to celebrate the leadership initiative by Our Representative David Price to respond to the White House's stonewalling against every effort of Congress to get accountability. Because the administration has blocked every other avenue, it has become absolutely necessary to

      Impeach Cheney & Bush.

      At 3:00 we'll start a short walk across Weaver Dairy Rd. to Vilcom Center Drive for a brief 'Pep Rally' @ 3:15. 

      Several members of GRIM, local elected officials, and human rights activists will meet with Representative Price from 3:30 to 4:00. 

      After the meeting, we'll all walk back to the shopping center where we will be granted access to the Chelsea Theater to begin the celebration.  

      PLEASE WEAR AS MUCH ORANGE

      AS YOU CAN (symbol of impeachment)  
       

      *GRIM—Grass Roots Impeachment Movement— www.impeachbushcheney.net

       
      ++++++
      We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.
       
      —Edward R. Murrow

      Sunday, August 05, 2007

      Upcoming events in August and September

      Here are some upcoming meetings on social justice and impeachment events:

       

      The next Durham Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC) meeting will probably be September 8th at 3pm, at a library if free space can be found.   At the August meeting people brought up Price's vote on the bill that would seem to legalize Bush's illegal domestic wiretapping, anti-torture organizing, impeachment efforts, easily tampered with American voting machines and those who support them (at least Durham has machines with paper ballots), the effort to get NC, along with other states, to award their electoral votes to the presidential candidate who gets the most votes nationally, the Durham library fee, etc.   There is lots going on and this was an unusually well-attended meeting, hopefully replicated in September. 

       

      The next Durham Impeach Bush-Cheney meetup (online at impeachbush.meetup.com/349/ ) will be at the Parkwood Library on Thursday, August 16th at 7pm.  There is going to be a viewing of Bill Moyers' recent program on impeachment and a work session to type petitions into Excel on Sunday, the 12th, at 2pm.   

       

      GRIM (impeachbushcheney.net) is meeting with Rep. Price at I think 2pm on Monday August 20 th in Chapel Hill, possibly with a meeting at Cup A Joe beforehand.  We are trying to collect 5000 signatures for a new petition and it is going quickly (one person alone got 200 signatures in 200 minutes holding a sign at a civic event in downtown Raleigh recently), but we need more people to circulate the petition.   I was told 20 people attending a few events would be enough to reach the goal.  We have almost 1000 signatures now, and it is already at 1000 if the earlier petitions, such as www.petitiononline.com/dsmnc/petition.html and its paper version, are included.    

       

      NC Stop Torture Now is having several events soon.  Saturday, August 11th from 1-3pm there will be mobile freeway blogging protests at overpasses in Raleigh.  Signs and banners will be placed at overpasses and entrances/exits.   An anti-torture and anti-war rally or rallies are being organized for the weekend of October 27th near Aero Contractor's hangar at the Johnston County Airport.  There might be an earlier event in Raleigh as well.   The next STN monthly meeting will be August 19th, 2-4pm at the usual Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Raleigh location. 

       

      The Duke Human Rights Center and several other groups are hosting a half-day conference on extraordinary rendition and Guantánamo at John Hope Franklin Center room 240 (see map.duk.edu for directions) on Wednesday, September 26th, 12 to 5:30pm.  Stephen Grey, the author of a book on the rendition flights, Ghost Plane , Maher Arar, a Canadian who was sent to Syria by the US, where he was tortured, and Ariel Dorfman, author of the foreword to Poems from Guantánamo:  The Detainees Speak, will be at the conference (Arar will telecommute, because the Bush Administration still bars him from entering the country, without explanation).   Everything will also be streamed live on the Internet and at Duke's Bryan Center, and an audience at the University of Ottawa, in Canada, will also take part.

       

      The Triangle Socialist Forum will discuss rights on the job and fair wages September 1st at 2:30pm in the usual place at the Chapel Hill Public Library.   If there are readings, they will be posted soon, at Durham Spark, but Marx's Value, Price, and Profit, which we looked at last year, is a good work to review, summarizing the theory that monetary value comes from the cost of labor, which is the lowest cost of maintaining a worker and his family.   The UN International Labor Organization's standards are another document to look at, to see how many rights the US violates (which is one basis for Hear Our Public Employees' case against the State, for denying public employees the right to collectively bargain).  

       

      I think a national anti-war demonstration is being organized in Washington, DC for September 29th.    

      Sunday, July 29, 2007

      Update on the library meeting room fee

      I have heard some more details about the changes in the Durham libraries, and a response by some citizen groups is in the works. 
       
      A librarian gave me an unconfirmed rumor that there will be a three day grace period to return books and fines for an overdue book or video will be capped at $5 dollars. Someone else in the know told me that libraries around the country are doing this, because people apparently accumulate fines, and then never use the library again!
       
      There are various explanations for the fee.  A librarian told me it was to replace lost revenue.  A member of the Library's board of trustees told me that they did not like this decision, but it came straight from the County Commissioners, and is relatively low and seen as half of the for-profit fee.  Reportedly Ellen Reckhow proposed it two years ago and it was approved during budget discussions at the Commissioners' meetings in May and June this year.  The board member told me the fee is for room upkeep.  The rooms aren't that dirty or in need of upgrades I think.  Another person with Library connections told me this is not related to the changes in fines, but is purely the County Commissioners trying to raise general revenue for the government.  That person expects this policy will fail, because for-profit users won't use the libraries.
       
      The changes are supposed to start September 4th.  It looks like the smaller room at Parkwood and even smaller rooms at the North and East branches will continue to be free.  The board member said there were some inaccuracies in my earlier account,  I think this corrects them (though I doubt the fee is really only for room upkeep), but if anyone with information thinks this is inaccurate, please comment!
       
      I noticed yesterday that (I think) 62 luxuriant marijuana plants were found and destroyed in Durham.  I wonder how much those drug surveillance flights cost and what levels of government pay for them.  The anti-drug war looks worse for society than the affects of many or all of the major illegal drugs, and money is being spent on this counterproductive policy and wars while services, such as free library services, are being cut or made more costly to the public.  My point is, there are plenty of ways to reduce government spending without cutting services that are beneficial or vital to Americans, especially those who aren't wealthy.        

      Sunday, July 22, 2007

      Impeachment protest Monday and Library update

      This is an announcement abourt the protest in Chapel Hill at noon Monday.  At first I thought this had to do with the July 23rd national day of action on the Downing Street Memos in 2005, which is about the time when I got involved in impeachment campaigning.  The media is being invited, so let's make it a big event and make them pay attention to the mass support for impeaching Bush-Cheney! 
       
      > > > MONDAY /JULY 23RD AT TWELVE O'CLOCK
      > > >
      > > > AT FRANKLIN STREET POST OFFICE
      > > >
      > > > IN CHAPEL HILL
      > > >
      > > > 300 ORANGE BALLOONS
      > > >
      > > > WILL BE GIVEN AWAY
      > > >
      > > > COME AND BRING YOUR SUPPORT FOR IMPEACHMENT
      > > >
      > > > AND BE SUPPORTED BY THOSE
      > > >
      > > > AROUND YOU
      > > >
      > > > IF YOU CAN, WEAR ORANGE ON MONDAY
      > > >
      > > > JULY 23, A COLOR THAT HAS COME TO STAND FOR
      > > >
      > > > NONVIOLENT REVOLUTION
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > *
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > MONDAY JULY 23RD CINDY SHEEHAN WILL LEAD A MARCH
      > FROM ARLINGTON NATIONAL
      > > > CEMETERY (AT 10AM) TO CAPITOL HILL, TO THE
      > OFFICE OF CONGRESSMAN JOHN
      > > > CONYERS TO ASK HIM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH
      > IMPEACHMENT OF THE PRESIDENT, GEORGE
      > > > BUSH AND VICE-PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > This event has been accomplished by private
      > funds of average people and
      > > > businesses tired of the goings on of the
      > Government. There will be no
      > > > speeches, brochures or requests for funds; just
      > people to people. Please
      > > > come. Thank you.
       
      > > > CEMETERY (AT 10AM) TO CAPITOL HILL, TO THE
      > OFFICE OF CONGRESSMAN JOHN
      > > > CONYERS TO ASK HIM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH
      > IMPEACHMENT OF THE PRESIDENT, GEORGE
      > > > BUSH AND VICE-PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > This event has been accomplished by private
      > funds of average people and
      > > > businesses tired of the goings on of the
      > Government. There will be no
      > > > speeches, brochures or requests for funds; just
      > people to people. Please
      > > > come. Thank you.
       
      I wouldn't link this to Ukraine's so-called "revolution" a few years ago, which was really just a fight between two different wings of capital, not between different classes, like the revolutions in England, America (I would guess), France, or Russia.  Orange is a logical color for impeachment because peaches are an orange color (im-peach).  Thus Andy Silver's orange to impeach campaign, which has either spread across the country or been independently duplicated all over.   
       
      The Durham Library Situation
       
      I was told by a librarian that one or both of Parkwood's meeting rooms will cost starting in September, and this is a systemwide policy.  The fee will be $50 dollars for anything up to 4 hours and $100 dollars over that.  The rooms will also be opened up to for-profit activities, though those users will pay double the cost,
       
      Apparently this is part of a longstanding wish by the County Commissioners for changes in the Library system.  Overdue book fines will be reduced, for example, by restoring the four-day grace period (which I think is a helpful idea), and the Commissioners introduced the fee to make up for the lost revenue.  There is at least some discontent among the librarians. 
       
      As I said yesterday, I think this policy discourages citizens from organizing groups and events by depriving those without funds of a very user-friendly and publicly funded meeting space.  Taxes are supposed to support the libraries and surely they could have saved some money by making cuts elsewhere if they couldn't increase the Library's appropriation in the budget.  I'm glad for-profit users will have to pay more, thus potentially discouraging them from competing with non-profits for the spaces, but at the same time it seems a bit arbitrary and unfair to make them pay double the price.  Possibly the small meeting room at Parkwood will stay free, but I predict it will then be hard to book, because that Library is already sometimes very busy.  I belong to three groups that meet about monthly in the libraries, two of them at Parkwood, and as I said, I would have to pay for one of those groups.   
       
      There is a complaint list, at least at Parkwood, and concerned people can also call, email, or write to the County Commissioners to complain (contact info is on the County Government website and in the League of Women Voters publications at the libraries).  The Library had several public meetings earlier in the summer, but as far as I know they did not advertise that this fee was being eyed and I don't know if it was discussed at those events.   

      Friday, July 20, 2007

      Keep the Durham Co. libraries free

      I heard from the Durham BORDC's organizer that using either the auditorium or the upstairs conference room at the Main Library now costs $50 dollars.  I also heard that the Parkwood Branch Library will probably charge for the large meeting room (according to one librarian) or possibly both starting in September.  It looks like this is a system wide change, but I haven't confirmed that yet. 
       
      I think this is a bad idea that conflicts with the traditional concept of a public library that also serves as a community center.  I reserve a library meeting room in Durham at least 12 times a year, and it is too costly to pay a fee of $600 dollars a year.  This impacts everyone, but especially citizen groups without financial status, the poor, students, and homeless people.  Sure there are cheaper or free spaces, but these are mostly private locations with more drawbacks.  Church rooms are often very busy, may have a fee, and political meetings might be prohibited.  Homes might be too small, lack parking, and are private spaces that people might not want to use for public meetings open to everyone,  Southpoint Mall and coffee shops provide meeting spaces, but they are also crowded or busy with through traffic, small, and are more limited than the libraries have been,  If this change is to save money, I think it would be more in keeping with the mission of libraries if they saved money instead by not allowing refreshments (the serving of which already has a fee), cutting the lawn less often, etc.  
       
      I will provide an update about this when I have more details, but I was told that the Library is taking complaints, so we should send them in (contact information is available at www.durhamcountylibrary.org). 
       
      Another longstanding issue, possibly having to do with money, is the way the Library decides which books in its collection to sell. 

      Thursday, July 19, 2007

      Cindy Sheehan in Carrboro today

      Cindy Sheehan will be at Weaver Street Market in
      Carrboro today (7/19) at noon for an event organized
      by the Grass Roots Impeachment Movement.

      In the evening (I think at 7pm) the Durham Bush-Cheney
      Impeachment Meetup will be meeting for July at the
      Parkwood Branch Library in Durham.



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
      Need a vacation? Get great deals
      to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
      http://travel.yahoo.com/

      Sunday, July 15, 2007

      Creeping US fascism? discussion July 21st

      Creeped out by recent US history?  How far towards
      fascism has the USA gone under Bush-Cheney?  Join the
      discussion, Saturday, August 21st at 2:30 in the
      conference room of the Chapel Hill Public Library. For
      more information, including suggested online readings
      by Michael Ruppert and R Palme Dutt, see durhamspark.blogspot.com.
      An activist from a local Bill of Rights Defense Committee (www.bordc.org)
      will attend, and I might have a video to show also, 

      This is the July meeting of the Triangle Socialist
      Forum, a non-partisan group for discussing issues
      related to socialist theory and practice and broader
      progressive topics.
       

      Saturday, June 23, 2007

      Durham BORDC meeting Saturday at Stanford Warren

      The Durham Bill of Rights Defense Committee's June meeting is today at 3pm at the Stanford Warren Library, on Fayetteville St.  I think the main agenda items will be the ongoing campaign against the NC connection to rendition of prisoners for torture and tabling at July 4th events. 
       
      Also, this is the second day of the Friends of the Durham Library's summer booksale.  They have a range of books, most going for $1 dollar hardcover and 50 cents paperback.  I found most of my Marxist books in the philosophy section and sometimes in the history section, along with books on the histories of the "socialist bloc" countries.
       
      I think the renovations downtown are also being officially unveiled Saturday, with the festivities starting at 10am.  It would be nice if the editors of UNC's Daily Tar Heel and others who are hard on Durham's image would take notice.  Though we could use some new trees downtown to replace the ones cut for street work.  
       
      If the Grass Roots Impeachment Movement meeting Sunday at 5:30 is open to the public, I assume it is announced at www.impeachbushcheney.net.     

      Thursday, June 21, 2007

      Protecting and expanding democracy, July 2nd meeting

      The event below, marking July 4th by looking at what has been left undone in the way of democracy and equality since the first US revolution, will involve some discussion of the Bush Administration's crimes, impeachment, and the problems with Congressional leadership, so I am posting it here.  The Durham impeachment meetup met earlier Wednesday, mainly discussing whether to demand that Attorney General Gonzalez be impeached.  GRIM is meeting this Sunday in Chapel Hill.  The Durham Bill of Rights Defense Committee, which is about civil liberties mainly, is meeting Saturday, I think at 3pm at the Southwest Library. 
       
      Mark the July 4th national liberation of the USA by
      joining a discussion Monday, July 2nd at 7pm at
      Internationalist Books in Chapel Hill (405 W. Franklin
      St.) about the need for revolutionary political and
      economic change to make the country more democratic,
      fair, prosperous, and sustainable.  How can we remove
      Bush and Cheney for their proven crimes?  Whose
      interests control politics?  Is monopoly capitalism
      serving most Americans well?  How can we live up to
      our democratic and progressive ideals?

      Now is the time to discuss this, as Bush leads an
      an anti-democratic reaction, and at a time when we
      celebrate America's revolutionary birthday.

      Saturday, April 21, 2007

      Articles of impeachment to be filed against Cheney by Rep. Kucinich!

      This was posted on the Information Clearing House website (www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17554.htm) and comes the same week as the Vermont Senate overwhelmingly endorsed a resolution for impeaching Bush and Cheney and Gonzales was grilled by Congress members and appears to be on the way out. 
       
      Articles of Impeachment To Be Filed On Cheney

      By Mary Ann Akers

      04/18/07 "
      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."

      Sources tell the Sleuth that in light of the mass killings at Virginia Tech Monday, Kucinich's impeachment plans have been put on hold. There will be no action this week, they say.

      Kucinich's office had no comment on the Congressman's "Dear Colleague" letter -- which apparently was drafted over the weekend, before the school massacre -- or on what the focus of articles of impeachment against Cheney would be.

      But Kucinich shouldn't hold his breath on getting anywhere with his impeachment plan. "We'll see a Kucinich Administration before we'll see a Cheney impeachment," quipped one Democratic aide.

      Here is the text of his letter, a copy of which was forwarded to the Sleuth:

      April 17, 2007

      Dear Colleague:

      This week I intend to introduce Articles of Impeachment with respect to the conduct of Vice President Cheney. Please have your staff contact my office . . . if you would like to receive a confidential copy of the document prior to its introduction in the House.

      Sincerely,

      /s/

      Dennis J. Kucinich

      Member of Congress