Impeach 'Em Already

By: Bruce S. Ticker

To The Honorable Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania:

President Bush should be impeached, and I am really convinced that the House of Representatives has grounds to follow through with it.

You have said it yourself. Well, not directly. I reached my conclusion partly from reading between the lines. But it was confirmed to me when I observed the exchange between you and Attorney General John Ashcroft on Thursday during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

It was you who has called Bush and Ashcroft's anti-terrorism measures for military tribunals and monitoring of lawyer/client conversations as unconstitutional because they took these actions on their own - without bothering to consult with Congress.

Ashcroft enraged a lot of people with his rigid and abrasive performance on Thursday. If we really dug into his testimony* we might find that he lied and maybe met the legal standard for perjury, which means that your House colleagues would have grounds to impeach Ashcroft himself. I'll bet this guy has pulled stunts in his legal career which should have gotten him disbarred.

What galled me most was when you homed in on the issue of Bush and Ashcroft's failure to consult with Congress on controversial measures.

Ashcroft diverted you momentarily when he unexpectedly made a goodnatured joke. He only acted respectfully on Thursday when he was cornered. With your keen legal skills, he probably figured - as did I - that you were in the process of cornering him. He might have been trying to throw you off course.

I sensed that you were becoming agitated. You voted to confirm him as Attorney General, possibly against your better judgement and due to intense pressure from Republican leaders.

After you gave Bush and Ashcroft most of what they wanted to fight terror, they acted independently behind your back on measures which you said fall under Congress's authority.

And on Thursday Ashcroft probably intentionally interrupted you as you questioned him on your primary concern.

This exchange demonstrated not only Ashcroft's arrogance and manipulation but also provided more reason to believe that the Bush administration violated the Constitution.

Two weeks ago, the Bush Syndrome published a commentary suggesting that Bush has committed impeachable offenses. Subsequent events and Ashcroft's performance Thursday leave me personally convinced that Bush deserves to be impeached.

If Bush and Ashcroft need congressional approval to establish military tribunals, as you have said, then Bush's order to create such tribunals, which are illegal, authorized the commission of serious crimes - kidnapping, illegal detention and murder if anyone is executed, to name a few.

Bush's signature would have automatically made him a co-conspirator.

And, there is precedent for impeaching a president who violates federal laws. Post-Civil War President Andrew Johnson was impeached for violating a federal law on appointments.

History shows that this law was motivated by crass politics. The laws Bush has violated have substance and it has become a pattern for Bush to violate such laws.

I am not one who would call for any president's impeachment lightly, but I strongly believe that Congress has grounds to oust him.

This president also causes a crisis of citizenship for me. I want very much to support the government in our current war, but I don't trust Bush and many of his people, particularly Ashcroft.

Their arrogance and secrecy were exemplified by Ashcroft's testimony*.

His opening paragraph was a vague statement widely interpreted as an attempt to intimidate administration critics into shutting up.

However, if Bush and himself had consulted Congress in the first place, the issue of military tribunals probably would never have become a significant public concern.

Did Ashcroft lie? That depends on how you define that word. I consider any deliberate misrepresentation of the facts as a lie.

In his opening statement, he said, "I will continue to consult with Congress so that you may fulfill your constitutional responsibilities".

What does he mean continue? When did he ever start consulting with Congress as you personally want him to do?

Ashcroft stressed that he won't tell Congress the content of his advice to Bush unless Bush tells him to do that. Who asked him?

The Attorney General was still in top condescending form near the end when Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington wondered aloud "who's watching the watchers".

Ashcroft responded with a macho-type joke perhaps aimed at putting this left-coast, commie-pinko feminazi in her place.

Cantwell shot back: "I'm not sure everyone in America is laughing at that."

"Well, let me apologize if that's offensive to you", Ashcroft replied. "I don't take it lightly. I do know that the things that I do are serious."

Suddenly he was addressing her as if she is a senator. With proper respect.

Maybe that's because Cantwell had cornered Ashcroft. Like a rat.

*It depends on how on one defines testimony.