some counters fill, hate, and attempt. Others wickedly learn

Nader: Iraq an Unconstitutional, Illegal War

Based on Five Falsehoods:
CONGRESS SHOULD BEGIN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY OF BUSH AND CHENEY

"All public policy should revolve around the principle that individuals
are responsible for what they say and do." -- George W. Bush, 1994.

Washington, DC:
Building on his call for the impeachment of President
Bush and Vice President Cheney, Independent Presidential candidate Ralph
Nader today is calling on Members of the House of Representatives to
begin an impeachment inquiry to investigate two distinct impeachable
offenses.

An Impeachment Inquiry is the first step toward considering Articles of
Impeachment. During an Impeachment Inquiry the House would investigate
whether there are potential impeachable offenses.

Impeachment Inquiry and the Process of Impeachment

While the Constitution is clear in granting the impeachment power to the
House, it leaves the development of mechanisms for exercising the power
to the House. As noted by the Association of the Bar of the City of New
York in "The Law of Presidential Impeachment By the Committee on Federal
Legislation" (see: http://www.abcny.org/presimpt.htm):

"A variety of methods have been employed to institute impeachment
proceedings: Charges may be made orally on the floor by a Member of the
House; a Member may submit a written statement of charges; one or more
Members of the House may offer a resolution and place it in the
legislative hopper; a presidential message to the House may initiate
proceedings. The House has also received charges from a state
legislature, from a territory, and from a grand jury. Finally, there may
be a report of a committee of the House which may submit facts or
charges that will lead to impeachment. Under the rules governing the
order of business in the House a direct proposition to impeach is a
matter of highest privilege and supersedes other business. Similar
privileged treatment is given to propositions relating to a pending
impeachment."

The purpose of the Impeachment Inquiry is to have a Committee develop a
report for the House which then can be considered for the purpose of
determining whether to proceed with impeachment proceedings. The House
determines whether to impeach based on a majority vote. It is important
to remember that impeachment does not mean conviction - that is left to
the Senate. Impeachment is the equivalent of an indictment, making
formal charges, which the Senate then considers. Conviction requires
two-thirds of the Members present in the Senate to vote for conviction.

Two Potential Articles of Impeachment that Should be Part of an Impeachment Inquiry

The Impeachment Inquiry should focus on two areas involving President
Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The unconstitutional war in Iraq.

"The Inquiry should examine whether President Bush and Vice President
Cheney have gone beyond the bounds of the Constitution, defied the rule
of law, and if so, whether impeachment is the appropriate constitutional
punishment," said Nader. The United States Congress never voted for the
Iraq war. Congress voted for a resolution in October 2002 which
unlawfully transferred to the President the decision-making power of
whether to launch a first-strike invasion of Iraq. The United States
Constitution's War Powers Clause (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11) vests
the power of deciding whether to send the nation into war solely in the
United States Congress. This can only be changed by a constitutional
amendment.

"Our founders had seen what could occur when the power to declare war
was vested in one person, a King or a Queen, so they took clear steps to
ensure no one person could declare war for the United States. As James
Madison wrote: "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be
found, than in the clause which confides the question of war and peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department," noted Nader.

Five Falsehoods that Led to the Iraq Quagmire:

Making matters worse in this situation, the illegal first-strike
invasion and occupation of Iraq was justified by five falsehoods. Nader
calls for a second area for Impeachment Inquiry to examine: the "five
falsehoods that led to war." In 1994 George W. Bush said: "All public
policy should revolve around the principle that individuals are
responsible for what they say and do." In 2000, he ran as the
"responsibility " candidate. Manipulation or deliberate misuse of
national security intelligence data, if proven, would be "a high crime"
under the Constitution's impeachment clause. Article II, Section 4 of
the Constitution provides: "The President, Vice President and all civil
Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on
Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high
Crimes and Misdemeanors."

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

The weapons have still not been found. Nader emphasized, "Until the 1991
Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was our government's anti-communist ally in the
Middle East. We also used him to keep Iran at bay. In so doing, in the
1980s under Reagan and the first Bush, corporations were licensed by the
Department of Commerce to export the materials for chemical and
biological weapons that President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick
Cheney later accused him of having." Those weapons were destroyed after
the Gulf War. President Bush's favorite chief weapons inspector, David
Kay, after returning from Iraq and leading a large team of inspectors
and spending nearly half a billion dollars told the president :We were
wrong."

See: David Kay testimony before Senate Armed Services Committee,
January 28, 2004.

IRAQ TIES TO AL QAEDA:

The White House made this claim even though the CIA and FBI repeatedly
told the Administration that there was no tie between Saddam Hussein and
Al Qaeda. They were mortal enemies - one secular, the other
fundamentalist.

SADDAM HUSSEIN WAS A THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES:

In fact, Saddam was a tottering dictator, with an antiquated, fractured
army of low morale and with Kurdish enemies in Northern Iraq and Shiite
adversaries in the South of Iraq. He did not even control the air space
over most of Iraq.

SADDAM HUSSEIN WAS A THREAT TO HIS NEIGHBORS:

In fact, Iraq was surrounded by countries with far superior military
forces. Turkey, Iran and Israel were all capable of obliterating any
aggressive move by the Iraqi dictator.

THE LIBERATION OF THE IRAQI PEOPLE:

There are brutal dictators throughout the world, many supported over the
years by Washington, whose people need "liberation " from their leaders.
This is not a persuasive argument since for Iraq, it's about oil. In
fact, the occupation of Iraq by the United States is a magnet for
increasing violence, anarchy and insurrection.

Nader urges the Congress to investigate the illegal nature of the war,
and how the five falsehoods became part of the Bush Administration's
drum beat for war, in a formal Inquiry of Impeachment.

--

For further information, contact:

Kevin Zeese
1-202-265-4000

Matt Ahearn
[email protected]
1-201-314-9747

--
of Clinton's Cuba policy in 1998. Bernstein
was also quoted as saying she believes Cuba is the paradigm of democracy.

IFCO does not limit its activity to pro-Castro factions, though. Its
management maintains relationships with extremist Islamist groups as well.
Walker travels frequently to Iraq, usually alongside Ramsey Clark. IFCO is a
member of ANSWER Steering Committee.) Bernstein is a member of the American
Muslim Council's campaign against the use of secret evidence. Clement met
with Palestinians during a WILPF "solidarity" conference in May 2002. IFCO
is also a fiscal sponsor of the National Coalition to Protect Political
Freedom (NCPPF). The co-founder of NCPPF was the recently indicted terrorist
financier Sami Al-Arian.

However, NION's links with Muslim terrorists are not just indirect, through
IFCO. NION invited both Sami Al-Arian and Lynne Stewart to address their
October 6, 2002 rally in Central Park. Stewart was indicted for passing
messages on behalf of her terrorist client Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman.

One of the members of NION's Advisory Board, Abdeen Jabara, is a member of
the legal advisory board for the American Muslim Council. He is a past
president of the Arab-American Ant-Discrimination Committee, a board member
of William Kunstler's Center for Constitutional Rights, and a co-counsel
with Lynne Stewart for Sheik Rahman, the terrorist convicted for the 1993
World Trade Center bombing.

The Ame

---

› See More: some counters fill, hate, and attempt. Others wickedly learn

Originally Posted by Graybags

The unconstitutional war in Iraq.

"The Inquiry should examine whether President Bush and Vice President
Cheney have gone beyond the bounds of the Constitution, defied the rule
of law, and if so, whether impeachment is the appropriate constitutional
punishment," said Nader. The United States Congress never voted for the
Iraq war. Congress voted for a resolution in October 2002 which
unlawfully transferred to the President the decision-making power of
whether to launch a first-strike invasion of Iraq. The United States
Constitution's War Powers Clause (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11) vests
the power of deciding whether to send the nation into war solely in the
United States Congress. This can only be changed by a constitutional
amendment.

First I must say that I am not against any investigation into Bush/Cheney. I am certainly not pleased with either of them.
Nor am I saying Iraq is a just war or that it should continue. Of course pulling the troops out is another debate all by itself. I certainly do not deny the 5 falsehoods from the above Post.

It was my understanding that only a cease fire was enacted from the first Gulph war meaning the original war never ended. If my understanding is incorrect please educate me.
If this is indeed true then I am not seeing how this war is unconstitutional as it would merely be a resumption of hostilities.
When this all came about I was under the impression that there was only a ceasefire and saw Bush going to Congress as simply a Courtesy nothing more.

Please correct me if I am wrong in this understanding.