In California, "Arcata city council has passed a resolution calling for Bush to be impeached. The tiny coastal hamlet took a vote of council members late Wednesday and passed the resolution three-to-none. The council says Bush violated numerous international laws in waging war against Afghanistan and Iraq. The resolution states in part that Arcata should be seen as an example for other cities looking to rebuff 'the imperial goals of power-crazed leaders.'" You go, Arcata!

"More than 450 professors of law, international relations, and public policy--led by Harvard Law School faculty members-- sent a letter calling on Congress to hold accountable, through impeachment and removal if appropriate, civilian officials from the top of the Executive Branch on down for policies developed at high levels that have facilitated the recent abuses at Abu Ghraib... The letter has been signed by 56 law teachers at Harvard Law School, including former Dean Robert C. Clark, and Professors Laurence Tribe, Alan Dershowitz, Lani Guinier, Detlev Vagts and Frank Michelman. It has also been signed by leading experts on international relations, public policy and constitutional law across the nation." The letter is here: iraq-letter.com

Law prof. Marjorie Cohen writes, "In light of the Defense and Justice Dept. documents, there is probable cause to believe that the commander-in-chief condoned the methodology of torture to secure information from prisoners. The Constitution mandates the impeachment of a President for high crimes and misdemeanors. There is no higher crime than a war crime. Willful killing, torture and inhuman treatment constitute grave breaches of the Geneva Convention, which are considered war crimes under The War Crimes Act of 1996. Even if Bush's lawyers could successfully parse the meaning of torture, they cannot deny that the atrocities we've seen constitute inhuman treatment. Bush [implicitly] admitted sanctioning willful killing, torture and inhuman treatment in his 2003 State of the Union Address. He would be liable under the doctrine of command responsibility for war crimes committed in Iraq as well. The captain goes down with his ship. It is time to call for the Impeachment of George W. Bush."

"Bob Woodward's case, his book documented the war in Afghanistan and the lead up to the war in Iraq. The President can't allocate money, only Congress can. And then there's the torture scandal. Does the President condone torture? He deserves to face impeachment charges. If the president who was involved in seeing the Justice Department, from the Pentagon, suggest that torture would be permissible of prisoners in Afghanistan or Iraq or Guantanamo or anywhere else, this President deserves to face impeachment charges. If he does not, if he does not, then the Constitution suffers. We're effectively allowing the Constitution to be suspended in other words for this president to have these kinds of powers. We cannot declare post 9/11 that the President is now king on matters of foreign policy, that the President can take us into wars on his own personal whim. It is the destruction of the constitution if we allow that to happen. We have to stand up and protect it."

"As Gonzales' memo suggests, if Bush, Rumsfeld or others personally authorized the recently revealed interrogation methods, they could be charged, at a minimum, with conspiracy to commit war crimes. With America's international moral authority at an all-time low, we can't afford to let possible high-level crimes go unaddressed. John Ashcroft should appoint a special counsel to investigate whether senior administration officials conspired to violate the War Crimes Act. If Ashcroft drags his heels, Congress should begin its own hearings to investigate possible war crimes. And if it turns out that responsibility goes all the way to the Oval Office? Even the president can be impeached by Congress if he is suspected of 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' If 'I did not have sex with that woman' was enough to merit the impeachment of Bill Clinton, then surely conspiracy to commit war crimes should be adequate reason for Congress to consider impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush."

DemocraticTalkRadio.com hosts Stephen Crockett and Al Lawrence write: "We believe that Bush and his people will be revealed in time to be far more sinister than Nixon. We believe this is the most corrupt Administration in the history of the nation. And Nixon did not have the police-state tools of the falsely named Patriot Act to use against his political enemies list. We have joined along with other talk show hosts (Andy Johnson, Jerry Pippin, Guy James, Meria Heller, Peter Werbe and Radio Left) and others (Dems Online.net, ChewintheFat.com, Buzzflash.com and folksinger Yikes McGee) in endorsing the Democrats.com impeachment petition at http://democrats.com/impeach... Republicans would be wise to distance themselves from Bush and his policies as quickly as possible. Bush has begun a political meltdown that will make the Nixon collapse look mild in comparison. Both destroyed themselves for much the same reasons."

Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein writes, "Having read the report of Gen. Antonio Taguba, I expect [Howard] Baker's question ["what did the president know and when did he know it?"] will resound again in another congressional investigation. The equally relevant question is whether Republicans will, Pavlov-like, continue to defend their president with ideological and partisan reflex, or remember the example of principled predecessors who pursued truth at another dark moment. Today, the issue may not be high crimes and misdemeanors, but rather Bush's failure, or inability, to lead competently and honestly. 'You are courageously leading our nation in the war against terror,' Bush told Rumsfeld in a Wizard-of-Oz moment May 10... 'You are a strong secretary of Defense, and our nation owes you a debt of gratitude.' The scene recalled another Oz moment: Nixon praising his enablers, Bob Haldeman and John Ehrlichman, as 'two of the finest public servants I've ever known.'"

Daniel Patrick Welch writes, "Cornered at every turn, the thieves and liars of this junta respond to every new self-inflicted crisis with greater abandon. There are dangerous and powerful forces trying to keep this man in power, and there is no doubt that confronting them head on will prove difficult. But there is no choice left. These men intended all along to shred the Geneva Convention, the US constitution and every safeguard in between. The 'Iraq Prison Abuse Scandal,' a misnomer if ever there was one, is not about a few hicks on a rampage. The attempt to end-run the CIA and establish a fully secret system of torture and 'intelligence gathering' lays bare the core of these men's 'principles:' utter contempt for democracy and due process. It should be something of a clue to learn that the CIA was too accountable for these guys."

"In an interview broadcast on Saturday with WABC Radio's Mark Simone, Linda Ronstadt was in the middle of explaining why she prefers living in Arizona to Los Angeles or New York, when she added one caveat: 'The politics are very conservative here and I'm not conservative. I'm having a hard time sometimes convincing people that we need to vote for a new president,' she offered. When Simone begged to differ, the singer insisted, 'We need a different president right away, I think. I think we should impeach this one [rather than wait for] the next election.'" You Go, Linda!

There are about 20 groups polling Americans on political questions. But only ONE poll - Retro Poll - has the guts to ask Americans if Bush should be impeached for lying about Iraq. "26. President Bush misled the public and Congress by saying that Saddam's Iraq was an imminent threat to launch chemical, biological, and nuclear warfare against us. Do you think that misleading the public and Congress in this way in order to take the country to war is grounds for impeachment?" The results: Yes (38.9%), No (39.8%). In other words, Americans are split right down the middle. Remember that in 1998 Americans OPPOSED the impeachment of Bill Clinton by 2:1. Call other pollsters and tell them ask the impeachment question!

Harvey Wasserman writes: "Those American soldiers torturing and sexually abusing Iraqi prisoners have made criminals of us all. And there are only two possible responses to this horrible outrage: get out of Iraq. Now! And imprison the man responsible, George W. Bush. Any fantasy that the United States could 'bring democracy' or inject stability or somehow do something praiseworthy for the Iraqi people irrevocably died with the publication of those photographs. With Bush, the flow of abominations only seems to deepen and get worse with every passing day. Any whining or carping that he is not personally responsible is pure hypocrisy. This man belongs in prison!"

John Bonifaz tells Buzzflash, "It would be very unfortunate for this country to go through a process by which it reelects a President without any consideration of whether he's committed impeachable offenses, only to then, assuming after that election, begin that process. This process ought to begin now. There ought to be scrutiny engaged by the U.S. Congress today on whether Bush has committed impeachable offenses... These are high crimes that the President has committed, and he ought to be impeached for that reason. And this investigation ought to deal with the question of those high crimes. Elections are for questioning whether or not there's popular support for the person in office or the person seeking office. But the impeachment process is for addressing the matter of high crimes. And it's critical now for this nation and for the integrity of the Constitution that we engage in that process."

Buzzflash writes, "We have enough on the record to prove that the Bush Administration willfully ignored warnings about an Al-Qaeda attack. We have enough on the record to prove that the Bush administration strategically lied this country into a disastrous war that has united the people of Iraq, including two feuding religious sects, against us and created a recruiting ground for terrorists. We don't need a 9/11 Commission, we need to proceed directly to 'Plan B': Impeachment. Now, you say, there is radical 'ol BuzzFlash acting like some daffy extremist. Well excuse us, who's the extremist here? An administration that deliberately ignored impending 9/11 hijacking attacks and led us into a disastrous war that has created more terrorism and united feuding religious sects in Iraq against us, that piles lies upon lies in an effort to prolong its stolen reign of power? Or BuzzFlash who believes that democracy, the rule of law, truth and our Constitution are worth fighting for...?"

"Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader called Tuesday for President Bush to be impeached for "deceiving the American people night after night after night" about U.S. involvement in Iraq. "When you plunge our country into war on a platform of fabrications and deceptions, and you bring back thousands of American soldiers who are sick, injured or dead, and that war is unconstitutionally authorized to begin with, Mr. Bush's behavior qualifies for the high crimes and misdemeanor impeachment clause of the Constitution."

"BILL MOYERS: What is worse than Watergate? JOHN DEAN: If there's anything that really is the bottom line, it's taking the nation to war in a time - when they might not have had to go to war and people dying. That is worse than Watergate. No one died for Nixon's so-called Watergate abuses. BILL MOYERS: Let me go right to page 155 of your book. You write, quote, 'The evidence is overwhelming that George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have engaged in deceit and deception over going to war in Iraq. This is an impeachable offense.' JOHN DEAN: Absolutely is. The founders in the debates in the states- I cite one. I tracked down after reading the Nixon impeachment proceedings when- Congressman Robert Kastenmeier had gone back to look to see what the founders said about misrepresentations and lying to the Congress. Clearly, it is an impeachable offense. And I think the case is overwhelming that these people presented false information to the Congress and to the American people."

John Bonifaz and Bob Fertik write, "George W. Bush - whose own election was dubious - has seized monarchical powers in sending this nation into war without any legitimate congressional declaration of war or equivalent congressional action. He has lied to the Congress and to the American people about the rationale for the war. He has imprisoned American citizens without charges and denied them access to lawyers and the courts. He has thus trampled on the Constitution and he has violated his oath of office. This nation is at a crossroads. These are not simply issues to be debated in a presidential election. These are 'high crimes' in the most profound meaning of the phrase, and they require the most serious of legal responses. Our Constitution lays out a specific process for addressing high crimes committed by a president: impeachment. The time has come for Congress to investigate these crimes and begin impeachment proceedings. Our loyalty to our Constitution requires nothing less."

"The drumbeat for censure of Bush grows for his reckless refusal to tell the Congress and the American people the truth about his reasons for invading Iraq. Win Without War and its member organizations, including MoveOn.org, True Majority and Working Assets, together have gathered more than 600,000 petitions and messages urging censure. Many of the participating organizations have seen explosive growth since the rev-up to the war began. MoveOn.org alone has increased its membership from 400,000 to more than 2 million, largely on the strength of its opposition to the Bush war effort. 'Win Without War organizations and their members are highly motivated and mobilized over the Iraq misadventure. In addition to the campaign to censure Bush, they will be part of a continuing set of actions through 2004, and their numbers will continue to grow,' said Tom Andrews... TV ads will run this week in Washington and New York, along with a full-page NY Times ad."

"An aide to House Judiciary ranking member John Conyers (D) denied Tuesday that the Michigan lawmaker is drafting articles of impeachment against Bush, but declined to close the door on that prospect. 'We are aware of no plans to file articles of impeachment at present,' the aide said. The demurral came in response to comments made Sunday by Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader. Appearing on NBC's 'Meet the Press,' Nader suggested, in the course of reaffirming his own support for Bush's impeachment, that Conyers 'is going to file such a request.'... Several Web sites, including Democrats.com and VoteToImpeach.com, are, in varying degrees, devoted to the idea... Democratic leaders have steered clear of supporting actions such as impeachment in response. Referring to Nader's remarks about Conyers' plans, a Democratic leadership aide on Tuesday said, 'Until he actually files [articles], it's not something we're focused on.'" Join our campaign at impeachcentral.com!

Tim Russert quoted Nader as saying that Bush was not only "beatable but impeachable," for deceptions and prevarications on national security matters, and asked him: "Will part of your platform be the impeachment of George Bush?" Nader replied: "When a president misleads, if not fabricates, going to war and sending our sons and daughters to war with no exit strategy, with a quagmire over there, that is very serious, Tim. If there's any better definition of high crimes and misdemeanors in our Constitution, then misleading or fabricating the basis for going to war, as the press has documented ad infinitum, I don't know any cause of impeachment that's worse." RUSSERT: "So there should be an impeachment hearing and trial?" NADER: "I think John Conyers is going to file such a request." Hey Ralph - we're trying to build grassroots support at impeachcentral.com. Your help could make a HUGE difference! Why don't you drop your divisive campaign and save your reputation by joining us?

From MoveOn.org: "President Bush told our nation that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Now that the chief weapons inspector has revealed that that simply is not true, President Bush seeks to avoid responsibility by creating an investigation that will focus on the CIA. That's why we believe: 'Congress must censure President Bush for misleading the country about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.' You can join the call by sending an email with this message to your representatives in Congress. Please enter your name, email address, zip code, and personal comment below. We'll deliver these messages by to your member of Congress and other political leaders." We say Censure -- but ALSO Impeach!

"In the wake of David Kay's testimony before Congress that Iraq did not have any weapons of mass destruction, Democrats.com has launched a grassroots campaign to impeach George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and John Ashcroft. The campaign's Web site is ImpeachCentral.com. To organize grassroots support in each of the 435 Congressional districts in the nation, the campaign has launched a Meetup at ImpeachBush.Meetup.com, which already has over 3,500 participants. According to Democrats.com co-founder Bob Fertik, 'In the coming days, we hope to persuade Members of Congress to speak publicly about the inadequacy of a secret and evasive 'self-investigation' by the Bush investigation, and the need for open impeachment hearings which hold top officials fully accountable. And we hope to build a groundswell of support for impeachment among ordinary Americans, among prominent Americans, and among powerful editorial voices as well.'"

It's official. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. So sayest David Kay. That means everything Bush said about the threat from Iraq since his 'Axis of Evil' State of the Union address in January 2002 was a lie. Investigation? What is there to investigate? There is only one question: Why hasn't Bush been impeached?

On Monday Jan. 26, we launched ImpeachBush.Meetup.com with Meetups in New York City, Los Angeles, Sacramento & Philadelphia. The enthusiasm was tremendous! In just one week, we are now the 11th most popular political Meetup, with over 3,500 signups. That puts us ahead of Bush in 2004 - so there are more activists who want to impeach Bush than re-elect him! Our next Meetups will be on Monday Feb. 23 at 7 p.m. local time. We need two local hosts/organizers for each of the 420 cities where impeachers want to gather. Please contact Sophie at impeachcentral@yahoo.com

Robert Scheer writes, "Now, can we talk of impeachment? The rueful admission by former chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay that Saddam Hussein did not possess WMDs or the means to create them at the time of the U.S. invasion confirms the fact that the Bush administration is complicit in arguably the greatest scandal in U.S. history. It's only because the Republicans control both houses of Congress that we hear no calls for a broad-ranging investigation of the type that led to the discovery of Monica Lewinsky's infamous blue dress. In no previous instance of presidential malfeasance was so much at stake, both in preserving constitutional safeguards and national security. This egregious deception in leading us to war on phony intelligence overshadows those scandals based on greed, such as Teapot Dome during the Harding administration, or those aimed at political opponents, such as Watergate." Visit impeachcentral.com and impeachbush.meetup.com

After calling for the impeachment of Bush over plans to legalize millions of illegal aliens, talk-radio star Michael Savage has taken out a full-page ad in the New York Times declaring millions of Americans support his view.

As US deaths in Iraq pass 500, it is now clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that the reasons Bush gave for invading Iraq were all lies. If lying about sex is grounds for impeachment, then what about lying about war??? We believe the time has come to really demand IMPEACHMENT, so Democrats.com is helping to launch a nationwide grassroots impeachment campaign at ImpeachCentral.com. The site features a comprehensive impeachment kit to help you get to work. Our first challenge is to find one or more Representatives willing to introduce the Articles of Impeachment we have drafted. This will require local activists to join together to lobby their Representative. And there is no better tool for connecting with local activists in your area than Meetup. So sign up for the ImpeachBush meetup - the first meeting will be Monday January 26 at 7 pm local time. (Note: you must sign up by Thursday or your local Meetup may be cancelled.) Impeach Bush Now - we mean it!

Tallahassee Democrat editor Mike Pope describes how Condi told Tim Russert "I didn't remember" that the CIA said not to use the Niger Hoax. Condi "lectured Rep. Boyd - who served in Vietnam as an infantry officer - about the lesson of Vietnam. Rice seems pretty confident of her memory in this area, yet seems disturbingly aloof about her memory problems concerning the 2003 SOTU. This is the kind of willful deception that Sen. Bob Graham said was worthy of impeachment - if only we had a Congress that had the backbone to seriously examine the matter. By the standards set in the Clinton impeachment, Bush's crimes and misdemeanors are worthy of impeachment. Of course, getting testimony from folks as memory challenged as Rice might pose a problem. But... I think a Senate impeachment trial is warranted. Unfortunately, no member of the House of Representatives seems to be willing to risk the political capital necessary to file articles of impeachment." Why not? Impeach Bush Now!

A Retro Poll found that 40% of Americans believe Bush should be impeached for lying about Iraq. "Currently 47% of those polled know that Saddam's Iraq had no connection to the 9/11 attacks, up from 36% in a Retro Poll last April. Of that 47% who are now clear on this fact, 52% favored impeachment. Even more dramatic was the strength of support for impeachment among those who know that the Al Qaeda-Saddam connection was also a media-government fabrication, based on little evidence. Of the still small 32% who know that Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda were never partners a whopping 73% favor impeachment and 78% think the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq." Impeach Bush Now!

Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) began work on Articles of Impeachment against Bush in 2002, but never got a chance to introduce them before the establishment drove her out of office. Now McKinney is renewing her work on impeachment. Listen to her interview by Laura Flanders on Working Assets Radio.

"Santa Cruz Mayor Emily Reilly is warning her constituents in this liberal beach town not to jump to conspiracy theories about several unusual events involving her bakery in the days since the city council decided to challenge Resident Bush. It was Reilly who, after a Santa Cruz City Council vote on Sept. 9, sent a letter to Washington asking the U.S. House Judiciary Committee to consider impeaching Resident Bush. Four days later, a sophisticated burglar pried moulding off a window at Emily's Good Things to Eat bakery, evaded a motion detector and stole an old computer hard drive and the hard-drive backup. Then, on Sept. 17, [the] bakery was visited by an agent of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration... He asked if they used artificial coloring (heavens no!) or if they transported anything across the state lines (they've been known to mail cookie-grams)." Would a break-in by a FBI agent be covered under the "Sneak and Peak" provision of the Patriot Act? Just asking...

"Impeachment is on the agenda again this week. City Councilman Dave Meserve will ask the council at Wednesday's meeting to approve his resolution calling for the immediate impeachment of Resident George W. Bush and Vice Resident Richard Cheney. The vote in Arcata on Wednesday is likely to attract some national attention. Last month the Santa Cruz City Council voted to send a letter asking the House Judiciary Committee to investigate the Bush administration. Meserve's resolution, which he is sponsoring on behalf of Veterans for Peace, is somewhat stronger. As written when presented at an Aug. 20 meeting, the resolution reads, 'The City Council of the city of Arcata calls upon the United States House of Representatives to immediately impeach George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney.' The case for impeachment outlined in the resolution focuses on the war in Iraq and statements the resident made in his State of the Union address that turned out to be false."

"The Santa Cruz City Council on Tuesday became the nation's first local government to ask Congress to look into impeaching Bush on charges he deceived the American public about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and has used the Sept. 11 attacks as an excuse to crush civil rights. In a 6-1 vote, the council decided to send a letter to members of the House Judiciary Committee asking the panel to investigate the resident. Dozens of activists cheered the decision... [The letter] asks the panel to investigate whether Bush violated congressionally ratified international treaties and the Constitution by invading and occupying Iraq. Two other questions asked in the letter: 'Did false or misleading information exaggerate the threat posed by Iraq, and was this part of a conscious effort to mislead the American public? Did Bush exploit the fear generated by the 9/11 terrorist attacks to erode or compromise our constitutionally guaranteed rights and liberties?' "

How depressing it is to read the letters of die-hard Bush supporters who persist in claiming that this man is a "great leader" who has brought "dignity and morality" to the White House. These folks must define a great leader as one who produces the largest budget deficit in our history, who antagonizes our traditional allies and then has the gall to ask for their help in cleaning up the mess he created, who cons his countrymen into an unjustified war with no end in sight and who, as his crowning achievement, turns Iraqi cities into rubble, killing thousands of innocent Iraqis and American soldiers. This is morality?

Belva Ann Prycel writes: "Manipulation or deliberate abuse of national security intelligence data is 'a high crime' under the Constitution's impeachment clause. It is also a violation of federal criminal law and the anti-conspiracy statute which considers it a felony 'to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose' ...For those who would give George Bush some largely undeserved latitude, let's be clear that this was not a benign act with no victims and no ongoing consequences... Thousands of innocent Iraqis died and many continue to suffer in a lawless war-ravaged country. Millions of civilians, including American servicemen and women are exposed to the health hazards of depleted uranium from U.S. missiles. Every day, more young soldiers die as Iraqis make sitting ducks out of American troops... This is demonstrably a misdeed of monstrous proportions... George Walker Bush deserves impeachment."

Belva Ann Prycel writes, "Every day, more young soldiers die as Iraqis make sitting ducks out of American troops. The cost of war and a long occupation rises into the hundreds of billions of dollars, while our country faces a depleted treasury and deficits as far as the eye can see. This is demonstrably a misdeed of monstrous proportions. A huge, costly, and deadly lie was foisted on the American public and the Congress. The credibility of the United States was severely damaged and the constitutional powers of the presidency abused. George Walker Bush deserves impeachment. He deserves impeachment and removal from the office he was never elected to hold. Those who have paid the ultimate price with their lives demand no less. Our democracy demands no less. As citizens, we must clamor for the justice and accountability which our leaders would like to avoid. We must not forget."

IndictBushCheney.org writes, "This is to invite you to join us in a citizens' movement to indict members of the Bush administration now and George W. Bush when he leaves office... 'Just won't happen!' you say. Impeachment of Bush is what won't happen while the radical Republicans control the House. But indictment is different. Grand juries can indict officials of the federal government, except the President, whom they conclude should be tried for crimes such as those enumerated here. The Citizens' Indictment can lead to the full investigation, arrest and prosecution of officials in the Bush/Cheney government from Dick Cheney on down. This can happen. And if the President is not impeached and tried while he is in office, he can be indicted after he leaves the White House. Now or at any point, a real grand jury can do with the Citizens' Indictment, or variations or parts of it, whatever they have the courage, democratic convictions, and patriotism to do."

Francis Boyle writes: "With another Bush Family war of aggression against Iraq staring the American People, Congress and Republic in their face, on Tuesday 11 March 2003, Congressman John Conyers of Michigan, the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, which would have jurisdiction over any Bill of Impeachment, convened an emergency meeting of forty or more of his top advisors, most of whom were lawyers, to discuss and debate immediately putting into the House of Representatives Bills of Impeachment against President Bush Jr., Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, and Attorney General Ashcroft in order to head off the impending war. Congressman Conyers kindly requested me and Ramsey Clark to come in to the meeting and argue the case for impeachment. Ramsey had launched his own campaign to impeach Bush Jr. et al. in mid-January 2003 at a peace rally held in Washington D.C."

"Santa Cruz's city council was the first in the country to oppose the war in Iraq. Now a coalition of Santa Cruz groups wants the council to be the first to register its support for impeaching resident Bush. About 100 activists packed the council chamber Tuesday night to ask the council to help a nascent movement aimed at sending 'pink slips' to Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Attorney General John Ashcroft and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice for their roles in going to war and creating anti-terrorism legislation. 'They've really run amok,' said Sherry Conable. She and other activists, many wearing pink slips, staged a demonstration in front of City Hall carrying signs that read 'The USA is a Security Risk' and 'The Earth is My Homeland.'"

Bernard Weiner quotes 'Shallow Throat' as saying: "Now, just in case some actual or planted WMD turns up in Iraq, it's vital that your Democrat and internet-writer friends need to quit focusing only on those offending 16 words and to move on to the larger point: Nothing that has been found to date, and probably nothing that will be found, lends any credence to the Bush theory -- elaborated in speech after speech for months before the State of the Union address -- that Iraq was an imminent threat to the U.S. or U.K. or their neighbors...You can smell Vietnam all over Iraq. The U.S., too stupid and stubborn to admit it's made a bad mistake, not really understanding the layers of the culture in which they find themselves, is going to be bogged down there forever, fighting Iraqi guerrillas and calling for yes another 50,000 and then another 100,000 troops but we're winning the hearts and minds of the natives don't worry the boys will be home by Christmas now don't that sound familiar?"

Daniel Patrick Welch writes, "The bottom line is that George W. Bush knew the information was bogus, and used it anyway to convince millions to go along with his phony war. For that alone, for the memory of the thousands of dead Iraqis and Americans, he deserves the Il Duce treatment. The criminal enterprise called the Bush administration is (Helen Thomas was right) the worst ever. Their campaign in furtherance of the conspiracy to defraud the public into buying the Iraq war is one of the most cynical abuses of power in U.S. history. It deserves to be treated as such... We know who they are, the junta that has hijacked our government and our national agenda. The cartel must go: Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle should all resign, be fired or impeached immediately, before their conspiracy of lies and their mutual pact of self-protection is allowed to further endanger the country and the world. "

Robert Scheer writes, "With the discrediting of the Niger buy and the equally dubious citation of a purchase of aluminum tubes (which turned out to be inappropriate for the production of enriched uranium), one can imagine the disappointment at the White House. There was no evidence for painting Saddam Hussein as a nuclear threat. The proper reaction should have been to support the U.N. inspectors in doing their work in an efficient and timely fashion. We now know, and perhaps the White House knew then, that the inspectors eventually would come up empty-handed because no weapons of mass destruction program existed - not even a stray vial of chemical and biological weapons has been discovered. However, that would have obviated the administration's key rationale for an invasion, so lies substituted for facts that didn't exist. And there, dear readers, exists the firm basis for bringing a charge of impeachment against the president who employed lies to lead us into war."

Bob Graham (D-FL) "said he recently had seen 'Impeach George Bush' buttons on the campaign trail. He was asked in New Hampshire if Congress would impeach the president 'if in fact it was found there was manipulation of intelligence in order to create public support for the war' in Iraq. 'My answer was no, but the American people will have an opportunity to collapse both steps - impeachment and removal from office - on the first Tuesday of November 2004,' Graham told a couple hundred members of the New Democrat Network meeting in Washington. Graham, former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, did not see an impeachable offense in the buildup to war, but accused the administration of 'deception and deceit' in its foreign and domestic policies. 'We were sold on war with Iraq because of an imminent threat to the United States of weapons of mass destruction,' he said. 'Now we can't find 'Osama Bin Forgotten' or Saddam Hussein or those weapons.'" So Impeach Bush Now!

On 6-20-03, "The Win Without War coalition and MoveOn.org, two of the biggest antiwar groups, kicked off their new campaign yesterday with a full-page ad in the New York Times that labeled Bush a 'misleader' and demanded an independent commission to determine the truth about US intelligence on Iraq. 'It would be a tragedy if young men and women were sent to die for a lie,' the ad concluded." Yet most Democrats remain silent about Bush's LIE. One important exception is Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY): "'One president said 'I did not have sex with that woman' and he got impeached,' said Representative Jose E. Serrano, Democrat of New York. 'Another president lied to the American people, to Congress, and to the United Nations about weapons of mass destruction, bombed a country and killed many people, [and] in the process we lost some of our own brave folks. And he's some sort of hero. What gives?'" You go, Jose!

Steve Pitelli writes, "It has now become clear that President Bush lied to the American people in order to promote a war. That war continues and has already led to the death of thousands of Iraqi civilians, hundreds of U.S. soldiers and countless Iraqi soldiers. In truth, Bush's lies are more than just lies. They are high crimes and the President should now be subject to impeachment." Who says lying is grounds for impeachment? Republicans like Senator (then Rep.) Lindsay Graham, who declared in 1999: "The president of the United States sets atop of the legal pyramid. If there's reasonable doubt about his ability to faithfully execute the laws of the land, our future would be better off if that individual is removed. And let me tell you where it all comes down to me. If you can go back and explain to your children and your constituents how you can be truthful and misleading at the same time, good luck." Read some memorable Republican quotes on impeachment for lying!

Geov Parrish writes, "Soldiers are sacrosanct to many Americans, especially conservatives. Now, we have learned, [Bush] deployed our soldiers on the basis of a threat he knew or should have known did not exist. The unprovoked invasion, conquest, and occupation of Iraq should never have happened... Before and after his secret decision, for at least half a year, his Administration's claims were largely false. If Bush himself didn't know that, he should have. If he did know it, he has lied to Congress -- just like Clinton -- and to America and the world, but repeatedly and on a far more serious matter than the definition of 'sex.' Bush, instead, used his lies to intentionally sacrifice the lives of American soldiers -- along with other coalition soldiers and countless Iraqis, soldier and civilian alike. For this egregious abuse of his oath of office, George W. Bush should be impeached."

Denise Giardina writes: "What Saddam Hussein made clear was that he was one of scores of vicious dictators in the world today. Left to himself, his regime would have imploded of its own evil and madness, as did that of Idi Amin in Uganda. Saddam lasted as long as he did only because of years of support from the Reagan administration, including Donald Rumsfeld. Weapons of mass destruction? Saddam no longer had them. If he had, he would have used them. And if any are found now, the cabal that has hijacked our country will have planted them there. That is why the Bush administration has made clear it will not allow the U.N. back in the country to provide neutral inspections... George W. Bush and his cabal lied to the American people so they could attack another country to seize its oil wealth. Bush has, as Doonesbury and others have pointed out, assumed the mantle of Julius Caesar. He is in the process of ruining the American republic and establishing an American/corporate empire."

Russell Mokhiber of the Corporate Crime Reporter gets to ask Ari only one question every few days, but they are laser-guided weapons that terrify the Busheviks. Here is his question of 4-14-03: "Lawrence Eagleburger, the Secretary of State under George Bush Sr, told the BBC yesterday: 'If George Bush Jr. decided he was going to turn the troops loose on Syria and Iran - after that he would last in office for about 15 minutes. In fact if President [sic] Bush were to try that even now, I would think that he ought to be impeached. You can't get away with that sort of thing in this democracy.' Can you get away with that sort of thing? Ari Fleischer: I've answered that question previously up here." Of course that's another Ari LIE, as you can read for yourself. But Ari was so terrified by the question that once again he panicked and ended the press conference. You GO, Russell!

UK Mirror reports, "Speaking to reporters after returning from Camp David, Bush said: 'We believe there are chemical weapons in Syria. 'First things, first. We're here in Iraq now and the thing about Syria is we expect co-operation.' Mr Bush's warning followed earlier comments by a former US foreign policy chief that the president [sic] should be impeached if he attacks Syria. Lawrence Eagleburger, Secretary of State under George Bush Senior, said American public opinion would not tolerate action against Syria or Iran... 'You saw the furore that went on before Bush got sufficient support to do this,' he said. 'This is still a democracy and public opinion rules. If George Bush decided he was going to turn troops on Syria now and then Iran he'd be in office about 15 minutes. 'If Bush were to try it now, even I would feel he should be impeached. You can't get away with that sort off thing in a democracy." Right on, Larry!

Bush should be impeached for his documented perjuries... stealing the 2000 election... and trashing the Constitution. But why waste good words on a man who can't speak English? Just wear the T-Shirt.

"A full-page ad Monday calling for the impeachment of Bush sparked dozens of calls, letters and e-mails from readers angered that it would appear in The San Francisco Chronicle. 'We consider it an outrage that you accepted the advertisement to impeach our United States President,' said one letter faxed to Dick Rogers, readers' representative for the paper. ' The ad and the impeachment campaign are the brainchild of former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, a controversial figure long associated with the political left... Monday's ad, which typically would cost about $45,000, called for the impeachment of Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Attorney General John Ashcroft... Tens of thousands of people already have turned in impeachment petitions downloaded from the Internet or clipped from a similar ad that appeared in the New York Times last month, said Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, a spokeswoman for VoteToImpeach.org, the group that bought the ad. "

VoteToImpeach.org launched its ad campaign with a 4-count indictment. "1. Seized power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the rule of law; planned massive military assaults on Iraq, a country that is not threatening the United States; planned a 'shock and awe' strategy to create a Hiroshima-type effect on the Iraqi population which is terrorizing and outraging the people of the world. 2. Ordered and directed the violent overthrow of sovereign states, disappearances, kidnappings, assassinations, summary executions, murders and torture. 3. Threatened to wage first strike nuclear war against even non-nuclear countries, setting off a new arms race as non-nuclear nations now seek to develop nuclear arms to deter U.S. aggression or the loss of their sovereignty. 4. Trashed the Bill of Rights and fundamental freedoms of the American people and others everywhere by acting to strip U.S. citizens of their constitutional and human rights."

Rightwing National Review writes, "As the country braces for war, some liberal Democrats in Congress are preparing to introduce articles of impeachment against Bush and perhaps members of his Cabinet, according to lawmakers and congressional aides. Over the past few weeks, some of the most liberal members of the House have discussed the possibility of impeaching Bush. Talks have intensified this week, lawmakers say, largely because war with Iraq appears imminent... Rep. Danny K. Davis, a Chicago Democrat who has discussed impeachment with his colleagues in the congressional black and progressive caucuses, said a resolution probably would be introduced in the event of 'a full-fledged military effort' that occurs without new congressional war resolutions. 'There are some [lawmakers] who obviously are more eager to jump hard, and then there are others who probably aren't even thinking this way at all' about impeachment, Davis said. 'I'd probably be in the middle.'"

Geov Parrish writes of the 2/15 protests: "Far more than the lives of Iraqis were seen as being at stake. Repeatedly, the same theme emerged: it was not just war, but democracy itself that was being threatened... Here in Seattle, where up to 50,000 marched in a protest locals said was larger than any in the Vietnam era, the most popular sign was the now-ubiquitous 'No Iraq War' lawn signs that decorate tens of thousands of homes in the city. But the second most popular was one of another version of 'Impeach Bush!' People are talking impeachment not out of the belief that Bush has violated one or another specific law, but because of a far greater crime; they believe his administration is violating the very spirit of what we were all taught makes America a unique and wonderful nation... The challenge will be to take the tremendous political diversity and energy that characterized this past weekend's demonstrations, and transform it into a movement with relevance and staying power."

Knute Berger writes, "Impeach a President in time of war? Why not, especially when that war is indicative of the problem? If America was willing to pillory the husband of Hillary for lying about staining the dress of an intern, can we at least acknowledge that putting Bush on trial for more serious constitutional offenses is worthy of discussion? Apparently not. While 'Impeach Bush' is a crowd pleaser at anti-war rallies, it is not an idea that is getting much attention... Punch 'impeach Bush' into a LexisNexis search... and you'll get 24 hits-- seven fewer than if you try 'praise Hitler.'... Even though the eve of war might seem an inopportune time to discuss kicking the commander in chief out of office (that's why a Wag the Dog strategy works), there really is no better time than now. Because Bush is fighting an undeclared, unending war against 'evil' that will only be over when he says it's over. To legitimize that is to legitimize a perpetual state of silence from the people."

Geov Parrish writes, "Forget impeachment. Let's talk treason. Plenty of progressives snickered at last week's arrest in Spokane, Washington of a former Coast Guard officer and militia buff for spying. But which is worse? Passing police plans for emergency deployment along to a bunch of self-deluded cranks in the woods? Or running roughshod over the world, planning new Hiroshimas and the massacre of hundreds of thousands of people? Or, at home, trashing 200+ years of liberties and individual freedoms that, to use the cliche', generations of those soldiers once fought and died for? What Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, and the rest of these Strangelovian zealots are doing - and don't forget their Democratic enablers - deserves far worse than impeachment. A few more all but inevitable months of unchecked abuse, and these traitors will have earned a place at the head of the list of people who have brought disgrace to the idealistic dream that was once the United States of America."

"Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General during the Johnson Administration has drafted articles of impeachment setting forth high crimes and misdemeanors by Bush and other civil officers of his administration. Mr. Clark has also prepared historical notes on the power of impeachment, for consideration in the impeachment of Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, and Attorney General Ashcroft. Votes cast in this campaign will be hand delivered to the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and to the ranking Democrat on the Committee. Here is the statement: 'I want my representative in the U.S. House of Representatives to vote to impeach George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Attorney General John D. Ashcroft for high crimes and misdemeanors, and to have the case prosecuted and tried in the U.S. Senate.'"

"After a 16-month investigation, journalist Joyce Lynn, Editor of the Political Diary, has found 'grounds for impeachment' against G.W. Bush for his administration's foreknowledge of 9-11 and cover-up of its negligence/complicity in the event. At the same time, political activists are urging their elected representatives to introduce articles of impeachment against Bush asserting he failed to act to stop the terrorist attacks. Public figures such as Daniel Ellsberg, who released what are now known as the Pentagon Papers, former Vice President Al Gore, and dean of the Washington press corps Helen Thomas are speaking out about Bush's foreknowledge of and responsibility for 9-11. The Joint House Senate Intelligence Report lists pages of warnings about 9-11, including 11 references to using planes as weapons."

Article I: Bush "has attempted to impose a police state and a military dictatorship upon the people and Republic of the United States of America by means of 'a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations' against the Constitution since September 11, 2001. This subversive conduct includes but is not limited to trying to suspend the constitutional Writ of Habeas Corpus; ramming the totalitarian U.S.A. Patriot Act through Congress; the mass-round-up and incarceration of foreigners; kangaroo courts; depriving at least two United States citizens of their constitutional rights by means of military incarceration; interference with the constitutional right of defendants in criminal cases to lawyers; violating and subverting the Posse Comitatus Act; unlawful and unreasonable searches and seizures; violating the First Amendments rights..." Prof. Francis Boyle needs JUST ONE REPRESENTATIVE to introduce this resolution. Send this page to your Congressperson! (search Congress.org)

Activist Carol Brouillet writes, "On Martin Luther King's Birthday, January 15th, exactly a year since we marched on Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) to Demand a Congressional Investigation of 9-11, we will rally and march again to demand that she begin the impeachment process against Bush, assist us in repealing the Patriot Act, and preventing further crimes against humanity (a war on Iraq, Colombia, Venezuela or any other oil rich country Bush would like to attack). The rally and march will begin at 1:00 p.m. (following the weekly Listening Event) in downtown Palo Alto, Lytton Plaza, corner of Emerson and University. There are demos almost every day this week, plenty of opportunities for local outreach, and hopefully our action will encourage other people to approach their congressional representatives to support impeachment, as well (the hard part will be deciding which crime to impeach him on first and whether to impeach Cheney, Ashcroft and who else...)"

The UK Observer notes that just talking about invading Iraq is very useful for George W Bush. "It stops a public debate about his catastrophic record as Resident. Indeed, had President Clinton or any Democrat a similar record, impeachment would already be underway. [Bush walks away from treaties and willfully introduces anarchy into international security. Look at Republican issues. In all of these, Bush is a failure. Bush ignored warnings before 9/11, and has failed to hunt down Al Qaeda and Taliban leadership. Although the US could shut down Afghan heroin production, Bush has chosen this moment to surrender in the War on Drugs. Bush has undermined the world economy, failed] in advance of 9/11, failed to ensure that the military action that was taken was effective and surrendered in the war on drugs without having another plan." Impeach Bush Now! (http://democrats.com/impeach)

"The stark divisions within ruling circles underlie the growing focus in the media on the personal business records of both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. After ignoring for years the dubious means by which Bush went from business failure to multimillionaire, including inside trading of Harken Energy stock while Bush was a director and paid consultant...the very methods that were used to witch-hunt Clinton are now coming back to haunt the Bush administration. A turning point in the Republican campaign against the Clinton White House was the 9-0 decision by the Supreme Court in May of 1997 supporting Paula Jones's insistence that her civil suit go forward and not be delayed until after Clinton had finished his term of office. On the basis of this precedent, neither Cheney nor Bush can claim immunity from legal suits brought against them for their past business practices, and both could be forced to testify under oath."

"The offices of the president and vice president of the USA are being abused and dishonored by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney... There is ample reason to believe that this administration may have committed crimes and misdemeanors great enough to warrant impeachment. I still don't hear the calls for justice from those of you who couldn't say Clinton's name without bringing up impeachment. Maybe you're tired from the long fight. But I know you will raise your voices again in defense of the honor and integrity of the office of the presidency of the USA. Soon the silence will stop and the roar of true patriotism will call out in righteousness once again. I know this because you swore that it wasn't just personal, it was the principle. You told everyone that you were fighting to bring honor back, that integrity mattered. Many believed this. Now you have the opportunity and duty to prove it. After all, you fought hard for honor and integrity. You are not a hypocrite. You said so yourself."

"About a year ago, journalist Christopher Hitchens conducted a mock trial of Henry Kissinger for war crimes. I say the American public should go after Bush in the same way. Here are the basic charges: Murder of Afghan civilians; conspiracy to torture 'suspects;' reckless endangerment: of the environment, of American lives, and of the lives of people in other nations; disturbing the peace (of Americans and our neighbors in the world community); fraud: several counts, including the rigged election; illegal collusion with corporate interests, especially the media; repeated first amendment violations, misappropriation of federal funds; inside trading; repeated civil rights violations; bribery, including offering Taliban 'carpet of gold' for oil pipe line; perjury; campaign law and violations. And that's just for starters." So writes Cheryl Seal of Unknown News.

The national Council of the Alliance for Democracy, meeting in North Hills, California, Saturday, March 9, called for the impeachment of George W. Bush. "The discovery of George W. Bush's top-secret program to initiate first nuclear strikes in situations of conflict leaves the American democracy no honorable choice but to repudiate these plans by ejecting Mr. Bush from the White House," the Council said... "Mr. Bush's new policies embody indifference to the United States inflicting mass death abroad and put the American people at dramatically increased risk of retaliatory annihilation and terrorist attack. Now we understand why the Bush Administration has created an underground shadow government... "We call on all citizens and organizations who believe in peace and democracy to nonviolently resist this grossly irresponsible plan and to support the impeachment of George W. Bush," the statement said.