Bush Crimes That Will Get Him Impeached, Tried, Removed and Tried Again as a Common Criminal

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Watergate leftovers in the Bush administration learned all the wrong lessons. Dick Cheney, for example, learned how to stonewall, lie and obstruct justice. Outright treason he left to underlings who would take the fall for him. More ominously, however, these "leftovers" learned how to pull off a coup d'etat.

Those too young to remember Watergate are tempted to write that the GOP set the stage for impeachment hardball when they impeached Bill Clinton for lying about an act that was not even a crime. Admittedly, that was absurd. But it stands in stark contrast to the numerous real crimes that had been attributed to Richard Nixon during watergate and the numerous real crimes that will be charged and proven against George W. Bush.

It was, rather, the impending impeachment of Nixon that most surely set the stage for Bush, radicalizing the likes of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. A recent book, The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office lists only ten real crimes that should, by rights, should get George W. Bush thrown out of an office that he and a criminal gang of Goppers stole twice.

No progress can be made toward removing GWB until reality is acknowledged: Bush is not a legitimate "President", having conspired with prominent Republicans to steal the White House. The following heading is merely one of ten impeachable offenses that must be charged to George W. Bush. My notes follow. At the end this entry is a list of nine remaining offenses. Over the next several weeks, I hope to consider each in turn.

Bush 2000 Election Theft: A Coup d'Etat!

One's party affiliation is revealed by what is most vividly remembered about Florida. Republicans, brainwashed by the slanted media coverage will recall the "swamis divining" the intention of voters. By contrast, I remember most vividly a gang of GOP brownshirts attacking recounters who were merely doing their job, a court mandated civic, patriotic duty to make sure that all the votes were counted. It was not progressives or liberals who first used the word coup d'etat to describe that the nature of that stolen election. It was, rather, Paul Gigot, writing for the very voice of establishment America, the Wall Street Journal, who used that term. The best account of what really happened is found in John Dee's Coup2K.

In Florida, the Bush campaign quietly organized "rent-a-rioters" and flew them to Florida from all over the country. While disingenuously portraying the protests as "spontaneous grass-roots efforts," the Bush campaign sent special squads of GOP Congressional staffers who, in several instances, led violent attacks on Democratic observers, smashed windows, and tried to force their way into vote-counting rooms. This was not civil disobedience intended to show disagreement, but a concerted attack designed to threaten and intimidate. ³⁸

Shortly after the election, the Bush campaign began a two-pronged program to import as many protesters into Florida as they could. The first prong was done openly: phone-trees reached out across the country to coax party loyalists to head down and fight Al Gore's "theft" of the election. This much is standard political fare. What was unusual was the more discreet second prong.

Under the direction of House Republican Whip Tom DeLay (of Texas, mind you), staff members of GOP Congressmen were quietly approached with offers of all-expenses-paid trips to Florida, "all paid for by the Bush campaign." ³⁹ In addition to staying in swanky beach-side hotels, part of their reward would be an exclusive Thanksgiving Day party in Ft. Lauderdale.

According to the Wall Street Journal, more than 200 Congressional staffers signed on, with many of them staying in Florida for over a week. "Once word leaked out," said one GOP operative, "everybody wanted in." ⁴⁰
-John Dee, Coup2K

That news coverage was inadequate accounts for the fact that these events are all but forgotten. They have certainly not gotten the post-mortem they so richly deserve. The attacks consisted of felonious assaults and battery, crimes aggravated by the fact that the violence was directed against public officials performing their sworn duties.

According to US Codes, the GOP attacks are nothing less than seditious.

Section 2384. Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Section 2383. Rebellion or insurrectionWhoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
US Codes

Before the phrase was taken up by Paul Gigot, the perpetrators themselves referred to their actions as a coup d'etat! What is a coup d'etat but an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power from a legitimate government? In the wake of 911, such an attack must be considered to have been a terrorist attack.

Why have not charges been brought against these thugs and the Republican politicians [Bush and the Bush campaign] who financed them?

The Miami protesters who were paid by the Bush recount committee were:

1. Matt Schlapp, a Bush staffer who was based in Austin and received $4,276.09;
2. Thomas Pyle, a staff aide to House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, $456;
3. Michael Murphy, a DeLay fund-raiser, $935.12;
4. Garry Malphrus, House majority chief counsel to the House Judiciary subcommittee on criminal justice, $330;
5. Charles Royal, a legislative aide to Rep. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. $391.80;
6. Kevin Smith, a former GOP House staffer, $373.23.

Three of the Miami protesters are now members of Bush’s White House staff, the Miami Herald reported last month. They include Schlapp, who is now a special assistant to the president; Malphrus, who is now deputy director of the president’s Domestic Policy Council; and Joel Kaplan, another special assistant to the president.

[See Miami Herald, July 14, 2002]

Can't happen here? It did! Dees continues:

Other "Congress Gang" platoons were sent to Fort Lauderdale, and some of the same Congressional staffers were also involved in a tense confrontation with Democratic volunteers in West Palm Beach. The group, which included Rev. Al Sharpton, was cornered while trying to retrieve some campaign signs. Things got quite tense and heated words were exchanged, but no violence erupted.

In the end, the secret GOP effort was so successful that at many demonstrations, GOP protesters outnumbered Democratic supporters 10 to one.

When it was all over, the Republican rent-a-rioters got their lavish Thanksgiving Day party, with plenty of free food and booze. Wayne Newton crooned "Danke Schoen" for the crowd, until screaming female fans stormed the stage. "Danke schoen, darling, danke schoen. Save those lies, darling, don't explain...." ⁴⁶ But the real highlight of the evening was a conference call from Bush and Cheney. Instead of chastising the goon squad for their violent tactics, the candidates thanked them for their work. They even cracked mocking jokes about their rivals. ⁴⁷

The judicious application of "spontaneous" protests and mob violence has always been a key feature of CIA destabilization. Such operations help put political pressure on the target, make for good TV propaganda, and are sometimes used to intentionally provoke a crackdown that is then widely publicized, often through journalists on the Agency payroll.

For example, the CIA's plan for the 1953 coup in Iran called for "stage[d] political demonstrations under religious cover," to include "staged attacks" on Muslim religious leaders which would then be falsely blamed on the Mossadegh government. ⁴⁸

In their Chilean operations against Salvador Allende during the early '70s, one of the CIA's greatest propaganda victories was "The March of Empty Pots." Thousands of women marched through the streets banging empty cooking pots with ladles to protest food shortages. In reality, the shortages were artificially induced through a secret campaign of economic sabotage coordinated by the CIA along with ITT, Anaconda Copper and other multinationals. Many of the marching "housewives" were actually the spouses of wealthy anti-Allende partisans who were suffering little. Armed fascist gangs backed by the CIA marched along with the women, then provoked violent clashes with the police. Stories of police "attacking women with empty pots" flooded the world press. Dozens of other protests were organized by CIA front groups in order to artificially escalate tensions and portray Allende as having little support or control. ⁴⁹

In 1990, during Bulgaria's first post-Communist elections, professional agitators, backed by millions in covert financing from the US, organized massive street protests that ultimately succeeded in unseating the duly elected government. Even though the renamed Communist party had won the overwhelming majority in voting which western observers on the scene widely agreed had been fair, the US (through the CIA) used the mobs to intimidate and ultimately hound officials from office. ⁵⁰ -John Dee, Coup2K

Propaganda plays an important role in the post-coup period. According to Coup D'Etat - A Practical Handbook by Zionist headliner Edward Luttwak, the goal is not to explain the legitimacy of the coup d'etat. It is, rather, the fact that it is a fait accompli. This advice was taken to heart by James Baker and Bushco. Not concerned with the moral high-ground. Bushco worked overtly to derail the recount, to stop them while Bush was still ahead.

Clearly, Bush won the propaganda war, convincing just enough that it was Bush who was on the side of the law when, in fact, his thugs had just committed acts of seditious conspiracy, violations of US criminal codes. this was achieved through constant repetition, a tactic advocated by Luttwak.

The "Florida Game" is not over. Space and time prevents my addressing the similar issues clouding Bush's "victory" over John Kerry. There is evidence that the White House is still at work planning future election thefts in order to maintain what Rove had called a "permanent Republican majority". That makes no sense of course. If the GOP truly had a majority, it would not find it necessary to steal elections and disenfranchise voters not inclined to vote for GOP crooks.

Michael Winship: Keep Out the Vote
A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Michael Winship

It's a John Grisham novel, this whole scandal swirling about the Justice Department. Like "The Pelican Brief" maybe, in which the motive for the murder of two Supreme Court judges of disparate ideologies remains mysterious until a plucky law student turns up an obscure case on appeal that would ravage protected wetlands for oil and gas development. Mayhem ensues.

In other words, nothing is as it first seems and it can take a while before some semblance of truth emerges. Especially in Washington, home of the scheme and the fraud. You have to peel back the layers of the onion, just as that plucky law student did (pluckily played in the movie version by plucky Julia Roberts).

What's the real motive for knocking off those eight, now nine, maybe more US attorneys -- Republican appointees all -- apparently replaced for insufficient fealty to the Bushie party line? In part, the truth may be lurking in the upcoming 2008 elections.

The White House, Attorney General Gonzales, and the Justice Department have tried to hide their real reasons, citing "performance concerns" as the reason for firing the prosecutors and blaming various underlings for mishandling the dismissals, then throwing them to the wolves, too -- the latest being Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, who announced his resignation Monday. McNulty is the guy who indiscreetly told a Congressional hearing that the person behind the dismissal of Arkansas US Attorney Bud Cummins was Karl Rove, who wanted Cummins replaced with his buddy Tim Griffin. Oops.

Scratch the surface of anything vaguely nefarious at 1600 Pennsylvania and sooner or later you're likely to hit The Rovester. His most famous bit of dark wizardry is to take a negative about his own guy and turn it into a positive -- or, rather, a negative against the other side. In 2004, Rove defused rumors about the president's blotchy National Guard career by orchestrating attacks on John Kerry's legitimate Vietnam combat record. The Swift Boat Vets for Truth set sail and the rest is revisionist history. Klassic Karl.

The GOP, apparently plans to rule not by the "consent of the governed" but by repeated coups. That will be easier in theory than in fact. Nevertheless, the conditions for a Coup d'Etat seemed ripe in the year 2000. The GOP, as to be expected of a tight knit criminal conspiracy, was prepped to strike, to seize power illegitimately and opportunistically. Corporate sponsors expected a return on investment from the fascist state that the GOP leadership and its sponsors had envisioned. Luttwak outlines the conditions propitious for coups d'etat:

• The social and economic conditions of the target country must be such as to confine political participation to a small fraction of the population."
• The target state must be substantially independent and the influence of foreign powers in its internal political life must be relatively limited.
• The target state must have a political centre. If there are several centres these must be identifiable and they must be politically, rather than ethnically, structured. If the state is controlled by a non-politically organized unit, the coup can only be carried out with its consent or neutrality.

Still from Luttwak, a description of a possible "second" coup from within the government following the election theft. It takes the form of a "Palace Revolution" and one sees in this the hand of Cheney, Rove and the insiders who consolidated, with the bureaucracies of government itself, the power of a right wing, fascist revolution.

The importance of this development lies in the fact that if the bureaucrats are linked to the leadership, an illegal seizure of power must take the form of a 'Palace Revolution' and it essentially concerns the manipulation of the person of the ruler. He can be forced to accept to policies or advisors, he can be killed or held captive, but whatever happens the Palace Revolution can only be conducted from the 'inside', and by 'insiders'...
--Coup D'Etat - A Practical Handbook, Edward Luttwak

The months and weeks ahead are crucial for the future of America and, until America collapses of the incompetence of its ruling cabal, the world. There is much to do. The illegitimate regime must be ousted. An ongoing war crime must be brought to an end. Reparations must be agreed upon. War criminals must be brought to trial. Legitimacy and confidence must be restored. Is America up to it? Has Luttwak already described the strategy of a possible "counter" coup?

"...If we were revolutionaries, wanting to destroy the power of some of the political forces, and the long and often bloody process of revolutionary attrition can achieve this. Our purpose is, however, quite different: we want to seize power within the present system, and we shall only stay in power if we embody some new status quo supported by those very forces which a revolution may seek to destroy. Should we want to achieve fundamental social change we can do so after we have become the government. This is perhaps a more efficient method (and certainly a less painful one) than that of a classic revolution. [emphases in original]

"Though we will try to avoid all conflict with the 'political' forces, some of them will almost certainly oppose a coup. But this opposition will largely subside when we have substituted our new status quo for the old one, and can enforce it by our control of the state bureaucracy and security forces. We shall then be carrying out the dual task of imposing our control on the machinery of state while at the same time using it to impose our control on the country at large. [emphasis added] ...

"Our strategy, therefore, must be guided by two principal considerations: the need for maximum speed in the transition phase, and the need to neutralize fully the forces which could oppose us both before and immediately after the coup. If, in the operational phase of the coup, we are at any stage delayed, then our essential weakness will emerge: we shall probably acquire a definite political coloration, and this in turn will lead to a concentration of those forces which oppose the tendency we represent (or are thought to represent). As long as the execution of the coup is rapid, and we are cloaked in anonymity, no particular political faction will have either a motive, or an opportunity, to oppose us. ...[A] delay will lose us our principal advantage: the voluntary neutrality of 'the wait and see' elements, and the involuntary neutrality of those forces which need time to concentrate and deploy for action."

The words of two revolutionaries should inspire true patriots to action --Thomas Jefferson and Che Guevarra. It was Jefferson who wrote what is still a revolutionary manifesto: the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
--Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence

And from Che Guevara:

When the forces of oppression come to maintain themselves in power against established law; peace is considered already broken.
--Ernesto "Che" Guevara, Guerrilla Warfare

Clearly Bush, who seized power with both chicanery and violence, continues to rule illegitimately, unconstitutionally, unlawfully. The Bush regime is an outlaw regime. Bush does not merely break the laws of the land, his coup continues to subvert the rule of law, the very principles of our founding. The "peace", therefore, is already broken. Bush is at war with the people of the United States. He is at war with the Constitution, a people's charter, duly ratified, and in case law, statute, and Preamble, the Supreme Law of the Land.
Think of the Iraq war as a war waged by US troops on behalf of big oil companies and Bush cronies. Think of huge corporations literally buying, perhaps leasing, the resources of the United States to wage war or engage in other nefarious activities for corporate interests. Jack Abramoff was but the tip of an iceberg. Under Bush, there is not even the pretense that the US government, the executive branch especially, represents the interests of a free electorate. Your government has been hijacked.

Democrats See Chance to Fault Deficits and Pork

By Elizabeth Williamson and Lori Montgomery

Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, June 29, 2007; Page A19

An industrial lubricants program, bus replacement -- and the Grout Museum. A $12 million earmark in an emergency defense bill for "industrial mobilization" on the Iowa border.

Democrats have pork spending on the menu for their grilling of Jim Nussle, President Bush's pick as White House budget director. Nussle's confirmation hearings will focus on the former congressman's pursuit of earmarks for Iowa, as well as ballooning deficits during his tenure as chairman of the House Budget Committee.
...

Future installments. Each heading is an impeachable offense.

2. Lied about Iraq to Congress, the Public, and the United Nations.
3. 9-11 Cover-Up and Obstruction of Justice.
4. Violated Rights of Citizens including Habeas Corpus.
5. NSA Program to spy on Citizens without Warrant.
6. Violated International Treaties Including Geneva Convention.
7. Actively Encouraged, as a Policy, Use of Torture.
8. Gross Negligence on Hurricane Katrina.
9. Iraq Contract Corruption--Bremer "Lost" $8 billion in cash, sole source awards, and gross negligence in managing the peace.
10. Stole Ohio election in 2004.

---

---