Impeach President Bush?

Yes, let's do it.

Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman calls for the impeachment of President Bush in her article of January 11, The Impeachment of George W. Bush, published in The Nation.

Finally, it has started. People have begun to speak of impeaching President George W. Bush--not in hushed whispers but openly, in newspapers, on the Internet, in ordinary conversations and even in Congress. As a former member of Congress who sat on the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment proceedings against President Richard Nixon, I believe they are right to do so.

I can still remember the sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach during those proceedings, when it became clear that the President had so systematically abused the powers of the presidency and so threatened the rule of law that he had to be removed from office. As a Democrat who opposed many of President Nixon's policies, I still found voting for his impeachment to be one of the most sobering and unpleasant tasks I ever had to undertake. None of the members of the committee took pleasure in voting for impeachment; after all, Democrat or Republican, Nixon was still our President.

At the time, I hoped that our committee's work would send a strong signal to future Presidents that they had to obey the rule of law. I was wrong.

Holtzman presents her case by citing warrantless wiretaps, subverting democracy by willfully misleading the public about the Iraq War, torture, and other abuses of power. These are all issues that have been discussed in public forums. Holtzman's position does not stake out any new or radical position in that regard. Even some members of Congress are scratching their heads and wondering if they should do something about the issues.

The most recent bar for impeachment of a President was set when President Clinton lied to a grand jury about having sex with a White House intern. Abuse of power and felonies committed by a President seem well within the scope of impeachment hearings after the Clinton episode. The engaged and committed citizen should not be embarrassed by calling for full disclosure about abuses and impeachment of President Bush if the evidence warrants it.

A very vocal group claims that warrantless wiretaps do not matter because it is only the bad guys who are being tapped. Nobody knows who has been tapped and who hasn't. That dog won't hunt for the moment. The real point of the matter is whether the President has the power to do it, or has he illegally violated the rights of American citizens, abused his power, and committed felonies.

The same can be said of the other issues. The President is on record that he will continue to do whatever he wants regarding these issues. He needs to be taken at his word and taken to account.

One can arrive at an impeach President Bush perspective from many different philosophical viewpoints without being rabidly partisan about it. There is a Constitution and laws that stake out positions on these issues. Some don't care about that. They will assert that it is the bad guys who are in jeopardy from abuses of power. The problem with that argument is that the law already clearly spells out what the rights of citizens are whether they are suspected bad guys or not. Who has given up these rights before the fact? None. Some may want to give up their rights after the fact on the basis of a weakly argued war powers explanation. They are welcome to do it. That does not mean anyone who disagrees with their position must do the same. The Constitution and the law guarantees certain rights to all the citizens. The President is sworn to uphold those laws and rights.

The Congress won't thoroughly investigate and impeach President Bush of their own volition. The next big issue is how to cajole and pressure them into it.