Peter Mathews for CA-37: Why we must Impeach Bush
Thu Jun 14, 2007 at 06:16:03 AM PDT
[The following diary was prepared by CA-37 candidate Peter Mathews. I'm letting him post it under my account rather than his because of the first-week diary restriction on new accounts. He is in no way accountable for any past comments or diaries of mine made over the years, many of which are certainly silly.]
Hello to all Kossacks! I have had people on my staff after me to do this. The technology of blogging is still new to me, so be gentle!
My name is Peter Mathews, and I am running for Congress in the California 37th (Long Beach, Compton, Carson, Watts, Willowbrook) Congressional district special election on June 26th, to fill the vacancy created by the death of the late Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald.
(Peter Mathews bottom left)
Of the many issues facing the 37th and the nation that are important to me, there is one that I want to address in particular in this introductory diary: Impeachment.
Do the Republicans that have supported this president and his massive increase in the powers of the executive branch, to the detriment of the other branches of government, disrupting the system of checks and balances that are the cornerstone of our government, do these people ever wake up in the middle of the night, in a cold sweat, wondering what would happen if/when a Democratic president were elected and were to inherit these same powers? Do the same people that puffed up and complained so loudly about Bill Clinton’s "excesses" over Waco or Ruby Ridge or the White House Travel Office adventure ever wonder how hollow those same kind of complaints will sound in a future where Habeas Corpus is a quaint and antiquated idea?
Habeas Corpus is one of the most precious and fundamental cornerstones of our democracy, an ancient one that originated many hundreds of years ago. Without Habeas Corpus, without the right to challenge the government’s charges against you in a court of law, we are sliding on the slippery slope to dictatorship.
If the executive branch decides to stop recognizing the validity of the other two coequal branches of the government, the normal checks and balances of our government have failed. What use are the normal constitutional remedies of legislation or court challenges if the executive branch claims for itself the right to ignore such challenges? The president’s new and self-serving interpretation of the constitution make just such an end-run around the rule of law.
This is why the issue of impeachment must be on the table. It’s not an issue of personal vendetta or politics. It’s an issue of constitutional integrity that will be with us long after George W. Bush and his failed administration slink away into the historical dustbin.
Let’s separate the two parts of this issue:
- The legal basis for impeachment
The legal justifications for the constitutional impeachment of George W. Bush don’t seem to generate that much dispute. There has been plenty of discussion of the reasons. For a good explanation of the legal basis, I strongly recommend former congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman’s excellent book --The Impeachment of George W. Bush, a Practical Guide for Concerned Citizens --. There are reasons to satisfy anyone. Take your pick: the torture of prisoners, lying about a war of choice, the Valerie Plame mess, illegal wiretapping of Americans, the abysmal Katrina mismanagement, leaking classified information for political purposes, or the obstruction of justice that we are still uncovering in the Justice Department investigation.
- Practical and political basis for impeachment
This part generates more argument than the first part. Why bother to impeach a president who has less than two years left? Wouldn’t it be a distraction from stopping the war in Iraq? (This is Pelosi’s argument.) Couldn’t this backfire on Democrats as the Clinton impeachment backfired on Republicans? And isn’t it a vain effort, after all, with the Republicans having a sizeable enough minority in Congress to thwart it?
Those are all very good practical arguments, but this is more than just a political or tactical issue to me. As a professor of American Government and International Relations, I worry more about the precedent that we set if we do not act at all. We may dismiss George W. Bush as an aberration, and one with a limited shelf-life, but if the precedent he has set for extending executive authority is allowed to stand unquestioned, then future presidents, whether Democrat or Republican, may claim similar authority with some historical justification to back them up. Above and beyond the continuing damage that George W. Bush’s policies pose to our country in the remaining months of his presidency there lies the more lasting threat posed by his legacy.
I endorse Representative John Conyers’ bill HR 635, which will establish a select committee for the purpose of, to quote directly:
Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.
This bill needs to be brought out of committee and sent to the house floor so that we can begin the process of impeachment, if need be. I don’t want to prejudge anyone, even the president. But nobody is above the law. Not even the president.
I welcome your comments!
Peter Mathews for Congress CA-37. Vote June 26!
Help if you can. There are only 12 days left. 
Peter on Youtube
[HTML formatting courtesy of Dumbo]
Permalink | 7 comments