We know Bruce Fein has become one of the most passionate and articulate advocates for impeachment and that he has serious conservative bona fides.
This AM he was on Thom Hartmann, and I became convinced that Rep. Conyers should have him as one of the opening witnesses in the case for impeaching Cheney and Bush.
HIs answers to three sharp questions from Hartmann were fantastic- the questions were
- How would an impeachment of Bush and Cheney differ from Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton?
- Why have civil liberties not been eroded in democracies such as Germany, Italy, England, and Spain which have experienced sustained terrorist threats over many years?
- Is impeachment itself a constitutional crisis?
My paraphrases of his answers below the fold, as well as highlights from the 45 minute dialogue including the scary exec order Bush signed yesterday.
UPDATE: audio link below the fold.
UPDATE: Hear it here - thanks to quantumspin
- Clinton was targeted for a specific offense, Johnson by a politically overreaching congress. Cheney and Bush have mounted a sustained, systematic attack on the constitution and the balance of powers therein. The threat is far higher for these two than Clinton (recall that Fein helped draft the impeachment articles against Clinton).
- Germany, Spain, Italy, and the UK are parliamentary governments with relatively weak executive powers. Far more consensus must be build and maintained for action there. Moreover, they are not in the position of global strength of the US right now. Madison warned that the executive must be closely watched, particularly in times of war, because they will use the pretext of war to reach for more power.
- Impeachment is not a constitutional crisis and will not derail our ability to pass other legislation. Minimum wage increases and increased children's health coverage will be all lost if our constitutional democracy collapses under this onslaught.
Fein also cited his concern for the efforts of Cheney and Bush to go beyond what the despots of history did not do in effectively declaring every square foot of soil where Americans live a war zone in the war on terror, justifying military actions essentially universally.
Hartmann cited this very troubling executive orderr signed yesterday by Bush. The nominal upshot is that if you participate in a conversation which could be perceived as undermining Iraq reconstruction and development, your assets can be seized. The timing, given the all nighter, is chilling. Read it and see if you agree with Hartmann and me.
Fein also brushed aside the concern of Thom Hartmann about double jeopardy should impeachment conviction fail in the senate. He reminded Hartmann that impeachment is for the purpose of removal from office and is not a criminal proceeding and that this was why Ford went to the trouble of pardoning Nixon from Jaworski's possible indictments.
I think Fein would be a perfect person to initiate a hearing inquiring about impeachment. He can recite chapter and verse about the violations and he can be a great educator about the history and constitutional context. He is also a genuine Goldwater style conservative.
Are you reading Rep. Conyers?