I grew into the Grand Old Party through Ronald Reagan in 1980. It was my first presidential election and it laid the foundation for the next 34 years of my political life. I have supported every candidate with an (R) after their name ever since. Even when I didn't think Bob Dole stood a chance...even when I thought McCain was not the man to run against Obama in '08...and even during the 2012 primary season when I swore up and down I would support any candidate except Romney, I STILL supported Romney.
However many times I thought the Establishment GOP was taking their conservative base for granted, I kept supporting the party. Then the way in which the GOP treated us conservatives took a decidedly nasty turn in 2010. Instead of embracing the Tea Party and the grass roots energy we brought to the political landscape, you treated us like a plague. Instead of accepting the turn to the right that the conservatives were engendering, you stood in open opposition and defiance to us. Instead of accepting the will of the voters in several primaries in 2010, you rejected your own people and refused to support a candidate YOU didn't choose for us. And when those Tea Party candidates didn't win in the general election, you blamed US.
Like some spoiled little kid, when the conservatives in the party wouldn't play by YOUR rules, you took your ball (your money) and went home. Instead of taking back the Senate in 2010, like we easily could have, you were content to let the Dems keep their power just so you can maintain your unresistant control of the party. And you blamed US for our loss in the Senate.
I should have walked away then. I should have seen the writing on the wall. But for the sake of not letting Obama win re-election, I stuck with you. I gave you another chance in 2012. There were some great candidates in 2012...even a couple whom you could have worked with...like Newt or Santorum. We could have had any number of non-Romney candidates who could have beaten Obama. Rick Perry...do you really think his flub about naming three agencies compares to the gaffes made by Obama and his 57 states? Herman Cain...too much of an outsider for your tastes?
But, no. You made a deal with Romney in 2008 that he could be the next candidate and you were determined to ruin the reputations of some very good men who stood in the way of you nominating YOUR guy. How'd that turn out for ya? Not good...and even worse for the country. Thanks a bunch.
Now things have turned down right nasty. You don't just support your chosen candidates anymore, you destroy any conservative who stands in the way. It started in Virginia with their 2013 elections. If you had show an ounce of support for Cuccinelli there is little question he'd have won and Virginia would have been spared such an uniquely piss poor governor for the next four years.
Then came the primary season...California, Oklahoma, Iowa, Mississippi and many more. You couldn't just let two good candidates fight it out and save your bias for the general election by supporting whom the party in each state nominated, could you? You had to lie, cheat, destroy any conservative who stood in your way. And its quite clear you do so because you are so confident that we'll still vote GOP no matter how many times you piss on us.
But let me point something out to you about that Romney thing. Barack Obama received 5 million fewer votes in 2012 than he did in 2008...while Romney couldn't even garner as many as McCain got in 2008. You had the perfect chance to defeat Obama. His support was never going to be as strong as it was in 2008. Too many eyes were opened to what he was doing. But instead of riding the wave of the TeaParty and the conservatives in the party, you shoved a terrible candidate down our throats, the very last one any conservative wanted. And what was the result? Millions of us stayed home. Why do you think we lost house seats and even Senate seats? Because you forced us to stay home.
You're about to do the same thing again in 2014. You have pissed on us far too many times. We won't stand for it anymore. You may actually survive the election and win the Senate. But I will tell you this, get your affairs in order, because that may be the last thing the GOP ever wins. Every time you piss on us, you lose tens of thousands of more voters....you assure that the third party you've been terrified of will emerge and YOU...and the American people will be the ultimate losers.
Why? Because those liberals you so adoringly embraced in Mississippi to help ole boy Thad win the nomination will show you no mercy. They will wipe the floor of every political corner with the corpse of the GOP party and frankly I'm not sure our country will survive....thanks to YOU.
Bottom line...you lost me. I'm out. The GOP no longer represents my political beliefs. And I will no longer support it. You are no longer the party of Abraham Lincoln, Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan. You wanted to be the party of Bob Dole, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Thad Cochran and that's how you'll be remembered.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
A Free Press Is No Longer Free When They Fail To Defend That Freedom
"The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure." --Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1823. ME 15:491
For more than two hundred years our country has stood tall on the liberties afforded us by God, and protected by our Constitution. But as we have come to realize over decades of progressively more vile corruption in government, the only real security we have against a small ruling elitist group of people from completely reversing the course of individual liberty in this country is us...we, the people.
Every despot, every dictator has known throughout history that their power is only safe so long as they can control the spread of opinions that contradict their authority. Once the people rise up in opposition to their authority, they have no power to squelch them. Sooner or later they will fall.
This is exactly why one of the most vital actions any despotic ruler must take in gaining control over the masses is to control the distribution of information...i.e. - Control the Media. And this is exactly why our Founding Fathers thought so highly about insuring that our press is free from government intrusion, as well as being free from government influence.
All leaders in any government eventually fall prey to the temptations to cut corners in pursuit of their political agendas. None have been more emboldened to do so than this generation of politicians. Not fifty years ago if any of the things that today's politicians do with regularity were even tried by any politician from either side of the aisle our press would have exposed them like a string bikini.
Today, not only are our politicians emboldened by the lack of press scrutiny, they're encouraged by the level of actual unwillingness there is in the press to investigate corruption in government...EXCEPT...when it comes to politicians who don't fit in nicely with the agenda of the ruling class...think Ted Cruz, Ron Paul, Herb Cain, etc.
The number of scandals in this administration alone could conceivably total more than all previous administrations combined. I know, I'm being ridiculous. Or am I? I don't really know, I haven't really researched it. I do know, however, that there is little doubt that if any previous administration, especially a Republican one, had done a tenth of the things this administration has done that the press would have excoriated them.
Now days, the press is no long independent of the government. They are no longer guardians of free access to information. They are no longer concerned with informing the public with anything more than what their handlers direct them to do.
The public's perception of the press has followed suit. Less than 25% of us still trust the media to present us with the truth. The consequences of this are beyond conception. How does one make an informed decision when they can't trust the information they're getting as being real or true.
Let me set an example. We all know of the Sandy Hook mass shooting. We all know that 26 people died from one shooter. But did you know there are no death certificates on file. All people were pronounced dead on the scene by police...not in the hospital by medical personnel...that the shooter, a young boy was supposedly hauling around 50+ lbs of guns and ammo and shooting people with the accuracy of a world class shooter? Did you know that there is a great deal of evidence suggesting the entire Sandy Hook incident was a staged "wag the dog" event?
Do I believe it? I don't know. I don't know what to believe anymore. Can our government pull something like that off? I don't know anymore. And why don't I know? Because my ability to trust the press to present me with nothing but the facts is almost non-existent. Because my ability to believe that there are limits to what these elitists can do with the press sitting completely in their pocket is null and void.
How does the head of the IRS walk into a hearing in Congress tell us that the emails of seven relevant members of the congressional investigation were destroyed in a computer crash in two different cities that didn't effect anyone else...also happened at a time when there were no redundant back ups for those emails and the copies in the mailboxes of the people to whom they sent mail were also not there...that there were no hard copies of these emails despite the law that requires there be. How does he say that with a straight face and the entirety of the US news corp NOT rush to find answers to how this happened and who's getting fired for it happening.?
How do four Americans die in Benghazi under the cloud of accusations that it happened as a result of illegal gun running to Syrian rebels through Libya and the entirety of the news media NOT rush the White House, State Department and Pentagon demanding answers? Why is the only personality on any major network who took the time and energy to do her job to investigate this event end up being forced out of her job by the very network executives who hired her to do such work?
The news media in the United States is no longer reliable, trustworthy or worthy of the exemptions and protections our Constitution affords them. They must begin to, once again, become the watchtowers of our society or face the inevitable consequences of the corruption they have become so willing to protect.
For more than two hundred years our country has stood tall on the liberties afforded us by God, and protected by our Constitution. But as we have come to realize over decades of progressively more vile corruption in government, the only real security we have against a small ruling elitist group of people from completely reversing the course of individual liberty in this country is us...we, the people.
Every despot, every dictator has known throughout history that their power is only safe so long as they can control the spread of opinions that contradict their authority. Once the people rise up in opposition to their authority, they have no power to squelch them. Sooner or later they will fall.
This is exactly why one of the most vital actions any despotic ruler must take in gaining control over the masses is to control the distribution of information...i.e. - Control the Media. And this is exactly why our Founding Fathers thought so highly about insuring that our press is free from government intrusion, as well as being free from government influence.
All leaders in any government eventually fall prey to the temptations to cut corners in pursuit of their political agendas. None have been more emboldened to do so than this generation of politicians. Not fifty years ago if any of the things that today's politicians do with regularity were even tried by any politician from either side of the aisle our press would have exposed them like a string bikini.
Today, not only are our politicians emboldened by the lack of press scrutiny, they're encouraged by the level of actual unwillingness there is in the press to investigate corruption in government...EXCEPT...when it comes to politicians who don't fit in nicely with the agenda of the ruling class...think Ted Cruz, Ron Paul, Herb Cain, etc.
The number of scandals in this administration alone could conceivably total more than all previous administrations combined. I know, I'm being ridiculous. Or am I? I don't really know, I haven't really researched it. I do know, however, that there is little doubt that if any previous administration, especially a Republican one, had done a tenth of the things this administration has done that the press would have excoriated them.
Now days, the press is no long independent of the government. They are no longer guardians of free access to information. They are no longer concerned with informing the public with anything more than what their handlers direct them to do.
The public's perception of the press has followed suit. Less than 25% of us still trust the media to present us with the truth. The consequences of this are beyond conception. How does one make an informed decision when they can't trust the information they're getting as being real or true.
Let me set an example. We all know of the Sandy Hook mass shooting. We all know that 26 people died from one shooter. But did you know there are no death certificates on file. All people were pronounced dead on the scene by police...not in the hospital by medical personnel...that the shooter, a young boy was supposedly hauling around 50+ lbs of guns and ammo and shooting people with the accuracy of a world class shooter? Did you know that there is a great deal of evidence suggesting the entire Sandy Hook incident was a staged "wag the dog" event?
Do I believe it? I don't know. I don't know what to believe anymore. Can our government pull something like that off? I don't know anymore. And why don't I know? Because my ability to trust the press to present me with nothing but the facts is almost non-existent. Because my ability to believe that there are limits to what these elitists can do with the press sitting completely in their pocket is null and void.
How does the head of the IRS walk into a hearing in Congress tell us that the emails of seven relevant members of the congressional investigation were destroyed in a computer crash in two different cities that didn't effect anyone else...also happened at a time when there were no redundant back ups for those emails and the copies in the mailboxes of the people to whom they sent mail were also not there...that there were no hard copies of these emails despite the law that requires there be. How does he say that with a straight face and the entirety of the US news corp NOT rush to find answers to how this happened and who's getting fired for it happening.?
How do four Americans die in Benghazi under the cloud of accusations that it happened as a result of illegal gun running to Syrian rebels through Libya and the entirety of the news media NOT rush the White House, State Department and Pentagon demanding answers? Why is the only personality on any major network who took the time and energy to do her job to investigate this event end up being forced out of her job by the very network executives who hired her to do such work?
The news media in the United States is no longer reliable, trustworthy or worthy of the exemptions and protections our Constitution affords them. They must begin to, once again, become the watchtowers of our society or face the inevitable consequences of the corruption they have become so willing to protect.
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Historical Connection: Nixon and Obama
Everyday I roam through Facebook, news sites, blogs, and various other postings online seeing people call for Barack Obama's impeachment. The long list of potential violations have been often published, updated and republished.
At one time, recently, I listed off thirty-five different scandals within this administrations. Admittedly, not all of them would be impeachable offenses. But no less than 8-10 would be impeachable offenses. Here's that list (and yes, I would not be surprised that others could be added):
Libya
Benghazi
Bergdahl/5 Taliban Leaders
Solyndra
Fast n Furious
Obamacare (multiple incidents)
The Border (multiple incidents)
IRS
NSA
Assassination of US citizens
Below are the exact Articles of Impeachment of Richard Nixon in 1974. I've taken the time to highlight the sections of the articles for which I believe our current president could also be impeached. I invite you to post comments agreeing or disagreeing with those highlights and/or adding others.
For those not interested in doing that activity, read them anyway and tell me WHY this president has not been impeached yet.
Article 1: Obstruction of Justice.
In his conduct of the office of the President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, in that: On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President committed unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his subordinates and agents in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede and obstruct investigations of such unlawful entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities. The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan have included one or more of the following:
(1) Making or causing to be made false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States.
(2) Withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States.
(3) Approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counseling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings.
(4) Interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force and congressional committees.
(5) Approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payments of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry and other illegal activities.
(6) Endeavoring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States.
(7) Disseminating information received from officers of the Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States for the purpose of aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid criminal liability.
(8) Making false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation has been conducted with respect to allegation of misconduct on the part of personnel of the Executive Branch of the United States and personnel of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, and that there was no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct; or
(9) Endeavoring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favored treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
(Approved by a vote of 27-11 by the House Judiciary Committee on Saturday, July 27, 1974.)
Article 2: Abuse of Power.
Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, imparting the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposes of these agencies.
This conduct has included one or more of the following:
(1) He has, acting personally and through his subordinated and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigation to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.
(2) He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance.
(3) He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions to him, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.
(4) He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavored to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive; judicial and legislative entities concerning the unlawful entry into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, and the cover-up thereof, and concerning other unlawful activities including those relating to the confirmation of Richard Kleindienst as attorney general of the United States, the electronic surveillance of private citizens, the break-in into the office of Dr. Lewis Fielding, and the campaign financing practices of the Committee to Re-elect the President.
(5) In disregard of the rule of law: he knowingly misused the executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive branch: including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal Division and the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force of the Department of Justice, in violation of his duty to take care that the laws by faithfully executed.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
(Approved 28-10 by the House Judiciary Committee on Monday, July 29, 1974.)
Article 3: Contempt of Congress.
In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of the President of the United States, and to the best of his ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, had failed without lawful cause or excuse, to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives, on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. The subpoenaed papers and things were deemed necessary by the Committee in order to resolve by direct evidence fundamental, factual questions relating to Presidential direction, knowledge or approval of actions demonstrated by other evidence to be substantial grounds for impeachment of the President. In refusing to produce these papers and things, Richard M. Nixon, substituting his judgement as to what materials were necessary for the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, thereby assuming to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by Constitution in the House of Representatives.
In all this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore, Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial and removal from office.
So, again, I ask, why has this president NOT been impeached. The duty of the House of Representatives to file and vote upon impeachment papers is not dependent upon the political expediency of filing or not filing. They have their own constitutional obligation to do what is lawfully necessary without bias or prejudice. They are obligated to do what it necessary whether or not their own individual or party's positions of power are at risk or not. They are obligated to their constitutional duties whether or not there are social, political or other risks apparent.
At one time, recently, I listed off thirty-five different scandals within this administrations. Admittedly, not all of them would be impeachable offenses. But no less than 8-10 would be impeachable offenses. Here's that list (and yes, I would not be surprised that others could be added):
Libya
Benghazi
Bergdahl/5 Taliban Leaders
Solyndra
Fast n Furious
Obamacare (multiple incidents)
The Border (multiple incidents)
IRS
NSA
Assassination of US citizens
Below are the exact Articles of Impeachment of Richard Nixon in 1974. I've taken the time to highlight the sections of the articles for which I believe our current president could also be impeached. I invite you to post comments agreeing or disagreeing with those highlights and/or adding others.
For those not interested in doing that activity, read them anyway and tell me WHY this president has not been impeached yet.
Article 1: Obstruction of Justice.
In his conduct of the office of the President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prevented, obstructed, and impeded the administration of justice, in that: On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President committed unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office, engaged personally and through his subordinates and agents in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede and obstruct investigations of such unlawful entry; to cover up, conceal and protect those responsible and to conceal the existence and scope of other unlawful covert activities. The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan have included one or more of the following:
(1) Making or causing to be made false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States.
(2) Withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States.
(3) Approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counseling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings.
(4) Interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force and congressional committees.
(5) Approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payments of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry and other illegal activities.
(6) Endeavoring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States.
(7) Disseminating information received from officers of the Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States for the purpose of aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid criminal liability.
(8) Making false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation has been conducted with respect to allegation of misconduct on the part of personnel of the Executive Branch of the United States and personnel of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, and that there was no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct; or
(9) Endeavoring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favored treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
(Approved by a vote of 27-11 by the House Judiciary Committee on Saturday, July 27, 1974.)
Article 2: Abuse of Power.
Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, imparting the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposes of these agencies.
This conduct has included one or more of the following:
(1) He has, acting personally and through his subordinated and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposes not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigation to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.
(2) He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance.
(3) He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions to him, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.
(4) He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavored to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive; judicial and legislative entities concerning the unlawful entry into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, and the cover-up thereof, and concerning other unlawful activities including those relating to the confirmation of Richard Kleindienst as attorney general of the United States, the electronic surveillance of private citizens, the break-in into the office of Dr. Lewis Fielding, and the campaign financing practices of the Committee to Re-elect the President.
(5) In disregard of the rule of law: he knowingly misused the executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive branch: including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal Division and the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force of the Department of Justice, in violation of his duty to take care that the laws by faithfully executed.
In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
(Approved 28-10 by the House Judiciary Committee on Monday, July 29, 1974.)
Article 3: Contempt of Congress.
In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of the President of the United States, and to the best of his ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, had failed without lawful cause or excuse, to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives, on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. The subpoenaed papers and things were deemed necessary by the Committee in order to resolve by direct evidence fundamental, factual questions relating to Presidential direction, knowledge or approval of actions demonstrated by other evidence to be substantial grounds for impeachment of the President. In refusing to produce these papers and things, Richard M. Nixon, substituting his judgement as to what materials were necessary for the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, thereby assuming to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by Constitution in the House of Representatives.
In all this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore, Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial and removal from office.
So, again, I ask, why has this president NOT been impeached. The duty of the House of Representatives to file and vote upon impeachment papers is not dependent upon the political expediency of filing or not filing. They have their own constitutional obligation to do what is lawfully necessary without bias or prejudice. They are obligated to do what it necessary whether or not their own individual or party's positions of power are at risk or not. They are obligated to their constitutional duties whether or not there are social, political or other risks apparent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
