athelind: (number six)
[livejournal.com profile] scarfman* pointed me toward a thoughtful, informed, point-for-point analysis of Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment. I'll cheerfully admit that I have more outrage than expertise in matters of Constitutional law, so it was refreshing to see someone really scrutinizing the legal validity of the bill in question. Certainly, no one in the Corporate Media has bothered to do so.

He categorizes them according to the following criteria:

Fair Cop (no reason why Democrats shouldn't vote for it), Complicit (Democrats supported it), Clinton-bait (involves the same kind of crimes Democrats voted NOT to impeach Bill Clinton for), Not a Crime (self-explanatory), and Just Plain Nuts (ditto).


Even this gentleman classes no less than seven of the Articles as a Fair Cop, with no qualifiers. I must, however, take issue with his category of Clinton-bait. He explains it further in his analysis of Article II, stating:

This article, on the other hand, is simply about Bush lying, plain and simple. The Clinton impeachment made it plain that the majority of Democrats still in office today believe lying, even under oath as a witness in court, is not an impeachable offense.


This is binary logic at its worst. It lacks proportion and nuance, hinging on a comparison of a straw man version of one case to a straw man of the other. If I may be permitted to repeat a crudity, it sees no difference between cum stains and blood stains.

It also asserts that no member of Congress should ever be permitted to change his or her mind, even after the passage of a decade. Perhaps, given so long to consider the high ground of their opponents' punitive morality, they, too, have come to see the light!

And perhaps they could even say that with a straight face.


*Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] scarfman for mentioning the Impeachment issue in today's Arthur, King of Time and Space!
athelind: (Default)
[livejournal.com profile] scarfman* pointed me toward a thoughtful, informed, point-for-point analysis of Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment. I'll cheerfully admit that I have more outrage than expertise in matters of Constitutional law, so it was refreshing to see someone really scrutinizing the legal validity of the bill in question. Certainly, no one in the Corporate Media has bothered to do so.

He categorizes them according to the following criteria:

Fair Cop (no reason why Democrats shouldn't vote for it), Complicit (Democrats supported it), Clinton-bait (involves the same kind of crimes Democrats voted NOT to impeach Bill Clinton for), Not a Crime (self-explanatory), and Just Plain Nuts (ditto).


Even this gentleman classes no less than seven of the Articles as a Fair Cop, with no qualifiers. I must, however, take issue with his category of Clinton-bait. He explains it further in his analysis of Article II, stating:

This article, on the other hand, is simply about Bush lying, plain and simple. The Clinton impeachment made it plain that the majority of Democrats still in office today believe lying, even under oath as a witness in court, is not an impeachable offense.


This is binary logic at its worst. It lacks proportion and nuance, hinging on a comparison of a straw man version of one case to a straw man of the other. If I may be permitted to repeat a crudity, it sees no difference between cum stains and blood stains.

It also asserts that no member of Congress should ever be permitted to change his or her mind, even after the passage of a decade. Perhaps, given so long to consider the high ground of their opponents' punitive morality, they, too, have come to see the light!

And perhaps they could even say that with a straight face.


*Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] scarfman for mentioning the Impeachment issue in today's Arthur, King of Time and Space!

Purgatory.

Jun. 11th, 2008 03:32 pm
athelind: (outrage)
The following is not the sound of a fat lady singing:



The House has voted to send the impeachment resolution to legislative purgatory committee.

All 166 votes in favor of opening up a House impeachment debate came from Republicans, apparently eager to paint Democrats as political creatures in a time of serious issues. Kucinich voted with his party, against his own measure.



And what "serious issues" might those be?

The ongoing war that was founded on lies and deception?

The continued degradation of our freedoms in the name of preserving them?

The plummeting dollar, driven into the toilet by this deficit-funded conquest?

The skyrocketing price of gasoline, conveniently timed to draw attention away from our oil-funded oligarchy?

These are, indeed, serious issues.

Why, then, should we not bring charges against those culpable?



This changes nothing that I've said in the last three days. Keep badgering your Congressmen; keep putting pressure on them all. Let them know that the actions of this man and his cronies cannot go unanswered.


Purgatory.

Jun. 11th, 2008 03:32 pm
athelind: (Default)
The following is not the sound of a fat lady singing:



The House has voted to send the impeachment resolution to legislative purgatory committee.

All 166 votes in favor of opening up a House impeachment debate came from Republicans, apparently eager to paint Democrats as political creatures in a time of serious issues. Kucinich voted with his party, against his own measure.



And what "serious issues" might those be?

The ongoing war that was founded on lies and deception?

The continued degradation of our freedoms in the name of preserving them?

The plummeting dollar, driven into the toilet by this deficit-funded conquest?

The skyrocketing price of gasoline, conveniently timed to draw attention away from our oil-funded oligarchy?

These are, indeed, serious issues.

Why, then, should we not bring charges against those culpable?



This changes nothing that I've said in the last three days. Keep badgering your Congressmen; keep putting pressure on them all. Let them know that the actions of this man and his cronies cannot go unanswered.


athelind: (outrage)
This was originally a response to a comment in a previous post. At the suggestion of several people, I'm expanding it to a full post.

I have heard from several sources -- including [livejournal.com profile] hitchkitty's Congressman -- a reluctance to use impeachment as a "political tool" -- by which they mean a partisan tool, a means of vindictive retribution against the opposition.*

That boat sailed ten years ago, dear reader.

After achieving control of the House for the first time in forty years, and spending more than half of that time seething bitterly over the resignation and disgrace of Richard Milhouse Nixon, the "Grand Old Party" immediately turned their vindictive pettiness on the current Democratic President. Four years of a concerted witch hunt over matters long preceding Mr. Clinton's term in the White House followed. In the end, the most vicious, ruthless, take-no-prisoners political minds in this nation could find nothing more compromising than a hesitation to be entirely candid about a sexual indiscretion that had nothing to do with the original investigation.

And now, we have reached a point where this single, frivolous impeachment has so compromised the validity of the process that there is reluctance to invoke it in a clear-cut case of multiple offenses against the laws and the Constitution of the United States.

If the highest officials in the land cannot be held accountable for their actions using the legal framework set in place for exactly that, then they are, in fact, above the law, and the pretense of Democracy in the United States is a shadow play.

Other questions have been raised in regard to the timing, so close to being rid of the Current Occupant through the normal order of things. But consider this: Mr. Bush has 224 days left in office. If memory serves, they impeached Mr. Clinton in 181 days.

Even if this action does not get him removed from office, even the first phase -- getting the Congress to confirm that, yes, at least some of these offenses listed are, indeed, "an impeachable offense, warranting the removal from office" -- is important.

It is a valuable precursor for bringing the criminal charges these actions so richly deserve, be it in a United States court, or, if I may engage in a wishful fantasy of our country ever seeing fit to grow up and join the community of civilized nations, in the International Criminal Court.

Even if it amounts to no more than a symbolic gesture, we have to make it clear, to ourselves, to the rest of the world, to posterity -- and above all, to the power-hungry motherless savages, past and future, who seek to wring the public coffers dry to polish their own tick-bloated egos -- that sacrificing all that is right and good about the American experiment for any cause is simply not acceptable.

For more than a decade, we blockaded and starved the people of Iraq, because of their stubborn refusal to rise up against a leader who initiated a war of aggression, detained citizens and foreign nationals without due process of law, and maintaining and practicing tortue as a matter of official policy.

How can we not hold ourselves to the same standards?


*[livejournal.com profile] hitchkitty has more to say on the subject here, at the culmination of this thread.
athelind: (Default)
This was originally a response to a comment in a previous post. At the suggestion of several people, I'm expanding it to a full post.

I have heard from several sources -- including [livejournal.com profile] hitchkitty's Congressman -- a reluctance to use impeachment as a "political tool" -- by which they mean a partisan tool, a means of vindictive retribution against the opposition.*

That boat sailed ten years ago, dear reader.

After achieving control of the House for the first time in forty years, and spending more than half of that time seething bitterly over the resignation and disgrace of Richard Milhouse Nixon, the "Grand Old Party" immediately turned their vindictive pettiness on the current Democratic President. Four years of a concerted witch hunt over matters long preceding Mr. Clinton's term in the White House followed. In the end, the most vicious, ruthless, take-no-prisoners political minds in this nation could find nothing more compromising than a hesitation to be entirely candid about a sexual indiscretion that had nothing to do with the original investigation.

And now, we have reached a point where this single, frivolous impeachment has so compromised the validity of the process that there is reluctance to invoke it in a clear-cut case of multiple offenses against the laws and the Constitution of the United States.

If the highest officials in the land cannot be held accountable for their actions using the legal framework set in place for exactly that, then they are, in fact, above the law, and the pretense of Democracy in the United States is a shadow play.

Other questions have been raised in regard to the timing, so close to being rid of the Current Occupant through the normal order of things. But consider this: Mr. Bush has 224 days left in office. If memory serves, they impeached Mr. Clinton in 181 days.

Even if this action does not get him removed from office, even the first phase -- getting the Congress to confirm that, yes, at least some of these offenses listed are, indeed, "an impeachable offense, warranting the removal from office" -- is important.

It is a valuable precursor for bringing the criminal charges these actions so richly deserve, be it in a United States court, or, if I may engage in a wishful fantasy of our country ever seeing fit to grow up and join the community of civilized nations, in the International Criminal Court.

Even if it amounts to no more than a symbolic gesture, we have to make it clear, to ourselves, to the rest of the world, to posterity -- and above all, to the power-hungry motherless savages, past and future, who seek to wring the public coffers dry to polish their own tick-bloated egos -- that sacrificing all that is right and good about the American experiment for any cause is simply not acceptable.

For more than a decade, we blockaded and starved the people of Iraq, because of their stubborn refusal to rise up against a leader who initiated a war of aggression, detained citizens and foreign nationals without due process of law, and maintaining and practicing tortue as a matter of official policy.

How can we not hold ourselves to the same standards?


*[livejournal.com profile] hitchkitty has more to say on the subject here, at the culmination of this thread.
athelind: (patriot)

Articles of Impeachment for President George W. Bush



This is the full text.

It can be found at Democrats.com, AfterDowningStreet.org, and Congressman John Wexler's website, Wexler Wants Hearings.

They've dubbed the PDF file "A Moment Of Truth".

Let's hope it's more than just a moment -- and work toward that goal.


Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] eggshellhammer for being the first to bring this to my attention. You win the scavenger hunt!

Congressman Wexler also has the full text of last year's bill to impeach Vice President Richard B. Cheney, upon which the House Judiciary Committee has yet to act (as C-Span reminded us continually in the captions identifying the Gentleman from Ohio last night).


athelind: (Default)

Articles of Impeachment for President George W. Bush



This is the full text.

It can be found at Democrats.com, AfterDowningStreet.org, and Congressman John Wexler's website, Wexler Wants Hearings.

They've dubbed the PDF file "A Moment Of Truth".

Let's hope it's more than just a moment -- and work toward that goal.


Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] eggshellhammer for being the first to bring this to my attention. You win the scavenger hunt!

Congressman Wexler also has the full text of last year's bill to impeach Vice President Richard B. Cheney, upon which the House Judiciary Committee has yet to act (as C-Span reminded us continually in the captions identifying the Gentleman from Ohio last night).


athelind: (patriot)
The Belfast Telegraph is the first source that's come to my attention that actually lists the 35 Articles of Impeachment submitted by the Gentleman from Ohio.

Ready for this? Here we go...


Kucinich's case: the 35 points



Article I

Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq

Article II

Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression

Article III

Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War

Article IV

Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States

Article V

Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression

Article VI

Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114

Article VII

Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.

Article VIII

Invading Iraq, A Sovereign Nation, in Violation of the UN Charter

Article IX

Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor

Article X

Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes

Article XI

Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq

Article XII

Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources

Article XIIII

Creating a Secret Task Force to Develop Energy and Military Policies With Respect to Iraq and Other Countries

Article XIV

Misprision of a Felony, Misuse and Exposure of Classified Information And Obstruction of Justice in the Matter of Valerie Plame Wilson, Clandestine Agent of the Central Intelligence Agency

Article XV

Providing Immunity from Prosecution for Criminal Contractors in Iraq

Article XVI

Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With Iraq and US Contractors

Article XVII

Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign Captives

Article XVIII

Torture: Secretly Authorizing, and Encouraging the Use of Torture Against Captives in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Other Places, as a Matter of Official Policy

Article XIX

Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to " Black Sites" Located in Other Nations, Including Nations Known to Practice Torture

Article XX

Imprisoning Children

Article XXI

Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government

Article XXII

Creating Secret Laws

Article XXIII

Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act

Article XXIV

Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment

Article XXV

Directing Telecommunications Companies to Create an Illegal and Unconstitutional Database of the Private Telephone Numbers and Emails of American Citizens

Article XXVI

Announcing the Intent to Violate Laws with Signing Statements

Article XXVII

Failing to Comply with Congressional Subpoenas and Instructing Former Employees Not to Comply

Article XXVIII

Tampering with Free and Fair Elections, Corruption of the Administration of Justice

Article XXIX

Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965

Article XXX

Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare

Article XXXI

Katrina: Failure to Plan for the Predicted Disaster of Hurricane Katrina, Failure to Respond to a Civil Emergency

Article XXXII

Misleading Congress and the American People, Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global Climate Change

Article XXXIII

Repeatedly Ignored and Failed to Respond to High Level Intelligence Warnings of Planned Terrorist Attacks in the US, Prior to 911.

Article XXXIV

Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001

Article XXXV

Endangering the Health of 911 First Responders




As soon as I can find a source for the full text of these Articles, I will post a link in this journal.


Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] iceraptoress for finding this!
Lj-cut removed upon request from [livejournal.com profile] quelonzia.

athelind: (Default)
The Belfast Telegraph is the first source that's come to my attention that actually lists the 35 Articles of Impeachment submitted by the Gentleman from Ohio.

Ready for this? Here we go...


Kucinich's case: the 35 points



Article I

Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq

Article II

Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression

Article III

Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War

Article IV

Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States

Article V

Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression

Article VI

Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114

Article VII

Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.

Article VIII

Invading Iraq, A Sovereign Nation, in Violation of the UN Charter

Article IX

Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor

Article X

Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes

Article XI

Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq

Article XII

Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources

Article XIIII

Creating a Secret Task Force to Develop Energy and Military Policies With Respect to Iraq and Other Countries

Article XIV

Misprision of a Felony, Misuse and Exposure of Classified Information And Obstruction of Justice in the Matter of Valerie Plame Wilson, Clandestine Agent of the Central Intelligence Agency

Article XV

Providing Immunity from Prosecution for Criminal Contractors in Iraq

Article XVI

Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With Iraq and US Contractors

Article XVII

Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign Captives

Article XVIII

Torture: Secretly Authorizing, and Encouraging the Use of Torture Against Captives in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Other Places, as a Matter of Official Policy

Article XIX

Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to " Black Sites" Located in Other Nations, Including Nations Known to Practice Torture

Article XX

Imprisoning Children

Article XXI

Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government

Article XXII

Creating Secret Laws

Article XXIII

Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act

Article XXIV

Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment

Article XXV

Directing Telecommunications Companies to Create an Illegal and Unconstitutional Database of the Private Telephone Numbers and Emails of American Citizens

Article XXVI

Announcing the Intent to Violate Laws with Signing Statements

Article XXVII

Failing to Comply with Congressional Subpoenas and Instructing Former Employees Not to Comply

Article XXVIII

Tampering with Free and Fair Elections, Corruption of the Administration of Justice

Article XXIX

Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965

Article XXX

Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare

Article XXXI

Katrina: Failure to Plan for the Predicted Disaster of Hurricane Katrina, Failure to Respond to a Civil Emergency

Article XXXII

Misleading Congress and the American People, Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global Climate Change

Article XXXIII

Repeatedly Ignored and Failed to Respond to High Level Intelligence Warnings of Planned Terrorist Attacks in the US, Prior to 911.

Article XXXIV

Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001

Article XXXV

Endangering the Health of 911 First Responders




As soon as I can find a source for the full text of these Articles, I will post a link in this journal.


Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] iceraptoress for finding this!
Lj-cut removed upon request from [livejournal.com profile] quelonzia.

athelind: (outrage)
CNN, Reuters, the BBC, NPR, Salon, and the Google Top Story aggregation all appear on my Google home page. Not a single mention of yesterday's presentation of Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush could be found in those headlines.

To their credit, and against my expectations, the news was not driven off the page by headlines gushing over the new iPhone. Salmonella scares and international conflicts dominate the page.

I think NewsHounds ("We watch FOX so you don't have to") summed it up well:

No matter what you think of it, this is news. News. Relevant, important, history-making news. It was live, on C-Span. Reality TV. Yet our most famous, trusted, 24/7/365 cable news media outlets are asleep at the wheel - or holding back. Neither is a good option.


They just earned their place on my regular reading rotation. So has The Raw Story, which gave us pretty much what it says on the tin: straight, clinical, factual reporting, with as little commentary, opinion or bias as is humanly possible. They've updated their story since last night, by the way -- since I originally linked to them early on in the Gentleman from Ohio's presentation, there's been more Raw Story to report.

The Reuters article reiterates Speaker Pelosi's opposition to impeachment:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly said she opposes trying to remove the Republican president who leaves office next January because such an attempt would be divisive and most likely unsuccessful.


...so attempting to impeach a President with one of the lowest approval ratings of all time would be "divisive"?

Or, as my friend [livejournal.com profile] kolchis said:

"We can impeach a President over cum stains, but not blood stains??"



Fair warning: Your Obedient Serpent isn't going to let this go. I am going to continue to hunt for information about these proceedings -- I hope to find a full transcript today -- and I will continue to urge your Congresscritters to vote in favor of it, and not let it get shoved in a drawer.

Perhaps nothing will come of this. Perhaps the news media aren't reporting it because they think nothing will come of it. That's a self-fulfilling prophecy, however. If the public at large never HEAR about this, they will never have a chance to show their support, and inform Congress that... to borrow a slogan from the presumptive Democratic candidate... "Yes, we can!"

A couple of commentators in my journal have expressed the opinion that they're "waiting for the war crimes trial". So am I, dear reader, so am I -- but having our own nation admit culpability and take responsibility for this wanton disregard for national and international law is the first step toward seeing that happen.

If that offends you, feel free to drop this journal. You're in the wrong place.


athelind: (Default)
CNN, Reuters, the BBC, NPR, Salon, and the Google Top Story aggregation all appear on my Google home page. Not a single mention of yesterday's presentation of Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush could be found in those headlines.

To their credit, and against my expectations, the news was not driven off the page by headlines gushing over the new iPhone. Salmonella scares and international conflicts dominate the page.

I think NewsHounds ("We watch FOX so you don't have to") summed it up well:

No matter what you think of it, this is news. News. Relevant, important, history-making news. It was live, on C-Span. Reality TV. Yet our most famous, trusted, 24/7/365 cable news media outlets are asleep at the wheel - or holding back. Neither is a good option.


They just earned their place on my regular reading rotation. So has The Raw Story, which gave us pretty much what it says on the tin: straight, clinical, factual reporting, with as little commentary, opinion or bias as is humanly possible. They've updated their story since last night, by the way -- since I originally linked to them early on in the Gentleman from Ohio's presentation, there's been more Raw Story to report.

The Reuters article reiterates Speaker Pelosi's opposition to impeachment:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly said she opposes trying to remove the Republican president who leaves office next January because such an attempt would be divisive and most likely unsuccessful.


...so attempting to impeach a President with one of the lowest approval ratings of all time would be "divisive"?

Or, as my friend [livejournal.com profile] kolchis said:

"We can impeach a President over cum stains, but not blood stains??"



Fair warning: Your Obedient Serpent isn't going to let this go. I am going to continue to hunt for information about these proceedings -- I hope to find a full transcript today -- and I will continue to urge your Congresscritters to vote in favor of it, and not let it get shoved in a drawer.

Perhaps nothing will come of this. Perhaps the news media aren't reporting it because they think nothing will come of it. That's a self-fulfilling prophecy, however. If the public at large never HEAR about this, they will never have a chance to show their support, and inform Congress that... to borrow a slogan from the presumptive Democratic candidate... "Yes, we can!"

A couple of commentators in my journal have expressed the opinion that they're "waiting for the war crimes trial". So am I, dear reader, so am I -- but having our own nation admit culpability and take responsibility for this wanton disregard for national and international law is the first step toward seeing that happen.

If that offends you, feel free to drop this journal. You're in the wrong place.


athelind: (politics)

"Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense, warranting the removal from office."



Man, I will never get tired of hearing that.


athelind: (Default)

"Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense, warranting the removal from office."



Man, I will never get tired of hearing that.


athelind: (patriot)

Quoth Kucinich: "...torture has been authorized by the President as a policy of his administration."



This is happening now. Kucinich is halfway through his 35 Articles of Impeachment as I type this.

Tune into C-SPAN now.




CNN is NOT currently airing this; from what I hear, they have yet to mention it. If you think they should, go to their feedback page and say so.

My "story idea":
As I type this, Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) is presenting 35 Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush. C-SPAN is covering it. It is inexcusable that it has yet to warrant a MENTION on CNN.


athelind: (Default)

Quoth Kucinich: "...torture has been authorized by the President as a policy of his administration."



This is happening now. Kucinich is halfway through his 35 Articles of Impeachment as I type this.

Tune into C-SPAN now.




CNN is NOT currently airing this; from what I hear, they have yet to mention it. If you think they should, go to their feedback page and say so.

My "story idea":
As I type this, Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) is presenting 35 Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush. C-SPAN is covering it. It is inexcusable that it has yet to warrant a MENTION on CNN.


November 2016

S M T W T F S
  12345
6 78 9101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Tags

Page generated May. 26th, 2017 11:24 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios