State Imepachment Proclomations: Voters have 9 months to watch state, federal leadership squirm
Correct spelling: proclamation
The State-level impeachment discussions will give voters 9 months to assess whether the current leadership -- at both the state and local level -- are asserting their oaths of office; protecting this constitutional system as required under Article IV Section 4; or whether they choose to support this President's unlawful rebellion against the Constitution.
Ref: ConyersBlog Feline: Comment #108: feline said on 2/4/06 @ 4:18pm ET...
[ For your convenience, there is an NSA Hearing Archive; Click here to read other content in the NSA Hearing Archive.]
Background information: Things you'll want to read to see how this fits
Voter's guide to the NSA Hearings
This guide explains why voters need to call the state officials and friends to make sure they see the non-sense at the Senate Judiciary Hearing: What lies get told; what stonewalling the Congress assents to; which documents the White House refuses to turn over.
The Guide outlines a framework for state level voters to assess the non-sense in terms of whether your state and federal officials are or are not serious about their oaths of office, rule of law, and Constitutional system. Included is a handy checklist, discussion questions for you and your friends to discuss: Who do we really trust to honor their oath to preserve our Constitution? The voters decide in nine months. Here's the guide: [ Click ]
Solutions and Recommendations
State Level Proclamations put RNC in no-win situation for 9 months
There is no legal foundation for the NSA Activities
Witness impeachment: Gonzalez has been discredited
The voters are watching: We have nine months to digest this non-sense
Call it what it is: Presidential rebellion against the Constitution with RNC, Congressional and Joint Staff support
Delaying action: Congressional leadership staring into headlights
NSA Article Archive
There is nothing the Congress can do to stop the state-level debates. The public knows Vermont may very well do this. This means the voters know that there are no excuses for their state and federal officials to timely resolve this issue.
The voters have nine months to watch whether the elected officials are responsive; if they are not, they will be replaced. The voters in November 2006 -- when they cast their ballots for Congress -- will choose the next president that will replace Bush when he is removed. There is nothing the Senate, House, Congress, White House, or RNC can do to stop this process. The RNC is in a no-win situation. The voters have 9 months to digest whether the Congress asserts its oath to subdue this President’s rebellion against the Constitution.
The State impeachment proclamation process is gaining traction. This idea was originally raised here; then discussed more succinctly in Kos; then at several other blogs. The current discussion has focused like a laser on the issue: It's actually gaining some news coverage, discussion before Congress starts the reviews.
The purpose of this blogspot is to share some of the problems the RNC is currently facing, and how these state proclamations turn the entire 2006 election process upside down. Bluntly, the RNC has lost control of the agenda. Gone are the days when the RNC could isolate this debate to one forum -- DC, Congress -- and expect the States to go along with "whatever."
RNC, your agenda is just that: "Whatever."
The stage is radically different. Today, the debate is rapidly moving from DC and is settling into all 50 states. But that's on the beginning. Not only has the center of gravity shifted, but the 2006 election decisions is about one simple thing: Who do the voters want to elect to enter Congress and replace the current sitting President? The RNC realizes that the voters know another important thing: With the current political makeup in Vermont -- making certain a state proclamation calling for impeachment -- , there is on excuse for Congress not to address this issue. And the voters in all 50 states now know -- given the likelihood that other state legislators will join the debate -- that the impeachment issue will not get traction in DC, as it should.
The State proclamation process does one thing: It accelerates the timeline, and mandates that Congress address this issue before the 2006 elections. If they do what they've been doing since 9-11 -- not finding facts -- then the voters will have 9 months to digest that malfeasance and find leaders who are willing to assert their oaths and tame this President’s rebellion against the Constitution.
There is nothing the RNC can do to stop this. there are too many months, and not enough excuses. The only thing the RNC can do -- as they've already done -- is to defy the President. that's right -- fit eh RNC fails to assert the rule of law against the White House -- the voters will see the RNC has joined the President's rebellion. The issue will be whether the Senate wakes up to this before or after the States openly debate the impeachment. We judge the Senate -- as they did with the Alito filibuster -- will fail to realize the crisis in confidence, and slow roll the process as they've done with Phase II.
This means one thing: The voters will know they have options to do otherwise, and will decide whether they want to have real leaders who honor their oaths, or the same. Again, the debate shifts from DC to the state level. That's why voters and the state officials need to watch and monitor these hearing. Because these NSA hearings are important -- as a stage to see whether we're going to hear more White House / DoJ / Congressional excuses -- the RNC has already mobilized a disinformation campaign to spew forth non-sense. We outline details in this blog.
To take the broad view, given the DoJ non-sense in their December 2005 releases, and NSA Alexander’s comments – all but admitting there’s been a coup, and that the NSA ignores the 4th Amendment – there is no foundation for the White House. Thus, the only option the White House has is to delay, not cooperate. Yes! Even with their own RNC-controlled Congress.
This might have worked before December 2005. however, the NYT article now means the RNC realizes if they fail to assert their oath, there is going to be a backlash. Now that the states know they can take action – and that the Vermont situation makes this state-level proclamation inevitable – there is nothing the RNC can do justify slow rolling. Rather, the issue changes to one of: When will the RNC relent, and remove itself from supporting the President’s ongoing rebellion against the Constitution.
The issue is no longer if, but when: When will the RNC realize that continued support is no longer in the interests of the RNC. At this point, given the White House’s open defiance of the rule of law – and refusal to provide infraction to the RNC controlled Congress, the RNC will have to make a choice: Do they take a hit in November, all the while the States debate whether the RNC should be banned because of its continued support of this unlawful rebellion – or will the RNC do what they did with Nixon and say, “Mr. President, you don’t have enough votes.”
Either way, this President has no political future. And the RNC knows it. Their legal defenses are absurd. And even the most comatose voter knows. In other words, the RNC can’t play the game of appealing to voter stupidity. Even the most “stupid voters” know the President has no defense.
The only thing the RNC can do – as they’ve always done – is to blame others, create fiction, issue irrelevant information and threaten other countries – to create diversions> But the voters have woken up, thank you NSA!
The issue going forward is: Why is the Congress – that supposedly is “worried” about the “problems’ with this NSA and the basis for the Patriot Act – why are they doing what they do with the budgets – and having periodic release.
This needs to end. The monthly renewals have no merit. It is time Congress do what it did with the Soviet Union – declare the war ended and move on. Say no to this DoD proposal to allow service members run around out of uniform – if they do that – and are caught out of uniform they could be tried as spies. Is that what Congress ants to do? Congress, not the President defines whether Service members are or are not going to adhere to the laws of war. Congress – not the President – has the inherent authority to call u the militia to put down this President’s rebellion. Congress, not eh President has the power to impose sanctions on the Joint Staff for their open disregard for DoD directives.
Congress not the president has the power to create for Congress the necessary system that will monitor whether the President does or does not comply with the laws. We judge the most effective way to oversee the executive is for Congress to crate an NSA-like monitoring system that will be pointed like a laser at the White House, NSA, DoJ, and DoD to intercept information so that Congress can decide whether the President is lying about reasons for war, what the intelligence is or snot saying, and whether the President is fit for office or whether there should be an up or down votes on treaties, appointments, and war.
It’s time to accept that the 21st Century has arrived. Checks and balances means that the NSA-like capabilities currently unlawfully pointed at Americans must be trashed, and reconstitute under Control of Congress, then pointed at the Executive. No other solution is going to check this President or any other commander in charge of the NSA. They have shown that they ignore the laws; make up stories.
We can only wonder how much information NSA has gathered that was subsequently used for purposes of creating messages and domestic-consumption propaganda. At this juncture, the way forward is to create an NSA-like system for Congress to point at the Executive and sample his data. Congress has the inherent authority under Article 1 Section 8 to raise a militia and create system and programs that will ensure the laws are followed. The current “trust me” approach NSA and the Executive take are without merit, There are sampling plans that the Court can oversee; and methods to ensure the data Congress gets is protected. However, nobody in government has a right to privacy. You work for the American people. We are not here to be prodded like cattle. If you want a job and want to work for the government, your conduct becomes subject to NSA-like monitoring by Congress.
Period. Until that decision is made, Congress will be communicating one thing: We’re going to listen to this President’s non-sense and ignore our oaths o office. Until the Congress agrees to remedy this self0evdient violations of the law, voters should continue to mobilize, prepare for the State proclamations, and openly debate whether anyone in elected office is to be trusted to honor their oath, assert the rule of law, or exercise their duty under Article IV Section 4 to protect this system of checks an balances.
Now the voters know about their options, and the non-sense the Joint Staff just pulled with their joint letter directed at the cartoonist. We know that that letter violates DoD directives and we will watch – and debate in the states – whether this Congress will subdue this President and Joint Staff – or whether a new Congress is needed to lawfully raise a militia under Article 1 Section 8 to subdue this President’s and Joint Staff ongoing rebellion against the Constitution.
We have nine months to watch you fail. And there is nothing the RNC can do to stop this.
You have wished for this.
Added: 04 Feb 2006 – this has been cross posted [ Click here]
We previously raise concerns about a number of curiously time news release. We judge these news pieces are part of a disinformation campaign to mitigate the chances the President is deemed to be “unfit for continued service” and removed from the Presidency.
Congressman Conyers Blog has had some discussion. One blogger, named feline raised some interesting questions. The purpose of this information is to build off her questions and outline the issues in terms of the State proclamations, impeachment, checks and balances, oaths of office, and the 2006 elections.
Ref: ConyersBlog Feline: Comment #108: feline said on 2/4/06 @ 4:18pm ET...
Feline asked some interesting questions that well-articulated the problems with this issue. I've paraphrased feline’s comments.
Constant: Good point. Where's the evidence; and even if we have it -- does it tell us anything new? No, it merely confirms what the self-evident coordinated invasion tells us: They agreed to invade; they knew there was no WMD; and they have agreed to engage in war crimes; and the Downing Street memo is consistent with these conclusions.
Constant: You're assuming that "legal scholar" is the same as "non-connected to a disinformation campaign" or "not a person who the CIA has paid to provide non-sense." We don't know, and that appears to be the goal -- distract attention, spend time on this "trying to figure it out."
Constant: This assumes he's actually writing the book for profit. It is not unknown for MI5/6 and the US CIA to hire writers to create non-sense. Look into something called "MI6 Operation Mass Appeal." [Click for details on Operation Mass Appeal]
Constant: Good question. Perhaps they'll string the world along, and distract attention from the real issues: NSA's rebellion against the Constitution.
Good question. Without documentation, this is merely a parlor game -- as it appears to be -- a distraction from the Constitutional issues.
Constant: Of course, assuming the Senate decides to stay grounded; and the Senate sees there are real consequences if they do not remove this man from office. Hence, the purpose of the State proclamation is to drive it home: IF Congress after 01 March 2006 does not act, the public will openly debate this issue for 9 months to assess:
1. Is Congress up to the Job
2. Are the current elected officials taking action -- per Article IV Section 4 -- to preserve this system of checks and balances;
3. What is Congress -- if anything -- doing, as they should under Article 1 Section 8 -- to put down this President's rebellion against the Constitution?
4. Is the Senate ignoring the issue, hoping it goes away like Phase II?
5. Do local citizens have a more credible plan to approach this issue?
6. How many state legislators -- seeing that the current DC crew in Congress, House/Senate are not responsive -- will file proclamations calling for those elected officials to be expelled?
7. How many expelled members of the Senate -- in all three classes -- will mean that DNC governors will appoint DNC candidates to fill the RNC vacancies, thereby tipping the balance to the DNC favor?
8. How many Senators -- who the local voters see are ignoring the issues -- are removed from office?
The voters will have 9 months to openly debate this issue, and evaluate whether State officials are serious. This will drive a new round of public-inquiry – not just directed at the Federal level – but for the public to ask:
9. Given the outrage over the Patriot Act in local communities, are the state-level government officials voting in a manner consistent with local voter concerns?
10. Which state-level officials get in the way of these state-level debates on proclamations?
11. How will local voters change their state-level leadership once they see the state officials are working with the RNC and President to spread this rebellion against the Constitution?
12. Once the state-level votes are finalized – and local voters see how the state legislator’s have changed their votes – how will the new state-level legislators push for more proclamations demanding Congressional representatives and Senators be expelled?
In other words, the entire state proclamation isn’t simply a single proclamation, but it’s a barometer that the Voters can use between Feb 2006 and November to assess whether the elected officials are serious about:
If the answer is no, it doesn’t matter what “agenda” a party has. The voters will have the time and the forum – the state-level discussion – to mobilize for changes.
This is 9 months. That’s a long time to discuss, digest, and compel leadership to put their oath first. There is nothing the RNC or DNC can do to avoid the state proclamations or debate. If they fail to timely respond – as is expected – there will be a shakeup.
Bluntly, when Bush is removed – as he most surely is when the Senate realizes if they fail to remove him they’ll lose in the November election – then the voters need to realize their 2006 votes for Congress will likely choose the next President, as was Ford who came from the House to replace Nixon.
Again, the voters have 9 months to decide:
The voters have 9 months to digest what Congress does, find a candidate that puts the oath first, and place someone in Congress who is focused on the rule of law, not the rule of non-sense.
The candidate will have to develop a plan and approach that gives Congress an NSA-like monitoring capability so that Congress can independently monitor the NSA, DoJ, and White House, and DoD over issues of illegal war planning; memos that violate the law.
The President cannot argue that the White House has ‘privilege” – and that he has a “privacy right” -- while at the same time denying that privacy right inherent in the 4th Amendment. NSA’s Alexander has already shown he has no regard for the probable cause requirement in the 4th Amendment – lowering it to an unreasonable search standard; but then ignoring the warrant requirement in the constitutional FISA – which Congress passed lawfully in accordance with its Article 1 Section 8 powers to create rules. Mind you, DoJ in 2002 assented to the FISA rules – never mind they were actually agreeing to illegal NSA monitoring before 9-11 – making the “inherent authority related to the 9-11 use of force”-argument irrelevant. Rather, Bush was already violating the law before Congress “did anything.” [Click: More on the problems with 9-11, AUMF and the President's arguments]
In other words, what the President says about terrorism, 9-11, or 9-11 as an “excuse” to justify he conduct is without merit. The unlawful activity was occurring before these excuses existed; and to rely on the Congressional authorization is a red herring. Bluntly, the president has no lawful foundation for what he is doing; and is engaged in a rebellion – along with DoD, DoJ, and the NSA and Joint Staff – against the Constitution.
Again, Gonzalez approach on Monday – from what we can gather – is to assert the NSA unlawful activity was only targeted at criminals. How do they know the “people they are targeting are criminals?” Answer: If they know they’re criminals, why aren’t they rounding them up and bringing charges against them? Moreover, Gonzalez excuses -- that the US was going after guilty people -- is absurd in that if you know they're guilty, why monitor them; and the FISA contains the provision to permit surveillance so long as the warrant is secured within the deadline.
Gonzalez cannot explain -- why, despite the 2002 meetings to agree with FISA -- he said it was "OK" to ignore the FISA, and the retroactive warrant requirement. In other words, the White House has had more than 60 days -- after it knew the NYT was publishing -- to come up with a "really good story." Even the most politically daft and out of touch voter can see that the White House and DoJ arguments are at best frivolous, and at worst deliberate obstruction of Justice. It is no wonder the FISA court is in the eyes of the world discredited as a credible check on this Executive: This executive -- when he does not get the answer he wants -- ignores the court, the law, and the Congress.
That is what the founders spoke of in Federalist 47: A tyrant. [Federalist 47: Click to read about one branch holding all powers -- the first two paragraphs will drive the point home, and should be required reading for Gonzalez. What the status of his disbarment -- for alleged perjury -- by the way? Gonzalez Debarment plan: Click And while we're at it, John Yoo -- he's from Pennsylvania -- who's working his debarment? Yoo Debarment Plan]
Surely, the founders would ask the White House: How do you explain this? They have no answer because they’re in rebellion against the Constitution; they’ve been caught; did not expect to get caught; and they can’t explain themselves. The longer this goes on, the more evidence we have of their inconsistencies.
In a rational world where the Congressional rebellion is checked by the State proclamations. . . .
Asserting one branch has "inherent authority" to do something means the other two branches have the "inherent authority" to check whether that claim is constitutional, unlawful, or legal fiction. Moreover, a constitutional question like this demands an extended debate in the Senate: Do we trust this President's asserted power? If not, we need not consider the details in any treaty or the qualifications of the Nominee; rather we can have an extended debate. Presto! Article II Section 2 is the "inherent authority" of the Senate to engage in an extended debate -- filibuster -- the President's power. [Read more here how we arrive at this conclusion: Click]
Let's return to the current Presidential rebellion, and his chorus of apologists . . .
Gonzalez would have us believe that the President is “doing the right thing” because he’s chasing bad people. Well, Article 1 Section 8 gives Congress the power to define the rules related to the capture of Pirates – arguably AlQueda is a pirate clan – therefore, FISA is well within the scope of what Congress intended to be applied to those subject to Congressional rules. However, RNC’s answer is to define “the situation” as something outside the Constitution.
But, if you look at Article 1 Section 8, it’s clear that each of the Congressional powers dovetails exactly with the NSA program, FISA, rendition, and Alqueda:
To suggest that there is a “new standard” in the 4th Amendment – that both  changes the standard of evidence from probable cause to unreasonable suspicion to get a warrant and  ignore that agreed-to warrant requirement – means that the President, NSA, DoJ, DoD and Congress have assented to a change in the US Constitution without a lawful Constitutional Change.
If Bush intended to “do the right thing” – then he cannot explain why the “right things after 9-11” were going on before 9-11: Warrantless NSA spying.
In other words, it doesn’t matter what did or didn’t happen in Iraq: The impeachable offenses occurred before Iraq and 9-11; and the clear admissions of what was contrary to their oaths is well known. The only thing this Congress and President can do – to avoid the voters getting information – is to delay the hearings.
But the State level debates makes the Congressional delays irrelevant. Now, the voters know that they have 9 months to debate – and only one state has to do anything. We already know that the odds are already in the favor of Vermont doing something. The issue becomes: How many other states are going to debate – with full knowledge that there is no excuse for congress not to timely face the issue.
Answer: Everyone knows there’s no excuse for delays, inaction, or non-sense. We already know the NSA defense are frivolous; and that the unlawful conduct was occurring regardless what Congress did or didn’t say in the wake of 9-11.
In other words, the RNC is in a no-win situation – and the voters have 9 months to watch them squirm. And the RNC knows it has no defense – the very reason they are issuing this non-sense information: Its designed to distract you, waste your time, and keep you focused on things other than the self-evident problems with the President’s ongoing rebellion against the Constitution.
Yes, this entire mess is designed to confuse. Normally, Congress would get slow rolled. Now, the State Proclamations trumps all that and puts the debate into 50 different locations – outside DC, and there’s nothing Rove or the RNC can do to reframe the debate or keep the public from discussing the self-evident rebellion.
Nine  months to watch Gonzalez twist in the wind. We’ve had just over 30 days since the NYT article. Imagine what we’ll discuss over the next nine  months.
The 2006 election is about one thing: Asserting the Constitution over the nation and demanding the leadership assert their oaths, or they’re out of office. The next president will come from the Congress elected in nine  months.
There is nothing the RNC can do to stop this.
Hoc voluerunt !