From September 30, 2007, that's Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Bloody War Hawks"
And Bloody War Hawk Hillary is back in the news cycle. Francis A. Boyle is an attorney and a professor of international law. He's also the author of many books including, most recently, United Ireland, Human Rights and International Law.
Dori Smith: Who do you think might be the most effective person to introduce this bill {of impeachment against Bush Jr} and what is in the works in that regard?
Francis
A. Boyle: We just need one person to introduce the bill with courage,
integrity, principles, and of course a safe seat. In Gulf War I, I
worked with the late
great Congressman Henry B. Gonzales on his bill of impeachment against
Bush Sr. We put that one in. I did the first draft the day after the war
started. So in my opinion there is no excuse for these bills not to
have been put in already. In fact, I think I
mentioned to you before, on 11 March 2003 Congressman John Conyers
convened a meeting of 40 to 50 of his top advisors, most of whom were
lawyers, to debate putting in immediate bills of impeachment against
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft, to head off
the war. And there were draft bills sitting on the table that had been
prepared by me and Ramsey Clark. And the Congressman invited Ramsey and
me to come in and state the case for impeachment. It was a two hour
debate, very vigorous debate, obviously all of
these lawyers there. And most of the lawyers there didn’t disagree with
us on the merits of impeachment.
It was more as they saw it a
question of practical politics, namely, John Podesta was there,
Clinton’s former White House chief of staff; said he was appearing on
behalf of the Democratic National Committee and they were against
putting in immediate bills
of impeachment because it might hurt whoever their presidential
candidate was going to be in 2004. Well at that time no one even knew
who their presidential candidate was going to be in 2004.
I
didn’t argue the point, I’m a political independent, my position, and
it was not for me to tell Democrats how to elect their candidates. I
just continued arguing
the merits of impeachment. But Ramsey is a lifelong Democrat and he
argued that he felt that putting in these bills of impeachment might
help the Democrats and it certainly wasn’t going to hurt them in 2004.
Well
the Democrats did lose in 2004 but as Ramsey and I were walking out
after a two hour debate adjourned and I had offered to stay as long as
it took to polish up
my bills of impeachment and get them put in right away, because the war
started, it was going to start in four days. I turned to Ramsey and I
said Ramsey I just don’t understand it, their arguments make no sense,
why did they not take me up on my offer to
stay and polish up those bills of impeachment and put them in right
away to head off a war. And sadly, Ramsey said, “I think most of the
people there want a war.”
That was 11 March 2003.
It’s
very clear that the high officials in the Democratic Party, certainly
on the DNC, have been complicit with the Bush Administration in this war
against Iraq from
the get go. The Democratic national committee still vigorously opposes
putting in any bills of impeachment against Bush and Cheney.
Podesta made that very clear to us on 11 March 2003.
On Tuesday 11 March 2003, with the Bush Jr.
administration's war of aggression against Iraq staring the American
People, Congress and Republic in their face, Congressman John Conyers of
Michigan, the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee (which has
jurisdiction over Bills of Impeachment), convened an emergency meeting
of forty or more of his top advisors, most of whom were lawyers. The
purpose of the meeting was to discuss and debate immediately putting
into the U.S. House of Representatives Bills of Impeachment against
President Bush Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld, and then Attorney General John Ashcroft in order to
head off the impending war. Congressman Conyers kindly requested that
Ramsey Clark and I come to the meeting in order to argue the case for
impeachment.
This impeachment debate lasted for two hours. It was presided over by
Congressman Conyers, who quite correctly did not tip his hand one way or
the other on the merits of impeachment. He simply moderated the debate
between Clark and I, on the one side, favoring immediately filing Bills
of Impeachment against Bush Jr. et al. to stop the threatened war, and
almost everyone else there who were against impeachment for partisan
political reasons. Obviously no point would be served here by
attempting to digest a two-hour-long vigorous debate among a group of
well-trained lawyers on such a controversial matter at this critical
moment in American history. But at the time I was struck by the fact
that this momentous debate was conducted at a private office right down
the street from the White House on the eve of war.
Suffice it to say that most of the "experts" there opposed impeachment
not on the basis of enforcing the Constitution and the Rule of Law,
whether international or domestic, but on the political grounds that it
might hurt the Democratic Party effort to get their presidential
candidate elected in the year 2004. As a political independent, I did
not argue that point. Rather, I argued the merits of impeaching Bush
Jr., Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft under the United States
Constitution, U.S. federal laws, U.S. treaties and other international
agreements to which the United States is a party, etc. Article VI of
the U.S. Constitution provides that treaties "shall be the supreme Law
of the Land." This so-called Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution
also applies to international executive agreements concluded under the
auspices of the U.S. President such as the 1945 Nuremberg Charter.
Congressman Conyers was so kind as to allow me the closing argument in
the debate. Briefly put, the concluding point I chose to make was
historical: The Athenians lost their democracy. The Romans lost their
Republic. And if we Americans did not act now we could lose our
Republic! The United States of America is not immune to the laws of
history!
After two hours of most vigorous debate among those in attendance, the
meeting adjourned with second revised draft Bills of Impeachment sitting
on the table.
Certainly, if the U.S. House of Representatives can impeach President
Clinton for sex and lying about sex, then a fortiori the House can,
should, and must impeach President Bush Jr. for war, lying about war,
and threatening more wars. All that is needed is for one Member of
Congress with courage, integrity, principles and a safe seat to file
these currently amended draft Bills of Impeachment against Bush Jr.,
Cheney, Rumsfeld, and now Attorney General Albert Gonzales, who bears
personal criminal responsibility for the Bush Jr. administration torture
scandal. Failing this, the alternative is likely to be an American
Empire abroad, a U.S. police state at home, and continuing wars of
aggression to sustain both-along the lines of George Orwell's classic
novel 1984. Despite all of the serious flaws demonstrated by successive
United States governments that this author has amply documented
elsewhere during the past quarter century as a Professor of Law, the
truth of the matter is that America is still the oldest Republic in the
world today. "We the People of the United States" must fight to keep it
that way! Podesta did not!
[Francis A. Boyle is a Professor of International Law and a human rights
attorney. He is the author of "Destroying World Order" (2004, Clarity
Press).]
francis a. boyle
