Nancy Pelosi recently appeared on the morning talk show The View. Joy Behar, much to her credit, asked her why she took "impeachment off the table." Pelosi, in her arrogance, said someone should give her a crime that Bush could be impeached for. Well, if she doesn't believe Kucinich's 35 crimes, I have one she might like.

::::::::

After spending over 6 hours last Friday in front of my computer at work riveted to the stage set by the House Judiciary Committee players holding a meeting entitled  Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations,  impeachment-lite as Republican Congressman Lundgren called it, or whatever else it is referred to, I had such a headache, and was extremely depressed. 

 

I watched, possibly jeopardizing my job, intently hoping and waiting for Chair John Conyers to gain a backbone at age 79.  I saw many of my activist friends sitting in rows behind the star witnesses like Rep. Dennis Kucinich, former Representative Elizabeth Holtzman, who served on the Judiciary Committee overseeing the Nixon impeachment, and who I had the privilege to work for when she was NYC Comptroller, and Bruce Fein, both of whom wouldn’t back down from the issue of impeachment.  In fact, Holtzman said she was there to spell out the primary reasons for impeachment. And that the responsibility to deal with impeachment is sad, but it cannot be shrugged off.  There were disruptions, and Conyers pandered to the war-mongering republicans by throwing out people who applauded the witnesses.  However, to his credit, he let the scene play out. 

 

I kept yelling at my computer, people around me thinking I had really lost my mind, but I wanted those congress members to LISTEN to what Liz was saying.  There is no remedy other than impeachment!  They kept asking for other suggestions, only to be told, and with great frustration by Liz and Bruce Fein, the only way out of this mess IS impeachment. 

 

Conyers looked like he needed a shot of adrenaline, and Nadler looked very pensive, as if there was some silver bullet he was missing.  So in my estimation this committee wasted the taxpayer’s money upwards of $300,000 just for them sitting there for 6 hours and doing nothing.  Figure the cost of what they are getting paid, maybe 10 in the room at a time, and you do the math.

 

So over ¼ million dollars was just spent to “think” about impeachment.  Not to mention that during those 6 hours, hundreds of more Iraqi’s were killed, as well as who knows how many Afghani citizens, as well as troops.  But these esteemed members need a reason.

 

Want one?  Here it is.  My son, Sgt. James Brower, USMC Reserves, NYPD police officer, which is his regular job, has received redeployment orders.  This will be his THIRD tour of duty.  I quote from the original orders I now have in my possession since he will be leaving shortly for Baghdad: 

TO:  Sergeant James W. Brower

SUBJ:  ORDERED TO ACTIVATION-PARTIAL MOBILIZATION

You have been involuntarily ordered to active duty from your residence in support of the national emergency declared under Presidential Proclamation 7463 of 14 September 2001 and as prescribed in Executive Order 13223.  Under the provisions of Title 38, US Code, Section 4312(c)(4)(A) and (B) this period of active duty is exempt from the five-year cumulative service limitation on reemployment rights under Title 38, US Code, Chapter 43.  Your period of active duty is pursuant to US Code Title 10, Section 12302.  You are assigned to activation, in support of PFO – Operation Iraqi Freedom, on such a date that will enable you to report to the commanding officer.  Period of Duty:  17 May 2008 to 20 June 2009 for 400 days. 

So upon doing some research I found that Proclamation 7463 – Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks, was signed by the President 3 days after the attacks of 9/11.  In part it reads:

“A national emergency exists by reason of the terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center, New York, New York and the Pentagon, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.  

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the Unites States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, I hereby declare that the national emergency has existed since September 11, 2001, and, pursuant to the National Emergencies Act, I intend to utilize the following statutes…”   

The National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601-1651) is a United States federal law passed in 1976 to stop open-ended states of national emergency and formalize Congressional checks and balances on Presidential emergency powers. The act sets a limit of two years on states of national emergency. It also imposes certain "procedural formalities" on the President when invoking such powers, and provides a means for Congress to countermand a Presidential declaration of emergency and associated use of emergency powers.

I am no scholar, and thanks to the internet, anyone can conduct a little research and read the information that is right in front of them. Maybe Nancy should give it a try.

I.   Simply put, Iraq had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks, and that has been established.  Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz himself admitted in 2002 to a right-wing talk show host that “I’m not sure even now that I would say Iraq had something to with it.”  Iraq also had no Weapons of Mass Destruction, which even after a year after the invasion and 1,000 soldiers dead, none were found. Under the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) granted by Congress, an act of aggression against a sovereign nation was NEVER AUTHORIZED.  Operation Iraqi Freedom is over.

Conclusion:  Sending my son back to Iraq for another tour of duty is illegal, and therefore is a crime. 

II.  The commanding orders redeploying this marine also provide him with assurances as to job security.  This is referred to in US Code Title 38, Sec. 4301 which states:

(1) to encourage noncareer service in the uniformed services by eliminating or minimizing the disadvantages to civilian careers and employment which can result from such service;

(2)  to minimize the disruption to the lives of persons performing service in the uniformed services as well as to their employers….by providing for the prompt reemployment of such persons upon their completion of such service; and

(3) to prohibit discrimination against persons because of their service in the uniformed services.

According to statistics, and a study conducted by the Department of Veterans Affairs (see also http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23056355/) in 2007, 18 percent of the veterans who sought jobs within one to three years of discharge were unemployed, while one out of four who did find jobs earned less than $21,840 a year.  It said that employers often had misplaced stereotypes about veterans’ fitness for employment, such as concerns they did not possess adequate technological skills, or were too rigid, lacked education or were as risk for post-traumatic stress disorder. 

“The issue of mental health has turned into a double-edged sword for returning veterans.  More publicity has generated more public awareness and federal funding for those who return home different when they left.  However, more publicity, especially stories that perpetuate the “Wacko Vet’ myth, has also made some employers more cautious to hire a veteran.”

Also shown was that formal job complaints by reservists remained high, citing concerns about denied jobs or benefits after they tried to return to their old jobs after extended tours in Iraq.  Reservists filed 1,357 complaints with the department of Labor in 2006, the latest figures available.

Conclusion:  My son, upon returning from Iraq, was given a desk job because they "assumed" he had PTSD.  He was never evaluated, and they are still threatening to fire him, even upon his 3rd deployment! 

Therefore, this is in direct violation of said Presidential Proclamation 7463, as included in the orders from the US Marine Corps., and is a crime.

So if the "impeachment-lite" team did not convince Speaker Pelosi that George Bush and Dick Cheney have committed any crimes, or there are no impeachable offenses that she can think of, even if Congressman Dennis Kucinich submitted 35 which includes misleading the American people, which in includes, I might remind you, members of the Armed Services,  and members of Congress to believe Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, and that Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States; then let her speak to military family members who are suffering great losses; who watch their loved ones lives destroyed; and who are sacrificing everything for this lie that has been perpetrated. 

I ask you, Speaker Pelosi, or Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro, daughter of a popular local politician from the Little Italy section of Baltimore, Maryland, a devout Roman Catholic, mother of 5 children, and grandmother of 6, will your family be in Iraq fighting this war you keep funding?  Are you responsible for the continuous bloodshed when you know it must stop because you refuse to impeach the criminals who lied and continue lying to us.  Aren’t you convinced yet?  

Military family members now hold YOU personally responsible for the death and wounding of our loved ones.  I am repulsed by your face and the rest of the democrats who are complicit with sending my son back for another tour of duty.  I WILL hold you responsible if he does not return, because you needed a “reason” to impeach the people who sent him there in the first place!

Authors Website: http:/elaine.worldcantwait.net

Authors Bio:
Anti-war activist, mother of three combat tour US marine; member of the national steering committee for the "World Can't Wait" www.worldcantwait.net and member of Military Families Speak Out (my opinions do not reflect the national position of MFSO).