The Unimpeachable James Comey Guarantees the Impeachment of George W. Bush

  • Bob Fertik's picture
    Bob Fertik
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above! has been calling for the impeachment of George Bush and Dick Cheney since their lawless cronies on the U.S. Supreme Court stole the White House for them on December 10, 2000.

Today I am absolutely certain that George Bush and Dick Cheney will be impeached. Why? Because of the devastating testimony of the utterly unimpeachable James Comey.

Comey's riveting testimony revealed the following impeachable offenses:

  1. George Bush authorized a massively criminal program of spying on thousands millions of Americans without a warrant in direct violation of FISA
  2. When that program needed re-authorization, George Bush sent his Chief of Staff and his White House Counsel to "persuade" a semi-conscious hospital patient to re-authorize an illegal program this patient had no legal authority to authorize because he was not the Attorney General at that time, a fact that was well known to everyone involved
  3. When that semi-conscious hospital patient explicitly refused to authorize the illegal program on the grounds that it was illegal, George Bush authorized it anyway, thus knowingly committing another crime

It's no wonder George Bush refused to deny that he sent Gonzales and Card to Ashcroft's hospital bed.

Nora O'Donnell: There's been some very dramatic testimony before the Senate this week from one of your former top justice department officials, who describes a scene that some Senators called stunning about a time when the warrantless wiretap program was being reviewed. Sir, did you send your then chief of staff and White House counsel to the bedside of John Ashcroft, while he was ill to get him to approve os that program and do you believe that kind of conduct from White House officials is appropriate?

Bush: "There's a lot of speculation about what happened and what didn't happen, and I'm not going to talk about it."

Bush has exactly two choices: to tell the truth and confess to authorizing thousands millions of illegal wiretaps, or to flat-out lie to Congress and the American people by saying he didn't. Either way, he would be impeached.

Make no mistake: George Bush was personally and knowingly involved in a conspiracy with his closest aides to repeatedly violate FISA. As Digby says,

In any case, Bush was deeply involved. He met with both Comey and Mueller on the issue after they all said they'd resign. The spinners are trying to say that their Dear Leader finally overruled others who had nefarious intentions , but his refusal to answer the question today should put that to rest. There's no reason for him to launch into such outdated 2003 gibberish about enemies lurking who "would like to strike" if he didn't order it. It's obvious that he did.

In fact, if he wasn't facing impeachment, he would not only aggressively defend his actions, he would brag about them because he absolutely believes he has every right to break any law he pleases.

Richard Nixon famously told David Frost, "When the President does it, that means it's not illegal." Nixon may have faced impeachment for precisely the same actions as Bush (illegal spying on Americans citizens), but Bush (like all "conservative" Republicans) believes Nixon's legal analysis was exactly right - while Congress and the consensus view of post-Watergate historians were wrong.

Of course, Bush's views of presidential power aren't based on any reasoned legal analysis. It is purely a "gut" position (and Bush proudly relies on his "gut"), as revealed by his "joke" to Congress just eight days after stealing the White House: "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." Bush's "gut" belief that he can break the law with impunity comes as no shock to anyone who has paid the slightest attention to Bush since 2000.

But just because Bush's "gut" says so doesn't make it true. And the post-911 popularity that made Bush's lawlessness "acceptable" to the Washington Establishment has vanished, leaving Bush finally exposed to all as the emperor without clothes. The recognition of Bush's nakedness is so widespread that even Bush's most important defender - the Pentagon Post's editorial page - is finally opening its self-shuttered eyes.

The Post hasn't accused Bush of committing any crimes - yet. But once they ask the question, they must inevitably seek its answer.

And Comey's dramatic testimony has given Congress lots of explosive questions to answer. As Glenn Greenwald writes,

James Comey's testimony amounts to a statement that — even according to the administration's own loyal DOJ officials — the President ordered still-unknown spying on Americans, and engaged in that spying for a full two-and-a-half-years, that was so blatantly and shockingly illegal that they were all ready to resign over it. And the President's Attorney General then lied to ensure that this episode remain concealed. Mere one-day calls for a Congressional investigation are woefully inadequate here.

Congress has more than enough evidence in hand to start a de jure impeachment investigation. But because Democrats are deeply divided on whether to confront Bush, Cheney, and the GOP character assassination machine, they are conducting a de facto impeachment investigation. There are very few dots left to connect, but the Senate and House Judiciary Committees know exactly what they are and are clearly determined to connect them.

— Was the classified program referred to by Mr. Comey the Terrorist Surveillance Program, as it existed prior to the changes made according to the Justice Department’s recommendations and, if not, what was the classified program that Mr. Comey was referring to?

– Who was involved in deciding to seek approval from Attorney General Ashcroft from his hospital bed and who made the telephone call to arrange your visit to his bedside;

– What was the basis for the Administration’s decision on March 10-11 to continue with the program despite the Department’s objections, how long did it so continue?

– What was the basis for the Department’s objections to the program? What changes were made to the program to resolve the Department’s objections?

On April 28, impeachment activists in 125 locations from Miami to North Pole Alaska spelled I-M-P-E-A-C-H by connecting their bodies. By June 28 (if not sooner), Democrats in Congress will spell I-M-P-E-A-C-H by connecting their facts. And when that happens, Bush's departure will be as inevitable as Nixon's.


Please let this be true!

  • All about Truth's picture
    All about Truth
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

With all my heart and soul I want shod of this whole regime...  They know no pain and take no blame, for their actions, so remenicent of a true psychopath.  Our children are dieing in Iraq, for their greed and they are not worth it....  Please let this prediction be TRUTH

Isn't true Democracy the Greatest?

  • KimJones's picture
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

We did it people it is only a matter of time before he loses his mind in all the evidence he so arrogantly provided.

I love this country again for it's justice and hearings on this Administrative Monster Creator Incorporated.



May Big Tyrone and you live happily ever after on your cruise to ALCATRAZ SAN FRANCISCO BAY YOU RATS!!!!


The problem is Nancy Pelosi ( and Reid)

  • DLarsson's picture
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!


The problem is Nancy Pelosi.

 For some unknown reason, she is totally obstructing a very visibly growing movement all throughout the entire Nation in favor of Impeaching Richard Bruce Cheney and George Walker Bush.

 Somebody has to get through to Nancy Pelosi or nothing will ever happen even if Cheney were to eat live puppies in front of Tim Russert on TV and Bush were to urinate on the Constitution during his State of the Union speech.

Pelosi is the bottleneck here.

 I ask the question: Who is going to get through to her and get her to do anything?



I think the answer lies in a

  • Zoe Una's picture
    Zoe Una
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

I think the answer lies in a word in your first sentence. "unknown". What do you think that unknown reason is?

My strong feeling is that they have info on her/about her that she knows they have. Can't let the cat out of the bag. With technology as it is today, and the wiretapping programs, they could have picked up conversations on her home phone and cell phone. These days they don't need to plant a bug in a phone.

Start by contacting YOUR representative

  • kwahlf's picture
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

in Congress. Then contact your senators.

My representative, Rohrabacher is one of biggest neo-cons down here,
but he never stops hearing from me.

Stop blaming Pelosi and Reid for all our party's woes.
There is plenty of blame to go around, starting with
the DINOS.

Blame them, first.

I think with all the wire tapping

  • KimJones's picture
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Our spineless first female speaker of the house may have been blackmailed. They have said that the Republicans had the same problem since Bush started the program to get the rubberstamping.
Something smells mighty fishy about Impeachment off the Table.
what do you think? It makes sense that if someone were pulling dem strings under a scandal of some sort, to keep everybody's arse covered, they will play us out to do so. Everybody wins but us.



You may be right

  • Zoe Una's picture
    Zoe Una
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

You may be right Mommapanther - Another thing that I don't understand is how she can just out and out say "Impeachment is off the table". Impeachment is written in our Constitution. How did she come about declaring that Impeachment is off the table? Did she strike it from the Constitution? Is it illegal to take impeachment off the table especially given that crimes are taking place?

To me, it seems that Nancy Pelosi is being dragged over...

the coals for not making impeachment happen. You have to look beyond Nancy to discover why. She has a party whip, Steny Hoyer who is everything but a blue dog not working for her but for his own political ends. Dennis Kucinich, supposedly the godhead revisited according to many here, has not gotten much support amongst his fellow Dems in the house. Don't see much action from Dennis when one would think he would be climbing the walls in the house beating people over the head to back his bill. Think of all the other Dem reps who will not vote for impeachment--will not, no matter what. Reid is being the limp noodle he has always been...a leopard who will not change his spots.

Nancy doesn't have much to work with with the Dem Reps. Our party does not march in lockstep...hell, they almost don't talk to each other.

What support does Nancy look for in the Senate? Does Clinton, D-NY, push for impeachment? Does Kerry, D-MA, push for impeachment? Go through the states in both the house and senate and see which Dems are screaming for immediate impeachment. There aren't many.

Nancy is working with both hands tied behind her back. Those in leadership positions should be supporting her just as noisely as DeLay was supported.

For each of you from the different states: does your rep support Nancy...or are they politicing for their own purposes. Your job, not Nancy's to get them to fall into line.

This is Dennis's Impeachment. What the hell is he doing besides showing up and sitting there quietly day after day. Had Cynthia McKinney remained in the House, she would be screaming for support and immediate action.

You want Nancy to accomplish something...then support her to your own Reps and get them to support her.

The fault is not hers.

A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.

Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623

The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.

Think Again!

  • DLarsson's picture
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Your logic is broken.

Of course, the Senate does not have the votes  at  this  time  when:     a)  Dick Cheney has not even been placed under any damn investigation to begin with;  b)  he is in no political hot water right now without a)  first  taking place, and;  c) the House Speaker has decided to block any hearings and has failed to take up H.R. 333. 

And, similarly, (while H.R. 333 does have 4 co-sponsers), the vast majority of House Democrats are not going to step out of line and just anger their own House Leader (who clearly is not leading at all by ignoring a visibly growing grassroots movement across the Nation in favor of Impeachment) once she has set "the rules" and declared that Bush & Cheney will stay in power on her watch.

This whole "do nothing" atmosphere here has been created by nobody but Nancy Pelosi herself and her tone deaf  "Impeachment over my dead body" mandate that she (and only she) unnecessarily put into effect (which has made a mockery of government accountability). 

Until she lifts that Iron Curtain of stupidity off the backs of the Democratic Party, the U.S. House members do not have much of a choice except to fall in line and ignore the whole problem.

Let's look at the Gonzales case as a reference.

The only reason why Gonzales is in trouble now, and even the GOP no longer will support him, is because the Democrats took the action of hauling his ass onto the Senate floor and holding him publically accountable and formally Investigating his actions.  They revealed that he was corrupt and dishonest right on the floor of the House & Senate for all to see.

Now Think:  If they went after Dick Cheney and formally Investigated his War-Crimes, Faked Intelligence, Torture, War-Profiteering, his Sept. 11th War Games simulations (that paralyzed the NORAD Air Defense response), his intimidations and abuses of Constitutional laws, etc. and you started hearings with a parade of witnesses coming forward and Cheney himself put on Trial, he would also then be politically radioactive and even GOP members would recognize that they would lose credibility with the voters by continuing to support him.

Nancy Pelsoi is the whole problem!

Her decision to let these thugs just remain in office no matter what and not even hold hearings that could lead to an Impeachment verdict is mindboggling stupid.

Until you criminalize the barbaric and tyrannical policies of pre-emptive Invasions and Torture, they will just be repeated in the future. The current GOP candidates are all running on a "more of the same" War agenda.  By criminalizing these policies you would guarantee a Democratic Landslide in 2008.

And the same fate awaits Dick Cheney as what we've seen with Alberto Gonzales if you hold the hearings, do the investigations, force him to testify under oath, and place him under the microscope!

Nancy Pelosi is the one blocking all of this!

Her stubborn lock-jawed decision to purposely fail to hold these murderous thugs publically accountable is itself an abuse of office and it is failing to serve both the public interest and the future health of the Republic.

Somebody needs to get through to her!

Well then, Bay Area Californians, get on Nancy's case...

get her attention and force her to take action. Almost none of these Reps will respond to out-of-staters.

Kucinich made the case for the impeachment of Cheney--where is the action?

You state that all the Reps are just standing like wallflowers waiting for the last judgement or something? Maybe thats because no one is knocking on their pickets in front of their fuss/no muss/no progress.

A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.

Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623

The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.

Typical response from the

  • Bill Harding's picture
    Bill Harding
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Typical response from the "it's-always-somebody-else's-fault" crowd. For those of you who voted for the neoconservative DINOs of the Democratic "Leadership" Council (DLC), you need to look in the mirror when searchng for someone to blame for the Democrats' current "majority in name only" situation.

The SOTH is NOT an all-powerful position unless he/she has a super-majority, or at least a reliable contingent of simple-majority members. Nancy Pelosi has neither.

If you want action in the House, put the pressure on those neocon DINOs who are in lock-step with Dubya and his puppets. It is easy to take cheap shots at those who represent us, until we realize that the fight is not over -- not by a long shot. Until we clean out the DLC traitors in our own Party, Democrats will have neither a true majority, nor honest representation.

I agree that it appears that Nancy could be more forceful, and that she may be out of touch with grassroots Democrats. But then again, I don't know what is going on behind the scenes, and neither do most of us. I do know, however, that meaningful change begins from the bottom up, and not the other way around. The ball is in our court, and running around in circles wringing our hands, and attemtping to affix blame on someone else, will not get the job done.

The AEI/PPI neoconservative corporate whores on both sides of the aisle have had over a decade to bring our nation to this point of neglect and disrepair, and we allowed it to happen. Blaming a single individual for our current state-of-affairs is not only disingenuous, it is cowardly.

Impeachment? How About Dictatorship!

  • Ruha's picture
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Bob: First, the Democrats don't have the votes to pull off impeachment and the G.O.P. is not going to back them. Secondly, it appears that you are still under the mistaken impression that democracy is still completely operative when in fact, wholesale theft of our elections and G.O.P. appointments over the past decade plus have virtually nullified real opposition at every level among all three branches of government. As can be seen by the latest congressional vote, what we have at best is democratic window dressing. Last November was a small gasp of breath that democracy is not altogether moribund, but it will take MASSIVE - and I mean MASSIVE outpourings of voters, activists, protesters, media, etceteras, to even begin to redress the assassination of democracy in America at the hands of Bush-Cheney and Company. Thirdly, and most importantly, with what Bush has signed into law via his latest Executive Order on May 9, why should anyone assume that he and/or his regime will even relinquish power by January 20, 2009? There is every possibility that a new "terrorist" attack will conveniently occur in order to "justify" his unilateral declaration of emergency martial law with a resultant suspension of the Constitution, deployment of troops into U.S. cities, round-up of security threats into Halliburton/KBR internment centers, and control under his command of all federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments, military personnel, law enforcement agencies, and private sector organizations until he and/or a private non-governmental parallel agency of his making deems his declared state of emergency to be over. And considering that this White House (p)resident has declared the war against terrorism to be a perpetual twilight struggle, it may be quite some time before we even begin to again see a Constitutional form of government with any semblance of congressional power. Bush's new directive bypasses the National Emergency Act and any congressional authority whatsoever. Please see my blog under for more details. After 9-11, we disagreed about Bush administration culpability, but I believe independent investigation now supports my assertions. I hope I am wrong here, but there has been a steady stream of secretive orders, new directives, government contracts, military exercises, and contingecy plans that suggest the worst. In the interests of preserving democracy in America, I believe that the priority issue among all Americans should be immediate demand that Congress nullify Bush's extra-legal attempts to impose conditions permitting him virtual dictatorial power. This first - then move on to matters involving possible impeachment, future elections, etc. Until we can be assured that future elections are even possible, we had better use what power we have to redress these new Executive Orders that supersede Constitutional democracy in America.