Letters to the Editor
casual_observer
Published Letters: 1253 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Letter after Letter
[Read the article: Chris Floyd for Glenn Greenwald: Dissent or disgrace]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Honorable Lloyd Doggett
201 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC
Dear Lloyd,
This note in response to a call from your staffer, Bethany, who made an inquiry regarding previous letters.
The letter I referred to yesterday was sent July 22, three months ago. In it, I urged you consider impeachment proceedings:
---------------------------------------------------------------
“But I am writing today regarding the crisis in our constitutional form of government. As you know better than I, this White House has achieved an expansion of power that is unprecedented in our history. Its unhealthy and asymmetrical power-grab has occurred on so many fronts it is difficult to list them all, but I will touch on just a few:
Politicization of Executive Agencies: It seems clear to me that Hatch Act violations have occurred—and may still be occurring—in many agencies, from the DOJ to the Surgeon General’s office.
Perjury: I am convinced that numerous officials from several agencies have lied under oath to Congress, and that these crimes have been actively aided and abetted by officials from inside the White House.
Contempt: Employees of the White House, both past and present, have openly defied the reasonable and constitutional authority of the Congress, and they have done this under the direction of the President and his highest advisors.
Conspiracy: I am convinced that the President, Vice President, and other high executive officials have conspired to punish, defame, and ruin political critics, and in doing so have revealed covert US intelligence assets—an illegal act.
Fraud: Numerous claims by this Executive Branch leading up to the occupation of Iraq, with all its attendant tragedies, were intentionally misleading, doctored, and false. This was done with the knowledge of the highest officials within the Executive.
Felony: By its own public admission, this executive has intentionally violated federal law by not complying with FISA, and has unconstitutionally abridged the civil liberties of citizens affirmed by the Bill of Rights.
I could go on, but do not want to abuse your time and patience.
My response to all the above abuses, and other issues such as the concept and practices of the “Unitary Executive” is that an appropriate constitutional measure is available to you as a member of the House. Articles of Impeachment represent the only constitutional method to preserve a very threatened balance of power between our branches of government. I bear no hatred or ill will to Mr. Bush or Mr. Cheney, but these executive abuses MUST BE CHECKED, or they will become permanent powers of the Presidency. And they must be checked by impeachment, rather than by waiting for next year’s election. A change in political party will do nothing to constitutionally check this pervasive power-grab.
We face a constitutional crisis. Nothing less than the balance of powers among our three branches is at stake. The threat requires a treatment that is both proportional and reasonable. The founders were crystal-clear regarding the appropriate legal and constitutional treatment for an Executive Branch that is clearly out of control, and indeed pathological--toxic--to our form of government. “
---------------------------------------------------------------
On July 27th, in response to an email from you, I again brought this up:
“Thank you for your response, and for the news regarding your bill to block permanent bases, and also to block efforts forcing Iraq to give up control of a substantial share of its national oil wealth. This is obviously not in the best interests of Iraq, and any Iraqi patriot would know this, I presume.
But my letter to you was not about these issues. I wrote to you about our constitutional crisis. I listed a number of issues which form components of that crisis. I suggested that impeachment was the appropriate constitutional measure to treat with that crisis.”
I then requested a response on the impeachment issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------
On September 10th, I again wrote to you, in response to an email. In that note, I wrote:
“I note that you have not responded to my letter regarding impeachment, sent to you well over a month ago (July 22). I would like to know if you plan to respond, and if so, when.
Finally, please let me know if I can be of any service to you in the next election.”
---------------------------------------------------------------
The above are the basis for my email yesterday, in response to your group emailing regarding the appalling costs of the Iraq occupation.
I am sure you are aware of the arguments of Bruce Fein, a conservative lawyer who served in the Reagan Administration, who is one among many legal scholars and former government officials who have argued for impeachment as a proper, measured, and constitutional resolution to the abuses of this administration.
I am simply requesting, as a constituent and citizen, that you share your thoughts regarding impeachment as laid out in my letter of July 22. I’d like to know if you place a high value on the constitution, the rule of law, and the position of the legislative branch as an equal branch of government.
Sincerely,
-
Unabashedly unfair treatment of Verizon
[Read the article: Fred Hiatt's concern over "costly litigation" for AT&T and Verizon]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Glen, I am shocked that you would mischaracterize Verizon's finances in the way you have here. Everyone knows that "Revenue" is a top-line figure, which does not count taxes, all forms of expenses including salaries, maintanence, and of course lobbyist fees.
I have no idea what Verizons bottom line is, but I imagine is is a much, much smaller figure. 10% of revenue, for example, would be an excellent net profit.
Let's say it's 10%. Why, that's a mere 7 billion and change profit. They're barely scraping by.