Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
Yes, the president committed a federal crime by wiretapping Americans, say constitutional scholars, former intelligence officers and politicians. What's missing is the political will to impeach him.
The letters thread is now closed.
  • polls

    I'm troubled that Post pollster Morin requires a cue from political leaders to ask about impeachment. Politicians watch polls to see when it's OK to make such calls - hopefully not not the other way around. If both are waiting for the other to raise serious opposition... well, come to think of it, that would explain some things.

  • So, are people waking up?

    Because the deal is, the people reading this article are not the ones who need convincing. Those of us who do not agree with the administration, and who have seen Bush and Cheney as usurpers and liars and dangers to the republic from the beginning are powerless, as we have been since Bush first came into office.

    Are the conservatives, the REAL conservatives, and the independents, and the people he conned into voting for him seeing this? Do they care? Because the only people who can save us from this mess are the ones who voted us into it.

    I wish I had hope that they could see him for what he is now, when they wouldn't or couldn't before. When will the real conservatives stand up?

  • Surveillance Society

    "Undercover New York City police officers have conducted covert surveillance in the last 16 months of people protesting the Iraq war, bicycle riders taking part in mass rallies and even mourners at a street vigil for a cyclist killed in an accident, a series of videotapes show." (www.nytimes.com; Dec. 22)

  • Impeachment

    Bush and Cheney should be impeached. The Times should also be investigated why they hid the fact.

    The press in this country is as guilty as this administration and the Republican party has proved that it has no moral code except greed and power.

  • A Dishonest Article: Does Not Show Other Side of Legal Argument

    This is a mendacious article, for it omits the arguments made by respectable people, including Clinton's former Associate Attorney General, that Bush did not break the law. Anybody who cares to learn the other side can find it on the web, but it involves the president's constitutional powers which arguably cannot be abrogated by Congress, or at least arguably were not abrogated by Congress. One reason liberals make me sick is that they are no more intellectually honest than their professed enemies.

    i

  • He IS above the law, if there is even any law to be above.

    George Bush came right out like the local trailer trash bully and copped to stealing your car, right to your face. Straight up. Whatchya gonna doboutit? He knows he can get away with it and it's only a matter of time before we start seeing him dressed in a custom made military uniform. I recommend white, it's been the choice of south American plantation tyrants and African Cannibal kings for years.

    It will truly be interesting to see Democrats carp and scream about the law while Bush is telling them L'etat ce moi!

  • king george

    Would somebody ask Bush if his theory of presidential powers includes the power to cancel elections or ignore their results?

  • Morin IS Right

    Arguing that Morin should be polling impeachment because John Conyers has mentioned it is like arguing he should be spending time polling the transition to a worker's paradise. Conyers is irrelevant, he's got notably less influence than most of DC's homeless. There are Republicans arguing for a death sentence for doctors who perform abortions - should we be adding that question to abortion polls as well?

  • Bush's impeachable offense

    Writers continue to marvel that the administration would choose to repeatedly circumvent a process as compliant as FISA.

    Two possible reasons, both violations of the spirit or letter of the constitution, come to mind:

    Either Bush and company are intentionally expanding the authority of the Executive Branch beyond that intended by the framers, or they're using the NSA in ways they know that no court would approve: for monitoring domestic political opposition.

    On the issue of whether an impeachment movement would have a snowball's chance: pragmatic considerations are immaterial. We are obligated by duty to our children to oppose this assault on the rule of law and the ominous precedent it establishes.

  • Shocked!

    I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, at what this article has uncovered.

    P.S.

    Politics is a disease of the mind, and they ALL have it. To suggest that one politician is better or worse than another only demonstrates your stupidity.

    Poco

  • We're Talking About Impeachment

    Well, who knew?

    Here we are at the Salon, talking about impeachment of the Squatter In Chief.

    And we're talking about it a whole lot sooner than I expected. All of the posts here are in agreement that this is a naked and brazen violation of the Constitution of the United States as well as federal law. The Plame leak case is, to my mind clearly a violation of federal law, but it's a rather more difficult case to prove. This one is not. Not only are the facts clear and undisputed, but the president has admitted to doing it, and defiantly said he will continue to do it "as long as there's a threat to Americans." Now that's arrogance! Total unblinking bravado. Takes real stones to openly trash the rule of law, the Constitution, Congress, and the courts and defy those bodies to punish him. In this, President Bush has shown that he believes he is above the law. Of course he's delusional.

    I take note that Sen. Arlen Specter will hold hearings this coming year, and that even some of the most conservative Republicans are saying that Bush broke the law and ought to be held accountable. I also note that senators like Rick Santorum and John Cornyn seem to have become cheerleaders for the president.

    So the question of political will isn't an easy one to answer. But when you see people like this saying Bush was right to do what he did, you have to think the Democrats are right when they talk about a "culture of corruption". Also, I find it interesting that Bruce Fein is saying the Bush ought to be held accountable, since it's his wing of the Republican party that is responsible for the rhetoric and philosophy that brings about these abuses to begin with. Did he actually believe a worldview like this could be held in responsible hands? These are the nutbags that you used to come across every now and again and you'd hear their insane perspective, and you'd walk away thinking, "Man I'm glad people like THAT aren't running things." Well now they are.

    What are we going to do about this?