Bugliosi testimony at 'Impeachment Hearing' of Bush Administration; July 25, 2008

There was an Impeachment Hearing in Congress on Friday, July 25, 2008 (google Impeachment Hearings in news to read more - here is brief synopsis). Maybe it wasn't widely reported in the news, but C-Span did carry it - 6 hours. Rep. Kucinich was persistent in getting the Hearing, and while it was more of a Hearing to determine if Impeachment Hearing should be initiated, it did provide for testimony entered into the Congressional Record. I'm delighted that Vincent Bugliosi was invited to share testimony based on his latest released book (which we bought and own) 'The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder'

Here are the three youtube videos of Vincent Bugliosi testimony at the Hearing.





Vincent Bugliosi at the Hearing, in response to question from Rep. Jackson Lee. Bugliosi makes the case for why Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat to the United States of America. Bugliosi makes important distinction that it was moot whether Saddam did or did not have weapons of mass destruction. Rather that in classified document provided to this Administration, 16 intelligence agenices counseled and advised that Saddam was not a threat; whereas the White Paper presented by the Administration to Congress and the American people did not disclose this advising counsel. Rather the White Paper presented as fact (that Saddam was an imminent threat to U.S.) when, in fact, it was not factual. Thus is the lie by which this Administration perpetrated on this country, leading the U.S. to invade Iraq on an entirely false premise.

Read more

Impeachment: A good way to say we were wrong

excerpt: The Oscar-winning 1974 documentary "Hearts and Minds," about Vietnam, depicts a woman-on-the-street who asks this question: Why can't we just admit we were wrong? We expect grownups to do that when they make mistakes.

But how do we admit we were wrong? One way would be for the electorate to speak clearly with their ballots. They did so in November 2006, but that election has had no impact on the war's course.

Another way would be to impeach Bush. At other times, in other places, leaders who made major blunders — whether their fault or not — were expected to leave the scene. In this case, that is unlikely. Impeachment is unlikely, as well. Between the rigid party loyalists and the congressmen who are waiting longingly for the balance of Bush's term to expire, the votes are not available.

But in theory, impeachment is an attractive idea, not as a punishment for Bush, but as a way of saying that, knowing what we know now, we would never have gone into Iraq, which is a proposition that even thoughtful pro-war citizens should accept. It would be a way of taking this war away from our leaders who have mishandled it so badly.

read full article here;

John M. Crisp teaches in the English Department at Del Mar College in Corpus Christi, Texas. His e-mail address is jcrisp@delmar.edu.

Read more