COLONEL LAWRENCE WILERSON, USMC, Vietnam War veteran and former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, led off with the observation ?Nancy Pelosi is wrong. The Constitution is always on the table, therefore so is impeachment.? Privy to many top secret meetings and discussions, Colonel Wilkerson gave us some riveting insider insights, among them evidence that it truly is Cheney?s opinion the Constitution itself is an anachronism, irrelevant in today?s world (and yes, George Tenet really did say ?slam dunk? to Bush; he used basketball analogies constantly). He admitted he always chooses incompetency over conspiracy when looking at our government (laughter from the audience), but reminded us ?America is not eternal,? and that both our Founders and Lincoln were worried the Republic would fall not to an external enemy but to forces from within, which is why they would be appalled that the citizens had not used impeachment more often by now. In Wilkerson?s opinion our three attempted impeachments were feckless (Andrew Johnson, Nixon, Clinton), but even talking about impeachment is a powerful weapon. If we are to impeach anyone, begin with Cheney? if Bush were removed, Cheney would immediately declare marshal law, and that would be the end of the Republic. The reality is, we are living in a National Security State and under Bush foreign affairs are conducted not by the Department of State but by the Department of Defense.
MARCUS RASKIN, professor at George Washington University, co-founder of the Institute for Policy Studies, author of numerous books including ?Four Freedoms Under Siege? is a quiet academic clearly loyal to a John F. Kennedy style world-view. He agreed that we are living under a national security state which began developing after World War II when the United States filled the vacuum left by the disappearance of the older European empires, faced down Soviet Russia, and dealt with the awful threat of nuclear warfare. This current President has said he listens only to God (not to the American people in other words), and that the United States can do anything it wants to in order to be secure, unrestrained by laws and treaties. Do not be deceived, the coup has already occurred, being confirmed by such things as the Patriot Act and increasing government control over various populations, like immigrants and minorities. This war in which we are engaged will not end but continue on and on. Unfortunately, most Americans are oblivious because we have an enormous capacity for self-delusion and are still convinced we are living in an (unfettered) democracy (with the purest of motives and noblest of visions).
BARBARA OLSHANSKY, professor at Stanford Law School, former Deputy Legal Director for the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York, and co-author of the book ?The Case for Impeachment,? was also one of the 700 attorneys from 200 law firms who have been involved in helping the 700-2,000 prisoners swept up and ?disappeared? the day after 9/11--- not one of whom has ever been charged with anything, even after being held all these years. She is, as she says, a quick-talking, curly-headed New York lawyer now in California, which she admitted might turn off folks, and after her experience representing the prisoners, she is used to ?success without victory.? She characterized Guantanamo as a prison beyond the law. When FBI agents were sent there to help interrogate the prisoners, they refused to participate in what was going on, and even many knowledgeable military officers say that most of the people there are simply ?inconvenient? (i.e., not terrorists). President Bush pushed Congress to strike habeas corpus, but Congress cannot therefore be absolved of its complicity in abolishing the ancient right of any prisoner to challenge his detention and be told why he is being held and what is his offense. How, she asked, can we even be a country which does this sort of thing, using torture, rendition, and denial of habeas corpus? The world is watching; even if we do not ?have the votes? to impeach, even if the odds are against us, it has to happen.
GIL DAVIS, Parliamentarian for the 11th Congressional District Republican Committee, a past Counsel to the Bush Campaign Rules Committee, and the attorney who represented Paula Jones in her successful suit against President Clinton, presented a strong opposing view. He actually did strike me not only as a sharp attorney but also as a typical middle-aged white male Republican, a little beefy, completely confident? and the only rather flamboyantly dressed person on the platform with his very bright yellow shirt, blazer, colorful tie, and blazer... a barrister ready to dazzle the jury, perhaps. He reminded us that only the President is elected by all the people, and impeachment should be the last resort. Among the criteria for impeachment should be : 1) Is there a provable violation of the Constitution? 2) Is it serious enough to justify conviction? here he raised the issue of proportionality, meaning the depth of seriousness of the constitutional question and the offense. 3) Are there remedies other than impeachment, such as, for example, an election, scrutiny by the press and the public, taking the President to court (as he did in the Paula Jones case, securing a $90,000 judgment against Clinton), loss of political influence, and, mentioned last, Congressional oversight. Presidents have frequently exceeded their Constitutional powers, among them Jefferson (the Louisiana Purchase), Polk (the Mexican War), Lincoln (suspension of habeas corpus, the Emancipation Proclamation), FDR (internment of Japanese citizens), Truman (seizing the steel mills). Presidents often excused these actions by claiming military necessity? and so has President Bush. Regarding a complaint by Olshansky concerning Bush?s 3-year (or more) delay in following a court order to bring charges against certain detainees, that was the fault of the courts and the judges should be held responsible. Impeachment is not a remedy for a simple policy disagreement, and he cannot see anything today which merits impeachment of the President.
RON PINCHBACK asked: ?Why is impeachment considered off the table by Nancy Pelosi? Is it: expediency, complicity, or cowardice??
DAVIS: political calculus. We don?t know how it will turn out, and what if we had another major terrorist attack in the middle of it?
OLSHANSKY: expediency and complicity blended; maybe save it for closer to the elections?
RASKIN: Pelosi considers herself Speaker for the whole House, including Republicans? and she has counted her votes.
WILKERSON: actually, there is currently a court case being undertaken in Germany, naming Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, although Angela Merkl, German leader, probably will not let it go on? however, Cheney and Rumsfeld probably will not do much foreign traveling, given what happened to Pinochet and the Spanish courts.
Questions from the audience sometimes brought intriguing answers:
1) Asked if violation of a treaty approved by the United States constituted an impeachable offense, DAVIS agreed that, if serious, it is, which prompted WILKERSON to say that there had been serious discussions at the very highest level of the Bush Administration which had concluded that we could and should ignore any treaty which contravened our national interest . I myself would agree with that, but expect suitable public disavowal of the treaty.
2) Questioned about whether or not the Geneva Convention applied only to uniformed military, which would mean Gauntanamo detainees were exempted from coverage, OLSHANKY gave a detailed answer about the various Geneva Conventions, which basically said No, even irregulars and guerrillas were covered. WILKERSON remarked that Bush did agree to apply the Geneva Conventions, but Cheney objected.
3) Does anything said so far apply, because the truth is we have had a National Emergency Act in place since the days of President Hoover, it was used extensively by FDR during the Depression and World War II, and all a President has to do is proclaim an Emergency and he can suspend habeas corpus? so, where?s the problem with Bush? RASKIN agreed the National Emergency had been applied by FDR, it was extended in the 1970's, and by the Patriot Act Congress surrendered some of its Constitutional powers to the President? which may itself be unconstitutional, so we absolutely must have public debate on this question. In LEVINE?s opinion, Article I of the Constitution permits suspension of habeas corpus only in the event of rebellion or invasion and, while the former applied to Lincoln?s suspension of habeas, neither is the case today, so the Patriot Act is unconstitutional in that respect.
4) Many of the public really knew there were no WMDs in Iraq before the invasion, so, Colonel Wilkerson, what did Colin Powell know when he made that speech to the United Nations; couldn?t Powell have stopped Bush from the whole Iraq mess? WILKERSON smiled that he often heard this question, and said that just before the speech Powell was suddenly presented by Tenet and others with supposedly confirming information from other sources which, of course, later proved not to have been reliable. Truly, there was no way, even if Powell had resigned in protest, that Bush and Cheney would have stepped back from war.
5) Just how fragile is our democracy? Don?t we need an impeachment to learn the truth and prove we do have a democracy despite all Bush?s fear-mongering? LEVINE believes our democracy is very fragile, and we can no longer depend on the courts, especially the Supreme Court if a Republican president should make an appointment to fill the next vacancy. DAVIS was more optimistic, arguing that America is strong, we follow the process, respect the law, and, in any case, we are a republic, not a democracy.
6) When asked about parallels between Vietnam and Iraq, WILKERSON said the similarities were not in strategy but in the form of the war, but the relevant question is: How do we get out of there? He also mentioned that ?money negates democracy,? referring primarily to our electoral process. The Colonel also indicated he thought Congressional oversight was beginning to work? and tantalized us by saying that Senator Levin was sitting on some bombshells but will only start impeachment proceedings when the public shows it is ready for it.