Monday, March 10, 2008

Help HR 24 in New Hampshire; David Swanson on impeachment; Wexler on subpoenas & impeachment

Hi, Impeachment People and Greens,

1) Re: Betty Hall's New Hampshire HR 24 impeachment vote: Last week
saw substantial confusion about the scheduling of a vote. A vote was
originally scheduled for March 12, Wednesday, and Betty Hall went to
DC, where she talked to members of Congress. Lots of messages were
sent to support her efforts. Then the March 12 vote was cancelled
without explanation. It is now said the vote will take place later
this month. This gives us more time for action.

a) Susan Serpa of the Northeast Impeachment Coalition reports on
progress—now 1300 supportive emails—and updates current needs below.
b) She includes an email from a person identified only as Frisella
summarizing events last week.
c) Susan Serpa lists the names, phone numbers, and email addresses of
the 64 New Hampshire legislators (more information is on and
d) Gives talking points.

2) Cynthia McKinney's "Nixon Flooding Plan" and David Swanson's
article: Kucinich resolution to impeach Cheney now has more cosponsors
signed onto it than any resolution to impeach Nixon. Dennis Kucinich
has now written FIFTY articles of impeachment against Bush!
3) Rep. Robert Wexler asks for assistance to get hearings on impeachment.


a) Today's email from Susan Serpa (addressed to Frisella—see "b"
directly below):

Thanks for sending this! We now have over 1,300 emails. In addition
to emails and phone calls, we also need "Foot Soldiers" People who
can pass out flyers at public places in New Hampshire. Email me at: if you can pass out flyers [which contain the
talking points at below at "D".]

FYI - Below is my response the faulty thinking of the Majority report.

The statement above are compelling reasons to support HR24. The world
is indeed imperiled and riddled with uncertainty. Hatred of United
States is spreading because of the policies and actions fostered by
George Bush and Richard Cheney.
The hatred spreads as terrorist groups add to their recruitment. The
recruiting has not only grown during the past seven years, but has
spread to more arenas - there were NO Al Qaeda in Iraq before the Bush
invasion. Terrorist recruitment is accomplished by touting the need to
combat US policies adopted under this renegade administration. Under
the current administration, US policies are seen as those of a rogue
nation bent on infiltrating all nations for corporate interests under
the guise of national security. It is in our best interests to
demonstrate that the citizens do NOT support the deceitful,
law-breaking, unconstitutional corporate interests of a rogue

The people of all nations naturally want freedom. The eyes of the
world that thirst for freedom are upon us. They seek a model of
democracy. In that model they do not seek a nation "united", at all
costs, behind it's president; they look for a nation that will stand
up for the rights of mankind.

Backing this resolution will send the message that the citizenry of
our Nation value justice and the rule of law above unquestioning
obedience to the Executive. This message will not only receive
applause from our allies, but will serve to dissolve support or
terrorist organizations who recruit using fear of the current US
policies promoted by the Bush Adminsitration. It is precisely in the
national interests to pass HR24 as it will serve to mount
international support and diffuse the terrorists.

Therefore, I strongly urge the Representatives of the New Hampshire
House to vote in favor of HR 24 in support of the Constitution, our
troops and national security. The US Constitution has been a model
for the free world. Impeachment is mentioned six times in our
Constitution. If not now, When? If not for the crimes listed in
HR24, For what? This is our moment history to rescue our country by
backing our Constitution through the use of Section 603 of Jefferson's

Thank you,
Susan C. Paine Serpa
Worcester, MA

b) frisella <> wrote:
HR 24, petitioning Congress to commence impeachment procedures,
introduced by State Rep Betty Hall - where it stands now
The NH House State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee
voted 10-5, 1 protest vote and 3 not present for ITL, or inexpedient
to legislate, but HR 24 continues to go forward, for the full House
vote. This vote will take place later in March. We urge you to contact
your state reps, and to send an email supporting the bill to
If you need help with determining who your reps are and what their
contact info is, that is available here:
Please be sure to sign your name and your town in NH. These emails are
being delivered to the NH House. FYI, over 1000 people did send their
email support last week!
The Majority Report sounded like what you would expect - this will
embolden the terrorists. Aargh. If you want to read it you can here
I am printing the minority report here because it sums up why HR 24
should pass:
MINORITY: OUGHT TO PASS. Rep. Eleanor Glynn Kjellman for the Minority
of State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs: This bill is a
petition to the US House of Representatives to commence impeachment
procedures. Under Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of Parliamentary
Practice, a state legislature may bring this action. Many citizens and
several representatives of the NH House of various political
persuasions and parties, Republicans, Libertarians, Independents and
Democrats, appeared before the committee in favor of this resolution.
It appears to be not only bi-partisan but also multi-partisan. This
resolution does not impeach the president, but requests that the US
House begin an investigation regarding the various grievances of the
petitioners. It is not our prerogative in the NH House to argue the
merits of the grievances, or to seek proof of their validity, indeed
that is the purpose of the impeachment inquiry in the US House.
Impeachment is a tool of accountability -- part of the checks and
balances process of our democracy - which is available to the citizens
in our democracy. The people have a right to petition their
representatives and we have a duty to respond and act -- regardless of
the timing, convenience, political expediency or other concerns which
are secondary to the preservation of the democratic process. We
believe the process of impeachment should be exercised to maintain
accountability in the office of the
Presidency. When HR24 passes the House, HR 24 will be enacted as a
petition, transmitted to Congress as a directive from the State level
to the U.S. Congress.
Again, this email is coming from Pat and Manny. If you want off our
impeachment list, just let us know.
Thanks for all you do.
c) Susan Serpa passes on the names, phones, and email addresses of New
Hampshire legislators:
There are 64 NH reps to target. HELP New Hampshire follow their own
tradition of defenders of freedom - Impeaching Bush and Cheney is the
right way to support America...Mmmm PEACH! So good for U.S.!

Their names, phone numbers and emails listed below and on this link and also on David Swanson's

Attached is a
spreadsheet in excel showing their party affiliation, district and
committees. Other forms of the same spreadsheet are available here:

***Also, PLEASE send an email of support to Betty Hall at:
and be sure to include your NAME, CITY AND STATE

Yes, Virginia, there is impeachment - AND YOU CAN DO IT!

Member HomePhone Email
Baroody, Benjamin C 603-622-2844
Beaulieu, Jane E 603-626-1260
Beck, Catriona D 603-588-3053
Bergin, Peter F 603-673-1885
Brown, C. Pennington 603-679-1766
Brueggemann, Donald A 603-224-5548
Brunelle, Michael D 603-669-0868
Buco, Thomas L 603-447-4985
Burridge, Delmar D 603-352-5363
Butcher, Suzanne S 603-357-8383
Butterworth, Timothy 603-363-8076
Butynski, William 603-336-7498
Cali-Pitts, Jacqueline A 603-431-7657
Casey, Kimberley S 603-772-8506
Chase, Claudia A 603-547-6278
Cloutier, John R 603-542-6190
Converse, Larry 603-542-2180
Cooney, Mary R 603-536-1141
Daler, Jennifer 603-371-0595
Dokmo, Cynthia J 603-673-0395
Donovan, Thomas E (W)603-542-0463
Drisko, Richard B 603-465-2517
Dumaine, Dudley D 603-622-2293
Dunn, J. Timothy 603-357-7993
Eaton, Stephanie 603-444-2604
Flockhart, Eileen C 603-778-0647
Foster, Linda T 603-673-6104
Gargasz, Carolyn M 603-465-7463
Ginsburg, Ruth 603-882-8647
Grassie, Anne C 603-332-8562
Hager, Elizabeth S 603-224-2060
Hamm, Christine C 603-746-4919
Hammond, Jill Shaffer 603-547-0715
Harvey, Suzanne 603-598-0582
Hatch, William A 603-466-9491
Hilliard, Dana S 603-343-4114
Irwin, Anne-Marie 603-924-6617
Kaelin, Michael A 603-654-5948
Kaen, Naida L 603-659-2205
Knox, J. David 603-569-2530
Kopka, Angeline K 603-577-5561
Kurk, Neal M 603-529-7253
Leishman, Peter R 603-365-0621
Levesque, Melanie A 603-672-3951
Mann, Maureen R 603-463-9990
McLeod, Martha 603-823-8041
McMahon, Patricia M 603-927-4705
Merrick, Evalyn S 603-788-4311
Miller, Joseph M 603-868-1689
Millham, Alida I 603-524-1278
Mitchell, Bonnie G 603-532-6311
O'Connell, Timothy D 603-673-2963
Reardon, Tara G 603-224-0614
Roberts, Kris E 603-352-1105
Rosenwald, Cindy 603-595-9896
Schulze, Joan H 603-888-3380
Shaw, Barbara E 603-626-4681
Shaw, Kimberly C 603-882-2845
Wallner, Mary J 603-225-5249
Webb, Leigh A 603-934-8222
Weed, Charles F 603-352-8309
Williams, Robert W 603-225-9283
Yeaton, Charles B 603-736-9087

Impeachment is mentioned SIX (6) times in the Unites States Constitution.
If not impeach, INDICT!
If not now, WHEN?
If nor for these crimes, For What?

Susan C. Serpa, organizer
Northeast Impeachment Coalition

to persuade NH State
Representatives to vote
for Betty Hall's HR 24!

SUPPORT HR 24 to COMMENCE impeachment procedures!

d) Good talking points:
It does NOT impeach President Bush or Vice President Cheney
* Regardless of the timing,
* Convenience,
* Political expediency
* Or other concerns which are secondary
* To the preservation of the democratic process.

NOT prerogative in the NH House to argue
* Merits of the grievances
* Or to seek proof of their validity
* That is the purpose of impeachment inquiry in US House


People have a right to petition NH State Representatives
NH State Reps have a duty to respond and act...


Submit letters to NH State Representative
Betty Hall supporting passage of HR24:

please include your name and full address.
Thank you for showing your support....spread the word.

2) "The Nixon Flooding Plan" and David Swanson's article: Kucinich
resolution to impeach Cheney now has more cosponsors signed onto it
than any resolution to impeach Nixon Dennis Kucinich has now written
FIFTY articles of impeachment against Bush!

Subject: Full Steam Ahead: Impeachment Strategy & CodePink Impeachment
Action 3/18

Hello impeachment folks,
I'm writing to
1) share the David Swanson article below on a promising impeachment
strategy-- the Nixon flooding plan
2) invite you to collaborate on a CodePink Day of Action to Restore
the Constitution, Tues., March 18, to coincide with CodePink's DC
action the same day. Our Bay Area goal: to visit local Congressmembers
(Lofgren, Stark, Miller, Pelosi, Taucher, and further afield?),
discuss the Nixon flooding plan, and help them decide to join the call
for impeachment hearings. I'll send an email about the action shortly.

The Nixon Flooding Plan is covered in the article below. Please click
on the highlighted links to read the plan documents.

Of particular interest to me:
1) Pete Stark (my opponent for Congress in CA-13) played an important
role in the Nixon impeachment flooding plan; he introduced and
co-sponsored many of the impeachment resolutions
2) The cover letter to Zoe Lofgren, who was visited in DC recently by
a team promoting this impeachment plan
3) The office visits in DC were to 32 Reps. and the team members
weren't constituents
4) Resolutions for impeachment can include any of the charges listed,
not just those in Kucinich's articles, which many feel are too
Kucinich resolution to impeach Cheney now has more cosponsors signed
onto it than any resolution to impeach Nixon
Nixon, Cheney, and Le Deluge
Mon, 2008-03-03
By David Swanson
Congressman Dennis Kucinich's resolution to impeach Vice President
Dick Cheney now has more cosponsors signed onto it than any resolution
to impeach President Richard Nixon ever had. But separate resolutions
to impeach Nixon, some with a handful of cosponsors, many with no
cosponsors at all, were filed by the dozens. Today, Kucinich's
resolution stands alone.
"Back in 1973," Barbara Ellis wrote in a recent paper that has
inspired a new strategy among advocates of impeachment, "nearly 90
Democratic House members banded together to hopper separate bills to
impeach Nixon. Two-thirds of them were to investigate whether Nixon's
deeds rose to the level of Constitutional standards for impeachment;
the other third were plain-vanilla articles of impeachment. In October
alone, a flood of 40 bills were filed in that Democratic-controlled
Today there are 50 or 60 members of Congress who openly or secretly
support impeachment or impeachment hearings for Cheney. There are 26
who have signed onto actual articles of impeachment (Kucinich's
resolution), several others who have signed onto a letter to Judiciary
Committee Chairman John Conyers urging impeachment hearings, several
others who have made public comments suggesting they favor the
hearings, and several more who signed on during the last Congress to
Conyers' resolution to create a "preliminary impeachment
investigation." Conyers has not reintroduced that bill.
A group of citizen activists from around the country has been meeting
with members of Congress and their staffers to argue a case for
recreating what they are calling the Nixon flooding plan. If, they
argue, just the 30 or 40 members who are currently pushing for
Cheney's impeachment were to file their own resolutions, the impact
would be far greater than simply adding more names to Kucinich's bill
or to a Dear Colleague letter. All that is needed, in other words, to
move impeachment forward in the House might be for those who already
claim to support it to put their printers where their mouths are and
crank out a couple of dozen new bills.
In the Nixonian example, many of the bills introduced were very short
and simple, and many were nearly identical to each other. Others
picked out a few favorites from the list of available abuses by that
president. In the case of Dick Cheney (or George Bush, for that
matter), Congress Members could turn to the recent example of
Congressman Jay Inslee's short and simple resolution to open an
impeachment hearing on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. (Thirty-two
members got behind that bill, and surely more would have signed on had
Gonzales not resigned. Now, Gonzales' replacement is repeating his
crimes and abuses of power, but impeaching Mukasey would just
highlight the fact that Bush and Cheney are giving the orders and that
the Senate approved a clone of Gonzales as his replacement.) Beyond
Gonzales-style resolutions that simply create hearings,
pro-Constitution congress members could pick from a select menu of
those abuses in which (unlike most of the Bush-Cheney abuses) Congress
has not been complicit. These include rewriting laws with signing
statements and proceeding to violate numerous statutes, refusals to
turn over information, misleading Congress, refusals to comply with
subpoenas, ordering former staffers not to comply with subpoenas,
refusals to enforce contempt citations, commuting the sentence of a
former top staffer who obstructed an investigation that involved
Cheney and Bush, exposure of an undercover agent as punishment for a
whistleblower, running a secret energy task force in violation of
open-government laws, profiting through no-bid contracts to a war
profiteer, election fraud, and the criminally negligent response to
Hurricane Katrina.
Barbara Ellis, the author of the paper excerpted above, is an
impeachment activist in Oregon and a member of a group called the
National Coalition of We the People. Three members of this group,
Michael Greenman from Ohio, Marcia Meyers from Oregon, and Carl
McCargo from Massachusetts, traveled to Washington, D.C., last week
and met with 32 congressional offices, in some cases with members and
in others with staff. They intentionally included among those they
spoke with some of the leaders of the original Nixon Flooding Plan who
are still in Congress: Pete Stark (CA-8), John Conyers (MI-1), William
Lacy Clay (MO-1), David Obey (WI-7), and Charles Rangel (NY-19).
They brought along a packet of information that included Ellis's paper:
A partial list of the bills introduced against Nixon:
Arguments in favor of this approach:
And a cover letter:
The group reported on their congressional visits: "The Nixon Flooding
Plan was met with high interest from all of our 32 Congressional
contacts as a practical strategy for helping them to live up to that
oath of office. Using our networking knowledge of and confidence in
the millions of Americans passionate about impeachment, we promised
those who take up the Nixon plan national recognition and support and
offered sample investigation/impeachment bills for their convenience
in drafting such a bill. One constant heard from House members and/or
their key staffers was their message: 'We need to hear from our
constituents' about trying that multiple-bill approach.
"So the main effort we're launching is a drive in the national
impeachment movement for a "National Call for Impeachment Bills."
We'll focus on the week of March 16 - 22 to flood House members with
our support for either bills on investigations for impeachment or
articles of impeachment.
"One message House members need to hear is that participants in that
Nixon plan were re-elected in 1974 (five are still in the House). Only
two participants were not re-elected, but not because of hoppering an
impeachment bill against Nixon. Republican Paul McCloskey lost to a
Democrat; and Bill Roy ran for Senate. Not only did the Democrats
control the House in 1973-75 (242-192-1)), but they added nearly 50
more members (291-144) three months after Nixon resigned."
Congressman Kucinich has drafted over 50 articles of impeachment
against Bush, and he should be encouraged to introduce those soon. But
he and every member of Congress should be encouraged to introduce
their own favorite resolution with regard to Cheney, even if it's
simply a proposal to hold impeachment hearings.
The week of March 16-22 is a week when Congress Members are home in
the districts. It's also the five-year point in the occupation of
Iraq. A number of impeachment groups led by Code Pink have already
designated the 18th a day for impeachment events. Why not plan now to
pay a visit to your congress member's local office that week? More on
what's happening that week can be found at
Office of Cynthia McKinney
Candidate for Congress, June Dem Primary, CA-13

3) Rep. Robert Wexler asks for assistance to get hearings on impeachment:

Two weeks ago, the House took a bold step demanding accountability for
the Bush/Cheney Administration by holding former White House Council
Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in Contempt
of Congress for blatantly ignoring congressional subpoenas for over 8

Though it was not a surprise, Attorney General Michael Mukasey, wrote
a letter to the House of Representatives stating that he refuses to
call a Grand Jury to enforce those contempt citations.

The Attorney General's letter, effectively claiming that members of
the executive branch are immune from congressional subpoenas, calls
for quick action.

Click HERE to watch my latest video discussing Mukasey's outrageous response.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Judiciary Chairman Conyers have smartly
decided to pursue a civil lawsuit to force Bolton and Miers to appear
before Congress. We should pursue a lawsuit – but I think we can do
even more.

While a court may order – months from now –that Miers and Bolten must
appear before Congress, by then George Bush and Dick Cheney will have
largely accomplished their goal of running out the clock on the
investigation into this Administration's politicization of the Justice
Department. Even a successful outcome in federal court might only
mandate that they appear, at which time the witnesses are likely
simply to continue their obfuscation by claiming executive privilege
of the 5th Amendment in person.

The House of Representatives must re-establish its legitimate rights
as a co-equal branch of government. Congress cannot allow its power
to be summarily ignored and justice delayed.

The House was correct to hold these renegade White House officials in
contempt, and much credit should be given to Speaker Pelosi and
Chairman Conyers for pushing for that outcome. Now, we must go
further: The House must immediately consider taking the following
- Initiating impeachment hearings that would likely break through the
reckless claims of executive privilege made by the Bush

- Approve a resolution that calls for an inherent contempt citation
which would give the House Sergeant at Arms the power to bring Miers
and Bolton before Congress.
As you may know, 17 of my colleagues, including four of my fellow
members of the Judiciary Committee have joined my call for impeachment

This is not an issue between Democrats and Republicans. As members of
Congress, we have an absolute duty to enforce the checks and balances
prescribed by our Constitution.

We have ceded too much for too long, enabling George W. Bush to assume
a unitary imperial Presidency. It is long past time to secure
accountability for those who have, by all appearances, committed
significant breaches of our laws and trust.

Mukasey's claims are simply the latest in a long line of outlandish
legal arguments ranging from the idea that we can selectively
cherry-pick from torture laws to the concept that the Vice President
is no longer part of the Executive Branch (except, of course, when he
needs to claim Executive Privilege).

Over the past months, I have received tens of thousands of emails and
letters from you expressing your great support for my efforts. Your
encouragement and activism on these causes are much appreciated. I
continue to work hard on your behalf and hope you feel these updates
are valuable.

With kind regards,

Congressman Robert Wexler

Sign petition for Cheney impeachment hearings