CLICK
PLAY TO LISTEN
Listen to
Segment || Download
Show mp3
Watch 128k stream
Watch 256k stream
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
On Saturday, a coalition of groups are
meeting near Independence Hall in Philadelphia to announce
plans to mobilize a national movement to impeach President
Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
Groups backing the effort include
Progressive Democrats of America, CodePink, Gold Star
Families for Peace and Veterans for Peace.
While the pro-impeachment movement has
received little media attention, polls show growing numbers
support for Congress to take such action.
A recent Newsweek poll found 51 percent of
all Americans - including 20 percent of Republicans - feel
impeachment should be on the table.
But it appears the new Democrat-led Congress
will not take up the issue. Nancy Pelosi, who is set to
become House Speaker, was asked about it on Wednesday during
her first press conference since the mid-term election.
There is support for impeachment in the
House. Over three dozen Democrats in Congress have publicly
supported an inquiry into possible impeachable offenses by
the Bush administration. The list includes John Conyers of
Michigan who is positioned to become chair of the House
Judiciary Committee.
To talk more about impeachment, the mid-term
elections and the war in Iraq, we are joined by two guests:
Elizabeth Holtzman and Daniel Ellsberg.
-
Elizabeth Holtzman, served four
terms in Congress, where she played a key role in House
impeachment proceedings against President Richard Nixon.
She is co-author of the new book "The Impeachment of
George W. Bush: A Practical Guide for Concerned
Citizens." She will be speaking in Philadelphia on
Saturday at the pro-impeachment rally.
-
Daniel Ellsberg, may be the
country's best known whistleblower. He leaked to the
press the Pentagon Papers, the 7,000 page top-secret
study of U.S. decision making in Vietnam. This set in
motion actions that would eventually topple the Nixon
presidency. He recently published an article in Harpers
magazine about Iran. It is called "The Next War."
TRANSCRIPT
AMY GOODMAN: Nancy Pelosi, who is set
to become House Speaker, was asked about it on Wednesday
during her first press conference since the mid-term
election.
REP. NANCY PELOSI: Democrats are
not about getting even. Democrats are about helping the
American people get ahead. And that's what our agenda is
about. So while some people are excited about prospects
that they have, in terms of their priorities, they are
not our priorities. I have said, and I say again, that
impeachment is off the table.
AMY GOODMAN: There is support for
impeachment in the House. Over the three dozen Democrats in
Congress have publicly supported an inquiry into possible
impeachable offenses by the Bush administration. The list
includes John Conyers of Michigan, positioned to become
chair of the House Judiciary Committee.
To talk more about impeachment, the mid-term
elections, and the war in Iraq, we’re joined by two guests,
Elizabeth Holtzman and Daniel Ellsberg. Elizabeth Holtzman
served four terms in Congress, where she played a key role
in House impeachment proceedings against President Richard
Nixon. She is co-author of the new book The Impeachment
of George W. Bush: A Practical Guide for Concerned Citizens.
Welcome to Democracy Now! You’re going to be speaking
at a pro-impeachment rally on Saturday in Philadelphia?
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Correct. In an
effort to try to bring -- to create a grassroots movement
around the country and press Congress to do what should be
done.
AMY GOODMAN: What’s your response to
the Speaker in waiting, Nancy Pelosi, saying it’s off the
table?
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Well, it’s very
understandable. It was off the table to the Democrats in
1973, when the Democrats controlled the House and the
Senate, and you had Richard Nixon as president.
AMY GOODMAN: He had won by a
landslide victory in 1972.
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Correct. He had
won by a landslide, and impeachment was off the table then.
Nobody -- no Democrat was pushing for it. And, in fact, as
the revelations came out, it still wasn't on the table. It
took the American people, after the Saturday Night Massacre,
sending a clear message to the Congress --
AMY GOODMAN: The Saturday Night
Massacre being?
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: The firing by
Richard Nixon of the special prosecutor who was
investigating him. It took that clear signal from the
American people, who said, “Enough is enough. We are not a
banana republic. A president cannot be above the law. He
cannot stop an investigation into possible criminal behavior
by him or his top aides. And we want Congress to hold him
accountable.” So it came from the American people. It didn't
come from the Congress.
It’s understandable that congressional
leaders, members of Congress, will be very reluctant to take
this enormous step to protect our Constitution and our
democracy. But the American people still -- we have a
democracy. You saw what happened at the polls. Members of
Congress will get it, if the American people want it.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Of course, in the
Clinton scandal, it wasn’t a demand that came from the
American people for impeachment, it was one that came
directly from the Congress itself.
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Correct.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And, of course, that
was the level of alleged crimes there was certainly not at
the level that we're talking about here.
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Well, remember,
under the Constitution, first of all, you don't need a crime
to commit an impeachable offense. It doesn't have to be a
crime. A high crime and misdemeanor is really an archaic
British term that means an abuse of power. It’s a political
offense, not a criminal offense.
President Clinton did very bad things, but
they were not abuses of power. They did not threaten our
democracy, and the American people got it. They understand
what impeachment’s about, and that's why they in the end
supported the impeachment of Richard Nixon, because what he
was doing was an abuse -- involved an abuse of power. What
he was saying was that he was above the law, and the
American people said, “No, we don't want that kind of abuse
of our democracy.”
And I think the same thing can happen again.
Of course, you can't have a top-down impeachment. You can't
have a partisan impeachment. If an impeachment happens, it
has to be done, I think, the way we did it in Watergate,
which was bipartisan, to include the American people, to
have a process that was extremely fair, nobody could
question the fairness of it.
AMY GOODMAN: Explain how it worked,
because Nixon resigned. He wasn't impeached.
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Nixon resigned,
because the process was so fair and so thorough and so
honorable that he was going to have no support. Maybe one or
two people would have voted for him to stay on as President
in the House, and maybe one or two people would have voted
for him in the Senate. He had lost all support in the
Congress. And that's why a delegation of top Republican
leaders, including Barry Goldwater, went to see Richard
Nixon and told him, “You have no support in the House or the
Senate. You can go through an impeachment trial. You will be
surely impeached in the House, and you will be surely
removed from the Senate,” because what happened was, all the
members -- our first vote on the House Judiciary Committee
was a bipartisan vote. We had members of the Republicans, as
well as Democrats, including very conservative Democrats,
voting for impeachment.
Then, the smoking gun tape was released by
order of the Supreme Court. That's a tape that showed that
Richard Nixon, from the get-go, had ordered the cover-up, an
obstruction of justice. And once that tape came out, every
Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, even those who
had initially voted against impeachment, said he has
committed impeachable offenses. So --
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you, --
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: -- it was clear.
JUAN GONZALEZ: -- John Conyers, who
would head the House Judiciary Committee, certainly is not
one who is afraid to begin these kinds of investigations.
What was the relationship in the House Judiciary Committee
then between the chairs there and the leadership?
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Well, it was
first the American people that galvanized Congress into
action that lit that fire. That's what happened. The House
Judiciary Committee, the leadership had a key decision to
make: was it going to be the House Judiciary Committee that
undertook this or was there going to be a special select
committee? That was the first, I think, strategic and
important decision.
They said, “Okay, it’s going to the
Judiciary Committee, because if we create a special
committee, the American people will say we have stacked the
cards. We’re going to take the existing committee and use
that committee, and that's the committee that -- warts and
all, brand new members and all -- that was the committee
that was given this assignment. But we never -- I never was
given any instruction from any member of the leadership or
by the chair of the committee, as to how to vote.
AMY GOODMAN: Nancy Pelosi would be
president -- she’s third in line --
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Correct.
AMY GOODMAN: -- that is, if President
Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were impeached. But what
are you talking about when it comes to Vice President Dick
Cheney?
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN: Well, my view
right now is that I'm not sure we have the overwhelming
evidence. That's not to say he hasn't committed impeachable
offenses, just that we don't have the same level of evidence
that we have with respect to President Bush. On the illegal
wiretaps, for example, it’s President Bush who repeatedly
and admittedly signed these orders directing wiretaps in
violation of the explicit language of the statute. We don't
have Dick Cheney signing that. I mean, that’s a very good
example of how we have President Bush, but we don't see Vice
President Cheney's fingerprints. That’s not to say he wasn’t
part and parcel to this, but we don’t see that, so --
AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to former
Congress member Elizabeth Holtzman, who has written a book
on impeachment. Daniel Ellsberg is also with us, perhaps the
country’s best-known whistleblower. leaked to the press the
Pentagon Papers, the 7,000-page top-secret study of U.S.
decision-making in Vietnam that set in motion actions that
would eventually topple Nixon. He recently published an
article in Harper's magazine about Iran. It’s called
"The Next War." How do you tie this in, what your campaign
is now, which is not exactly impeachment, Daniel Ellsberg?
DANIEL ELLSBERG: I think the
impeachment process, starting with investigations, is very
important, but it’s not the only important thing right now.
Actually, Maurice Hinchey introduced a bill on June 20th
this year calling for Congress to cut off any funds, to deny
any funds of the appropriation bill for an attack on Iran,
unless that had followed, as in Article 1, Section 8, from a
decision by Congress. And it was a very brief little
discussion in the night of June 20th. Two hours later, there
was a vote. He had 158 votes in favor of that, somewhat
surprisingly. That is the way the Vietnam War was stopped. I
don't think they’ll stop the Iraq war very quickly that way.
It takes a long time for a congressman to face the charge
that he’s taking money away from the troops, no matter how
long, and whether they should be there or not.
But the Iran War has not yet started, and a
measure to prevent it before it starts has, I think, a lot
more promise, and I think that approach with the new
Congress has real promise. But even so, you would need, I
think, a crucial aspect of that would be information from
inside the government, and this applies both to the
impeachment process and to measures like this. If you rely
entirely on the administration cooperating by providing the
documents you're asking or the witnesses you're asking,
that’s not going to happen. They’ve promised already. I
think it’s Cheney who said “a cataclysmic fight to the
death,” before they will let these documents get out.
Now, a process like that is what finally
emboldened Congress or enraged Congress to the point where,
in fact, they did begin to cut off the funds for the war and
they did seriously begin to look at impeachment. If the
President was going to totally subordinate their role, rule
it out of the Constitution essentially, that finally got
their backs up. That could happen here, as investigations
start, on a variety of reasons, which should happen,
including Cheney. You’ll get the facts on the table from
leakers. The facts you’ll get will be unauthorized.
And now, an unauthorized disclosure, a leak,
has a chance of being acted on by Congress, which in the
last several years, people have gotten discouraged. They’ve
put out the truth to Sy Hersh and to others, and we can all
see, not much happens. Congress, the Republican committees
are not interested in hearing that. They don't want to act
on it. Now, it's a challenge. If somebody inside the
government gives information either on criminal wrongdoing
by their bosses, which bears directly, or, you know,
terrible high crimes and misdemeanors, which bears directly
on impeachment, if they give that to Congress and the press,
Congress can’t -- Congress now led by the Democrats cannot
just ignore it, at least not if we let them. We can demand
that they do act on it, and that’s a great inducement to
get.
JUAN GONZALEZ: So, what you're saying
in essence is that another Daniel Ellsberg is needed, and
then maybe even another John Dean, to come forward from the
inner circle.
DANIEL ELLSBERG: Both of those and
more are needed, and we need them in a more timely way than
either of us did it. Dean knew about the burglary of my
psychiatrist's office years before he revealed it under
pressure. I knew about what was happening in Nixon years
before I finally saw the light, that it had to be given not
only to Congress, which was sitting on it, but to the press.
And I'm sorry it took that long, but when it comes to
impeachment, say I have a full disclosure here to make, it
was crimes that Nixon did against me, in part we learned by
leaking, that were a major part of the impeachment process,
that you were looking at, that he was committing those
crimes.
If Dean had not revealed them in order to
cop a plea himself in the process and not told the truth,
they would not have called other people back to the grand
jury and discovered they had enough basis for an
impeachment. And likewise, if I hadn't put the documents
out, Nixon wouldn't have been so afraid of me as to commit
the crimes to shut me up.
I don't suppose I’ve made Bush as afraid of
me then, I’m sorry to say. If he has committed crimes
against me, I don't know them yet. If I have been listened
in on warrant-less wiretaps -- I imagine I have, but it may
be a while before I learn it. But there are others who could
supply the names of who -- which Specter was not able to get
from the President. Republican head of the Judiciary
Committee was not able to get the names or even the
programs. There are people in NSA who could tell him that.
And if a Democrat now wants to hear that, which Specter
didn't, he can call those people, he can put them under
oath, and he can hear their testimony, people like Sibel
Edmonds, Russell Tice, and people in NSA, who know the
crimes that have been committed.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank
you both for being with us: Daniel Ellsberg, Pentagon
whistleblower, calling for whistleblowers today to come out,
especially around plans for Iran; and former Congress member
Liz Holtzman, she has written a new book. It’s called The
Impeachment of George W. Bush: A Practical Guide for
Concerned Citizens. She will be speaking on Saturday in
Philadelphia at a pro-impeachment rally this Veteran’s Day
weekend.
To purchase an audio or video copy of this
entire program,
click here for online ordering or call 1 (888) 999-3877.
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and relevant to the story. We encourage engaging, diverse and meaningful commentary. Do not include personal information such as names, addresses, phone numbers and emails. Comments falling outside our guidelines – those including personal attacks and profanity – are not permitted.
See our complete Comment Policy and use this link to notify us if you have concerns about a comment. We’ll promptly review and remove any inappropriate postings.