Daily Archives: April 26, 2006

Vermont Legislators’ impeachment letter

Here is the text of the letter sent by Vermont legislators to our Congressional delegation supporting impeachment:

Dear Members of the Vermont Delegation:

As you know, many of our fellow Vermonters are speaking out over their
deep concerns regarding many actions of President Bush-actions which
they believe violate our laws, our constitution, and our international
treaty obligations.  These concerns of average Vermonters are being
voiced through resolutions adopted at town meetings, resolutions voted
at county and state committee meetings, in public petitions, and in an
ever-increasing number of letters seen in our newspapers. 

Based upon the public information already available to them, many
Vermonters whom we serve have indicated that they would respond
affirmatively to each of the following questions:

Has George Bush violated the law and Constitution by ordering American
citizens to be held indefinitely without access to counsel and without
being charged, or afforded any opportunity to challenge such detention
before a civil judge, based solely on his discretionary and unilateral
designation of them as “enemy combatants”?

Has George Bush violated the law and Constitution by ordering and
continuing to order the interception and recording of telephone calls by
the National Security Agency without obtaining statutorily required
court orders?

Has George Bush violated international treaties and the United Nations
Charter by invading Iraq and by obtaining authorization from the United
States Congress for that invasion based upon intentionally false
information and the intentional withholding of accurate information and
by then intentionally concealing those actions?

Has George Bush violated the law and Constitution by ordering the
continued detention of persons being held, even after their release has
been ordered by a court?

These questions raise, both individually and in their totality, issues
of the gravest national importance.  Fundamental standards of due
process require that such allegations not simply be accepted as true;
however, they also cannot and should not be ignored.

Indeed, we believe that openly obtaining objective answers to these
questions is increasingly critical to sustaining public faith in our
constitutional system of government and in its requirement for
accountability by every President.  Obviously, if any or all of these
alleged acts is substantiated through a fair investigation and hearings,
it then could either require censure or setting in motion the
constitutional process for possible removal from office.

We realize the serious practical difficulties of initiating even an
initial investigation of these issues at present, much less in actually
moving forward should they be substantiated.  However, speaking as
individual Members of the Vermont House of Representatives and the State
Senate, we ask that you take all possible steps which you believe can
lead to the initiation of such an investigation and then promptly
conduct all further proceedings which are warranted by its results.

We believe that Vermonters, our nation and our constitutional
principles deserve no less.
###

Thanks to Rep. Dick Marek, who wrote the letter and sent me the copy.

Open season?

It’s pretty obvious that one minority group that is an “acceptable” target for hate is sex offenders. The latest from Bill O’Reilly is certainly an example of this phenomenon.

Another, of course, is the murders of two sex offenders in Maine.

We now learn that the suspected killer, while searching for victims, searched the Vermont registry.

Given the fact that everyone is entitled to protection from criminal assault, and that one of the things we know for sure is that isolation makes offenders more likely to reoffend, shouldn’t we be reconsidering whether painting targets on released sex offenders is good public policy?

From today’s Vermont Guardian

http://www.vermontguardian.com/local/042006/VTSaysImpeach.shtml

Rep. David Zuckerman, a Progressive from Burlington is collecting signatures from lawmakers today to introduce a formal resolution in the legislature demanding that Congress draft articles of impeachment against the pResident. Zuckerman is relying on the Jefferson Manual of rules for the U.S. House of Representatives which was cited in the Rutland resolution that passed many Democratic County Committees.

According to today’s vermontguardian, at least 12 legislators had signed on.  Please, everyone, call your local reps and ask them to sign on, and to vote for it.  Tell them not to let fear rule their lives. 

Most people know about the lies told us to get our support for invading Iraq.  Most know about wiretapping and threats to our civil liberties.  This is not news — but if the conversation does not become front and center we will be stuck in the same quicksand for another two years.  This should be a national discussion, and Vermont should lead the way.

Barbara

Bill O’Reilly Still Loves Vermont

The Cashman issue may be yesterday’s news, but Vermont is still near and dear to Bill O’Reilly’s heart. From the Free Press and Fox News via Media Matters (in case you missed it while it was on the Media Matters sidebar):

While discussing states’ sentencing laws for people convicted of sex crimes against children, Bill O’Reilly declared: “Soon, there will only be a few states where” sex offenders “can go and molest children and get sympathy, states like Massachusetts and Vermont.”

You can also click on the image for a link to the clip. Click on “there’s more” for the context.

As The Burlington Free Press reported on April 13, the Vermont Senate “unanimously gave preliminary approval Wednesday [April 12] to a bill designed to crack down on sex offenses” by “increasing the number of investigators who focus on sex crimes, increasing the number of pre-sentence investigations that judges use to help determine a sentence, trying to better coordinate prevention programs … decriminalizing consensual sex between teenagers”; creating a “a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years for aggravated sexual assault”; “expand[ing] the sex offender registry to list more offenders on the Internet and add[ing] a registry for violent offenders.”

The Vermont House of Representatives previously had passed legislation that “approved a mandatory life maximum and set advisory minimum sentences, but declined to affix a mandatory minimum out of concerns they would make it more difficult to prosecute sex crimes.” As the Free Press noted on April 5, “[M]any prosecutors and victims’ advocates” oppose mandatory sentencing laws “out of concern that the mandate would force more defendants to take their cases to trial, forcing more victims to testify and creating the possibility of more acquittals because sex crimes can be difficult to prove.”

Now, do you think the subtleties escape Bill because he’s not interested, or is he just a dimwit?

Or do we really care anymore?

Whatever. I’m gonna go watch Olbermann now…