Radio Show
      Listen Host Guests Archive
On The Side

View the Latest Action Alerts and Stay informed!

Read our current Commentaries for indepth analysis into hot issues!




March 2005   jim moore
Clinton Is Impeached For Sex, Bush Gets A Pass For Treason By Jim Moore


By: Jim Moore

Is this a great country, or what? Our values have become so mega-warped that it has become well nigh impossible to distinguish between a man who only disgraces the presidency and one who destroys it.

That doesn't let Bill Clinton off the hook. He did his share of breaking the presidential oath of office by the transfer, on his watch, of U.S. nuclear technology to our arch enemy, China.

But strike that. His REAL crime (as the Congress saw it) was not furthering China's capacity to enhance their nuclear potential, it was (heaven forbid) his romp in the Oval Office with Monica, an intern; and then lying about it under oath--- and demolishing the meaning of the word "IS" in the process.--- that did him in.

For that unzip of the trouser and slip of the tongue, Clinton got the ultimate in presidential punishment: he was impeached.

Fast forward to another president, George W. Bush, self-proclaimed master of all he surveys. Here we have an avaricious, power-hungry, autocratic, mystically-ordained president whose mission in this life (and maybe the next as well) is to force the political system of democracy down the throats of every "non-believer" in the world, whether they like it or not, and even if they know that democracies, unlike republics, historically degenerate into tyranny and totalitarianism.

This, too, is a breach of the presidential oath, which reads like this: "I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

But is Bush's breaking of the presidential oath a matter of treason, or merely promises to the American people that are not kept?

We shall see.

The Constitutional provisions concerning impeachment states: "The President, Vice President, and all other civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

The Constitution itself is ambiguous about the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" so we will automatically strike that from any Bush indictment. We will strike "bribery" as well, since if Bush bribed anybody it's so well covered that finding it would be like digging for oil with a spoon. But treason is quite another thing. Treason is defined as: Violation of allegiance to one's country or sovereign; especially betrayal of one's own country; a betrayal of trust or confidence. With this definition, Bush, it seems to me, is as guilty of treason as if, when he took the oath of office, he had put his left hand in the air and his right hand on a copy of Mad Magazine.

Admittedly, much of what Bush is doing might not be ruled treasonable, if defended by verbally-adept lawyers, but instead would be relegated to categories such as, bad taste, unpopular policy, poor judgment, or human error. And, although Bush ranks low in all these categories, they do not rise to the level of treason, as defined above.

But these do.

+ He joined Prime Minister, Tony Blair, in a "secret" pact to go to war; as reported by Britain's former international development secretary.

+ He lied to mislead America into war, claimed by Ritter, a former Marine.

+ He declared we had ironclad proof that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction which posed an immanent threat to the U.S., and therefore "justified" a preemptive war, as reported by Ray Close, former CIA analyst

+ He committed possible war crimes in Iraq, a claim by former U.S. Representative Clare Callan of Nebraska, and now being adjudicated in federal court.

+ He admitted sending terror suspects to countries that practice torture, despite the fact that the U.S. is party to the 1987 convention against torture.

+ He ambiguously sneers at international law one day and invokes it the next, and expects other countries not to do the same.

+ He threatened small nations if they support a resolution to move international debate about U.S. occupation of Iraq from the Security Council to the General Assembly where the U.S. has no vote.

+ He betrayed our boys who enlist expecting the President to uphold his oath of office, and carry out all operations within the Constitution and treaties to which we are bound.

+ He conducted a secret "dirty tricks" campaign against U.S. Security Council delegation in New York in a effort to win votes in favor of war against Iraq.

+ He is creating permanent military bases in Iraq from which to dominate the Middle East.

+ He is shredding the Constitutional guarantees of basic legal rights and sanctuary from government spying.

+ He is negating civilian control of the military (as the Constitution requires) to give more power to the military and the CIA.

+ He is promoting military injustice by pushing trials with no juries, no right to choose counsel, and no public admitted.

And these are small potatoes. You will notice that there is no mention here of Bush's unwillingness or inability to (1) reign in his war-driven staff of neo-conservatives, (2) his unconcern with the enormous (and rising) war debt, (3) his economic "payoffs" to small nations that "cooperate", (4) his blatant disregard for dissenting congressional advice, (5) his "patriotic" shutting down of opposition voices, (6) his determination to "democratize" every nation in the world at the expense of American lives and money, and (7) his careless disregard for Constitutional law and the Bill of Rights.

All this may be true, you say, but after all, Bush is only one man, he probably is not doing all these things personally. Perhaps, but they reflect the actions of his administration, which reflect the agenda of the president. To believe otherwise would be like saying: if a major corporation is scammed into bankruptcy, don't blame the CEO.

Truman was right. The buck stops with the president. And if this president is guilty of only a fraction of the treasonous acts he is accused of he should be impeached, and faster than Clinton was.

"Published originally at : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."

Jim Moore is a free-lance political writer and is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.

Jim Moore can be reached at

Published in the March 16, 2005 issue of Ether Zone. Copyright 1997 - 2005 Ether Zone.

We invite your comments on this article in our forum!