IMPEACHMENT? NO. INDICTMENT!
THE INDICTMENT OF GWBUSH AWAITS ONLY COURAGE

By: Nathanael

United States v. George W. Bush et al is a new book that portrays the hypothetical account of grand jury proceedings against President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and former Secretary of State Colin Powell for “… tricking the nation into war – in legal terms, conspiracy to defraud the United States.” The book was released early December of 2006 and written by Ms. Elizabeth de la Vega who retired in 2004 after 20 years as federal prosecutor and whose work included being …

 …an Assistant U. S. Attorney in Minneapolis, a member of the Organized Crime Strike Force in San Jose, and Chief of the San Jose Branch U.S. Attorney's Office, I prosecuted all manner of criminal cases. There were bank embezzlements, government frauds, violent takeover robberies, piloting a commercial passenger flight while under the influence – the pilot had had twenty rum and (diet) Cokes and four hours' sleep before takeoff – and investment frauds, to name a few.

Tom Engelhardt and Ms. de la Vega recently posted a two-part preview of this book along with some book excerpts, which can be found here (part 1) and here (part 2). These two articles give such substantial explanation that felony crimes have been committed as to make reading the book all but superfluous. An excerpt from part 1 follows:

After analyzing this evidence in light of the applicable law, I've determined that we already have more than enough information to allow a reasonable person to conclude that the President conducted a wide-ranging effort to deceive the American people and Congress into supporting a war against Iraq. In other words, in legal terms, there is probable cause to believe that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and Powell violated Title 18, United States Code, Section 371, which prohibits conspiracies to defraud the United States. Probable cause is the standard of proof required for a grand jury to return an indictment. Consequently, we have more than sufficient evidence to warrant indictment of the President and his advisers.

Do I expect someone to promptly indict the President and his aides? No. I am aware of the political impediments and constitutional issues relating to the indictment of a sitting president. Do those impediments make this merely an empty exercise? Absolutely not.

Numerous questions arise out of the last paragraph. If the President and his aides have committed crimes, then what prevents any other federal prosecutor from impaneling a grand jury to consider placing him under indictment? Is Ms. de la Vega the only federal prosecutor in the America that understands the law and the rest are clueless? Is there any constitutional provision, law or statute that places GWBush technically above the law? So if her book is not an empty exercise, what options or obligations does Ms. de la Vega have as past federal prosecutor and still being a licensed attorney?

Consider these excerpts from her three stated goals for the book.

1. Did the President and his team defraud the country? After swearing to uphold the law of the land, did our highest government officials employ the universal techniques of fraudsters – deliberate concealment, misrepresentations, false pretenses, half-truths – to deceive Congress and the American people? 

2. By presenting the President's conspiracy to defraud just as a prosecutor would present any fraud conspiracy, I hope to enable readers to consider the case in an uncharged atmosphere, applying criminal law to the evidence that they believe has been proved to the standard of probable cause, just as grand jurors would in any other case.

3. My third goal is to send the message home – to whomever will listen. And this is it: The President has committed fraud. It is a crime in the legal, not merely the colloquial, sense. It is far worse than Enron. It is not a victimless crime. We cannot shrug our shoulders and walk away.

Assuming the evermore-obvious fascist/socialist intentions on destroying the Bill of Rights and Constitution can be avoided, future Americans may well view Ms. de la Vega as a solitary voice and hero from the legal community. There are tens of thousands of knowledgeable but silent prosecuting attorneys, judges and elected officials that understand this criminal reality just as she does. Ms. de la Vega states (in part 1) that the risk of losing their jobs has rendered these officials mute. Their silence to the crimes of GWBush equates to having sold out the rule of law and the Constitution for money.

However, publishing this book has correspondingly created a serious legal obligation for Ms. de la Vega. All attorneys are officers of the Court. They take an oath of office just like any elected official. They are all obligated to uphold and protect the Constitution.

UNITED STATES CODE - TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I – CRIMES, CHAPTER 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 4. Misprision of felony

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.


As an officer of the Court, Ms. de la Vega must communicate what she understands about GWBush et al to a court of proper jurisdiction in the form of a sworn statement or affidavit. Her experience and knowledge undeniably compels her to distill her book into a formal federal criminal complaint and have it served upon a competent court. If not then she has subjected herself to willful misprision, a felony.

Upon submitting her federal criminal complaint, Ms. de la Vega has met her fiduciary obligation to We the People and the Constitution. The responsibility for continuing against GWBush et al has shifted to the Judge who was served, the local office of the US Attorney and/or the State Attorney General in which it is filed. These recipients are then faced with serious legal ramifications if they do not investigate the charges in Ms. de la Vega’s affidavit. Ignoring or failing to submit her allegations to a grand jury will arguably subject any of these recipients to criminal exposure for misprision, conspiracy to defraud the UNITED STATES by intentional inaction, aiding and abetting a criminal enterprise, obstruction of justice and other possible crimes.

So then, is GWBush immune from prosecution for his actions as President or in his personal capacity while he is President? No. Judges, Congressmen, Mayors, Senators and all manner of elected officials can and do get hauled off in handcuffs for crimes they have committed. There is no portion of the Constitution that immunizes the President from criminal prosecution. Article 1, Section 3 (the Powers of the Congress) states as follows:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Impeachment is only a political act with limited consequences that bear one’s ability to retain or hold elected office. The convicted Party (such as the President or Judge or Congressperson) of an Impeachment is still liable and subject to Indictment and prosecution for any criminal acts according to Law.

 

There is no language in the Constitution or the US Code that requires an impeachment proceeding to come before a criminal indictment or prosecution. Any Constitutional Scholar, retired Assistant US Attorney, Supreme Court Justice, Attorney General, Congressperson or any Court stating such prior constraint is in violation of the Constitution and the Law. No one is above the law, not even the President. The Constitution cannot be altered by statute, a legislative act, a bill passed by Congress and signed by the President or an Executive Order. A valid Article V procedure must be accomplished before the Constitution is lawfully modified.

 

UNITED STATES CODE - TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I – CRIMES, CHAPTER 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 2. Principals

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.
(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

After Ms. de la Vega has taken up her responsibility by filing her criminal complaint, she has other serious crimes to attest and allege against the President and others. These perpetrators have confessed to these crimes by their public actions. Just prior to the November 2006 election cycle, Congress passed and the President signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006.  

One aspect of this supposed “Act of Congress” retroactively holds people criminally liable for certain actions that happened before the bill was passed by Congress and signed by GWBush. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is a direct violation of the Constitution, Article I, Section 9, and Paragraph 3, is constitutionally null and void and of no force and effect.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. 

"All laws repugnant to the Constitution are void of law.”
Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison (1803)

A challenge to any and all attorneys, including retired Assistant US Attorneys ... please explain why the members of Congress who voted for the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and the President who signed it supposedly into law are not guilty of rebellion or sedition and other related crimes?

18 USC CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Sec. 2383. Rebellion or insurrection

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. 

The Military Commission Act of 2006 has been veiled in the appearance of law when in fact it is a criminal act. The presentation of an invalid, unlawful act as being a valid law is known as acting under the color of law. It is a gross and intentional misrepresentation that is not law but tyranny. It is a serious enough violation of the rights of the people that the potential consequences include capital punishment.

UNITED STATES CODE - TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART 1 - CRIMES, CHAPTER 13 - CIVIL RIGHTS

 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law 

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.  

UNITED STATES CODE - TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART 1 - CRIMES, CHAPTER 13 - CIVIL RIGHTS

  241. Conspiracy against rights 

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
 

Ms de la Vega also adds to her responsibilities to We the People by making additional assertions in a bold and accurate statement found in part 1.

 

George W. Bush exploited the vulnerability of an entire populace reeling from the September 11, 2001, attacks to manipulate them into supporting a war based on false pretenses. 

The President has in all likelihood committed War Crimes under USC Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 18, Section 2441 for his Iraq War. If she truly believes her above statement, then she must attest and affirm to these criminal actions of GWBush et al in another criminal complaint.
 

There is one last question to Ms. de la Vega. If GWBush were monstrous enough to use the 911 attacks as a false pretense to commit war crimes against Iraq, then why would it be unreasonable to consider the 911 attacks as a false flag action perpetrated by internal terrorists? The resultant blood rage of the people could then be manipulated into a war footing against Iraq.  

I suggest that you read and consider the works of Morgan Reynolds, Judy Wood, Jim Fetzer and Rick Siegel before answering that question.

Luke 11:45-46 NASB
 
(45) One of the lawyers said to Him in reply, "Teacher, when You say this, You insult us too."
(46) But He said, "Woe to you lawyers as well! For you weigh men down with burdens hard to bear, while you yourselves will not even touch the burdens with one of your fingers.
 
 
Ephesians 5:11-13 NASB
 
(11) Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them;
(12) for it is disgraceful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret.
(13) But all things become visible when they are exposed by the light, for everything that becomes visible is light.
 
 
Galatians 4:16 NASB
 
So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?

Related Article: Conspiracy of War Criminals... GWBush and Congress




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


Nathanael is a self-employed engineer and lives in metropolitan area of Dallas, Texas. He had only ever been a life long registered Republican but changed to the Constitution Party in May of 2004. He is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.

Nathanael can be reached at nathanael4551@yahoo.com

Published in the January 22, 2007 issue of  Ether Zone.
Copyright 1997 - 2007 Ether Zone.

We invite your comments on this article in our forum!