Her opening paragraph sets the table nicely:

Finally, it has started. People have begun to speak of impeaching President George W. Bush--not in hushed whispers but openly, in newspapers, on the Internet, in ordinary conversations and even in Congress. As a former member of Congress who sat on the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment proceedings against President Richard Nixon, I believe they are right to do so.

She writes of being troubled by the lack of Bush living up to our treaty obligations (torture), and the misleading of our country into the war in Iraq.  But it was the illegal wiretapping by NSA that returned that pit in the stomach feeling for this former representative:

As a matter of constitutional law, these and other misdeeds constitute grounds for the impeachment of President Bush. A President, any President, who maintains that he is above the law--and repeatedly violates the law--thereby commits high crimes and misdemeanors, the constitutional standard for impeachment and removal from office. A high crime or misdemeanor is an archaic term that means a serious abuse of power, whether or not it is also a crime, that endangers our constitutional system of government.

<snip>

But impeachment and removal from office will not happen unless the American people are convinced of its necessity after a full and fair inquiry into the facts and law is conducted. That inquiry must commence now.

Former Representative Holztman proceeds to tear apart the rationale provided thus far by the Bush Administration of the "Commander-in-Chief"-idea whereby he can do anything (also used by Bush to ignore the McCain anti-torture amendment) and any defense of ignoring the FISA court, put into place because of the Nixon abuses of wiretapping Americans in the name of National Security.

Holtzman writes that Bush is "Subverting Our Democracy", and failing to faithfully follow the oath of office.  This is what really gets my undies in a bunch -- since Bush boasts of his obvious Constitutional violations, and provides no indication of stopping them -- I really don't even see the need for hearings, impeachment proceedings can start just based on the record.  But I do understand it is a Republican Congress.

Holtzman concludes with actions we are already doing, such as letter writing and contacting our Senators and Representatives to demand hearings, along with supporting organizations (AfterDowningStreet.org and ImpeachPac.org) that are actively working towards this end.

Her final paragraphs:

Finally, if this pressure fails to produce results, attention must be focused on changing the political composition of the House and Senate in the upcoming 2006 elections. If a Republican Congress is unwilling to investigate and take appropriate action against a Republican President, then a Democratic Congress should replace it.

As awful as Watergate was, after the vote on impeachment and the resignation of President Nixon, the nation felt a huge sense of relief. Impeachment is a tortuous process, but now that President Bush has thrown down the gauntlet and virtually dared Congress to stop him from violating the law, nothing less is necessary to protect our constitutional system and preserve our democracy.

Here's hoping that this bubbles to the surface, with James Risen's book and the true whistleblowers come out to provide a truth and a healing bright light upon the secrecy that started in earnest the minute Dick Cheney was selected by the Rehnquist Court, a decision re-affirmed in the 2004 Blackwell v. Voting Public case.

Today, he wrote something appropriate, that I hope he doesn't mind me sharing:

One bill makes recounts use the paper ballot, instead of the electronic tally -- and the other bill bans wireless access for voting machines.

:: DETAILS BELOW -- PLEASE TAKE ACTION ::

While the focus tends to be on Karl Rove, and sometimes "Scooter" Libby ... this scandal's depth and breadth is nicely gathered together -- across multiple departments, after the fold ....

Well, Sacramento began spraying pesticides from airplanes last night, and I'm wondering if anyone has any thoughts about this.

Stand Up for Free Speech!!

Join Air America / Talk City 1240 / Christine Craft listeners, the ACLU, Sacramento for Democracy, Code Pink, Green Party and others as we protect our 1st Amendment right to Free Speech!!

Where:
California Department of Justice
1300 I St (13th & I St)
Downtown Sacramento

When:
Thurs. July 28th
11 AM - 8 PM
Optimal time period is from 4 PM - 6 PM. That's when local media will be there. It may be national as well!!

More after the fold

Sonoma State University students took on a task of examining the boards of directors at the Big Ten Media Companies.

I had always known that GE owned NBC, but just how intertwined are the board members of these media conglomerates?

More below the fold:

From the San Diego Tribune:

The eight-term North County Republican read a brief written statement and did not take questions before ducking back into a library on the California State University, San Marcos campus.

"The time has come for me to conclude the public chapter in my life," Cunningham said. "Quite simply, right now I may not be the strongest candidate."

Meanwhile, subpoenas were issued:

Two members and two employees of a Washington, D.C., yacht club where Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham lived aboard a defense contractor's boat have been subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury in San Diego investigating the congressman, according to a person with knowledge of the plans.

The four who are flying to San Diego to testify Monday are the first witnesses known to be appearing before the federal panel that is gathering evidence on the eight-term Republican from Del Mar and his dealings with defense contractor MZM Inc.

The group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) says not seeking re-election is not enough:

"Given the ever-lengthening list of Representative Randy "Duke" Cunningham's unethical and potentially criminal acts, it is not sufficient for the Congressman to do nothing more than announce that he will not seek another term," Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) said today. "Rep. Cunningham's conduct is so beyond the pale as to require nothing less than his immediate resignation. His constituents deserve a Member of Congress who can concentrate on the district's issues, rather than one who will be spending his time focusing on his criminal defense."

"Today's announcement should have no effect on the pending Department of Justice, Internal Revenue Service and Department of Defense investigations into Rep. Cunningham and a member of the House of Representatives should file an ethics complaint against him with the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct."

CREW is preparing an ethics complaint against Cunningham, which will be released Friday morning.

CREW filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on June 20, 2005 with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and with the Department of Defense to garner any communications between Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) and Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) regarding defense contractor MZM, Inc. and the company's president, Mitchell Wade, from January 1, 2001, to the present.

More information about CREW:
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a non-profit, progressive legal watchdog group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions. CREW drafted the complaint against Tom DeLay, filed by former Congressman Chris Bell, for which DeLay was admonished last year.

"Petition-fatigue".  Maybe (if not probably) this has been brought up before.  If so, I apologize and I doubt I will be mentioning anything that hasn't previously been said.

Are we reaching a point where there are so many petitions, that each loses their potential impact?  500,000 for Rep. Conyers to investigate the DSM was extremely impressive, and I believe ultimately effective -- to what extent remains to be seen.

You see, today is a special day in our household.  Jane, my wife of eight years, is celebrating her 48th birthday.

I have a favor to ask, below the fold.

... the source of-for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump ...

More below the fold:

From the L.A. Times:

The nonpartisan Field Poll of registered voters found that just 39 percent said they were inclined to give Schwarzenegger a second term, while 57 percent were not. As recently as February, the numbers were almost reversed, with 56 percent saying they were inclined to re-elect Schwarzenegger and just 42 percent were not.

This is a sharp turnaround in a short amount of time.

Neither of the two announced Democratic candidates have much name recognition, but either would beat Schwarzenegger if the election were held today.

From the Sacramento Bee:

State Treasurer Phil Angelides is locked in a tight race with Schwarzenegger, leading him by a margin of 46 percent to 42 percent. That is a significant shift from February, when the Republican governor led Angelides, 52 percent to 35 percent.

State Controller Steve Westly also holds a four-point lead over Schwarzenegger in the survey, 44 percent to 40 percent. Westly trailed Schwarzenegger in February, 52 percent to 33 percent.

DiCamillo said the Democrats' standings represent logical upswings among party voters who first and foremost don't like Schwarzenegger, even if they are unfamiliar with their own standard-bearers - 37 percent have no opinion of Angelides and 43 percent are similarly bereft of a personal conclusion when it comes to Westly.

"Most of what you're seeing is just kind of a name recognition," DiCamillo said. "I don't think voters know a lot about Angelides or Westly, but they still have them ahead of Schwarzenegger."

Schwarzenegger's political career will be mortally wounded if he fails at the ballot box on a series of initiatives vital to his credibility as a reformer.

Let's see how that's going:

From the L.A. Daily News:

The findings are the latest in a series released by Field researchers indicating Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has lost considerable ground among voters in recent months. The drop in the governor's popularity has coincided with his push for a fall special election for voters to consider several ballot measures aimed at curbing the power of Democrats and public employee unions in state government.

Earlier installments of the poll have shown that Schwarzenegger's job approval ratings have tumbled amid voters expressing skepticism about the special election and tepid support for his ballot measures.

<snip>

" ... the poll found that 83 percent of Democrats, who form the majority of the state's registered voters, would oppose a second term, as would 61 percent of independent voters. Solid majorities of Hispanic voters and women also say they do not want to see the governor re-elected.

"This is a definite turn away from the governor," Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo said. "It's fallen so far, so fast and in a very broad-based way."

From the San Diego Union Tribune:

After months of wrangling with public employees unions and Democrats in the Legislature, much of Schwarzenegger's luster as a superstar celebrity politician appears to have faded.

"You close your eyes, he looks like any other politician, whereas a year ago, he had a lot of unique characteristics," Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo said. "People from across the aisle viewed him positively and he was well-received by nonpartisans and - a little more than normal for a Republican - among Latinos, among younger voters. But that's no longer there."

Alas, now is not the time to let up.  We need to defeat these measures designed to turn California into a Red State -- Rove is pulling the strings on this.

For historical perspective, again from the San Diego Union Tribune:

The last two governors, Democrat Gray Davis and Republican Pete Wilson, bounced back from negative poll numbers at a comparable time to win second terms.

Wilson was widely counted out when a May 1993 Field Poll showed him trailing the eventual Democratic nominee, Kathleen Brown, by 23 percentage points and showed that 61 percent of the voters were not inclined to re-elect him. In November 1994, Wilson was re-elected in a 15-percentage-point rout.

Ms. Brown ran a horrible campaign, and had been carrying baggage from her brother and father (Jerry and Pat), both former Governors who Right Wing Republicans hold strong views against, particularly when referring to Jerry as "Gov. Moonbeam".  Many of Wilson's advisors are now advising Schwarzenegger, but I think the inexperience of Schwarzenegger is showing, the celebrity aura is fading fast, and what is left is a egotistical Puff of Hot Air whose catch phrases from lousy movies are wearing thin on the majority of Californians desperate for true leadership.

Billmon had an excellent post:

But I actually think Rove's rant should be seen as a somewhat encouraging sign. Rove and his idiot chorus aren't roaring at the top of their lungs to try to drown out the liberals -- that would be absurd overkill, given how effectively the corporate media has ridiculed and/or demonized the likes of Howard Dean and Dick Durbin. No, Rove's hate rally is aimed squarely at suppressing the growing doubts of the great silent majority -- and even, to a certain extent, those of the conservative true believers, some of whom are showing ominous signs of war weariness.

The rhetorical assault on the liberals, in other words, is the core of the PR counteroffensive the White House has been promising to unleash for the past week.

There is more, I encourage everyone to read it.

My $0.02 below the fold (cross posted elsewhere):