Roger Thomas – 9/30/04

This page was last updated on September 30, 2004.

Start the impeachment now; Roger Thomas; Beaver County Times; September 30, 2004.

This letter presents one obvious lie after another. The only reason I’m dissecting it is to expose Mr. Thomas.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“Every impeachment has taken place during the second term.

“Andrew Johnson’s was during Lincoln’s second term, Nixon’s was during his second term, and Clinton’s was during his second term. Lyndon Johnson was forced to resign during the second term of the Kennedy/Johnson administration.

[RWC] Lyndon Johnson didn’t resign; he chose not to run for re-election in 1968. There’s a huge difference. Is not running for re-election now the same as being impeached? Also, it was in his first term. The Kennedy/Johnson administration ended with Johnson’s inauguration in 1965.

“A CIA operative has been unmasked during this administration. That is a felony, and independent investigation has traced it back to the White House.”

[RWC] Apparently Mr. Thomas has read the report for an investigation that has not yet been completed. An initial allegation claimed a White House official “outted” an alleged undercover CIA agent even before the investigation began. Even if someone on the White House staff knowingly outted an agent he knew to be working under cover, does anyone believe it was President Bush? For what it’s worth, many news reports conceded the alleged undercover status of the agent in question had been a poorly kept secret for a long time. Regardless, if someone knowingly outted an agent he knew to be working under cover, he should be prosecuted.

“Iraq was invaded because of weapons of mass destruction, even though David McKay had clearly reported that there were none there.

[RWC] Does Mr. Thomas mean “David Kay?” Mr. Thomas needs to get his timeline straight. David Kay didn’t conduct his investigation until after the Iraq invasion and didn’t submit his report until early 2004. When Mr. Kay testified before Congress in 2004, he said, “All I can say is if you read the total body of intelligence in the last 12 to 15 years that flowed on Iraq, I quite frankly think it would be hard to come to a conclusion other than Iraq was a gathering, serious threat to the world with regard to WMD. I have said I actually think this may be one of those cases where it was even more dangerous than we thought.”

“Iraq was invaded because of Saddam’s links to Sept. 11, 2001 and Osama bin Laden.

[RWC] Another lie. Read the Iraq War Resolution. Besides, I thought “Iraq was invaded because of weapons of mass destruction.” Which is it, Mr. Thomas?

“Both Paul O’Neill and David Clarke had clearly reported that there were no ties between the two. Establishing an alliance between Saddam and bin Laden would be like finding one between the pope [sic] and Stalin. The men detested each other.

[RWC] Regarding Paul O’Neill, he was Secretary of the Treasury. He wasn’t even working on counterterrorism. Does Mr. Thomas just make this stuff up?

Regarding “David Clarke,” does Mr. Thomas mean “Richard Clarke?” If so, he can’t even get his references correct. In any case, Richard Clarke claimed in 1999 there were ties between Iraq and bin Laden when the Clinton administration sent cruise missiles to destroy a pharmaceuticals plant in Sudan. Clarke believed the plant financed by bin Laden was producing VX nerve gas with help from Iraqi chemical weapon experts.

“Prisoners have been held without due process of law in direct violation of the Geneva Convention, to which both Iraq and the United States are signatories. Ghost prisoners have been held in secret, without notice to appropriate international agencies, in direct violation of the law.”

[RWC] Mr. Thomas needs to read the Geneva Conventions. Most of the prisoners were not covered by the Conventions. Despite that fact, United States policy is to treat all prisoners according to the Conventions. That said, there were a few exceptions requested by the CIA and they required approval by Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. When our guys and gals in uniform are in harm’s way, I’m willing to cut us a little slack.

“The Supreme Court has just ruled that the administration’s holding of American citizens without due process of law violates the Constitution.”

[RWC] That ruling was no surprise. Even though the American citizens referred to were designated “enemy combatants,” I agree with the Supreme Court on this ruling. I’m sure Mr. Thomas doesn’t know this, but there was precedent during World War II for holding American enemy combatants. Maybe we should retroactively impeach FDR and Harry Truman. <g>

“Permission to use dogs, nudity, and humiliation to soften prisoners for interrogation has now been traced to the White House. This violates the human rights provisions of the Geneva and other conventions.”

[RWC] Again, does Mr. Thomas just make this stuff up? To date, every report issued so far about Abu Ghraib indicates no such thing.

“The CIA is now attempting to influence the outcome of the Iraqi election in direct violation of executive orders running back to the Ford administration.”

[RWC] Did you notice Mr. Thomas provides not one stitch of evidence for any of his claims?

“This bill of particulars for impeachment is not exhaustive, but it shows a prima fascia case. The charges need to be filed now, before there’s a chance for a second term.”

[RWC] For his sake, I hope Mr. Thomas isn’t a lawyer if he believes a provable pack of lies “shows a prima fascia case” for anything, let alone an impeachment.