If
you've been reading the Quad-City
Times or The
Dispatch/Rock
Island Argus, you might
have no idea that one of Ohio's U.S. Representatives, Democrat
Dennis Kucinich, is trying to impeach President George W. Bush. To be
fair, unless you've been watching C-SPAN or you have a friend or
co-worker who is a rabid Kucinich fan, you probably don't have much
information on it, either.
And even though - or perhaps because - his impeachment articles will likely go nowhere in the House, it falls to the media to create an arena for public debate. Yet neither the Dispatch/Argus nor the Times ran a news article on Kucinich's impeachment effort the week he filed his articles, and they're ignoring both an opportunity and a historic moment.
On June 9, Kucinich filed 35 articles of impeachment against Bush, including falsifying accounts of U.S. troop deaths and injuries for political purposes; imprisoning children; misleading Congress and the American people regarding the invasion of Iraq and the threats posed by Saddam Hussein; kidnapping people and taking them to "black sites"; creating secret laws; spying against the American people; and systematically undermining efforts to address global climate change. The document can be downloaded at (http://chun.afterdowningstreet.org/amomentoftruth.pdf).
Kucinich supports his claims with nearly 65 pages of facts and quotes from Congressional reports, Pentagon reports, White House memorandums, testimony from former advisors, and FBI briefings.
The Constitution says that impeachment is reserved for those who commit "treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors." Impeachment proceedings begin in the House and, with a majority vote, move on to the Senate for a trial. In the Senate, an official can be convicted with a two-thirds vote.
Kucinich has tried to provide a voice for those who feel Bush has committed atrocities. According to a Fox/Opinion Dynamics poll conducted June 17 and 18, 64 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's performance. A November 2007 poll conducted by the American Research Group found that 34 percent of Americans think Bush should be impeached. Kucinich's attempt should have garnered more media attention based on those numbers alone.
The media delivered almost around-the-clock coverage of President Clinton's impeachment - as they should have. Yet that impeachment stemmed from two articles, not 35. And while perjury is serious, both articles of impeachment in Clinton's trial were derived not from a war, kidnappings, or spying on Americans, but - let's face it - lying about a blowjob. If the Clinton impeachment is anything to go by, the allegations facing Bush should have the media falling over themselves to cover this.
But they're not.
One reason might be that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been reluctant to bring charges against Bush; she recently said that she would not "support a resolution calling for Bush's impeachment." Joe Beach, news editor for the Rock Island Argus, said that Kucinich's attempt was merely a partisan ploy that had no chance of advancing. Chris Baldus, news editor for the Quad-City Times, did not return two phone messages seeking comment.
This effort by Kucinich will certainly be in vain if the only measuring stick is removal from office; the bill was sent to the House Judiciary Committee, a virtual graveyard for legislation. But the impeachment attempt had support; 166 representatives voted to debate the legislation, with 251 voting to instead send it to committee. The chair of the committee, John Conyers, once vowed to hold Bush impeachment hearings.
The Democrats are suggesting that they can hold President Bush accountable without attempting to impeach him, and Majority Leader Steney Hoyer said that Democrats shouldn't spend their time trying to prosecute Bush in the waning months of his presidency.
Yet even with such grim prospects in the House, the media have a basic responsibility to at least make people aware of Kucinich's actions.
The Quad-City Times published only a letter to the editor about the impeachment - on page A13 on June 12, three days after Kucinich submitted his articles.
A few articles that the Times did feel were relevant enough to publish in its Nation section: on Tuesday, June 10, a brief on Laura Bush's admiration for Hillary Clinton and a story about campaign music; on Wednesday, June 11, a short article about the widow of Enron's founder; and on Friday, June 13, an article about new stamps.
The Dispatch/Argus didn't acknowledge the impeachment articles in its pages. On Tuesday, June 10, it ran a brief on crane laws; on Thursday, June 12, it ran a small article about criminal charges against a priest who was caught jogging nude.
"Our real focus is local news," Beach said. Yet the Dispatch/Argus devotes at least an entire page daily to national news. Apparently, the Argus has decided that nude priests and laws regarding the use of cranes in the workplace are more important than presidential impeachment.
