While the Vice President goes through theatrics, the States should put pressure on the House to impeach the Vice President, even after he leaves office.

America cannot outsource its criminal justice system to the international community. TPM readers have the opportunity to help bring about the needed change.

There is something specific TPM readers can do. A draft-"State Proclamation" calls on the House to impeach. It will include your inputs. 

The House Rules permit proclamations from the States calling on the House to start impeachment proceedings.  The House can also start impeachment based on charges from a grand jury.

Consider the language of these state proclamations calling for impeachment. After you review this information with your friends, you can provide inputs to how you would like to proceed. Inaction is not "change".

These State Proclamations will help the Congress focus on what must be changed; and give the public the needed information to know whether the promise of change is real.

This is intended for discussion purposes only.

Working Copy of State Prolamation

This sample state proclamation below is not intended to be legal advice, nor direction of what must or must not be contained in a state proclamation. Each citizen through each state has the opportunity to independently draft their own state proclamation.

Whereas House Rule 603 recognizes State proclamations calling on the House to start impeachment proceedings after a grand jury indictment;

Whereas the US Congress has the power to start impeachment proceedings against anyone for any reason and is not bound by any precedent;

Whereas a Texas Grand Jury has issued a grand jury indictment against the Vice President for allegedly profiting from illegal prisoner abuse and organized criminal activity;

Whereas the United States Congress has not started impeachment proceedings against the Vice President over these specific charges in the Texas Grand Jury;

Whereas the State of _____ has the vital interest in ensuring the US Constitution is defended against domestic enemies;

Whereas the State of ____ has the obligation to assert its power to remind the House of Representatives its concern that the Vice President's alleged criminal activity must be,but has not been, confronted;

Whereas the United States Constitution permits the President to grant a pardon to anyone for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment;

Whereas there is a vital interest in denying the Vice President of any chance of a pardon by starting impeachment proceedings against him;

Whereas the Citizens of the State of _____ recognize there are many financial issues worthy of Congressional attention; and

Whereas the US Constitution delegates through Article I exclusive legislative power and responsibility to the Congress to responsibly handle economic and impeachment issues at the same time;

Whereas the United States and Iraqi governments quickly conducted prosecutions without lengthy investigations against Saddam Hussein on a short list of criminal charges;

We the People of the State of ______ through our respective legislature/assembly call on the United States House of Representatives to impeach Vice President Richard Cheney over charges in the Texas Grand Jury indictment.'

The Jefferson's Manual opens the door for impeachment following a grand jury indictment. :

Sec. 603. Inception of impeachment proceedings in the House.

House of Representatives there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion: by charges made on the floor on the responsibility of a Member or Delegate (II, 1303; III, 2342, 2400, 2469; VI, 525, 526, 528, 535, 536); by charges preferred by a memorial, which is usually referred to a committee for examination (III, 2364, 2491,  2494, 2496, 2499, 2515; VI, 543); or by a resolution dropped in the hopper by a Member and referred to a committee (Apr. 15, 1970, p. 11941-42; Oct. 23, 1973, p. 34873); by a message from the President (III, 2294, 2319; VI, 498); by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State (III, 2469) or Territory (III, 2487) or from a grand jury (III, 2488); or from facts developed and reported by an investigating committee of the House (III, 2399, 2444).

The House Rules include the Hinds Precedent re from 1811 (III, 2488) re a grand jury [emphasis added]:

On December 16, 1811, the Speaker laid before the House a letter from Cowles Mead, speaker of the house of representatives of the Mississippi Territory, inclosing the copy of a presentment against Harry Toulmin, judge of the superior court for the Washington district, in said Territory made by the grand jury of Baldwin County, specifying charges against the said judge, which were read and ordered to lie on the table.

The charges relate to Cheney's alleged official acts in office. This is explained by the commentaries to the House rules:

In the 93d Congress, the Vice President sought to initiate an investigation by the House of charges against him of possibly impeachable offenses; the Speaker and the House took no action on the request since the matter was pending in the courts  and the offenses did not relate to activities during the Vice President's term of office (Sept. 25, 1973, p. 31368); see III, 2510, wherein the Committee on the Judiciary (to which the matter had been referred by privileged resolution) reported that a civil officer (the Vice President) could not be impeached for acts or omissions committed prior to his term of office

Commentary

I. The Groundwork has been laid to Hold Cheney Accountable

Vermont's Senate passed a similar proclamation. We're waiting on the House. If Speaker Pelosi refuses to consider the Texas Grand Jury indictment or these State proclamations, we should openly discuss removing Pelosi as speaker. [Send this Letter to support this.] Your assistance will send a clear message to the world community: Change has arrived. We the People intend to ensure Congress embraces the change. The domestic enemies must be confronted, not given a blind eye.

II. Sitting Vice Presidents Are Not Above The Law

Vice President Cheney has been indicted by a grand jury. Sitting Vice Presidents have been prosecuted. Vice President Aaron Burr was charged with Hamilton's murder.

III. The House Has A Duty, But Refuses To Act

The court had an arraignment hearing today. It is irrelevant whether these indictments are quashed. Once the charges are on the table, the Congress has a duty to review those charges.  Congress can support Texas and ensure Cheney's responsiveness by keeping the threat of impeachment on the table.

IV. The House Has A Duty, Even After Cheney Leaves Office

Some suggest time is running out. Cheney can be impeached after he leaves office. The House has work to do, but points to diversions. They might as well start now. The States should start now to pressure the House to confront the Vice President, even after he leaves office.

V. The States Must Heed The Lessons of This Congress: Inaction In Action

An impeachment will quickly do what the Vice President hopes to avoid: Accountability.  However, Congress is reluctant to act, despite the promise of change. 

Indeed, the States must heed the lessons of this Congress and Vice President: They will point to future, possible confrontation as an excuse to do nothing today. Then they do nothing.

VI. The States Must Confront The Vice President's Defiance

The threat of a state proclamation, a grand jury, a criminal trial, and House impeachment have meant nothing to this Vice President. Then he should be forced to confront all these threats.

The Texas Grand Jury's indictment is a signal to the States. First, Congress has not confronted the Vice President; and, second, the States must pressure Congress to act. If Congress will not confront domestic threats, we have no reason to believe they'll confront reality or embrace change.

The states have the obligation to review this Vice President's refusal to timely cooperate. The states should indepdendently move to sidestep this Vice President's agenda of delay, and pressure the House to hold the Vice President to account.

These discussions must start now at the local and state level.

VII. American "Excuses For Inaction" Is Not "Change"

There is no excuse for the House not to bring these charges before the Senate for trial. Only the threat of impeachment will force the Vice President to timely cooperate with the Texas court, and quickly complete the trial. However, if the Vice President refuses to cooperate with the trial, the House must keep the impeachment option on the table: The trial must start in Texas; and the House must prepare to present the charges to the Senate.

A short list of charges means there should be a short trial. As intended. Just like Saddam Hussein.

VIII. The House Rules Recognize Grand Jury Indictments On Impeachment

A state legislature or assembly may forward the charges to the House. The House rules do not specify that the legislature only from Texas may forward charges from Texas grand juries. There is the option for any state to forward the Texas Grand Jury charges to the House; and for any State to use the Texas Grand Jury charges to justify any state proclamation

No state should wait for the Texas Courts. All States should discuss their state proclamations to bring pressure to bear to the United States House. Waiting is not a solution, but more of the Executive branch's strategy of arrogance.

IX. States Must Prepare Now: Pending Matters Gives The House Time To Make Excuses

Some suggest this matter is "pending" and the House should do nothing. That argue fails to embrace what the Vice President's lawyers are doing: Attempting to eject the case. The Vice President cannot have it both ways. If he continues to attempt to end the criminal trial, the only responsible action is for the House to proceed.

The House must use the threat of impeachment as the leverage to force the Vice President to cooperate with the judicial branch. Even if the Vice President (reluctantly) agrees to cooperate with the court, the House should still prepare for trial. The threat of impeachment must remain on the the table.

X. Change Must Be From What Is Known To What Will Solve The Problem

Some say we should "move on". To what, based on what, and from what? They are providing excuses not to confront reality. Rather, those calling for the nation to "move on" would implicitly ask that we not dig into the details; nor formulate an agenda of change based on reality. They offer not reason why they are reluctant to assert power. They offer excuses to capitulate not confront.

That is not change. But more smokescreens and excuses.

The public needs to know whether the promise of change is matched by a real plan to address what is wrong. We need to know whether that plan will or will not address the abuses this Vice President and his lawyers jointly crafted to thwart We the People and Congress.

Without a confrontation, there is no incentive for this Vice President to respond. Our government can only reform if we change what is known to be wrong, and discuss options to those specific problems. Without a confrontation, we will have more excuses to "move on" and not solve the real problem. Whatever that is. Unaddressed, those problems will be exploited and further threaten our Constitution and Republic.

Congress seems reluctant to act on these serious allegations. They deserve attention.  One problem has been the American leadership's refusal to confront reality, and their failure to chart a course from what is wrong to what is right.  Congress is (again) operating on the basis of ignorance. That is not change or reform.

Congress needs (another) wakeup call. If we're going to "move on," we must know what we are moving from. Then we can decide whether the leadership is moving from what is known to what is preferred. That is real, credible change.

An impeachment will force the nation to pay attention. Then we the People can decide whether we are moving forward based on facts, or more smokescreens of ineffective "leaders". The promise of reform must be fulfilled with confrontation then change, not excuses to "move on." We must move forward to goals, not "move on" from what we do not understand. What failed must be understood, otherwise it will happen again. That is not change, but a worthless promise.

XI. State Action Will Signal The Vice President We're Serious

Confrontation and examination will set the stage for fact finding and future oversight. Unless there is a confrontation with this Vice President in the Senate, the nation is forced to watch the Vice President attempt to derail the proceedings in Texas. He should not be given that luxury.

This VIce President must be presented two problems at the same time: A criminal trial in Texas; and an impeachment trial in the Senate. This was foreseeable, yet his lawyers would ask that we "hold back". This Vice President has been unresponsive to oversight and demands for information. There is no reason to respect his desire to further challenge We the People.

The Vice President must be forced to respond to We the People through impeachment. We're not here to make the Vice Preident's job easy. We're here to hold him accountable. He will never cooperate with accountability, unless he is lawfully forced. Impeachment in the House will bypass the judicial branch, and prevent the Vice President and his lawyers from using delaying tactics in court. As the Framers intended.

XII. Texas Grand Jury Indictment Opens Door For All States To Assert Power

The States may individually use this Texas Grand Jury indictment to create standing to pass a proclamation calling on the House to start impeachment proceedings. The House Rules permit states to pass proclamations calling on the House to impeach; and for the House to recognize those proclamations.

Any state may use the Texas Grand Jury indictment as the basis for their state proclamation. The House rules are permissive. The House rules are not an exhaustive list of what is or isn't permissible.

Any state may use any reason it chooses to call on the House to impeach. The House may use any reason to start impeachment proceedings. The House and State are not bound by any rule or precedent. It is irrelevant that the House Rules may or may not have been interpreted in a specific way.

XIII. Federal Government Has Multiple Responsibilities With Must Be Simultaneously Managed

Understandably, there are concerns that there are higher, more serious issues. It is our position that the Constitution comes first: IT delegates to the Congress simultaneous power and responsibility to handle economic and legal issues at teh same time. Congress has a duty to confront both issues.

Congress does not need to do exhaustive investigations. The Texas Prosecutor and Grand Jury have done the work. The decision is whether the Senate will or will not use the information from the Texas prosecutor to remove Cheney from office.

Some have argued that the nation faces many challenges and that an impeachment would be a distraction. Indeed, an impeachment would command needed attention to the abuses this Vice President commited. We can only wonder why it took this long.

The US Constitution delegates to the Congress multiple powers. One power involves reglating commerce. Another involves enforcing the law. The two powers must be simulatenously be asserted. There are multiple committees. There is plenty of staff to focus on both the Texas Grand Jury and the economic issues.

XIV. Lessons of Saddam Hussein's Trial: A Short, Concise Investigation and Trial

Some have suggested that the investigation into Cheney will take too long, or that this would be a distraction. This argument isn't a defense, but a recognition the scope of Cheney's alleged misconduct is wide. Rather, the solution is to consider the US-Iraqi approach to prossecuting Saddam Hussein. Rather than spend many years conducting exhaustive investigations, the prosecutors narrowly focused on specific, provable charges: Saddam's role in gassing the Iraqi Kurds.

Simiarly, the US House does not need to spend years conducting investigations. The Texas Prosecutor has done the work. He is ready to provide the evidence to the Senate for trial. The House does not need to do anything except forward the Texas Grand Jury indictment to the US Senate for trial.

XV. Congress Needs A Reminder of Constitutional Priorities

Some suggest Congress has more important things to do. Indeed, they do, but refuse. This proclamation will force the House to confront these issues: The Serious charges against the President, and the continued failure of the Congressional leaadership to put aside their partisan agendas and focus on domestic threats.

The election is over. The Congress has time to forward the Texas Grand Jury indictment to the Senate for trial. The House has the power to invite the Texas Prosecutor to lead the House in presenting the case to the Senate. The question is not a lack of time, but a question of interest in fully asserting the oath of office.

XVI. Let The Senate Justify Its Decision

Some suggest the Senate will never remove the Vice President. That is not something for the States or House to consider. The issue is whether, despite the overwhelming evidence supporting the Texas Grand Jury indictment, the US government will or will not respond to evidence.

A mandate for change must include action. Now. The Congress must show that it will start the change. Without an impeachment and trial of Cheney in the Senate, the public reasonably can question whether the 2008 promise of change is any better than the broken promises of 2006.

We the People have spoken. The Texas Grand Jury has reviewed the evidence. It is time for the US House to present this evidence to the Senate. Once the evidence is on the table, the public can make an informed decision whether the Senators did or did not do the right thing.

XVII. House Rules Create Multiple Options For States To Assert Power

Some have suggested the House Rule 603 is vague, or that there are not enough clear commentaries within the House rules to help the States understand whether this is or is not permissible. This is irrelevant. A State Legislature or Assembly may -- at any time -- pass any proclamation it chooses.

This Congress has not adequately stepped up to meet its legal obligations. It has for seven years made excuses not to confront the Vice President. Those days need to end. Let history remind future generations that it was We the People through the grand jury process that started the needed change on this impeachment.

XVIII. Notice Where The Leadership Is -- You

The leadership did not come from Congress, the House mangement; or the Federal-level prosecutors and investigators in the Department of Justice. This effort to hold the Vice President accountable started with the inherent belief that one person -- someone like you -- can make a difference, and lead others to challenge abuse of power. Even when all others make excuses to do nothing, create roadblocks, and assent to abusive power.

XIX. Nuremberg: Precedent For Prosecuting Those Who Refuse To Meet Legal Obligations

History will not be kind to those lawyers and investigators who actively thwarted enforcement of the laws of war. Rather, the United States and Iraq, when it prosecuted Saddam Hussein, shows it is possible to achieve legal objectives, even on the back of narrow charges.

Indeed, the Texas Grand Jury indictment does not cover the Geneva violations allegedly linked with this Vice President. The Texas Grand Jury did what it could. The United States government officials who refused to enforce Geneva and FISA during wartime can be held to account before lawful tribunals.

The State Proclamations will ensure that, even if the courts are thwarted, there remains on the table the prospect of legislative impeachment. Nuremberg shows us that civilian leadership and legal counsel can be prosecuting for failing to enforce the laws of war through either impeachment or prosecution.

The Texas Grand Jury action is a gift which We the People must embrace as the needed check on tyranny and abusive power. Clear the way for a trial in the Senate. Now.

Let history decide whether the US government remains responsive. If it refuses, it too can be lawfully changed.