Shortly after Barack Obama has secured the Democratic nomination for the presidency, another member of the Democratic Party has presented articles for the impeachment of US President George W. Bush to Congress. Representative Dennis Kucinich told Congress that the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, thereby validating impeachment.

“Resolved,” Kucinich said, “that President George W. Bush be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate.”

He explained: “In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of president of the United States, and to the best of his ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has committed the following abuses of power…”

The first article Kucinich presented, and many that followed, regarded the war in Iraq: “Article 1 - Creating a secret propaganda campaign to manufacture a false case for war against Iraq.”

On several occasions, Kucinich referenced RAW STORY and its noted investigative news chief, Larisa Alexandrovna, as source material for the articles. Two of the RAW STORY pieces Kucinich mentioned are viewable here and here.

Below you can read more of what Kucinich had to say. You can also watch a video of him at the Raw Story.

Although this move makes Rep. Kucinich a hero to many liberal members of the blogosphere, one has to wonder what it is he’s trying to accomplish here exactly. President Bush will leave office in January of 2009. That means that he has only seven months left, five of which he will have little to nothing to do. He is for the most part already a lame duck, and that will even be more so within a couple of months time.

Secondly, little to no information has come to light in recent months that would validate impeachment. The US Senate produced a report about the run-up to the Iraq war, which disappointed just about every single Bush-hating politician and blogger alive. Instead of proving that Bush lied to the public, the report shows that the situation is far more complex. There was an intelligence failure, and Bush et al. focused too much on making the case for war, instead of looking at the available evidence in a objective manner.

Additionally, it’s difficult to understand what kind of high crimes and misdemeanors Kucinich is talking about. Sure, Bush is a controversial president who adheres to a controversial outlook on the role of the president, but that does not quite make him a criminal.

Finally, one cannot quite see how trying to impeach Bush will help the Democrats. Most people seemingly do not care about Kucinich’s move, and if Democrats rally behind their Congressman they will probably be punished by voters, since voters do not care much about impeachments. After all, impeaching a president causes a lot of chaos.

What Rep. Kucinich said:

mr. kucinich: the form of the resolution is as follows. a resolution, articles of impeachment of george bush, president of the united states. resolved that president george w. bush be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanor and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the united states senate. articles of impeachment exhibited by the house of representatives of the united states of america in the name of itself and of the people of the united states of america in maintenance and support of its impeachment against george w. bush for high crimes and misdemeanor. it is conduct while president of the united states, george w. bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faith fully execute the office of the office of president of the united states and best of his ability, preserve protect and defend the constitution of the united states and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be safely executed has committed the following abuses of power. article i, creating a secret propaganda campaign to manufacture a false case for war against iraq. in his conduct while president of the united states, george w. bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faith fully execute the office of president of the united states and to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the united states and in violation of its constitutional duty to take care that the laws be safely executed, has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, together with the vice president, illegally spent public dollars on a secret propaganda campaign to manufacture a false cause for war against iraq. the department of defense has engaged in a years long secret domestic propaganda campaign — the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the house will come to order. please proceed. . mr. kucinich: the president and the department of defense promoted a secret program for war with iraq this program follows the pattern of crimes detailed in articles i, ii, iv, and 7:00 — strike that, 8:00. the mission of this program placed it within the field controlled by the white house iraq group, known as whig, a white house task formed — task force formed in 2002 that ind colluded karl rove, lewis libby, mary matalin, nicholas calleo, and james r. wilkinson. the white house iraq group, or whig, produced white papers detailing so-called intelligence of iraq’s nuclear intelligence that later proved to be false. this sprosed — supposed intelligence included the claim that iraq had sought uranium from niger and that the high-strength uranium tubes were to be used for building centrifuges to enrich uranium. unlike the national intelligence estimate of 2002, the whigs’ white paper provided lit rare license on intelligence. it was written at the same time and by the same people as speeches and talking points prepared for president bush and some of his top officials. the white house-iraq group also organized a media campaign in which, between september 7 and 8, 2002, president bush and his top advisors appeared on numerous interviews and all provided similarly gripping images about the possibility of a nuclear attack by iraq. the timing was no coincidence as andrew card explained in an interview regarding waiting to labor day to try to sell the american people on military action against iraq he said, quote from a marketing point of view, you don’t introduce knew products in august. september 7 and september 8, 2002, nbc’s “meet the press,” vice president cheney accused saddam of moving aggressively to develop nuclear weapons over the past 14 months to add to his stockpile of chemical and biological arms. cnn. then national-security — then-national security advisor race side of iraq obtain agnew clear weapon, we don’t want a smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud. president bush said saddam was six months away from developing nuclear weapons and cited photos of weapons inspectors in iraq that saddam was trying to develop nuclear arms. the pentagon prop began dist military program was revealed in an april 20, 2002, “new york times” article. the program illegally involved, quote, attempts to change opinion through the use of third parties. secretary of defense donald rumsfeld recruited 75 retired military officers and gave them talking points to deliver on fobblings, cnn, abc, nbc, cbs, and msnbc, according to “the new york times” report, which has not been discomputered by the pentagon or white house. quote, participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contact with the pentagon. according to the pentagon’s own internal document the military analysts were considered, quote, message-force multipliers, unquote, as surrogates to deliver administration themes and messages to millions of americans in the form of their own opinions. in fact they did deliver the themes and messages but did not reveal the pentagon had provided them with their talking points. robert s. bevelaqua a retired green beret and fox news analyst, described this as follows. he said, it was them say, we need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you. congress has restricted annual appropriations bills since 1951 with this language, and i quote, no part of any appropriation contained in this or any other act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the united states, not here turnover authorized by the congress, unquote. a march 21, 2005, report by the congressional research service states that publicity or propaganda is defined by the u.s. government accountability office, g.a.o., mean either one self-aggrandizement by public officials, two, purely partisan activity, or three, covert propaganda. these concerns about covert propaganda were also the basis for the g.a.o.’s standard for determining when government-funded video news releases are illegal, and i quote. the failure of an agency to identify itself as the source of a prepackaged news story misleads the viewing public by encouraging the viewing audience to believe that the broadcasting news organization developed the information. the prepackaged news stories are purposely designed to be indistinguishable from news segments broadcast to the public. when the public does not know the stories they watched on television news stories they watched about the government were prepared by the government the stories are in a sense, no longer purely factual. the white house’s own office of legal counsel stated in a memorandum tpwhrin 2005, following the controversy over the armstrong-williams scandal, i quote, over the years g.a.o. has interpreted publicity or propaganda restrictions to preclude the use of appropriated funds for, among other things so-called covert prop began dasm squint that view, the office of ledge — of legal counsel demermed 1988 that a statutory prohibition on using appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda precluded undisclosed agency funded of advocacy by third-party groups. we stated that covert attempts to mold opinion through the undisclosed use of third parties would run afoul of presixth — restrictions for using funds for propaganda. asked about the pentagon’s propaganda program at a white house press briefing, white house press secretary dana pe reno defended it not by arguing it was legal, but by suggesting that it should be. he said, quote, look, i didn’t know. look, i think you guys should take a step back and look at this look. d.o.d. has made a decision. they decided to stop this program. but i would say that one of the things we try to do in the administration is to get information out to a variety of people so everyone else can call them and ask their opinion about something. i don’t think that should be against the law. i think it’s fropet provide information to people who are seeking it and will be providing their opinions on it. it doesn’t mean the military analysts agree twhed administration. i think you can go back and look and think thi a lot of their analysis was tough on the administration that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk to people, unquote…