John Conyers, are you out there?

[kpete]

John Conyers, are you out there?

Are you listening?

Dennis Kucinich is saying exactly what you were saying before you became chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Now you have the power. Use it.

To hell with Pelosi and Hoyer.

This is your moment for courage.


more at:
http://www.progressive.org/mag_wx0613b08

[LakeSamish706]

1. Thats not going to happen, both Pelosi and Reid have something to hide with...

respect to this Administration....

[crickets]

2. Only three House members have had the courage to support DK:

Lynn Woolsey and Barbara Lee of California, and Robert Wexler of Florida. That's four out of 435 who have the guts and conscience to stand up and do what is right.

Pitiful.

[az chela]

3. Conyers is a chicken shit

He is the one that had the DOWNING ST memo meeting and then walked away from it.
It proved w had this war planned before 9/11

[LWolf]

4. He's listening whether he wants to or not.

Whether or not he acts on what he is hearing is the question.

I don't think he will. What a disappointment.

[KharmaTrain]

5. His Hands Are Tied...In Many Directions

Conyers has said on many occasions he wants to move forward on this issue, but that he's limited right now on what he can really do...from getting the sufficient votes in his own committee to move articles along to having those articles meet a big defeat in the Senate. He also is facing a party that is focused on winning elections this November and looking positive rather than "negative"...impeachment to many is a distraction from far more serious issues...and a reason, IMHO, many may silently agree, but won't sign on the dotted line at this time. Plus, there absolutely no support across the aisle...not a single Repugnican with a spine or sense of decency to say they'd support even an inquiry, yet alone go along with supporting or co-sponsoring articles.

It's also frustrated by a wall of obstruction and excessive executive privilidge that will grind any inquiry to a halt. To have hearing, you need witnesses and right now this regime will prevent anyone from testifying and can hide behind partisan judges who will keep the stonewall in place through the elections. The only power he has here is inherent contempt...which he will have to use to get Rove to testify, but he can't drag every regime toady in this way without a lot of corporate media heat. It's just too much junk in his way.

This is also very frustrating as it's not as though this regime doesn't deserve to be thrown out post-haste and impeachment is deserved, it's just not proven and fully examined. The crimes have been stated, but there's a lot of evidence that still remains hidden and for an impeachment to be fair and just, it must be presented...openly and clearly. A rush to judgement is incomplete justice.

[bean fidhleir]

6. I don't think you can get very far with that argument

There are massive amounts of evidence that BushCo committed crimes against peace - the paramount international crime. Bush is the "ceo" of BushCo, and the buck stops at his desk (as Truman's sign said). Only one article need be proven against him, and Congress would be spoiled for choice.

[KharmaTrain]

7. It's Not My Argument

I don't need any proof of the crimes of this regime...and I've long said impeachment isn't good enough for these crimes and crooks. It's a political solution and doesn't adddress the many crimes that have been committed or those who weren't elected that were the foot soldiers and cheerleaders in this destruction of lives and liberty. The buck doesn't stop on boooshie's desk as he has found ways to avoid it...obstruct ever having to confront it and revise history to ignore it.

Proven is the key word here. Yes, we have crimes, but we have no legal, criminal indictments or convictions of those crimes...no legal basis in which a throughough investigations of the crimes has been conducted. All charges at this point are political...and while that's all well and good, a political impeachment doesn't address the crimes...or can be used in conjunction with prosecuting those crimes.

If I had my wish, this regime would have been removed when the 9/11 revelations came to the fore...total negligence in protecting the nation. Everything else is just "icing" on the cake and the list of crimes is long.

Yes, it only takes one article to be proven, but proven doesn't mean conviction in a political court...one where half the jurors are already rigged and where outside partisans and the corporate media will exert a lot of influence. It's a process at the present time that won't accomplish removal...and could easily prevent future investigations and prosecutions...a thorough prosecution of all the crimes and criminals in this regime.

Sorry it doesn't move the way you wish.

[crickets]

8. Excellent article. Kick.

[Mind_your_head]

9. Too late to recommend, but I will give this a kick

:kick: