Impeachment: A Duty, Not An Option

[Jcrowley]

Impeachment: A duty, not an option
By Carla Binion
Online Journal Associate Editor


Apr 16, 2007, 00:27

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney deceived Congress and the American people into supporting their unlawful invasion of Iraq. Their abuse of power continues. They should be impeached, not for partisan reasons, but to maintain our constitutional system and to deter future leaders from abusing power.

Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. discussed Richard Nixon’s expansion and abuse of presidential power in “The Imperial Presidency” (Houghton Mifflin Company, 1973). Schlesinger said the question of impeachment “was more than whether Congress and the people wanted to deal with the particular iniquities of the Nixon administration. It was whether they wished to rein in the runaway Presidency.”

Today’s runaway Presidency is far from reined in. Bush and Cheney are emboldened by the fact that they’ve managed to get away with the high crime of lying to Congress in order to dupe the nation into war. They keep escalating the conflict, peddling the same distortions and propaganda they’ve used all along. Bush and Cheney function as kings. This isn’t what America’s founders had in mind.

<snip>

Any member of Congress who still doubts the Bush administration deliberately fixed the intelligence and knowingly misled the nation to attack Iraq should read the ample evidence in this article: Any member of Congress who still doubts the Bush administration deliberately fixed the intelligence and knowingly misled the nation to attack Iraq should read the ample evidence in this article, The Growing Case for a Resolution of Inquiry. <http://democracyrising.us/content/view/245/164/> The article was written in 2005, before the mid-term elections, when Republicans dominated Congress and yielded to Bush’s every demand. Now that we have a Democratic majority in Congress, there is no excuse for our Democratic representatives to shirk their responsibility to hold official investigations looking toward impeachment.

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1971.shtml

[EFerrari]

1. K&R

Enough already.

[Solly Mack]

2. America is so fucked if we don't

I know people think "once Bush is gone" and tell themselves how good that will be and how things will be different and how someone like Bush will never happen again - but the ugly fact is, all the wanna-be tyrants in politics now know exactly how far they can push the American people and exactly how much they can erode rights and still get away with it(America tortures people - and gets away with it)...that if Bush and Cheney aren't held accountable, the next wanna-be tyrant will have it ever so much easier....and the results will be far worse than what we are experiencing now.

[Mme. Defarge]

3. My Pelosi 07 bumper sticker

is now in place. The first person to notice and comment was the President of my company -- she thought it was great. So, I gave her one! I have a few more to hand out if others are interested, and will re-order if demand warrants it.

[BuyingThyme]

5. Took me a few seconds.

:)

[Solly Mack]

6. good one

[BuyingThyme]

4. Yes, it is a duty, just as it is a duty for prosecutors to try murderers.

Kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick, kick.

:kick:

[az chela]

7. anyone who supports this government are as guilty as the

criminals running this war!!!!!!!!!!
END THE WAR NOW

[chknltl]

8. Each day the bfee holds power...

...is a bad day for our nation, for humanity and for our planet.

[BuyingThyme]

9. kcik

[Jcrowley]

10. Oath of office

At the start of each new Congress, in January of every odd-numbered year, the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate takes an oath of office. The Speaker of the House will direct the Members to rise and the oath is administered. The original oath was as follows: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States."

The oath was revised during the Civil War, when members of Congress were concerned about traitors. The current oath is as follows:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

How many members of the House have said that BushCo. was/is a threat to The Constitution ad a threat to American democracy? More than several I am sure. If this is the case they are implying the Constitution is under attack. Is it then not their duty to protect the Constitution? And by what means are they given to do so? Impeachment. So in not doing so are they shirking their sworn duty?

As to whether it is "practical" or they "Don't have the votes" that is irrelevant to their sworn oath. And don't doesn't mean "Won't" as the investigations proceed.

[JohnnyLib2]

11. I think of impeachment as an enema for this administration.

Not nice, not a cure-all, maybe not the best treatment, but it gets things moving.

:shrug:

[zalinda]

12. Bernie Sanders explained the reason why it is off the table

If we (the dems) bring impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney, then the repubs can say in the 2008 elections, "see they hated Bush so much that their total agenda was to impeach him." Plus, it will never pass, we don't have the votes for it. Now, if repubs get on board like they did with Nixon, another matter altogether.

Basically, impeachment only helps the repubs and hurts the dems in the next election. And, you know they have all the talking points ready. When the time comes that it can't hurt them any more every repub will throw Georgie under the bus, but not until then.

zalinda

[TahitiNut]

18. I think it's nice you let the Republicans decide. After all, nobody else counts.

That's patriotic. ... or something-otic. :shrug: :patriot:

[omega minimo]

19. The question is why Bernie and you and others deliver their talking points for them

"And, you know they have all the talking points ready.

1. "If we (the dems) bring impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney, then the repubs can say in the 2008 elections, "see they hated Bush so much that their total agenda was to impeach him."

2. "Plus, it will never pass, we don't have the votes for it. Now, if repubs get on board like they did with Nixon, another matter altogether.

3. "Basically, impeachment only helps the repubs and hurts the dems in the next election.

4. "When the time comes that it can't hurt them any more every repub will throw Georgie under the bus, but not until then."

[BeFree]

26. #4 Under the bus

Well, someone's got to be driving that bus
And it better be us.

Congressmen, start your engine!

[Jcrowley]

23. Please explain

"Basically, impeachment only helps the repubs and hurts the dems in the next election."

What do you mean by this? Remember Nixon?

What's being thrown under the bus is The Constitution. All the speculation averts what is the obvious. It is the sworn duty of those in office to protect the US Constitution. Do you believe that Bush has not and will not further endanger The Constitution?

[porphyrian]

42. That's just a cowardly excuse not to do the right thing now.

The blood of everyone who dies for that cowardice is on their hands as well.

[Time for change]

13. I think this quote is right on target

"If the Nixon White House escaped the legal consequences of its illegal behavior,” said Schlesinger, “why would future Presidents and their associates not suppose themselves entitled to do what the Nixon White House had done?"

So true. And one of the problems with the impeachment surrounding Watergat was that Nixon's secret war in Cambodia was NOT included among the articles of impeachment. And then we have Reagan conducting a secret war against Nicaragua. And then we have Bush lying us into war, and although I believe that most of the American people see no reason why that couldn't constitute an impeachable offense, Congress apparently doesn't think it does, and our coporate media tells us that it doesn't.

Impeachment is indeed a duty of Congress, and if they fail to fulfill that duty they will be doing a great disservice to our country, likely with catastrophic results -- such as the facilitation of more unnecessary wars.

[elocs]

14. I disagree. Rush to judgment now, and Bush walks. I want him convicted

and I will not be satisfied to simply see him impeached. People need to step back from their passions and their righteous indignation to coldly examine the process.
Investigate, investigate, investigate. Build the case and change the minds of the Republican senators that will be needed to convict, then bring articles of impeachment. As it stands now I think that Bush would love impeachment because it would be the ultimate distraction and misdirection from everything else since impeachment is all we would hear about. Think it through and don't get carried away with emotions.

[Jcrowley]

16. Have thought it through

Impeachment is the first step towards criminal proceedings. This has nothing to do with emotions. It has everything to do with what is the sworn duty of officeholders "to protect the constitution." That this isn't recognized and acted upon should be quite unsettling to all.

But if I read you right you are saying hearings first which is of course what capital "I" impeachment means. It begins with investigatory proceedings. The hearings themselves not only lay the groundwork for the impeachment but also will bring forth evidence exposing criminal conduct.

[elocs]

17. It's more about emotions than you would like to believe.

People are going off like their heads are going to explode if there is not impeachment immediately. If you have thought it through, please explain where the 67 votes needed to convict in the Senate will come from? That is a rather important point to think through since unlike most trials in this country we already know who the jury will be and how most of them will vote. Just think, if we could have rushed impeachment through in January, then maybe we could already have had a vote in the Senate and Bush would be crowing about how it was all political, the vote being mostly on party lines, and that they did not even come close to convicting him. Many a good DA will not indict if there is not yet any possibility of conviction. Pelosi knows this, is smart, and can even count and that is why she said impeachment is off the table. Think it through--she has.

[Jcrowley]

22. I have not only thought it through

but have been doing quite a bit of research on this as to what obligations are for our Reps.

I think it is important to recognize the canard of the "where are the votes going to come from."

This is off in two ways:
1) The votes come after the entire process as you know and the momentum builds (or doesn't) based on the hearings which alter entirely (or don't) the political landscape bringing the necessary votes (or not) as pressure mounts (or doesn't). In short you cannot say the votes are or aren't there until the hearings begin. With this administration (lowest public approval rating ever) and the immense nature of their high crimes and misdemeanors there is a very high likelihood that numerous votes will turn towards impeachment if the case is presented. enough to impeach? Who knows. More importantly;

2) The speculation on whether or not there are enough votes has no bearing on what is asked of us and the Reps. "To protect the constitution" does not mean if you think it is politically viable. If there are 99 Senators who are rabid right-wingers and you believe the Constitution is in danger by an official it is your sworn obligation to begin the process even if it means tilting at windmills.

I can count too. And I understand what is asked of us.

[Time for change]

30. Great points -- Our nation is in great danger now, teetering on the edge of fascist dictatorship

To not go forward with impeachment when the evidence for numerous impeachable offenses is overwhelming, and many of those offenses involving violation of our Constitution, sends the message that we don't need a Constitution. The effective abandonment of our Constitution, which has been going on right before our eyes for the past 6 years, will be the end of our democracy. This is no time for political partisanship and calculations.

[elocs]

31. Since you can count and if Bush is likely not convicted will you declare nobly:

"Mission Accomplished!"? It has been easy and popular to dance around and scream Impeach! since last November without having a clear approach toward impeachment other than tilting at windmills. I prefer not to put the cart before the horse and build the case first. Any good DA scopes out and examines the jury. In this case it is already known exactly who the jury will be and there is a good idea how most will vote at this time. It has to do with winning the case, not just politics.

If Bush is prematurely impeached and not convicted, the same people screaming for immediate impeachment will be moaning how he got off and scratching their heads how it ever could have happened since he so clearly deserved to be convicted. I stick with the decision of the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who says that impeachment is off the table and I think I am in good company. I also think there are some others here who believe as I do and we are entitled to our point of view and that does not make us any less patriotic than the impeachment now crowd.

[Jcrowley]

33. A few points

The calls for impeachment have been going on for much longer than past November. I hope you remember that. If not look into it further.

In that light look into how the case for impeachment had already been meticulously articulated well before 2004 elections.

You would also do well to take the time to actually research the mechanics of the Impeachment process and re-read the Constitutional provisions on impeachment.

Two minor points:
1) Noone is questioning anyone's patriotism (though jingoism is questionable itself) if you can point to that please do;

2) Leave aside the snide remarks about counting. My math is quite good unless we get beyond trigonometry. At that point you can deride my mathematical abilities.

[elocs]

35. Well,

1. The implication seems to be that only those who are crying out for impeachment are the real defenders of our Constitution. Yes, it has been going on for longer than since last November, but after the election it has reached a crescendo when the ability to do it has been there. I am still not convinced that every Democrat would vote for articles of impeachment.

2. I don't mean to deride your mathematical abilities, but to applaud those who can clearly see that there are not 67 votes in the Senate to convict. I have seen no convincing argument as to how bringing articles of impeachment first would bring about conviction. I see it as a way for many to feel good and righteous that the Democrats did something, but then there would be endless bitching when there is no conviction.
Until she changes her mind, I'll stick with Pelosi because I believe she knows what she is doing.

[omega minimo]

24. People need to step back from their ignorance and "coldly examine the process."

That's what this comes down to. It's hard to believe that we are seeing the same old arguments in response to this EXTREMELY clear article saying exactly what DUers have been saying for a long, long, long time-- while the occupation and criminal behavior of this unelected administration are allowed to continue.

THAT'S INSANE.


elocs (1000+ posts)  Sat Apr-21-07 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
14. I disagree. Rush to judgment now, and Bush walks. I want him convicted
and I will not be satisfied to simply see him impeached. People need to step back from their passions and their righteous indignation to coldly examine the process.

IT'S NOT ABOUT "PASSIONS" AND "RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION" IT'S ABOUT THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION.

"...........ultimate distraction and misdirection from everything else since impeachment is all we would hear about. Think it through and don't get carried away with emotions."

GOOD GOD WHAT PROTECTIONS DO PEOPLE WHO MAKE THIS ARGUMENT THINK THEY HAVE IN THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT OF THE FUTURE IF THIS (SHOUTING LOUDER) TRAVESTY REMAINS UNCHALLENGED?

That is the EPITOME of NOT "thinking it through" and relying on some INFANTILE "emotional" belief in a CONSTITUTION THAT YOU AND YOUR CONGRESS REFUSE TO PROTECT.

Which-- as JCrowley points out IS FURTHER CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION!!!!

[frogcycle]

20. roger that

investigations, relentless, on all fronts. turn over every rock. hell, make no bones about the fact your keeping a list. let them watch you spin the cartridge, insert another bullet...

I do think they are probably working overtime destroying evidence, but there is probably plenty in places where they can't get rid of it

[elocs]

32. Keep pummeling Bushco and there may be no need for impeachment as it implodes.

After all, Nixon was not impeached. If Bush is impeached when there is a clear chance for his conviction I believe he would resign before that happens.

[frogcycle]

34. hell, if they get him dead to rights in high crime

I don't know that they'd even need a likely conviction

I think he'd take a powder

Regardless, whatever the outcome - removal or no - he has to be kept off balance (ok, redundant, I know)

[Maraya1969]

15. All the time and money used to convict Scooter Libby is naught if they are not impeached

I bet he does not do 1 day in jail. Of course if they are impeached......

[Swamp Rat]

21. IMPEACH!

[omega minimo]

25. Fascinating

People still don't get it. Even as clearly as that is expressed.

THIS IS WHY THEY DON'T TEACH CIVICS ANYMORE. SO PEOPLE (SHOUTING LOUDER) WON'T GET IT.

The impeachment of Bushco (or lack of it) is the pivotal civics lesson for the US of A.
:patriot:

[BeFree]

27. Pivotal, indeed

Either the bush/reagan/nixon era continues, or a new era begins.

I prefer a new era begin.

It is time to end nixon's reign, once and for all.

Let the chips fall where they may.

[omega minimo]

29. Hear Hear Here!!

Thanks for the truth and levity tonight-- much needed!!

:hi:

[zalinda]

37. It doesn't matter how loud you shout

it's not going to happen. There is simply not the votes to impeach. You could have video of him raping the constitution, and the repubs will not vote for impeachment. Wasn't there a bill recently that a was sponsored by a repub, but was voted down because the white house told them to do it, it was a test of loyalty. I am sure that just about every dem in office wants impeachment so badly they can taste it, but they know they can't make it happen at this time.

And, to tell you the truth, I think impeachment is too good for this group. I want to see them ALL in jail. I want to see their ill-gotten gains ripped from their greedy hands. I want them boxed into a corner so that they feel the squeeze that we have felt all these years. Yes, I want them to suffer.

Impeachment is too clean and dry cut. They WILL get out of it, if the timing is not just right. From the moment that it was announced that he "won", I have been hoping that they will get their just rewards. I WILL NOT let my emotions take over. It seems like most of you are smelling blood in the water, and are looking forward to haveing a feeding frenzy when the meal is just not there yet.

Politics moves slowly, it was designed that way. The grass roots have accomplished a lot in these last 6 years. I know it doesn't seem like it, but we have. Keep calling for the dems to stand up for us, and call repubs too. But, please don't let your anger get in the way of your logic.

zalinda

[omega minimo]

41. The ignorance and apathy of the pampered sheeple will be the death of this nation

Please don't let that get in the way of YOUR logic.

Even the way you phrase your comments shows that you don't understand the process or the purpose of impeachment. As long as these (same, uninformed) arguments and (same, Right Wing) talking points have been continuing on DU, the Don't Impeach crowd continues to reveal that lack of awareness.

Such that even an OP written as clearly as this one doesn't get through the layers of denial, delusion and deliberate ignorance about what impeachment means.

And that, in the end, spells culpability with the crimes being perpetrated by those you claim you want to see in jail.

"I WILL NOT let my emotions take over. It seems like most of you are smelling blood in the water, and are looking forward to haveing a feeding frenzy when the meal is just not there yet."

Quit fooling yourself. This is not about emotions-- or "blood in the water." The meal IS there and it's a toxic spread. What's missing is THE TABLE which was removed by the leaders of the Democratic Party. Why? No, don't answer that. Until you have informed yourself honestly about American government and the process of impeachment, you will buy whatever line they feed you-- instead of "the meal."


:thumbsdown:


As I said, impeachment -- or the lack of -- is the pivotal civics lesson for the country. In your version, the apathy and ignorance will rule, as will the criminals.

[zalinda]

44. So you are saying bring it to the table

even though impeachment can't be had.

Well, you people LOVE to bring up OJ and how guilty he is. How did you feel when OJ got off? Did you feel good? Was there justice? Was the law upheld? Was there satisfaction? Did you get your fill?

Bush = OJ OJ = Bush Same damn thing, same damn out come.

Go in with faulty evidence, you don't get a conviction.

zalinda



And, I got an A in civics. I also know this is about emotion, not intelligence, no matter how many times you say it isn't so. Hear the screaming? When you talk intelligently about something, you don't need to scream.

[omega minimo]

45. I'm saying we need a New Table

"....even though impeachment can't be had."

Again this statement reinforces the impression you don't understand the process. As do most of the comments of the Non-Impeach foiks. The same misinformed (Right Wing) talking points are repeated and not much else.

Add the bizarre comments about "you people" and "OJ" and the credibility is even lower.

[zalinda]

47. It's simply, we don't have a new table

we have, what we have.

And OJ is a perfect analogy. He was brought to trial before all the facts were in, before all the t's were crossed and i's dotted. He was brought to trial because people were screaming that he's guilty, so let's get on with it. And to top it off, he was brought before a biased jury.

Do you honestly think that enough repubs will cross the aisle to vote for impeachment? Do you honestly think that Bush's poll numbers will go down? What if his poll numbers go up, because people don't want to impeach a president during a time of war or they are more afraid of Cheney? No one thought that Bush would be re-elected (yeah, I know he cheated, but it was close enough that he could cheat).

I really, really don't know what you think you would accomplish by starting impeachment proceedings. And except for insulting me, you haven't told me anything except pro-impeachment talking points.

zalinda

[omega minimo]

48. "You people" refuse to inform yourselves and keep pretending the case has not been made

while not bothering to understand the purpose and process of impeachment . That delusion is what allows the Bush WH to continue.

Congratulations.

[EFerrari]

28. kick

[stephinrome]

36. Get organized for impeachment day April 28!

Find an action in your area and get out in the streets!

http://a28.org

Steph

[Herman74]

38. I DON'T CARE IF WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SENATE VOTES TO CONVICT!!

We impeach not just for our generation, but to set an example for future generations!!! If the House impeaches Bush, Cheney (Rice, Gonzo, etc.) it sends a powerful message that we didn't put up with this IMMORAL BUSHCO. CRAP!!! People both now and in the future will understand that getting some of the Senate Republicans to go along with conviction would have been hard; nonetheless, they shall be inspired by what we accomplished!!

Besides, who knows what impeachment investigations in the House might uncover on NSA spying, Plamegate, torture, WMD lies, etc.? Yes, in an ideal world what has already been found would have been enough to send Cheney and The Chimp away for a long time, but it's not inconceivable that new additional findings would convince Republican senators of employment repercussions should they vote to acquit.

[ThomWV]

39. That Is Absurd ... do we only take criminals to court if a hanging jury is available

Or must those who will decide on the validity of a charge be of such a mindset that they can not be swayed by the argument before them? Do you not think that after the presentation (prosecution) by those members of Congress who are selected to present the case to the Senate that no Senator might be swayed by those arguments? Consider while you ponder this question that the impeachment trial will certainly be televised for the world to see as will the vote on impeachment.

[Herman74]

40. I definitely DID NOT SAY that "we only take criminals to court" if conviction results

...and you won't be able to find anything that I wrote opposing impeachment!!!!

Look, for conviction by the Senate to occur 16 out of 49 Republicans (and all Democrats and Lieberman) would have to vote to convict. That probably would never happen; even based on the damning evidence we have now, how many Republican Congresspersons are demanding impeachment? What proportion of Republicans anywhere are demanding impeachment? What I wrote was that I don't give a damn whether a conviction ultimately results; impeachment should proceed nonetheless.

Moreover, while I don't foresee as many as 30 percent of Republican senators becoming open to conviction, I also did not completely exclude that possibility. If you read my words carefully, you'll note that I refer to "new additional" findings possibly arising from thorough impeachment investigations that might compel any Republican Senator wishing to remain a Senator to vote guilty.

[porphyrian]

46. How do you know what will happen in the Senate after impeachment hearings actually occur?

Get real. If we don't have the votes by the time an impeachment investigation brings to light everything the corporate media has been complicit in hiding from the general public, there won't be a republican elected in 2008 at all simply due to the fury of people realizing they've been lied to and made to look like asses.

You're complaining about bread not rising before the yeast is even added to the dough, and it's tiring, intellectually dishonest and hurting everyone but the criminals responsible.

[Herman74]

49. What's Intellectually Dishonest is the Notion that You Have...

...Republicans everywhere will give a damn about Bush Administration misdeeds. There "won't be a Republican elected in 2008" if impeachment proceedings were to fail to lead to a conviction (needing 2/3 of the votes in the Senate)? Take your own advice: get real.

And I'm not complaining about anything, though this may be beyond your ability to grasp. (What exactly have I written that is a complaint, dude???) As I stated already, I don't care whether or not impeachment leads to conviction, I want it to proceed nonetheless!

[ThatsMyBarack]

43. K&R!

:patriot:

[Mme. Defarge]

50. I believe it is my duty

to make this a flaming discussion!