Why they won't Impeach. Really.

So you’ve heard all the excuses and the tortured rationales:

Not enough votes.

Too much other important business to conduct.

Don’t want to divide the Nation.

Don’t want to lose the 08 elections.

And my new favorite from my local paper today: Don’t want to unite the Republicans.

And our fine Congressional cowards may well believe some, or all, of these things. But these are not the crux. These are not why. These are the manufactured rationales of the pundits, and the apologists, and the staff stooges. These are the excuses our Congress members are oh so happy to embrace – to glom on to – in order to gain some semblance of cover. Cover from what, you ask? Cover from us. Cover from those of us who really believe that the actions of this administration justify Impeachment. And the reason they need this cover? They DO NOT AGREE WITH US.

Oh yes, most of our fine Democratic critters will tell you to your face that they are just as outraged as you are. They will tell you that, yes, domestic spying is disgraceful. Torture is beyond the pale. And lying us into war - well, that’s just outrageous. They share your anger, your pain and your patriotic offense. They would get rid of these guys if only they could!

But here’s a newsflash: Most of them just don’t agree - at least not with the extent of our concern. They do not believe the crimes of this administration rise to the level of a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER. If they genuinely shared this sentiment with the many millions of us who hold it – then the rationales they put forth would crumble of their own absurdity.

After all, if Bush or Cheney were to draw a gun and shoot a child in the front row of a speech, would they proffer these same arguments? If Bush or Cheney were to make an outright declaration that the Constitution was for suckers and was now moot, would these same rationales be put forth? Or course they wouldn’t. These anti-Impeachment arguments only hold water for those who DO NOT SHARE the view that we face a REAL threat to American democracy RIGHT NOW. That, my friends, is the real reason they will not Impeach.

Sooo..

When we find ourselves debating the merits of the contrived rationales – when we allow the discussion to revolve around number of needed votes – or the mood of the electorate – or the 08 elections – or the other oh so critical business at hand – we miss the point. We lose by default. We need to keep the focus on the ball. We need to convince our fellow Americans – members of Congress and otherwise – that the threat is REAL. We need to CONVINCE them of the truth. They simply do not see it. They are not there yet.

Do not be confused by the lip service given to our fears. Talk is cheap in politics. And talking the talk of the “base” is easy and cheap.

But do they really share our full sense of outrage and despair?

Sorry – I think most simply do not - despite what the cowards will tell you to your face.

They will IMPEACH. Once we give them their own sense of outrage and despair.

Never Give Up.

That the leadership has been warned not to if they want to keep there positions and avoid embarrassing revelations on their persons.
For them it may be better to use the excuses given to them than chance taking on the powerful crime family that has the resources to squelch almost anything

Give up, resistance is futile...

~yawn~

NGU.

Because resistance is essential and not at all futile.
It only means that we elect someone that will change things and send home those that have baggage and too close connections with the big money boys in the back room.

Then the issue would move well beyond cowardice and into the realm of "swinging from a lamp post" treason. For all of them.

With a Gun to your head
Then you have to ask who is the real bad guy.

The Repukes got out there and said what they needed to, even if they were wearing diapers, and they stuck it out. Meanwhile, our Dems (who probably do not wear diapers, or visit prostitutes, or hang out in bathrooms waiting to catch a glimpse of some man's kielbasa), are being polite and nice. I DO NOT GET IT!

It might be a good idea to show a little backbone and get the impeachment procedures going.
Americans are not known for voting for wussies!

they won't push impeachment because it is a waste of time, and they know they won't be able to convict.

Guess we better swing wide those prison doors, huh?

NGU.

its just theatre. Bring all the charges you want. Nothing will come of them. Too many Repigs.

:eyes:

NGU.

NGU.

Republican incumbent races

Lamar Alexander of Tennessee
Saxby Chambliss of Georgia
Norm Coleman of Minnesota
Susan Collins of Maine
John Cornyn of Texas
Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina
Pete Domenici of New Mexico
Michael Enzi of Wyoming
Lindsey Graham of South Carolina
Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma
Mitch McConnell of Kentucky
Pat Roberts of Kansas
Jeff Sessions of Alabama
Gordon Smith of Oregon
John Sununu of New Hampshire

Do you really think they have what it takes to stand with a guy who's approval is at 18%, is an admitted criminal, has become despised by the press (including Wolf Blitzer), shoots a guy in the face and then hides out for days while he sobers up, and on top of all of that.. he claims he is not part of the government that he was elected to?

Don't kid yourself. They'll hurl him under the bus before the articles can even be drawn up.

We can't do so with literally 100% accuracy, but we can be pretty damn close.

When I hold up a pen and let go of it, it falls to the ground.

When a Republican senator has nothing to gain and everything to lose by voting for impeachment, they will vote against it.

Any Republican who voted to impeach Bush would lose their next primary faster than you can say "high crimes and misdemeanours". Even if by a miracle they won it, in the election their vote would cost them the support of a *vast* swathe of the Republican core vote who won't support a traitor, as well as lots of voters turned off the Republicans in general because a Republican President was found guilty, and gain them tuppence hapenny - nearly all the people who care about impeachment enough would never vote Republican anyhow.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

NGU.

You couldn't put forth such a twisted rationale unless you DID NOT AGREE that we face a REAL threat to our democracy.

I hope you keep learning and soon come to understand the real present danger. :hi:

The Plame leak took years and its not resolved. It took several months to even bring down Libby, the fall guy, just so he could be sprung from jail.

So lets say you do pass Impeachment in the House, its very likely to happen. Then what?

Trial in the Senate, Dems produce evidence and get shouted down, Republicans go on Faux News and CNN and play down and dismiss all charges. Dems go on TV talking about crimes that were committed, Repigs calm the sheep public down by saying its all grandstanding and a witch hunt, and downplay the charges with shit like "Well, presidents do this all the time".

Even if you can even get the most damning piece of evidence, it will be hard to convict in the court of public opinion, and you can be damn sure it will be impossible to get a conviction in the Senate. Not nearly enough votes.

So now you've wasted months and months in the year before an election accomplishing nothing, and looking like a mean-spirited, do-nothing congress. Can you say Republican president and Republican congress? They won't convict, but don't think they will be rallying around Bush during election time. The Repig front-runner will win the same way Bush did the first time, by playing the idiot public like a fiddle with talk of God and faith, packaged as a moderate who respects traditional values.

All for, what exactly? A futile attempt to remove a president who only has a year and a half left, knowing it will fail before you even start?

Besides, how do you try someone who doesn't believe they have to submit to the rule of law? He won't go on the stand, he will never be under oath, and no one will force him to as long as the Republicans have enough votes to keep him afloat.

I won't bother to lay out the alternative to that because I don't think it's really necessary. Let's just say politics and media are dynamic things. And piling on is a popular sport.

I will point out that the number of Senators who supported the Impeachment of Clinton moved dramatically upward following the Senate trial. And the press loves a good lynching. Always has.

edit: spelling

care more for their own political careers than they do for the Constitution. If it were otherwise, Clinton would NEVER have been impeached for lying about sex, and Bush would have been impeached for even trying to start the Iraq war with lies.

At this point, in my own opinion, Congresspeople who don't support impeachment are collaborators in the destruction of our Constitution.

Not even this backtracking progressive Congress can fail to act, if it were the will of the people!!

Here's what I've been doing...

http://www.awesclarkdemocrat.com/2007/07/enough.htm

more: http://www.theyoungturks.com/section/Enough

What are you willing to do for Truth, Justice and The American Way??
(w/ apologies to "The Justice League")

Agree inasmuch as that I do not think that the claim that American democracy is in "clear and present danger" is one that deserves to be taken seriously.


Disagree inasmuch as that's *not* why I oppose impeachment procedings - for one thing, I would oppose them far more if it was true.


Impeachment isn't for presidents who pose a clear and present danger to democracy, it's for presidents who've committed high crimes and misdemeanours. I'm not *certain* that Bush's involvement in the exposure of Valerie Plame constitutes that, and I don't think anyone else on DU has grounds to be either, but I do think it very probable indeed that it does.

However, impeachment is like any other crime - you don't prosecute unless and until you have a chance of success.

The *reason* I don't support impeachment procedings (talking about "supporting impeachment" is like talking about whether or not one supports declaring a victorious war) is, to quote the OP, "not enough votes; don't want to lose the 08 elections".

There's nothing even slightly tortured about those rationales. There *aren't* enough votes, and impeachment procedings *would* risk losing the Dems the 08 elections.

Even if American democracy *was* in clear and present danger from the Republicans, opening impeachment procedings would make that danger worse, not alleviate it - there still wouldn't be enough votes, it would still jeopardise the 2008 elections, which - unlike impeachment procedings - offer a real chance of removing the Republicans from power.

that our democracy is in clear and present danger. We could discuss why you think it's not - but I'm afraid that would be a rat hole.

As for "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" - one Federal judge has already ruled that the warrantless wiretapping program is a felony. And the decider has publicly stated his responsibility for it. That's "case closed" even if you adhere to literalist interpretation of the Impeachment clause. If you go with a broader interpretation that also recognizes Impeachment as a political act (as past precedent would dictate), the justifications then become endless.

As for "don't prosecute unless and until you have a chance of success" - there are several reasons this is wrong. One is that the act of Impeaching sends a powerful message about right and wrong even if it fails. It sends this message not only to the rest of the world, but also to our children and future generations of Americans. Such imperatives do not apply to other run-of-the-mill criminal prosecutions. The other reason is that we cannot be SURE it will fail. I'll grant you that it's most likely to fail, but the political and media momentum of an actual Impeachment proceeding are too unpredictable to take book.

Lastly, as for "risk losing the 08 elections" - This one is the silliest of all. Let's just say it comes straight out of opposite world. Which part of polls favoring Impeachment (at least of Cheney) do we not understand? Since when has fighting for what we believe cost the Democrats in an election? How many Republicans lost their seats in the Senate because they supported an UNPOPULAR Impeachment of Clinton? I simply do not buy the canard that Impeachment is a political loser. It's a winner. Bank it.


So this just leaves your initial point of concession - that we actually do not face a clear and present danger to democracy. Maybe if you shared that view you wouldn't need these other strange rationales to glom to. But about this present danger we obviously disagree. And I think that's really the fundamental point.

What I was agreeing with is not that your democracy is in clear and present danger, but that most opponents of impeachment procedings, including me, don't think that it is. My apologies if I didn't make that clear.

I acknowledged that you conceded the point for the sake of argument - not that you agreed with it. I understand that you don't.

If you oppose abortion I can well understand how the takeover of American democracy (at least by these fundamentalists) would be just okey dokey with you. Although you may someday find the costs extreme in other areas. But hey, whatever.

As I've edited to say, when I said "abortion", I actually meant "impeachment" - or "impeachment procedings", to be more accurate.

They have the same number of syllables...

You didn't mention why you were as sure of your convictions, but what the Hell. Let's say you are right.

The revolution will not be televised. It will not be presented in the form of a public town hall meeting in each District. It will not be well presented by the newspapers, the television and even talk radio.

No, the next step will have to come from every person who is genuinely of the opinion that their congressional representative would not begin the discussion of impeachment without it being collectively shoved up their arse. Articles of impeachment must begin BY AND FOR THE PEOPLE.

So, are you ready, yet? :spank: Let's quit wringing hands to get to work!

There is no good rationale for not impeaching.

It gets worse each day ... each hour.

What will it take to wake people up?

Which in part explains why they are in same boat as the republicans. They are enablers in the classic sense. I never understood wife beaters or the wifes that put up with it. It has always been something off in the far for me. Today this little wayward talk radio station had the off the beat Saturday crew on. But the explanation worked for me, and it was this idea that abused would protect the abuser to the point of being aggressive to anyone that would even criticize the abuser. They do it and we have all seen them do it but seems we don't notice it's going on in such clear terms. They do it from the point fear that the abuser will even make worse on them or others

I might have had to deal with a few of these people in the periphery but never been akin to staying around one long enough to experience. In the U.S., you can push them aside and get on with your life. This kind of a unique problem cause the people who need to push him aside seem trapped and in sense are holding rest of hostage in their weakness.

At least this is the way it seems to me. How to deal with it or if it's in part one of the problems at all not sure. Not even sure when and if it will work its self out but the OP is on to something too in the explanation in whats happening. There is something there but the exact cause is being hidden and thats a for sure :shrug:

what motivates these people. Common sense does not seem to be it.

Is it really fear? I did call them cowards. But maybe it's something more subtle. A kind of groupthink.

Shit, who knows?

in fact there was a very widely-read and distributed essay about it right after the 2004 election, but unfortunately I can't remember who the author is at the moment. Maybe someone else remembers better and can post a link?

Anyway, reading your post got me to carry it one critical step further, especially this part:

But the explanation worked for me, and it was this idea that abused would protect the abuser to the point of being aggressive to anyone that would even criticize the abuser. They do it and we have all seen them do it but seems we don't notice it's going on in such clear terms. They do it from the point fear that the abuser will even make worse on them or others.

They are afraid the abuser will make it even worse for them or others

And that is a very valid, very well-founded fear. It's well known that the most dangerous time for a battered wife, the time when she is most likely to be killed by the abuser, is when she decides to leave him and has taken definite, concrete steps in that direction. It can even happen after she's already left--women have been stalked and killed in shelters.

So it could very well be that the Democrats in Congress are afraid of really standing up to the Bush regime in any substantive way (such as by impeaching Cheney or Bush or both of them) because it could get "that much worse" for them personally or for the country? There could also be threats: People have speculated here on DU about blackmail and much, much worse than that.

they are complicit AND/OR or guilty of something else.