Conyers' hard choice: An expert on impeachment says not this time

All I can say is, this makes me want to cry.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/11402

Conyers' hard choice: An expert on impeachment says not this time
by Jack Lessenberry | Dec 5 2007


"My best friends are my biggest problem," he told me, out of the blue, as we leaned up against a wine bar at the Hyatt Regency in Dearborn Saturday night. He wanted to talk about the possibility of impeaching the president.

snip//

As a man who loves the Constitution, Conyers deeply loathes both these men, who have violated civil liberties and waged unjust war and sanctioned torture. He would be very happy, pleased and satisfied to see them gone.

Yet he knows that trying to impeach Smirky and Snarly now would be a very bad idea. It would be an effort doomed to failure, and one he knows he needs to resist, for a number of compelling reasons.

"There aren't the votes there, period," said Conyers, who was in Dearborn for the American Civil Liberties Union's annual dinner. "You need 218 in the House to impeach and 67 in the Senate to convict, and 218 and 67 just aren't there," he said, peering over his glasses.

"But beyond that — do you know what a boost that would give Bush if we tried and failed to convict him? He would have an outpouring of sympathy for him, we'd be discredited, and it might help elect one of his clones.

"Nothing is more important than stopping that from happening."

more...

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/11402
_______

“There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because his conscience tells him it is right.”

– Martin Luther King

NGU, Rep. Conyers...

NGU.

After all, the way I see it, "the votes aren't there". So why make the effort?

:shrug:

How do we know there aren't enough Americans, left and right, who will be so outraged when Bushco's crimes are illuminated on the evening news every night that they'll demand their Senators and Representatives vote to convict? The fact that repuke politicians are such whores would seem to guarantee conviction and removal. We'll have the votes when the evidence is presented to the general public.

You vote in 2008 to get Repukes out of office (create the votes).

"I may not vote at all in 2008" was to make the point that it is ridiculous not to take necessary action just because one is unconvinced of its chances of success.

Sadly, I see his point. There is NO WAY IN HELL a single Republican would EVER vote to throw him out. NEVER. They play for keeps and protect their own.

The only solution is this: NEVER EVER let ANY Republican get easily elected to ANY public office again. Make them work for it, and hopefully keep enough of them out that they cannot have this much say in things EVER AGAIN.

Conyers presumption-- true or not-- is that members of the republican party will evidently ignore high crimes in favor of party loyalty, no matter what the crimes. That makes the republican members of congress participants in organized crime, IMO. The only possible solution is to NEVER permit them to occupy elected office again. This is one of the most shameful episodes in American history.

".......That makes the republican members of congress participants in organized crime......."

Nits make lice. Don't let the newbie fascists get their feet in the door. Not even for dogcatcher.

Never again.

Would there have been such an outpouring of sympathy if the House hadn't voted as it did on Nixon?

I don't want to be stupid about this --
I can see the argument as to creating sympathy --- but with the reckless, murderous reality
we have been facing --- from TORTURE to loss of civil rights --- we'd have to have a really
dense population not to "get it" . . .

I don't "get it" ... ??

the moment he leaves the presidency. That way his whinny constituents can have 4 years to get over it before the next election.

There it would be, in the process of an impeachment proceeding, all the dirty laundry aired for all to see. All the sneaky little deals that have cost us money. All the cronyism. All the hypocrisy.

And who knows what else we might discover.

I think once the facts are made public through the impeachment process, the American people will DEMAND impeachment, and the Repukes will have to go along with it if they want to retain their seats.

That's the way it works. It will be hard to support Bush/Cheney in an election year when the entire country is aware of all the crimes they've committed.

Impeach, Conyers. The Constitution says nothing about doing it only if you have the votes. It says you must do it if high crimes and misdemeanors have been committed. And few would say high crimes haven't been committed at this point.

Waiting to do something is the real risk here, IMO. Are we going to wait for a war with Iran before anything is done to stop them? The danger is in waiting. Impeach, Rep. Conyers. It is your duty to do so.

For Republic's Sake, Pelosi Must Ponder Impeachment
by John Nichols

But is impeachment really a political loser? Not if history is a guide. There have been nine attempts since the founding of the republic to move articles of impeachment against a sitting president. In the cases in which impeachment was proposed by members of an opposition party, that party either maintained or improved its position in Congress at the next general election. In seven instances the party that proposed impeachment secured the presidency in the next election.

==

The benefit of an impeachment fight to an opposition party comes not in the removal of an individual who happens to wear the label of another party. Rather, it comes in the elevation of the discourse to a higher ground where politicians and voters can ponder the deeper meaning of democracy.

When the whole of a political party finally concludes that it must take up the weighty responsibility of impeaching a president, as Democrats did in 1974 but Republicans never fully did in 1998, its language is clarified and transfigured. What Walt Whitman referred to as "long dumb voices" are suddenly transformed into clarion calls as a dialogue of governmental marginalia gives way to discussion of the intent of the founders, the duty of the people's representatives, and the renewal of the republic.

When a political party speaks well and wisely of impeachment, frustrated voters come to see it in a new way. It is no longer merely the tribune of its own ambition. It becomes a champion of the American experiment. To be sure, such a leap entails risk. But it is the risk-averse political party that is most likely to remain the permanent opposition.

more -

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1109-27.htm

Oh, I'm glad I'm half past my lifespan, 'cuz the lessons we are teaching are gonna bring awfully bitter fruit.

How very calculating and wrongheaded of "our" side.

Would there really be an outpouring of sympathy once the evidence comes out in an impeachment hearing?

George W. Bush is not Bill Clinton. The circumstances are nowhere NEAR the same.

Outpourings of sympathy occur after BOGUS impeachment proceedings, not after impeachment proceedings in which mountains of evidence show the impeachment to be warranted, regardless of votes.

This should be the easiest fallacy in the world to spot, but yet, all of our leadership stands behind it. They parrot these weak talking points as if their base were a bunch of six-year-olds.

because it is the right thing to do. Bring the law back into this country. Make these criminals accountable. Ask the people what they think, not the faux leaders. Make Congress refuse to Impeach so that we can hear and see them do it. Let us count those who do not respect democracy. peace, Kim

Why can't they understand that when we say impeach, we want hearings first? The votes will come.

but disagree with him on this one. Impeachment is not just called for but necessary to preserve our Constitution. They just can't get away with what they have done with no consequences.

will stop them killing a million more?

Whether they voted for impeachment or not. Remind them that America is watching how they are voting, and their record of voting will be on display for their next election.

Either they stand for treason and cover-ups or they don't.

fall. Most aware Americans would welcome at least an attempt.

Very sad statement on this nation and its moral compass.

I am heartsick.

forever a nation that allows war criminals to go free...forever a war crime nation

Is it that you don't have the votes, or that Pelosi has you handcuffed?

-Hoot

:(

x(

He's exactly right.

:crazy:

Sign on to the International criminal court and retroactively rescind any immunity put forth by the Bush administration.

Hand them over to the international community. Please! Impeachment has no teeth anyways.

If he doesn't understand that it's part of his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution.

I guess our egos and strong sense of ethics have blinded us to the reality that we're dealing with a much bigger and "badder" gang than us.

I say we hand them over to the police, since we can't take them on ourselves. Because god knows they've committed crimes against humanity.

If we get a "stop crying in your tea cups and move on" or "we need to move our country forward" or "the country has been through enough already" or "we have more important things to think about"......then it will NEVER happen. We MUST HAVE someone, who loves our Constitution, in power to hold these thugs accountable for the crimes they've committed.

Obama won't do it. He wants to "bring the country together." Hillary won't do it. She's too connected the the Beltway insiders. Biden won't do it. Also too connected. Will Edwards? I know Dennis would. Would Dodd? I don't think Richardson would do it either.

I am hoping an international tribunal will begin at some point. Although from my limited knowledge of the Hague, the country of origin is supposed to be actively pursuing justice before they'll intervene.

I have more thoughts on this, but they really boil down to who we are as Americans. This is a bottom up process. We're so sleepy, we're letting Congress off the hook. People like my well driller. He thinks there were wmd's in Iraq, and therefore we should be bombing Iran. There's a lot of ignorance out there. I think that's most of the problem. Congress is getting nearly zero pressure from us. Even those who are strongly in support of impeachment, very few take leave of their lives for ten minutes to actually communicate their sentiments to Congress.

He is assigning the responsibility of his failure to honor his oath of office to others.

See how easily I roll over?

I shouldn't even trust Conyers when I know better. We've been all over this.

there Congressman, if you know in your heart that team Bu$h/Cheney is deserving of impeachment then its incumbent on your Judiciary Committee to do whatever it takes to "get those votes" and squash any chance for " a outpouring of sympathy" with an ironclad case.

If Congress does not impeach * , history will say we the people supported his policies.

It doesn't help that many around the world believe we support *, it's amazing that such an idiot got 2 terms.

Or that it trumps the Constitution.

Damn.

is being honest. He was actively pursuing impeachment when we had a rethug majority congress. Why would he bother if he didn't think "the votes were there"? I think (and approval numbers back me) that the nation is so outraged and that fact alone will force the votes. Rethugs are resigning in record numbers and those that choose to stay know it is more politically beneficial to throw the *'s under the bus. I think Conyers is lying and there is probably more to it. To speculate on what that would be would put me clearly in tin foil territory.:mad:

I used to call myself pragmatic but I never really was. Now, I'm just demoralized.

so close in time. By the way, for us not to have the votes in the house is not forgiveable by me. It lets me know that impeachment ought to be removed from the constitution. This is a test book case for it. To impeach someone in the future is now mute if these aren't because of the amount of constitutional crimes already committed. But I guess the founding fathers underestimated political parties and human greed or they would have given us another trigger besides voting in order to try and save the republic.

refuse to impeach the CRIMINALS would pay dearly in the election! The people want these thugs IMPEACHED!

Figuratively speaking of course. ;)

the next time there's a Democratic president and a Republican congress

we were so busy defending them...like we were with Clinton...we couldn't see the "forest for the trees."

Maybe this report from Smirking Chimp is misinterpreting things..taking out of context...or maybe we need to realize that "it is what it is."

It makes me sad, too...but how much more pounding over the head to we take until "we get it?" They are telling us...they will never Impeach the SOB's. NEVER. And that they won't go after them after '08 either. They will turn the page in the book to a new chapter just like with all the other stuff..Iran Contra, Nixon Crimes...Assassinations of Dems...Anthrax of Dems...all of it.

It doesn't matter. Don't we get it by now?