As we have, often, opined on this blog and others, there is a huge difference, it seems, between the way independents and Democrats in the hinterlands view impeachment.
Number 1) It is not so difficult understand why Democrats would be loathe to initiate impeachment-type investigations. For one thing no one wants government by investigation, as we had all through the 1990s. Nevertheless, we haven't even had any meaningful congressional oversight for almost 6 years, so that possibility is already out. But many D.C. Dems fear blow-back, like the losses the GOP experienced after their ridiculous exercise in stupidity, pomposity and pathetic prudishness which lead to the impeachment, but not to the conviction of Bill Clinton. DC Dems do not seem to be in touch with the electoral pulse if they think there would be any comparisons of the two situations that would not favor them. The situations are a different as daylight and dark. To put it in a nice slogan:" When Clinton Lied, No One Died."
Number 2) It isn't only about Iraq War, however. It wasn't the Vietnam War which eventually put Richard Nixon's butt in a sling. It was "abuse of power" directed at political opposition, Jouranalists and citizen activists who opposed policy. This administration has committed abuses of power that make Nixon look like a neophyte, all across the board. How can we allow such abuses to go unaddressed? Where is the accountability; the same accountability we demand of people who are guilty of far lesser offenses every day, that isn't a government holiday, in these United States? Are we a nation under law or not? That becomes a very important question, especially when it is the government that is behaving in an unlawful manner, with all of the power and agencies of the executive as tools of abuse.
Number 3) Of course, to the Democrats, there is real politk to consider. If the GOP decides to, they can block any hope of conviction in the Senate. The Democrats don't have a real majority in the Senate, let alone enough votes to convict Bush/Cheney of even the most solid Articles of Impeachment if the GOP maintains a solid front.
Some Democrats, reportedly fear appearing weak or silly or as losers if their is no conviction.
If the GOP should do such a thing as protect Bush/Cheney, again,, after all the evidence is laid out, I believe it would be the biggest mistake they have ever made, other than running George W. Bush for the presidency to begin with. They would probably be powerless for generations to come.
There must also be a real temptation to just allow the steady drip, drip, drip of oversight hearing after oversight hearing, possibly having a similar outcome.
We are more concerned about this country than either major political party. Politicians might want to think about that.
Our only concern is that a non-conviction would greatly harm the country, as the world would see such an official finding as a blanket pardon for Bush and Cheney by the nation. This administration must not be pardoned, in any form, for their many crimes, both domestic and those which have been commited abroad.
Number 4) The people cannot stop raising the heat and demanding accountability. Impeachment and trial by the senate is our only legal tool for dealing with an out-of-control executive. We must do all in our power to force accountability on a seemingly unwilling government.
The future of this nation is clearly in the hands of her people. Leadership will not be forthcoming from Washington, D.C, apparently.
Published on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 by McClatchy Newspapers
Democrats in Washington Want To Keep Impeachment Off The Table
by Steven Thomma
WASHINGTON - The push to impeach President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney is gaining a hearing in some parts of the country, but not in Washington.
More than 70 cities and 14 state Democratic parties have urged impeachment or investigations that could lead to impeachment. The most common charge is that Bush manipulated intelligence to lead the country into the Iraq war. Other charges include spying on Americans and torturing suspected terrorists in violation of U.S. and international law.
Most recently, the Massachusetts Democratic Party voted to push impeachment of both men. The 2,500 state convention delegates voted almost unanimously against Cheney; the vote against Bush was closer.
Massachusetts’ Democratic Party thus joined 13 others on the investigate-or-impeach bandwagon, including: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin.
Among the cities and towns, the largest and most recent is Detroit, where the city council voted 7-0 this month to urge Congress to impeach Bush and Cheney for “intentionally misleading Congress and the public regarding the threat from Iraq in order to justify the war.”
“There’s a lot growing in support,” said Tim Carpenter, the director of the liberal group Progressive Democrats of America. “Whether Congress will respond, that’s another question.”
Indeed. The Democrats who run Congress have no interest in impeaching Bush or Cheney, despite pressure from their party’s base outside the Beltway.
It’s noteworthy that impeachment pressure is coming from the home states of the two Democratic leaders in Congress, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
Pelosi said last year that impeachment “is off the table.” Under the Constitution, the House impeaches; the Senate then decides whether to convict and remove from office.
It’s also interesting that one of the resolutions came from Detroit, home to Rep. John Conyers, who as the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee would lead any impeachment hearings.
The Detroit resolution was co-authored by Monica Conyers, the congressman’s wife. But she hasn’t had any noticeable clout at home: Conyers said last year that he wasn’t interested in impeachment - just oversight investigations - and he hasn’t changed his stand.
There are both policy and political reasons that Democratic leaders are risking the anger of their
base.
One is that some don’t see an impeachable offense in what Bush has done, what the Constitution calls “high crimes and misdemeanors.” They might find such evidence in any of the many congressional investigations, but they haven’t yet.
Another is that they fear a political backlash from voters similar to the one that punished Republicans after they impeached Bill Clinton. One factor on the side of the pro-impeachment crowd: Clinton was much more popular than Bush.
The third is that they’re eager to keep Bush and Cheney around as punching bags for Democratic candidates in the 2008 campaign.
“The political lens they’re looking through is the 2008 election,” Carpenter said. “They want to see Bush and Cheney dangling so the election is a referendum on them. That is not the correct lens.”
To him, the right lens is the last election, when voters threw the Republicans out of power in Congress. Those people, he said, now want Bush and Cheney out.
“There is a groundswell here,” Carpenter said. “Pelosi says it’s off the table. It’s our role to put it on the table."
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
No comments:
Post a Comment