“Nancy Pelosi is wrong.”

Impeachment is much on the minds of bloggers, pundits and Americans — with Bush hitting an approval rating of 25% and Cheney in the teens … with Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former Counsel Harriet Miers to face criminal contempt charges in Congress tomorrow, in lock-step with the Decider’s wishes that they stonewall the law [and in protection of their own skins, to be sure] … with the hundreds of signing statements and egregious Executive Orders defining a rogue regime that ignores Rule of Law and the Constitution … with many of us wondering if there will be a democracy left to defend before long — is there any other answer?

Add that Gonzales has, today, apparently implicated himself in other “behind the scenes” domestic spying programs and that Bush’s latest military plan has no significant movement in troops til 2009 and the answer to the [rhetorical] question above is a resounding NO.

Here’s a collection of impeachment articles … everybody’s writing one … and we’ll start it with a short list of grievances. After that, really good reads — I especially liked the first two. There’s a Moyers video, from his PBS episode on impeachment — and audio from Barbara Boxer in here.

Last four pieces here have to do with Cindy Sheehans knockdown-dragout with Conyers, and the impeachment movements disenchantment with him. Cindy was arrested during this event, and says she will run against Pelosi. Me, I hate to see that happen; Sheehan has become an effective peace proponent but I don’t see her as a legislator — her recent “quit/don’t quit” on politics in general is an example. You have to have the stomach for it, the skills … I don’t think she has them and even as Liberal as San Francisco is, they will likely choose competence over passion.

Here’s a vast collection regarding the essential American project we must come to … soon!

Jude

List of Impeachable Offenses
AfterDowningStreet

• The President and Vice President conspired to defraud the American People and Congress into believing that Iraq possessed WMDs and was a threat to use them against us.

• They conspired to defraud the American People that Saddam Hussein and Iraq were linked to the 9/11 attacks and al Qaeda.

• They led the nation into a “war of aggression” (’the supreme international crime’ Nuremburg Tribunal) in violation of the United Nations Charter.

• The House Judiciary Committee’s Democratic Staff Report states there is a prima facie case that the President and his Administration are guilty of breaking at least 7 international and federal laws in the run up to the Iraq Invasion.

• They have and continued to torture.

• They have suspended habeas corpus and held prisoners without charges in excess of 5 years.

• In direct violation of the FISA law they have wiretapped U.S. citizens without a warrant.

• They were grossly negligent in their response to Hurricane Katrina.

• They have politicized the U.S. Department of Justice by encouraging and discouraging prosecution of individuals according to what political party they belong to.

• With presidential “signing statements” and the Administration’s unilateral theory of a “unitary executive” they attempted to change the balance of powers enshrined in the Constitution.

• They have refused to comply with Congressional subpoenas in oversight investigations.

• The President has obstructed justice by commuting Scooter Libby’s jail sentence after Libby refused to give testimony on the President and Vice President’s involvement in outing CIA agent Valerie Plame.

• They have attempted to allow the theft of 80% of present Iraq oil fields and 100% of future fields by multinational oil companies through the Iraqi Hydrocarbons Bill, passage of which is demanded as a benchmark for progress by the Iraqi government and parliament. ++

Impeach George Bush To Stop War Lies, Deaths
Jimmy Breslin, Newsday via CommonDreams
Monday, July 23, 2007

I am walking in Rosedale on this day early in the week while I wait for the funeral of Army soldier Le Ron Wilson, who died at age 18 in Iraq. He was 17 1/2 when he had his mother sign his enlistment papers at the Jamaica recruiting office. If she didn’t, he told her, he would just wait for the months to his 18th birthday and go in anyway. He graduated from Thomas Edison High School at noon one day in May. He left right away for basic training. He came home in a box last weekend. He had a fast war.

The war was there to take his life because George Bush started it with bold-faced lies.

He got this lovely kid killed by lying.

If Bush did this in Queens, he would be in court on Queens Boulevard on a murder charge.

He did it in the White House, and it is appropriate, and mandatory for the good of the nation, that impeachment proceedings be started. You can’t live with lies. You can’t permit them to be passed on as if it is the thing to do.

Yesterday, Bush didn’t run the country for a couple of hours while he had a colonoscopy at the presidential retreat, Camp David. He came out of it all right. He should now take his good health and go home, quit a job he doesn’t have a clue as to how to do.

The other day, Bush said he couldn’t understand why in the world would some people say that millions of Americans have no health insurance. “Why, all they have to do is go to the emergency room,” he said.

Said this with the smirk, the insolent smug, contemptuous way he speaks to citizens.

People, particularly these politicians, these frightened beggars in suits, seem petrified about impeachment. It could wreck the country. Ridiculous. I’ve been around this business twice and we’re all still here and no politician was even injured. Richard Nixon lied during a war and helped get some 58,500 Americans killed and many escaped by hanging onto helicopter skids. Nixon left peacefully. Mike Mansfield of Montana, the Democratic Senate majority leader, said on television that the Senate impeachment trial of Nixon would be televised and there would be no immunity. That meant Nixon would have to face the country under oath and if he lied he would go to prison. He knew he was finished as he heard this. Mansfield said no more. He got up and left. Barbara Walters, on the “Today” show, said, “He doesn’t say very much, does he?”

The second time the subject was Bill Clinton for illegal holding in the hallway.

This time, we have dead bodies involved. Consider what is accomplished by the simple power of the word impeachment. If you read these broken-down news writers or terrified politicians claiming that an impeachment would leave the nation in pieces, don’t give a moment to them.

It opens with the appointing of an investigator to report to the House on evidence that calls for impeachment. He could bring witnesses forward. That would be all you’d need. Here in the impeachment proceedings against Richard Nixon came John Dean. His history shows how far down the honesty and honor of this country has gone. Dean was the White House counsel. Richard Nixon, at his worst, never told him not to appear or to remain silent in front of the Congress. Dean went on and did his best to fill prisons. After that came Alexander Butterfield, a nobody. All he had to say was that the White House had a taping system that caught all the conversations in the White House. Any of them not on tape were erased by a participant.

The same is desperately needed now. Curious, following the words, an investigator - the mind here sees George Mitchell and Warren Rudman, and you name me better - can slap a hand on the slitherers and sneaks who have kept us in war for five years and who use failing generals to beg for more time and more lives of our young. A final word in September? Two years more, the generals and Bush people say.

Say impeachment and you’ll get your troops home.

As I am walking in Rosedale, on these streets sparkling with sun, I remember the places I have been in the cold rain for the deaths of our young in this war. Rosedale now, Washington Heights before, and the South Bronx, and Bay Shore and Hauppauge and too many other places around here.

And in Washington we had this Bush, and it is implausible to have anyone who is this dumb running anything, smirking at his country. He sure doesn’t mind copying those people. On his PBS television show the other night, Bill Moyers said he was amazed at Sara Taylor of the White House staff saying that she didn’t have to talk to a congressional committee because George Bush had ordered her not to. “I took an oath to uphold the president,” she said.

That president had been in charge of a government that kidnapped, tortured, lied, intercepted mail and calls, all in the name of opposing people who are willing to kill themselves right in front of you. You have to get rid of a government like this. Ask anybody in Rosedale, where Le Ron Wilson wanted to live his young life. His grave speaks out that this is an impeachable offense. ++

George Bush: Moral Termite
Bob Burnett, Smirking Chimp
Jul 24 2007

For many of us on the left coast, President Bush’s pardon of Scooter Libby was a non-event; we’ve grown blasé about Bush abuses. As a result, we shrug and say to the rest of the nation: What did you expect? You supported a conservative demagogue whose most notable “accomplishments” were a series of business failures. Why are you surprised that he’s become the worst President in modern history? Nonetheless, while it’s comforting to bask in self-righteousness, that won’t fix our common problem: Bush will be President for another 18 months and the immorality of the Bush Administration infects us all. The President is a moral termite.

If you’ve ever had a termite infestation in your house, you know how pernicious the insects are: they chew their way deep into your woodwork and, before you know it, your home’s structure is jeopardized. Then the infected area has to be treated to ensure the termites are destroyed - often the entire house needs fumigation - and the damage has to be repaired - whole sections of your residence require reconstruction. That’s exactly where America is with the Bush Administration: first the pests have to be treated and then the structure - the federal government - has to be repaired.

How do we remove these moral termites from the White House? The best alternative is for Bush and Cheney to resign. After all, even Richard Nixon had the sense to resign once he realized that he’d lost the support of three-quarters of the US electorate. Unfortunately, Bush and Cheney don’t have good sense, so it will be necessary to impeach them. There are specific, factual grounds for impeachment such as their falsifying the justification for the invasion of Iraq and illegally eavesdropping on domestic communications. But, the larger grounds are the damage the Bush Administration has inflicted on the U.S., the corruption of America’s moral infrastructure.

Bush and company has caused four types of destruction: They’ve severely damaged the reputation of the United States. Recent polls indicate the US continues to lose favor with much of the world. It’s not only that non-Americans don’t like us, think we’re fat, greedy, and brutal, but also that they listen to our talk about democracy and don’t believe we are sincere. After all, in many parts of the world the face of America is our military or our most aggressive businesspeople. As a result, when we say “democracy,” many non-Americans see militarism and unrestrained capitalism. Throughout the world there’s deep cynicism about Bush’s claim that the US is spreading liberty and democracy. This has affected our reputation and the security of Americans who travel overseas. Moreover, in some parts of the world it’s made theocracy look attractive.

Secondly, the Bush Administration has jeopardized the security of the United States. The invasion of Iraq has done more harm than good: it has promoted the cause of Al Qaeda, and other Islamic extremists, and made it easier for them to attract recruits. As serious as that is, it’s overshadowed by two more debilitating injuries: the prolonged occupation has weakened the US military and the Bush Administration’s tight focus on Iraq has delayed the implementation of the recommendations of the 9-11 commission, kept the U.S. from common-sense actions that strengthen domestic security.

Thirdly, Bush Administration termites have adversely affected the lives of most Americans. Some of this deterioration has been psychological: recent surveys indicate that American confidence in the future is approaching an all-time low. Most Americans don’t like the road that America is on and don’t have confidence in the President or Congress. They have good reasons for this pessimism: for millions of Americans, life got much harder under the Bush Administration. For the past six years, the White House has catered to the rich and powerful. As a result, the social fabric of democracy has been weakened as average Americans are forced to spend more time working and less time participating in public democracy.

Finally, the Bush termite infestation has undermined the office of the Presidency. After six years, it’s become painfully apparent George Bush never accepted a fundamental tenet of American democracy: the balance of powers doctrine. Bush and Cheney believe in the Imperial Presidency, the notion that the President is above the law. Bush’s conduct has disgraced the office of the President and created a situation where a majority of Americans do not trust him or the government. This is bad at any time, but it’s particularly troubling in an era where American is battling militant fundamentalists.

So, what needs to be done? The obvious first step is to remove Bush and Cheney from office. The next step is to replace them with someone who is committed not only to occupying the White House but also to restoring public confidence in the presidency. The problem is larger than politics, it reflects the public morality that runs America: do politicians govern from the perspective of their own self-interest or with respect for the common good? We need to clean the termites out of the White House and restore integrity to our government. ++

Impeach Impeach Impeach Impeach Impeach Impeach
Brady Bonk, Smirking Chimp
Jul 24 2007

Harry Reid this weekend pushed it away like it was a smelly bowl of oatmeal. Russ Feingold wasn’t quite as finicky as all that about it but did, in a more moderate course, hold his nose the whole time. And we all know that Nancy Pelosi has just plain scooped up that bowl and flinged it plum off the table.

Why, oh why, are Democrats so bloody scared of impeachment?

Do you think they know what it means?

The thought occurred to me this afternoon, as I remembered when, probably in or about seventh grade, some civics teacher had to twist some heads on straight regarding the ‘I’ word. It was a tall order of a lesson because so many to that point had already learned it completely wrong, and it is more difficult to unlearn than to learn.

This hero of a civics teacher had to disabuse a roomful of cocky teens of the notion that “impeachment” means you’re showing the Prez the door. He had to explain that impeachment is actually the first of a two part process, that what the House of Representatives actually does is to draw and approve the Articles of Impeachment, which is nothing more than an indictment, and that the trial itself goes forth in the Senate.

Is it possible that Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, was down with the mumps that day? Or that senators Reid and Feingold are keeping their distance because they still hold the incorrect notion that impeachment is “don’t the the door hit ya?” Or are they merely afeared that their constituents are thusly ignorant?

Except that the polls aren’t bearing that last idea out, or else we’ve got voters sharpening their guillotine blades like the French were circa 1789. The polls said 46 percent wanted Bush impeached and that 54 percent wanted the same fate for the president. I mean, Cheney. Juxtapose those numbers versus the tumbling approval numbers, and the message seems clear. First 100 Hours, Our Asses. We didn’t put you Democrats in there to play footsie. Shake some foundations, or we’re lighting torches. That’s what’s on a majority of our minds these days regarding Congress.

A few weeks ago, Bill Moyers interviewed a liberal journalist and a conservative constitutional scholar.

Both of them convincingly and correctly argued for impeachment, not just to get the current president’s goat, not just to halt the insane occupation of Iraq, but to neuter a dangerous threat to the Constitution and to American democracy itself. If this Congress allows the current Administration to skate to 2009 without impeachment proceedings, they argued (and agreed), it tacitly approves of unchecked rendering and interrogation, of spying on Americans, and of a general overreach of the executive that Bruce Fein, the conservative one, said that even King George III wouldn’t have imagined.

It’s a stunning interview. If you haven’t seen it, please find it on the Tivo or on the Web. Note: it’s posted below in the article entitled “Impeachment is the Cure” — keep reading]

I still say Congressional Democrats have Uzis in front of them that they’re not willing to touch in this fight, and that it’s insane and shameful. Impeachment hearings would offer more weight to the process and would more strongly compel testimony from reluctant witnesses. It might more vigorously shake the trees for whistle blowers and might at last reveal to the world this administration’s John Dean. It might bring truths forth that are so undeniable about the abyssmal, criminal behavior of the present administration that the Senate trial to follow would have no choice but to eschew politics in favor of a conviction and subsequent eviction of the current president and, perhaps, the current vice president.

There is a concept from behaviorist Abraham Maslow that haunts me perpetually regarding this situation, that if the only tool you think you have is a hammer, you tend to think every problem is a nail. This has certainly described the White House of the past six years, but I am fearing these days that it also describes our Congress. It is time to pause, step back, review the tool bench, and pick up the level instead of the hammer.

Impeachment. Now. ++

Censure & Impeachment
John Nichols, The Nation via CommonDreams
Monday, July 23, 2007 by The Nation

There is every reason to be enthusiastic about U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold’s decision to ask the Senate to consider a pair of censure resolutions condemning the President, Vice President and other administration officials for misconduct relating to the war in Iraq and for their repeated assaults on the rule of law.Indeed, as the movement to impeach Bush and Cheney attracts more support with each passing day, Feingold’s resolutions should be seen as evidence that the essential American principle of presidential accountability is finally being put back on the table by responsible members of Congress.

Feingold is renewing and extending a call for censure that that the Wisconsin Democrat initially made in March, 2006. The senator now proposes one resolution censuring the president, the vice president and their aides for overstating the case that Saddam Hussein had WMDs, particularly nuclear weapons, and falsely implying a relationship with al Qaeda and links to 9/11; for failing to plan for the civil conflict and humanitarian problems that the intelligence community predicted; for over-stretching the Army, Marine Corps and Guard with prolonged deployments and for justifying U.S. military involvement in Iraq by repeatedly distorting the situation on the ground there. A second resolution would censure the administration for approving the illegal NSA warrantless wiretapping program, for promoting extreme policies on torture, the Geneva Conventions, and detainees at Guantanamo; and for refusing to recognize legitimate congressional oversight into the improper firings of U.S. Attorneys.

Feingold, a Constitutional scholar, is well aware that these misdeeds of the George Bush, Dick Cheney and their minions fall, as the senator has suggested, “right in the strike zone of the concept of high crimes and misdemeanors.” He has frequently suggested that he “would not rule out any form of accountability,” including an impeachment inquiry beginning with proper investigation and hearings.

But, as a senator, Feingold cannot initiate an impeachment.

The founders, wisely, rested that power with members of the U.S. House.

The drafters of the Constitution feared that the Senate — which was initially conceived of as an appointed chamber, more akin to the British House of Lords than the elected body it has become — would be too formal and cautious about holding presidents and vice presidents to account.

So they gave the authority to impeach members of the executive branch to the House, which was elected from districts and, as a result, more closely in tune with the ebbs and flows of popular sentiment. James Madison, George Mason and the other essential authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights wanted impeachment to be a popular process. And the House was the more populist chamber.

That said, they did not intend for senators to sit idly by while high crimes and misdemeanors were committed.

Feingold is right to describe his censure motions as “a relatively modest response.” But they are precisely the response that a senator can and should propose.

“Censure is about holding the administration accountable,” says Feingold. “Congress needs to formally condemn the President and members of the administration for misconduct before and during the Iraq war, and for undermining the rule of law at home. Censure is not a cure for the devastating toll this administration’s actions have taken on this country. But when future generations look back at the terrible misconduct of this administration, they need to see that a co-equal branch of government stood up and held to account those who violated the principles on which this nation was founded.”

Censure is not the cure. Impeachment is. But censuring Bush and Cheney ought not be seen as a compromise, or an insufficient response to the crisis. It is a senatorial compliment to the burgeoning movement for impeachment — a movement that today delivered petitions with more than 1,000,000 signatures to Congressman John Conyers appealing to him to begin impeachment proceedings. Conyers, it should be noted, indicated at a recent meeting in California with members of Progressive Democrats of America that he would be receptive to appeals from other members of the House to develop a game-plan for considering serious impeachment proposals.

Supporting Feingold’s censure resolutions should not distract from nor negate the push for impeachment. Rather, moves to get the Senate to censure Bush and Cheney ought to be seen as vital pieces of the broader struggle to hold this administration to account. ++

Impeach Now
Or Face the End of Constitutional Democracy
PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS, CounterPunch
July 16, 2007

Unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney, a year from now the US could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran.

Bush has put in place all the necessary measures for dictatorship in the form of “executive orders” that are triggered whenever Bush declares a national emergency. Recent statements by Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff, former Republican senator Rick Santorum and others suggest that Americans might expect a series of staged, or false flag, “terrorist” events in the near future.

Many attentive people believe that the reason the Bush administration will not bow to expert advice and public opinion and begin withdrawing US troops from Iraq is that the administration intends to rescue its unpopular position with false flag operations that can be used to expand the war to Iran.

Too much is going wrong for the Bush administration: the failure of its Middle East wars, Republican senators jumping ship, Turkish troops massed on northern Iraq’s border poised for an invasion to deal with Kurds, and a majority of Americans favoring the impeachment of Cheney and a near-majority favoring Bush’s impeachment. The Bush administration desperately needs dramatic events to scare the American people and the Congress back in line with the militarist-police state that Bush and Cheney have fostered.

William Norman Grigg recently wrote that the GOP is “praying for a terrorist strike” to save the party from electoral wipeout in 2008.

Chertoff, Cheney, the neocon nazis, and Mossad would have no qualms about saving the bacon for the Republicans, who have enabled Bush to start two unjustified wars, with Iran waiting in the wings to be attacked in a third war.

The Bush administration has tried unsuccessfully to resurrect the terrorist fear factor by infiltrating some blowhard groups and encouraging them to talk about staging “terrorist” events. The talk, encouraged by federal agents, resulted in “terrorist” arrests hyped by the media, but even the captive media was unable to scare people with such transparent sting operations.

If the Bush administration wants to continue its wars in the Middle East and to entrench the “unitary executive” at home, it will have to conduct some false flag operations that will both frighten and anger the American people and make them accept Bush’s declaration of “national emergency” and the return of the draft. Alternatively, the administration could simply allow any real terrorist plot to proceed without hindrance.

A series of staged or permitted attacks would be spun by the captive media as a vindication of the neoconsevatives’ Islamophobic policy, the intention of which is to destroy all Middle Eastern governments that are not American puppet states. Success would give the US control over oil, but the main purpose is to eliminate any resistance to Israel’s complete absorption of Palestine into Greater Israel.

Think about it. If another 9/11-type “security failure” were not in the works, why would Homeland Security czar Chertoff go to the trouble of convincing the Chicago Tribune that Americans have become complacent about terrorist threats and that he has “a gut feeling” that America will soon be hit hard?

Why would Republican warmonger Rick Santorum say on the Hugh Hewitt radio show that “between now and November, a lot of things are going to happen, and I believe that by this time next year, the American public’s (sic) going to have a very different view of this war.”

Throughout its existence the US government has staged incidents that the government then used in behalf of purposes that it could not otherwise have pursued. According to a number of writers, false flag operations have been routinely used by the Israeli state. During the Czarist era in Russia, the secret police would set off bombs in order to arrest those the secret police regarded as troublesome. Hitler was a dramatic orchestrator of false flag operations. False flag operations are a commonplace tool of governments.

Ask yourself: Would a government that has lied us into two wars and is working to lie us into an attack on Iran shrink from staging “terrorist” attacks in order to remove opposition to its agenda?

Only a diehard minority believes in the honesty and integrity of the Bush-Cheney administration and in the truthfulness of the corporate media.

Hitler, who never achieved majority support in a German election, used the Reichstag fire to fan hysteria and push through the Enabling Act, which made him dictator. Determined tyrants never require majority support in order to overthrow constitutional orders.

The American constitutional system is near to being overthrown. Are coming “terrorist” events of which Chertoff warns and Santorum promises the means for overthrowing our constitutional democracy?

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. ++

“Impeachment Is The Cure”
Scarecrow, FireDogLake
7/16/07

Bill Moyers with Bruce Fein and John Nichols
Youtube

The Bush/Cheney White House is now in open defiance of Congress, the wishes of the American people, the Constitution, and the rule of law, and every week its actions are becoming more arrogant, lawless and monarchical. They are essentially daring Congress to confront them, because they believe Congress has neither the spine nor the institutional strength to stop this lawless regime. It is time to prove them wrong.

Last Friday, Bill Moyer’s Journal provided a forum for two responsible citizens — one a liberal, the other a conservative, both patriots who care deeply about their country — to explain as eloquently as can be said what needs to be done. You can watch the full program here; below the fold are excepts from the transcript, just a small part of what Bruce Fein and John Nichols said. Every American should watch or read the full program.

There is no more important issue in America today than impeachment, not even Iraq, because any wise resolution of the Iraq occupation, as well as every other public policy issue, requires a White House that is willing to work with Congress as a co-equal branch, that has the confidence of the American people, and that can function within the boundaries of the Constitution and the rule of law. Failing on all three counts, President Bush and Vice President Cheney have brought us to this point by defying the law, the Congress, and the American people, thus gravely undermining the Constitution. The Founders provided a remedy for exactly this kind of dangerous, monarchical behavior. It is time for Congress to apply the cure, and for the nation’s media to demand that it do so.

Congress has telephone numbers:

1 (800) 828 - 0498
1 (800) 459 - 1887
1 (800) 614 - 2803
1 (866) 340 - 9281
1 (866) 338 - 1015
1 (877) 851 - 6437

Excerpts from Bill Moyer’s Journal

BRUCE FEIN: . . . I think Bush’s crimes are a little bit different. I think they’re a little bit more worrisome than Clinton’s. You don’t have to have–

BILL MOYERS: More worrisome?

BRUCE FEIN: More worrisome than Clinton’s– because he is seeking more institutionally to cripple checks and balances and the authority of Congress and the judiciary to superintend his assertions of power. He has claimed the authority to tell Congress they don’t have any right to know what he’s doing with relation to spying on American citizens, using that information in any way that he wants in contradiction to a federal statute called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He’s claimed authority to say he can kidnap people, throw them into dungeons abroad, dump them out into Siberia without any political or legal accountability. These are standards that are totally anathema to a democratic society devoted to the rule of law.

BILL MOYERS: It seems to me the country is ahead of Congress on this. How do you explain all this talk about impeachment today out across the country?

JOHN NICHOLS: People don’t want to let this go. They do not accept Nancy Pelosi’s argument that impeachment is, quote/unquote, off the table. Because I guess maybe they’re glad she didn’t take some other part of the Constitution off the table like freedom of speech. But they also don’t accept the argument that, oh, well, there’s a presidential campaign going on. So let’s just hold our breath till Bush and Cheney get done.

When I go out across America, what I hear is something that’s really very refreshing and very hopeful about this country. An awfully lot of Americans understand what Thomas Jefferson understood. And that is that the election of a president does not make him a king for four years. That if a president sins against the Constitution– and does damage to the republic, the people have a right in an organic process to demand of their House of Representatives, the branch of government closest to the people, that it act to remove that president. And I think that sentiment is afoot in the land.

BILL MOYERS: Bruce, you talk about overreaching. What, in practical terms, do you mean by that?

BRUCE FEIN: It means asserting powers and claiming that there are no other branches that have the authority to question it. Take, for instance, the assertion that he’s made that when he is out to collect foreign intelligence, no other branch can tell him what to do. That means he can intercept your e-mails, your phone calls, open your regular mail, he can break and enter your home. He can even kidnap you, claiming I am seeking foreign intelligence and there’s no other branch Congress can’t say it’s illegal–judges can’t say this is illegal. I can do anything I want. That is overreaching. When he says that all of the world, all of the United States is a military battlefield because Osama bin Laden says he wants to kill us there, and I can then use the military to go into your homes and kill anyone there who I think is al-Qaeda or drop a rocket, that is overreaching. That is a claim even King George III didn’t make . . . at the time of the Revolution.

BRUCE FEIN: Let me underscore one of the things that you remember, Bill, ’cause I was there at the time of Watergate. And this relates to one political– official in the White House, Sara Taylor’s testimony. And claiming that George Bush could tell her to be silent.

BILL MOYERS: That was a great moment when Sara Taylor said, “I took an oath to uphold the president.” Did you see that?

BRUCE FEIN: Yes. And that was like the military in Germany saying, “My oath is to the Fuhrer, not to the country.” She took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. I did, too, when I was in the government. There’s no oath that says, “I’m loyal to a president even if he defiles the Constitution.”

JOHN NICHOLS: You– we’re at this table because the fact of the matter is that impeachment has moved well up the list of things we can talk about because of the Scooter Libby affair. Now, should it be the– one that tipped it? I think Bruce and I would probably both agree no. There are probably more important issues. But the Scooter Libby affair gets to the heart of what I think an awfully lot of Americans are concerned about with this administration and with the executive branch in– general, that it is lawless, that– it can rewrite the rules for itself, that it can protect itself.

And, you know, the founders anticipated just such a moment. If you look at the discussions in the Federalist Papers but also at the Constitutional Convention, when they spoke about impeachment, one of the things that Madison and George Mason spoke about was the notion that you needed the power to impeach particularly as regards to pardons and commutations because a president might try to take the burden of the law off members of his administration to prevent them from cooperating with Congress in order to expose wrongdoings by the president himself. And so Madison said that is why we must have the power to impeach. Because otherwise a president might be able to use his authority and pardons and such to prevent an investigation from getting to him.

JOHN NICHOLS: Sneering is not an impeachable sentence. But the founders who had recently fought a revolution against a king named George would tell you that monarchical behavior, the behavior of a king, acting like a king, is an impeachable offense. You need not look for specific laws or statutes. What you need to look for is a pattern of behavior that says that the presidency is superior not merely to Congress but to the laws of the land, to the rules of law. And that is why we ought to be discussing impeachment. Not because of George Bush and Dick Cheney but because we are establishing a presidency that does not respect the rule of law. And people, Americans, are rightly frightened by that. Their fear is the fear of the founders. It is appropriate. It is necessary.

JOHN NICHOLS: The hearings are important. There’s no question at that. And we should be at that stage. Remember, Thomas Jefferson and others, the founders, suggested that impeachment was an organic process. That information would come out. The people would be horrified. They would tell their representatives in Congress, “You must act upon this.” Well, the interesting thing is we are well down the track in the organic process. The people are saying it’s time. We need some accountability.

BILL MOYERS: But Nancy Pelosi doesn’t agree.

JOHN NICHOLS: Nancy Pelosi is wrong. Nancy Pelosi is disregarding her oath of office. She should change course now. And more importantly, members of her caucus and responsible Republicans should step up. It is not enough–

JOHN NICHOLS: You are seeing impeachment as a constitutional crisis. Impeachment is the cure for a constitutional crisis. Don’t mistake the medicine for the disease. When you have a constitutional crisis, the founders are very clear. They said there is a way to deal with this. We don’t have to have a war. We don’t have to raise an army and go to Washington. We have procedures in place where we can sanction a president appropriately, do what needs to be done up to the point of removing him from office and continue the republic. So we’re not talking here about taking an ax to government. Quite the opposite. We are talking about applying some necessary strong medicine that may cure not merely the crisis of the moment but, done right . . .

The people themselves have said, if the polls are correct, that, you know, something ought to be done. If nothing is done, if we do not step forward at this point, if we do not step up to this point, then we have, frankly, told the people, you know, you can even recognize that the king has no clothes, but we’re not gonna put any clothes on him. And at that point, the country is in very, very dire circumstances

Barbara Boxer: Impeachment “Should Be On The Table. This Is As Close As We’ve Ever Come To A Dictatorship”
Jonathan Schwarz, Raw Story
Thu, 2007-07-12

Here’s Barbara Boxer on the Ed Schultz Show yesterday. Though she wimped out a bit at the end, she was mostly strong on the necessity of considering impeachment.

(If you haven’t already, sign the ImpeachCheney.org petition and the Moveon impeachment petition.)

Listen (mp3) [open link]

SCHULTZ: They’re throwing down the gauntlet. They’re just declaring that they’re not going to change anything — the President in Cleveland yesterday saying, we’re just getting started. So in the meantime, the frustration of the American people continues to build, and I have to tell you Senator, I’m not trying to rope you into a conversation one way or another or where you’re at on this, but I want to say this for our listeners: they want impeachment put back on the table. They want impeachment on the table as a bargaining chip. Because for instance, Scooter Libby, commuting the sentence, what happened today with Sarah Taylor saying she’d been instructed by the president not to say anything, Alberto Gonzales, the story today about how he was briefed over the Patriot Act and then lied a week later in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee. I mean, when is enough is enough?

BOXER: Yeah. I mean, you left out a bunch of things — spying on citizens without a warrant, going around FISA, on and on. Look, I have always said it should be on the table. Ed, I’ve always said it. I was on a book tour and I ran into John Dean of Watergate fame. He was on the book tour that I was on, for his book. And it was right after we discovered that the administration was spying on our people without a warrant. And he just said, he looked at me and basically just said, as far as he could see, unless there was some explanation for this, this was impeachable. I’ve always said that you need to keep it on the table, and you need to look at these things, because now people are dying because of this administration. That’s the truth. And they won’t change course. They are ignoring the Congress. They keep signing these signing statements which mean that he’s decided not to enforce the law. This is as close as we’ve ever come to a dictatorship. When you have a situation where Congress is stepped on, that means the American people are stepped on. So I don’t think you can take anything off the table. Because in fact the Constitution doesn’t permit us to take these things off the table.

SCHULTZ: Would you counsel Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to put it on the table and make a statement before everybody goes home in August. Because they’re going to get an earful from the American people when they go home.

BOXER: Well, I don’t presume to tell people what to do. I have made my statements. And of course if asked I will say. I’ve been out there, I’m out here again today. I think, John Conyers is — this is where impeachment starts. When Alberto Gonzales, when it came out that he fired these U.S. attorneys, that it was politics being played with it, I thought then that we should look into impeachment hearings. So I don’t think it should be taken off the table.

On the other hand, we’ve got a war to end. We’ve got things that we’ve got to keep on doing. So if we do this right, we should give it to the appropriate committees, let them do the hard work that it entails, but we have to do something about health insurance. We have to do something about global warming. We have to end this war. We have to do something about education. And all these other things. About the budget deficit. You have to walk and chew gum at the same. And I know Nancy’s point was, we have to reverse about seven years of this horrific administration’s policies, and she’s fearful of losing steam on that, in that regard.

Impeachment Countdown: Are Bush and Cheney Starting to Lose Sleep?
Dave Lindorff, BuzzFlash
Thu, 07/12/2007

Now it’s Sen. Barbara Boxer.

The junior senator from California on Wednesday stated publicly on national radio (the Ed Schultz Show) that in her view, impeachment of the president should be “on the table.”

The reference, of course, was a pointed dig at Boxer’s San Francisco neighbor, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who over a year ago announced that if Democrats were to regain control of the House, impeachment would not even be considered. It would, she famously vowed, be “off the table.”

Of course, since Pelosi made that shameful declaration, brushing aside Bush’s already committed crimes against the Constitution, it has become clear that this president has been refusing to enact dozens, perhaps hundreds, of laws duly passed by the Congress, and that he has ignored the clear will of the people to have the disastrous Iraq War brought to a quick, merciful end. As well, proof has mounted of presidential and vice presidential lying to put the country at war with Iraq. More recently, the vice president pushed for, and the president decided on, a commutation of I. “Scooter” Libby’s sentence for perjury and obstruction of justice. Beyond that, news has come of a string of political firings of U.S. Attorneys, primarily because they had not acceded to the filing of harassing election fraud lawsuits designed to help keep Democrats away from the polls.

In short, evidence of outrageous administration lawlessness and abuse of power has been piling up for a year since Pelosi’s statement, and during her 6-month stint as Speaker, during which time she has continued not just to block impeachment bills in Congress, but to work hard behind the scenes to undermine a growing grassroots impeachment movement.

Sen. Boxer’s bold statement puts impeachment front and center inside the Beltway, and in the national media. It adds new weight to the bill calling for the impeachment of Dick Cheney that Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) filed in the House on April 24, and which now has 14 additional co-sponsors.

We’re not there yet, but thanks to a growing grassroots campaign, impeachment is being forced into public and Congressional consciousness. It is reaching a point where even the most cowardly or complicit news editors will not be able to push it aside, black it out, or deride it as a “fringe” thing.

We’re getting to a point where the powerful in Congress, and the pundits and opinion makers in the media, are going to have to acknowledge that impeachment is being demanded by the public, and that it is appropriate to the crimes that are being perpetrated by the White House.

Speaker Pelosi’s position is becoming less and less tenable, and is looking more and more shrill and even ridiculous.

How, after all, can the leader of the House say that impeachment is inappropriate when the president is thumbing his nose at Congress every time they send him a bill! She and the rest of the members of Congress are well aware that if Bush doesn’t like a bill, he will just sign it and then refuse to enact it, making a joke of the whole legislative process.

How many other institutions can you think of where the members of that institution have stood idly by, hands in pockets, while their power and authority was trampled? Even on the grounds of simple ego, you would think Congress would rise up as one to put an end to such a travesty, and yet not one bill has been submitted calling for the president’s impeachment.

Even Kucinich’s bill is limited to the vice president, and to issues of war and peace, and it says nothing about abuse of power — the really serious crime of this administration.

No wonder support for the Democratic Congress has tanked, falling to 23 percent in the latest poll on the subject. No wonder Pelosi herself has seen her popularity in California plunge to 39 percent. No wonder she’s being threatened by peace activist and Gold Star Mother Cindy Sheehan with a challenge for her seat in 2008.

But with each new member of the House who signs on to Kucinich’s H Res 333 (the latest is California Democratic Rep. Sam Farr), and with each new senator who joins Barbara Boxer in standing up and calling for impeachment, it becomes easier for the next ones to follow.

President Bush and Vice President Cheney have had pretty much a free ride for 6 years, and have probably shared plenty of laughs at the Democratic “opposition” over the last six years as they steamrollered both them and the Constitution. But suddenly, things are turning around, and as is often the case in politics, they are turning quickly.

My guess is that Bush and Cheney are starting to lose sleep, wondering if they may end up facing impeachment after all. I suspect Pelosi is starting to lose sleep too, wondering if she needs to rethink her menu. ++

Come on, Obama, and Clinton, and Edwards, and Pelosi: All Aboard the Impeachment Train
Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive via CommonDreams
Monday, July 16, 2007

With Bush stiff-arming Congress with one specious claim of executive privilege after another, impeachment is more imperative than ever.

The people understand this. It’s the politicians, even most Democratic ones, who are lagging so far behind.

A poll came out in early July that showed 45 percent of the public in favor of impeaching Bush, and a whopping 54 percent in favor of impeaching Cheney.

What makes these numbers even more amazing is that they are so high when no senior Democrat has been promoting the cause, and the mainstream media has been shortshrifting it (until Bill Moyers just interviewed John Nichols and Bruce Fein on the subject).

This may be changing for the better, though.

Senator Barbara Boxer was on the Ed Schultz Show last week, and she did not agree with Nancy Pelosi that we should keep impeachment off the table.

“I don’t think you can take anything off the table,” Boxer said. “Because, in fact, the Constitution does not permit us to take these things off the table.”

Boxer, at least, recognizes the gravity of the Bush crimes.

“This is as close as we’ve ever come to dictatorship,” she said.

But the Democratic Presidential candidates, with the exception of Dennis Kucinich, are laggards on this one.

Only Dennis Kucinich has come out for the impeachment of Cheney.

Barack Obama, to his discredit, said on June 28 that he opposes impeaching either Cheney or Bush.

“I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the President’s authority,” Obama said.

Well, let’s take a look here.

Lying to Congress and the American people about weapons of mass destruction so as to justify a war of aggression is not a grave or intentional breach?

Come on, Obama.

Eavesdropping on Americans here at home without a warrant, when the law says clearly that the “exclusive means” for authorizing such eavesdropping is via a warrant, is not a grave or intentional breach?

Come on, Obama.

Disappearing detainees and torturing them isn’t a grave or intentional breach?

Come on, Obama.

Using the U.S. attorneys to file flimsy charges against Democrats in an attempt to alter the outcome of an election, and firing those who wouldn’t play Bush League ball, isn’t a grave or intentional breach?

Come on, Obama.

Using signing statements more than 750 times to unfaithfully execute the laws of the land isn’t a grave or intentional breach?

Come on, Obama.

Outing a CIA agent to silence criticism of this hideous war, and then commuting the sentence of the guy who obstructed the investigation of the matter, isn’t a grave or intentional breach?

Come on, Obama.

And now depriving Congress of the documents and witnesses it needs to explore a whole range of Bush Administration malfeasance-this, too, isn’t a grave or intentional breach?

Come on, Obama.

And come on, John Edwards.

And come on, Hillary Clinton.

And come on, all other aspirants to that office.

And come on, Nancy Pelosi, too.

The impeachment train is leaving the station.

All aboard. ++

Time’s Up, Congress! Impeach, Now!
Cindy Sheehan, CommonDreams
Monday, July 23, 2007

Our Constitution established a tri-partite system of government, with the notion that each branch of government would act as a check on the other two. Unfortunately, for the last six years, the Republicans in Congress have largely viewed themselves as defenders of the Bush Administration, instead of a vital check on overreaching by the Executive Branch. By doing so, I believe they have acted to the detriment of our Constitutional form of government.

We have seen so many transgressions by this Administration that it is easy to forget last week’s scandal amid this week’s new outrage. I am hopeful that compiling all of these events of the last few years will help wake all of us up to the gravity of these matters and the cumulative damage to our country.

~ Congressman John Conyers, Constitution in Crisis, July 31, 2006

Congressman Conyers wrote this brilliant and stinging indictment of BushCo almost a year ago. The booklet outlines and expounds on the crimes of the Bush Regime, and my question for him the last time we met in May, was: What has the President and Vice President done since the Dems regained both houses of Congress in January to miraculously become “innocent” of treason and other high crimes and misdemeanors?

Today we march from Arlington to Congress.

We arrived in DC yesterday from Crawford, Texas after two weeks of our journey.

Twenty-five (sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less) of us have traveled from town to town where we were almost universally welcomed with a small amount of protest mostly in the form of the foul-mouthed and gnarly-breathed, Gathering of Eagles (they call us “hippies” “dirty”). All along the way we have encountered our fellow Americans who are sick and fed up with the crimes of BushCo and the slaughter in the Middle East.

Today we will march from Arlington Cemetery where absolutely no desecration is planned by our group, but where desecration has been committed on a daily basis by the neocon war mongers who use our troops unwisely, illegally, immorally and for monetary and political expediency.

When we arrive at Congressman John Conyer’s (D-Mi, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee) office today we will arrive with over one million signatures on petitions to impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney. We will arrive with the sentiments of the majority of Americans on our side. We will arrive with a thirst for justice and armed with the truth and compassion for our children serving in Iraq and our brothers and sisters who have had to suffer there under the corporate greed of US war profiteers.

The other day in San Diego, Rep. Conyers told an audience that he would go forward with impeachment if 3 other members joined him, well he has 15 other members already signed on H(Res) 333 which is Articles of Impeachment for Dastardly Dick introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich. Both Rep. Conyers and Speaker Pelosi need to be reminded of what their constitutional duties are and must be forced to act now before it is too late. I wonder how many more of our troops and Iraqis they are willing to sacrifice on the altar of partisan politics?

Today there will be dozens of us who will sit-in Congressman Conyer’s office until he agrees to do the right thing and we will risk arrest if he doesn’t. We are doing it because we profoundly believe that accountability in the form of impeachment is imperative to restore the rule of law and to protect the future from an executive branch that has run amok.

We march for peace. We sit for accountability.

On Tuesday, July 24th, I may become a candidate in California’s 8th district. The balls’ in Congress’ court now. I hope they come through for us. ++

Cindy Sheehan Announces Challenge to Pelosi in ‘08, Gets Arrested
Sheehan’s protest in Conyers office draws police while she hopes her ‘08 congressional challenge to Nancy Pelosi draws support.
Nick Juliano and Michael Roston, Raw Story via Alternet
July 24, 2007

Anti-Iraq War activist Cindy Sheehan announced in Washington on Monday afternoon that she would challenge Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the 2008 Congressional election.

“The Democrats will not hold this administration accountable so we have to hold them accountable, and I for one will step up to the plate and run against Nancy Pelosi,” Sheehan told a cheering crowd outside Rep. John Conyers’ office on Capitol Hill.

Sheehan brought a petition calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney to Conyers, D-Mich., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Pro-impeachment organizers gathered more than 1 million signatures for the petition, Sheehan said.

Sheehan and other activists meet with Conyers in his office for nearly two hours. Conyers told them there were not enough votes to impeach the President or Vice President, and so he did not intend to hold hearings on the impeachment resolution introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, Sheehan said, eliciting loud boos from the hundreds of people gathered outside. Kucinich’s Articles target the Vice President.

“We expressed what we feel is the urgency of removing George Bush and Dick Cheney from office,” Sheehan told the crowd. She said their impeachment was “the only thing that can save our country and our soldiers” by brining the war in Iraq to an end.

A spokesperson for the Congressman would not confirm the details of the meeting with RAW STORY, but agreed that Rep. Conyers said the resolution would not advance.

The anti-war activist, who became prominent after initiating peace vigils near President Bush’s Crawford, Texas ranch, then conducted a sit-in at Conyers’ congressional office, where she was later arrested by Capitol police. Between 20 and 30 people were carted off by Capitol police after they refused to clear Conyers’ office and the hallway outside.

“Everybody, this is a police action now,” a Capitol police officer told the protesters. The officer told RAW STORY that the protesters would be charged with unlawful assembly or similar charges.

Sheehan and a group of 300 or so supporters marched to Capitol Hill from the Arlington National Cemetery. Sheehan is the mother of Casey Sheehan, an Army Specialist who was killed in the Iraq War.

The activists came to Washington from across the country to make their voices heard in favor of impeachment. Even if the protest doesn’t change many minds, it is important to speak up for one’s beliefs, some of the activists told RAW STORY.

“I felt strongly about what Vietnam was doing to this country, and this time around, I want to be a little more involved than last time,” Ken Jones, a 58-year-old protester, told RAW STORY. Jones traveled to Washington from Pennsylvania to participate in what was his first pro-impeachment demonstration.

Daily Kos diarist Bob Fertik offered further details of the Conyers-Sheehan.

While Sheehan has considerably greater national prominence, she would not be the first progressive candidate to challenge Pelosi. In the 2006 Congressional election, Pelosi faced Green Party candidate Krissy Keefer, who received 8% of the vote in Pelosi’s San Francisco district. The Speaker received 80% of the vote.

Sheehan and her supporters hope her decision to challenge Pelosi inspires other progressive citizens to challenge their elected representatives in the 2008 elections.

“We need citizens that aren’t beholden to corporations,” Tina Richards, CEO of Grassroots America and a Sheehan supporter, told RAW STORY, “people that won’t allow their government to have preemptive wars.”

UPDATE: Sheehan arrested while calling for Bush, Cheney impeachment

WASHINGTON (AP) — Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday at the Capitol for disorderly conduct, shortly after saying she would run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the California Democrat’s refusal to try to impeach President Bush.
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan says “Impeachment is not a fringe movement.”

Sheehan was taken into custody inside Rep. John Conyers’ office, where she had spent an hour imploring him to launch impeachment proceedings against Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Conyers, D-Michigan, chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where any impeachment effort would have to begin.

“The Democrats will not hold this administration accountable, so we have to hold the Democrats accountable,” Sheehan said outside Conyers’ office after the meeting. “And I for one am going to step up to the plate and run against Nancy Pelosi.”

Sheehan and about 200 other protesters had walked to Conyers’ office from Arlington National Cemetery. She said Conyers told her there weren’t enough votes for impeachment to move forward on the issue.

Forty-five of Sheehan’s fellow protesters also were arrested. Capitol Police spokeswoman Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said that after they are processed, the arrested activists could each pay a $50 fine to be released.

“Impeachment is not a fringe movement, it is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table,” Sheehan told her group of orange-clad activists before they began their march from the national cemetery.

Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq, has been saying for two weeks that she would seek to oust Pelosi from office by running against her as an independent in her San Francisco district if Pelosi didn’t change her mind by July 23 on trying to impeach Bush.

Conyers introduced a bill last term calling on Congress to determine whether there are grounds for impeaching Bush. Pelosi has steadfastly dismissed any talk of impeachment, saying Democrats should focus their efforts on ending the war in Iraq. ++

Overcoming John Conyers
Conyers Calls Cops to Arrest Cindy Sheehan and Other Impeachment Demonstrators
DAVE LINDORFF, CounterPunch
July 24, 2007

Rep. John Conyers, venerable member of Congress, finally chair of the House Judiciary Committee, is a man who worked with Rosa Parks in Alabama and who hired her on his staff after he won election to Congress in Detroit. Years in Washington DC change a man. Yesterday Conyers had 48 impeachment activists, including Gold Star Families for Peace founder Cindy Sheehan, Iraq Veteran Against the War activist Lennox Yearwood and Intelligence Veterans for Sanity founder Ray McGovern, arrested for conducting a sit-in in his office in the Rayburn House Office Building. The three, together with several hundred other impeachment activists who packed the fourth floor hallway outside Rep. Conyers’ office, had come to press Conyers to take action on impeachment, and specifically to start action on H.Res. 333, the bill submitted nearly three months ago by Rep. Dennis Kucinich calling for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney.

After nearly an hour of talking with Conyers, a clearly angry Sheehan emerged together with Yearwood and McGovern, and announced to the waiting throng in the hall that Conyers had told them “impeachment isn’t going to happen because we don’t have the votes.” Sheehan said Conyers had insisted that the best thing was for Democrats to focus on “winning big in 2008.” To volleys of boos and hisses, the three went back inside Conyers’ office suite, where they were joined by some thirty other supporters, and all were subsequently arrested, at Conyers’ request, by Capitol police, who cuffed them and walked them off for booking.

Several of those who sat in refused to walk and were carried or dragged out of the Rayburn Office Building, as the activists in the hall chanted “Shame on Conyers! Shame onConyers!” and “Arrest Bush, Not the People!”

It was a disgraceful scene wholly unworthy of a dean of the Congressional Black Caucus. Before returning to sit in the Judiciary chairman’s office and await arrest, Sheehan publicly announced her intention to run in 2008 as an independent candidate for Congress against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and she called on Americans everywhere to run not just against Republicans in 2008, but against Democrats too. Yearwood, who is a chaplain in the Air Force, said that Conyers had been a mentor to him, but he declared that he now felt betrayed and that Americans needed to take back their government. As he was led down the hall to his arraignment, the handcuffed Yearwood sang “We Shall Overcome!”

This reporter subsequently called Conyers’ press office for an explanation of Conyers’ true position on impeachment. Only a few days earlier the congressman, at a San Diego meeting on health care reform, had told members of Progressive Democrats of America that it was time to “take these two guys (Bush and Cheney) out” and had promised that if just “a few more” members of the House signed on to the Kucinich bill (it already has 14 co-sponsors), he would move it forward for consideration in his Judiciary Committee. Asked how that statement squared with what he had told the group of activists in his office, the spokesman said Conyers’ “must have been misunderstood” in San Diego. He said that in view of Conyers’ statement to Sheehan and the others today, the Kucinich bill was “not going to go anywhere.”

As impeachment activist David Swanson of AfterDowningStreet.org has said, there “seem to be two John Conyers.” There’s the one who, in 2005 and early 2006, while Republicans controlled the House, was systematically making the case for impeaching the president and vice president. This Conyers had even submitted a bill, with 39 co-sponsors, which called for creation of a select committee to investigate possible impeachable crimes by the administration. And then there’s the Conyers who submits to the wishes of the new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and is keeping impeachment off the table.

Occasionally the former Conyers breaks out, saying things such as that the president needs to be “taken out” or, as he put it at an anti-war rally last spring, that “we can fire him!” But then the other Conyers comes to the fore, and stands in the way of impeachment action.

Yesterday, however, was worse than just doing nothing. The arrest of impeachment activists and their forcible eviction from his office was a betrayal of people who were doing the very thing that had allowed Conyers to make his way into Congress in the first place: sitting in to insist on action on their demands for justice. It was, after all, sit-ins that helped lead to the Voting Rights Act which allowed African American candidates like Conyers to finally win seats in the US Congress.

It’s ironic that Rep. Conyers, speaking in 2005 on “Democracy Now!” following Rosa Parks’ death at the age of 92, said her passing “is probably the end of an era.” Certainly, with his request to have Capitol Police officers enter his office (the very office where Parks once had worked as a staff member!) to cuff and arrest peaceful protesters who were trying to defend the Constitution, he has made that point far more clearly than he could have expressed it in mere words.

But as in the case of Rosa Parks and the Civil Rights movement, arrests and fines will not stop the national grassroots drive to impeach this president and vice president. With polls showing that a majority of the country now favors impeachment, and with Conyers, Pelosi, and the Democratic Congress sinking deeper and deeper into disfavor even as the president continues to add to his list of Constitutional crimes, something’s gotta give. After all, the Founders, in writing impeachment into the Constitution, did not say the test was whether Congress had the votes to impeach. They wrote that if the president abused his power, or committed other high crimes and misdemeanors, bribery or treason, Congress “shall” impeach.

The American public has made it clear: we want impeachment and we want the troops home. ++

The Conyers Legacy
David Swanson, Smirking Chimp
Jul 24 2007

About 47 of us spent 8 or 9 hours yesterday in jail for protesting a man who, at least when he woke up yesterday morning, only thought of himself as on the side of those who protest power.

While hundreds of us lined the hallways outside Chairman John Conyers’ office, one of his staffers approached the door to his office but was unable to enter. The place was wall-to-wall media inside, with Cindy Sheehan, Ray McGovern, and Rev. Lennox Yearwood giving a press conference in Conyers’ office in his absence. They’d gone in to speak with Conyers, but it would take him quite a while to show up.

The staffer was annoyed and complained to his colleague “It’s bad enough they shut the office down with phone calls.” Another staffer, this one rather pleased about it (the police, too, were on our side and three of them quietly accepted Impeach Bush and Cheney shirts), told me they were getting a pro-impeachment phone call every 30 seconds. They were also flooded with Emails and with thousands of faxes yesterday. But the message was not getting through to the Congressman.

He and several staffers met with Sheehan, McGovern, and Yearwood. It was a heated discussion. Conyers began by proposing to discuss impeachment sometime in August at a town hall meeting. We’ve been doing those for years. We held a huge one in Detroit in May that Conyers agreed to speak at. He showed up and left before it started. Yearwood, Sheehan, and McGovern told Conyers his time was up.

What was Conyers’ objection to moving forward on impeachment now? Well, he said, if he were to do that Fox News would go after him and accuse him of being partisan. I kid you not. The Democratic Chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee is basing his decisions on whether a Republican cable TV station would approve. As Cindy Sheehan told me outside the jail last night: “If I based my decisions on Fox, I would never do anything.”

As long as Conyers is working for Fox, maybe our next sit-in needs to be in their studios.

But Conyers expressed another concern as well. He’s concerned about his legacy. I wish there were a kind way to tell him that he is about to flush it down the toilet. Conyers’ judiciary committee staffers, who were in the meeting yesterday, including Ted Kalo, Perry Appelbaum, and Jonathan Godfrey, produced a year and a half ago one of the best reports summarizing and documenting the crimes of Bush and Cheney. Conyers is aware that Bush and Cheney are killing people every day that he refrains from fulfilling his oath of office. He knows that nearly a million Iraqis and 4,000 U.S. troops lie dead already. He knows that this president and vice president kidnap, torture, and murder human beings. But when pressed to act with the urgency appropriate to saving lives, Conyers replied that our nation has always killed people and that he wasn’t “going to play politics.”

At other times, Conyers told our delegation that they needed to wise up and move from working on justice to doing politics. But politics has become a bad word because of the way Conyers uses it. He places elections highest in the order of priorities and refuses to do his job in between elections because that would be “politics.”

We elected Democrats in 2006 so that Conyers would have the committee chairmanship and move on impeachment. If he fails to act, he will quickly discover that yesterday was just a warm-up.

This Thursday and Friday, members of ImpeachForPeace.org, World Can’t Wait, and After Downing Street will meet to discuss impeachment with Congress Members Maxine Waters and Keith Ellison, and with the offices of Jerrold Nadler, Adam Schiff, Robert Wexler, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz. We’ll be delivering petitions for impeachment from all over the country.

Now is the moment for every member of Congress to