Tags for This Article:

Impeachment (2739)  Congress (2410)  Pelosi-Nancy (342)  Judiciary (176)  Subpoena (103)  Conyers-John (100)  Waxman-Henry (38)  Ray McGovern (7) 

Populum Tag Cloud
       Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
Articles
Diaries Products
All
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs
From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity
Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
Sub-levels

 

 

 

Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
March 22, 2008 at 07:57:51

Headlined on 3/22/08:
The Democratic Majority: Enabling a Rogue Presidency and Stonewalling the American People

by Cheryl Biren-Wright     Page 3 of 4 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com


Tell A Friend

In a lengthy speech the Republican member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee said, I have come to the sad conclusion that this administration has intentionally obstructed Congress' rightful and constitutional duties." Rohrabacher offers "When I hear my friends on the other side of the aisle accusing this administration of stonewalling, of coverups, or thwarting investigations, I sadly must concur with them." He concludes, "We should not be setting precedents that the President of the United States has the lion’s share of the power in this great democracy of ours." Are you listening, Nancy?

The Pelosi Factor

"I have said it before and I will say it again: Impeachment is off the table."

When all efforts to effect checks and balances are thwarted and there is no other recourse to restore order in an administration gone wild, taking impeachment "off the table" really boils down to a matter of obstruction of justice. This begs the question why would the House Speaker obstruct justice?

Rarely discussed in the corporate media since initial reports is the fact that two of the most abhorrent impeachable offenses in the eyes of the American people were disclosed to Nancy Pelosi several years before they went public.

As the
Washington Post reported late last year, in September 2002, along with three other members of Congress, Nancy Pelosi was briefed on "overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk. Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was water boarding." The Washington Post reported that Pelosi did not raise any objections at the time.

In a 2006 oped, Nancy Pelosi remarked that the president’s admission that he authorized the electronic surveillance on Americans is a "wake-up call for intensive congressional oversight of intelligence activities." With no expression of constitutional responsibility, she acknowledges that she, herself, had been informed of the president’s authorization. She went on to excuse herself by stating "But when the administration notifies Congress in this manner, it is not seeking approval."

Former CIA analyst, Ray McGovern, raises another unsettling question. According to the former head of Qwest Communications, the NSA sought assistance with surveillance in February 2001, challenging the repeated claim that 9/11 "changed everything." The question then, is "
What Did Pelosi Know about NSA, and When Did She Know It?"

An Impeachment Groundswell

Despite the lack of cooperation from the Congress, the movement to impeach continues to gain traction in communities throughout the country.

According to
AfterDowningStreet.org, impeachment resolutions have passed in Vermont’s state legislature (introduced in 11 other states), 26 statewide and national political committees, 19 state legislative districts, 91 cities, towns and counties, 54 local political groups/parties/jurisdictions, and several unions, seven ACLU chapters, with dozens more pending or in the works. Organizations well versed in constitutional law like the National Lawyers Guild and the Center for Constitutional Rights have also called for impeachment.

In addition, indictment resolutions against the president and vice president have been introduced in three jurisdictions including Kennebunkport, Maine, summer home of the Bush family. In Brattleboro, Vermont, the votes were cast and the president and vice President may be wise not to tread on that town any time soon.

These actions stand in stark contrast with John Conyers’ assertion in his prepared speech at last year’s Take Back America conference that "Too many Americans, however, feel that Bush’s assault on civil liberties are not really their concern."

Congressional Rebuffs

Refusal by many members of Congress to support impeachment has little to do with whether or not they believe serious offenses have been committed as evidenced by letters to constituents.

Steve Rothman (D-NJ) is "outraged" over the president’s "overreaching intelligence gathering measures" and for "misleading the American people about the basis for going to war in Iraq." He’s just not sure there is enough evidence. Perhaps John Conyers can lend him a copy of the "Constitution in Crisis."

Representative Joe Sestak (D-PA) wrote "we have witnessed our government ignore the freedoms established in the Constitution on countless occasions and flaunted national security as justification." While Sestak lays out numerous "egregious" abuses that "strike at the heart of our democracy," he contends that congressional oversight will do the trick. One after another, members of Congress outline assaults on the Constitution by the president and vice president, but choose to ride out the next 10 months with little regard to the consequences.

Jerrold Nadler, chair of the Subcommittee on the Constitution has, in essence, altered the Constitution by ruling out impeachment as a viable tool for this and future administrations. By doing so, he opens the door to certain abuse of power. Impeachment, he says, "Doesn’t work. It doesn’t work because essentially the framers of the Constitution did not foresee political parties." It’s a wonder George Mason, himself, hasn’t risen up to demand that Nadler step down from his chairmanship.

"No point," said Mason, "is of more importance than that the right of impeachment should be continued."Upholding the Oath

Conservative Bruce Fein, a constitutional lawyer who served as associate deputy attorney general under President Ronald Reagan had a message for the Democratic leadership in a radio interview with
Rob Kall of OpEdNews.com.

"It is quite clear," Fein remarked, "that they will not move because they think collectively that it will not be advantageous politically for the Democratic Party. I have retorted, you have taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States which includes the impeachment clause."

 1  |  2  |  3  |  4

 

Writer/Photographer/Activist. An advocate for clean government, media integrity and civil liberties. Chair of the Progressive Democrats of America S. Jersey Chapter Impeachment Team and co-leader of the New Jersey Impeach Groups. Founder of the Strike08.com campaign. Working to end the war in Iraq and prevent one with Iran. Writer and editor for OpEdNews.com. cherylbirenwright.wordpress.com

Contact Author

Contact Editor

View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Spurl      Tag!RawSugar      Shadows Tag!      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
6 comments

Mark is an anti-civilizationist in San Diego.
Mark E. SmithMark is an anti-civilizationist in San Diego.

A Dissident Democrat?

Is that something like a law-abiding member of the Mafia, or a non-racist member of the Ku Klux Klan?

Kucinich called himself "the only real Democrat." But he would never split his party's vote by running as an independent, just because his party and its candidates favor everything he claims to oppose.

Sorry, Cheryl, a Democrat is a Democrat is a Democrat, whether you call yourself a dissident Democrat, a progressive Democrat, or the only real Democrat.

Being a Democrat means that you will vote for somebody who is committed to continuing the wars of aggression (crimes against humanity) you claim to oppose, because you want your party to get a bigger share of the war profits than the other party.

It means that you remained loyal to a party that does not represent you.

It means that you are supportive of a system that does not represent you.

And it means that you remain loyal to a Constitution that does not even allow you to elect your President and Vice-President. You may, if the state you live in grants you that right, vote for Electors, but their names aren't on the ballots (the names of the candidates you may NOT vote for are on the ballots) so you think you're voting for Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates when you don't even know who you're voting for, but whoever it is, it is NOT the names on the ballot because you may not vote for them, only the Electoral College can do that.

John Conyers is a very smart man. And he knows how ignorant and stupid most people are. He knows that the military-industrial complex decides who the candidates will be, decides who will win the elections, and controls both political parties. The MIC will not allow impeachment. So the very fact that people are asking John Conyers to do something that is not within his power to do, tells him how uninformed our electorate is.

All the candidates are committed to continuing the war crimes and one of them will be "elected" or selected by the Supreme Court.

To belong to ANY political party, or to vote in this country's faith-based elections, is an indication of ignorance and apathy -- ignorance of who really runs this country, and apathy with regard to war crimes. The only thing a person of conscience who wants to be able to die without blood on their hands can do, is to refuse to vote. Fifty percent of the electorate already do just that because nobody on the ballot ever represents their interests.

Join us, or remain a Vichy Democrat. Or a dissident Vichy Democrat if you prefer. Whether you piously claim to oppose the war crimes doesn't matter. What matters is if you will support a party (and its candidates) that has consistently voted for war crimes and is committed to continuing them. Only war criminals and their collaborators will do that, and I am proud of the fifty percent of Americans who will not. WE are the only ones who really care.

 

by Mark E. Smith (20 articles, 23 quicklinks, 59 diaries, 710 comments) on Sunday, March 23, 2008 at 2:33:38 AM
 


I have worked as a reporter, media watch columnist, ran a consumer group for three years and been an occasional pro se attorney. I've sold everything from vacuum cleaners to satelite dishes to computers. I am a huge fan (literally, I'm 6' 5") of comics and science fiction and am a Pop Culture addict in general.
Philip ShropshireI have worked as a reporter, media watch columnist, ran a consumer group for three years and been an occasional pro se attorney. I've sold everything from vacuum cleaners to satelite dishes to computers. I am a huge fan (literally, I'm 6' 5") of comics and science fiction and am a Pop Culture addict in general.

I think that's an unfair critique...

There really are no viable third parties in the United States. They're underfunded whites only clubs that simply aren't competitive in just about any race of consequence. I think there are differences between the major parties, perhaps not much but I remember having a decent job during the Clinton years, not to mention that I never worried about being sent to an internment camp. I am extremely disappointed that they haven't impeached our current war criminals in chief but I will participate in the process as much as I can...

 

Philip Shropshire 

www.threeriversonline.com

 

PS: I think there is less risk going after Bush after he's no longer commander in chief of the armed forces, which, and after watching this guy for awhile, he would probably use to keep power, up to and including the arrests of anyone and anybody who tried to "impeach" him... 

by Philip Shropshire (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 7 comments) on Sunday, March 23, 2008 at 3:59:06 AM
 


Writer/Photographer/Activist. An advocate for clean government, media integrity and civil liberties. Chair of the Progressive Democrats of America S. Jersey Chapter Impeachment Team and co-leader of the New Jersey Impeach Groups. Founder of the Strike08.com campaign. Working to end the war in Iraq and prevent one with Iran. Writer and editor for OpEdNews.com.

cherylbirenwright.wordpress.com

Cheryl Biren-WrightWriter/Photographer/Activist. An advocate for clean government, media integrity and civil liberties. Chair of the Progressive Democrats of America S. Jersey Chapter Impeachment Team and co-leader of the New Jersey Impeach Groups. Founder of the Strike08.com campaign. Working to end the war in Iraq and prevent one with Iran. Writer and editor for OpEdNews.com.

cherylbirenwright.wordpress.com

honestly?

thanks, mark, for sharing your thoughts, but do you honestly think that

The only thing a person of conscience who wants to be able to die without blood on their hands can do, is to refuse to vote. Fifty percent of the electorate already do just that because nobody on the ballot ever represents their interests . . . I am proud of the fifty percent of Americans who will not. WE are the only ones who really care.

i very seriously doubt the reason 50% of our electorate are not voting is a matter of principle. i seriously doubt there are that many who are sitting around assessing the situation and concluding that no one represents them and hence they are not voting. do you have stats on that? a good percentage of that 50% i am sure are people who simply don't give a sh*t. i think it's more about apathy.

that said, perhaps you can share more about what you think people ought to be actively doing to help the situation. and, for the record, i am not registered for any party, although i did take a Democratic ballot in nj last month to vote against clinton. and, no, that does not mean i think obama is all that much better.

p.s. do the other "anti-civilizationists" know you're using a computer?

by Cheryl Biren-Wright (13 articles, 9 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 186 comments) on Sunday, March 23, 2008 at 6:33:52 AM
 


Brett Paatsch is an Australian born secular humanist with degrees in management and science and an interest in politics. He is a former pro-American that wishes to be pro-American again and thinks the impeachment and repudiation of President George W Bush for the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 is necessary to reestablish trust in American signatures on international treaties and confidence in the global rule of law.
Brett PaatschBrett Paatsch is an Australian born secular humanist with degrees in management and science and an interest in politics. He is a former pro-American that wishes to be pro-American again and thinks the impeachment and repudiation of President George W Bush for the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 is necessary to reestablish trust in American signatures on international treaties and confidence in the global rule of law.

Holding impeachment hearings IS within Conyers power

and its also within the ambit of his oath of office. Conyers cannot credibly argue that he does not perceive the Bush administration as a domestic enemy of the constitution. 

the very fact that people are asking John Conyers to do something that is not within his power to do, tells him how uninformed our electorate is.

It would involve some political risk yes, but as Cheryl points out in her article that Fein has noted, those who played key roles in the founding of the United States put a lot more at risk personally than just their careers.

I am not an American but found Opednews because my daily google alert on impeach Bush kept showing that Opednews was a place where likeminded Americans were posting. Yet even here there is a very small minority that actually seem to know how their own system works as opposed to having mythological beliefs about it - many of which seem to serve no real purpose other than to convince those who could do something with the power of a citizen to actually rationalise doing very little at all. 

I don't doubt for a moment that there is some substance to the notion of a military industrial complex but I don't credit that any such a complex would weild more political power that large numbers of Americans writing their representatives and demanding that their oaths of office be upheld or else. 

The real problem with America is that most Americans don't understand the power they have and don't accept any of the responsibilies of maintaining a government of the people by the people for the people.

Modern America is a great example of bystander calculus - a phenomena whereby people perceive that there is a problem but also that there are a large numbers of witnesses to that problem and so each actually does less figuring their contribution would either be too small or their non contribution will go overlooked.

by Brett Paatsch (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 610 comments) on Sunday, March 23, 2008 at 6:51:07 PM
 


I am a Vietnam Vet disabled by MS and other various diseases.  On average I am a Moderate with slight Conservative leanings although it truly depends on what issue I am concerned with at the time.
Hayesml47I am a Vietnam Vet disabled by MS and other various diseases.  On average I am a Moderate with slight Conservative leanings although it truly depends on what issue I am concerned with at the time.

Impeachment list

It is time to add Conyers and Pelosi to the impeachment list.  If we can just impeach one of these miserable creeps then maybe the whole deck of them will start to fall.  God knows this list is getting bigger all the time.

by Hayesml47 (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 200 comments) on Sunday, March 23, 2008 at 5:52:43 PM
 


Michael Cavlan , RN, was an Official Green Party Observer for the 2004 Ohio Re-Count.
He was the Green Party Candidate for US Senate 2006 and is a Candidate US Senate
2008 Seeking Green Party Endorsement in Minnesota. See www.michaelcavlan.org

Michael CavlanMichael Cavlan , RN, was an Official Green Party Observer for the 2004 Ohio Re-Count.
He was the Green Party Candidate for US Senate 2006 and is a Candidate US Senate
2008 Seeking Green Party Endorsement in Minnesota. See www.michaelcavlan.org

Why No Impeachment

Cheryl,

Please feel free to check out my story on Impeachment. Oh and for the record Impeach For Peace also cornered Conyers in Minnesota. Check out my campaign website, click on the movie about Conyers. I am the guy in Nurses scrubs (I am a Nurse) challenging Conyers.

 

I am a dissident, plain and simple. I oppose BOTH wings of the war machine.

 

Michael Cavlan

 

Minnesota 

by Michael Cavlan (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 71 comments) on Monday, March 24, 2008 at 2:38:09 PM
 

 

6 comments

 

Tell A Friend

 


Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008