Despite heroic efforts by Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) to bring 35 Articles of Impeachment against Bush, the wildfire of information and affirmation of these articles in print and in the blogosphere, and the efforts of so many within the impeachment movement, the main-stream media continues to marginalize Kucinich's effort by either ignoring the story altogether or publishing simplistic 200 word articles about it. Main-stream media insists, despite polls that say otherwise, that impeachment is not popular and because George W. Bush is a lame duck at this point, impeachment is unnecessary.
Is George W. Bush a lame duck? Is impeachment at this point unnecessary? What kind of future can we look forward to if Bush is never impeached? In order to answer these questions it is important to look at what impeachment is and what it would do.
Impeachment would open up investigations by the judiciary committee into the 35 Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush.
If the judiciary committee finds that these investigations show that crimes have been committed a resolution will be issued to the House, which then goes on to a Floor vote, and if voted through by a majority will lead to a trial in the Senate.
The trial in the Senate would be run similar to a court trial, with the full Senate acting as jury with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, (John Roberts), acting as judge. Once the arguments of the prosecution and defense are heard the Senate would meet in a closed session to deliberate, the Senate would then vote in open session on each Article of Impeachment – a two-thirds vote is needed for a conviction. On conviction the official, (Bush), would be removed from office, if a two-thirds vote is not reached the official would be acquitted.
If convicted, Bush would be removed from office, but even if Bush was not convicted in the course of the impeachment spectacle the crimes of the Bush administration would be aired, debated, and proclaimed to the world. No longer could the media ignore the vast legacy of criminality that the Bush regime has perpetrated for the last seven years, and the people of the world would hear all the dark dirty secrets and crimes that this regime has kept and committed and there would be a resounding outcry for justice.
Not only would the Bush regime's deadly crimes be laid bare, but it is highly probable that an impeachment trial would completely prevent Bush from attacking Iran. Article XXI charges Bush with: "Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government". Surely with such a charge pending trial and with a public challenge on the validity of any action against Iran being heard in the Senate, no declaration of war could be acted upon during that time.
The fact that George W. Bush has pushed and continues to push for war with Iran shows that he is far from a lame duck. Bush and his administration are continuing their agenda unabated and virtually unchallenged. Impeachment could be instrumental in preventing Bush from starting another illegal, pre-emptive, and baseless war.
Not only can impeachment lay bare the crimes of the Bush regime for the world to see, remove Bush from office, and at the same time prevent war with Iran, impeachment can also serve another extremely vital function: the impeachment process can serve as an example to future leaders of what will happen to them if they decide to subvert the rule of law.
But what will happen if Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment quietly die in judiciary committee and the crimes of the Bush regime are not investigated? If the Bush regime's crimes are not investigated will these crimes then become accepted behavior by America's leaders? If no one is held to account for authority over-stepped, laws undermined, rule of law flouted, and torture codified, what's to stop the next president, and the next and the next and the one after that from following suit?
To allow George W. Bush to go virtually unchallenged in any significant and legal way now is to allow a foundation of corruption and despotism to be laid at the feet of every president after him: an absolutely flawless model for sidestepping accountability and practicing unchecked and unfettered powers.
Imagine a progression and a continuation of the agenda of the Bush regime year after year. Imagine the aftermath that a pre-emptive and deadly bombing of Iran will have on the world, not only the horrendous death and destruction such an act would immediately cause, but the worldwide economic fall-out, and the possibility of an increase in the ferocity of the wars already being waged and the likely increase in terrorism in retaliation for the actions of George W. Bush. Such a future portends to be a much darker version of our current reality.
A future without impeachment paints a frighteningly bleak picture, a picture that at this point many of us can see but too few of us are acting to prevent. If ever there was a time to act, now is that time. Congressman Kucinich has promised to re-introduce the 35 Articles of Impeachment against Bush within 30 days of the first introduction if the judiciary committee does not act. That's just a few short weeks from now. It's time, right now, to promote the necessity of impeachment as widely as possible. It is imperative that the Bush regime be driven from office and held accountable for its many crimes - it's time to act now.
At this point the future in unwritten; which one we get is up to us.
How to rouse John Conyers from the deep sleep into which he seems to have fallen? He "wrote the book" on the need to impeach. Now that the time is here, he appears to be unable to act.
It is such a small window of time, during which such action is possible. Once bombing starts on Iran a whole other set of rules can be applied, including all those measures already set in place in preparation for a state of emergency. These include use of the military to maintain order within the homeland, application of martial law, mass arrests - with the FEMA camps ready and waiting for any excess of prisoners.
Mr Conyers talk of possible impeachment "if Mr Bush declares war on Iran" is unrealistic in the extreme. The war on Iran will place him beyond impeachment, for the US will be at war "big time", and the president will again be seen to be the untouchable Commander in Chief.
by
Aurora (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 274 comments)
on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 8:23:32 PM
Instead of 15 - 20 people doing a sit-in in his office - how about 20,000 people doing a sit in? Maybe that's extreme? How about 5,000? Maybe that would do it - if they were dedicated enough to go through the police brutality that some would surely suffer. How to organize such a thing? Hmmm that would take UNITY within the peace/anti-war movement to organize it - it could be done - if people were willing.
How about instead of 50,000 protesters in DC - 5 million protesters virtually shut it down. These are the kind of numbers that it may take to force our so-called leaders to take notice of the will of the American people. We all know that these numbers are possible because this is a fraction of the number of people who are conscious of what's going on here.
Trouble is.... can't get Americans off the couch yet.....yet. But I'm afraid things are going to get much worse for everyone with the economy/gas prices etc... and then maybe, MAYBE, Americans will get up off the couch and do something about it.
by
Cheryl Abraham (13 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 139 comments)
on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 11:18:29 AM
I thought you’d like to check out the political allegory of mine that I recently found a literary agent for. It’s a story set in the context of a teacher discussing with his class all of the evidence that the Bush administration is as corrupt as it is incompetent; and how to rectify the Constitutional crisis we face. It’s couched in a discussion about the urgent need to stop abusing Mother Nature. I wrote in 3 dozen celebrities to play the students, so it’s very funny despite how infuriating it is. You can read it at www.stoplittering.com/theswitch.htmand, yes, StopLittering.com is my site.
And enjoy this poem of mine…
If Jesus Were Alive Today
If Jesus were alive today, He'd surely feel despair, Amidst a world of plenty, And a bounty that's not shared.
If Jesus were alive today, He wouldn't understand, The system of oppression, And how so few give a damn.
If Jesus were alive today, He'd certainly be distraught, Because the animals of Earth, Are not treated as they ought.
If Jesus were alive today, His eyes would have some tears, And based on all the evidence, I'd say he was sincere.
If Jesus were alive today, He'd have to jump and shout, To wake us from our slumber: "THE FUTURE IS IN DOUBT!!"
If Jesus were alive today, You know he'd try in vain, To save us from each other... (No doubt he'd go insane.)
If Jesus were alive today, I expect we'd be rebuked; It is likely he'd remark: "Knock it off before I puke."
If Jesus were alive today, No way he'd vote for Bush; To those who say he should, He'd say,"Kiss my tush!"
If Jesus were alive today, With Bushies he'd be pissed: "Ignorance is no defence! Otherwise, get yourself a psychiatrist."
If Jesus were alive today, He'd put John Kerry in his place, As the world's lamest candidate: "Why'd they even let that Jackass race?!"
If Jesus were alive today, Boy, would Congress get a smack, For practically everything they've done, Especially for trusting Jr. with Iraq.
If Jesus were alive today, He'd say the media was to blame: "Don't think I haven't noticed, That you people have no shame."
If Jesus were alive today, The Democrats he would scorn, For keeping out Wes Clark: "Was it yesterday these fools were born?!"
If Jesus were alive today, His sense of humor would be great.
Too wry, perhaps, for some,
But that’s how he’d get laid.
If Jesus were alive today, He'd be branded as a cynic, Because no one wants to hear, If it's raining at their picnic.
If Jesus were alive today, He'd force us all to see, That hope and love are the answer, To who we're supposed to be.
by
Jay Foster (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 21 comments)
on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 8:29:04 PM
If the Democrats in Congress continue to push aside impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney, I’m strongly considering giving my support to a Third Party–likely Nader.
As an African American, I have made considerable effort in supporting Sen. Obama. However, if impeachment continues to be “off the table”, so will be my support for Mr. Obama.
Many of our nation's Black brothers and sisters are in the prison system for committing far less harm to our society than President Bush and his Neo-Con-men in the White House (who signed the Project for the New American Century manifesto for world domination at all cost).
Yet, to those incarcerated, as well as to the larger public, how do we justify our nation’s conduct regarding crime and punishment when the Bush administration has, in effect, usurped our Constitution.
Additionally, Speaker Nancy Pelosi should be investigated for aiding the Bush administration, stating in a recent letter to me, “I believe impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney will distract us from our mission…”.
Well, to Ms. Pelosi and all those who are relentlessly enabling this epic tragedy of senseless death, shattered lives, broken families, mind-numbing abuses of our hard-earned tax dollars, savage corporate exploitation; I say, JUSTICE IS NO DISTRACTION! There is no justice without impeachment!
Many in Congress and the Senate had the same intelligence as the White House administration, yet their conclusions were vastly different and, as it turns out, shockingly correct.
The press, which as we now know from Bill Moyers’ insightful PBS documentary, “Buying the War”, rather than giving us the benefit of being watch-dog, instead served as lap-dog to the Bush White House—providing no real means for adequate public scrutiny.
The Congressional Black Caucus stood in the House on the eve of the invasion on Iraq and made fact-based, rational, and passionate presentations pleading with the President not to invade Iraq.
Sadly, most Americans to this day still do not know about those presentations because the mainstream press never reported that historic event.
It is now time for us, all of us, to speak up to our elected officials in the name of justice. Our laws say we are entitled to impeachment proceedings, and our morality demands it.
Because we were fooled into war with Iraq, there are so many in this country who weep at the mere sight of the empty chair at the dinner table, knowing their loved one will never return to break bread in the sacred fellowship of family.
To me, this issue runs much deeper than race. This is about the essence of justice, coming from the heart of democracy, a democracy which we still strive to achieve.
By overriding what polls reveal as a huge majority of the nation favoring impeachment, the Democrats are robbing the American public of a tremendous opportunity to grow in its civic stewardship by learning what really happened to us, and how never to allow it again. They are robbing us of our ability to bring justice to bear against those who perpetrated this monstrous misadventure. And more importantly, the Democrats are robbing our nation of the opportunity to heal from the devastating impact of this massive tyranny and death.
Indeed, justice is no distraction. There will be no justice without impeachment!
by
Ellison Horne (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 8 comments)
on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 12:04:27 AM
Great statement. There are so many things wrong with our country - so much injustice. Impeachment is so vital because not only will it serve the functions that I stated in this article but it will also serve the function of raising the consciousness of Americans - a civics lesson on a grand scale, I seriously doubt that the removal of civics courses in public schools was done by mere accident!
by
Cheryl Abraham (13 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 139 comments)
on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 11:24:14 AM
Kudos to Cheryl on this one. There are many, many valid, pressing reasons to push on for impeachment. But several notions are contained in this article, and the comments that follow, that cry out for reinforcement.
Yes, if we can do it, and we certainly should, it will lay bare the horrific nature of the crimes this country has committed under W. It will reveal to the world what we know about ourselves and show that we can confess. It will publicly admit to the world community that we are liars. The world needs a better vision of the U.S. right, now and I can't think of a better way to make amends than to oust the scoundrel responsible, and to do it for everyone to see.
At the top of anyone's list should absolutely be the prevention of any attack on Iran and the world chaos and misery it will cause. Anyone who thinks that our standard of living is bad now will wake up as if they've been hit in the face with a bucket ice water. Ask a few from the "greatest generation", and anyone who lived through the 1930's, how they liked rationing and soup kitchens. From what I read and hear, almost daily now, impeachment, pulling the rug of authority out from under this administration completely, is the only way to prevent this looming disaster. I just read a comment under another article about this possible war that simply said, "Scared to death". Frankly, so am I.
So he's a lame duck. So what? After what he has done to us and the millions of Iraqi's and the prisoners at Gitmo, I have no reluctance whatever about kicking him when he is down. He'd do that to you. And Cheney would help. And as long as he is in office, he is just plain dangerous.
And of course, Cheryl, there is the matter of setting the precedent that you mention, by letting this opporunity (it's a mandate, really) get by. Failure to impeach lowers the moral bar and opens the floodgate for future "leaders" to swamp the system with more injustice. And that of course brings us back to what it makes us look like and how we are regarded in the world community.
You mention getting people off the couch. Others are fond of referring to Americans as "sheeple". The couch is just terribly comfortable because the general level of awareness about what it really going on is so terribly low. How many articles have we seen just in the last 48 hours about the failure of the MSM to tell us anything that would get our attention? Mostly we get fluff. Mostly we get lied to. Web sites like OEN are trying, but it is all a matter of swimming upstream when everyone else is coming downstream in inflatable inner tubes, drinking beer. How to get America, in spite of some very good efforts, to "snap out of it", has me baffled. I like the idea of five million folks simply shutting DC down. I think that's called revolution. Or at least an uprising. Shoot, the French do it all the time. Why not us?
Ellison Horne's comment was eloquent and precise. I can't help but wonder if he would have written it if he had not seen this article. Had he not, we would all have been less wise and much more poorly informed. Thanks to him, as well.
And Wolfie: as always, being the harbinger of doom, but I thought he knew already that all of DC was a bordello?
by
Ivan Hentschel (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 132 comments)
on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 2:52:57 PM
Yes, it is something to contemplate, this issue of why Americans continue to stay on the couch. Dr. Dennis Loo has an interesting article at this link:
Something to consider and at the very least something that inspires more discussion and thought.
I think the time is short and that we must do all that we personally can do stop Bush from bombing Iran. Millions in the street did not work to stop the Iraq war. We need MORE people and we need them to move beyond "freedom zones" and beyond just holding signs up. We need civil disobedience en masse. We need full out strikes, and we need far more cooperation and interest from the American people than we've gotten so far.
by
Cheryl Abraham (13 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 139 comments)
on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 8:20:58 PM
Getting the American people to "move", in any fashion at all does seem to be a little like trying to move the Rocky Mountains with a small shovel,alone. "We the people", who threw out King George, now need to throw out "king George". The populace is incredibly sedentary, glued to their TVs and dedicated more to sports than to freedom and liberty for all.
I am suddenly reminded of an excellent example of and metaphor for these Great American Doldrums: I was a grad student, teaching freshman English for first years flunkies during summer school at my university. The assignment was to read Thoreau's "On Civil Disobedience" and write a short paper. One hapless student turned in two pages which stated the entire Thoreau thesis exactly in reverse. He had clearly never read the essay (never got off the couch) and just assumed, I guess, that I wouldn't (get off the couch and) read his. Like many people today, he just "assumed" everything would be all right. It wasn't and it isn't.
I wonder where he is now? Please keep writing.
by
Ivan Hentschel (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 132 comments)
on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 9:10:52 PM
CONGRESS AND THE SENATE ARE LAUGHING AT US , KNOWING THERE IS NOTHING WE THE PEOPLE CAN DO, THE GLOBAL ELITE THAT HAVE TAKING OVER THIS COUNTRY AND ARE IN THE PROCESSS OF THE WORLD NEXT, THEY ARE THE ONES THAT WE CAN;T GET TO, WE HAVE GONE PAST THE POINT OF NO RETURN, JUST AS THE GLOBAL ELITE PLANED. ITS ALL OVER BUT THE TALKING ABOUT IT. WITCH THAT IS ALL WE CAN DO, UNLESS WE GET OFF OUR BUTTS AND MARCH TO DC ALL OF US AT THE SAME TIME, THATS THE ONLY WAY.
by
RICH SHA (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 106 comments)
on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 4:22:28 PM
I can't say that I speak for everyone else posted here, but I do speak for me:
Addressing everyone as "you people" is assumptive, elitist, arrogant and possibly racist in the worst sort of way. You are no more qualified to make judgements on this planet than anyone else. Your title alone is dismissive and derisive and your tone is needlessly combative.
Your punctuation and grammar are atrocious and anybody who types in all caps is not taking their communication efforts very seriously.
"The congress and the Senate" is wrong: it's either the "congress" or the "House and the Senate".
You might try serious discourse instead of ranting, thereby perhaps actually referencing the article and commenting on its merits or shortcomings, rather than using it as a platform to blather and harrangue in public. You haven't helped anyone, especially yourself.
Most of "us people", especially this article's author, write to offer insight, enourage debate and to contemplate social change and improvement. We take offense when you generalize, belittle en masse and hoist yourself up by means of your own self-assumed superiority. Never read George Orwell, have you? If you had, you would know that some pigs ARE NOT more equal than others, and those who think they are, eventually gets their butts kicked.
You are taking up space better used for better purposes and owe Cheryl an apology. She began this dialogue in the spirit of openness and with the courage and encouragement to raise our levels of introspection.
I know it is a free country and this is as close to we get to really free press, but please stick to the subject at hand and please think twice before you do this again.
by
Ivan Hentschel (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 132 comments)
on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 6:32:23 PM
I'm hardly cranky. But from the vantage point of a literary person and grammarian, you submitted some bad writing...and you largely missed the point of the discourse in play. This most recent snipet does not further your cause any, either. It is also poorly conceived and badly written. I simply got out my red pen and graded your paper. Anything you bring to class is subject to such scrutiny, even in the free press.
And, not incidentally, your arrogance was worthy of some cursory admonishment. And, yes, that is my arrogance, but I and all of the other writers on this page write more clearly and express themselves more eloquently than do you. Before you join into the fray so energetically and with such gusto, you first might check your credentials and qualifications before you claim bragging rights. The rest of us ("you people"), and particularly myself, take offense to the fact that just because you have a keyboard and computer, you have allowed yourself to think that you are always correct and somehow superior in your thinking and outlook. Sorry, yours was just bad writing. Written better, I might have listened with more interest and less of a tendency to be irked by your sloppy indolence.
When you conclude your documentation by saying, that is "why there will be no impeachment", you have missed the point of the article and sadly given up on the future, all at once. The point is that without everyone recognizing this obvious and urgent need for impeachment, the picture of the future is very bleak. That point was made very clearly and you missed it. The article also asks that you consider strongly the ramifications of our recent American tradition of doing nothing. The article asks you to THINK about the future. It seems you have chosen not to do this. You appear to have already resigned yourself, however, to some kind of "I'm asleep on the couch and can't do anything about it anyway" stance. That kind of thinking is what has landed us precisely where we are, today. To borrow your point from below, that is precisely what the Congress did when they gave the authorization for war to the President in the first place. You seem angry about that and well you should be. So am I. So are we. Yes, WE, those fellow citizens whom you refer to as "you people". We all live here, under the same laws and with the same opportunities as you do. "We" are very sorry if that is troublesome for you. You might try getting over it: we are all in this together.
Yes, impeachment may never happen, unfortunately, but it should not preclude the rest of us from maintaining hope and attempting to think ahead. And God help us if it doesn't, or at least if the threat of it isn't enough to prevent another terrible mistake. There are lots of tactics to use against a bully in the schoolyard. Perhaps it is high time to bring as much intimidation (Go to jail, do not collect 2 million dollars)to bear on this sad character as we can. As the author says, shutting down DC would be a very good start.
No, I am not cranky. But I am just plain annoyed that you don't read, don't comprehend, don't respond in kind or in content and write so badly.
by
Ivan Hentschel (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 132 comments)
on Thursday, June 26, 2008 at 10:53:43 AM
Nowhere in the Constitution is any branch except Congress given the power to deciare war. The declaration of war is a legislative- branch function, not an executive-branch function. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution mandates that Congress "shall have the power to deciare war."
Congress violated the "separation of power" under the Constitution when they gave the war powers decision for iraq to bush. It was done in HJR II4,AUTHORIZATION FOR THE USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ" 2nd session, 107th congress.
What Congress did here was not a declaration of war. They bascially said to the president. 'You decide when we should go to war, and let us know shortly afterwards"
Every Member and senator in congress-- all 373 of them- who voted to give Bush his very own war- deicaring powers for iraq-- is guilty of violating his/hers oath to uphold the Constitution. On top of this, they are also guilty of violating 18 USC 241 --conspiracy against the citizen- rights os US soldiers to be sent to war ONLY on the expressed order of Congress.
HJR-114 is not a one-dimensional Congressional crime. WHEN BUSH SIGNED IT INTO LAW-"contray to his oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States, and, to the best of his ability to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his Constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed"( quoted from all three Nixon's articies of impeachment, July 1974)-it became Public law 107-243, it became, under 18 USC 241, a conspiracy of congress and the president.
That is, Congress and this president used an unconstitutional federal stature to violate and override the supreme law of the land, conspiring to commit feloney murder of US soldiers in violation of 18 USC 241.
Under 18 usc 241, as soon as one US soldier was killed in action in Iraq, Bush was ptosecutable for conspiracy to commit felony murder. If convicted, 18 USC 241, says that he and his co-conspirators (CONGRESS) can be sentened to life imprisonment- or to death.
This is why there will be no IMPEACHMENT.
by
RICH SHA (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 106 comments)
on Thursday, June 26, 2008 at 5:16:52 AM
Pelosi will not allow impeachment hearings and this is why:
If your neighbor murdered his wife and buried her in the back yard and the police were at his house investigating and arresting him - as his neighbor you'd be glad to get such a dangerous person off the street and to have justice served wouldn't you? But if you helped your neighbor bury his wife you arent' going to be very helpful with the police investigation now are you?
This is why impeachment isn't getting the attention it deserves - too many people are culpable in the crimes that have been committed. No less Pelosi who was privy to information regarding torture methods being approved. If you open that can of worms - they all are rotten with few exceptions. They literally covering their own asses by their paltry and pathetic excuses about why we cannot impeach at this time.
This is a far different situation than the Clinton impeachment - no one helped Monica blow the president, here the vast majority of congress et al helped Bush/Cheny f**k the world.
by
Cheryl Abraham (13 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 139 comments)
on Thursday, June 26, 2008 at 11:54:51 AM
To Impeach before Nov 4, Do Something Different, Quickly!
WHY haven't WE caused Impeachment of Cheney? Or Bush?
Or at least pushed the House Democrats to hold Impeachment Hearings?
We've marched, protested, fasted, are holding strikes, vigils, sit-ins, die-ins and god knows what else to no avail whatsoever as long as our Democratic Congressmen ignore us.
The media, wanting access and good treatment from Congress, will also ignore us, for as long as Congress does.
What can we do that is different and radical enough to get action by Congress?
Perhaps it will help to consider that the current Democratic Majority in the House may be the danger to the Constitution.
If Congress takes an oath to defend the Constitution and does not, it is the enemy of both the Constitution and the people?
I am not proposing rebellion, but how are we to get their attention before the next election?
In Colorado we have done over 110 impeachment events in 14 months, all of which have been ignored by our Colorado Congressmen.
We have tried to learn from that and come up with a plan that could cause our Congressmen to pay attention.
Our conclusion was that we need to find the Democratic Congressmen who are running for re-election or for the Senate and are in tight races
and campaign against them primarily on the point
that they are a traitor to their oath and Our Constitution when they do not rise to the defense of the Constitution and call for Impeachment Hearings.
If they won't defend the Constitution they probably won't do a good job of defending the rights of the voters.
We are campaigning against Rep. Udall using harsh language. We also say he is betraying and diminishing the power of Congress itself if he does not defend it against the executive branch.
In a state where registered Republicans outnumber registered Democrats and Independents are just as strong, We need only move the public's perception of him by a few percentage points to get his attention.
We believe that it will take a lot less money, people and effort to do that effectively than trying to persuade Congressman from "safe districts" to impeach. We believe that with enough pressure either Udall or one of the "safe seat" Congressmen will change their mind on impeachment.
A prominent local member of the Colorado peace and justice community asked me recently why we are going after Udall saying that surely we don't want the Republican to win the Senate seat.
I replied No, we don't want Schaffer over Udall, but if pressuring Udall within a hair of losing the election will get one or more of our Colorado Congressmen to come out for impeachment, we'll take the risk."
Getting the US House to hold impeachment hearings would go a long way to putting some steel in their collective spine for our other goals and would help restore much needed influence of the peace and justice/anti-war community.
We think it is worth the risk of losing one or two Democratic Congressmen across the country.
We think that the Democrats will add to their majorities in the House and Senate no matter what pressure we activists put on them.
It is more a matter of affecting the extent of that increased majority. No Congressman wants to be the one to lose by a few votes and that could happen to Udall. And more importantly, no senior Congressman wants to lose a Chairmanship they have enjoyed for the first time in 10 years, or if they are anticipating gaining a Chair, having it snatched away at the last minute by rabid protesters. We think it is possible to build on all Congressmen's fear of losing by attacking the weaker candidates.
It is not just about one candidate's race but about the percentage of Democrats in Congress. We can worry all of them by challenging that percentage.
Our plan is to pressure the weaker Democratic Congressional candidates, the ones in tight races for either House or Senate. We think that will put pressure on both the "tight race" Democratic Candidates themselves and the "safe seat" Dems as well to support impeachment hearings. It is to Rep. DeGette's advantage to have a higher number of House seats held by Democrats, it affects Committee assignments and senority, and her power and influence.
We have been protesting at our Congressman Udall's state campaign headquarters, at public appearances, at even Republican events where we can get our point about Udall noticed.
Since we have started down this path the honking at our impeach protests has easily quadrupled.
We think the voters are aware that the problem really is our Democratic Congressmen. We gave the House Democrats the Majority in 2006 because of their promise to stop the Iraq War and hold Bush and Cheney accountable. They accomplished neither but gave Bush more than he asked for on most occasions.
The huge increase in honking at our protests indicates to us that the voters are glad that we are forcefully trying to persuade the Democrats to impeach.
We recently had feedback from the Udall campaign via a well known local Democratic blogger and rabid Udall supporter asking us to back off. The plan is working here.
We are asking all activists across the Country
to consider changing your emphasis from the anti-war path
to that of challenging the fitness for re-election of all Democratic Candidates for the House or Senate based on their not protecting the Constitution and Separation Of Powers.
Sticking to this one point will help us teach the public about the necessity for protecting the Constitution by Impeachment and for doing it now.
Stopping the illegal Iraq War requires that UFPJ and other anti-war activists shift their emphasis for a few months to impeachment. An organization that can field over 1,000 protests on the Anniversary of the Iraq War should do no less for impeachment, as impeachment may be the only way to stop the war soon.
John H Kennedy, Denver CO.
43 yr Democratic voter, Obama delegate , organizer of
The last paragraph of Ms. Abraham's lamentation says it all -- and echoes the sentiment expressed by former congressmember Elizabeth Holtzman, who served on the House's judiciary committee during the Nixon impeachment. At Camp Democracy a few summers ago, on the grounds of the Washington Monument, she told the audience that, if the people want impeachment, they'll get it. The question remains: how many of us want it enough to work for it? As part of the answer to that question, I've been posting, for several months now, my serialized e-book "The Bu$ch-Cheezey Impeachment Chronicles" upon the web site of http://www.bushbusiness.com/Bryant_OP.htm ; access to it remains free.
Meantime, in case impeachment of the Bush-Cheney RICO junta does turn out to be the Ultimate Lost Cause, we have an alternative People's Remedy -- my citizen's arrest warrant posted at http://www.petitiononline.com/arrest/petition.html . It awaits your signature and wider dissemination.
by
LarryWBryant (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 55 comments)
on Thursday, June 26, 2008 at 10:46
