Speaker Nancy Pelosi may have taken impeachment "off the table," but House Judiciary Chair John Conyers (D-MI) is about to put it back on the menu.
Conyers may have been blocked by a timid Pelosi from initiating impeachment hearings immediately into President Bush's crimes against the Constitution, but he's taken the first step anyway, with the anouncement of plans to hold hearings into what is surely the President's gravest abuse of power.
The congressman, a veteran of the Nixon impeachment hearings who recently published a book on Bush's crimes, today announced plans to have his Judiciary Committee hold hearings on Bush's rampant use of so-called "signing statements." These are the documents the president has claimed give him the power, as a commander-in-chief, to ignore laws duly passed by the Congress.
Bush has used this bogus claim to ignore all or parts of some 1200 laws passed by Congress. He has done it willfully, and he has done it deceptively, often adding the signing statement saying he will be ignoring a law after having first hosted a friendly photo-op signing session at which he offer no indication that he had any problem with a measure.
The first Judiciary Committee hearing is set for January 31.
Hopefully this will be followed by more Judiciary hearings into the president's other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Readers should encourage Conyers in his efforts, and urge him to follow through, by sending messages of support to: john.conyers@mail.house.gov
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
Dave Lindorff, a columnist for Counterpunch, is author of several recent books ("This Can't Be Happening! Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy" and "Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal"). His latest book, coauthored with Barbara Olshanshky, is "The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office (St. Martin's Press, May 2006). His writing is available at http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
The Constitution doesn’t say that we shouldn’t impeach any President because it will disrupt the government. Impeachment was written to use when and if necessary surely with the expectation that there will be a disrupting interval. If Congress allows criminal behavior by the President & Vice President, Congress has reneged on its oath to uphold the Constitution.
The government’s decision to force the military to continue fighting an illegal war is the essence of treason. The arguments by elected officials who claim that they made an honest mistake because the intelligence was wrong at the time they voted now admit to being wrong then.
The question for impeachment needs to be based upon whether or not the intelligence had been intentionally made wrong by the President & Vice President when and if they coerced the CIA to falsify its intelligence. The Libby trial is corroborating that question. The investigation published by David Corn and Michael Isakoff in HUBRIS details the deliberate falsification of incidents to deceive a legitimate intelligence effort.
There needs to be immediate hearings now to determine if Bush & Cheney coerced bad intelligence that would trick the Congress. (Who doesn’t know that happened?)
If Dennis Kucinich does what is demanded by the Constitution now, he will be elected as President in 2008. Any political calculation that deviates from the obligation prescribed by the Constitution will be a mistake.
Best regards,
Steve Miller
Do you believe President Bush's actions justify impeachment? * 421245 responses
Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.
87%
No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high crimes and misdemeanors."
4.5%
No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.
6.1%
I don't know.
1.9%
by
Steve Miller (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 6 comments)
on Sunday, February 18, 2007 at 10:46:24 PM
Dave,
I will eagerly watch any hearing on impeachment. I would feel much better about Conyers if he co-sponsored HR 333 right now. I would like to hear Conyer's reason for not co-sponsoring HR 333 and why he has been voting to fund the war. I know he sweats Pelosi. Each Congressman who fails to co-sponsor HR 333 is reneging on his oath to the Constitution. The Constitution obligates Congress to impeach a Vice President who commits treason. Ordering our military to attack a country for outright lies that falsely claim there will be an imminent attack on America is treason. The false claims are public quotes by Vice President Cheney on a variety of TV shows. Have you read HR 333?
The issue being ignored is that the Constitution directs Congress to impeach a Vice President for treason. Dennis has chosen to begin with Cheney for a good reason. Even a guy like you is ignoring the Articles of Impeachment because the media has never mentioned it. That is powerful. Come on Dave the media has a purpose that has been ignored even by you.
Steve
by
Steve Miller (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 6 comments)
on Sunday, May 27, 2007 at 6:48:53 PM
