I hate to be the nervous Nellie of the impeachment crowd but have we really thought this out thoroughly? Let me preface this by saying that I would love nothing more than to see Dick Cheney frog-walked out of the White House to pay for his many crimes against the American people. The same goes for his boss. The trail of impeachable offenses is long and offensive and makes the Clinton lynching pale in comparison. That said, I wish it was 2006 or 2007 and not the crucial election year of 2008. I never thought I would say it but given the likely way an impeachment would play out, aren’t there bigger fish to fry?
I can see the outrage in the responses already but bear with me. The number one priority this year has to be eliminating the stranglehold the GOP has held on the executive branch of government for the past eight years. The number one priority has to be ensuring that John McCain does not get four years to continue his 100-year plan in Iraq and to bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb Iran. Assuming that the progressive mindset agrees with this priority, as well as maintaining control of Congress, let’s examine the 600-pound gorilla in the room; the corporate media.
When I spoke with progressive activists who are pushing impeachment about this theory, I was greeted with the “what’s wrong with holding people accountable for violating their oaths of office and the constitution?” Nothing of course but the false assumption being made is that everyone who votes thinks the same way we do. The false assumption being made is that everyone gets their news from the Internet and alternate news sources. Sorry folks, they still do not. They still rely on the fixed news sources that infect mainstream corporate media. Remember, this is the same corporate media that is pimping the false angle that McCain is somehow moderate and reviled by the conservative base. So the big question is; how will impeachment proceedings be represented by the media and what effect might it have on the general election?
I think it is safe to project that any impeachment proceedings will be greeted with utter contempt by the corporate media. Forget what Fox News will do alone. They will run anti-democratic segments one after the other for the entire length of the proceedings. They will relate it as payback for the Clinton impeachment. They will rally the otherwise apathetic GOP voters to backlash against the democratic congress. Do not be lulled into the “Fox has no pull anymore” logic. There are still 30% of this country that support Bush and probably watch Fox. I believe the majority of them will be indifferent this voting season and will stay home, unless they are given a reason to come out to the polls. A lengthy impeachment process, which will probably not result in any conviction, is just such a reason.
Then there is the other 70% of the country. Right now the election will be focused on two things, the economy and the war. John McCain is painted into a corner that he cannot win from. He has sold out for the war and Bush to the point that there is virtually no way this country will vote him into office; especially if it is Obama as his opponent. Even though the country is sick of the do nothing democratic congress, they are clearly anti-war at this point. The way the election season is set to play out it will be the war and making the Bush tax cuts permanent versus ending the war and restoring some sense of fiscal sanity. That is a recipe for progressive goals being met on Election Day.
Now factor in a protracted impeachment process. It will certainly carry on well into and beyond the election. It will easily dominate the headlines and talk shows. It will be the lead story over the election and will in fact be morphed into the election. Do you think anyone besides Keith Olbermann will portray the impeachment fairly? What do you think Chris Matthews will say, night after night, on his softball program? What about Tucker and Scarborough? What about Hume and Hannity? What about the CNN talking heads? What about talk radio? Instead of concentrating on the election, we will be revisiting the sins of the administration that is already on the way out. It will be portrayed as sour grapes by the democrats. It will be portrayed as revenge for Clinton and forget about the damage if Hillary is the candidate. Granted; you and I may not care what is said in the corporate media but do not think for a second that the majority of the country feels the same way. They will be bathed in non-stop negative impeachment coverage instead of focusing on the most important election in decades.
It is a shame to have to even consider this side of impeachment. In a perfect world the only thing that should matter is the truth. The truth is that both Cheney and Bush deserve impeachment. Unfortunately, the truth is also that the media the majority of the country follows will not report the truth objectively. They have not for a decade now so there is no reason to believe they will all of sudden act in the best interest of the country. The truth is also that impeachment will dominate the public discourse instead of the clear choices the election holds this year. That would be a boon for the GOP. To have a discussion about something other than the war and the economy? To turn two reviled characters such as Bush and Cheney into sympathetic figures? Even if that doesn’t happen, it is not like they are running for anything. Lastly, what is the result that we truly seek? Do you really believe in the end of the drama that there will be a conviction? If you really believe that then you haven’t been paying attention over the past few years. The two parties protect each other when push comes to shove. They exist for the sole purpose of ensuring their continued control over this country. I seriously doubt that in the end, the frog-walk is going to happen anyway. But the result could be more damaging to what progressives truly seek this November; and end to the politics and crimes we sought the impeachment for to begin with.
Anthony Wade, a contributing writer to opednews.com, is dedicated to educating the populace to the lies and abuses of the government. He is a 40-year-old independent writer from New York with political commentary articles seen on multiple websites. A Christian progressive and professional Rehabilitation Counselor working with the poor and disabled, Mr. Wade believes that you can have faith and hold elected officials accountable for lies and excess.
Except the impeachment will not be someone saying you bad boys go away and they leave. The facts for impeachment go from the 935 lies to go to war to 9350 lies about the world trade centers to the blackbox voting and that rock gathers no moss as it gets rolling. All the crap and disinformation on talk radio and Limbaugh will be drowned put by this financial meltdown that is just starting to wake up the insulated think they are safe crowd. In the paper this morning Radian philadelphia mortgage insurer reports defaults doubled in one year including prime which climbed from 28.9 million to 53.2 million the last quarter.In the end Bush and Cheney will be safer in a jail cell than out on the street exposed to some rough and tumble justice which the disenfranchised will be looking to dole out.
by
tjb (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 179 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 7:01:04 AM
If there's any justice on this planet, it would include the hanging of GW and Cheney in a public place to send a message to any of their cohorts who think they'd like to "follow in their peer's footsteps". In my nearly 60 years on this planet I've never seen the level of corruption that currently exists within our government. If space travel were possible, I'd be looking for another planet....this one's gonna be "screwed" for quite awhile.
by
Galen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 32 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 8:09:24 PM
"The number one priority this year has to be eliminating the stranglehold the GOP has held on the executive branch of government for the past eight years" is short-term thinking that tosses away long-term necessities--and you don't get any longer term than the Constitution.
Democrats cannot be trusted to govern reliably, they've proven this since 2006. Why does 2008 give you hope, when you watched your 'new majority' roll over and play dead for Bush?
Impeachment is a matter of regaining precedent. This country, which claims to be a nation of laws and not men, runs on legal precedent. The violations of the Bush administration, if not corrected and punished, become precedent.
I'm personally unwilling to trade the defense of constitutional precedent for a Democrat in the White House.
by
Jim Freeman (108 articles, 40 quicklinks, 160 diaries, 328 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 9:56:56 AM
Jim Freeman is correct, impeachment is not a political position, it is about ACCOUNTABILITY. Let me put this is a different context. Do some of the worst leaders in the world carry out their atrocities for anyone other than the people they presume to serve? Bush and Cheney have excused the excesses of this administration based on the need to "protect us." Many conservatives buy that logic, and I do not doubt that many Americans do as well. Behavioral research shows 90% of the public is OBEDIENT to AUTHORITY. People in society must be obedient in order for society to function. The downside of that OBEDIENCE is when AUTHORITY decides it can define what laws to follow and which to break, people accept that authority. They can even be easily coerced in to doing its bidding. In order that our society not to follow the wrong AUTHORITY, it is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL that we ensure all AUTHORITY follows the rules we as a society have established. Otherwise, there is absolutely nothing to prevent us from falling in behind a Hitler or Pol Pot, or any other charismatic leader who decides "he knows what is best for us" and will do whatever it takes to ensure the "greater good" for our society.
It is far to late to address this problem AFTER it has gotten totally out of hand and you are headed toward Armageddon. It is absolutely essential this country address this issue, hold those who have broken laws accountable and then move on reaffirming we are a country of laws and rules and everyone in this country (including the President and the VP) are bound by our laws and rules. Suggesting we do less, suggesting we let it go so Democrats are not hurt in the Fall elections is trivial by comparison to this far bigger and greater issue we now face: Are we either a nation of laws and justice, or are we a nation that blindly follows authority and allows it to decide for us what laws and rules are most important and which ones can be broken! In my book, this is a far, far more critical issue we address and resolve then the issue "who wins in the fall"? Whoever wins, it won't matter a TINKERS DAMN if the President and VP have been allowed to set the precedent that it is okay for the EXECUTIVE BRANCH to break our laws when they think it is in our "best interests". I could live with lots of things, but that is a situation I could not live with, ever.
by
Peter Wedlund (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 132 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 11:48:39 AM
I continue to view our current and past political scenarios as reflected by an old cliche, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely". The majority of "life forms" that are attracted to these positions of authority share a number of deficiencies that include overt self-focus and a complete inability to see the "big picture" in any aspect that is beneficial to (planetary) longevity. For every one of these "turkeys" that we manage to shut down, there are a dozen more "waiting in the wings".
Perhaps the only solution to curtailing this abberant political behavior is to start enforcing a stricter code of conduct (first) by eliminating all of the contrived "smoke screens" (ie electoral college, super delegates) in an effort to strengthen the effectiveness of the "popular" vote. As a "closet" human behavioralist I'm seeing a phenomenal amount of social unrest and distrust regarding the workings and structure of our political system and I don't think that our current "gaggle of leadership" has a clue as to how short their "career lives" may become. Wake up Washington....there's a huge "can of whoopass" coming your way and it isn't going to be pretty.
by
Galen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 32 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 11:44:43 PM
You have it spot on, Jim. What is more, any who actually want a Democratic victory in November across the board will be well served by opening impeachment hearings now against Cheney.
There is a sleeper issue in re Cheney. It is 9/11. This has a better chance to surface if hearings begin even on the three articles in the present HR 333/799 bill now in the HJC. A fourth and fifth article can be crafted, one dealing with Cheney's role in outing Valerie Plame Wilson, about which conservatives have much to hang their collective heads. That helps crush McCain!
The other is 9/11. Cheney can be shown to have lied to the 9/11 commission about his own acts of treason that day. See Sec. Mineta's clear testimony to the commission. This is so explosive that the MSM dare not NOT cover it! It is fatal to the media to try to hide it, as their own complicity is exposed. The media loves the fall of a celeb, and Cheney is made to order.
The best way the Dems can gain the WH in November is to have Speaker Pelosi sworn in as a caretaker until the election . Cheney will never be impeached, but his "health" can fail very fast before the hearings are ten days old. Before Bush can appoint a replacement, he crumbles from some new revelations that will shock and sicken the electorate.
Those who fear impeachment proceedings now, like Anthony, simply are not taking into account the dramatic developments that can unfurl once the trigger is set.
Let's see what the new Zogby poll says tomorrow... If it's a green light or even a blinking yellow, I say LET'S PUSH THE HJC!!!
by
Carl Weis (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 23 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 11:49:36 PM
Impeachment would be the straw that breaks the camel back.
Alternative news will have to become mainstream as the reasons for impeachment will come forth. The media will try to hold back the storm, but they will not be able to. Impeachment will be a strong attention getter and people
will turn aside from their everyday concerns for awhile to check all this out.
Just my two cents worth. Bottom line: go ahead with impeachment proceedings full steam ahead.
by
Bob Gormley (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 865 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 10:08:36 AM
Congressman Robert Wexler can answer any questions you may have left. Your nervousness is understandable, yet there is no valid reason to run from duty on the field of battle.
by
JustHisWordsdotcom (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 10:21:34 AM
This admin has run roughshod for seven years now but now is the time for accountability? And you are going to criticize me for being honest about what will happen? I was writing against this admin since the onset of the war.
Derilect of duty, that is ridiculous.
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 3:40:19 PM
But cute catch phrases will not solve this problem. I have been on the front line of this battle for five years now. The truth is i was calling for impeachment and accountability when everyone else was watching the world disintegrate. These colors do run, they have run red with the blood of innocents for the past six years.
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 3:38:33 PM
For 230 years, the party that brings impeachment wins
[No] one says aloud what the reasons are for opposing impeachment. That Cheney and Bush have committed impeachable offenses is universally understood. But the arguments against impeaching them (other priorities, bipartisanship, we don't have the votes, etc.) usually sound like lame cover for whatever the real reason is. I suspect the real reason is built into Nadler's plan of wasting a year in order to pass bills next year. He assumes that in 2009 there will be either a better Congress or a better president (he backs Hillary Clinton), or both.
Sadly, history says otherwise. For 230 years, the party that brings impeachment wins, and the party that fails to do so when it's called for loses. Conyers was there when the Democrats moved to impeach Nixon and then won big. He was there when they refused to impeach Reagan and then lost. And most of the current committee was there when the Republicans impeached Clinton against the will of the public for a non-impeachable offense and still won both houses of Congress and the White House.
When the Democrats held back from impeachment during Iran Contra, they lost the next elections. When the Democrats led the effort to investigate and impeach Nixon, they won big in the next election, even though Ford was running as an incumbent. When the Republicans tried to impeach Truman, they got what they wanted out of the Supreme Court and then won the next elections. Articles of impeachment have been filed against 10 presidents, usually by Republicans, and usually with electoral success following. When the Republicans impeached Clinton, impeachment was actually unpopular with the public. Even so, the Republicans lost far fewer seats than is the norm for a majority party at that point in its tenure. Two years later, they lost seats in the Senate, which had acquitted, but maintained their strength in the House, with representatives who had led the impeachment charge winning big.
Parties that seek to impeach are not punished at the next election. In fact, they frequently improve their position -- as evidenced by the Democrats in 1974, Republicans in 1952, and all the way back to the Whigs of last century. In every election back to 1842 where House members of an opposition party to a sitting president have -- as a whole or a significant caucus within the party -- proposed impeachment of the president, that opposition party retained or improved its position in the House at the following election. There is no instance of voters responding to a significant impeachment effort by sweeping its advocates out of office. In fact, history points in a different direction, suggesting that voters frequently reward parties for taking the Constitution and the rule of law seriously.
And we wouldn't wait until the next election to reward members of Congress who put impeachment back in the Constitution. The minute Pelosi or Conyers or Nadler opens the door to impeachment hearings, every activist organization in this country and around the world that works on behalf of peace or justice or the rule of law will flood them with flowers, donations, volunteers, and support.
This time there is a corporate media that did not exist in the other instances. If i thought the media would tell the truth, i would agree. You speak in contexts that no longer exist.
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 3:42:04 PM
Should never be allowed not to pay for their crimes.
I would hate to see Bush and Cheney living in the lap of luxury from all the money they have made from their crimes. While it may be to late for Impeachment now these two must not get out of office and allowed to live happily ever after in Dubai.
by
Linda (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 11:07:36 AM
I would hate it too. Loo, i said at the beginning i support impeachment. I just think that people are not considering the timing. You can say cute things like "playing politics" but thats the reality of the situation. You can claim that the constitution is more important and i agree, but unfortunately they do not.
Does anyone honestly believe they will be convicted??? Seriously?
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 3:44:25 PM
Mr. Wade, you are the kind of person I pin my hopes on
Like Barack Obama, you have no reason to carry personal grudges over Watergate, In your study of history during the last half of the 20th Cent. you probably came to realize that the draft is not at play this time around, although the false call to arms from the government still exists.
I'm glad to see that you care what happens in Iraq and the terrible war which woke up most of the American public to reality of something wrong in Washington D.C. It's as simple as the fact that the President believes he has unlimited power and that if he scares us badly enough, we'll lay down and roll over.
Please read John Nichols' book called The Genius of Impeachment. There shouldn't be a trial to send anyone to permanent exile. As a matter of fact, if a careful committee investigation is carried out, it is likely there will be no need to go to "trying" Bush/Cheney et al for high crimes and misdemeanors. Already some of their operatives have slunk away. It could be a process which was orchestrated over Richard Nixon's imperial presidency issues. This time is simpler, because we already have so many smoking guns. It will be hard to determine which to name first.
Think of this--which Nichols makes a central argument in the current crisis--if we let George W. Bush ride back Crawford without letting him know he had some matters deadwrong, the next President (regardless of who) will have a lot of dying issues to grapple with before he/she can get down to important needs in 2009.
by
Margaret Bassett (19 articles, 1121 quicklinks, 24 diaries, 620 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 11:24:16 AM
force the media to report the truth for a change. They may not be able to finish the impeachment but they can hold the hearings and bring out the evidence. Perhaps the evidence can be used at a later date for war crimes againts Bush, Chaney and others in the administration.
by
tginmn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 40 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 11:40:30 AM
WE know the truth but the truth becomes a malleable property in the hands of a media that will not support the impeachment. Alot of what we know still has to be proven in court and remember, it is ultimately up to two corrupt parties to convict. I simply do not believe that will ever happen.
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 3:52:05 PM
that if the threat of impeachment is even breathed at this point, Bush declares martial law and is forever (and I mean that literally) secure in his power.
by
Watching (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 313 comments)
on Sunday, February 17, 2008 at 11:48:54 AM
The Congress doesn't have the huevos to press for impeachment. They've caved on every important issue except maybe FISA, and they just let that expire. The crux of the matter is not impeachment, it is criminal prosecution, and it goes far beyond Bush & Cheney.
However, we have an Attorney General, approved by our Congress, who can't even decide on a definition of torture that could be easily defined by a group of grade schoolers!
