Tag(s): ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (24 comments)

Conyers Staffer Says They Are Choosing to Let Bush Continue Violating Laws

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend
Get Embed HTML Code
By Donna Norton, Sonoma County PDA  Posted by David Swanson (about the submitter)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (60 fans)   -- Page 1 of 1 page(s)

opednews.com

Continuing Battle with Conyers' Office on Impeachment
By Donna Norton, Sonoma County PDA

On January 25th, I had a telephone conversation (40 mins +) with a legislative assistant in Conyers' office regarding impeachment. He had obviously been well-instructed on how to express their current policy. Our conversation included both Bush and Cheney, and took some strange turns, but this is basically the stand they're taking:

* Impeachment's not necessary. The next election will take care of EVERYTHING. Just ELECT DEMOCRATS. (This chorus was repeated throughout our discussion.)

* A sitting President is not subject to court actions. Nothing in the Constitution says a President is subject to the law. He finally conceded this remains an "unsettle" question in the courts. (I insisted on documentation to support his statements, and he emailed me a Congressional report, 1978 "CRS Report for Congress" #98-186 A, on impeachment, about 30 pgs.)

* Congress does not have an OBLIGATION or duty to investigate or take any action to prevent a President from breaking the law or abusing his powers. It's totally up to THEIR DISCRETION.

* It's okay for their decision to be based on party politics rather than Constitutional considerations because the decision is solely theirs to make.


* The courts can follow up with any illegal acts of the President or Vice-President AFTER they're out of office, and all will be fine.

* Correcting power-abuse really has no meaning because power is what it's all about. They all abuse it. So what? It's just politics.

We both agreed that according to what he was telling me, it boils down to the following:

A sitting President is not subject to the law as long as he remains in office. He can CONTINUE to break laws as long as he remains in office. He can only be removed DURING his term of office (and therefore become subject to the law) through impeachment. Only Congress can impeach, and it's solely up to their DISCRETION. So, as long as Congress successfully blocks the impeachment process, they are willfully allowing the President to remain completely outside the law, condoning that principle, and, in effect, shielding him from being removed from office so that he will be subject to the law and can be prosecuted. Congress has no OBLIGATION to intervene.

The aide seemed not the least bit disturbed by the gravity or import of my conclusions. It is, after all, just politics. And, by the way, electing Democrats to office will take care of everything (just in case I forgot to mention that).

 

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
IMPEACH

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Editor

Follow Me on Twitter

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
24 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Hail to the King by Mr M on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 11:13:15 AM
Elective Despotism by Frank J. Ranelli on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 2:20:55 PM
I have a news update. by George Washington on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 2:34:26 PM
Which is why by Dawn Owens on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 11:22:30 PM
Impeachment doesn't not lead to a prison term by Stephen Demetriou on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 3:13:51 PM
Actually, by George Washington on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 3:21:59 PM
Washington by Stephen Demetriou on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 3:35:30 PM
sovereign immunity by Stephen Demetriou on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 3:37:00 PM
Yes, by George Washington on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 4:16:22 PM
Impeachment does not lead to removal from office either by Watching on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 10:42:59 PM
Impeachment leads to trial in Senate by PrMaine on Saturday, Feb 2, 2008 at 3:01:59 PM
Military Commissions Act by Stephen Demetriou on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 3:47:25 PM
algebraic inferences by martinweiss on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 4:34:52 PM
now I am fully justified in ignoring the Democratic party by sunnyjim on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 5:58:52 PM
whoa by Jeanette Doney on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 7:00:40 PM
Who will you vote for then? by Watching on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 10:50:21 PM
It all boils down to "discretion". by Harold Smith on Friday, Feb 1, 2008 at 6:14:00 PM
Seems what's up is how to discipline our Congress by Kathryn Smith on Saturday, Feb 2, 2008 at 12:12:10 AM
Impeachment by ed clark on Saturday, Feb 2, 2008 at 9:26:08 AM
Elect Democrats?? by paganbaby on Saturday, Feb 2, 2008 at 10:11:12 AM
The Declaration of Independance by Rick Theile on Saturday, Feb 2, 2008 at 1:21:26 PM
POETIC JUSTICE!!!!!! by rhalfhill on Sunday, Feb 3, 2008 at 3:13:07 AM
But wait! by c. linman on Monday, Feb 4, 2008 at 9:24:50 AM
we have roughly one week left by erik mouse on Monday, Feb 4, 2008 at 10:58:37 AM