The Republican leadership in the House has voted to allow for Cheney's impeachment to reach the House floor. They think that the Democrats would be losers in the impeachment process. It is my position that the Democrats would be BIG WINNERS if they understood the constitution and what the public wants. Below are the positive points that would bolster their position with the media and the voters:
-The MSM and the Republicans are calling Democrats gutless.
-Courage of conviction is admirable and what the voters want.
-It would allow Democrats to argue that patriotism is more important than party loyalty.
-Bush would not be sidetracked because he would not be the target
-Cheney's popular polls are very low.
-Cheney is the perfect villain for the Democrats as the ultimate neocon.
-Impeachment is purely a legislative process that cannot be challenged by the other branches.
-Legislative subpoenas could not be challenged by executive privilege.
-Failure to cooperate by Cheney could cause a charge of contempt of Congress.
-The Capitol Police would have full powers to arrest and seize documents.
-Technically the Capitol Police could seize Cheney's walk in safe and arrest him.
-The impeachment trial would expose all of the criminal activity of this Administration.
-It would be leverage to negotiate an end of the war in Iraq in that Congress could drop the proceedings if Bush/Cheney agree to withdraw the troops.
-The House and Senate could finish their legislative agenda before the Senate trial . -Other Congressional business can be done while the trial is proceeding.
If I missed something, please let me know. My belief is that the Democrats will lose credibility with their base and independents unless they do what is best for our country. This is a fight that they should welcome instead of rationalizing that we are better off waiting until January 2009. That is a strategy that will not work with these guys. The waiting game puts us all at risk of global annihilation.
novamradio.com
Sheldon Drobny was the co-founder of Nova M radio and Air America Radio. He has supported many philanthropic causes and is currently involved in purchasing radio stations for liberal talk radio with his new company, Nova M Radio, Inc. Mr. Drobny specializes in business and tax matters and is admitted to practice before the U.S. Tax Court as a non-attorney. Less than 200 non-attorneys have been admitted to practice before the U.S. Tax Court since its inception in 1942. Mr. Drobny received a Bachelor of Science Degree in accounting from Roosevelt University in Chicago and is a member of Beta Gamma Sigma, an honorary fraternity recognizing acadamic achievement in colleges of business administration.
OK, you asked that we let you know if you missed something.
What you missed is in your 3rd sentence: "It is my position that the Democrats would be BIG WINNERS if they understood the constitution and what the public wants."
The D's understand perfectly what the public wants. However, that is not what they want. They want to protect Bush & Cheney, and prevent any situation from developing that would expose the manifold ways they've been complicit in every one of Bush/Cheney's crimes. They do not want the spectacle of a televised impeachment hearing in which they'd supposedly be accusing Cheney of crimes, only to have it made abundantly clear that they collaborated in every one of these crimes. They do not want the spectacle of the entire US government OF BOTH PARTIES being exposed as the venal liars that they are, & thus to have the government's credibility destroyed with the whole world watching.
In fact, the Democrats would far, far rather lose the 2008 election, than open the door to any process which risks shattering the US government's credibility (& thus that of the 2-party system), thus making it clear to the entire population that their government has betrayed them.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1121 comments)
on Friday, November 9, 2007 at 3:51:27 PM
Those are some excellent points that you make Mr. Drobny.
"The Failure to cooperate by Cheney could cause a charge of contempt of Congress at which time The Capitol Police would have full powers to arrest and seize documents." How intriguing!
The chance this does occur, one would assume that none of Cheney's 2001 "secret" energy task force meeting documents would be amongst those seized. Having said that, if I could take a moment to address Richard Mynick's response to your article. Mr. Mynick laments: The "D's" do not want the spectacle of a televised impeachment hearing in which they'd supposedly be accusing Cheney of crimes, only to have it made abundantly clear that they collaborated in every one of thesecrimes.
I would then ask Mr. Mynick, how many "D's" exactly were in attendance during Cheney's secret energy task force meetings? I will also note that documents from these meetings were turned over in the summer of 2003 by the Commerce Department as a result of the Sierra Club’s and Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, concerning the activities of the Cheney Energy Task Force, they contained a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as two charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts.”
The Democrats collaborated in every single one of these crimes? Isn't that right Mr. Mynick!
by
Munich (0 articles, 53 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 739 comments)
on Friday, November 9, 2007 at 6:28:17 PM
Do you think that to collaborate in a crime, it's necessary
to be physically "in attendance" at every conversation between other plotters of the crime? For the Democrats to collaborate on the war, is it necessary that they be in the room every time, say, Cheney, Bush and Blair were making plans for the war? No, it's obviously not. Being in the room is one thing; collaborating with the policy is something else. You're rather absurdly trying to claim that they're the same thing.
In a whole host of ways, the Democrats collaborated on the war, despite not being in the room every time Bush spoke with someone about it.
Similarly, it's not necessary for Democrats to have been physically "in attendance" at the meetings of the Cheney Energy Task Force, in order for their party to collude with the policy discussed at those meetings.
As you point out, Judicial Watch & Sierra Club got those documents from their FOIA lawsuit in the summer of 2003. Yet, for example, no issue was made of this by the Democrats during the entire Presidential Campaign of 2004. That's a simple example of "complicity" with the policy -- something entirely distinct from being present at all discussions of the policy.
Those FOIA documents show that the oil fields had plenty to do with invading Iraq. Yet not a single Democrat (besides the marginalized Kucinich) has dared to make this point publicly. The very example you cite, in other words, demonstrates Dem Party complicity -- regardless of whether D's were physically "in the room" at certain meetings.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1121 comments)
on Friday, November 9, 2007 at 7:15:47 PM
In no way am I condoning what the Democrats are now doing or have done before the initial invasion of Iraq. They're as complicit as this pernicious Bush cabal in the atrocities and the war crimes which have been committed. However, the point I was referring regarding Cheney's secret energy task force meetings is that this is when the initial plans were being prepared for the post invasion of Iraq and there were no Democrats in attendance. That's not absurd.
As you are aware, after the March 20, 03' invasion of Iraq there was no turning back. This Bush-Cheney cabal had the media, who I might add is just as complicit, in their back pockets. Public opinion was swayed and Iraq would be the revenge factor for 911 (sic) and the Democrats, well sadly, and I'm not trying to make excuses, they couldn't be seen as being soft on terror. Let's not forget, we had to get the so called "Weapons of Mass Destruction" which didn't exist but literally scared the heck outta most of America. This was part of the overall PNAC plan (sic). However, there were also many Democrats who knew Iraq wasn't involved with 911 and they expressed their opinions many evenings on C-Span to denounce any invasion of Iraq. And you would have thought that with over hundred thousand critical thinkers who marched on D.C. prior to the invasion, including former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who also understood there was absolutely no correlation between 911 and Iraq, that this so called "Liberal" Main Stream Media would have allowed a more open debate of the facts? This never happened. Hence, the cake walk (sic) into Iraq began.
Again, in no way am I making excuses for the many complicit Democrats who continue to cower to this evil Bush junta. I'm merely stating they weren't in attendance during Cheney's energy meetings. If you find out otherwise, please let me know.
Excellent point. Recommend further discussion and analysis.
I have been wondering if VP Cheney has something on every Democratic Congressman/woman. However, your explanation makes more sense. Would like to hear comments on this from others.
by
Christie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 149 comments)
on Friday, November 9, 2007 at 5:58:42 PM
Remember the hearings that were undertaken only to be discarded when the Democrats hadnt the sand to hold the liars in contempt of Congress? How would one expect them to find the spine to impeach such an obvious target as our reptile eyed Vice President?
This too shall pass....it damn well better.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Friday, November 9, 2007 at 7:46:03 PM
Naturally, I took the time to read it, and while I was aware of the directive - I didn't consider that the Dems may be holding-off on impeachment for fear that Bush will declare an emergency and essentially become an instantaneous dictator, assuming control of every aspect of our governance - if you could call it that without vomiting. I immediately followed the link, posted my response to my local paper as well as my appropriate Senators, etc., but was very disappointed to note that I was only one of the few that had followed this vital and important link to express our outrage against this highly secretive Presidential Directive that even our own Congress is unable to read.
Without a doubt or question, this is one matter that Congress must be forced to take-up NOW - and I'll reprint my comment to my local paper to give a glimpse of what I feel about this directive. This is serious beyond any scope of our imagination or comprehension, and could hold the answer as to why Congress seems to be so cowed - but to me, it's now or never - and if we don't face it head-on and damn the consequences - we risk losing everything anyway whenever Herr Bush decides to implement whatever his secret directive actually is:
Why is Congress so cowardly and cowed that they refuse to address this issue? Bush has set himself up to be a dictator and it's evident to anyone that takes the time to simply read this outrageous Presidential directive. Congress is failing the people, and the Mainstream News Media is also complicit for not warning the people - who are cowards as well. If you're afraid to impeach because Bush will cause an emergency to take control of our country, then let's get it started while we still have a chance to beat off the heal of oppression - not when it's too late to react or act accordingly. Where is the courage and fortitude of our forefathers who fought and died to create this Democratic Republic? By failing to act, to impeach these tyrants, we spit on the graves of those who valiantly fought and died for the freedom we used to enjoy, but diminish almost on a daily basis. Where has the American spirit gone? Where is the courage that once was the bellwether of this great nation? A coward dies a thousand deaths - and a man only dies once! We as a nation should be ashamed of ourselves for allowing this to happen, and there is still time, but first, the News Media has to alert the people of the danger they face - and we all know that won't happen, because unfortunately - the media are the greatest cowards of all!
William Cormier
by
William Cormier (117 articles, 5 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 292 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 8:30:33 AM
Naturally, I took the time to read it, and while I was aware of the directive - I didn't consider that the Dems may be holding-off on impeachment for fear that Bush will declare an emergency and essentially become an instantaneous dictator, assuming control of every aspect of our governance - if you could call it that without vomiting. I immediately followed the link, posted my response to my local paper as well as my appropriate Senators, etc., but was very disappointed to note that I was only one of the few that had followed this vital and important link to express our outrage against this highly secretive Presidential Directive that even our own Congress is unable to read.
Without a doubt or question, this is one matter that Congress must be forced to take-up NOW - and I'll reprint my comment to my local paper to give a glimpse of what I feel about this directive. This is serious beyond any scope of our imagination or comprehension, and could hold the answer as to why Congress seems to be so cowed - but to me, it's now or never - and if we don't face it head-on and damn the consequences - we risk losing everything anyway whenever Herr Bush decides to implement whatever his secret directive actually is:
Why is Congress so cowardly and cowed that they refuse to address this issue? Bush has set himself up to be a dictator and it's evident to anyone that takes the time to simply read this outrageous Presidential directive. Congress is failing the people, and the Mainstream News Media is also complicit for not warning the people - who are cowards as well. If you're afraid to impeach because Bush will cause an emergency to take control of our country, then let's get it started while we still have a chance to beat off the heal of oppression - not when it's too late to react or act accordingly. Where is the courage and fortitude of our forefathers who fought and died to create this Democratic Republic? By failing to act, to impeach these tyrants, we spit on the graves of those who valiantly fought and died for the freedom we used to enjoy, but diminish almost on a daily basis. Where has the American spirit gone? Where is the courage that once was the bellwether of this great nation? A coward dies a thousand deaths - and a man only dies once! We as a nation should be ashamed of ourselves for allowing this to happen, and there is still time, but first, the News Media has to alert the people of the danger they face - and we all know that won't happen, because unfortunately - the media are the greatest cowards of all!
William Cormier
by
William Cormier (117 articles, 5 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 292 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 8:32:17 AM
I've been having the same exact thought. In-fact, this past week Truthseeker and radio talk show host Mike Malloy at Nova M Radio if I could just note, was founded by Mr. Drobney, had on as a guest Dr. Justin Frank, the author of Bush on the Couch. Dr. Frank stated that it was his belief the reason the Democrats are hesitant to impeach Bush is because they're actually afraid of him and what he could do. Hence, him declaring an emergency and essentially become an instantaneous dictator, assuming control of every aspect of our governance. Quite a scary thought indeed.
by
Munich (0 articles, 53 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 739 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 11:14:28 AM
Ralph Nader wrote on this very topic last month --
"...Maybe the Democrats think that Bush and Cheney are such wild and crazy guys that a serious impeachment drive in Congress would provoke the two draft-dodgers to launch a military emergency, strike Iran or otherwise generate a crisis, based on their continual fulminations about the “war on terror,” that would engulf the Democrats and throw them on the defensive for 2008.
In short, the Democrats may be viewing Bush and Cheney as being so defiantly, aggressively impeachable on so many counts as to be unimpeachable. That is, with the White House harboring so much political nitroglycerine, don’t even try to remove it.
Such a cowardly position would make quite a precedent for future Presidents who want to illegally elbow out the other two branches of government and our Constitution..."
... would be the unstoppable momentum the airing of the evidence would create. What Republican could vote against impeachment once the scope of Cheney's treasonous activities are made public? Let them try to continue opposing impeachment - what would be their chances of re-election? What would be Bush's chances of staying in power, or exercising dictatorial power, once his complicity in Cheney's machinations is revealed?
Having said that, I agree with those who've identified the sorry reasons many Dems oppose the hearings. But all it takes is for massive pressure on Conyers from US to get the momentum rolling. Call his office, encourage everyone you know to do the same. All we have to do is get this train rolling, then hang on for the ride.
by
Jim Arnold (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 81 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 12:33:12 PM
When impeachment hearings were begun against Richard Nixon, at first there wasn't a large amount of support. Then, as would happen now if the hearings would actually reach the floor and the MSM had to report upon the proceedings, the preponderance of evidence would engage the public - as most of them that get their news from the MSM are still virtually in the dark - and until America as a whole is apprised of the many crimes of the Bush administration - and Congress addresses NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE 51; I fear we are in deep Sh*t. I'd rather fight a fire long before it gets to my doorstep, and to me, it seems that Congress is "hoping" that Bush won't execute the above directive;
But, you know what they say about hope; hope in one hand and crap in the other, and see which one fills-up first. I only wish Congress would wake-up and realize that this country wasn't founded by hope, but by the blood of patriots that stood-up for our freedom. As I said, you have to wonder where the American spirit has gone...
William Cormier
by
William Cormier (117 articles, 5 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 292 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 12:51:57 PM
Impeaching VP Cheney is absolutely ludricious. Impeaching VP Cheney is just a flag in which the angry liberals rally around because they are totally impotent.
There is 1 year left in the VP's term of office. ONE YEAR. The American People will vote Democrats out of office in groves in 2008 if they commit to such a political witch hunt wasting millions of taxpayer dollars and diverting attention from real problems like AMT, schools, healthcare, and the war in Iraq. This is most do nothing congress in history that has done nothing but hold hearings to investigate worthless BS and long and involved impeachment proceedings would just be one more ugly stain on them.
Has one criminal indictment come from all this political grandstanding? One?
That is why the Republicans want Cheney impeached (he, like Clinton, will not be convicted not because he is guilty or not, but because of political reasons.) because impeaching Cheney would be one more thing Republicans can point to when they denigrate this terrible congress. If your enemies want you to do something then you had better step back and ask why.
Far-out liberal Democrats had better also sit down and do a reality check and do it fast. The Democratic Party is about to nominate someone who is one of the most devisive political figures of our times. She is an ethically challenged person that has an ethically challenged husband who happens to be a former president and rest assured this will be brought out in a campaign. If you give the opposition something as unneccesary as the impeachment of Cheney, who, BTW will be out of office anyways in ONE YEAR, for her to defend at every campaign stop you will guarantee a loss. You would be way better off writing off the past as the past because the last time I checked Bush and Cheney aren't running in 2008 and move on to what can be done to make this a better country.
by
Mad Jayhawk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 226 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 12:46:51 PM
Gosh, it's really touching to see someone who is presumably not a "far-out leftist" encouraging us not to do something self-defeating. Either that or you're showing that you at least have a sub-conscious connection with reality, and have taken the trouble of writing in hopes that the proceedings don't go forward. If the latter, I congratulate you on either not-yet devolving into a neo-con, or for having emerged from being one.
by
Jim Arnold (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 81 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 1:11:35 PM
I can understand your anger, as I lived in Kansas for almost four years; in fact, my website is dedicated to a friend and family who are/were all devout Republicans, however, when the truth and facts are presented in a subtle manner as to not invoke arguments, it's amazing how opinions can change.
Characterizing impeachment of Bush or Cheney as a "political witch-hunt" is absurd beyond belief. There are so many crimes those two have committed, it would take more than one page to list them all, and then, many would still remain unaddressed. When a President refuses to uphold our own constitution, spits on the Rule of Law, and violates international treaties and agreements with impunity - to not impeach is a crime itself! When free speech is stifled, as noted by the students who were punished for attempting to voice their first amendment rights, we know that our freedom(s) are rapidly vanishing - and believe it or not, disagreeing and protesting is not against the law, and adding Americans to a terrorist watch-list simply because they are exercising their constitutional rights should be enough to wake-up anyone, Democrat, Republican, or Independent!
I loved Kansas, and my heart will always be there - but I did note that Republican support in many areas of Kansas is almost like a religion or cult, and no matter what these tyrants in Washington do, there are some that are so blinded with support of their party that they refuse to open their eyes and examine the facts - not rely on political rhetoric or the propaganda that emanates from Faux News on a daily basis.
William Cormier
by
William Cormier (117 articles, 5 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 292 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 1:12:52 PM
Why do you assume that 1) I live in Kansas 2) I am a Republican? I did not mention either in my post. Is it because you are one of those "so blinded with support of their party that they refuse to open their eyes and examine the facts - not rely on political rhetoric or the propaganda that emanates from" Air America "on a daily basis"? Are you familiar with the term "ad hominem"?
I just try to offer alternative ways to look at things and encourage people to think about what they read and write. If they do not like what I read, they can always turn away. I certainly do not read everything that is posted here because a lot of it is utterly foolish and without any merit.
For someone to recommend that congress impeach VP Cheney is foolish in my view. The writer was suggesting that blackmailing the administration and using Capitol Police, who do probably do not even have jurisdiction in matters like these, do a fishing expedition in Cheney's safe and to even arrest him is a great idea. That is a silly and an irresponsible suggestion. I cannot believe how many people here actually think that this is a good idea and that the American People would look upon Democrats as big time winners for doing something as nonsensical as this.
The writer also suggests that congress would continue to do what it is already doing while all this is going on which is basically investigating all the misdeeds of the Bush WH. If this doesn't sound like a proposal based on total ignorance I do not know what does. I think that the main function of the Capitol Police is to physically protect congress and traffic control around the capitol building and not to do investigative police work over in the Executive Branch of the government. I have never heard or read of them investigating anyone in the Executive Branch of government and probably never will.
The writer has a short memory. The Clinton impeachment pretty much shut down congress and the White House during the investigation and trial. Defending and prosecuting a President wasn't something that happened during everyone's spare time. In my view, it would to be a total waste of time and money. It would only serve to make a few unhinged people happy for a short period of time. We all would be better off working to make this a greater country than it already is.
Keep in mind that when your opposition helps you do something and your own leadership doesn't want you to there has to be fairly good reason.
by
Mad Jayhawk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 226 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 2:25:27 PM
If that was an incorrect assumption, I obviously made a mistake. When I noted your "Mad Jayhawk" signature, the Jayhawks are synonymous with Kansas, and I am also an avid fan myself. To those here that aren't aware of the "Jayhawks", they are an absolute legend and are the team(s) of the University of Kansas. I owned and operated a business in Lawrence, Kansas, which is sort of an island in Kansas where progressives and liberals seem to be more popular than anywhere else in the state, and for the casual observer - Lawrence, Kansas, is akin to an oasis of progressive ideals in the midst of a state that is known for their allegiance to the Republican Party.
In the same breath, Kansas is where I learned that quite a few Republicans share many of the same ideals that many of us Liberals and Progressives stand for, albeit in a different manner. Republicans as a party doesn’t necessarily bother me in the least, as I lived among them for years, and found most of them to be wonderful people. It's the right-wing Neo-conservative Republicans that I oppose, and Kansas is also abundantly populated by those too - but to say that all Republicans are all wrong or misguided is the same as saying that all Muslims are bad - a patently false assumption.
Just out of curiosity, are you from Kansas, attended college there, or just a JayHawk fan? It's actually none of my business, and if you don't answer, that's fine - but at least we do have one thing in common - (maybe) and that's that we are both JayHawk fans, an amazing University as well as teams that constantly are some of the best in the US. When you live in Kansas and see “JayHawk” anywhere else in the US, it is reminiscent of Kansas and believe me, if you aren’t from Kansas, then it may be a little harder for you to understand why I “assumed” that’s where you were from…
William Cormier
by
William Cormier (117 articles, 5 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 292 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 3:57:26 PM
You cannot be anymore succinct and as you have so eloquently stated: When a President refuses to uphold our own constitution, spits on the Rule of Law and violates international treaties and agreements with impunity, which are "high crimes and misdemeanors," and it is indeed a crime not to impeach!
Our Founding Fathers gave us the power to prevent this type of abuse of power and would have demanded impeachment.
by
Munich (0 articles, 53 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 739 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 4:23:00 PM
You cannot be anymore succinct and as you have so eloquently stated: When a President refuses to uphold our own constitution, spits on the Rule of Law and violates international treaties and agreements with impunity, which are "high crimes and misdemeanors," and it is indeed a crime not to impeach!
Our Founding Fathers gave us the power to prevent this type of abuse of power and would have demanded impeachment.
by
Munich (0 articles, 53 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 739 comments)
on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 4:24:24 PM
