I've read that John Conyers Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has calmly concluded that neither the House nor Senate has enough votes to impeach big bro 43, and, even if they did, there is not enough time to do so. He concluded that if "bubble boy" was subjected to this his poll numbers would go up, as Clinton's did, and possibly the Democrats would suffer in the 2008 election.
He also thinks that Democrats can accomplish nothing if we all dragged through impeachment again.
The GOP won everything in 2000 after Clinton was impeached for a stained dress. 42 had the momentum his policies were generating stopped dead in their tracks as the entire administration was forced to deal with a man's personal indiscretion. W is killing people from foreign countries, having ours killed, and transferring all of our resources to his top 1% cronies as a result of his lies.
What the Democrats should do if they don't have the stones to start an impeachment is have investigations relating to how W's goon's cherry-picked valid Iraq pre-war intelligence and was recently found doing the same with Iran.
According to the "Senate Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq" at
"As of May, 2007, the portions of the phase II report that have not yet been released are the review of public statements by U.S. government leaders prior to the war, and the assessment of the activities of Douglas Feith and the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans."
Feith took Chalabi's INC lies, including Curveball, who just happened to be a relative of a Chalabi aide, and put them into W's mouth. The article of December 16, 2002 article "The Pentagon Muzzles the CIA -- Devising bad intelligence to promote bad policy" at
describes how Feith's group, under Tricky Dickless Cheney, used Chalabi's lies, for propaganda purposes.
These hypocrisies were also transcribed by the New York Times' Judith Miller for an anxious and unprepared US populace's consumption. We all know that "neither State nor the CIA likes very much" the INC defectors and stopped funding them, but Rumsfeld, who has always been un-naturally close with the Dickless one, they were both original members of PNAC, loved the lies that served his purposes of promoting US hegemony.
They keep on recycling the truly evil ones so that nothing close to the truth ever becomes public knowledge. Hadley is again one of the officials advising W. Hadley recently was the official who initiated the surge policy. Remember that earlier he was one of the group of officials who claimed responsibility for allowing W to utter his "16 words", even though the CIA Director, Tenet, had twice earlier forced the "intellectually incurious one" to remove those words from his speeches.
We'll never get any documentation of big bro 43's lies about Iraq in a formal Senate investigation-even though a brief search of the Internet would compile huge lists of them, because the GOP control enough of each Congressional chamber to quash that effort.
This same trend regarding Iran is even more disgusting than the previous one with Iraq because we know how Iraq has turned so dreadfully against US' interests and because it makes our allies hate us and it makes other 3rd rate tyrants look more trustworthy than the puppet we have in place.
It seems like the GOP is plotting something. Where is Herr Karl?
The article "Review of Iran Intelligence to Be Sought -- As Conservatives Reject New NIE, Republican Senators to Urge Congressional Panel" at
states "Senate Republicans are planning to call for a congressional commission to investigate the conclusions of the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran as well as the specific intelligence that went into it, according to congressional sources."
Look, Pat Roberts sat on Phase 2 of the Iraq pre-war intelligence investigations for years. The old Simon and Garfunkel lyric "the pattern never alters until the rat dies" comes to mind.
There have been many examinations of what big bro 43 said and how it evolved but it is all nonsense. He lied. The world knows it, but "Press Secretary" Dana Perino said yesterday that Bush meant he was told the gist of the new intelligence. That Iran had had a covert nuclear weapons program but had suspended it, but he was not given details, pending a deeper assessment of the data. "The president could have been more precise in that language," she said, "but the president was being truthful."
The article "WAS BUSH HIDING INTELLIGENCE?" at
states "This is all very dangerous for America and its security. Military action is a last resort, and if not used with extreme caution, it can have disastrous results, as we've seen with the war in Iraq.