Swanson's Article--Is Peace or Impeachment Possible?--Makes Clear that Pelosi' Appeasement with Bush -Cheney is a Loser

Swanson: "Nixon took 3 months.  Clinton took 2.  They've spent 9 thus far avoiding it, and with very little to show for it.  Impeachment for refusal to comply with subpoenas would take one day."

Swanson: "Yeah?  Like what?  Since when is restoring the Bill of Rights a distraction?  A distraction from funding wars and legalizing spying is fine with me.  A distraction from passing bills that will be vetoed does not worry me."

Swanson: "OK, but if you focus on ending the war for two full years and don't actually end it, I wish you luck getting people to turn out next November.  When Congress moved toward impeachment of Nixon, it found the nerve to end a war, and he backed off on his veto threats.  Congress passed a menu of progressive legislation in part because of, not despite, the impeachment threat hanging over Nixon.  And ultimately of course impeachment is going to be needed to end the current occupation of Iraq." 

Swanson: "Actually that's not true among Democrats.  Eighty percent favor impeachment.  But as far as bipartisan harmony on Capitol Hill goes, the dangers of creating divisiveness is sort of like the danger of violence breaking out if we leave Iraq.  It's too late already!  And it's too late because the Republicans never give a damn for bipartisan harmony."  Swanson also remarks,   "John Nichols says:  impeachment is not a constitutional crisis.  It's the cure for the one we're in.  Aspirin is not a headache crisis.  Impeachment is not a constitutional crisis."

Swanson: Well, you would if Pelosi whipped on it.  And Congress members back bills all the time that are not predicted to pass.  If their colleagues fail to join them, that's between their colleagues and their colleagues' constituents.  And again, impeachment usually does its work without getting all the way to impeachment.  A move to impeach for refusal to comply with subpoenas, for example, might result in compliance with subpoenas.  And it is the only thing that might."

Swanson: "Well, you might if you put the crimes on television and if the house impeached.  But you would do good for the nation and Democrats would do good for their party even with a Senate acquittal.  Nothing would better identify for the public the Senators who need to be thrown out of office.  And impeachment even without conviction would reverse the public perception of Democrats as having no spine.  They may hold even in the next election without impeaching anyone or getting us out of Iraq, but if they want to win new seats, and if they want to win the White House with a large enough margin to not have the election stolen, they will reverse their current position and act!"

Swanson: "We expect you to sign onto a bill based on the merits of it, or to introduce your own." 

Swanson: "Well, Kucinich's bill charges Cheney with the felony that involves misleading Congress and with the crime of threatening war on Iran. Cheney is on videotape doing so.  Conyers' book lists lots of felonies.  But in fact, not every crime is an impeachable offense and not every impeachable offense is a crime.  When Nixon cheated on his taxes or Clinton cheated on his wife and lied about it under oath, no impeachable offenses were committed.  When Nixon lied to the public or when Bush ignored warnings prior to 9/11, no crimes were committed, but the offenses were impeachable."

Swanson: "Yes, Congressman; Yes, Congresswoman.  And if you don't people will die.  Which is worse?  A majority backs impeachment now for Cheney and a majority or close to it for Bush.  Those numbers will go up, not down, if you act, regardless of what the media says.  You know those 18 percent of Americans who approve of the job you're doing?  Even they don't like the media.  No campaign email raises more money than one that begins, 'Fox News just attacked me.'" 

Swanson: "I think Congress should start with Cheney and watch as Republicans are forced to abandon him.  The Republicans would have done this to the Democrats years ago.  The idea that impeachment would help Bush and Cheney originated in Republican National Committee talking points published in May 2006.  Pelosi immediately adopted the idea as her own.  It flies in the face of the historical record.  When the Republicans have moved impeachment, as against Truman for example, they've benefited at the polls.  When the Democrats tried to impeach Nixon, who was popular compared to Cheney or Bush, they won huge victories.  When they promised not to impeach Reagan, they lost in the next elections.  The exceptional case is the Clinton impeachment which was uniquely unpopular. Nonetheless, the Republicans hung onto both houses of Congress and the White House." 

Swanson: "[C]ompared to Bush and Cheney he looks like a saint."

Swanson: "We cannot afford the luxury of pessimism.  While there are things Congress refuses to even consider, like ending the occupation or impeaching Cheney or Bush, there are also things that we as citizens have a responsibility to consider but rarely do.  We can shut down our Congress members' offices with endless repeated sit-ins.  We can make it impossible for them to work.  That changes the whole calculation.  We can shut down the city of Washington.  The next big march is on the 29th, following a camp in front of the Capitol from the 22nd to the 29th.  If we bring a million people and on the 29th refuse to leave, if we block the streets and fill the jails, all bets and probably all wars are off."

In this writing, I have both summarized and extrapolated on parts of Swanson's speech, called "Is Peace or Impeachment Possible?", originally published as an article in this week's Op-Ed. 

That article is a great tool for Americans who are crying out for justice and a just government restoration in the USA.

Swanson ends his speech in an optimistic tone that encourages us all to continue contacting our congressmen. 

I encourage you readers to do so now! (I sent out my letters this afternoon already using that helpful link.)

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).