Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » Time for change » Read entry Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
Time for change's Journal
Posted by Time for change in General Discussion
Mon Jun 09th 2008, 07:40 PM
Since Conyers is welcoming arguments that would help him make up his mind, if you agree that Bush and Cheney should be impeached, please consider writing Conyers to tell him so. In doing so, please feel free to use any ideas in this post, verbatim or
The National Impeachment Network reports that on June 5th, John Conyers agreed to meet with a group of CodePinkers to discuss impeachment, challenging them to try to rebut his objections to impeachment.

We all know that Conyers has very ambivalent feelings about impeachment. On the one hand, we know that he would love to see it done, as proven by his great 345 page report of August 2006, “The Constitution in Crisis – The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, Cover-ups in the Iraq War, and Illegal Domestic Surveillance”, in which he lays out an airtight case for impeachment, with 1,401 references. In the introduction to his report, Congress thanks the blogosphere for all the help they provided him in the writing of his report:

I would like to give credit to the “blogosphere” for its myriad and invaluable contributions to me and my staff. Absent the assistance of “blogs” and other internet based media, it would have been impossible to assemble all the information, sources and other materials necessary to the preparation of this report. Whereas the so-called “mainstream media” has frequently been willing to look past the abuses of the Bush administration, the blogosphere has proven to be a new and important bulwark of our Nation’s first amendment freedoms.

But on the other hand, he is very worried about the consequences of a failed impeachment attempt, and also he is wary about going against the Democratic Party leadership on this issue. His ambivalence can be clearly seen in a transcript and video of a January 2008 interview with Rob Kall of Op-Ed News, where Conyers actually says that “impeachment is ON the table”, but for various reasons he is reluctant to proceed “at this time”. Conyers’ current objections to impeachment are:

 The majority of Americans don’t want impeachment.
 The corporate media will slay us.
 There is not enough time.
 There are not enough votes.
 It could cost us the 2008 election.

The following are my answers to those objections.


The majority of Americans don’t want impeachment

You can see from this list of polls, most which were obtained when George Bush was more popular than he is now, that the percent of Americans responding positively to impeachment polls varies usually between over 30% and over 50%, depending upon how the poll is worded. At the high end, polls that say “hold accountable through impeachment” or “consider impeaching” show a clear majority in favor, such as 53% to 42% in this poll, or 52% to 43% in this one. At the other end, polls which actually mention removal from office usually show only around 30% to 45% in favor.

There are two very important things to consider about these polls. First, holding an impeachment hearing is the equivalent of Congress “considering impeachment” – which most Americans favor. Polls which actually mention removal from office are understandably less likely to be met with a favorable response because there are many Americans who feel uncomfortable enough with what Bush and Cheney are doing to our country that they want to see impeachment pursued, but they are not yet convinced enough that they are willing to say that they should be removed from office.

More important is the fact that most Americans have little or no understanding of the extent and seriousness of the many crimes that Bush and Cheney have committed, because of the appalling lack of substantive coverage by our corporate news media. Once impeachment hearings get underway, our corporate news media will be forced to cover them. Most Americans will then become much better educated about the issues than they are now, and the percent that are in favor of removal from office will likely go through the roof, as happened with Richard Nixon when his crimes were exposed during the televised Watergate hearings. The fact that nearly 50% of Americans already are in favor of impeachment, despite the lack of substantive media coverage, should be seen as very ominous for the Bush administration.


The corporate media will slay us

Undoubtedly, most of the corporate media will indeed attempt to slay us, just as they always attempt to slay Democrats, especially around election time. In other words, most corporate talking heads will attempt to spin the situation to make the impeachment hearings appear to be spiteful acts of vengeance or a dirty political scheme unworthy of serious statesmen.

But it’s a lot easier to get away with spinning things that people don’t get to see for themselves. When our corporate media repeatedly said during the 2000 election campaign that Al Gore was a liar, most uninformed people had no way to judge that statement, so some chose to believe it and others didn’t. But when people actually see on television the evidence presented against Bush and Cheney, it will be very difficult for the corporate media to spin that evidence into something other than the high crimes that it points to.

It all comes down to the question of whether or not the Democratic Party is willing to let the corporate media define the two parties and what they stand for, or whether they choose to fight back and present their case directly to the American people. Ultimately, if they choose to let the corporate media define politics in our country, the wealthy and powerful corporate elite will become our masters even more than they are today. That is the road to fascism. We are already well along that road. If we don’t fight back we will soon reach the point where turning back will be next to impossible without a violent upheaval that few Americans are ready for.


There is not enough time

The impeachment hearings of Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton took very little time. In Bush and Cheney’s case, a vast amount of evidence has already been accumulated. In fact, John Conyers himself summed up the evidence in his 2006 report as follows:

The report finds there is substantial evidence the President, the Vice President and other high ranking members of the Bush Administration misled Congress and the American people … The Report concludes that a number of these actions amount to prima facie evidence that federal criminal laws have been violated… The Report also concludes that these charges clearly rise to the level of impeachable conduct.

And a vast amount of additional evidence has accumulated since Conyers conducted his investigation and made that statement. In other words, the evidence is already there. It is just a matter of getting it together and presenting it to the American people.


There are not enough votes

In many ways the argument that there are not enough votes for conviction of Bush and Cheney for impeachable offenses is analogous to a prosecuting attorney who is considering an indictment for murder deciding against doing so because he believes there are not enough votes on the jury. That is an absurd argument because nobody expects the votes to be there until the trial has been conducted. But admittedly, my example of the murder trial is a somewhat different situation than impeachment because impeachment hearings and trials in the Senate for conviction of impeachable offenses are generally more political in nature than simple murder trials. So let’s consider this from the political angle.

Granted, the current crop of Senate Republicans are largely hard core conservatives who don’t give a damn about our Constitution or the Bush/Cheney administration’s repeated violations of it. So why bother even trying? Aside from the fact that it is the right thing to do, and that failing to even try to impeach Bush and Cheney would condone their numerous criminal violations of our Constitution, there are a couple of other good reasons to discount what some consider to be the current lack of votes for conviction in the Senate.

As conservative and conscienceless as most of our Republican Senators are, most of them want to remain in the Senate. When the American public is presented over a period of several weeks or months with the accumulated evidence of high crimes committed by the Bush/Cheney administration, and as their outrage grows and Bush’s poll numbers plummet to new lows, I suspect that a number of Republican Senators will opt for self-preservation at the expense of loyalty to a sinking presidential administration.

But if they don’t, at least we will have one big consolation: Just imagine what our new Senate will look like in 2009.


It could cost us the 2008 election

Consider the attempt to impeach Richard Nixon. (The Clinton impeachment hearings are not comparable because Clinton had done nothing that could be considered an impeachable offense, and most Americans were well aware of that). The Nixon impeachment hearings, on the other hand, provide the most similar example in U.S. history to potential Bush/Cheney impeachment hearings, except that Bush and Cheney’s crimes are more numerous and serious than Nixon’s.

As a result of evidence obtained from hearings of the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities to investigate events surrounding the break-in at the Watergate Hotel and other abuses of Presidential power by Richard Nixon, House Democrats initiated impeachment hearings against Nixon in October 1973. As impeachment hearings progressed and as more and more evidence of impeachable offenses accumulated, U.S. public opinion turned against Nixon, and eventually his own Republican Party turned against him, thus forcing him to resign in August 1974. In the 1974 mid-term elections Democrats gained 48 seats in the House and 5 seats in the Senate. In order to “heal our nation’s wounds”, our new President, Gerald Ford, appointed by Nixon as Vice President shortly prior to Nixon’s resignation, preemptively pardoned Nixon for any crimes he may have committed that were related to the impeachment charges against him. Many believe that that pardon was a major factor in Ford’s defeat in the 1976 Presidential election.


In conclusion

Elizabeth Holtzman, former U.S. Congresswoman from New York, who was an active participant on the U.S. House Committee handling the impeachment of Richard Nixon, had this to say on the issue of George Bush’s impeachment:

Our country's Founders provided the power of impeachment to prevent the subversion of the Constitution. President Bush has subverted and defied the Constitution in many ways. His defiance and his subversion continue.

Failure to impeach Bush would condone his actions. It would allow him to assume he can simply continue to violate the laws on wiretapping and torture and violate other laws as well without fear of punishment. He could keep the Iraq War going or expand it even further than he just has on the basis of more lies, deceptions and exaggerations… Worse still, if Congress fails to act, Bush might be emboldened to believe he may start another war, perhaps against Iran, again on the basis of lies, deceptions and exaggerations.

There is no remedy short of impeachment to protect us from this President, whose ability to cause damage in the next two years is enormous. If we do not act against Bush, we send a terrible message of impunity to him and to future Presidents and mark a clear path to despotism and tyranny. Succeeding generations of Americans will never forgive us for lacking the nerve to protect our democracy.

Those words are just as applicable today as they were last year.

Since John Conyers is welcoming arguments that would help him make up his mind, if you agree that Bush and Cheney should be impeached, please consider writing Conyers to tell him so. In doing so, please feel free to use any combination of the arguments in this post, verbatim, or with any changes you feel are appropriate. Conyers’ contact information is included here.
Discuss (12 comments) | Recommend (55 votes)
A summary of my DU posts
Time for change


The good majority of my DU posts consist of one of six general subjects: The need to remove from office the current cancer upon our nation; election fraud; the tragedy of the Bush administration; my ideas on the liberal values that we all hope will some day replace the values that our current government runs on; historical events that I believe cast light upon our current situation; and other political ideas.


The need to remove Bush and Cheney from office

In 2006, John Conyers wrote a 198 page report, documented with 1,401 references, titled “The Constitution in Crisis – The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, Cover-ups in the Iraq War, and Illegal Domestic Surveillance”. The title of his report reflected the primary reasons why George Bush and Dick Cheney must be removed from office: They have made a mockery of our Constitution – the foundation for the rule of law in our nation – by consistently violating it. Our Constitution, if we can keep it in fact and not just in name, makes our nation much more than just a democracy. By providing protections for minorities and the powerless, our Constitution adds civility, humanity, and decency to what could otherwise be a barbaric nation – democratic or not.

Aside from the continuing damage that Bush and Cheney can do to our country in their remaining time in office, including their potential to involve us in ever expanding new wars, failing to remove from office the most lawless presidential administration in our history will set an awful precedent in our nation – a precedent for doing away with our Constitution. Providing in our Constitution a mechanism for impeachment and removal from office was of utmost priority to our Founding Fathers. As Thomas Jefferson once said, “When once a republic is corrupted there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles…”

Many arguments have been put forward against impeachment. This post answers those arguments. Some opponents of impeachment mistakenly advocate the view that the impeachment of public officials requires evidence of the commitment of an actual crime – and would not be justified by such things as gross violation of the public trust, corruption, negligence, or incompetence. Leaving aside the fact that such an interpretation would leave our nation subject to rule by people who would do great and possibly irreparable harm to it, the preponderance of evidence flatly contradicts that interpretation.

Others claim that we don’t have enough evidence to proceed with impeachment. I argue here that the current evidence for impeachment is so abundant, arguing that we need more sets the impeachment bar at an absurdly high level.

Others argue we don’t have the votes for impeachment – which implies that we must not bring individuals to trial until we have counted the votes, rather the using the trial to get the votes. Such an argument ignores the likelihood that votes will accumulate as Americans watch the impeachment trial and become intensely exposed for the first time to the many outrageous crimes of George Bush and Dick Cheney. And it also ignores the fact that Senators who refuse to vote for conviction will probably be putting their seats in jeopardy.

But perhaps the most urgent reason for moving to impeach Bush and Cheney as soon as possible is that their continuing refusal to be bound by the laws and the Constitution of our nation raises the spectacle that they may be planning a coup d’etat. Why else would they go to such lengths to destroy our Constitution and the rule of law in our nation? We must preempt them by moving as quickly as possible on this.


Election fraud

The DU apparently was born as a result of the 2000 November-December election fraud that began the long nightmare that is the George W. Bush administration.

I went to bed on Election Day 2000, shortly after Bush was announced as our new President, feeling as if the end of world civilization was near at hand. My wife woke me up a couple hours later to tell me the good news that the announcement of Bush’s Presidency had been temporarily cancelled. Thus began a period of 36 days that I followed more intensely than any other news event of my life – ending in the infamous and disastrous Supreme Court decision that marked the beginning of our long road to dictatorship.

My son (EOTE) joined DU in January 2001, a few days after it began, but I did not, for reasons that now escape me. I did, however, do a lot of writing about the 2000 election, including a desperate plea to my Maryland Senators, to please demand a real recount of the 2000 Florida vote. And I also contributed an article to DU on that subject, in my son’s name (I did not use my own name because I was a federal employee and I was afraid that I could get into trouble for writing such an article), in the spring of 2001.

The fraudulent 2004 Presidential election is what brought me into DU. I had worked as a volunteer in the Kerry/Edwards campaign, I had followed the presidential polls obsessively, and by Election Day 2004 I was about as confident as I could be that John Kerry would be our next President. Thus, the reported results of that election were both profoundly disappointing and difficult for me to believe, as they were for the great majority of DUers.

I immediately began an effort to acquire as many election statistics as I could, in a feverish and desperate attempt to prove that the election was a fraud, which I hoped would aid in its overturning. In late November I had my son post an analysis that I did of the discrepancy between the exit polls and the official election results (Note: My son supplied the title, which I feel is too strong, which you can see if you read the article). And finding that it was awkward to have my son post my articles, I joined DU a few days later.

Since then I have posted dozens of election fraud related threads, a small number of the most important of which I have included in my journal.

In particular, I have come to believe that the main mechanism by which the 2004 election was stolen was the massive and illegal targeted purging of Democratic voters in Ohio, especially in Cleveland. This thread contains a great amount of evidence to support that contention.

In addition, I believe that there is good evidence that says that large numbers of votes in Cuyahoga County were deleted by its central tabulator, as explained in this thread, which also discusses an early 2006 partial audit of Cuyahoga County. And, I think that the death of Raymond Lemme, who while investigating Clint Curtis’ sworn allegations of vote switching computer programs, was found dead in a Georgia hotel room, just a couple weeks after telling Curtis that he had traced the corruption “all the way to the top”, is extremely suspicious to say the least. Here is my explanation of the controversy over the discrepancy between the 2004 exit polls and the official 2004 vote count. And here is a summary of several reasons I have written about for believing that the 2004 election was stolen.

Finally, here are my ideas for preventing another stolen election in 2006 and 2008.


The tragedy of the Bush administration

The fake war on terrorism

I believe that a crucial requirement for a good understanding of the Bush administration’s actions since September 11, 2001, is the realization that its “War on Terrorism” is nothing but a colossal fake. Only with that realization do numerous Bush administration characteristics and actions make sense, including: Its disinterest in Osama bin Laden; its great urge to rush into a war with Iraq at any cost; its utter contempt for international law and the rest of the world; its succession of no-bid contracts for its wealthy friends; its lavish tax cuts for the wealthiest of our citizens and corporations during ‘time of war’; the Dubai port deals; and, its attempt to turn our democracy into a dictatorship.

With that in mind, I wrote in this post about the main reasons why I believe that the Bush administration was complicit in the 9-11 attacks. There are many reasons why I believe that now, but the initial and still most important reason is the utter failure of our military, the mightiest military that the world has ever known, despite repeated warnings and more than ample time on 9-11 itself, to protect its own capital city.

Abuse of the human rights of prisoners for no apparent purpose

To me, the most sickening and disgraceful aspect of the Bush administration’s “War on Terrorism” is its complete lack of concern for human rights, demonstrated among other ways by the indefinite confinement, without trial or even bringing of charges, of thousands of prisoners of war, and its frequent use of torture. I have discussed this issue in several OPs, starting with this one. Here I describe the issue as seen through the eyes of a U.S. Army Muslim Chaplain who had ministerial responsibilities for hundreds of our prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, who witnessed the severe and daily abuse of his charges over a period of several months, and who eventually was imprisoned himself when it was felt that he was making too many waves over what he had seen. Here is my summary of what the great journalist Seymour Hersh had to say on this subject, based on his numerous high level sources. Jimmy Carter felt so strongly about this issue that he broke the unwritten rule against ex-Presidents criticizing sitting Presidents, with one of the most scathing attacks on this policy that I have ever seen. And Senator Richard Durbin was the victim of continued public verbal abuse from the right for daring to make public how our government was treating its prisoners.

Lying us into war

It is evident to most informed people that one of the biggest motivations for Bush's "War on Terror" was to provide a justification for the invasion of Iraq. Seymour Hersh’s excellent account of how the Bush administration manipulated and twisted intelligence in order justify a preemptive war against Iraq is a must read for anyone who still supports this administration and thinks that the Iraq war was necessary. And as for Bush's excuse that we are now fighting that war for the benefit of the Iraqi people, Democrats should start talking about how the Iraqi people actually feel about us being in their country.

Just how bad are Bush and his cronies and how much danger do they pose to American democracy?

George w. Bush and his administration and fellow travellers in today's Republican Party are about as bad as they come. They are anti-science ignoramuses. They are chicken hawks. They have no consciences. They are torturers. They are cowards. They are evil. And I doubt that there are any moral boundaries beyond which they will not go to get their way.

I think that in the interest of preserving our democracy, we should be aware of the similarities between the Bush administration and Hitler’s Nazis (which I wrote about even before the revelations about Bush’s warantless wiretapping), and understand that if we aren’t vigilant, yes it CAN happen here too.


Moral values that separate us from today’s Republicans

It makes me so mad to hear people ridicule what they consider to be “liberal values” and compare them unfavorably to the wonderful moral values of George W. Bush and his Republicans friends. In the vast majority of cases these people don’t even have a vague idea about what liberal values really are. They have simply been conditioned by our corporate media over several years or decades to believe that liberals encourage irresponsibility, are ‘soft’ on national defense and ‘law and order’, and are wild spenders. These ridiculous myths about liberals have in turn encouraged the Democratic Party to disavow the liberal label and in some cases to veer way to the right. I submit that, rather than running away from the liberal label we should be proud of it, and we should challenge those that seek to disparage it. And to further make this point I posted a tribute to several historical and current political leaders who have been unafraid to speak out loudly for what they believe in, and I suggested an answer to those Republican morons who accuse liberals of hating America.

Let's take a look at some of the specific moral values that separate Democrats from Republicans:

Republicans like to pretend that they're more moral than us because they're more "religious"

Many of those who disparage liberals are fundamentalist Christians who repeatedly invoke the name of Jesus Christ, and who believe that the superiority of their moral values to those of liberals and Democrats is proven by their repeated references to Jesus. Don’t these people understand that Jesus was a liberal, whose moral values were much closer to those of the Democratic Party than to those of the Republican Party, with whom they align themselves and vote for? Isn't it an astounding paradox that the Republican Party has usurped for their own purposes one of the most liberal religious leaders in world history, while at the same time showing nothing but contempt for liberals and liberal principles?

The movement for privatization of government functions

One of the biggest threats to our democracy is the privatization movement. In the name of “freedom” and “self-reliance”, the leaders of this movement advocate the freedom of powerful corporations to destroy our environment and to run our elections, our schools, our social safety net programs, and our prison system, as well as every other program which has long been considered a legitimate function of government. The fact that government is elected by the people to serve public functions, whereas the purpose of private corporations is to make profits for their investors, is either totally lost on these people, or else they simply feel that the above mentioned programs should be run for profit rather than for service.

Al Gore alluded to this issue in his great film, "An Inconvenient Truth", where he discussed the unholy alliance between government, private industry, and the press, whereby a corrupt government, in exchange for legal bribes from the industries they are supposed to control, propagates false information and policies that are favorable to those industries instead of the public that they are elected to serve. I discuss my own personal experience with that unholy alliance, where the FDA withdrew an about to be published scientific article I had written, under pressure from a manufacturer who stood to be economically hurt by the information in that article.

The need for a free and independent press

Another great threat to our democracy is the ownership of our country’s news media by a very small group of wealthy individuals who have strong ties to the Republican Party, and whose motivation in providing “news” is to maintain satisfaction with the status quo, rather than to report what is important and true. Two prime examples of corporate media shills and pseudo-journalists who pretend to be real journalists are Chris Matthews and Tim Russert. Bill Moyers explains how this situation threatens to destroy our democracy, and how this came about through the dismantling of rules and regulations which were meant to prevent the monopolization of our news. And Robert Parry explains why he started his web site to help combat the misinformation we get from our corporate media.

Health care

Liberals, and most other decent people, believe that people should be entitled to decent health care. That is why, prior to the "pro-life" administration of George W. Bush, infant mortality rate in the United States had been steadily declining for several decades. But shortly into the Bush administration, due to the starving of women and infant health programs for federal funds, infant mortality rate began a steady rise. Nor do Republicans care much about veterans' health, as indicated by the rejecting of this much needed veteran's health bill in the U.S. Senate by virtually a strict party line vote.

An enquiring mind

One of the many tricks that our corporate media uses to squelch alternative viewpoints is to label anyone who substantially disagrees with their “correct” version of the news as “conspiracy theorists”. Well, I have news for them. The views of us “conspiracy theorists” are usually much more closely aligned with reality than is most of the trash that we hear from the corporate news media these days, such as the stories about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, which were used to justify our illegal preemptive invasion of that country. We “conspiracy theorists” believe that it is not only the right of American citizens to challenge the corporate news media story lines, but it is our responsibility as well, as good citizens who care about our country.

The dignity of all human beings

Perhaps the most important value held by liberals is a belief in the dignity of all human beings – hence the 19th century movement by liberals to abolish slavery. Here is one of my favorite stories on that subject.

A summary

And here is a post where I talk about all the major values that separate Democrats from Republicans.


Historical events that help us understand our present

Though there is little doubt that George W. Bush is by far the worst president we’ve ever had, our past history is at least partly responsible for preparing the way for this tragedy. The history of our nation is full of examples of failures to live up to our ideals. In addition to our long history of slavery and our near extermination of the Native American population of our present day country, we began a long history of overseas imperialism beginning in the late 19th Century. The long standing history of extreme hostility to socialism by the elites of our country has been responsible for much of this imperialism, as well as domestic repression against labor unions and others who would speak out against the status quo. The usurpation by our Executive Branch of the war making powers given to Congress by our Founding Fathers did not originate with George W. Bush. And the attitudes fostered by our long history of slavery are still with us today, especially in the areas of our country where slavery thrived for so long.

Today, as the transgressions of George Bush and Dick Cheney threaten the existence of our nation as we know it, we would do well to recall how the German nation was led into tyranny more than six decades ago. The parallels between Hitler’s war on terror and George Bush’s war on terror are extraordinarily striking in my opinion. And the better able we are to recognize the danger, the more likely we are to take steps to prevent a similar fate.


Political ideas

Republicans have 3 great advantages in elections against Democrats, whereas the only advantage that the Democratic Party has is that its policies are meant to serve all Americans, rather than just the select few. In addition to electoral fraud and huge sums of money donated to the GOP by their corporate masters as legalized bribery, Democrats have to contend with a multitude of news media whores.

But those advantages are not sufficient for a Party that has nothing of value to offer to our country. So, when we suggest investigation of their corrupt deeds they call us conspiracy theorists. When we suggest policies such as making basic affordable health care available to all Americans they accuse us of class warfare. And when we criticize the rampant corruption at the highest levels of government they accuse us of "hating America". And when none of that works they try to scare us by telling us that if we don't give them unlimited power over us we risk being killed by terrorists.

If there was ever a presidential administration that needed to be impeached, this is it. Grass roots efforts are under way to accomplish this, and we can all help. Our Democratic leaders need to seriously consider and talk about this. And they must be united and avoid inter-party warfare.
Profile Information
Time for change
Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your ignore list
DU Donor DU Donor
8282 posts
Member since Thu Dec 2nd 2004
Silver Spring, MD, US
Male
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.