Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiJohn Conyers Is No Martin Luther King
What do Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, chair of the House Committee on the Judiciary, and President George W. Bush have in common? They both think they can dis Cindy Sheehan and count on gossip columnists like the Washington Post's David Milbank to trivialize a historic moment.
I'll give this to President Bush. He makes no pretense when he disses. He would not meet with Sheehan to define for her the "noble cause" for which her son Casey died or tell her why he had said it was "worth it."
Conyers, on the other hand, was dripping with pretense as he met with Sheehan, Rev. Lennox Yearwood and me Monday in his office in the Rayburn building. I have seldom been so disappointed with someone I had previously held in high esteem. And before leaving, I told him so.
Throwing salt in our wounds, he had us, and some 50 others in his anteroom arrested and taken out of action as the Capitol Police "processed" us for the next six hours.
As we began our discussion with Conyers, it was as though he thought we were "born yesterday," as Harry Truman would put it. With feigned enthusiasm he began, Let's hold a Town Hall meeting in Detroit so we can talk about impeachment. Get out my schedule; let's see, we need to hear from everyone about this.
Been there, done that, I reminded the congressman.
On May 29, 2007, Col. Ann Wright and I were among those who flew to Detroit for a highly advertised Town Hall meeting on impeachment, because we were assured that John Conyers would be there.
That Town Hall/panel discussion was arranged by the Michigan chapter of the National Lawyers Guild less than two weeks after the Detroit City Council passed a resolution, cosponsored by Conyers' wife Monica Conyers-calling for the impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. We had hoped that Monica's clear vision and courage might be contagious.
I had to remind the congressman that he did not show up for the Town Hall.
Apparently, that incident was of such little consequence to the congressman that he had completely forgotten about it. Small wonder, then, that he has apparently forgotten the oath he took to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Selective Alzheimers? I don't know. What was clear was that he had forgotten a whole lot.
When I raised James Madison's role in crafting a Constitution that mentions impeachment no fewer than six times, he replied: Madison did not say Conyers has to impeach every one. Why, if I had to impeach everyone for high crimes and misdemeanors, that's all my committee would have time to do.
I learned in Rhetoric 101 the name of that technique: reductio ad absurdam.
How about just Bush and Cheney, we suggested.
Conyers protested that he would need 218 votes in the House and complained that the votes are not there. His priorities showed through in his loud lament that if he fell short of the 218 votes, the Republicans and Fox News would have a field day.
There was no getting through to Conyers, who seemed astonished at the direct questions we were posing.
In reflecting on this later, the dictum of my father, also a lawyer, began to ring in my ears: "When you reach the age of 'statutory senility,' you do everyone a favor if you retire."
He followed his own example, when he retired as Chancellor of the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York, long before senility-statutory, or otherwise-set in for him.
Septuagenarian Conyers (and, for that matter, 80-year-old Senator John Warner, R-Virginia, who has also forgotten his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution) would do well to heed that advice.
Toward the end of the meeting, Conyers showed uncommon chutzpah in referring to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. That was too much for me.
You're no Martin Luther King, I found myself wanting to say. Instead, I quoted a portion of Dr. King's famous address at Riverside Church almost 40 years ago:
"We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak....there is such a thing as being too late....Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, and dejected with lost opportunity....Over the bleached bones of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: 'Too late.'"
I used that quote in a letter I left with Conyers' aides on Monday, in which I tried to express why my colleagues in Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity feel it is URGENT to find some way to apply the Constitution to restrain a run-away Executive.
The text of that letter follows:
A Note to Congressman John Conyers:
On Impeachment and the Edmund Pettus Bridge
Dear John,
We each have our favored crime for which President Bush and Vice President Cheney should be impeached. Many of us have several.
But the real challenge is to look AHEAD. What are Bush/Cheney likely to do in the coming months if the impeachment process does NOT begin?
One often hears, Oh, they will do what they want anyway, impeachment process or not. Not true.
If we the people and our representatives in Congress choose the course given us by our Founders and impeachment proceedings begin, important swaths of our body politic AND military will be less likely to follow illegal orders from the White House.
These important constituencies will become sensitized to the peril into which this administration has brought us and to the extra-constitutional orders they may be asked to carry out.
NEW ELEMENT: Even the Scaife-owned newspapers have begun to question Bush's MENTAL STABILITY.
What could be more important at this juncture?
We Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have been applying all of our analytical techniques to assess the Bush/Cheney administration. We have helped to establish the long record of abuses and usurpations of the past. What about the future?
Iraq is going to hell in a hand basket. A Tet-type incident becomes more and more likely. The Green Zone is being hit by mortar fire more frequently than before. It may be just a matter of time before the Resistance gets lucky and lobs a shell onto our spanking new $600-million embassy, killing a bunch of Americans in the process.
What then? Will Cheney tell the president the US military has found Iranian markings on the shell fragments and we need to retaliate...and, actually, while we're at it, let's implement Plan A and hit all Iranian nuclear-related facilities.
With Congress voting resolution after resolution against Iran, how would the president react to such a suggestion from Cheney?
Many of us intelligence analysts have found utility in relying, in part, on short studies applying psychoanalysis to develop profiles of foreign leaders. (This marriage of psychoanalysis and intelligence work actually goes back to the early 1940s, when the OSS commissioned such studies on Hitler.) We called them "at-a-distance personality assessments."
Three years ago Justin Frank, M.D., a psychiatrist here in Washington, wrote a book "Bush on the Couch" in which he provided keen insights into the president's mode of thinking-or not thinking.
Eager to use every tool at our disposal, VIPS recently asked Dr. Frank to update his observations, with a view to forecasting, to the extent possible, how Bush is likely to react to the building pressures of the coming weeks and months. We will issue, perhaps as early as this week, Dr. Frank's latest analysis, fortified by our own input. But we already have his preliminary analysis; there is no other word for it: Scary.
In a quick note to us this morning [July 23], Dr. Frank noted we are "dealing with a potentially cornered man [who] could lash out, and it is possible that the best way would be to bomb Iran.... Whatever the root causes of Bush's pathology, we have a dangerous man running things...grandiose and unchecked."
Some snippets from the Memorandum that Dr. Frank is drafting for issuance under VIPS auspices:
"George W. Bush is without conscience...and destructive, willfully so. He has always likes to break things...most shocking is the way he is breaking our armed forces.
"He doesn't care about others, is indifferent to their suffering...He is almost constitutionally missing the ability to sympathize or empathize...More indifferent to reality than out of touch with it, he makes up whatever story he wants.
"Ultimately, he is psychologically unstable...His goal is to destroy things [and he can do that] without experiencing anxiety or a sense of responsibility. An equally important goal is to protect himself from shame, from being wrong, from being found small and weak."
So what do we do?
At a similarly critical juncture, Dr. King was typically direct: "We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak.... there is such a thing as being too late.... Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, and dejected with lost opportunity.... Over the bleached bones of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: 'Too late.'"
There is today another Edmund Pettus Bridge to cross, John. And it has fallen to you to lead us across.
With respect,
Ray McGovern (for VIPS)
Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in Washington, DC. He is a 27-year veteran analyst of the CIA and co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).
© 2007 Consortium News
71 Comments so far
Show Allto RichM July 24th, 2007 5:51 pm
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/mprot3.htm
I don't buy the "we don't have the votes" BS thrown out every time these cowards are confronted.
81 municipalities and counting didn't vote Clinton for impeachment.
Offices for impeachment were not set up for Clinton.
People didn't march in the streets repeatedly to impeach Clinton.
Calls for impeachment from numerous Constitutional scholars, and former high government servants didn't call for Clinton's impeachment.
Books weren't written exposing numerous high crimes and misdemeanors Clinton should be impeached for.
All these things and more have happened to impeach bush, so screw they don't have the votes - THEY HAVE THE PEOPLE!!!
Public pressure for impeachment is like any other kind of pressure. You wouldn't know it was there unless you turned a valve and heard a disconcerting hiss, or unbolted the lid and witnessed an explosion. The press don't gauge it, having found their true calling of professional obfuscation. Sheehan vs Conyers has the right resonance; something straight from the core, just loud enough for most to notice, faintly trembling the whole apparatus.
Are the votes there or not? Is there a real chance of fouling the game plan for dem victory in '08 via republican self-hanging?
Suppose the impeachment votes would materialise but were never called for. Suppose that by the end of next year the words 'Democrat' and 'Republican' sounded tragically anachronistic. You'd only be supposing what conscience whispers.
Is any other voice to be trusted right now?
ABBY... what about Michael Moore?
TNATHANT: Good points!
JEFFREY COURION: Love your posting! Hey, listen, next time if you perchance pick up a "call" from Molly (Ivins) could you pass on my fond regards?
ABBYWOODS: thank you for reminding us of these key film developments. FEW forms of media can touch minds and awaken souls as powerfully and efficiently as film!
What do you suppose the reaction is going to be when "Loose Change the Final Cut" is released world-wide the weekend before the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the 3 Trade Centers in NYC, the Pentagon in D.C. and the "crash" of the "hijacked" jet in Shanksville, PA?
Mind you, this film has a $20 million budget, and is being executive produced by the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, Mark Cuban. Mark Cuban owns Landmark Theaters. Charlie Sheen is narrating the documentary. Richard Branson was showing "Loose Change the 2nd Edition" on all his Virgin Atlantic flights until he pulled it because some people were going NUTS!!!
This documentary has NEW information and I'm sure it will include Dr. David Ray Griffin, the 9/11 Pilots, Engineers, Physicists, Professors, the Jersey Girls who pushed for the investigation etc.
And not only will the film be released theatrically. Don't you suppose with a $20 million budget and Charlie Sheen there will be interviews on CNN, Fox, MSNBC, Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart etc?
As with Sicko, we need to get out and see this film and chat it up with our families and friends and online. I believe this film can provide the "tipping point" we need to confront not only the Bush Administration but the Democrats and Republican cowards who are currently fouling the halls of the Capitol.
Whether you believe the evidence brought forth in the film or not, I feel we should all take a long hard look at it and respond accordingly.
And this Friday the award winning film "No End in Sight" about the Iraq war is opening and it will most certainly be discussed in the MSM.
Do ya'll agree that it's a tipping point we need? People in the MSM growing a spine? Those in the military growing a spine? Those roaming the halls of Congress growing a spine?
Where are the true American heros? I'll be listening to one online this afternoon at 3pm Pacific. KPFA out of Berkeley, "Guns and Butter" produced by Bonnie Faulkner. I don't know the subject of the show and I don't care. I respect her and I've never heard a bad show yet.
Here are my American heros right now: Bill Moyers, Scott Ritter, Bill Maher, Dr. David Ray Griffin, Steven Jones, Bonnie Faulkner, Charlie Sheen, Sean Penn, Keith Olbermann, Ed Asner, and Cindy Sheehan. Oh! And the producers of "Lil' Bush" on Comedy Central. (It's on tonight at 10:30). And almost all of YOU!!!!
Sheehan running for office is the best news I've heard in a long, long, long time.
Has nothing to do with race it has to do with substance and Conyers has no real substance when it comes to changing the system for he is a product of the system.
Not once in his carreer has he gone against the system of tit for tat you scratch my back I scratch yours and giving mouth to clearly unatainable goals such as Reparations keeps his supporters happy but not one piece of legislation put forward by his office is worth paper it is written upon in that regards.
What committee does he sit upon that has oversight and what has happend to that committee and do not blame the opposition that he has gone along with because he was more inteested in welfare programs.
When do the people put into office run the country, governments buisness, instead of social restructuring, buisness interference, while the people outside of elected office get the legislation and laws passed by non elected bureaucrats tied in with corproate interest finaceing a few politicos to the max who are supposed to be on oversight cvommittees to keep government limited and not partnered with financial interest.
the new bill by Demos being introduced in lower house gives President actually more powers than he has today in keeping men in Iraq, with the demos saying they do not beleive Iraq has anything to do with oil.
That is something that people like Conyers will never do admit to the true policy of US government and they hand our freebes instead.
Wjhen success is measured how is it done>
Wehen Conyers supported Bills give billions away through tthe years to pharms, farms Elecrical and energy entitys and returns but millions back to the popualce how do the scales tip?
These attacks on Conyers are counterproductive and stench of racism. How dare a white person, such as myself, determine that Conyers is "no Martin Luther King." Are white activists telling Black people who their leaders are and aren't now? Conyers has been fighting for people's rights for decades. Because he does not feel it is strategic in this instance to impeach, he is viciously attacked by so-called "progressives?"
I have no love to the majority of folks in Congress, Democrat or Republican. But these kind of furious condescending attacks on the integrity of someone who has worked hard for causes such as reperations and civil rights do nothing to help build coalitions across race and class in this country. Articles like this alienate anti-racist radicals like myself from the righteous anti-war and progressive stances that people such as Sheehan have taken.
Kathyodat--
You rock girl! That mental picture of the cook, the customer, and you in the middle is a gem!
NSA spying for Bush equals dirt on Dems. Add Wellstone, false flag ops, and you know why nothing is moving forward right now. This is the only explanation. Perks of office and cash for re-election doesn't explain it completely, because most Democrats know in their heart of hearts that Bush and Co are beyond horrible, and that interesting times call for courage. And yet...
Too bad Conyers doesn't realize that life under a dictatorship is not worth living. I was going to say the progressive caucus should get together and agree to speak out (it's unthinkable that they don't know what is REALLY going on), as there is power in numbers, but maybe the problems identified in my first paragraph successfully and continually nip it in the bud.
People -- and especially any brave members of Congress or the government, be there any -- need to speak out and walk point. Others will follow, and we can have our Constitution back.
At least half of the people are fed up. Twenty percent will never understand the discussion in this forum. The other 30% need to come around, soon. that will be enough. Forward this info to your dad in Topeka, your aunt in Illinois, and your acquaintances in your address book. So what if it annoys some of them. Others will be grateful, and life is too precious to worry about netiquette.
Conyers is obviously just phoning it in now, not just as a congressman but also as a human being. Some people make it to 100 and beyond without a change in mental status. Others change abruptly in odd, decreased mental flexibility. I'm not saying Conyers is senile, but he's perhaps undergone a mental transition that has rendered him less able and less flexible in problem solving.
Re Dr Frank's assessment of Bush: Close to truth. Can anyone here picture Bush doing anything sympathetic, anything compassionate or caring? A person's intuitive feel for what to expect is a powerful predictor. I for one would always be wary around Bush, even if he was a coworker or someone loading groceries. Picture yourself in a situation where you were seriously injured and the only one you had to rely on is Bush. How would you feel? Yeah, now you get it. And this thing is our president.
How can we beat Karl Rove at his own game?
I have only one question about the dishonorable Conyers and that is "What took you people so long to bring him out of the closet so we can see his true being?"
You have had this info for over two years and by withholding it so many people put their trust in Conyers expecting him to do as he talks so that now that so many peoples wasted efforts and the campaign contributions are already in his coffers you finaly bring him inot focus.
I am just a man of average intelligence but even I could research his true calling and e-mail the ones who new him best and the staffers who interacted with his staffers but I am not a man of letters as so many of you are. So many who are a lot smarter than I and depend upon those who are much better able to get it out into print.
Well the old saying, "Better Late Than Never" comes to mind but in this case late is too late and maybe we will never be able to regroup in the limited time before BushnCorp is repalced by those of HillarynCorp!
How about doing what's right....because it's right...Step-N-Fetch-It
What a disappointing excuse of a man. Coward
I think there may be something else going on... does it seem plausible to anyone else that Conyers (who I still think is one of the better ones) and others in a position to do something may have been threatened that if they move forward in any real way to stop this band of thugs who have taken over the govt that they will stage another domestic terrorist attack or cause some 'crisis' and declare martial law? they have all the pieces in place to do so. It's also possible that some who should be speaking out are being blackmailed (all that wiretapping, you know) or bribed, if not brainwashed? re another staged attack like 9/11, an inside job, check this out - http://en.rian.ru/world/20070720/69340886.html Conyers et al may be backing down for a reason. However, this band of thugs must still be stopped, for the sake of all.
I just had a "reverse the charges" phone conversaton (conference charges from an unknown higher destination -- I accepted) from Frederick Douglass, Barbara Jordan, Martin Luther King Jr., and Malcolm X. Very revealing. They are really pissed about the behavior and lack of spine by Mr. John Conyers from Detroit. Seems they all tried to mentor John while they were on earth while he was a young man. They all acknowledged he showed such promise. Yet, they all shook their heads in shame. They said it "seems" that after all these years of hope -- that John just doesn't have the soul development to join them in the quest of serving and delivering what is "right" in defining this moment of life.
The four of them send their sincere love to you -- and urge ll of us to stay the course for human dignity and rights.
Conyers was investigating the Ohio election farce also and it apparently didn`t get to first base. Now his reversal on the impeachment proceedings makes one wonder if he was reminded what has happened to all the others who disagreed with this administrations actions. Defination of dictator---one who excercises supreme authority in a state. Mission accomplished.
Yesterday's exercise had some considerable value, in that it should put an end to Conyers' ability to work both sides of the street. By going out of his way to cause the arrest of impeachment advocates, Conyers defines himself as a Bush Administration supporter and the enemy of any effort to call that administration to account.
Put another way, the Democrats simply want the Bush presidency for THEMSELVES. They have not the slightest interest in keeping government within constitutional boundaries. As old Senator Aldrich of Rhode Island once put it, any professed motive but power and self-enrichment is simply "sentimental rot." A pity this confrontation didn't happen in early January instead of late July!
From other articles on the same subject, it would appear Conyers' tactic is a classic example of bait-and-switch. Last Fall, and to select audiences as late as this Spring; Conyers has PROMISED impeachment. He will do so no more!
Lacking constitutional provision for recall of the president, vice president and members of Congress; the only course for the antiwar, impeachment crowd would appear to be this: refusing to engage in or with this premature campaign for president--no money, no work, no attendance at meetings or rallies--UNTIL impeachment and our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are satisfactorily addressed.
This premature presidential campaign was always a diversion from war and accountability of present office holders--and it will be "off to the races" again with whomever is elected president. I've read of HRC telling her military briefers she expects US troops to still be in Iraq at the end of her administration (20 January 2009 through 20 January 2017)!
Thanks for posting the Obama sell-out, Illinios-I! What's a little law breaking when there's a meaningless consensus to embrace? Let the precedent of unchallenged expansion of the executive stand; that's going to do us all a lot of favors down the road. Who needs courts and legislatures or habeus corpus when we have a decider? When did "civil and responsible" come to mean toothless, spineless, and conscience-free? When did holding criminals accountable become "partisan gamesmanship," or does AG actually have it right? This isn't a game of gotcha or chicken. The Bush cabal has broken the most important laws in the land with impunity and recklessness in order to increase their own power and wealth. But why make them submit to a reckoning for their misdeeds? There's a consensus to build.
Considering the rising wrath of voters, it seems there is more going on than the Democrats just blindly waiting it out to 2008. It's possible, of course; I've heard some ignorant and stupid statements out of congresspeople. But several posters have referred to other more nefarious reasons Congress refuses to act against the Bush/Cheney cabal. Such as, the illegal wiretapping has put some Democratic skeletons in Bush's hands. Or Bush is threatening a nuclear holocaust if the Democrats move against him (considering his personality disorder, sounds realistic to me).
We're just the slobs who vote, we're not privileged to know what's going on up there. But I've read enough to know what we learn is the tip of the iceberg. Having been a waitress, I know what it's like to get caught between a cook with a bug up his rear and an irate customer. You can't say anything to the cook, who is in a position of punitive power, and you can't tell the customer that the person cooking his food is an a-hole. You bite the bullet and accept the blame.
I have no solutions, I'm just looking at the situation. But I do agree, I don't see any Wellstones in Congress. Remember, however, Wellstone is dead, and so is his family. Every member of Congress knows that. So how much should we ask of them? If they know better than we that we're faced with an administration that will stop at nothing - nothing - to have their way, what is the solution? How many of you think they would roll out the tanks against Americans who tried to seriously revolt? They've made it very clear that people dying means nothing to them (and actually relish it). The electorate is split on impeachment, athough shifting toward it, and I think it will take public pressure and lots of it to make a difference. Right now there isn't a lot of public pressure. There's a few of us making a lot of noise.
That was a beautiful story and a beautiful letter, Ray McGovern.
I just got Obama's response to my request for him to join impeachment efforts. For those of you with a stomach, read below...it's a load of crap. Vive la revolution!:
---------
Thank you for advising me of your desire to see President Bush impeached. I appreciate hearing from you and understand your concerns and mounting frustration.
I fully appreciate and share your strong dissatisfaction with the current Administration. Major challenges like the war in Iraq and the Gulf Coast tragedy only exacerbate the sense of mishandling and ineffectiveness of those of us who are concerned about the priorities and judgment of this Administration.
While I know many Americans share your strong feelings, I do not think that options like calling for impeachment of the President or the Vice President serve our ultimate objective, which is getting the country back on the right track. The Democratic Party, by vote of the people, took back the majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives in the November elections. But that result has provided Democrats in Congress with more than just subpoena powers or the Speaker's gavel. For the first time in over a decade, we have the opportunity to set the agenda and lead the policy debate, and we have a responsibility to do something constructive with that opportunity.
In this last election, we saw people from Montana to Rhode Island respond to a message of common purpose and progress. On the campaign trail last fall, I saw people respond to a shared desire to educate our kids, grow our economy, care for the vulnerable and expand a culture of tolerance and diversity. I heard a call for progress, not partisanship or political gamesmanship. Americans are ready for a more civil and responsible style of leadership than the kind we have seen on Capitol Hill in recent years. Americans expect and deserve leaders who will focus on meeting the needs of their constituents and working together to solve the most pressing problems we face as a nation.
Thank you again for writing. Please stay in touch in the days ahead.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
United States Senator
-------
Unseat them all!!!!!!!!!!
Another reason they give for not going ahead with impeachment proceedings is that even if they impeach Bush in the Congress they will never have the votes to convict him in the Senate. It doesn't matter to me if he is convicted or not. If they were to impeach Bush, it would kill him. He thinks that history will show him to be a great leader and a "war president". I read Justin Frank's book (if you haven't , I suggest you do) and if they were to impeach him, he would implode. But I think it would never get that far. As soon a they start the impeachment proceedings, there will definitely be another terrorist attack in this country. And it won't be by al Qaeda. These people would do anything to keep power. After the attack they will invoke Marshall law and presidental directive 51. There is a reason Haliburton has been building all those detention centers. You may call me paranoid, but look at what they have done already. It is not paranoia if the threat is real.
montemerrick; You either have no knowledge of what Ray McGovern has been doing these past five years or so to worn the American people about the Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz agenda. or maybe you are just a Bushie trying to stir up opposition against impeachment. Mr. McGovern was ONE OF THE FIRST, to expose the BCW agenda and that, my friend, took extraordinary courage. His remark was certainly not racist. Compare that to Barbara Bush's remark about the black people after hurricane Katrina. That was an insult and a slur.
poet; Your comment is very, very strange. My comment to montemerrick applies to you also.
What has "being alive" got to do with telling the truth and comparing him to William Colby?
bushladin; Great email. Three cheers to you.
RichM; Good post from you, and an accurate description of the " purge".
ezeflyer; Right on! We don't have representative democracy. I'm ready for direct democracy. It's long overdue!
plantman13; Thanks for the history lesson. Our morals and integrity as a nation have sunk to the bottom since Watergate.
Giovanna; Many psychiatrists and psychologists have said the same thing about Bush, including yours truly who is not a doctor.
The status quo will no longer suffice. We must give our financial support to all progressives challenging the seats of these Republicrats. Our democracy depends on it.
Also..Can someone please challenge Rep Bobby Rush (D)? - my congressman from Illinois. He's sitting on his a** and I'm sick of it.
Impeachment
"Impeachment, in the U.S. and Great Britain, proceeding by a legislature for the removal from office of a public official charged with misconduct in office. Impeachment comprises both the act of formulating the accusation and the resulting trial of the charges; it is frequently but erroneously taken to mean only the removal from office of an accused public official. An impeachment trial may result in either an acquittal or in a verdict of guilty. In the latter case the impeached official is removed from office; if the charges warrant such action, the official is also remanded to the proper authorities for trial before a court." Source: FWE
Congress knows they have given away so much power to the Executive that they realize [OR SHOULD] they HAVE NO EFFECT against the current occupant's signing statements. Whatever GWB INC. wants, he creates it through his own silent [under reported] Executive Orders or even less reported signing statements. Congress essentially has NO POWER!
THE ONLY thing our 'representatives' can effectively do is subpoena, hold in contempt, impeach, convict and hope the current occupant does not create or 'allow' another 9/11 to change the apathy in the citizens of this 'great nation' into fear once AGAIN.
WE MUST keep the pressure on for them to ALL they CAN and ALL they SHOULD and ALL THEY MUST DO to relieve this nation of the criminals in the Executive offices.
"Until democracy in effective enthusiastic action fills the vacuum created by the power of modern inventions, we may expect the fascists to increase in power after the war both in the United States and in the world. " - Henry A. Wallace
Anyone who has studied psychopathology has to know that George Bush exhibits all the text-book traits of a psychopath--right down to his semantic aphasia. I noticed his strange demeanor and complete lack of mature character, content, and humility years ago. He displays narcissistic, contradictory, immature, tempermental, and emotionally juvenile behavior on a daily basis. He's arrogant, possesses a distorted sense of entitlement, lies pathologically, has zero empathy, conscience, or sense of remorse. He experiences no anxiety and does not recognize or care about future consequences. Without a doubt, this individual--along with Cheney and Rove, are the most dangerous people in the entire world. They are pure evil and need to be stopped. They should be imprisoned to protect society from further carnage at their hands. John Conyers used to have my respect, but now I know he's just another obsequious sycophant to a psychopathic, tyrannical despot. George Bush and his neo-con ilk together with his democratic enablers in Congress are further examples of how "we hang the petty thieves in this country and appoint the 'privileged' ones to office."
RichM writes:
Poet (2:09 pm ) & montemerrick attack Ray McGovern, above. The basic idea behind the attack is that McGovern was a CIA agent, so he (needless to say) must still be a plant, secretly "working for the agency," and can't be trusted
Over the last 30 years, there has in effect been a purge in the CIA, resulting in a politicization of intelligence. Personnel within the agency who had any real principle, integrity & independence were systematically eliminated. Poppy Bush guided the purge as CIA director in the mid '70s, then Wm Casey & Robt Gates took it much further in the '80s.
There were those who resisted this. It's silly to assume that all of them were irredeemably evil, or hardcore rightwingers.
I hate & fear the CIA as much as anyone, & think it should be abolished. But Ray McGovern's work as an antiwar activist in recent years strikes me as genuine. If there's any real evidence that McGovern is not what he appears to be, I'd be interested in hearing it. Without offering such evidence, smearing him seems irresponsible & childish.
******************
First of all I am not accusing McGovern of being "irredeemably evil or a hardcore rightwinger". I am merely accusing him of being a "company man" who is pro CIA before anything else. Ray survived all those purges you spoke of and even rose to be the daily presidential briefer during the Bush I adminstration.
The CIA is an unelected, unaccountable, collection of people with amazing talents and profound authority to make all manner of mischief which they they have done and still do.
The primary difference between now and when Ray retired is that their purview has been expanded to the American people whereas before it was suppossed to be restricted to those beyond our borders.
To have an appologist for such an enterprise in your midst should not be very comforting. No matter what he might say.
I've got a suggestion. Why not ask Barbara Boxer to run for President along with Dennis Kucinich. Since, as Noam Chomsky says, Democrats and Republicans are two wings of the same bird, why not cause some trouble? I'm serious.
"and so it goes"
Plantman: I can't get the edit thingy to work. Here's the toll free number
1-866-338-1015
Plantman: I think you have a misunderstanding of what is being asked of you. I was alive, awake, and quite old enough to vote during the Watergate mess. The fact is that impeachment was voted out of committee so the evidence could be brought forward on the floor of the House for the public and House members to see. What we are asking from you now is to get Conyers to move this out of the judiciary committee so we can hear the evidence. All that means is that you have to call your House congress critter and ask nicely that they sign on to HR333 for the impeachment of Dick Cheney. If Conyers gets enough signors on this bill, he will have to bring it up in committee and move it out onto the House floor for a hearing.
Here is a toll free number for you to call ANYONE in the Congress. 1-866-338-1015 Get on the horn, and tell your rep. to do his/her job and protect and defend the Constitution. Then call conyers at the same number and do the same thing. You REALLY do have time for this.
Thanks for all you do
I have posted this before on this site, that the Democrat's got "talked" to before they caved to the no strings attached Iraq funding bill they passed in May.
They had the "situation" explained to them. Now, they are on-board, players, have their chips in the "game", and won't make impeachment noises about bushcon.
That is what threats can do; to family, reputations, careers, future financial stability.
How disappointing - that they have sold their souls, and will let this betrayal stand, whimpering that they don't have the "votes" to protect America from a rogue, crazed animal and will just stand there, with their backs turned away from the crimes against our nation.
Pity, and we were worth saving.
IKSAFFORD:
After coming across your comments in two different places, I feel compelled to correct your mistaken ideas. To begin with, I, and most everyone else cannot
go out and get Conyers the votes he needs to impeach
Bush/Cheney. We have jobs, families and lives that demand almost all of our time, with the little left over ear-marked for sleep (if we're lucky).
Mr. Conyers also has a job which, as an elected representative of the people includes taking the time to get the votes he needs. Cindy Sheehan's treatment in Conyers office should show how far the avarage citizen would get doing what you propose...and she's not average; she's exceptional. But unfortunatly we live in a C minus world and most of us are just trying to get by.
I must question whether you are old enough to remember the Watergate scandal and the susbsequent congressional hearings which ended with the President's resignation...and I mean remember as in actually being alive and aware at the time. When the scandal first started to surface, Nixon was at the pinnacle of his power. He had won an election with the largest landslide to date...a mandate in anyone's book,
and was taking credit for ending the Vietnam war.
The democraps didn't have the votes then either when they started impeachment hearings against Nixon.
But the hearings were televised day after day, the evidence was laid bare for the whole country to see and suddenly the Republican leadership was limo-ing down Penn ave. to inform the prez that the jig was up and the votes were there.
This is the dereliction of duty the people we gave a majority in the congress are presently commiting. Conyers is certainly old enough to remember Watergate.
He knows for a fact his excuses are a lie. He has been bought off as have they all. Its that simple. No amount of writing to my congressman is going to change the fact that he or she has already sold their soul for campaign funds. A member of congress has to raise 30,000 dollars a week to get re-elected. Where do you think all that cash comes from...us? I barely cover the bills and the mortgage as it is.
Why do these Democrats count the empeachment vote before they have an investigation and trial based on the facts?
That's like polling the jury before the trial.
Ask the police to set any criminal free if they can't get the jury to vote them guilty before they check out the evidence!
Peace
karl
A Memoir?! NOW?? Just goes to show you, people aren't corrupt, it's the people that allow themselves to be corrupted.
while i still think mcgovern's comment was racist, i just want all to know that conyers better find some courage to do the right thing if he wants to face st peter with nothing to hide.
Hell hath no fury as a conservative scorned. If Conyers had not stuck his neck out in the first place, he wouldn't be persona non grata now. Yet another reason to start depending on direct democracy and stop depending on representative "democracy".
Poet (2:09 pm ) & montemerrick attack Ray McGovern, above. The basic idea behind the attack is that McGovern was a CIA agent, so he (needless to say) must still be a plant, secretly "working for the agency," and can't be trusted.
This seems a groundless assertion. To name just a few counterexamples, Phillip Agee and William Sloane Coffin were both once CIA agents. Does anyone seriously doubt that they wound up on the right side of things?
Over the last 30 years, there has in effect been a purge in the CIA, resulting in a politicization of intelligence. Personnel within the agency who had any real principle, integrity & independence were systematically eliminated. Poppy Bush guided the purge as CIA director in the mid '70s, then Wm Casey & Robt Gates took it much further in the '80s.
There were those who resisted this. It's silly to assume that all of them were irredeemably evil, or hardcore rightwingers.
I hate & fear the CIA as much as anyone, & think it should be abolished. But Ray McGovern's work as an antiwar activist in recent years strikes me as genuine. If there's any real evidence that McGovern is not what he appears to be, I'd be interested in hearing it. Without offering such evidence, smearing him seems irresponsible & childish.
Cross posting here:
You can call your members of Congress now toll free at 866-338-1015, 800-459-1887 or 800-614-2803. Phone Chairman Conyers at 202-225-5126 and ask him to support HR 333 and to start the impeachment of Dick Cheney; and phone your own Congress Member at 202-224-3121 and ask them to immediately call Conyers' office to express their support for impeachment.
As Frederick Douglass said, "Agitate, agitate, agitate
It's WAAAAAAY past time for the tar and feathers.
Without Impeachment of Bush and Cheney, the Democrats will not be able to accomplish any legislative initiatives and they know it. They are betting that Cheney does not pull a 9/11 or use some other reason to suspend the constitution before 1/20/09, and that a Democrat wins the presidency and Democrats maintain Congress and then they have total control and can pad their own nests. That is a bad bet, especially for the American people.
I like Earthian's idea -- some progressive celebrity should run for Conyers' seat. And others should run for the other seats of the Dem decisionmakers. And progressives could send in money from around the nation to those challengers, including Sheehan.
The people never supported Bush's positions, but many did like his boldness. The craven Dems better learn to grow some brass ones real quick or they might just go extinct as a political species.
Sheehan and Code Pink did more to help the Democrats gain control of Congress than Raum Emanuel and DLC.
It is typical and cynical that Conyers, Pelosi and the DLC should shun Sheehan and Code Pink.
Between the Administration and the Democrats we will never find the pieces of the shredded Constitution.
Conyers facing the question of having enough votes in the House for impeachment, and the specter of Fox News ridicule upon such a failure, is itself the whole impeachment battle.
If/when Conyers stands up to Fox, today, tomorrow, next week, then many more will be inspired by his willingness to risk something, and he will build greater support.
Will Conyers push the Fox back into its hole and build the vote for impeachment?
My email to Conyers today.
The Hon John Conyers
I hate to say it but, from a long time supporter of yours, you were wrong. Having Sheehan et al. arrested was purely silly from a man that had garnered a reputation as fair and thoughtful.
I understand that you are under a great deal of pressure at the moment but you and a number of other Democrats were elected to stop this madness from the cheney/bush White House, you were not elected to avoid your constitutional duties. The founding fathers established a clever system of checks and balances, three different and distinct branches of government, staggered elections and additional remedies to prevent one or more of the branches of government from attempting to "take over" the country. We have now reached the stage of "additional remedies".
James Madison, in his wisdom, warned us against a President that might seek to establish an Imperial Presidency and discussed remedies that could be used to prevent such an occurrence. The absolute remedy was and is impeachment. Not just impeachment of the President but Impeachment of the Vice President as well, and at the same time, if that proved to be necessary. In light of the dangerous unconstitutional, illegal, grab for power by cheney/bush now is the time for impeachment.
I can well understand your distaste for such an action, it is difficult to admit that there is a constitutional crisis, it is hard to admit that Congress was not doing its job with oversight and it must be galling to admit that you, and the Democratic leadership, are not doing what the Constitution requires of you.
You said yesterday that the citizen's remedy for a runaway Executive and a "do nothing" Congress was the ballot box well we did that. We had elections, we threw the GOP out, not just of the House but the Senate as well. It was, by all but Fox News, a resounding repudiation of the policies of the administration and the lack luster performance of Congress. The Democrats were elected to stop the destructive policies of the administration and to stop the further erosion of our rights, rights that you who spent time with Martin Luther King should respect from deep in your heart. One of those rights is the right to protest, peacefully. Yesterday you denied those rights for a group of citizens in our House.
On Wednesday in that same House you are going to rule, in our name, as to whether Harriet Miers and others have broken the law, have gone outside the Constitution, are in contempt of Congress, are in contempt of the American people. And when you have ruled, as you should, that she has indeed been contemptuous of the American people what will you do. You have the constitutional power to have her arrested, imprisoned and be incarcerated until such time as she complies with the law or until this session of Congress is over. What will you do? Will you ignore her transgressions or will you do your constitutional duty? Will you have her arrested as you did Cindy Sheehan even though Sheehan had broken no laws and was merely exercising her peaceful constitutional rights? Will you have the courage to stand up for the American people and move to stop the drive by cheney/bush to establish an Imperial Presidency or will you turn your back on the American people, on the Constitution and the opportunity to restore Congress as a respected coequal branch of government?
Yesterday you did the wrong thing will you do the right thing on Wednesday?
Sincerely
Not a dime in donations to politicians who failed to lead on impeachment! Not an hour of volunteer service for a party that refuses its Constitutional obligation to check the lawlessness of an imperial executive! The Democrats are failing, as usual, to make the good arguments that they clearly could make, while pursuing a bad, "safe" strategy that appeals to ….who exactly? This is the party that looked all the world for embracing gay rights during last night's debate, but need I remind people that it's also the party that gave us the Defense of Marriage Act (it passed the Senate by 85-14 in 1996) and Don't Ask, Don't Tell? The Democrats talk a good game, but lack the courage to take it to the floors of the House and Senate. This is just another failure to put in the ever growing Democratic Hall of Shame.
I live in Detroit and I am quite aware of his "non-record" and his lack of concern for any issue other than his re-election to Congress. His only claim to fame was not a stellar legal career (many have pegged him as not too bright) but offering Rosa Parks a position in his office. Other than that, his rise to power was one of being in the right place at the right time when blacks needed a "representative" and he presented a nonthreatening personage to the electorate. As a matter of fact, I have continually bemused that Conyers even had the intellectual mettle to think of this "impeachment" on his own devices. It has always been my impression that he and Bush are members of the same academic fraternity and they receive much of their information and knowledge indirectly--thruough brain infusions. So, it comes as no surprise that Conyers does not see this as a parallel to the Civil Rights movement. No, he perceived this as a threat to his turf as a Congressman. If someone asked Conyers what were the impeachable offenses he wouldn't be able to name one.
This was really an ignorant, shot-in-foot, foot-in-mouth, dumb***, stupendously stupid decision he made. A true testament to his esteemed service in Congress.
Progressives -- let's not fall into the trap of thinking this is about votes. Conyers defense of inaction based on inadequate votes is a false defense because it confuses the ultimate objective of the impeachment proceedings.
The endgame of impeachment proceedings is the restoration of our balanced system of government, where the Legislative Branch acts as a check on lawlessness and monarchical behavior by the Executive Branch. Removal from office or even Senate hearings are not the goal. Conyers is duping some into accepting his irrelevant argument based on vote counts.
Psychoanalysis from afar is dangerous, and not terribly credible, in my opinion. However, it is certainly telling that there are no reports of Bush showing or feeling, in public or in private, any sense of doubt, remorse, or responsibility for what has happened.
By contrast, consider LBJ at the tail end of his term. The carnage in Vietnam had a profound effect on him, and he refused to seek re-election. That is the difference between a real man and a bloated frat boy.
So Joe Donut goes to McCongress asking for take out and service is refused. Only way Joe Donut ever gets service is if he sits on the floor and refuses to leave until the meal is finished.
Conyers doesn't think the rigged jury would vote to impeach, and they wouldn't unless of course charges were made public and Joe Donut learned half as much about the criminal junta as Conyers already knows. In the meantime, the question isn't whether or not a Nazi jury would convict Der Fuhrer, but whether or not Joe Donut can get something to go at McCongress, and the answer is no.
"if I had to impeach everyone for high crimes and misdemeanors, that's all my committee would have time to do." Gosh, is it that bad? Who let it get that way, Mr. Conyers? Could it be the gutless chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
I have never been more disappointed in a political person than I am right now in John Conyers. Everyday we see weak and cowardly democrats kowtowing to the Republicans with their collective tail between their legs. Before today, you could always say, at least we have John Conyers we can count on him to do the right thing, didn't he say he would call for impeachment? Yes, he did say that but apparently he is too afraid of Fox News making fun of him. Do we ever get out of grade school? Can this be right? John Conyers would rather have the respect of Fox News than that of the American people. Doesn't he know his supporters don't watch Fox News? I'm sorry, did I say John Conyers supporters, I think after today they will be former supporters.
This two party system is no longer working. It is time to get rid of it. We need a regime change at home that includes no only the Executive Branch but the Congress and Senate too. Now, is the time for revolution, before it's too late.
Good point Montmerick!--Not only isn't Ray McGovern no MLK, he is in all likelyhood still working for those from whose service he suppossedly "retired".
Ray baby, sell that crap like soap! Sure John Conyers is no MLK, but you're no William Colby either, Ray! The proof is that you are still alive. Anyone interested in a canoe trip--hmmm?
Ray McGovern...Hello???? I admire what you did, meeting with Conyers and presenting petitions for impeachment to a deaf ear ( and perhaps a senile mind). But, you act as though meeting Conyers and getting the usual brush-off by a corporate-owned Democrat was some kind of political revelation. How come millions of Americans already know what kind of person works in the halls of Congress these days?
simply running for and maintaining a congressional seat means that conyers is no mlk - gee whiz - no one but mlk is mlk - i find the juxtaposition to be kind of racist and cheap - there is plenty to take conyers to task for - but not being mlk isnt one of them - ray mcgovern is no mlk either.
He's either being threatened physically or economically by our Mafia government, or he has some information he can't share with us because it could cause a panic. Peak oil? The fall of the dollar? Gravel's National Initiative could circumvent these problems. Even if you don't vote for him, it would pay to learn about this most important piece of legislation that would let the people decide.
I am surprised to see Mr McGovern to have had a different opinion of John Conyers than until he just met him. All Repugnants and almost all Democraps are crooks representing some corporations or others. I thought McGovern should have been the first to know.
The fact that Conyers and 80-year-old Senator John Warner, R-Virginia, and other senile politicians are still holding office is an undeniable indication of electorate stupidity. I have always pleaded on this site to people not to re-elect career politicians because they are crooks. Nobody listens to what has proven to be obvious.
If the present regime in Washington again does anything disastrous then the BushCo and the entire likeminded minions and procrastinators in the Congress should be hanged in Washington, D.C. as a reminder that people are still in power.
Iksaford has it backwards. Conyers is purposefully making it difficult to mobilize public pressure by blocking the bill from hearings.
As Chair of the Judiciary Committee, John Conyers has absolute power over H. Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment on Dick Cheney. The next step for the bill is to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, chaired by Rep. Nadler (D-Manhattan), for hearings and markup. By sitting on the bill like a mother hen, Conyers alone prevents hearings and the momentum that hearings would bring.
Moreover, how can Conyers say he "doesn't have the votes"?!
How can he know for sure? There have been no hearings, no one has see evidence in the subcommitte, because he is preventing it!
Actually it is neither John Conyers' job nor his concern whether impeachment could pass the full house at this moment. His only job is this: to forward the bill to the relevant subcommittee under his jurisdiction.
As the evidence comes forth, more votes will become evident.
Or not, in which case at least he will have done his job, and he'll be able to look people in the eye as he says "I told you so." Right now he is only blocking the Constitutional democratic process, and making himself look like a hypocrite. The question is, why? What have they got on him? What does he hope to gain, by fronting for Pelosi and the leadership--in contradiction of his evident feelings? (That is, his feelings before the election. Or does having actual power turn everyone into a . . . ?)
Seriously, What's Going On, John?
Hey Ray, I appreciate your chutzpah in Conyers' office. I bet he WAS taken aback because people in his position aren't used to being spoken to as he was. That being said, well, did you look around his office? Did it seem comfy? Did the Congressman seem well-heeled, well-fed? Well then, you have one big clue as to why Conyers won't put this at risk. Of course, you nailed the other one:
Conyers protested that he would need 218 votes in the House and complained that the votes are not there. His priorities showed through in his loud lament that if he fell short of the 218 votes, the Republicans and Fox News would have a field day.
Where have we come to as a nation when a leader of the people is more afraid of a morally bankrupt news organ than the fallout to our posterity? But Fox News is a metaphor of sorts here - Conyers and the Dems don't trust the American people not to fall for Fox spin. They feel it would upset their careful electoral triangulation for 2008. If this is true, that is to say, we have reached the point where Fox News sets the agenda for political activism in this country, then we as a people are truly finished.
The good people of Michigan need to start looking for a replacement for Conyers. Every dem traitor must be replaced or we may wind up in civil war. No one wants that.
I hope Sheehan's strategy magnifies and spreads. She will run against Pelosi in San Francisco in the Democratic primary. I'd love to see McGovern or some other very credible progressive run against Conyers. Progressives need to target the corporate, militarist Democrats in the primaries--and then if a given election fails, to do the same in the actual House and Senate races on the Green Party ticket.
lksafford - This is a bit of a catch 22 since one of the biggest reasons they don't have the votes is that the Dim leadership is opposed to it.
Rep. Conyers said what he needed to impeach: votes. Get him the votes start preaching to the unconverted Reps and Senators. Make sure he has the votes to pass the resolution and a reasonable chance to convict in the Senate. Then watch the fur fly.
Your demonstrations in Conyers office are terribly misguided. Go get him votes then come back.
NEW ELEMENT: Even the Scaife-owned newspapers have begun to question Bush's MENTAL STABILITY.
There's a video on You Tube showing W. performing rather brilliantly in a 1990 debate, speaking fluently without notes, tossing out statistics, appearing normal in all respects. Then a current video shows the obvious mental deterioration. The diagnosis is pre-senile dementia. Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRhhtkRp8aM or just search youtube for bush presenile dementia.
There is no cause at this time to consider impeachment proceedings against the Vice-President. He has served this nation honorably and to the best of his ability. Furthermore, the casualness with which impeachment is thrown around simply for partisan purposes over policy differences should be a concern to all American's and the future of our politics.Steven Pearce (R-NM) 7/17/07
----
You impeached Clinton when a little head never killed anyone.
I live and work in Nancy Pelosi's district. Based on her cowardly inaction, I will vote for Cindy Sheehan, if she should run.
I understand that Nancy is about to publish a memoir. What can she possibly say when she hasn't done the most important thing in her career? What will be her legacy? I think we know the answer to that already.
Two words: Incredibly disappointing.
"Why, if I had to impeach everyone for high crimes and misdemeanors, that's all my committee would have time to do."
Yea, and? You work for US, you S.O.B., remember? And if we want "your" committee to impeach every goddamn loyalbushie on the planet, then shut the f**k up and do your job!
Maybe impeachment's "off the table" because the Loonitary Co-Diktators have warned our so-called Reps that they'll blow the living s**t out of the rest of this world if pushed.