Hints And Allegations

Untitled document

Close on the heels of the op-ed today by Pete du Pont that appeared in the Opinion Journal, comes this item from the New York Sun: "Conyers Hones A Case Against President Bush". Reporter Eli Lake separates politicians words from their actions and comes to the conclusion that Representative Conyers will, for all practical purposes, be headed for impeachment hearings no matter what.

WASHINGTON — The Democratic leader of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is promising that her party has no plans to pursue impeachment of President Bush if it wins a majority in next month's elections. But she intends to allow the House Judiciary Committee to be headed by a lawmaker who has been preparing the grounds for impeachment for two years.

John Conyers, a Democrat of Michigan, is now in line to become the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which has the authority to begin hearings and an investigation into whether the planning and selling of the Iraq war was a constitutional crime. Last week, the Washington Post first reported that if Ms. Pelosi, a Democrat of California, becomes House majority leader, she will keep the seniority system intact for selecting committee chairmen in Congress. An aide to Ms. Pelosi confirmed the report yesterday.

Mr. Conyers's office has released two reports in the last year outlining Mr. Bush's various constitutional transgressions in the war on terror. The first report, released in 2005, focused mostly on his handling of pre-war Iraq intelligence. The second, released this year, was dedicated to the Bush administration's violations of the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act in authorizing the National Security Agency to listen in to some domestic phone calls without a court warrant.

Ten months ago, Mr. Conyers introduced legislation to form a "select committee to investigate the administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment."

Members of Mr. Conyers's staff refused a request to answer questions on the record yesterday. A senior aide to Mr. Conyers was careful to say that his boss "has no plans to begin impeachment proceedings." But the aide added, "If evidence for impeachment is uncovered, it should be brought before the committee."

Note the sidestep there. Some very fancy footwork, but it is fairly obvious where they want to head. There is also the netroots agitation, of course. Lake points that out later in the article:

David Swanson, the Washington director of a political action committee that raises money for pro-impeachment candidates, ImpeachPAC, said he was disappointed in Ms. Pelosi.

"I think it is not the place of the broadcast media to demand that our elected officials take positions against protecting our Constitution," Mr. Swanson said. "It is not the place of Congresswoman Pelosi to claim to know where investigations might lead when overwhelming evidence of impeachable offenses is already public knowledge.

But I would encourage people around the country not to lose heart and to understand that a popular movement will be able to persuade chairman Conyers and members of the House Judiciary Committee to move forward, regardless of what Congresswoman Pelosi says on television."

142 years ago, Abraham Lincoln called his cabinet into session and asked them all to sign the back of a sealed envelope containing a document. They were not informed of the contents of the envelope. The memo that was inside read:

"This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probably that this Administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to so co-operate with the President-elect, as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration; as he will have secured his election on such ground that he can not possibly save it afterwards."

In this election the Democrats will have secured their majority in such a way that Conyers will inevitably tie the country in knots.

Note the sidestep there. Some very fancy footwork, but it is fairly obvious where they want to head. There is also the netroots agitation, of course. Lake points that out later in the article:

David Swanson, the Washington director of a political action committee that raises money for pro-impeachment candidates, ImpeachPAC, said he was disappointed in Ms. Pelosi.

"I think it is not the place of the broadcast media to demand that our elected officials take positions against protecting our Constitution," Mr. Swanson said. "It is not the place of Congresswoman Pelosi to claim to know where investigations might lead when overwhelming evidence of impeachable offenses is already public knowledge.

But I would encourage people around the country not to lose heart and to understand that a popular movement will be able to persuade chairman Conyers and members of the House Judiciary Committee to move forward, regardless of what Congresswoman Pelosi says on television."

142 years ago, Abraham Lincoln called his cabinet into session and asked them all to sign the back of a sealed envelope containing a document. They were not informed of the contents of the envelope. The memo that was inside read:

"This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probably that this Administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to so co-operate with the President-elect, as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration; as he will have secured his election on such ground that he can not possibly save it afterwards."

In this election the Democrats will have secured their majority in such a way that Conyers will inevitably tie the country in knots.

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Hints And Allegations

  1. Neal says:

    But oh, holier than though right wingers, what sins might have Bush commited that you are afraid of? Day after day I read this blog and your incessant defense of Bush. So, I dont understand what mistakes Bush might have made in the past 6 years that you should be afraid of.

    Let the truth come out – what did Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, et al do to prepare for the war, what documents did they have access to base don which they went into Iraq? Dont you think as American citizens its our right to know.

  2. Gaius says:

    If you read this blog day after day, you know I am not a Bush defender. Try actually reading it as opposed to deciding what I said before I say it.

Comments are closed.