a little history. Nixon-who had the good sense to quit right before he would have been impeached-(if only we would have been lucky enough
that bill clinton had done the same thing, Al Gore would be retiring this year after 10 glorious peaceful prosperous wonderful years as President...

The first article was the most damning because it was the least technical. It accused the president of:

1 making false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
2 withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;
3 approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counselling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized

investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;
4 interfering or endeavouring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of 6 Investigation, the office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees;
5 approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payment of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or
influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry and other illegal activities;
6 endeavouring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States;
7 disseminating information received from officers of the Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States, for the purpose of aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid criminal liability;
8 making or causing to be made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation had been conducted with respect to allegations of misconduct on the part of personnel of the executive branch of the United States and personnel of the Committee for the Re-election of the President, and that there was no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct: or
9 endeavouring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favoured treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.
The mortal blow to Nixon's presidency came on Aug. 5. He released three tapes that

there is not one thing on that list of the first article used against Nixon that couldn't word for word be used against Bush

PUT IMPEACHMENT BACK ON THE TABLE...

And put Pelosi and Reid under the table.

I have been listening to the House Judiciary committee hearings this morning on C-SPAN. So far, I haven't heard anything new that could change the political outcome. Representative Conyers and others argue that these hearings are to address concerns over abuse of executive power by administrations in the future. Perhaps, facts could be placed on the record and eventually legislation could be enacted, that better protect the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches with respect to war powers.

I'm skeptical as to whether these hearings can be productive given the current conventional wisdom that we are fighting a "war on terror." A war on terror has no specified in the point or does it identify a specific political entity as the enemy. As long as no one challenges the construct of "a war on terror" it is difficult to counter the argument that the president was just acting in good faith under circumstances of a crisis and uncertainty. A a president's decisions in wartime might be criticized in light of hindsight, but as long as the nation is at war it's very difficult to prove that the president was acting in bad faith.

The validity of the construct "war on terror" needs to be challenged with respect to our understanding of constitutional war powers.

Amen.

There is no such thing as "War" on terror and it is nothing but an Executive powergrab and a dereliction of duty by Congress.

I just hope we can clean up the Constitutional mess that BushCo has made ane restore Constitutional liberties and protections and eliminate the tyrannical notions of the Executive Branch.

BUSH SHOULD CLEARLY BE IMPEACHED.

BUSH'S OFFENSES HAVE EXCEEDED THE CRIMINALITY OF NIXON AND WATERGATE BY A MILE OR TEN.

The Democratic Party and Congress are GUTLESS and their inaction borders on treason.

I agree. The mess that most needs cleaning up is in Congress. If there weren't so many
democratic enablers with their hand in the cooky jar, Cheny and Bush would have already
been impeached.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GDAFozFn4kU

How many people do you know have their hands in the cookie jar?

Look folks, IS4U is absolutely right here, but some of you are avoiding the implications of what he is saying. Impeachment is just not gonna happen in the context of what is going on, unless something simply unprecedented turns up, a major historical blockbuster. And soon.

I admire Conyers for being dogged here. Someone has to fight for these things, even when they have few friends. But I would focus on the basic issues here, civil liberties and the fraudulent construct of a "war on terror". There is a serious problem of terror, which must largely be dealt with by means other than military ones, even if military means are a part of the toolbox.

Realism is a handy tool at times.

Face it people, you are not going to get to scratch that itch.

You have two choices here, as I see it, turf the miscreants out in November, or risk a backlash that this is political posturing to aid Obama in this campaign and maybe get just the opposite of what you desire.

Much can be done with new management in the WH to record for posterity what has transpired during the past almost 8 years. And many of the attacks on the Constitution can be rectified with a constitutional scholar at the helm.

Its your choice of course... go for the immediate jolt like a junkie injecting heroin with no concern for the aftereffects or take the mature approach and think of what will ultimately serve your country and your people best over the long haul.

Just my

Impeachment isn't likely because it will bring out the ineptitude, incompetence, and dereliction of Constitutional duties of Congress as well as BushCo.

That's what happens when everyone shares the guilt and its also why criminals try to turn everyone into an accomplice. Congress definitely does not want to stir the $hit and get it all over themselves before the election.

Personally, I don't care what Congress wants. The Constitution is more important than the President or Congress. Without the Constitution we do not have a nation... we have an empire ruled by a dictator.

Just my $ .02.

Arne, its pretty obvious that its not going to happen in as much as the committee investigating it
has been prohibitted from saying the word. Conyers failed us more than anyone since he was in a better position to do something than anyone. I feel sorry for Pelosi and Reid's great grand children
for what they will have to read in History about their decendents.

I hope you are right CO.

I have great hope that Obama would roll back the Constitutionally-infringing Executive Orders and directives put forth by BushCo. Unfortunately, even the most principalled seem to strive to maintain power rather than diminish it. It is going to take exceptional leadership to act in the best interest of the people and restore the balance of power.

As much faith as I have in Obama, I have less faith in his willingness and ability to act in such fashion given the political climate and the consequences of any terrorist attack against the United States (and the manner in which it would be used against the administration and Democrats).

Oh... and, isn't the silence in the MSM deafening...

Not a whisper or a word.

NO, you makes some good points. But CO is right, we need to be realistic. This just ain't gonna happen, barring some event that is huge and also unlikely in the extreme.

We can rail at politicians for being spineless, but isn't that their normal situation throughout history?

From where I sit Conyers may be the most honorable and effective person on this in the entire Congress. It seems like he has done what he could but he just has been dealt a bad hand.

And quite honestly this "saying the word" thing is nonsense. If Conyers had been able to turn something up no one in Congress would have had to say the word, the MSM would have been screaming the word.

Yes, this will be known as the Congress that tried. They tried and tried and tried and tried...
but we love you any way, Charlie Brown...

I completely agree that it won't happen Arne. 100%.

It could and would have already happened had the MSM fulfilled its duty of informing the public, but the MSM was guilty of selling the war to America without critical scrutiny and actual complicity. And... now the MSM is more interested in selling advertising than journalistic reporting. The PTB have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and attacking the President or GOP would be biting the hand that fed them... and created them. Cable news is, after all, a product of Reagan-era and subsequent (mostly GOP) leadership and ownership/control is vested in GOP friendly parties who have used their little alliances to consolidate and monopolize the media and fashion the message in mutually beneficial ways.

If Conyers had been able to turn up something ?

Seems like this was more of a kangaroo court aimed at silencing the truth (and Kucinich) rather than making a legitimate attempt to find facts.

Pragmatic ? Maybe

Principaled ? Hardly

Well maybe things could have been different if the MSM had done a better job of informing people as opposed to going along with the hysteria (much of it orchestrated) at the moment. I certainly don't defend the MSM. But the point is this is what we have to deal with.

Impeaching a President is a big step, which should not be taken lightly (even though it has been taken lightly). So would trying an ex-President for crimes allegedly committed while in office. Recently I saw a plausible argument opposed to the second action in Newsweek. Plausible, but wrong, IMHO. Now if honest and professional prosecutors thought that they could not make a solid case against Bush and/or Cheney then I would respect that. But I would not prevent prosecutions in the first place, although many would argue that they should be prevented, no matter how culpable Bush and Cheney were. Many within the political establishment. So even taking the second action will be tough. But I would not counsel giving up on that one. Of course we would need to wait until the next (hopefully Obama) Administration comes in.

I meant turning up something that would make more than a few people stand up and take notice.

they don't need anything new

if torture and killing and maiming, and ripping arms out of the socket, and heads out of their necks, and cutting fingers and toes off are not enough to excite the masses
and blood gushing, beatings, poking eyeballs out of their holes,

but what do you expect from the USA? Nothing but criminals.

I would agree.. and have no problem with the latter alternative though I view both as pretty much equally unlikely.



Like a video or audio of Bush or Cheney directing the misinformation campaign. A real smoking gun...

I don't even know if that would be enough. It would take a groundswell of public sentiment which, under the present socio-economic climate, is unlikely to develop. Everyone is much further down on Maslow's heirarchy of needs right now.

Unfortunately this is not enough. It is not as though Bush and Cheney have been shown to have personally done stuff like this. (Some of this stuff sounds more lurid than factual, but I am certainly not denying that there was torture under U.S. auspices.) The thing is too many people think that whatever torture there was was "justified" torture.

You are getting at what I am talking about. Absolutely a groundswell of public sentiment would be needed. Remember that there was one during Watergate. By 1974 it was safe for the most timid politician to favor impeaching Richard Nixon, in fact the "courageous" (if wrongheaded) course was to oppose it.

Yep.

They can't even enforce a subpoena against Rove to force him to testify before Congress.

They have to have the power to investigate and enforce on a small scale before they can even begin to tackle an impeachment.

Right ? No

Reality

You mean like GWB getting a blow job from someone other than his spouse?

Amazing how the GOP can mount a PR campaign and motivate their base to raise such issues to the top of public consciousness... while the Dems have a hard time, even given the multitude of infractions and displays of utter incompetence, getting a shout to be heard.

Actually, I guess it's not when the media is clearly GOP owned and run for their interests.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationw...0,1066312.story

tribune dispatch

Panel holds 'non-impeachment hearing'
Critics assail Bush on war, prosecution of Dems, the Tribune's Katie Fretland writes
By Katie Fretland Tribune reporter
July 26, 2008

WASHINGTON—Critics of President George W. Bush got the chance to air grievances against him Friday at a House Judiciary Committee "non-impeachment hearing" before a packed audience of political activists.

Even Cindy Sheehan, the famous anti-war mother, was there until she got kicked out for being loud.

...well, I guess they could be spending more money...

Should the appropriate standard of behavior be what the Republicans under the leadership of Tom Delay did?

Remember that the Republican effort ended up with them losing five seats in the House, which was an exception to the pattern of the party not holding the WH usually making big gains in the off-election during the second term of the President.

I agree with Arn this will not happen. NO lays it out where we are in this country though. We have arrived at a place in America where we are in real danger of losing our republic in all but name. The MSM is a joke when it comes to reporting the news. They never hold the PTB accountable because they are owned lock stock and barrel. The self-promoting talking heads who make a living covering up what is actually happening, or even outright lying to America is now the state of public discourse. There is no such thing as a real debate because of massive repeated lies swallowed whole and accepted as "facts"! They are never debunked and rightly scorned. And those who told them never held up to justified public ridicule. The timid and silent men and women who pass themselves off as reporters and journalists in the Washington press corp are pathetic. The Democratic Party is at a loss in figuring out how to deal with the Republican Party's outright criminality and total lack of morality. As Conyers put it there is so much that has stacked up due to virtually no oversight of the Executive while the Republicans ran Congress that it is overwhelming them all. Precidents have been set that will plague America for many years to come! Perhaps never will we fully recover as a nation and many innocent people's lives have been lost or permanently damaged here and around the world due to gross incompetence, greed, downright thievery and much worse.

The Republican Party has betrayed their public trust, in fact betrayed America and sold us to the highest bidder, and to the degree the hapless Democratic Party has allowed it they also are culpable. If and when Mr. Obama as a "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" he will face what Bill Clinton faced and was condemned for. That is the politics of a Party that wants to "win the game" at all costs and will do and say anything while the Dems find themselves spinning on their heels unable to fathom the mendacity of Republicans. I see it over and over again how the republican leadership will hold a press conference and lie outright to the reporters and will refuse to answer any questions they don't want to and cow and stare down any reporter with the effrontery to call them on it. The Dems are constantly trying to correct the record like an overwhelmed lonely santitation man with a can and a broom behind a parade of a hundred elephants with diarrea.