Moving Beyond the Symbolic-Murtha Talks Impeachment

[babylonsister]

http://counterpunch.com/lindorff05012007.html


Moving Beyond the Symbolic
Murtha Talks Impeachment

By DAVE LINDORFF


snip//

As Bob Fertik, a leader of the national impeachment movement, observes, "It is no accident that Murtha used the `I' word: he wanted to send a shot across Bush's bow that he'd better start negotiating (on Iraq troop funding) ­ or else." Fertik adds, "And Murtha must have cleared his comments with Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi before his appearance, so one can safely conclude that impeachment is back "on the table" where it belongs.

For too long, Congressional Democratic leaders have been blocking impeachment, beginning with Pelosi's pre-election vow that if Democrats took control of Congress impeachment would be "off the table." The public explanations for this position have never made any sense, and indeed have been specious: the claim that impeaching Bush would mean Cheney would become president is ludicrous (what Republican would want to have the monumentally unpopular Cheney at the head of the GOP heading into the 2008 elections?); the claim that Democrats had an important agenda of bills to pass is preposterous, given their slim margins of control in both houses, the promise of presidential vetoes, and the president's hyperactive use of "signing statements" to illegally kill laws enacted by Congress; and the claim that impeachment would be "divisive" is bogus, because it is the administration and the Republicans in Congress who have been divisive for the past six years.

In fact, the real reason the Democratic leadership has been running from impeachment is that party leaders think they are better off letting this increasingly unpopular administration continue to foul up domestically and especially in Iraq. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), actually at one point publicly stated that it would be "good" for Democrats if the Iraq War continued into November 2008. This heartless Machiavellian thinking may or may not be strategically valid (I suspect it's not correct), but it is certainly a betrayal of the American people who voted Democrats into control last November, and is certainly a betrayal of the troops who are fighting and dying in Iraq every day.

It appears, from Murtha's comment about impeachment, that leading Democrats in Congress are starting to realize that the public is way ahead of them, and is growing frustrated and angry at Democratic pussyfooting.

Americans don't want symbolic action by Democrats on ending the war. They want the troops brought home--now. They don't want tangential investigations by Congress into the political firing of federal prosecutors, or into the faked documents alleging that Iraq was buying uranium ore from Niger, They want impeachment bills against President Bush, and the convening of impeachment hearings in the House Judiciary Committee to defend a Constitution that has been vitiated by six years of Bush administration crimes, abuses of power and blatant undermining of the Bill of Rights.

more...

[chaska]

1. Excellent! Thanks. Bookmarked for later.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Wrong, Bob.

Americans don't want symbolic action by Democrats on ending the war. They want the troops brought home--now. They don't want tangential investigations by Congress into the political firing of federal prosecutors, or into the faked documents alleging that Iraq was buying uranium ore from Niger, They want impeachment bills against President Bush, and the convening of impeachment hearings in the House Judiciary Committee to defend a Constitution that has been vitiated by six years of Bush administration crimes, abuses of power and blatant undermining of the Bill of Rights.

At least THIS American wants the investigations, and for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that we need to develop rock-solid evidence for the impeachment and trial for removal. But beyond that, I want the American public to understand the consequences of permitting this gang to take power. I want them have their noses rubbed into the shit on the floor like an errant puppy until they GET IT about why allowing neocons, nutcases and know-nothings to run things is a really bad idea.

[babylonsister]

3. I think Bob was going for the more direct, immediate approach.

Get out of Iraq, impeach, and bring on the investigations.

[ninkasi]

4. Exactly!

If Bush and Cheney aren't investigated for their many and egregious abuses of power, and shredding the Constitution they swore to uphold, then what would it take for a future president to be impeached? These are the worst of the worst, and should be shown for what they are.

By not impeaching, we have given tacit approval for future presidents to start illegal wars, ignore laws passed by Congress by way of signing statements, spying on citizens, holding people without cause, or access to legal representation, and many, many other dangerous things. There are far too many abuses to even go into here, but we all know what many of them are. It scares me to think there are probably many more we haven't heard about yet.

[midnight]

6. Bring the troops home! I love typing that. I repeat it often....

All the hell my family goes through for our Bring the troops sign is nothing compared to what is happening to other family's who are fighting this war over their and the family's over their that are being ripped apart.

[texpatriot2004]

5. This American wants them IMPEACHED NOW nm