Crucible of Impeachment: If Not Now, When? .... from AfterDowningStreet

[marmar]

The Crucible Of Impeachment: If Not Now, When?
Submitted by davidswanson on Sun, 2006-12-24 09:05. Impeachment
By Robert Weitzel

When once a republic is corrupted there is no possibility of remedying
any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption . . . every
other correction is either useless or a new evil.
- Thomas Jefferson -

If Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota were unable to remain
in office because of health reasons, his replacement would be
appointed by the state's Republican governor, effectively returning
control of the Senate to the GOP and Dick Cheney.

Initially, the thought of losing the precious 51-49 margin in the
Senate disturbed me. But when I remembered that Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the
new Democratic Speaker of the House, said that impeachment is "a waste
of time" and "is off the table," I thought, so what if the Dems do
lose the Senate. It's back-scratching politics as usual in Washington
regardless.

How is it possible that a member of Congress can say it is "a waste of
time" to impeach a president who has lied—under oath of office—to
justify invading a nonbelligerent country, conspired to torture
prisoners and to strip them of their constitutional rights, illegally
spied on American citizens, violated international treaties against
aggressive war and treatment of POW's, and, quite possibly, is
complicit in treason and war profiteering? Think Valerie Plame and
Halliburton!

Rabbi Hillel asked of a different time and circumstance, "If not now, when?"

Precisely. When?

What will it take short of fellatio in the Oval Office for politicians
to show some spine and stop hiding behind self-serving excuses: "we
don't want to be seen as vindictive" or "it would be political
suicide" or "let the electorate 'impeach' him at the polls" or "the
country needs to move on" or "we need to do things for the country . .
. blah, blah, blah?"

How much more egregious does the abuse of power have to be—can it
be—before members of Congress take seriously their oath to "support
and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic?"

The Constitution is barely seven paragraphs old before the founding
fathers gave the people's elected representatives the power to impeach
the president and whomever in the executive branch for "treason,
bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
Unfortunately, they could not give their descendents' representatives
the political—dare I say the moral—guts to use that power.

What better, more patriotic, thing can an elected representative do
for the country than to temper the Constitution and, consequently, the
Republic itself in the crucible of impeachment when it is so obviously
warranted?

David Corn of The Nation was only half right when he said that
impeachment is an extreme action. He should have said it is an
extremely rare action, which has been used only nine times in the
history of the nation.

But the Framers never intended impeachment to be either extreme or
rare. It was meant to be used forcefully and unapologetically and as
often as necessary to check the excesses of power or wanton corruption
of the temporary occupants of the White House.

That it has been so rarely used has led us to the unconscionable level
of abuse by the Bush administration. They proceed as though they have
nothing to fear, as if the Constitution is powerless to hold them
accountable. It is this lack of fear that is sounding the death knell
of our democracy; the final taps at the twilight of the Republic.

John Nichols, author of The Genius of Impeachment writes, "The
founders of the American experiment, who expressed deep fears about
the corruption of elections and the elected, saw in impeachment not a
challenge to democracy but a tool for its rejuvenation in those
periods when decay would set in."

We cannot hope to rejuvenate a decaying democracy unless we have the
fortitude to endure the unpleasant political process of impeachment.
Citizens will be pit one against the other, tempers will flare,
friends will disagree and scream, issues will be discussed and
debated, pundits will pontificate, and the talking heads will incite
while politicians monitor the direction of the wind.

If, in the end, elected representatives still lack the political spine
to see the impeachment process to its conclusion, the nation will have
passed through the crucible and fear it less and be more willing and
quick to light the fire under the caldron . . . to the peril of the
abusing power.

Our Republic was forged in the crucible of a revolution and
strengthened in the crucible of a civil war. The blood and the gold of
past generations were mixed in the caldron to that end. This
generation should expect to offer no less.

But if not now, when?

-END-

Biography
Robert Weitzel is a freelance writer whose essays appear in The
Capital Times of Madison, WI. He has also been published in the
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Skeptic Magazine, Freethought Today, and
on the web sites, commondream.org and smirkingchimp.com. He can be
contacted at [e-mail].

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/16670

[PSPS]

1. Indeed

I know very well that many at DU are on the DLC bandwagon and are virulently against any move toward impeachment. But this lays it out pretty clearly. We're supposed to be a nation of laws, so how can we just give a pass to what is the most criminal administration the nation has ever endured?

It really bothers me to hear the newly elected democrats say that their first priorities are raising the minimum wage, national health care, and the like. These are all important, for sure. But who cares about any of these things when we institutionalize the most heinous criminal acts done in our name by bush and his cabal?

By not aggressively pursuing impeachment, and even criminal prosecution, of these thugs, we, as a nation, are actually giving our official imprimatur to torture, war crimes, and an almost endless list of horrible criminal acts carried out with glee by a ruthless gang of criminals.

[Kurovski]

2. K&R

ITMFA

[Jim Sagle]

3. Simplistic, overheated rubbish.

The way it works is: investigate, then impeach.

[90-percent]

4. Step One

Is a bunch of good old fashioned well performed congressional investigations. Justice in any form, be it impeachment, resignations, criminal prosecutions or what ever else the citizens will demand after the facts come out, will naturally flourish from good investigations.

-85% Jimmy

[Senator]

9. It's the "investigate" rationalization that is rubbish

There really is nothing to "investigate" when it comes to Geneva violations and illegal spying. The regime admits and "defends" these clearly impeachable offenses -- in direct contradiction to rulings by the USSC and the FISA court. An emperor doesn't get more naked than this. And there's no reason to pursue any other articles.

The "investigations" question is whether to hold "impeachment hearings" or "open-ended fact-finding hearings" (on specific matters that may or may not lead to impeachment charges, sometime, when the ... ZZZ... zzz... zz).

Doing the former (while not even "required") could well be helpful to bringing more of the public (already a majority) and even Republicans back into the reality-based community where impeachment is imperative to defend the Constitution and begin to Redeem Our National Soul.

Doing the latter displays weakness and sends the message that there is some uncertainty about the ongoing reality that is staring us in the face. That is why the "off the table" comment is so damaging. It is a self-defeating prophesy regardless of whether or not there's some "strategery" behind it. If you don't broach the accusation, you garner zero attention or moral support for the activity.

The public is already way ahead of the LieberDems on this:


Only 44% oppose because they're not being totally gaslighted by the DC/Euphemedia Wurlitzer. And 1/5 of that "opposition" are Dems following their craven "leadership." The public already knows that the never-elected, never-legitimate regime is the biggest obstacle to improvement in any situation, foreign or domestic. Hence the anti-regime (not "pro" anything, let alone the Dems) midterm results.

Only Impeachment responds to the midterm mandate. If the LiebeDems fail to get this, they'll be swept out in '08 lamenting that they didn't "get their message out" (i.e., failed to manipulate the voters).

It just seems to be too simple for liberals. Nothing to "teach" the poor, ignorant masses. No armchair psychoanalysis of tragic actors necessary. So all we hear is a generic call to "investigate," without any description of what exactly is "not known" that must be "found out;" or why the torture and spying -- already stipulated to -- is not sufficient to bring action. It's really just more rationalization for inaction.

Impeachment IS our positive agenda.

It is our ONLY moral, patriotic option.

===

[Jim Sagle]

10. If it was just you and I that had to be convinced, you'd be right.

The American people need to be brought on board. The way to do that is with investigation, not assertion. Period.

[Senator]

12. Exactly who are "you and I" better or smarter than?

As my post demonstrated (not asserted), the American People are already largely "on board."

All that remains are those like you, who merely assert that there is some "unknown unknown" to investigate.

And others who maintain that there is some higher priority than not becoming war criminals themselves, by failing to act to remove the never-elected, never-legitimate criminal regime. Like Pelosi and the other Dem members of the DC/Euphemedia Analstocracy.

But we are not without methods to bring them back into the reality-based community.

--

[Jim Sagle]

15. 28% does not equate to "largely on board."

Investigations will boost that to a necessary higher level.

[Senator]

16. 51% does -- which is the number of Americans who support it

And that's all on their own. In the face of direct opposition from the beltway LieberDems.

It would be "reverse Clinton" numbers overnight if the DC Dems would come to their senses.

--

[Jim Sagle]

17. We need investigations and the big ugly headlines that go with it

to drive those numbers even higher. It won't be hard and it won't take long. So if we want impeachment to succeed, that's how we'll do it.

[Senator]

21. No, we really don't

All we need do is limit the articles of impeachment to Geneva violations and/or illegal spying. They are both admitted to and indefensible.

While "the run up to the war" may seem a "bigger" crime, it is a fool's errand to pursue it when these others are sufficient to remove the continuing threat to the Constitution and stop the torture immediately. While it is obvious that the regime Terrorized the Nation into War, it is virtually unprovable that they did so with malice aforethought, through willful deception. They merely need to maintain that they believed the unbelievable.

It is understandable that people would want to pursue this charge as it was the American People who were the victims -- not some anonymous foreign detainees or unknown number of callers and emailers. But that is at root a very selfish choice.

The first priority, morally and under our treaty obligations, is to stop the ongoing war crimes.

Failure to do so is a war crime itself. One that DC Dems become guilty of on Jan. 3rd if they fail to act.

That's the only real "need." Period.

--

[Jim Sagle]

23. That's YOUR only real need. The American people are not where they need to be

to see it that way. They need to see this crew of torturers, killers, liars and thieves dragged through their own mud in prime time slo mo. Only then will they support what needs to be done.

[omega minimo]

24. "dragged through their own mud in prime time slo mo" = impeachment hearings a la Watergate

Overly "polite" investigations could serve to only push more dirt under the rug, as one challenge here is the deep state of denial that many Americans and Congress members are in, regarding evidence, public confessions, congress members research/hearings and local/state/national impeachment actions that already exist.


We can't let that happen.

[Senator]

25. They already support it

And while many may well enjoy a good mud dragging, very few would continue to turn a blind eye to torture for such a selfish thrill.

Besides, only impeachment gets you "prime time."

Only Impeachment

--

[cool user name]

5. Kicking and screaming!

[grytpype]

6. "Dick Cheney for President"

That's what I heard you say. You want Dick Cheney to be President, I happen to disagree.

[Senator]

7. "Let the War Crimes Continue"

That's what I heard you say. You want Geneva violations to be tacitly approved in the name of the American People.

I happen to disagree that there's any reason not to double impeach.

---

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

8. When? Easy. After Official And Thorough Congressional Investigations If A Determination Is Made

that there is enough irrefutable evidence worthy of impeachment to make the case legitimately to the full congress and American people.

Ya know, like when it's s'posed ta happen.

[BigBearJohn]

11. Kicked and screaming too!

[chknltl]

13. To not impeach paints an even bigger target on OUR backs!

...who here condones bushco's crimes against humanity??? Well how about PROVING it to those who doubt your words. Remember9-11? The whole world is watching. EOM

[Poiuyt]

14. Clinton's impeachment made impeaching Bush more difficult

You would have thought that it would have lowered the bar, but instead it raised it. Congress is afraid to bring impeachment hearings against Bush for fear of looking like it's out for retribution. I think that they feel it would look bad to impeach two presidents in a row. Clinton's impeachment has essentially given Bush a free pass to commit all the high crimes and misdemeanors that he wants.

[focusfan]

18. I wish he would get impeached

and maybe he would stop his bull sh-t on Iraq among other
things he has done wrong during his presidency.I wish he could
be throwed out on his ears lol

[pberq]

19. Well-written

To the "investigation" crowd: there's already plenty of evidence in the public domain.

[The Count]

20. Hear, hear! Stop the killing and the torture! There are crimes in progress

and we have the choice to stop them or condone them.
There's prima facie evidence of law breaking - singnature statements, lies to war, Geneva conventions. Just reading the texts is investigation enough.

STOP THE MURDERERS!

[chknltl]

22. kicked nt