Conyers: 3 More Congress Members and I'll Impeach

[proud2BlibKansan]

Submitted by davidswanson on Sat, 2007-07-21 22:50.
By David Swanson

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has said that if three more Congress Members get behind impeachment he will start the impeachment proceedings.

I was a guest today on Bree Walker's radio show. She's the progressive radio host from California who purchased Cindy Sheehan's land from her in Crawford, Texas.

Bree attended an event on Friday in San Diego at which Congressman Conyers spoke about impeachment. Her report was extremely interesting. I had already heard reports that Conyers had said: "What are we waiting for? Let's take these two guys out!" But, of course, what we're waiting for is John Conyers. Is he ready to act? It was hard to tell from that comment. In January, Conyers spoke at a huge rally on the National Mall and declared "We can fire them!" but later explained that what he meant was that we could wait for two years and Bush and Cheney's terms would end. Was this week's remark just more empty rhetoric?

It appears to be more than that. Bree Walker told me, on the air, that Conyers said that all he needs is three more Congress Members backing impeachment, and he'll move on it, even without Pelosi. I asked whether that meant specifically moving from 14 cosponsors of H Res 333 to 17, or adding 3 to the larger number of Congress Members who have spoken favorably of impeachment but not all signed onto bills. Bree said she didn't know and that Conyers had declined to take any questions.

more . . . http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/24962

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. Click on the link and read the whole thing!

Lots of GREAT information there.

It's lookin very promising, folks!!! :woohoo:

[Ben Masel]

2. Doesn't it have to be referred to the Judiciary Committee first?

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. Conyers IS the Judiciary Committee

[Ben Masel]

13. That doesn't give him authority

to take up a Resolution which has not been referred.

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. I think it means it has a pretty good chance

[Ben Masel]

19. What does that mean?

A Committee has no jurisdiction over a Resolution unless and until it's been referred.

At this point, we're discussing a rumor, not a fact.

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. Did you read the linked article?

[Ben Masel]

28. The linked article is, sadly, wrong.

"Bree Walker told me, on the air, that Conyers said that all he needs is three more Congress Members backing impeachment, and he'll move on it, even without Pelosi."

Conyers knows he can't proceed without a referral. Bree, apparently, is not aware of House rules, and erred in filling in the blanks.

[proud2BlibKansan]

30. So you are accusing Bree of misquoting Conyers?

[Ben Masel]

33. Not maliciously.

More likely misunderstanding him.

[Ben Masel]

43. ***I'M WRONG***

H. Res. 333 was already Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, 5/4/2007.

[EFerrari]

61. Have I said welcome to DU yet, Ben?

:hi:

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. Phew you had me worried there for a minute!

:hi:

[Freddie Stubbs]

54. A member of Congress would have to introduce articles of impeachment first

[mmonk]

72. H Res 333

[MonkeyFunk]

75. So was Conyers talking about impeaching Cheney?

or Bush?

[mmonk]

81. The only thing I saw was a mention of both.

[KAT119]

89. To Contact Conyers:

http://judiciary.house.gov/Contact.aspx

Phone: [phone]

(edited for phone #).

[stirlingsliver]

3. I'm Calling My CongressCritter.....

I sure as hell amn calling my Congress Critter, and telling him to sign on with Conyers!

We need a groundswell of grass-roots support!!

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. I talked to mine today

Maybe I should email this article to him.

[Fovea]

17. I will email Dennis Moore again tonight.

But I think he is starting to get the idea.

[proud2BlibKansan]

20. I went to the WyCo Dems breakfast and he was the guest speaker

I wore my IMPEACH shirt. He smiled and he even pointed to me when he brought up impeachment in his remarks.

I also asked him if he would sign the letter that 70 reps sent bush telling him they will only vote for money to bring the troops home, no more money for war. He said he would consider it.

He was actually more friendly than he has been in awhile. I doubt if he will sign off on impeachment, but we absolutely must let him know that's what we want.



To get one of these shirts -- > http://www.beachblogger.net/barbara/

[Fovea]

53. I need to bicycle my butt out to one of those.

Not too far down the road, just usually only get to see my grad student sweetheart on weekends anymore.

And BTW, that is a stylin shirt.

[proud2BlibKansan]

74. WyCo is 3rd Saturday at the Woodlands

JoCo is 2nd Saturday at the Holiday Inn on Shawnee Mission Parkway and Metcalf. Both start at 8am.

[Fovea]

88. yeah, I live in Strawberry Hill

and have an interest in Wyco, and the woodlands is not that far or as many hills as my usual route. Just gotta pry my gimp ass out of bed and go.

[proud2BlibKansan]

90. I would be more than happy to give you a ride - PM me for my number

BTW, TODAY at noon. 5th and State in KCK. The ENOUGH protest. That's pretty close to where you live! :)

[Fovea]

101. I will put a sign in my yard...

I had to go shoot photos of my friend's baby shower.

I got letters of support from neighbors when I had a Kucinich sign up in 2004.

[ClassWarrior]

21. Get his fax number and fax him this article.

I'm faxing it to mine on Monday.

NGU.

[Jack Bone]

4. Let's Get It On!!

:toast: :bounce: :party: :headbang: :applause: :patriot:

[bdamomma]

5. maybe we should think of ourselves as being shareholders

to a company, * is the CEO, and we the shareholders are not happy with the progress of the company and we fire him, Since they like to think they are CEO's of a big corporation, Let's fire them.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. Works for me!!

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

9. I'm phoning Peter DeFazio Mon. morning. Impeach !

[MLFerrell]

10. Dear Congressman Conyers...

FUCK WAITING!

START THE GODDAMNED PROCESS NOW!!!

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Looks like he might just be doing that

[MLFerrell]

12. I certainly hope so.

[John Q. Citizen]

31. i had a good long talk with his office staff in one of his smaller constitutent office's

the other day. She was all for impeachment. She said they had been getting calls on it and that she thought it was well warrented.

[LibertyorDeath]

15. About fucking time.....

Rec!!

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. If this isn't it, I am going to be so pissed off!!

[babylonsister]

18. We're getting closer! nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. I am sick to death of these baby steps.

[babylonsister]

25. Me, too, but think how sweet it will be when Conyers finally does something

to further the impeachment cause. :thumbsup:

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. Well my congressman was less negative about it today than he has been before

I got the impression he has been hearing this from his constituents.

[onenote]

67. My condolences

Unfortunately, there is no way that an impeachment process against either cheney or chimpy is going to get started without a vote by the full House to authorize it and right now its going to take more than 3 more Democrats coming out in favor of taking that step to make it happen.

[proud2BlibKansan]

91. What the impeachment of Cheney or Bush will be is very, very fast.

It will not disrupt or distract from the important business of passing nonbinding resolutions and holding all-night gripe sessions over bills destined to be vetoed. Impeachment in the case of Dick Cheney need not take the three months it did for Nixon or the two months it did for President Bill Clinton. In fact, it could take a day. Here's why:

Bush and Cheney's lies about Iraqi ties to al Qaeda are on videotape and in writing, and Bush and Cheney continue to make them to this day. There was no al Qaeda in Iraq until the invasion.

Their claims about Iraqi weapons have been shown in every detail to have been, not mistakes, but lies.

Their threats to Iran are on videotape.

Bush being warned about Katrina and claiming he was not are on videotape.

Bush lying about illegal spying and later confessing to it are on videotape. A federal court has ruled that spying to be a felony.

The Supreme Court has ruled Bush and Cheney's system of detentions unconstitutional.

Torture, openly advocated for by Bush and Cheney and their staffs, is documented by victims, witnesses, and public photographs. Torture was always illegal and has been repeatedly recriminalized under Bush and Cheney. Bush has reversed laws with signing statements.

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/24962

[onenote]

102. dream on

Its not going to be fast. I'd bet my house on that.

[Poiuyt]

24. The article doesn't make totally clear if Conyers was talking about impeaching just

Bush, just Cheney, or both Bush and Cheney. I'd like to see them both impeached simultaneously myself. I have a feeling that if just Cheney were impeached, Congress would not move to impeach Bush.

[proud2BlibKansan]

27. If we can't get both of them, I would prefer cheney.

He's the real monster.

[pokercat999]

29. Right....and Conyers says

The check's in the mail....you didn't get it, hmmmmm I sent it two weeks ago I'm sure....oh, wait, that check, it was sent last week don't you remember me telling you that, oh wait sorry, it wasn't sent I'll get it in the mail right away look for it in just a little while, you know I'm good for it.......RRRRRRight?

Ok? Well, I'm rather owe it to you than cheat you out of it!

[proud2BlibKansan]

32. Hey I hear ya!!

[porphyrian]

34. Why 3 more? Why wait at all? - n/t

[Ben Masel]

35. He CAN'T do anything

without a Resolution being referred to the Committee.

[proud2BlibKansan]

38. How many co-signers were on the resolution to impeach Clinton?

[warren pease]

58. There were several posts on another thread earlier this week that said NO co-signers. n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

70. And that would be correct

:)

[porphyrian]

39. So, like, H.R. 333 would have to be referred to Conyers' committee?

I can't remember all of the procedural ritual bullshit involved, so please forgive my ignorance. How would waiting for 3 more supporters refer it to his committee?

[Ben Masel]

45. ALREADY REFERRED

H. Res. 333 Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, 5/4/2007.

[onenote]

66. still needs full House vote to start impeachment inquiry

Here's how it works, using the Clinton impeachment inquiry as an example:

In early September 1998, a resolution was introduced by Rep. SOlomon, the chair of the Rules Committee, proposing that the Starr Report be referred to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration as to whether the findings in the report constituted grounds for impeachment. That resolution was approved by the Rules Committee on a voice vote (although 4 Democrats submitted a written dissent to the committee report accompanying the resolution). The entire House then considered and approved this resolution by an overwhelming, bi-partisan 363-63 margin.

The House Judiciary Committee directed the majority and minority staffs of the committee to review the Starr report. Based on that review, Rep. Hyde, the Chairman of the Judiciary Commmittee introduced a resolution in early October calling for the commencement of an impeachment inquiry. The committee report accompanying that resolution spells out the historical precedent (dating back to the 19th century) for having a vote of the full House as a prerequisite for the acutal commencement of imppeachment inquiry by the Judiciary Committee. There was one hearing on the Hyde resolution -- the witnesses were the majority and minority staff counsels of the committee reporting on their findings regarding the starr report. There were two Democratic-led efforts to stave off approval of the Hyde resolution, one sponsored by Boucher and one by Berman. Both lost on straight party line votes. The resolution then passed by a straight party line vote in committee. A day later, the full House considered the resolution to authorize the Committee to commence an impeachment inquiry and approved it by a vote of 258-176, with 31 Democrats voting in support of the resolution.


So, the mere fact that the resolution was referred by the chair to the House Judiciary Committee doesn't mean that Judiciary can now commence an impeachment investigation and inquiry without the full House acting first. At most, the House Judiciary can hold limited hearings for the purpose of building a record as to whether a resolution calling for the commencement of the impeachment inquiry should be approved by the committee and sent to the full house.

[proud2BlibKansan]

36. Good question

[porphyrian]

40. I don't know if it's good, but it's the obvious one. - n/t

[warren pease]

59. Oh, it's just that 17's his lucky number...

And he likes to hit on 17 for some weird reason.

Just as I wouldn't go anywhere without my lucky penny in my right front pocket, my increasingly useless comb in the right rear pocket, and an old guitar pick in the left rear one. Then I have to walk out the front door, spin around three times and stop facing due north. Then I retie my shoes (other special rules for flip flops apply in summer), spin around two times and stop facing due south.

If I screw up any of these critical details, I have to start all over again. So it often takes a while to get going.


Kinda like Conyers...


wp

[porphyrian]

93. I wonder how much of superstition is really OCD...

But, yeah.

[warren pease]

97. OCD...

...is probably not Conyers' problem. He seems a pretty reasonable guy, well-spoken, calm, strong-willed, fueled by outrage and willing to work hard to make the perps pay.

Which makes it even harder to understand why he's pulling this "three more" = "lucky penny" nonsense. As far as I know, there's nothing magical about 17 co-signers. As I noted above, Clinton's impeachment resolution had NO co-signers. With 14 already on board, why throw up meaningless barriers? Why not just get on with it?

I just don't get it. And he's one of the good guys, along with the rest of the co-signers. That leaves well over 200 fraudulent Democratic candy asses in the House, most posing as anti-war, anti-corruption, anti-imperial presidency reformers who absolutely refuse to take even the first, easiest step to impose the will of the people on the runaway lunatics in the white house.

How hard is it to go on record as opposed to dictatorial "unitary executives?" It's not like that's a controversial position. Virtually everyone on the planet, with the exception of the stupidest, most demented 24 to 30 percent the US electorate, wants these people out of office yesterday and their cold, dead hands removed from the levers of power.

Why is it that hundreds of millions -- probably billions -- of people from just about every country on earth await the day these bastards are no longer running the show? And why is it that a couple of hundred people from the country most affected by these monsters can't seem to understand that they have it within their power to lance this boil on the bottom of human decency and progress?

Is it apathy? Is it fear? Is it because they secretly support BushCo's agenda? Is it blackmail? Are they all on the DC Madam's list -- including the women?

Hard to believe, but what other conclusions can we draw from their shameful behavior and their utter disinterest in doing what they were elected to do?

Fuck 'em. As usual, leftists/progressives/free-thinkers have been abandoned by Democrats in favor of the corporate agenda they're paid to follow in this bribocracy. Unfortunately, I can't afford to buy a Senator or Congressperson, so I have to hope that a few Barbara Lees and Dennis Kuciniches and Lynne Woolseys will step up and represent my interests simply because their interests and mine coincide on this issue.

Meanwhile, everybody else seems to be waiting for the '08 elections -- which may not happen unless these pantywaists take a little preemptive action and remove, arrest, indict and imprison the entire BushCo cabal. The country, and the world, won't be safe until they're rotting in some moldy prison doing several consecutive life terms without possibility of parole.


wp

[porphyrian]

98. Man, that needs to be in print. I'm completely with you in that understanding and frustration.

It's like we're being corralled towards either compliance or the Unspeakable Response, neither of which are acceptable. I wish someone would think of another option quick because I'm stumped and we may have already run out of time.

[Alexander]

37. I'm contacting Harry Mitchell's office then...

Although frankly I'd be shocked if he signed on to impeachment this early.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

41. My Congressman (Sam Farr) already signed on!

Hooray for Sam!

[Peace Patriot]

42. Here's a thread on how it could happen via a citizens' petition...

“'Do-It-Yourself' Impeachment Petitions are described under the House Rules, Jefferson’s Manual Section LIII. They constitute a legal means of initiating the impeachment process, and were successfully used in 1830 to impeach Federal Judge James Peck. This method is the only means by which an individual citizen can legally initiate the impeachment of a federal official. While only one such citizen’s petition is necessary to begin the process, thousands of these are to be delivered on Friday."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1396723

Thread title: "Wexler, Waters, Schiff, Wasserman Agree To Meet On Impeachment of Cheney"

-----

And see my post #11 at that thread (reply to #10), which lists the ways that an impeachment petition can be submitted to the House. The ways I knew of (in Jefferson's Rules)--by a state legislature (it only takes one) or a grand jury--it hits the House as a privileged resolution. All House business must stop to consider it. I don't know if this is the case with a citizen petition as well.

-----

So-o-o, an impeachment bill can be introduced in many ways, including by just ONE citizen. But I'm not sure what happens after that. I would presume that it goes to the Judiciary Committee, but I'm not sure--that is, if it's a privileged resolution, the House MUST do SOMETHING with it, and referral to Judiciary would be the most logical.

[Frustratedlady]

44. What has happened to all the petitions the various cities have voted on?

I can't recall all of them, but there have been many on the East Coast and one in California a week or so ago, if my memory serves me correctly. My goodness, I have signed a ton of them, but then I never hear anything about who got them or if they were tossed in the circular file.

I understand they have to have the votes to proceed, but if the Congress Critters are working for us and "us" signed petitions over and over again, shouldn't they be doing our bidding? Just askin'.

I'll now go back to my corner and suck my thumb.

[EFerrari]

56. I've signed so many I can't keep track any more.

Keep pushing!

[EFerrari]

46. Who has three congress people laying around?

lol

:woohoo:

[proud2BlibKansan]

48. David lists several in his article

It's definitely a goal that can be achieved.

BTW, I went to a breakfast today where my congressman was the guest speaker. He is a Blue Dog Dem. He was talking about Pelosi and went on and on about how much he admired her and he talked about how liberal her district is and then he looked right at me (I was wearing my IMPEACH shirt) and he said "You know, she has people camped out at her house in San Francisco!"

I laughed cause I thought about YOU. :rofl:

[EFerrari]

49. LOL! There was a picture of Leslie and Medea on the front page

of the Chron last week, sitting in a hearing. It was shocking to realize that I know both of them and that we've plotted against the empire together! :rofl:

[proud2BlibKansan]

51. My congressman is kinda slow to pick up on things

and I could tell today he was surprised that Pelosi was taking so much pressure at home. But I also think he is finally realizing we really mean business.

[EFerrari]

52. Did you see that several of the Republics mentioned Code Pink

"wandering the halls" of Congress with what amounted to a shudder during the filibuster? That was hilarious.

I guess they don't like to be lobbied by pink statues of liberty. lol :hi:

[DancingBear]

47. I am not one for calling Congress, but this time I WILL call Conyers

and my House reps.

If I am understanding this correctly then impeachment resolutions should be forthcoming.

If they are not - after the threshold has been met - then I wish nothing more to do with either mainstream political party ever again.

Right now, I am mildly hopeful.

I'll give it what I got, and hope for the best.

[proud2BlibKansan]

50. I talked to my congressman's aide this morning

I know him - he used to work here in my county running the local party. And I trust him. Anyway, I asked how often we should call about things we are lobbying for. He said if we call every day, they put us in the kook file. Once a week is just about right.

[me b zola]

55. Alrighty then. We have our work cut out for us

I've been calling Rep Blumenhauer, now I am going to step up the pressure :)

Let's make this happen! :kick:

[brettdale]

57. kick kick kick kick

Get Kicked.

[Disturbed]

63. A reminder of how many Reps there are.

Washington, DC 20515 | [phone] | TTY: [phone]
Go directly to content »
This Web site is speech enabled
Large-Print
Default

A

Abercrombie, Neil, Hawaii, 1st
Ackerman, Gary, New York, 5th
Aderholt, Robert, Alabama, 4th
Akin, Todd, Missouri, 2nd
Alexander, Rodney, Louisiana, 5th
Allen, Tom, Maine, 1st
Altmire, Jason, Pennsylvania, 4th
Andrews, Robert E., New Jersey, 1st
Arcuri, Michael A., New York, 24th

B

Baca, Joe, California, 43rd
Bachmann, Michele, Minnesota, 6th
Bachus, Spencer, Alabama, 6th
Baird, Brian, Washington, 3rd
Baker, Richard, Louisiana, 6th
Baldwin, Tammy, Wisconsin, 2nd
Barrett, J.Gresham, South Carolina, 3rd
Barrow, John, Georgia, 12th
Bartlett, Roscoe, Maryland, 6th
Barton, Joe, Texas, 6th
Bean, Melissa L., Illinois, 8th
Becerra, Xavier, California, 31st
Berkley, Shelley, Nevada, 1st
Berman, Howard, California, 28th
Berry, Marion, Arkansas, 1st
Biggert, Judy, Illinois, 13th
Bilbray, Brian P., California, 50th
Bilirakis, Gus M., Florida, 9th
Bishop, Rob, Utah, 1st
Bishop Jr., Sanford D., Georgia, 2nd
Bishop, Timothy, New York, 1st
Blackburn, Marsha, Tennessee, 7th
Blumenauer, Earl, Oregon, 3rd
Blunt, Roy, Missouri, 7th
Boehner, John A., Ohio, 8th
Bonner, Jo, Alabama, 1st
Bono, Mary, California, 45th
Boozman, John, Arkansas, 3rd
Bordallo, Madeleine, Guam
Boren, Dan, Oklahoma, 2nd
Boswell, Leonard, Iowa, 3rd
Boucher, Rick, Virginia, 9th
Boustany Jr., Charles W., Louisiana, 7th
Boyd, Allen, Florida, 2nd
Boyda, Nancy E., Kansas, 2nd
Brady, Kevin, Texas, 8th
Brady, Robert, Pennsylvania, 1st
Braley, Bruce L., Iowa, 1st
Brown, Corrine, Florida, 3rd
Brown, Henry, South Carolina, 1st
Brown-Waite, Virginia, Florida, 5th
Buchanan, Vern, Florida, 13th
Burgess, Michael, Texas, 26th
Burton, Dan, Indiana, 5th
Butterfield, G.K., North Carolina, 1st
Buyer, Steve, Indiana, 4th
C

Calvert, Ken, California, 44th
Camp, Dave, Michigan, 4th
Campbell, John, California, 48th
Cannon, Chris, Utah, 3rd
Cantor, Eric, Virginia, 7th
Capito, Shelley Moore, West Virginia, 2nd
Capps, Lois, California, 23rd
Capuano, Michael E., Massachusetts, 8th
Cardoza, Dennis, California, 18th
Carnahan, Russ, Missouri, 3rd
Carney, Christopher P., Pennsylvania, 10th
Carson, Julia, Indiana, 7th
Carter, John, Texas, 31st
astle, Michael N., Delaware, At Large
Castor, Kathy, Florida, 11th
Chabot, Steve, Ohio, 1st
Chandler, Ben, Kentucky, 6th
Christian-Christensen, Donna M., U.S. Virgin Islands
Clarke, Yvette D., New York, 11th
Clay Jr., William "Lacy", Missouri, 1st
Cleaver, Emanuel, Missouri, 5th
Clyburn, James E., South Carolina, 6th
Coble, Howard, North Carolina, 6th
Cohen, Steve, Tennessee, 9th
Cole, Tom, Oklahoma, 4th
Conaway, K. Michael, Texas, 11th
Conyers Jr., John, Michigan, 14th
Cooper, Jim, Tennessee, 5th
Costa, Jim, California, 20th
Costello, Jerry, Illinois, 12th
Courtney, Joe, Connecticut, 2nd
Cramer, Robert E. "Bud", Alabama, 5th
Crenshaw, Ander, Florida, 4th
Crowley, Joseph, New York, 7th
Cubin, Barbara, Wyoming, At Large
Cuellar, Henry, Texas, 28th
Culberson, John, Texas, 7th
Cummings, Elijah, Maryland, 7th

D

Davis, Artur, Alabama, 7th
Davis, Danny K., Illinois, 7th
Davis, David, Tennessee, 1st
Davis, Geoff, Kentucky, 4th
Davis, Jo Ann S., Virginia, 1st
Davis, Lincoln, Tennessee, 4th
Davis, Susan, California, 53rd
Davis, Tom, Virginia, 11th
Deal, Nathan, Georgia, 9th
DeFazio, Peter, Oregon, 4th
DeGette, Diana, Colorado, 1st
Delahunt, William, Massachusetts, 10th
DeLauro, Rosa L., Connecticut, 3rd
Dent, Charles W., Pennsylvania, 15th
Diaz-Balart, Lincoln, Florida, 21st
Diaz-Balart, Mario, Florida, 25th
Dicks, Norman D., Washington, 6th
Dingell, John, Michigan, 15th
Doggett, Lloyd, Texas, 25th
Donnelly, Joe, Indiana, 2nd
Doolittle, John, California, 4th
Doyle, Mike, Pennsylvania, 14th
Drake, Thelma D., Virginia, 2nd
Dreier, David, California, 26th
Duncan Jr., John J., Tennessee, 2ndE

Edwards, Chet, Texas, 17th
Ehlers, Vernon J., Michigan, 3rd
Ellison, Keith, Minnesota, 5th
Ellsworth, Brad, Indiana, 8th
Emanuel, Rahm, Illinois, 5th
Emerson, Jo Ann, Missouri, 8th
Engel, Eliot, New York, 17th
English, Phil, Pennsylvania, 3rd
Eshoo, Anna G., California, 14th
Etheridge, Bob, North Carolina, 2nd
Everett, Terry, Alabama, 2nd

F

Faleomavaega, Eni F. H., American Samoa
Fallin, Mary, Oklahoma, 5th
Farr, Sam, California, 17th
Fattah, Chaka, Pennsylvania, 2nd
Feeney, Tom, Florida, 24th
Ferguson, Michael, New Jersey, 7th
Filner, Bob, California, 51st Flake, Jeff , Arizona, 6th
Forbes, J. Randy, Virginia, 4th Fortenberry, Jeff, Nebraska, 1st
Fortuno, Luis G., Puerto Rico Fossella, Vito, New York, 13th
Foxx, Virginia, North Carolina, 5th Frank, Barney, Massachusetts, 4th
Franks, Trent, Arizona, 2nd Frelinghuysen, Rodney, New Jersey, 11th
^ return to top
G

Gallegly, Elton, California, 24th Garrett, Scott, New Jersey, 5th
Gerlach, Jim, Pennsylvania, 6th Giffords, Gabrielle, Arizona, 8th
Gilchrest, Wayne, Maryland, 1st Gillibrand, Kirsten E., New York, 20th
Gillmor, Paul, Ohio, 5th Gingrey, Phil, Georgia, 11th
Gohmert, Louie, Texas, 1st Gonzalez, Charlie A., Texas, 20th
Goode Jr., Virgil H., Virginia, 5th Goodlatte, Bob, Virginia, 6th
Gordon, Bart, Tennessee, 6th Granger, Kay, Texas, 12th
Graves, Sam, Missouri, 6th Green, Al, Texas, 9th
Green, Gene, Texas, 29th Grijalva, Raul, Arizona, 7th
Gutierrez, Luis, Illinois, 4th
^ return to top
H

Hall, John J., New York, 19th Hall, Ralph M., Texas, 4th
Hare, Phil, Illinois, 17th Harman, Jane, California, 36th
Hastert, Denny, Illinois, 14th Hastings, Alcee L., Florida, 23rd
Hastings, Doc, Washington, 4th Hayes, Robin, North Carolina, 8th
Heller, Dean, Nevada, 2nd Hensarling, Jeb, Texas, 5th
Herger, Wally, California, 2nd Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie, South Dakota, At Large
Higgins, Brian, New York, 27th Hill, Baron, Indiana, 9th
Hinchey, Maurice, New York, 22nd Hinojosa, Rubén, Texas, 15th
Hirono, Mazie K., Hawaii, 2nd Hobson, David, Ohio, 7th
Hodes, Paul W., New Hampshire, 2nd Hoekstra, Pete, Michigan, 2nd
Holden, Tim, Pennsylvania, 17th Holt, Rush, New Jersey, 12th
Honda, Mike, California, 15th Hooley, Darlene, Oregon, 5th
Hoyer, Steny H., Maryland, 5th Hulshof, Kenny, Missouri, 9th
Hunter, Duncan, California, 52nd
^ return to top
I

Inglis, Bob, South Carolina, 4th Inslee, Jay, Washington, 1st
Israel, Steve, New York, 2nd Issa, Darrell, California, 49th
^ return to top
J

Jackson Jr., Jesse L., Illinois, 2nd Jackson Lee, Sheila, Texas, 18th
Jefferson, William J., Louisiana, 2nd Jindal, Bobby, Louisiana, 1st
Johnson, Eddie Bernice, Texas, 30th Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" Jr., Georgia, 4th
Johnson, Sam, Texas, 3rd Johnson, Timothy V., Illinois, 15th
Jones, Stephanie Tubbs, Ohio, 11th Jones, Walter B., North Carolina, 3rd
Jordan, Jim, Ohio, 4th
^ return to top
K

Kagen, Steve, Wisconsin, 8th Kanjorski, Paul E., Pennsylvania, 11th
Kaptur, Marcy, Ohio, 9th Keller, Ric, Florida, 8th
Kennedy, Patrick, Rhode Island, 1st Kildee, Dale, Michigan, 5th
Kilpatrick, Carolyn, Michigan, 13th Kind, Ron, Wisconsin, 3rd
King, Pete, New York, 3rd King, Steve, Iowa, 5th
Kingston, Jack, Georgia, 1st Kirk, Mark, Illinois, 10th
Klein, Ron , Florida, 22nd Kline, John, Minnesota, 2nd
Knollenberg, Joseph , Michigan, 9th Kucinich, Dennis J., Ohio, 10th
Kuhl Jr., John R. "Randy", New York, 29th
^ return to top
L

LaHood, Ray, Illinois, 18th Lamborn, Doug, Colorado, 5th
Lampson, Nick, Texas, 22nd Langevin, Jim, Rhode Island, 2nd
Lantos, Tom, California, 12th Larsen, Rick, Washington, 2nd
Larson, John B., Connecticut, 1st Latham, Tom, Iowa, 4th
LaTourette, Steven C., Ohio, 14th Lee, Barbara, California, 9th
Levin, Sander, Michigan, 12th Lewis, Jerry, California, 41st
Lewis, John, Georgia, 5th Lewis, Ron, Kentucky, 2nd
Linder, John, Georgia, 7th Lipinski, Daniel, Illinois, 3rd
LoBiondo, Frank, New Jersey, 2nd Loebsack, David, Iowa, 2nd
Lofgren, Zoe, California, 16th Lowey, Nita, New York, 18th
Lucas, Frank, Oklahoma, 3rd Lungren, Daniel E., California, 3rd
Lynch, Stephen F., Massachusetts, 9th
^ return to top
M

Mack, Connie, Florida, 14th Mahoney, Tim, Florida, 16th
Maloney, Carolyn, New York, 14th Manzullo, Donald, Illinois, 16th
Marchant, Kenny, Texas, 24th Markey, Ed, Massachusetts, 7th
Marshall, Jim, Georgia, 8th Matheson, Jim, Utah, 2nd
Matsui, Doris O., California, 5th McCarthy, Carolyn, New York, 4th
McCarthy, Kevin, California, 22nd McCaul, Michael T., Texas, 10th
McCollum, Betty, Minnesota, 4th McCotter, Thaddeus, Michigan, 11th
McCrery, Jim, Louisiana, 4th McDermott, Jim, Washington, 7th
McGovern, James, Massachusetts, 3rd McHenry, Patrick T., North Carolina, 10th
McHugh, John M., New York, 23rd McIntyre, Mike, North Carolina, 7th
McKeon, Buck, California, 25th McMorris Rodgers, Cathy, Washington, 5th
McNerney, Jerry, California, 11th McNulty, Michael R., New York, 21st
Meehan, Marty, Massachusetts, 5th --Vacancy Meek, Kendrick, Florida, 17th
Meeks, Gregory W., New York, 6th Melancon, Charlie, Louisiana, 3rd
Mica, John, Florida, 7th Michaud, Michael, Maine, 2nd
Millender-McDonald, Juanita, California, 37th -- Vacancy Miller, Brad, North Carolina, 13th
Miller, Candice, Michigan, 10th Miller, Gary, California, 42nd
Miller, George, California, 7th Miller, Jeff, Florida, 1st
Mitchell, Harry E., Arizona, 5th Mollohan, Alan B., West Virginia, 1st
Moore, Dennis, Kansas, 3rd Moore, Gwen, Wisconsin, 4th
Moran, Jerry, Kansas, 1st Moran, Jim, Virginia, 8th
Murphy, Christopher S., Connecticut, 5th Murphy, Patrick J., Pennsylvania, 8th
Murphy, Tim, Pennsylvania, 18th Murtha, John, Pennsylvania, 12th
Musgrave, Marilyn, Colorado, 4th Myrick, Sue, North Carolina, 9th
^ return to top
N

Nadler, Jerrold, New York, 8th Napolitano, Grace, California, 38th
Neal, Richard E., Massachusetts, 2nd Neugebauer, Randy, Texas, 19th
Norton, Eleanor Holmes, District of Columbia Norwood, Charlie, Georgia, 10th -- Vacancy
Nunes, Devin, California, 21st
^ return to top
O

Oberstar, James L., Minnesota, 8th Obey, David R., Wisconsin, 7th
Olver, John, Massachusetts, 1st Ortiz, Solomon P., Texas, 27th
^ return to top
P

Pallone Jr., Frank, New Jersey, 6th Pascrell Jr., Bill, New Jersey, 8th
Pastor, Ed , Arizona, 4th Paul, Ron, Texas, 14th
Payne, Donald M., New Jersey, 10th Pearce, Steve, New Mexico, 2nd
Pelosi, Nancy, California, 8th Pence, Mike, Indiana, 6th
Perlmutter, Ed, Colorado, 7th Peterson, Collin C., Minnesota, 7th
Peterson, John E., Pennsylvania, 5th Petri, Thomas, Wisconsin, 6th
Pickering, Charles W. "Chip", Mississippi, 3rd Pitts, Joseph R., Pennsylvania, 16th
Platts, Todd, Pennsylvania, 19th Poe, Ted, Texas, 2nd
Pomeroy, Earl, North Dakota, At Large Porter, Jon, Nevada, 3rd
Price, David, North Carolina, 4th Price, Tom, Georgia, 6th
Pryce, Deborah, Ohio, 15th Putnam, Adam, Florida, 12th
^ return to top
R

Radanovich, George P., California, 19th Rahall, Nick, West Virginia, 3rd
Ramstad, Jim, Minnesota, 3rd Rangel, Charles B., New York, 15th
Regula, Ralph, Ohio, 16th Rehberg, Dennis, Montana, At Large
Reichert, David G., Washington, 8th Renzi, Rick, Arizona, 1st
Reyes, Silvestre, Texas, 16th Reynolds, Thomas M., New York, 26th
Rodriguez, Ciro, Texas, 23rd Rogers, Harold, Kentucky, 5th
Rogers, Mike, Alabama, 3rd Rogers, Mike, Michigan, 8th
Rohrabacher, Dana, California, 46th Roskam, Peter J., Illinois, 6th
Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana, Florida, 18th Ross, Mike, Arkansas, 4th
Rothman, Steven, New Jersey, 9th Roybal-Allard, Lucille, California, 34th
Royce, Ed, California, 40th Ruppersberger, Dutch, Maryland, 2nd
Rush, Bobby L., Illinois, 1st Ryan, Paul, Wisconsin, 1st
Ryan, Tim, Ohio, 17th
^ return to top
S

Salazar, John T., Colorado, 3rd Sali, Bill, Idaho, 1st
Sanchez, Linda, California, 39th Sarbanes, John P., Maryland, 3rd
Sanchez, Loretta, California, 47th Saxton, Jim, New Jersey, 3rd
Schakowsky, Jan, Illinois, 9th Schiff, Adam, California, 29th
Schmidt, Jean, Ohio, 2nd Schwartz, Allyson Y., Pennsylvania, 13th
Scott, David, Georgia, 13th Scott, Robert C. "Bobby", Virginia, 3rd
Sensenbrenner, F. James, Wisconsin, 5th Serrano, José E., New York, 16th
Sessions, Pete, Texas, 32nd Sestak, Joe, Pennsylvania, 7th
Shadegg, John, Arizona, 3rd Shays, Christopher, Connecticut, 4th
Shea-Porter, Carol, New Hampshire, 1st Sherman, Brad, California, 27th
Shimkus, John, Illinois, 19th Shuler, Heath, North Carolina, 11th
Shuster, Bill, Pennsylvania, 9th Simpson, Mike, Idaho, 2nd
Sires, Albio, New Jersey, 13th Skelton, Ike, Missouri, 4th
Slaughter, Louise, New York, 28th Smith, Adam, Washington, 9th
Smith, Adrian, Nebraska, 3rd Smith, Chris, New Jersey, 4th
Smith, Lamar, Texas, 21st Snyder, Vic, Arkansas, 2nd
Solis, Hilda, California, 32nd Souder, Mark E., Indiana, 3rd
Space, Zachary T., Ohio, 18th Spratt, John, South Carolina, 5th
Stark, Fortney Pete, California, 13th Stearns, Cliff, Florida, 6th
Stupak, Bart, Michigan, 1st Sullivan, John, Oklahoma, 1st
Sutton, Betty, Ohio, 13th
^ return to top
T

Tancredo, Tom, Colorado, 6th Tanner, John, Tennessee, 8th
Tauscher, Ellen, California, 10th Taylor, Gene, Mississippi, 4th
Terry, Lee, Nebraska, 2nd Thompson, Bennie G., Mississippi, 2nd
Thompson, Mike, California, 1st Thornberry, Mac, Texas, 13th
Tiahrt, Todd, Kansas, 4th Tiberi, Pat, Ohio, 12th
Tierney, John, Massachusetts, 6th Towns, Edolphus, New York, 10th
Turner, Michael, Ohio, 3rd
^ return to top
U

Udall, Mark, Colorado, 2nd Udall, Tom, New Mexico, 3rd
Upton, Fred, Michigan, 6th
^ return to top
V

Van Hollen, Chris, Maryland, 8th Velázquez, Nydia M., New York, 12th
Visclosky, Peter, Indiana, 1st
^ return to top
W

Walberg, Timothy, Michigan, 7th Walden, Greg, Oregon, 2nd
Walsh, Jim, New York, 25th Walz, Timothy J., Minnesota, 1st
Wamp, Zach, Tennessee, 3rd Wasserman Schultz, Debbie, Florida, 20th
Waters, Maxine, California, 35th Watson, Diane E., California, 33rd
Watt, Mel, North Carolina, 12th Waxman, Henry, California, 30th
Weiner, Anthony D., New York, 9th Welch, Peter, Vermont, At Large
Weldon, Dave, Florida, 15th Weller, Jerry, Illinois, 11th
Westmoreland, Lynn A., Georgia, 3rd Wexler, Robert, Florida, 19th
Whitfield, Ed, Kentucky, 1st Wicker, Roger, Mississippi, 1st
Wilson, Charles A., Ohio, 6th Wilson, Heather, New Mexico, 1st
Wilson, Joe, South Carolina, 2nd Wolf, Frank, Virginia, 10th
Woolsey, Lynn, California, 6th Wu, David, Oregon, 1st
Wynn, Albert, Maryland, 4th
^ return to top
Y

Yarmuth, John A., Kentucky, 3rd Young, C.W. Bill, Florida, 10th
Young, Don, Alaska, At Large

[brettdale]

77. kick

kick

[wordpix]

60. talk to my congressman, Chris Murphy from CT---he just got an earful from us when he was in the dist

rict. He learned that those who bothered to turn out to speak with him were for impeachment x2.

[StarryNite]

62. I'm so afraid to get my hopes up

once again. But what the heck! It's time to throw the bums out. No, it's way past time.

Do it! Do it! Do it!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[bonito]

64. Kick!

:bounce:

[EFerrari]

65. Kicking for Mr. Conyers

[brettdale]

68. kick

kick

[GoddessOfGuinness]

69. I'll give money to the first person who actually DOES something about these assholes.

I'm tired of talk. I've been outraged for years. Fucking DO something already!

[chknltl]

73. I contacted 4 Congressmen

Norm Dicks, Patty Murray, Maria Cantwell and Jim McDermott. Representative McDermott was likely the most important one because he is already on board. He supports impeachment! Why do I say he is the most important one? Because he has the ear of the other three. He has the ear of all of Congress should he so choose. I only have my keyboard and a vote. I have nobody's ears. I urged him to do whatever it takes to help us get those other three Congressmen. Then I thanked him on behalf of WE THE PEOPLE for representing us and more importantly, for representing Democracy in America.

[yurbud]

76. CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSMAN LINK

Call, write, fax, and harrass.

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. Well time to send a copy of the genious of impeachmet

to my congress critter and a copy of the damn consitution

[Vidar]

79. Hope at last. K&R.

[chknltl]

80. Well got's me a bonified auto-response from Senator Murray

I suppose I'll catch hell for this but here it is in it's entirety. First though, I sent her, and Senator Maria Cantwell and Representative Norm Dicks an e-mail similar to what I have posted just a few posts above in this thread explaining why I urged her to support impeachment. This is the automated response I got:



Subject: Response from Senator Murray
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, July 21, 2007 11:14 pm


Dear Mr. (me):



Thank you for contacting me about impeachment proceedings for President
Bush or members of his Administration. I appreciate hearing from you
about this serious issue.



As you know, Congress may remove the President, Vice President, and any
Civil Officer of the United States from office through the impeachment
process. According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives may
impeach an official on charges of "Treason, Bribery, or other High
Crimes and Misdemeanors" (Article II, Section 4) to remove the
individual from office. Only two sitting Presidents have ever been
impeached: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. No sitting President has
been convicted and removed from office.



Recently, Washington state legislators in Olympia introduced resolutions
that called for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice
President Dick Cheney. State Senator Eric Oemig (D-Kirkland) was the
sponsor of this resolution, Senate Joint Memorial 8016. However, since
State Senator Oemig's resolution was at the state level, it would have
had no binding impact on the impeachment proceedings at the federal
level. The State Legislature adjourned without taking action on this
legislation. In addition, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) has
introduced House Resolution 333 (H.Res. 333) in the U.S. House of
Representatives, which calls for the impeachment of Vice President Dick
Cheney. The U.S. House of Representatives is the only legislative body
with the authority to begin impeachment proceedings of the Executive
Branch.



I share your serious concerns and frustrations with the direction that
President Bush and his Administration have been taking our country, both
at home and overseas. I am troubled that Congress has been denied a
chance to hold hearings and to bring accountability to this
Administration. Now that Congress is under new leadership, we finally
have that opportunity, and Congress is using the oversight process
aggressively to get the facts to help our country move forward. We have
held more oversight hearings of the Administration's handling of the
Iraq war in the first few months of the Democratic control of the
Congress than the Republicans did since the war began.



I believe the best way to alter the direction that our country is headed
in is to focus on fixing the current problems. At both the state and
federal levels, there are many issues that require our attention,
discussion, and action, and will require the President's active
involvement. I am concerned that progress on health care, education, and
veteran's care would all be put on hold and would not be fixed if
Congress solely focused on impeachment proceedings.



Be assured, I believe that the Congress must hold the Administration
accountable for their actions and decisions, and I look forward to the
upcoming hearings and investigations that are occurring in the 110th
Congress.



Thank you for sharing your views on this matter with me, and I will be
sure to keep your thoughts in mind as the actions of President Bush and
his administration are reviewed.



I hope all is well in Tacoma.


Well that sounds promising: NOT!

Dear Senator Murray
I posted your response in the Democratic Underground. I concur that there are a great many issues facing our state, our nation and our world. I worry that none of these issues can be addressed effectively with a sitting Presidential Administration which flaunts our nations laws. I want to continue supporting you on your good efforts on my behalf as a Veteran, I love that you share my concerns over Health Care and I agree that our Education System needs work. However all of Congress's actions are attenuated through the Bush Administration and it is easily apparent that they do not share our concerns. I feel time spent on these issues may come to naught. Impeachment can change all that. Again, we are a land governed by laws. Yet to date, Congress has not held this President and members of his administration accountable for behaving as though current laws don't apply to them! President Bush is a citizen of America, he works for me. I live in a land of laws not a Monarchy or a Dictatorship! Please, if you can, help Representative Conyers enforce those laws.

[KoKo]

87. Murray says: "...many issue that will require President's active involvement.."

I believe the best way to alter the direction that our country is headed
in is to focus on fixing the current problems. At both the state and
federal levels, there are many issues that require our attention,
discussion, and action, and will require the President's active
involvement. I am concerned that progress on health care, education, and
veteran's care would all be put on hold and would not be fixed if
Congress solely focused on impeachment proceedings.


Thank you for posting your e-mail and Murray's response and your response back. It's hard to understand why Murray (and I assume others) talk about legislation that will require the Presiden't "active involvement" when the only active involvement he has is VETOing Dem Legilation and issuing signing statements to get around any legislation he doesn't like.

I have to hope that Murray was being sarcastic in that comment and just didn't want to tip her hand that she would support impeachment. Since she says no President has been removed by impeachment it implies we are doomed before we start...but Nixon was forced to RESIGN and Clinton's impeachment was a SHAM that didn't pass the House. We must SHAME Cheney to resign by starting impeachment. Cheney is NOT popular with anyone on right or left and it's worth the effort even if the RW Repugs throw Tantrums! GONZO must GO FIRST, then CHENEY. Leave the Chimp but have him tied up in chains to serve out his last year.

[chknltl]

104. Thank You

I have supported Senator Murray since she started out as the "Jr. Senator in Tennis Shoes" long ago. Now she has some senority and I could not be happier. This year she has exibeted behavior I had reason to question: First she enlisted fellow Congressman Jay Inslee, they went to Olympia and spoke out against We The People when we tried for our own version of a Peoples Movement for Impeachment. Then she voted with the rethugs against citizens being able to buy legal prescription drugs by mail from distributers overseas, (Canada) and now she wants to work WITH the President.

I do not know if it means anything but I found a link which shows who is spending money to support our individual representitives. I noticed Microsoft, has been a big fan of Republicans but considerably less of Democrats over the last few years. This very year, Microsoft has switched it's financial support from the republicans to...yep you guessed it, Patty Murray. Again, I do NOT know if that means anything at all.

This link is for my state but you can reset it to give all sorts of interesting info for any state or politician...(it is where I got the info about Microsoft's donations to Senator Murray)

http://www.opensecrets.org/states/summary.asp?State=WA&Year=2006

[rosesaylavee]

82. K & R

My congressman is Hastert. Somehow I don't think I will convince him to go along. Hopefully, this will change when the indictments rain down on him after Sibel gets her day in court.

But I will call other congress critters in my area - Jesse Jackson Jr for sure.

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[C_U_L8R]

84. you and what army?

all twenty freeps?
A friendly suggestion Jethro... learn how to read and write. It might do you some good.

[nadinbrzezinski]

85. Ammusing the same crowd that cried until they were

blue in the face over Clinton give a pass to somebody whose frontal attack on the Constitution is oh so glaring

Perhaps a sting in the army would be good for you anyhow chickenhawk

[proud2BlibKansan]

86. Welcome to DU!

Enjoy your stay!! :hi:

[yurbud]

92. REPLY WHEN YOU CALL, EMAIL OR FAX YOUR REP to keep this thread on top

I've emailed mine, got the fax in the que, and I'm going to call tomorrow when they are in.

[snappyturtle]

94. Kick! n/t

[Rex]

95. YES!

Go John!

[mzmolly]

96. Conyers has never given up on impeachment, no matter what political statements have been made.

:hi:

[sandyj999]

99. OK John, Make your state proud!!!! n/t

[brettdale]

100. Kick

Kick

[Major Hogwash]

103. Just do it.

"How I Spent My Summer Vacation"
by Major Hogwash

I got up.
I brushed my teeth.
I begged Congress to impeach Bush all day.
Then I went to bed.
The next day I did the same thing.
The day after that I did the same thing.
I did it every day of the week.
Every day of the week for the whole month.
Every month for the whole summer.
Now, it's September and Bush is still in office.