Conyers "Gives His Word" That He Will Impeach Chimpy...After a Dem Wins the WH.

[tekisui]

At a gathering of liberal activists in Washington on Tuesday, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) was asked if he would commit to holding the Bush administration accountable once a Democrat is in the White House and illegal acts have been pinned on President Bush.

"Yes, you have my word on that," Conyers replied. He then shook the questioner's hand as a sign of his commitment.

Conyers, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, told an audience at the liberal Take Back America Conference that he is wrestling with the idea of beginning impeachment proceedings against President Bush and Vice President Cheney, but he believes that such an effort might hamper Sen. Barack Obama's chance of winning the presidency.

However, Conyers guaranteed his liberal audience that he will pursue legal action against Bush after the November elections.

"There are those who said, if you elect Democrats to Congress, we will guarantee you two things: Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y) will become chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and he will raises taxes; and Conyers will become chairman of the Judiciary and he will impeach President George W. Bush," Conyers said. "You want to make them half right?"

The audience replied with thirty seconds of hearty applause. Conyers was speaking at a panel discussion entitled "The Republic Against the Rogue Presidency."

"Dear friends, this is a decision I am struggling with, and I want to share it here. Do I want to jeopardize the election by taking up this issue?" Conyers asked. "The problem is, this could become the issue of the 2008 election. This brilliant, talented Senator (Obama), who has more delegates and more votes than anybody else, could get derailed."

When Cybercast News Service asked Conyers to clarify the statement, he said, "I am afraid they would raise it in the campaign, and that they will use it against us, and that we would end up getting McCain. I would regret that for the rest of my life," he said. "That's the only reason. That would be my fear."

But Conyers told Cybercast News Service this does not mean the Bush administration will not be held accountable. "We can win this election and go get these guys afterwards. But we just don't want to jeopardize November 4th," he said.

link: http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200803/POL20080319c.html

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Maybe after * leaves, he can be held accountable, but I don't think you can impeach

(trial to remove from office) when that target defendant is not an office holder any longer.

[tekisui]

3. You still can Impeach.

Impeachment is the process to hold an elected individual to account. It can remove them from office, and ban them from future office holding. It also is the first step in convicting of crimes.

AND, chimpy will still be Pres. from Nov. 4th to Jan. 21.

Plenty of time to Impeach.

[Drifter]

5. Yes you can ...

impeachment was originally an action taken after a person left office.
The founders debated whether the President should be subject to impeachment while in office (leading to removal from office).

Cheers
Drifter

[bean fidhleir]

24. Citation please?

I'm somewhat well acquainted with Madison's record of the discussions that took place, and I don't recall anything like that. So could you give us a pointer?

[no_hypocrisy]

7. Thanks. You guys really cheered me up.

Never been happier to be wrong in my life.

:toast:

[Clear Blue Sky]

13. Talk is cheap

Many said the same thing before the 2006 midterm elections.

[Drifter]

2. I want to be able to say this ....

The difference between the Clinton impeachment and the Bush impeachment, is that Bush was convicted.

Cheers
Drifter

[tekisui]

4. This is the rational of waiting until Nov. 4 to really ramp up the

Impeachment campaign.

[Donnachaidh]

19. Don't hold your breath

Conyers and the rest ain't gonna do shit against Bush or Cheney. They'll find another reason to *wait*. And Bush will be installed in his Paraguay ranch, laughing his ass off because it was our OWN PARTY who played US like frigging panflutes. :rant:

[bdamomma]

6. boy, they are banking on that election aren't they???

who's to stay if it will even be considered.

[seemslikeadream]

8. "Yes, you have my word on that,"

Conyers replied.

[bean fidhleir]

9. If it isn't one excuse, it's another.

I used to respect him greatly. No more.

[Fireweed247]

10. oh my, I thought this was a joke!

That is so absurd. The whole 2008 election excuse is stupid. The only way the Dems can regain credibility and win elections is to uphold the Constitution. Conyers is just leading everyone on...again...stop insulting our intelligence already! I don't believe a word he says and I wish someone would run against him in his primary. The reason they treat us so badly is that we allow them to get away with it. I feel like I am in an abusive relationship.

[Fresh_Start]

11. Conyers says I'm not doing my job unless you pay blackmail nt

nt

[Winterblues]

12. We will see just how good his word is

I will not hold my breath..Indict, Convict, Incarcerate...ICI... should be our call

[Fireweed247]

15. His "word" is meaningless

He promised to begin Impeachment hearings when the Dems won in 2006. Then it was 'we have to wait for investigations', then he blocked the investigations, and now this??

[ORDagnabbit]

14. blah blah blah...... fuckers lie to us just like the repukes.... its demopublican or republicrat

turn all the bums out and start over.

[ThomWV]

16. I simply do not believe him. I think he is lieing, I think he has lied for years.

He was lieing when he held those mock hearings in the basement, he is lieing now.

[Individualist]

17. Conyers needs to realize people know BS when they hear it.

He's played this dog and pony show so many times that at this point he's only making a fool of himself.

[Donnachaidh]

18. Oh for fuck's sake!

Heaven FORBID he should do something that might HAMPER Barack Obama becoming President! :sarcasm:

Oh Yeah -- Barack and Conyers are BOTH agents of CHANGE. :sarcasm:

He's not going to do SHIT -- no matter WHO gets voted in. He's leading the Democratic SHEEP choir. :grr:

[librechik]

20. Huh. He says this, then he says there is not enough time to impeach,

One day he is aware that you can impeach after they leave office, one day he isn't. Just don't know about Conyers.

Everything I know about Democrats tells me he would GAIN votes by impeaching before the election. Dem leadership hold up the popularity of Clinton during his impeachment as an example of the way they are afraid things would go during a Bush impeachment. Are they CRAZY??? Clinton was popular during his impeachment because Democrats knew it was an unfair and bogus charge, totally partisan and political and so we rallied behind him.

In this case, everyone knows Bush deserves impeachment and so much more. We would rally behind an impeachment to hold the criminal accountable. Even many in his own party. There would be no popularity spike. Are they serious? Do they not read polls? For five years?

I give up on this man.

[dorkulon]

21. This is idiotic.

Nothing could help the Democrats more than a disgraced, impeached Republican president. It certainly didn't hurt the Republicans when Bill was impeached, did it?

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. Conyers: 3 More Congress Members and I'll Impeach

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

[tekisui]

23. They keep dangling the carrot.

There are 26 co-sponsors of H.Res. 333 now.