For a fringe idea… Part II

Clinton wasn’t convicted in the Senate, either, but that never stopped the GOP from moving forward with it in the House, did it?

This is a president who has shown himself to be impervious to the rule of law, and I think when that is the case, the only remedy left is the one that is most severe. If the executive branch demonstrates – as it has, repeatedly – that it does not care about the law, it is up to the legislative branch to take up the reins of government and do what needs to be done.

If they don’t, they will have failed the people and failed the democracy, which is meant to be protected by the exercise of this constitutional imperative.

If Bush leaves office without the Congress having drawn a line, and without having withdrawn and revoked the precedents set during his terms, they will have opened a door to future presidents and administrations that may not be able to be closed.

Impeachment is a stupid idea.

It would be a waste of time and effort, and would ultimately fail. It would also be an act of cowardice. Congress has the power of the purse which is more than enough to limit the power of the President. Using impeachment instead of these powers is an abdication of responsibility.

In 18 months we will have a new president. We should focus on the future instead of seeking vengeance for the past. It is not a question of whether Bush or Cheney deserve impeachment. Of course they do. It is a question of how we conduct the nation’s business. History will deal with Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Rice.

That may not be enough for many, but there is a lot of work to do to undo the damage that they have done. That should be our priority. It is time to put the interests of our nation above the anger in our hearts.

In 18 months we will have a new president. — NeilS, @4

And how many more dead? And can you give me your guarantee that we won’t be in Iran? That there won’t be a further erosion of the law between now and then? More skewed Supremes, for instance?

Congress has the power of the purse which is more than enough to limit the power of the President. — same as above

And why not use *both* tools? Power of the purse short term (because building up support for impeachment will take time) and impeachmnet as the long-term goal. Throw in the investigations, just to keep the WH vermin busy on all fronts and also to keep bolstering the reasons for the long term goal…

Re the Rasmussen results: I wonder what the real numbers are. Because all of Rasmussen’s polls always seem to be skewed, by anywhere between 5 and 10% in pro-Bush direction (when compared to other polls, even the Faux ones), it’s hard to trust them on this.

Only a gain of 7 points in 18 months?

Americans are pretty tolerant. At least, when it comes to rampaging, power-mad, fascist criminals posing as politicians.

If you want to increase the power of Congress (and thus decrease that of the Executive), you need to exercise the powers of Congress.

Nancy Pelosi said best today: “We have many arrows in our quiver.”

That woman is smart. I’d listen to her.

Do you think that the House would impeach? I don’t. But if it did, would the Senate convict? No.

So what would you have accomplished?

Our time is much better spent changing the dreadful and dangerous course that this administration has chosen. There is a lot to do other than impeach a lame duck President.

tko – insults are below the normal caliber of this blog.

Let’s see – invasion of a country to control its resources, pulling forces out of Afghanistan so that Osama could escape, blocking the investigation of 9/11 so that we do not know today why the trade towers fell, torture and endless imprisonment of civilians, failure to respond to a hurricane bearing down on New Orleans – the reasons go on and on. I think this issue is moot because Bush is going to force Congress to impeach him by blocking all the investigations into his criminal activities. Impeachment proceedings need to go forward to show the country and the world that we do not tolerate this kind of behavior from our president. President Cheney would be an improvement over vice-president Cheney since his activities would become more public and subject to scrutiny.

Do you think that the House would impeach? I don’t. But if it did, would the Senate convict? No. — NeilS. @10

Not today, no. But, the sooner, the better. And the only way for the idea to snowball and gain heft is to keep bringing it up, so that people are less frightened of it and so that it becomes a part of everyday conversation. If we don’t even start the conversation, we’ll never get anywhere.

Pelosi’s “we have many arrows in our quiver” is not today’s quote and it was uttered in ref. to a different subject. But, if you’d like to apply it to this situation… Perhaps it means she’s smart enough to keep the I-arrow in the quiver also, as the situation on the ground changes, instead of sweeping it off the table entirely.

Phoebes, @9,
Yeah, sure. *For now*, investigations (and publicizing the results as you suggest — simply, but loudly) are our best option. And, sure, NeilS is right that we need to use the power of the purse to stop the XYZs in the WH, short term (September budget sounds like a good date to contemplate).

But why should we not, eventually, avail ourselves of *all* the tools that are at our disposal? If you need to take a tree down in a hurry and the power is off, you start hacking with an axe. But, as soon as the power’s back on, you take a chainsaw to it. So we start hacking (investigations, power of the purse) and wait for the power to come back.

What’s needed is, *in that order*:
investigate
impeach
imprison.

Zeitgeist, @13,
It’s true that, the longer we go, the less “apppetizing” impeachment may sound. People like Neil will say “it’s only x months left, is it worth it?” But, the longer we go, the less certain I am that there will be a “natural end” to Bush’s term; not with the Grand Ventriloquist dictating the Dummy’s moves. With this malAdministration, tin-foil hats don’t seem to be a riduiculous fashion accessory at all. In fact, I think they ought to be made of heaviest grade aluminium.

Bush’s numbers are going to all time RECORD lows.

What better time to get the Repub Congress and Senate to go on record as supporting the President.

Being for impeachment now is going to be a real vote getter in 2008.

Bet on it.

In all of this debate and discussion, I think we are missing the bigger picture. Emotionally, I have wanted Bush and Cheney impeached years ago. Rationally, I have been slower to reach that point for both legal and pragmatic reasons. But the one thing that I think we on all sides of the issue are missing is the historical, constitutional implication of such an action. I grew up with the history lessons of the Andrew Johnson impeachment, witnessed the almost-impeachment and resignation of Richard Nixon, and voted the issue of the then-possible impeachment of Bill Clinton. All of those impeachment proceedings have made statements about how American government should or should not function.

The history books I grew up with looked kindly upon the senator (no one was specified) who refused to cast the vote necessary to achieve the two-thirds vote necessary to convict. This has been seen as a decision that protected the proper balance of power between the legislative and executive branches. And the crime that Johnson was impeached for is now seen as an unconstitutional usurpation of power by a partisan Congress.

While I witnessed the Nixon episode as a young teen, I had no idea, until reviewing the incidents later in a history class, the overall severity of the situation. The lessons of that “imperial presidency” have stayed with me ever since. I also did not realize in the moment how much Congressional members grappled with the issue in simultaneously solemn, regretful, and resolute ways. I also had no realization of how close this country came to a martial take-over.

I feel confident that history will continue to show that the Clinton impeachment was a partisan maneuver of the Congressional Republicans with no regard for the national well-being or for solid and significant reasons for impeachment and/or removal.

In this current instance, I believe that history will show that a successful impeachment of Bush AND Cheney, if done properly and solemnly, can make an important historical statement about what is acceptable within American constitutional government. History will ultimately judge the House on both how it conducts itself and why it does so.

At this point, I believe that the House needs to proceed on impeachment in a sound and responsibly swift manner, mindful of making a statement that will stand the test of time. Don’t impeach because we’re angry. Don’t impeach to grandstand or to just make any statement. Impeach because there are serious constitutional and criminal issues involved.

If the process is done well and carefully within the House, then history will judge the Senate and how it responds on the issue of conviction and removal accordingly. But at least a historical statement and precedent will be set that the lunacy of the Bush administration and others that would seek to emulate it should not be tolerated.

It is time for impeachment – sound and reasoned impeachment.

I agree with Phonatic and Jesseaw on sensible consideration of impeachment.

To NeilS’ point about what Bush has done differently, I think it is the attitude of the Administration as well as its historical context. They wiretapped despite a FISA law designed to address secret wiretaps AND, most importantly, a supine Republican Congress who would have changed the FISA law. Even worse, they said post 9/11 that changes to FISA were not needed.

In addition, I think their rabid secrecy and adamant refusal to own up to their own actions, to defend what they’ve done illegally. Take Iraq. One could argue (heartlessly, in my opinion) that our national security interests dictated we attack that country and establish a presence. But the Bushies did not take that approach. And they deliberately ignored advice that would have mitigated many of the ensuing problems, for example, General Shinseki’s advice on troop numbers based on his experience in the Balkans and his subsequent firing (or retirement). Instead, they fear-mongered then attacked the patriotism of critics and outed an active CIA agent working on Iranian WMD.

So I don’t know that the Republicans would have the guts to impeach the next Democratic President. Or that the next President, of any party, will behave the way this Administration has for the past two terms.

My belief is that setting precedent for future government behavior is critical now. The Democrats and rational Republicans need to educate the public about the extent of any illegal activities that have gone on and make clear the rules for the future. That might be impeachment. It might be passing laws that are more clearly drawn. It might be more Congressional investigations. Or all of these actions. But I believe accountability is less important than setting a clear precedent for future behavior from Presidents and Congress.

I’m waiting for Pelosi and Reid to step up and call a spade a spade. Waxman, Conyers, Leahy, and others have. But we need the leadership. We need sensible members of both parties to clean up this mess. We need to isolate and marginalize the enablers of this sort of malfeasance.

Maybe everybody could stop trangulating for a minute and carefully exploring politcial consequences and try to wrap their heads around the concept of doing the right thing. Impreachment is the right thing. Keep doing the right thing, over and over again, and even in the inattentive American people might eventually get the idea that you always do the right thing.