Hagel mentions the ‘I’ word

March 7, 2007

I know it’s not going to happen, and I know it doesn’t have the votes to pass, but it’s nevertheless striking to hear a Republican lawmaker use the “I” word in reference to the president. (via TP)

“The president says, ‘I don’t care.’ He’s not accountable anymore,” [Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.)] says, measuring his words by the syllable and his syllables almost by the letter. “He’s not accountable anymore, which isn’t totally true. You can impeach him, and before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment. I don’t know. It depends how this goes.”

The conversation beaches itself for a moment on that word — impeachment — spoken by a conservative Republican from a safe Senate seat in a reddish state. It’s barely even whispered among the serious set in Washington, and it rings like a gong in the middle of the sentence, even though it flowed quite naturally out of the conversation he was having about how everybody had abandoned their responsibility to the country, and now there was a war going bad because of it.

You’ll notice, of course, that Hagel wasn’t actually advocating impeachment, and didn’t even say he’d vote to throw Bush out of office, if it ever came to that.

But it’s striking to hear the word, isn’t it?

i’m hoping we’ll start hearing a lot more of that “i” word over the next few weeks and months…….

  • The Clinton Impeachment was outrageous, but how outrageous would it be to impeach this president. His crimes are outrageous. Why are people only whispering what should be shouted?

  • Have we talked today about the 60 towns in Vermont voting to impeach Bush/Cheney? Do the Vermont senators and congressmen (-man?) have to start discussing this in Congress now (understanding that it would have to start in the house)?

  • Chuck Hagel: “You can impeach him…”

    OK, Chuck, let’s do it. All we need is for our Democratic “leaders” to quit listening to the beltway kool kids and do their jobs. The American people want to know how they got tricked into Iraq, and when they find out for sure how Bush lied to them, they will want his head on a pike.

    Want proof? In October of 2005:

    By a margin of 50% to 44%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he lied about the war in Iraq

    http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/3528

    And I’m pretty sure Bush has lost a little bit of his support since then. Or a lot of it.

    ATTENTION DEMS: Start the hearings before Bush starts the next war.

  • Man, wouldn’t it be great if he runs for pres? He’ll get creamed by the true believers, and he’s a hardass social conservative, but the Republican debates would be entertaining as hell.

  • Even though Hagel has occasionally demonstrated the ability to say one thing, and then do the opposite—it is fitting that a conservative be the first to openly pronounce the word. I am curious, though, as to how the Reich noise machine will spin this. To ignore it is to give tacit approval, and to acknowledge it—even for the purpose of refuting the idea—is to give the idea of impeachment expanded potential for a national discourse.

    Could 2007 be the end of the Bush/Cheney regime? One can only wonder….

  • Hagel insults everyone who saw the bogusness of the Iraq war and tried to stop it:

    “Congress abdicated its oversight responsibility,” he says. “The press abdicated its responsibility, and the American people abdicated their responsibilities. Terror was on the minds of everyone, and nobody questioned anything, quite frankly.”

    “the American people abdicated their responsibilities”?

    “nobody questioned anything”?

    A lot of us didn’t abdicate our responsibilities, Chuck. A lot of us questioned the whole thing.

    The February 15, 2003 anti-war protest was a coordinated day of protests across the world against the imminent invasion of Iraq. Millions of people protested in approximately 800 cities around the world. According to BBC News, between six and ten million people took part in protests in up to sixty countries over the weekend of the 15th and 16th; other estimates range from eight million to thirty million.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_15%2C_2003_anti-war_protest

    Maybe Chuck should give up selling bogus history and go sell shoes if he doesn’t listen NOW to those of us who saw then what he only sees now in hindsight.

  • If I remember correctly, the Nixon impeachment started the same way, one or two defectors at a time. I remember my Republican father going to see our congressperson in Washington and telling him that the folks at home (Northern California) were not pleased with Nixon and believed he should be impeached. He later told me how shocked our congressman was (I think his name was Clausen) and In fact, he was nearly incredulous.

    By the time for the vote, Clausen and many other Republicans voted with the Dems to impeach. Everyone in Congress is afraid of being reactionary, but the voice of the people is a very strong voice and will eventually prevail over party lines and loyalties. At least that is the way it is supposed to work.

  • Yeah Gracious that is how it is supposed to work, and it may someday work that way again if, as I read somewhere last week, Diebold actually does get out of the voting machine business.

  • Umm, Chuck – you just voted a month ago to cut off debate about Iraq.

    That was 24 hours after you said America needs a debate on Iraq.

    Put your money where your mouth is and work with Reid to put out a resolution to begin hearings investigating whether there is grounds for impeachment.

  • Aw geez, Hagel has absolutely no credibility about anything. His rhetoric never matches his votes, his statements are worthless, and nothing he says is news.

  • At this point, I view Hagel’s mentioning the I-word in the same light as the pundits (and some Repub Congresscrtitters) saying “the Congress has the power of the purse; if you care about ending the war in Iraq, you can always cut the funding”. It’s an attempt to goad Dems into trying. The better to make a target for Rep attacks.

    **** you and horse you rode in on, Chuckie. Why don’t you build your presidential platform on that plank? You might have more credibility then. And you might try backing your hot air with some real acts — like votes.

  • GRACIOUS has a point. Something big and scary like impeachment isn’t going to happen overnight. It will happen — drip, drip, drip — as the “I” word continues to pop up, especially from Repubs. At some point it will move from whispers to open conversation.

    I think it’s entirely possible for Bush to be nailed. He’s just got too much time left in office. (Cheney, by the way, has recently provided a “health issues” excuse to resign or for Impeachment Lite — terrific pressure to resign.)

    The thing that keeps astonishing me is that I keep stumbling, not intentionally, over the volume of Bush controversies. There are dozens of well-publicized ones. For example, looking for something else, I found the story of Intelligence agents being advised to buy liability insurance. I remember that story, but there are so many, you lose track.

    The dung is just everywhere you look. Now, maybe, we have a congress that will look and point.

  • Hagel says only what is good for Hagel. He’s all hat and no spurs. He’s either trying to boost his chances for president by running away from Bush or trying to weasel some advantage from the White House in exchange for not following through with his words.

    He’s a two-timing snake in the grass who, like the scorpion, stings everything that moves simply because it’s his nature to do so.

  • Cheney might be easier (and better) to impeach. His roll in the Plame betrayal seems like an impeachable offense (Bush called the outing “treasonous” before their cover was blown), even if Fitzgerald couldn’t find enough evidence for a traditional court.

  • (Bush called the outing “treasonous” before their cover was blown),
    Comment by Owen

    What’s your theory on that, Owen? Did Bush know what Cheney was doing and figured he was safe denouncing it, or did Cheney do go after Plame without Bush knowing about it?

  • “…or did Cheney go after Plame without Bush knowing about it?”

    — Dale

    Many of us grouse (pardon the pun) that Cheney is the real President. I really think he is. He has steadily built his power to the point that he now is the de facto prez. I don’t think Cheney bothers to say anything to Bush unless it’s an order or an ego stroke for doing Cheney’s bidding.

    This frigging administration should be in jail. A jail in Ankara. Or Niger.

  • CB,

    Brattlerouser here. Hope all is well.

    Base on what I remember they said the same thing back when Nixon was president. Namely that, “it would never happen.” We all know what happened after that and I think it had to do with the investigations and the evidence that came out.

    Who’s to say it won’t happen if/when they conduct “investigations” for possible impeachment. If the evidence isn’t there… then fine. Americans will move on. But when you have people like John Dean (who participated in WG) writing a book called, “Worse Than Watergate” and Elizabeth Holtzman (D-NY) writing a book laying out prima face evidence why it’s necessary to conduct investigations into impeachment…shouldn’t people’s bells & whistles be going off right about now???

    I agree the votes aren’t there yet. But let the hearings occur and and when they find out the abuses of power, who’s to say our Congress will vote along party lines? What happened in 1999 with Bill Clinton doesn’t mean the same situation will happen if Congress moves forward.

    Lastly, I often hear that we shouldn’t be focusing on investigations into impeachment when there are so many pressing issues that need to be taken care of (i.e. the war in Iraq/Afghanistan, ethics reform, health care, education, etc.). Keep in mind… during the investigations into Nixon’s imepeachment Congress raised the minimum wage, established the EPA, and passed landmark legislation like the Endangered Species Act. In other words, if they hold hearings soon, Congress can get other work down as well. They are fully capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time.

    It’s an investigation NOT an impeachment. Let the chips fall where they may and if it fails it fails. But it really should happen, IMHO because our democracy and our Constitution has been abused and trampled on by our President and Veep.

    Anybody gonna disagree with me on that?

    This is what’s its all about preserving and protecting the sanctity of our democratic institutions of power from abuse. I say we go for it!

    • Comments are closed.