Bob Fertik: Impeachment Is The Only Alternative To Constitutional Despair

[Hissyspit]

http://www.democrats.com/impeachment-is-the-only-altern...

Impeachment is the Only Alternative to Constitutional Despair
Submitted by Bob Fertik on October 5, 2007

After the NY Times revealed that Alberto Gonzales reversed the administration's short-lived anti-torture policy and secretly re-authorized torture, you might think impeachment would have picked itself off the nation's floor and jumped squarely onto the nation's table, where is so urgently belongs.

But you'd be wrong. While Bruce Fein and John Dean and other Republican friends of Keith Olbermann keep mentioning impeachment, along with one or two bloggers, the most prominent progressive Democrats are avoiding impeachment like the plague.

- snip -

Glenn Greenwald is an excellent example. Glenn is a brilliant blogger, cares passionately about the Constitution, and knows as much about Bush's impeachable crimes as anyone. But for some reason, Greenwald adamantly refuses to even write about impeachment, let alone advocate for it.

This morning Glenn wrote a semi-despairing blog:

when it comes to Bush's extremism and lawbreaking, we're not imposing consequences slowly. We're not imposing consequences at all. Quite the contrary, we're moving in the opposite direction -- when we're not affirmatively endorsing and providing protection for that conduct, we're choosing not to know about it, or simply allowing it to fester. And the more that happens, the less that behavior becomes the exclusive province of the Bush administration and the more it becomes our country's defining behavior.

This could still all be reversed. The NYT article today reveals new facts about the administration's lawbreaking, lying, and pursuit of torture policies which we had decided, with futility, to outlaw. The Congress could aggressively investigate. Criminal prosecutions could be commenced. Our opinion-making elite could sound the alarm. New laws could be passed, reversing the prior endorsements and imposing new restrictions, along with the will to enforce those laws. We still have the ability to vindicate the rule of law and enforce our basic constitutional framework.

- snip -

So that leaves Walsh's other priorities. Stopping the war? Democrats can't and won't, so that shouldn't stand in the way of impeachment.

Winning the White House and retaining control of Congress? As John Nichols brilliantly demonstrated in The Genius of Impeachment, opposition parties that start impeachment always win the next Presidential election.

So if you really care about the Constitution, there is no excuse for ignoring impeachment any more. If liberals like Walsh and Greenwald want to end Bush's Constitutional crimes, hold him accountable, and make sure no future President commits them, then they need to join Dennis Kucinich and his 20 co-sponsors and the Dirty Hippies like us and tell Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats to put impeachment on the table - now.

MORE

[peacebird]

1. Why do the Dems in Congress REFUSE to even discuss impeachment? I don't get it.

Clearly Bushco have committed impeachable crimes (many). Yet Nancy says impeachment is "off the table".... WHY?

[Nite Owl]

3. I don't understand that either

Any reason they have given just doesn't fly. They want to get something done: they aren't. They need to investigate: they can't even get them to honor the supoenas. They don't have public support: they were elected to be our leaders, they don't lead.

[seemslikeadream]

2. IMPEACH NOW