The Impeachment of Bush & Cheney, And Other Historical Lost Causes

[Mister Ed]

If there's one thing that unites all DU'ers, it's an abhorrence of the Bush White House. There is no DU'er, anywhere, who would not like to see Bush and Cheney out of office at the earliest possible moment. On that we can all agree.

Despite these sentiments, however, it's become clear to me as I read DU that impeachment is simply out of the question. For one thing, from what I read, it's just plain impossible. No matter how heinous and numerous the crimes of Bush and Cheney, no matter how thoroughly the crimes are proven, no matter how bright a national spotlight we shine on the proceedings, legislators are going to vote along party lines. That means impeachment will readily pass through the House, but the Senate will balk at conviction. All Republican senators will conspicuously and publicly demonstrate that their allegiance is to their party - not to the law, not to the voters, not to the nation or the Constitution they swore to uphold and defend.

Besides, impeachment proceedings would take up a lot of time and resources that could be devoted to more important things. They'd stir up a lot of controversy, and who needs that? It could take so long to prosecute Bush and Cheney that their terms could be almost over before any sort of conclusion is reached.

Modern history is rife with examples of what can happen when people fail to be guided by common sense. I'd like to offer up a few of those examples, in the hopes that, on the topic of impeachment, people in the Democratic party will simmer down and let cooler heads prevail:


1: Lake Placid, 1980

The proper goal of the U.S. Nationals - raw, under-funded, and under-practiced - was to simply make an honorable showing at the Olympics, which the mighty Soviets had always dominated, and always would.

But, goaded on by their ambitious, over-reaching coach, the players allowed their youthful recklessness and imprudence to drive them headlong into a confrontation that will always be sadly remembered as the greatest tragedy in the annals of Olympic hockey.



2:The 2006 Elections

At the beginning of 2006, it was clear that the Democratic Party had no reasonable hopes of gaining control over both houses of Congress. The Republicans had a stranglehold on power. They dominated all three branches of the federal government. They had the wealthiest corporate donors in their corner. They had a firm grip on the media megaphone, and they were not about to share it.

As always, Democrats were fractious and disorganized. To make matter worse, Howard Dean was hell-bent on squandering precious resources in Republican strongholds with his "50-State Strategy". Under these circumstances, the thing for Democrats to do was to hunker down, hold the line, cut our losses, and keep our powder dry for the next election. We failed to do that, and now look what's happened.


3: The Montgomery Bus Boycott, 1955

This may be the saddest example of all. What on earth were the Black folks in Alabama thinking? Oh, sure, you and I may be full of sympathy for them - but what good can sympathy do for them once they've lost their jobs because they were too proud to ride the bus?

Car pooling? We have to be realistic here. How many African-Americans in the Deep South were able to afford their own automobiles?

Facts are stubborn things, and the fact is that the White opponents of the boycott had all the power on their side. They had the police. They had the money.They had the judges and the local government.

And who did the Black people have in their corner? A young, idealistic preacher with his head in the clouds and his heart full of lofty ideals. It was pretty easy to see how that lopsided battle was going to end up.

Yep, those who knew best and cared most about the well-being of Southern Blacks could see that the best thing for them to do - unbearable as it may have been - was to pipe down, pay their fares, and move to the back of the bus. Better to live to fight another day.


DU'ers: On the question of impeachment, please - let modern history be a lesson to all of us!


Disclaimer: I know that sarcasm is much harder to convey in print than it is in speech. I very much want to avoid angering hockey fans or true-blue Democratic party stalwarts. I especially want to avoid angering those who revere human dignity and human rights.

Thank heaven the DU administrators, in their infinite wisdom, provide the trusty tag. Please know, then, that the screed posted above is an example of heavy

[solara]

1. K&R

[TwilightZone]

2. Where are the votes?

If we can't even get Republicans to vote for a non-binding resolution, where are we going to get the votes to convict?

[Mister Ed]

3. You're right about that, of course

but I must ask: should a prosecution never go forward if the prosecutor doesn't feel certain that the jury is likely to convict?

[TwilightZone]

5. Prosecutors rarely go forward with cases where they are certain that the jury will not convict.

This jury, at least at this moment, most certainly will not convict.

I see little benefit to pursuing an impeachment that is bound to fail. Unfortunately, the voting public isn't often impressed with symbolic victories. They see the end result: a loss.

[Senator]

17. We Have the Votes

To impeach. And that is the only thing at issue. This is not a criminal prosecution. And even without removal, impeachment is at least a substantive act -- an objection in the name of the American People -- against the horrors to which they never gave consent.

But Congress members are duty bound to level charges, impeachment articles, when such charges are warranted. They are not afforded the luxury of thinking they know how a Senate trial would/might conclude. Ironically, impeachment articles are a "non-binding resolution."

But as for the Senate, how many Senators do you think will publicly defend -- and thus make themselves prosecutable for -- torture and other war crimes? Warner, McCain, and Graham have already refused to do so in the "War Criminals Protection Act." And they are the GOP leaders on such matters in the Senate. Recall also that McCain's anti-torture bill was nearly unanimous, though rendered moot (impeachably) by "rule by signing statement."

If we are able to break the LieberDem stonewall (arguably a war crime itself), I think the chances of removal are better than 50/50. And the likelihood of resignations to "avoid unpleasantness" much higher.

-

[Independent_Liberal]

4. Then we'll have set the precedent that all future presidents can break the law and get away with it.

Once again, more rationalization for inaction. If I remember correctly, Clinton's impeachment only took a couple of months. It doesn't always have to take a year or two.

You seriously believe that Republicans will continue to vote party lines even if the truths come out? Why do people keep assuming that every Republican is going to move to save Bush's ass? You don't KNOW that!

If we don't even try to impeach we're accepting a man who thinks of himself as king. All future presidents will be the same.

The reason why we're in the situation that we're in is because we let Reagan and Bush Sr. off the hook. It showed the Iran Contra crew that they could get away with it. And now they're back.

Remember Watergate and Nixon's impeachment? Nobody thought anything would come of that. Nobody thought the Republicans would turn on Nixon. Once the investigations and hearings brought everything to light, the public's opinion is ultimately what had an impact. Even the Repubs couldn't ignore it. They then went and told Nixon it was time to leave.

Another thing people keep taking for gospel is that an impeachment process will tie up the legislative process and keep other business from getting done. Not necessarily. Elizabeth Holtzman who was on the House Judiciary Committee during the Nixon impeachment said herself that Congress can walk and chew gum at the same time. She's somebody who knows the impeachment process up and down. She definitely knows what she's talking about.

It's up to us. Should we continue to remain complicit in the crimes and continue the war and killing in Iraq and possibly expand it to Iran or will we do the patriotic thing and take action? History will be the judge of us. If we don't act, we'll be condoning these actions. That's how all future generations will view us. We'll have set the precedent that this great Constitution and Bill of Rights we were given isn't that great after all and isn't worth defending.

[Mister Ed]

6. Those are my sentiments too

That OP of mine is insufferably long-winded. It takes a long time to make your way down to the tags. Sorry about that.

[Independent_Liberal]

7. Oh, sorry. My bad!

Nice to see you share my sentiments dear friend.

Peace,
IL

[pat_k]

8. Yep. All those failed heroes. Why'd they bother?

Silly things. What a waste of time. They could have been "getting things done."

[TahitiNut]

9. The voices of 'pragmatism' have always opposed "Doing The Right Thing"

The voices of 'pragmatism' are always comingled with the voices of cowardice and conservatism - indistinguishable in the chicken coop cacaphony that is a context for all tyrannies, big and small.

We'd still be living in caves throwing rocks at each other if such voices always prevailed. Maybe we still are.

[Hawkowl]

10. Heroes don't play the odds

You don't get to be a hero by doing only the easy tasks. It is only impossible until we make it happen. The 2006 elections were just the first step. Next is impeachment. Then there is conviction, removal from office, and finally imprisonment.

Once more into the breach my dear friends!!!

[90-percent]

11. impeach cheney first

But, if that doesn't happen aren't there International Courts that could do this?

If not now, when?

-85% jimmy

[Cocoa]

12. even if successful, what would be the point?

another partisan impeachment? two in a row? I don't see that as a good thing.

[magellan]

13. At this point it wouldn't be a partisan impeachment

...because in order to impeach, Republicans in the Senate would have to vote for impeachment.

But whether it was partisan or not, since when does that trump justice? If it's the right thing to do then it should be done, regardless of "how it looks".

[omega minimo]

15. #1. To educate those like you who have no concept of Constitutional law and government

#2. To bring us back from the brink of utter insanity where an adminstration can commit multiple offenses and NOT be impeached.

#3. Start with those and get back to us..........................



"another partisan impeachment? two in a row? I don't see that as a good thing."

[omega minimo]

14. kickety kick

[In Truth We Trust]

16. IMPEACH NOW! Let there be justice and rule of law!

[mmonk]

18. Love the sarcasm. For that alone, I recommend.