Reply #60: {Failure to accuse} = {Exoneration} = {"Accessory After the Fact" War Criminal}

[pat_k]

Five points for your consideration:

1. http://january6th.org/oct2006-newsweek-poll-impeach.html">Newsweek found that 51% of the nation wants impeachment to be a priority in the 110th Congress.
   
   Even with 100% anti-impeachment propaganda coming fast and furious from both the Republican and Democratic establishment, only 44% say the new Congress "Shouldn't impeach."
   
   These kind of numbers when no leader has has the courage to be a champion of the people -- no leader giving voice to the outrage at what Bush has done to this country and actually DOING something about it by fighting for impeachment. In fact, we have an "anti-champion" in Speaker-elect Pelosi. Instead of giving voice to the outrage she is doing everything in her power to suppress it -- political insanity.



2. Numerous charges against Bush and Cheney are well known to the public. Elected bodies, good government organizations, and countless individual citizens have examined the evidence and judged the case for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney to be overwhelming. The charges are not going to magically "disappear."
   
   Every day that they do nothing they betray their oath and demonstrate contempt for the concerned citizens who are calling on them to act.
   
   Every day that they do nothing effectively exonerates Bush and Cheney. If exoneration is their intent, then they should do it honestly by telling the nation why they don't think the abuses that are obvious to a majority of Americans are abuses.



3. If it gets to the Senate, a verdict of guilty is as likely as not, but it may never get there. Republicans will have a choice. Defend the indefensible or "get it over with" ASAP by pressuring Bush and Cheney to take the resignation "http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k/12">exit strategy." Given the public's growing dismay at the arrogant, irresponsible, and autocratic Bush-Cheney White House, Republicans may be more than happy to be rid of them.
   
   It is impossible to know how many Republicans will be willing to defend the indefensible until the leadership makes specific accusations and declares their intent to impeach. There may be far fewer than we can imagine. For example, Bush's abuse of signing statements to nullify McCain's anti-torture amendment (the overwhelming will of the people) in order to keep torture "on the table" is not something that many would happily defend. Warner, Graham, McCain, and Collins (may have been others I'm not recalling) came out against the "War Criminals Protection Act." The "compromise" they got was not much of one, it just shifted the responsibility for actually approving torture to Bush (as opposed to approving it themselves and becoming War Criminals). Specter dismissed the WH defense of the criminal surveillance program as absurd. There are some other "rational" Republicans (Snowe, Hagel, and Lugar).



4. With great crises come great opportunities. The biggest problem Democrats have is the perception that they are weak and unprincipled. It is hard to imagine a more effective way that Democrats can prove they are the party of strength and principle than to stand and fight for the Constitution, come what may. If there were no risk, they would no be demonstrating courage or principle. It is taking up a fight in the face of risk that Americans respect.
   
   What better time than now, when the principle of consent and the dictates of our Constitution are so desperately in need of a champion?
   
   Another complaint about Democrats is that they have been so tactical and programmatic that voters don't know what they stand for. The Party establishment gives lip serve to the need to "define the Party." They talk about needing a "message." But when confronted with a crisis in which they could actually stand and fight for the unifying principles and aspirations of our Constitution (and thus define what they stand for) they appear to be doing everything in their power to escape.


5. As the Honorable Barbara Jordan pointed out, Members of the House are not the judges and their decision to bring charges cannot be based on what they believe will happen in the Senate.
   
   It may never even get to the Senate.
   
   Whatever the expected outcome or political implications, for Members of the House, the choice is clear: Duty or Complicity.