This will make your hair stand on end...brace yourself!

[ray of light]

CONYERS STILL POOH POOHING IMPEACHMENT:
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2007/12/22/
from-democracy-now-interview-with-conyers-he-doesnt-care-about-wexlers-petition/


Democracy Now: An Interview With Conyers On Impeachment

AMY GOODMAN:Congressman Conyers, I wanted to turn to another controversial issue, one that you’ve been dealing with and have over time, that issue of impeachment. Now, three Democratic members of your committee, of the House Judiciary Committee-Robert Wexler of Florida, Luis Gutierrez of Illinois, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin-have called on you to begin impeachment hearings against Vice President Dick Cheney. This week, Congressman Wexler said the charges against the Vice President are too serious to ignore.

REP. ROBERT WEXLER: It is time for the House Judiciary Committee to hold impeachment hearings for Vice President Cheney. We have an obligation to ask questions, to determine whether in fact the Vice President purposefully manipulated intelligence, bringing us into war, whether he knowingly ordered the illegal use of torture, whether he knowingly exposed covert agents for political purposes, whether he obstructed federal investigations. These charges are too serious to ignore.

AMY GOODMAN: Since last week, over 100,000 people have signed a petition on Congressman Wexler’s website supporting impeachment hearings. And we’re wondering, Congressman Conyers, now with your committee members taking up this issue, an issue that you actually long championed, what your feelings are today. Will you be supporting them in this?

REP. JOHN CONYERS: Well, no, but there are a lot of things that can and will be done. We’re documenting the transgressions and errors of the administration in the Department of Justice, which have led to the firing of nine US attorneys. We’re looking at the protections of the right to vote. The election is coming up. We’ve got to protect everybody’s right to get out here and make a choice and make sure that it’s counted.

AMY GOODMAN: Why stop short of hearings on impeachment?

REP. JOHN CONYERS: Well, because, unless we’re going to impeach the Vice President and the President within this space of time, I think we could be very seriously compromising the greatest important-most important thing, in addition to documenting any misdeeds that may have happened, whether we continue to have Bush enablers continue to shatter and tear the Constitution to shreds. And so, all of this, academically, is great. I’ve got a number of books from my friends about which articles would be best and which ones we should go after more. But it seems to me that the time element and also the feasibility of whether or not there is any possible chance of success-there is a very stark reality that with the corporatization of the media, we could end up with turning people who should be documented in history as making many profound errors and violating the Constitution from villains into victims. And those are the kinds of considerations that have entered my mind in thinking about this process, Amy.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And, Ray McGovern, you’ve been outspoken on this issue, and given the new evidence now about the destruction of the CIA tapes and the White House staff-some staff involvement in that, your sense of the impeachment situation?

RAY McGOVERN: Well, we not only have the obstruction of justice, but we have the President’s former spokesman saying that he was involved in the outing of Valerie Plame. We also have the President threatening World War III on bogus evidence that Iran was developing a nuclear weapons development program. So, you know, it’s sort of like outreach fatigue. Where do you begin?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(My comments)
Hey Conyer's staff--If you're reading DU. Representative Conyers is dead wrong on this. He was pro-impeachment right up to the 06 elections. He's making a tremendous mistake and by doing so he is losing any integrity points he had in the past.

Right now he looks like a liar.

Right now he is complicit with Bush/Cheney and is seriously harming our country.

I witness John Conyers talk about impeachment from 04-06 and he's done a 180.

Grow a spine Representative Conyers. You have a fork in the road. One fork leads to more war, crimes, lies, spying, and lives losts. The other fork leads to impeachment and lives saved.

AND Ray McGovern is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ON THIS. Cheney and Bush have tried to lead us to WWIII and they outed a spy. They have done so many impeachable crimes it's not even difficult to find a plausible reason to impeach.

[Beelzebud]

1. I remember all of his tough talk back when he was in the minority party.

Such a shame that he's turned out to be a damn weasel like the rest of them.

[ray of light]

12. CHECK THIS OUT (It's too late for me to edit the top post)

[nashville_brook]

53. i think he's been threatened.

[mdmc]

55. my question to conyers

why shouldn't the left primary you? I think it would be good for democracy and I would love to see a real lefty fight for chIMPEACHMENT while Conyers stands his ground.

[ray of light]

2. revenge...get more signers at www.wexlerwantshearings.com

And make the numbers so large that they can't ignore them any longer.

[tavalon]

57. And how many would that be?

500, 500,000, 5,000,000. 50,000,000?

[RC]

3. Hey man, cut down the length ot the ~~~~~~

Your post is twice as wide as my screen.

[ray of light]

8. Sorry! It looked normal in mine. (Done though!)

[Truth2Tell]

4. We get it Conyers

You fear the power of the corporate media. But guess what, we'll never turn the twisted media dynamic around in this country unless you take a stand.

We have reached a propaganda rubicon - let's please not cross it. We beg you. Impeachment is the issue to stand on - it gives you the highest ground from which to fight.

The people are behind you - this criminal has a 25% approval rating. The Constitution is behind you - unquestionably the facts are there to do this.

The world is behind you - in fact, the world is desperately behind you.

And now it looks like critical elements of the CIA/Congress/Media complex are finally behind you. If you don't take the right wing information distortion machine on now, we may not get another chance for a long long time.

This should be the fight of your life John. And you can win it. You can. We can!

Get over your fear dammit!

[ray of light]

28. Check this out.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2521160

[Truth2Tell]

36. Yep,

That's the craziest part of this - he admits that Bush committed impeachable crimes. Yet he is afraid to act because of political considerations. He's afraid the Democrats can't win the public debate. He has seriously miscalculated on this. He's like a kid standing on the diving board afraid to jump in the pool because he thinks he'll drown. He needs to overcome his fears.

[VP505]

5. Something I find strange

about all those mealy-mouthed excuses that they (Dem Leadership) give for not impeaching. Without impeaching team Bu$h/Cheney they don't have a snowballs chance in hell of advancing their agenda or accomplishing all the things they want done before the 08 election. Sure they might slip something through here and there but overall Bu$h and his enablers in the congress are going to keep them (Dem's) from doing much of anything. They (Republics) are hell bent on keeping the 110th Congress as do nothing as possible, leading me to believe that they have a whole year to impeach cause in reality they aren't gonna get anything done anyway.

[morgan2]

6. while nixon proved the president wasn't above the law

Bush has proved that now the president is... fuck this country

[OzarkDem]

7. Whatever it was Dem leaders told him

I wish they would share with us. If there's a good reason not to pursue impeachment when the majority of Americans wish to see it move forward, by all means let us in on it.

[Perry Logan]

9. I know it's frustrating. But what if Conyers is right?

Since I don't believe for a minute that getting elected to Congress turns normal people into cowards, I submit that cowardice cannot be what's keeping Congress from getting bolder.

I think Conyers is trying to tell us (without actually saying it) that we are asking him to step in front of a speeding train. He would know better than we about the power of the media.

I have come to believe we are grossly underestimating the power of the right-controlled media to turn people against the Democrats in Congress. We are asking them to engage in a fight which they know will be catastrophic. That's my theory, which has the virtue of portraying our leaders as something other than craven cowards.

Some of the same people who want the Democrats in Congress to step in front of the media locomotive would be among the first to agree that most Americans seem easily led by the nose. Why would it be any different if Congress took the steps we want them to?

If my theory is right, we can only damage ourselves by throwing snits over imagined cowardice. Even if we replaced them all with more progressive versions, reality would intervene, and the new Democrats would either have to act in exactly the same way as the old Democrats--or they'd go down in flames, as the sheeplike people of the United States yielded to the media uproar.

[TreasonousBastard]

17. Unfortunately, the impeachment or death crowd won't...

ever let go.

Personally, rather than thinking that they're fools and cowarsds, I believe that they simply know a lot more than we do about just how difficult it would be at this point to get any impeachement moving.

It is not entirely the media at fault-- I have heard WaPo and NYT people who were around a the time saying that they would NEVER be able to get the Pentagon Papers or Deep Throat out to the public with the nation as it is now. The right wing has become extremely efficient at destroying any attempts to get at truth they don't like, and attacks on the press from BOTH the left and the right have managed to reduce its credibility.

[Hydra]

20. There's just one problem with your theory, or their strategy if this is what they are doing

The fact is, they are weakening their positions by refusing to stand in front of the train.

Bushco has never been as vulnerable as they are now. The list of scandals is more than a mile long. Support for the war wanes by the day, and belief that it was all based on oil is growing. People are sick of the economy going downhill for all but the richest of us. People are getting annoyed with the fundies and their end of the world politics. The voodoo economists are getting laughed out of the room when they talk about how offshoring is good for the US and how the weak dollar is not a reason to worry.

All of this could be pinned on Bush, and by means of funding or impeachment hearings, Congress could jerk him up short and derail any plans he has before he leaves office(maybe).

Instead, Congress is squandering their chance, and people like Wolf Blitzer are having a field day when the Dems claim to be "holding them accountable" when he points out that their actions have no teeth, and in fact we've seen precious few of the investigations that were promised go anywhere.

Do I think they're cowards? Hell no. You don't get in positions like that by being so. No, I go for complicity. It was never part of the plan for the Senate to have been won by the Dems in 2006, for the exact reason that they could claim not to have a majority, and to be the victims of obstruction.

The fact that they claim to have no power, and the fact that Bush continually gets what he wants(all the major issues slide right through) tells me that they are either on the same team, or have interests that coincide. Not good.

[chaz4jazz]

49. It's Obvious To Me ...

That the BushCo surveillances have come up with crap on everyone of their enemies and they've let them know somehow that any action they might take against the administration will result in their destruction by releasing this damaging information to the compliant media. This goes for Conyers and Pelosi and all the other Dems who've stepped back and now say "it's not the right time..."

They're waiting of course for the opportunity to be the controlling party in the White House and have said so. This is my opinion.

[brentspeak]

10. This is just anti-Conyers propaganda on your part

Conyers was never "pro-impeachment"; he was pro-INVESTIGATIONS. He didn't promise anyone he was going to push for impeachment.

Right now, it looks like the "liar" isn't Conyers.

[TheWatcher]

44. Perhaps you are correct, sir.

But we do not even see Investigations going on, now do we.

Spin Like A Top, all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that nothing is being done.

But I suppose we should all just feel good and go watch some football, right?

So tiresome.

[ray of light]

51. Pictures speak louder than words.

That's Conyers, right?

That's IMPEACHMENT behind him, right?

Sounds like the only propaganda was your defence. And looks like I'm not the liar around here.

OH..and by the way, I witnessed Conyers discuss impeachment at many different forums over the last 3 years. He was pushing for impeachment right up til the 06 election. I saw it in person. I also so AFTER the election when he started to make excuses and be no-shows to different forums--despite his name being there as a headliner.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

11. I posted a poll in late July to try and get a read...

...on how my fellow DUers felt about Conyers' apparent post '06 election loss of enthusiasm for impeachment in the wake of the incident at his Capitol Hill office, and was met with more than one impassioned, if not rational, rebuke -- not the least of which was this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1438386#1439562

I wonder how these questions would poll now. If I can work up the courage I might run it again.

[ray of light]

14. You should run it. I think we have lots more info now than we did in July

but we are also closer to the primaries too.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

38. I may do that, probably wait till after the holidays though...

...Merry Christmas and New Year to you, Ray of Light.

[MADem]

15. The majority of the country who oppose Bush feel that impeachment's ship has sailed.

It's not that Bush doesn't deserve it--he does.

It's just that he is a lame duck and he is ineffectual, now, anyway. Impeachment would appear to be political revenge, even if it isn't. It wouldn't sell well with most of the country. You may not agree with that view, but that's just the way it is.

It's as easy to keep him in his little lame duck cage, and poke him with a stick every so often, and watch him pout, and let him finish out his term. That way, the GOP can't claim that WERE IT NOT FOR IMPEACHMENT, Bush would have fixed EVERYTHING and the Middle East would be a Haven of Peace and Opportunity.

[unapatriciated]

29. lame duck?

hmm congress passed his energy bill, gave him more funding for his war no strings attached and oh yeah they confirmed Mukasey you know the guy who wasn't sure water boarding was torture. That duck is still flying high.

[MADem]

40. Well, you tell Jim Webb that as makes his way to the Hill to gavel in a proforma on Christmas Day

whydoncha?

I find it astounding what people expect with a Congress that isn't unified on all these issues. And D does NOT equal "antiwar" uniformly.

You'd be quite surprised how many representatives don't feel the way you do. All politics, like it or not--and despite the fact that many of us don't like it--is LOCAL. Some of these politicians are actually in NO HURRY to end that war so long as the casualties remain low. These are the politicians with the guns, bullet, bodybag, body armor, bootlaces, Humvee parts, and other assorted military-support factories in THEIR districts. They like their constituents to be employed, see? They don't want to see three hundred combat boot makers on the unemployment line, or four hundred bomb assemblers applying for unemployment.

Don't you DARE shoot the messenger, now. I MEAN it.

That's just fact, it ain't "endorsement."

Not every Democrat is as eager to end this war as some are, is all I am saying. All Politics IS Local.

[unapatriciated]

41. not too worry I'm also for stronger gun control

but I really can't stand pork, it leaves an awful taste in my mouth. Maybe the not so eager Dems can explain to next dead soldier's family how it's all good cause the casualties are are low.

:banghead:

[MADem]

59. It's unfortunate that so many love the taste of pork--and they can't get enough of it. NT

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

37. I think the considerations you put forth have some validity...

...but for me the question of whether or not to impeach is one primarily of principle, not liklihood of success or any other political considerations, and looked at in this way there is nothing to debate -- the case is a slam dunk. It's something that should have been pursued by Dem leadership as soon as they had a sufficiently compelling case for it -- at least two years ago, maybe three.

[MADem]

39. Oh, I understand that many have that view, but regrettably, it hasn't reached

critical mass. And impeachment is not a 'punishment' per se. It is simply removal from office, nothing more. Some think it should be done at the very end of the line, but that, too, would be seen as meanspirited.

The Dem leadership couldn't have done jack two or three years ago, though--we didn't have the majority. We couldn't set the agenda, we couldn't even call HEARINGS. Remember Conyers in the Basement? That was purely symbolic.

Now, we do set the agenda, but we do so with a razor-thin majority in the Senate, the "jury" if you will, for impeachment. The place where "removal from office" wouldn't happen (see Joe, Holy). And then, BushCo would get a large bounce for beating back that dragon--it happened with Clinton. Of course, Bush probably wouldn't hit thirty five, but it beats his present percentage.

I note that Harry is keeping the Senate in session over Xmas--the idea being to prevent some squirrelly recess appointments.

That's keeping Bushco in the cage, and poking him with the stick....

[ray of light]

52. he's not lame. He's DANGEROUS! HE had NOTHING to lose by starting WWIII

and we already saw how he tried that.

[MADem]

61. Poppy's boy is running DOD now. Even his role as Commander in Chief has been abrogated.

That's why more military officers are speaking out.

[Bonhomme Richard]

13. THis is Key "very stark reality that with the corporatization of the media"

What he is saying, and afraid of, is that if they go after the administration he knows damn well that the media will go after democrats like a rabid dog. Our side's argument will never reach the mass of people and we will be painted as crazy. Day after day after day after.........
I don't totally agree but now I understand what the real fear is.

[AntiFascist]

22. This sounds like a logical train of thought, but...

there are always those rogue corporations, like GE.

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. Proud to give this important post #5

[nolies32fouettes]

18. k/r

[femrap]

19. k and r

I have lost a tremendous amount of respect for Conyers. After working so hard in '06 to get Dems elected, I am well beyond disappointed. I am disgusted by the lack of balls/ova of our Dems on the Judiciary Committee. We are more and more immersed in fascism...with the Dems totally complicit.

[rucky]

21. A failed impeachment attempt would lessen the chances of criminal conviction

when the gang is out of the White House.

Conyers can't say that, but he's ready for something. If his chances of success are better in '09, I can wait.

[nolies32fouettes]

26. Not true. Impeachment is POLITICAL, and a criminal trial is using

different standards altogether.

[rucky]

32. Who would convict for something Congress couldn't even impeach over? n/t

[unapatriciated]

43. In "Bush-world" their defense would be...

"If we were acting unconstitutionally why didn't the dems impeach." and that defense will probably work

[rucky]

50. That's why we have a better chance when Bush World leaves the WH

they can't abuse the powers of the Executive to obstruct justice.

we can't even issue a subpoena, at this point. who's going to follow the orders to arrest Harriet Miers for contempt? Capitol Police? What happens when they get conflicting orders from the Vice-President?

[lateo]

66. A judge. nt

[shadowknows69]

23. Enough excuses

Mr. Conyers, you either stand for the Constitution which DEMANDS we impeach these criminals or you stand for nothing.

[Hydra]

24. Apparently the Dems have gotten too caught up in the game

to understand that they are being made more irrelevant every day. And they are helping that process by not pushing back and taking a stand.

Instead, they seem to want to slow play until 2008...instead of looking at what could be done to dismantle the RW grasp on power, including megacorp media.

I guess the bribes are just to sweet. I hope they enjoy them before the legislative branch is disbanded and these guys have to get real jobs.

[FlyingSquirrel]

25. You know what? That actually did PHYSICALLY make my hair stand on end.

Weird.

[nolies32fouettes]

27. me too!

[Vinca]

30. I don't get it. I just don't get it. This president and sidekick

deserve impeachment more than anyone in the history of the country. Why are the Dems in power so afraid of them?

[HuffleClaw]

31. he's not wrong

but who cares. the majority of the american public wants accountability.

[bluesmail]

33. Would you announce your plans

if you really believed those in power are guilty of TREASON? I know I wouldn't. And that's where the illegal wiretapping comes in oh so handy.

[ray of light]

34. He'd BETTER come back in JANUARY with papers in hand

and REAL JUDICIAL HEARINGS.

[tbyg52]

60. If he does, all is forgiven,

by me anyway. I'll believe it when I see it, but here's hoping.

[Cleita]

35. I guess our politicos on both sides of the aisle don't see

why having impeachment hearings is so necessary. It's the only way that the malfaesance and crimes committed by this administration will get on record for history to judge. If there are no hearings to create a record, history gets rewritten, and the shredding industry has a business boom.

I'm not holding out much hope however. I have gotten past believing that our leaders will do their job beyond a token peek into the matter. I think more and more, it's time for the international community to get involved and start filing complaints with the World Court at the Hague. If they don't and these pricks get away with hijacking this country among many others, the free world is gonna start shrinking and pretty fast.

[CK_John]

42. It's very simple, * says to congress you start impeachment, I press the red button. n/t

[librechik]

45. I don't know--Conyers just sounds like he's talking gibberish

he sounds terrified. What do they have on him? This is a man who marched with MLK. He's in his 70s. Yhe media doesn't scare him, surely. What is he so frightened of that his speech wanders off into nonsensical circles on this subject?

[orleans]

47. exactly. what the FUCK is he saying?

"And the Constitution doesn’t read into us the other considerations of timing"

"what I’m doing this morning is holding hearings to reveal the fact that there ought to be public knowledge of what’s going on in all these attempts at secret hearings "

(how's he gonna do that if the big bad media will say something not nice?)

"I’ve got to put together a winning program and not step on our message. "

pelosi-bot, pelosi-bot!

you hit the nail on the head when you said he was talking gibberish and nonsensical circles

[Jim Sagle]

54. Bushco showed him the chainsaw.

[TerwilligeRedux]

63. Bushco did?

You sure it had nothing to do with Nancy Pelosi?

[orleans]

46. WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME--WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: we don't have enough time :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: we don't have enough time :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
:puke:
especially now you don't have enough time since you've PISSED AWAY AN ENTIRE FUCKING YEAR! :puke:

[orleans]

48. unfucking real. IS EVERYONE TAKING CRAZY PILLS???

[Javaman]

56. I have no hair to stand on end...

What part of "our dem congress people are full of shit" don't you understand?

Once you begin looking upon our political process as a retarded version of kabuki theater all becomes clear.

[Dukkha]

58. These people would let mass murderers go without a trial

if they felt the jury wouldn't vote in their favor.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

62. This is in fact exactly what they're doing. nt

[lovuian]

64. I think Conyers actions speak louder than words

Obviously his inaction speaks volumes

[greiner3]

65. Damn! Now his legacy will be;

That of an aged Democrat too old to stand and make a fight of it. His legacy could have been one of history's greatest figures, one that looked evil in the eye and won the ensuing fight. RIP Congressman Conyers.