Conyers Says He's on Edge of Starting Impeachment

[davidswanson]

On Thursday, Chairman John Conyers' House Judiciary Committee held a hearing at which Attorney General Michael Mukasey said that he would not investigate torture (<a href="http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/30848">video</a>) or warrantless spying (<a href="http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/30850">video</A>), he would not enforce contempt citations (<a href="http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/30851">video</a>), and he would treat Justice Department opinions as providing immunity for crimes (<A href="http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/30855">report</a>).

None of this was new, but perhaps it touched something in Conyers that had not been touched before. Following the hearing, he and two staffers met for an hour and 15 minutes with two members of Code Pink to discuss impeachment.

Conyers expressed fear of what might happen following an impeachment, fear of installing a Bush replacement or losing an election. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback." Conyers told Ellen Taylor and Manijeh Saba: "You need to be more than brave and courageous. You need to be smart."

Their response? They are asking people who care about justice to help them let Conyers know that the smart thing right now would be bravery and courage.

On Rosa Parks' birthday last week, Leslie Angeline began a fast for impeachment. Taylor and over 20 other activists have joined <A href="http://afterdowningstreet.org/fast">the fast</a>. Conyers has agreed to meet with Angeline to discuss impeachment on Tuesday.

The Chairman told Taylor and Saba that he is listening to several advocates for impeachment, including Liz Holtzman and this author, and asked "So how would it look if I allowed two women to push me over the edge?" Conyers leaned out of his chair for dramatic effect.

A number of organizations will be sending their members this alert Monday morning:

<blockquote>Let's push Conyers over the edge by flooding his office with phone calls, faxes, and Emails on Monday and Tuesday. Let him know that only impeachment hearings
1-will make it on TV,
2-will force compliance with subpoenas by eliminating "executive privilege",
3-will hold brazen criminals accountable, and
4-will convince voters that Democrats care about the Constitution.
Call 202-225-5126
Fax [phone]
Email [e-mail] </blockquote>

Angeline, whose father was on the original Freedom Riders bus that was firebombed in Anniston, Ala., in 1961 began her fast and a sit-in in Conyers' office on Rosa Parks' birthday, and within a few minutes had been granted an appointment with Conyers for Thursday. He postponed it until Tuesday because of the duration of the Mukasey hearing. Taylor, Saba, and others attended the hearing and were told by Conyers' staffer Therise West that they would be removed by force if they did not cover up shirts and pins with messages including "No Torture," "Arrest Bush," "Not One More," and even the text of Article II Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution. Rather than comply, Taylor and Saba wore shirts displaying that section of the Constitution, were not removed, and were granted the meeting with Conyers to discuss it.

The meeting took place in the rooms attached to the committee room. After an hour delay, Conyers came in with three beers, a bag of nuts, and two staffers. Nobody drank the beers. Conyers ate the nuts. The staffers were Perry Appelbaum, who left early, and George Slover.

As Taylor recounted it to me, she and Saba pushed Conyers on the importance of the Constitution, on the crisis it faces, and on Congress's lack of action. Of course, Conyers wrote a book two years ago called "<a href="http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/constitutionincrisis">The Constitution in Crisis</a>," which details many of Bush and Cheney's impeachable offenses.

Conyers' initial reply was along the lines of "Didn't you see the hearing we just had? Do you know how many people saw that?" To their credit, the two Code Pink women replied "Not very many, since most people don't get C-Span." Conyers said he would keep following up with Mukasey, but Taylor and Saba asked to what end he would do so and advised him to shift his focus to the executive.

Conyers, Taylor said, then began giving reasons why he was afraid of impeachment. That wasn't the word he used, but Taylor understood his concerns to all be expressions of an inchoate fear. Conyers spoke of "potential ramifications that haven't been examined." Interestingly, among his concerns was not the one he has used a lot recently, namely that impeachment would not pass the House. Instead he was concerned about what might happen after a successful impeachment and removal from office. Of course, the inconsistency in the excuses Conyers uses could simply be a reflection of the lack of importance he places on the choice of excuse.

The two women argued for the wisdom, bravery, and courage of Congressman Robert Wexler's proposal to simply begin impeachment hearings on Dick Cheney and see where they go. The impeachment movement is urging people not only to contact Conyers but also to ask their own representatives to sign onto a letter Wexler has written to Conyers, and to themselves sign Wexler's petition at http://wexlerwantshearings.com

Conyers said that he knew all about Wexler's idea and that he was listening to various impeachment advocates. The two names Taylor remembered him mentioning were mine and Holtzman's. He's certainly not listening closely to me, and I would love to meet with him at his convenience. Holtzman, I know, has wanted to meet with Conyers on this topic for quite some time, but to my knowledge has never been able to do so.

I think the people Conyers is really listening to are too smart for their own good but lacking a bit in the bravery and courage area. Their wise strategy places the outcome of elections ahead of preserving the democracy in which those elections are held or even the verifiability of those elections. And, on their own terms, they are probably wrong. Nothing (except perhaps hand-counted paper ballots) would benefit the Democrats in the next election more than a real fight to stand up for justice. If Congress chooses to cede all power to the White House and move to the back of the bus, Conyers' legacy will not be what it might have been.

[jasmine621]

1. Oh, oh. He'll be at odd with his candidate, Obama.

He doesn't think what George and Dick did was that serious.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-28-obama-impeachment_N.htm

[jkshaw]

3. Jasmine, that's bunk

and you know it.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

6. Not bunk. He said it.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/06/28/america/NA-POL-US-Obama-No-Impeachment.php

[defendandprotect]

8. Obama says Bush administration has "SHORTCOMINGS" . . . !!! !!!!

Obama says despite shortcomings of Bush administration, impeachment is not acceptable

WASHINGTON: Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama laid out list of political shortcomings he sees in the Bush administration but said he opposes impeachment for either President George W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney.

Obama said he would not back such a move, although he has been distressed by the "loose ethical standards, the secrecy and incompetence" of a "variety of characters" in the administration.

"There's a way to bring an end to those practices, you know: vote the bums out," the presidential candidate said, without naming Bush or Cheney. "That's how our system is designed."

The term for Bush and Cheney ends on Jan. 20, 2009. Bush cannot constitutionally run for a third term, and Cheney has said he will not run to succeed Bush.

Obama, a Harvard law school graduate and former lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago, said impeachment should not be used as a standard political tool.

Vote the bums out???
That's how our system is designed ???

No -- we have a specific remedy for corrupt and criminal adminsitrations ---IMPEACHMENT -- !!!


WOW --- this is so just over the top stupid and naive ---
I don't see how I could ever vote for this man who over and again turns up as an "empty suit."

Nor will I vote for Hillary ---

[DCKit]

21. "...impeachment should not be used as a standard political tool."

But it works in a pinch when that's all you've got after a $500 million witch-hunt, eh? Yeah, folks, that's what we paid for WJC's impeachment.

[FirstLight]

82. AMEN!

I was thinking the exact thing! so its okay to impeach for sexual doublestandards, but not for the deaths of milions and the trashing of a country and its constitution?

I would think a Harvard Law Grad would know those constitutional rule-thingys!!!

[Orsino]

100. It *won't* be used by the standard political tools, says Pelosi. n/t

[puebloknot]

30. Vote the bums out? Doesn't Mr. Obama remember how hard we've tried...

...to do just that. That's a quaint, lame comment which speaks loudly to just what kind of leader Obama would be. Nor has Hillary exactly put her shoulder to the wheel in service of clean elections.

In the name of all of our troops who have died for a lie, and in the name of the million Iraqis who have died for this criminal folly, impeachment and removal is the only just response to the last ten years of horror. I go back beyond Selection 2000 to the time when they were attacking our legally-elected President, Bill Clinton. I'm disappointed in him now, but I've spent the last ten years of my life watching our democracy in freefall.

[Beer Snob-50]

58. ..impeachment should not be used as a standard political tool..

This is not a standard political tool! this is bringing to light the criminal actions of these gentlemen.

I just e-mail Representative Conyers saying that while I have been against the idea of impeachemnt in the past, the recent admissions of waterboarding have changed how I feel. We are now looking at real criminal activities. But I guess since we are not talking about blow jobs here!!!! (the last sentence was not in my e-mail)

[earth mom]

23. Get Real. Obama said it himself: * & Cheney haven't done anything "grave" enough to Impeach.

Guess killing a MILLION Iraqis and torturing people isn't "grave" enough.

And you call that bunk?! Are you fucking kidding me? :wtf:

And people say Obama isn't a rethuglican?!!! :puke:

[bdamomma]

44. Neither Obama or Hillary will hold these thugs accountable.

for their crimes, how can anyone say they have not done anything "grave" enough to impeach, don't they realize it is in the Constitution for a reason. Plus I think they should have Presidents serve only one term only, 4 years is enough.

[jasmine621]

43. Well, read what he said for yourself.

What the hell does it take for Obama fans to deal with reality?

[SammyWinstonJack]

72. They don't care just so long as Barack "I'm in this for myself" Obama is the nominee.

[sce56]

116. The lesser of two Evils is the only choice we have now that DK & JE have dropped out of the race

[EFerrari]

11. Delete.

[Wizard777]

47. Impeachment of Bush and Cheney would be used as a Law Enorcement tool.

The Clinton impeachment was a "political tool."

[Patchuli]

125. !!! Ding Ding!! We got a winner!

:applause: That was succinctly put!

[Lance_Boyle]

55. So what does Hillary say about impeachment?

Does she have any substantive differences from Obama on this issue?

I still think Obama is the lesser of the two weasels - not any more trustworthy than Clinton, but somehow slightly less UN-trustworthy.

[alllyingwhores]

87. Hasn't Conyers been on edge for a couple of years now?...seriously, what's the rush.

[Ichingcarpenter]

2. I have called, written, supported and advocated petitions

The ball is in Conyers court now
and I hope he doesn't double dribble.

I am not optimistic with some of the team members he has to play with.

[shadowknows69]

4. Oh well, take your freaking time John

By all means.

[Demeter]

14. He's Such a Tease!

His momma's gonna come out any minute and yank him back from the edge of that cliff.

[Zookeeper]

81. Exactly. I'll believe it when I see it. n/t

[jberryhill]

5. Weapons of Mass Impeachment...

...uhm... program planning activity.

We are preparing to begin the process of considering to decide whether to, uh, think about approaching the time when, ah, we may have to give serious thought to perhaps becoming vigorous in our pursuit of figuring out that it is becoming appropriate to, um, uh....

[Ghost in the Machine]

7. By GAWD, you *nailed* it!

Thanks for the laugh!

I think this is DUzy worthy...

[Ichingcarpenter]

10. A worthy DUzy for sure.

[Richard Steele]

28. You. Nail. Head.

"Humor" is TRUTH, only faster.

[Donnachaidh]

42. DUZY Nomination!

If this isn't fitting -- nothing is!

[pberq]

48. BINGO!

[KoKo]

73. and "btw ....help yourself to the beer and nuts."

Ayyy... what was that about... Serving Beer? Was it a rude gesture with the nuts?

I don't know what's happened to John Conyers. I'm worried about his mental health. So much he says doesn't make sense. He almost seems to be silently laughing about impeachment as he spins his answers.
In his hearings he often sounds incoherent and wanders off subject, every once in awhile throwing in odd comments like "following the trail of breadcrumbs" or waxing into some jazz talk that doesn't fit in with anything.

[AikidoSoul]

109. I don't know whether to

:rofl: or :cry:

:rofl: :cry: :rofl: :cry: :rofl: :cry: :rofl: :cry: :rofl: :cry:

:rofl: :cry: :rofl: :cry: :rofl: :cry: :rofl: :cry: :rofl: :cry:

ahhhhhhhh :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

urrrpppp

:puke:

[EFerrari]

9. Mr. Conyers knows we cannot impeach at the polls.

:kick:

[TahitiNut]

12. The edge of what? The table? Nancy'll just shove his ass off it again.

:shrug: :grr:

[EFerrari]

13. Democrats in this district are looking for someone to challenge her.

And that's Democrats, not your assorted progressives.

[lala_rawraw]

51. now that is the best thing i have read all day:)

[nashville_brook]

15. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback."

discuss?

[puebloknot]

33. Yes! What does he mean by blowback?

What would happen if Mr. Conyers and others named the game, stood up and said, "These are the entities that threaten our democracy, and we're not having it"! Naive, I suppose. Paul Wellstone was that kind of guy.

We're laboring under the sub rosa threat of martial law and nuking Iran, if that's what it takes to retain power on the part of the Republicans. Bushco might be a paper tiger, but they might not. Rather like disarming a bomb, it seems!

[RuleOfNah]

52. Blowback, like anthrax?

What I find interesting is how long it took to get this far in their game.

Conyers thoughts and strategies were formed and solidified some time before this meeting. How long ago? A week? A month? A year? Before he wrote his impeachment book?

[puebloknot]

89. Blowback, like martial law, closing of borders, "detention centers"...

...Blackwater on our streets, cancelling of elections, disappearances into some gulag. It boggles the mind to think of what he might mean by that term.

I've been pissed with Conyers for what appears to be his sudden reluctance to proceed with impeachment after November 2006. He may have legitimate fears, but it's the job of Congress to assert their constitutional powers. The job may be dangerous, but just as my father and his comrades took an oath to support and defend the Constitution (and many gave their lives in the doing), the Congress needs to act, or we'll forever cower in the shadow of these tyrants who have taken over our country.

[peace13]

16. Well Jesus John do it today!

I visualize you still trying to decide if Ohio was stolen in 2004. Your heart is in the right place but could we please just pull one of these off before the end of times?

[KakistocracyHater]

17. Coward & liar

"Conyers expressed fear of what might happen following an impeachment, fear of installing a Bush replacement or losing an election. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback." Conyers told Ellen Taylor and Manijeh Saba: "You need to be more than brave and courageous. You need to be smart."

So like the mafia the multi-national corporations threaten judges, is that what he's saying? What a coward! Liberty has left America in spirit already, the law is openly broken & subpoeneas go unheeded. Gee what happened to the GOP after they tried to impeach Clinton, oh the blowback!! Why the false argument already?

The Congressional Branch of government has already been ended, it's only a veneer to trick the dumbest of dumbos, Bush issues kingly signing statements, Congress does nothing, Bush & Cheney break American laws, Congress & the Judicial Branch do nothing. They are not overt about it in China either, it's only when you inadvertently brush up against it personally....

[Marr]

18. Uh-huh, sure.

Apparently he thinks we're as stupid as the Republican base.

[BrightKnight]

19. Letting Darth Vader overtly run the Country is a bad idea. - n/t

[peace13]

22. The people in our government should be held accountable.

They know the law is broken, they know the Constitution has been *hit on yet they refuse to do anything about it. Folks like Cheney are free to steal and rape this country blind. Where will it end? Peace, Kim

[tavalon]

85. Pretending he doesn't do exactly that and hasn't since 2000

is an even worse idea. He likes dark, unexamined places, in which to do his evil. We bring him into the light and he'll have a much harder time doing what he's been doing for the last SEVEN YEARS!!!

[trashcanistanista]

20. Conyers is full of shit.

He missed his chance and will be remembered as being complicit. Vote him out. I've had it up to hear with these jokers.

[pat_k]

24. Impeachment is "Smart" for America. . . and Democrats (here's why)

From the PDF flyer http://january6th.org/talking-impeachment-customize.pdf">Talking Impeachment is a Foreign Land (the DC beltway)

. . .
Impeachment is Best for Democrats:

• The party’s historical "weakness" is what got us into this mess.
  It pervades the electorate’s view on all other issues. A display
  of resolve now could erase decades of damage.
• Impeachment forces a comprehensive "up or down vote."
  It can force Republicans to go on record defending the worst
  of the recent past with the maximum public attention.
• The polls show independents’ support for impeachment
  to be high. Now is the time to lock in that swing vote for
  the foreseeable future.
  

. . .

Members of Congress have a moral obligation to impeach. That is, and always will be, the bottom line. But they have been so hung up on their baseless belief that impeachment is "certain" political suicide that they have been deaf to the moral case. The truth is that impeachment shouldn't actually require much "courage." Impeaching is not just the right thing to do, impeaching Bush and Cheney for torture is a BIG WINNER It's not just about telling Conyers why impeachment is the Best and Smartest political move he can make. We need to combat the fears too.

If Conyers is really "on the edge;" if he is actually looking for reasons that impeachment is Smart, then the points in the http://january6th.org/talking-impeachment-customize.pdf">Talking Impeachment flyer should help you "close the deal." (Print the flyer double-sided and fold to make yourself and your fellow impeachment lobbyists a handy quick reference.)

For tips on getting "buy-in" on basic principles, eliciting their rationalizations for inaction, and challenging them in a way that leaves no logical out, check out:

http://january6th.org/talking-impeachment.pdf">Talking Impeachment as a Citizen Lobbyist
A PDF guide that describes how you can
request, schedule, prepare for, conduct, and
follow-up a meeting with a Member of Congress or
staffer to maximize your effectiveness.

[dmosh42]

27. Forget that! Just send another nasty letter! n/t

[puebloknot]

32. If any national leader had the guts to stand up for justice...

...I think we'd see a stream of people following this Pied Piper; and assuming it was a Democrat, there would be a wind of change and hope (real change, not the ersatz kind that is being sold right now)that could begin to restore our democracy. Weakness will continue to yield very predictable results.

[Echo In Light]

39. Corporate mafia: no one wants to upset their apple cart

[puebloknot]

84. If they try, they'll very possibly be "Wellstoned" -- a euphemism...

...that may or may not have its origins in truth!

[Tresalisa]

25. As I see it, not on the edge of impeachment

but listening to various impeachment advocates. It sounds like just more blowing smoke up our @sses to me. :smoke: :shrug: and nothing will happen.

[Riddler]

26. If he hasn't seen enough to push him over that edge by now,

he never will. Too bad our party is lorded over by cowards and spineless chickenshits.

[malaise]

29. The corporate power structure?

The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback."

Many of them need to be tried as accomplices.

[SpiralHawk]

31. Translation: greedhead anti-American republicon cronies

people who are out only for themselves, and who are willing to trash America for their own narrow gain: republicons.

[Disturbed]

35. "That's how our system is designed."

Our system is designed to Impeach those that violate the Constitution of the United States.

[tavalon]

88. Well, he is one of the few to mention the elephant in the room

It's the multinational corporations that are running our goverment, not the judicial, legislative or executive, unless you count the "unitary Executive" which is a euphemism for Executive entwined with Corporations or if you prefer the shorter word for that, Fascism.

[BelgianMadCow]

105. kick that!

[Senator]

34. I Would Think That Anyone "Corporate" Seeking To Defend War Criminals...

...would be the ones at risk of "blowback" on their profit margins.

And they would think that too, if only the "DC Dem powerless structure" would give up acting as the regime's firewall against the truth.

---

[mmonk]

36. Well David, Mr, Conyers has certainly pulled us all around into circles.

I'm frankly tiring of the fight. I would love to end this stint into fascism and for him to end the circle. He has loads of impeachable evidence since he ran investigations in the basement while in the minority. Since we pay his salary, it would be nice to get a return on all that.

[radfringe]

37. let me know if he crosses the edge

been there before, not getting my hopes up and fully expecting he'll back away from the edge....again

[porphyrian]

38. Whatever. I'll believe it when someone actually does something. -n/t

[Vinca]

40. Yawn . . . no excitement here. Not a chance in hell. nt

[Stoic]

41. Jeeze, Conyers. What took you so long?

A year and a half ago, this would have been significant. Now it just looks like grandstanding.

[tavalon]

90. It is neither from where I'm sitting,

it just looks like he's pulling us around by our noses again. I, for one, am tired of the bread and circuses, specifically from Conyers, but also from the Democratic "leadership". Wow, if that isn't an oxymoron.

[whistle]

45. Conyers must start impeachment now!

[L. Coyote]

46. YES, folks it is a two-year plan, and year two has begun.

Now that everyone knows the Dems are not impeaching for revenge, let's get on with the Constitutional Imperative.......

Hang 'em as high as their crimes!

[Warren Stupidity]

49. Where he will remain carefully balanced until January.

I've lost all hope for this congress. I am reluctant to invest a lot of hope in the next congress either.

[lala_rawraw]

50. on the edge?

hmmm... so starting an illegal war, torture, obstruction, outing a cia officer, using doj as political attack dogs and hundreds of other cabal activities have only put him on the edge? are you kidding me?

[tavalon]

91. No, he isn't kidding you, lala,

he's playing you for a fool. Bad move, don't you think? From where I've been sitting, you've never been a fool.

I used to idolize John Conyers and it's hard to lump him into the group with the rest of the "do nothing Dems" but he really, really seems to be playing us, and I, for one, am damn sick of it!

[lala_rawraw]

118. i have no clue

what the hell is going on with him. all i know is, something has gone terribly wrong and Congress is somehow missing.

[emald]

53. his voice roars with the strength of a......kitten

Oh, we wouldn't want to upset the poor corporations, god only knows what the "blowback" would be.
Seriously, it is way past time to put these criminal conspirators into orange jump suits. Bravery would be someone standing up to this thuggery not triangulating a position to wait out the current time frame. As far as I can tell the dems and pukes are one and the same. Our once great country has been taken down by greed and criminal activity with the consent, nay, the encouragement of congress. We can't even feed our poor, educate our children, give hope to the sick, because of Iraq and tax cuts.
What does it take, mr. conyers, to rise to the level of impeachment? Shooting someone in the face? People don't matter to these fools, only the inside of their own pockets matter.
Ffuck you congress. Fuck you mr pResident. People die because of this shit and congress just mutters to themselves about "blowback". This country is sick and needs justice in the worst way but it won't be coming anytime soon as those who hold the levers of power are busy being "smart". Idiots. Blathering stupid vapid idiots.

[NikolaC]

54. I Would Love To Be Wrong About This

but it just seems to me that he is dragging the process out as long as possible, giving lip service and hemming and hawing to run the clock out. It seems as though they are trying to pacify the angry children all the while knowing that there is no way they are going to give them what they asked for. In the end, they will apologize for not doing anything because there was no time given the process that they had to go through and the fact that they only obtained a majority in late 2006. I will not hold my breath for Conyers to do his job, but would be pleasantly surprised if he does.

[lonestarnot]

57. I don't know, but I do know it is making me sick!

:puke: Impeach already! Shit!

[Cleita]

56. This is why they won't impeach?

Conyers expressed fear of what might happen following an impeachment, fear of installing a Bush replacement or losing an election. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback." Conyers told Ellen Taylor and Manijeh Saba: "You need to be more than brave and courageous. You need to be smart."

Sorry but this is not a good reason to not impeach. We need impeachment to start investigations. This administration is a criminal adminstration and they cannot be allowed to walk into the sunset unscathed. To do so only invites generations of criminals in our government because they know that they can get away with flaunting our Consititution, bankrupting our country and placing Americans in grave danger because of their greedy actions.

It's time for us to push Conyers and Congress to that edge.

[Pacifist Patriot]

59. Once again....I'll believe it when I see it.

[mod mom]

60. Maybe he is waiting until after the Hearing on Voter Suppression (w Blackwell)

that was postponed today:

http://judiciary.house.gov/oversight.aspx?ID=408

[Recursion]

61. Conyers, I love you, but shit or get off the pot

Do it or don't.

[The Stranger]

62. They are going to huff, and they are going to puff, but --

-- they never seem to blow the house down.

[femrap]

63. K and R

Conyers deserves a kick in the ass. What 'blowback' could the 'corporate power structure' let loose?

So our representatives are ruled by the corporate power structure? Glad he admitted it.

[Lilith Velkor]

64. Pull the trigger or STFU, John

[2008]

69. no shit

HEY JOHN IT'S NOVEMBER 2006
WE WON
LET'S WRAP THIS IMPEACHMENT THING UP NOW
OR AT LEAST START THE PROCESS
JUST 2 MORE YEARS TO GO, AFTER ALL

[jlake]

65. Hasn't he been saying this for years?

I'm not holding my breath anymore.

[Individualist]

66. The dog and pony show continues.

[femrap]

67. Last month I spoke with Betty Sutton,

rep from Ohio and on the Judiciary Committee..she said the rumor was that Impeachment hearings could place from Nov. 6 to Jan. 20 when there is nothing else to do. That's what she told me...and maybe she just wanted to shut me up.

After working so hard for the '06 election, I am beyond disappoint. Betty Sutton also said: "It's always your own Party that breaks your heart."

I will be amazed if we get to the '08 Election...I fear martial law.

[Javaman]

68. Oh for fucking christ sakes, someone kick him in his

god damn ass and push this waffling mother fucker over the edge. I have fucking had it with this puppet show dramatics.

If there ever was a way to really piss people off, he has found it.

What is this bullshit about being on the edge.

Just announce you are doing it, don't get our hopes up yet again only to see them torn apart by the enables inaction.

fuck it!

[jgraz]

70. Sadly, he's talking about Nixon.

[Fire Walk With Me]

71. The price of peace is victory over those who don't want it. -Joe S.

"The 'corporate power structure', he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing 'blowback.'"

Let them.

Give people more reason to bring an end to this tyranny. Let the problem stand stark and clear and unavoidable.

See my autosignature.

[Time for change]

74. Wow!

Maybe there's still hope.

[Independent_Liberal]

76. I feel there is.

I'm one of the few who still feel that way.

[tblue37]

75. There's another problem I see.

The Dems feel pretty certain they will win in this election cycle, and I think they don't want to do anything to reduce the imperial presidential powers before the (assumed) Dem president gets a chance to enjoy them.

[Ichingcarpenter]

77. Kick

[Freddie Stubbs]

78. Conyers: 3 More Congress Members and I'll Impeach

Submitted by davidswanson on Sat, 2007-07-21 22:50.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has said that if three more Congress Members get behind impeachment he will start the impeachment proceedings.

I was a guest today on Bree Walker's radio show. She's the progressive radio host from California who purchased Cindy Sheehan's land from her in Crawford, Texas.

Bree attended an event on Friday in San Diego at which Congressman Conyers spoke about impeachment. Her report was extremely interesting. I had already heard reports that Conyers had said: "What are we waiting for? Let's take these two guys out!" But, of course, what we're waiting for is John Conyers. Is he ready to act? It was hard to tell from that comment. In January, Conyers spoke at a huge rally on the National Mall and declared "We can fire them!" but later explained that what he meant was that we could wait for two years and Bush and Cheney's terms would end. Was this week's remark just more empty rhetoric?

It appears to be more than that. Bree Walker told me, on the air, that Conyers said that all he needs is three more Congress Members backing impeachment, and he'll move on it, even without Pelosi. I asked whether that meant specifically moving from 14 cosponsors of H Res 333 to 17, or adding 3 to the larger number of Congress Members who have spoken favorably of impeachment but not all signed onto bills. Bree said she didn't know and that Conyers had declined to take any questions.

more: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/24962

[Ichingcarpenter]

79. Kick for the DUer that wrote this

[ForeignSpectator]

80. Just one word :

"Reeelly"?

[Beam Me Up]

83. No shit. I'm not holding my breath. They should have done this years ago.

[rateyes]

86. If, indeed, Conyers is on the edge of the impeachment cliff...

I say it's time to do all we can to push him over it.

[Radical Activist]

92. Push him!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL03THMxea0

[Phred42]

93. How many times have we been here?

I'll believe it when it happens.

Conyers has been acting more like Specter - you know -

Like Lucy holding the Football for Charlie Brown.

Talk is cheap.

[Phred42]

98. Where would we be if the Founding Fathers were AFRAID of Blowback?

Worrying about Blow back is an excuse for something else.

[Psyop Samurai]

94. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback."

How interesting.

And, assuming this to be a true statement, how revealing. Moreso for the fact that even we, long inured to this duplicitous game, are by now so steeped in doublethink that the most extreme example can pass by without anyone even attempting to parse it.

First, and right-flashing-red-upfront, is the stunning admission that we are living under a covert corporatocracy, and that the legally constituted representative government is but a facade that serves at the pleasure of our covert rulers.

Second, that our legally constituted government is under threat from this "corporate power structure", to do their bidding. Would this not, in anything but the Orwellian nightmare in which we're living, be called extortion?

And did no one else notice the curious re-defining of words here: "...without unleashing "blowback"?

So, "blowback", which we're given to understand as being unintended consequences arising from operations abroad and entirely of foreign agency, is, by Chairman Conyers' reckoning, something the powers-that-be can "unleash". How very extraordinary.

And what, do you suppose, such "blowback" might consist of? What horror might be "unleashed"; what threat sufficient to utterly paralyze the government of the United States?

Sheesh..., good thing these are only tea leaves, and this is only a game, otherwise, we could be in serious trouble.

[RuleOfNah]

112. Did Conyers actually say "corporate power structure" and "blowback"?

Did he use kinder, gentler terms that were translated en route? Perhaps that will be his path of retreat, claiming he was misquoted?

[McCamy Taylor]

95. Impeach Cheney first---do it for Haliburton's illegal no bid contracts.

America can not abide a war profiteer. This will completely undercut the Bush-Cheney lie that they are doing it to protect America.

If W. tries to name McCain his VP, then McCain is tarnished by association with W.

If Cheney does not want to get impeached, then he has to bargain with Congress and start bringing the troops home.

It is a win/win deal.

[AikidoSoul]

111. I'm with you baby N/T

[bjobotts]

96. Not Fooled.He has no intention of making admin. accountable. Just appeasing the public.

Just what Obama may do. Talk about it but do nothing. No consequences for "bad actors", they just made bad decisions according to Obama. DUH! Conyers has neither the energy or the will to take on the money party. He's done nothing and will do nothing. This administration laughs in his face (Mukasey) and ignores him. Him and all congress. "Pass what you want I'll just do another signing statement. The DoJ and the AG will approve it and as we know there will be no consequences coming from that old black fart or his cohort , the cowardly Pelosi." This is how the WH thinks of them...people to just ignore.

[Individualist]

102. He's like Lucy in the Peanuts comic strip,

holds out the football, then yanks it away. Conyers needs to realize we're not Charlie Brown; we don't fall for the tease.

[AllyCat]

97. ON the edge? What does it take with these people? Anything he's done up to now

was impeachable and now they admit to torture and a couple of people are thinking about supporting Wexler and Kucinich?

I give up on these people. I hope they do something, but I am no longer holding my breath now that I am quite certain Nancy Pelousy is a Republican.

[Phred42]

99. "A time comes when silence is betrayal" - Martin Luther King

[L. Coyote]

101. REC 60 Looking forward to more evidence becoming public soon.

[spanone]

103. what edge?

[fascisthunter]

104. No More Talking... Just Do It!

[NoodleyAppendage]

106. Is Conyers' up for re-election in 2008? If so, then look for the answer no more. COWARD.

Conyers is all bark and no bite. His sole purpose is to string along the grassroots and deflect outrage...what a sorry excuse for a elected official.

J

[davidswanson]

107. like all congress members

he must get elected every even numbered year, but he has no challenger and no chance of losing

his constituents are gung ho for impeachment

the Detroit City Council passed a resolution unanimously demanding impeachment

it was introduced by a city council member who happens to be married to John Conyers

Somebody buy up all copies of Lysistrata and send them to the global warming city please

[NoodleyAppendage]

122. Nice Aristophanes reference...doesn't happen much around DU. n/t

J

[GrantDem]

108. He really, really, really, means it this time.

Whatever, put up or shutup...

[nightrain]

110. It's about time!

Wake up and listen to the people! Investigate, convict, and punish the transgressors.

[disndat]

113. It sounds to me like

Conyers will go ahead with impeachment after the November elections, presumably, by then the Democrats will win the presidency and no problem with Corporate 'blow back.'

[varelse]

114. That actually sounds like a smart thing to do...

...assuming we won't have another 911 before the election results are all in. It's so hard to trust this current government to play by the rules when they've given us all so many reasons to doubt that they will :(

[Wapsie B]

115. Oh for god's sake.

Last time I checked it was February '08. Kinda running out of time aren't we Conyers? And this couldn't have been done earlier? Either do it or just admit total failure.

[DRoseDARs]

117. And I say I'm on the edge of giving a shit WHAT this cowardly Dem-controlled Congress says...

Less talk (and talk ... and talk ... and talk ... always talking about doing something) and more action ... or else just shut the fuck up and let Bush and his enablers continue to fuck you up just as you've always let them do. I'm so sick of the talking, fucking just DO SOMETHING already. :eyes: :thumbsdown:

[Postman]

119. Call us when you "get to the rim".....

I'll believe it when I see it.

[mike_c]

120. the "corporate power structure" just about says it all....

This is no longer a government of the people.

[California Griz]

121. Timing is everything

I have to be honest here. We have known that we used water boarding for quite some time. We've know about all of the Bush crimes for quite some time. Suddenly Conyers thinks it might be time to do something. We have a general election coming in 10 months. This would force the Republicans to either stand by an unpopular President or throw Bush under the train. I love it the Republicans have been playing hardball for a long time they are overdue for a taste of their own medicine. I'm always amused when I hear them say this is just a political move. Duh I think that must be why they call it politics.
I can't wait to see a Democrat back in the White House the sooner the better. I'll vote for the nominee whether it's Hillary or Obama. That's not enough though we need more seats in the Senate. The big question is will impeachment help that effort. I see this as a political war it's us against them for the future of our country. I really want to see Bush impeached but I don't want to win that battle if it means we lose the war.

[Snarkoleptic]

123. New flash...I'm on the edge of staring to date Michelle Pfeiffer.

I've heard way too much of this hyperbole to attach any credibility.
I hope that we can impeach these clowns, but history has shown us that our people lack spine.
sigh....

[Deny and Shred]

124. I'm with you snark.

I pray it goes somewhere, but this is headed under the rug, like all Bush misdeeds. I hope the next President lets the crimes be known, come hell or high water. Otherwise, our dumb electorate will vote in another Neocon soon enough.

I remember L. Walsh, the prosecutor for Iran Contra freaking out when Bush (41) pardoned his inner circle. Ain't no way this makes it into centerist Joe-Six Pack's lexicon - the pardons are coming. For the future of democracy, it is incumbent on the next President to not play ball with the GOP just because it may be politically expedient in the short-term. Not another Whiteout.

http://books.google.com/books?id=s5qIj_h_PtkC&pg=PA338&lpg=PA338&dq=jackson+stephens+arkansas+rose+law+firm&source=web&ots=zcmuZfYswa&sig=IF-IXYT2kbFd_CeZDdW87AwMryk#PPR7,M1

[bobthedrummer]

126. Some public contact phone numbers-John Conyers direct DC office lines

[phone], [phone].

Jerrold Nadler, member of the House Judiciary Committee and Chair of the Subcommittee on The Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties-direct DC office line [phone]

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House-direct DC office line [phone]

Steny Hoyer, House Majority Leader-direct DC office line [phone]

Dennis Kucinich, introduced Articles of Impeachment against Richard Cheney-direct DC office line [phone]

Toll free Congressional switchboard numbers

1-800-862-5530

1-800-828-0498

1-800-614-2803

1-866-340-9281

1-866-338-1015

1-866-220-0044

[TankLV]

127. No he won't - he's a fucking LIAR...

NOTHING will come of this - NOTHING - he's just blowing hot air up our skirts...

[man4allcats]

128. Re: "So how would it look if I allowed two women

to push me over the edge?"

I don't understand his concern here. He apparently isn't bothered by the fact that he's been allowing one woman to force him to abandon his principles for over a year now, and yet he's concerned about his image if he listens to these two ladies from Code Pink? Am I missing something?