Forget her "Pledge," She Took an Oath: Why Pelosi is Wrong about Impeachment

  • dlindorff's picture
    dlindorff
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

By Dave Lindorff

House minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), in an interview with Lesley Stahl of CBS News, said impeachment would be "off the table" if Democrats take over the House of Representatives in November, calling it a "waste of time."

She couldn't be more wrong, and most Americans know it.

While Pelosi was responding to a loaded question from Stahl, who couched impeachment in terms of Democrats' supposed desire to seek revenge if they retake Congress, Pelosi, who would become majority leader in a Democratic House, bought into Stahl's argument, saying that she'd be "satisfied" to see the president and vice president spending the remaining two years of their second term as "lame ducks."What Stahl should have asked Pelosi was whether she thought that President Bush had violated the law and the Constitution, and whether she believed he has committed impeachable offenses.

The answer to that is clearly yes.

Rep. Pelosi must know most of the president's crimes are not partisan at all. They are crimes against Americans of all stripes, and against liberty and the Constitution.Just take the president's order to the National Security Administration to spy on Americans without first seeking a warrant. A federal judge in Detroit has already found that the president violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act--a felony--and the Fourth Amendment. That is an impeachable act, and one which Democrats and Republicans alike would punish if they understood the the implications of what the president has done. Given that the secret FISA court has only rejected a handful of warrant requests out of over 70,000 made since 1978, the only reason Bush could have decided to violate the law is that he is doing something so outrageous he knew the hand-picked, top-security-cleared FISA judges would have rejected it out of hand.Or take the signing statements. This president has used so-called "signing statements" to render inoperative over 800 laws or parts of laws passed by Congress, claiming that he has the authority to do so because he is a commander in chief in time of war (the so-called "War" on Terror).

Rep. Pelosi claims that if she becomes House leader, Democrats will want to pursue a positive, progressive political agenda, yet this will be clearly impossible if the president is allowed to simply continue issuing signing statements invalidating any laws passed by a Democratic Congress. Signing statements cannot be overridden, and if Democrats were to attempt to pass legislation outlawing them, Bush could veto that legislation--or render it inoperative with another signing statement. The only way to stop this unconstitutional usurpation of the founding principle of tripartite government is to impeach the president for blatant abuse of power.This too, is an issue that Republicans and Democrats should agree on, for if this president is permitted to ignore laws passed by the Congress, then subsequent presidents (perhaps a President Hillary Clinton or Barak Obama?) could also do it, citing the continuing "War" on Terror, and the Bush precedent.

Does Nancy Pelosi believe that the president's lies and deceptions and the conspiracy by his administration to trick the nation into a disastrous invasion of Iraq is not grounds for impeachment? Nearly 3000 Americans have died as a result of that deceit, and nearly 40,000 have suffered grievous wounds, while the US military has been stretched to the breaking point, leaving the country unable to respond to genuine threats. Surely the author of this ongoing national nightmare must be punished, so that future presidents will not attempt to do the same thing.

These are only some of this administration's crimes. Others include:

* Bush's role in attacking, and then covering up the attack on former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his CIA agent wife, Valerie Plame--a crime that was committed to discredit Wilson and discourage reporters from probing more deeply into his revelation that the documents used to claim Iraq was trying to buy uranium ore from Niger were obvious forgeries, and into who was behind those forgeries in the first place.

* Bush's authorization of torture as a policy for captives in Afghanistan, Iraq and in the nebulous, endless and borderless "War" on Terror. The president, in an act of desperation, has gotten the currently Republican Congress to ram through a bill granting retroactive immunity to all those, including himself, who authorized or engaged in torture, but this should not deter a Democratic Congress from seeking impeachment for an action that remains a violation of international law, that places American troops at greater risk, and that has destroyed America's image around the globe.

* Bush's criminally negligent handling of the Katrina disaster in New Orleans.

* The rot of corruption in the administration, highlighted by the Abramoff lobbying scandals, which clearly reach right into the Oval Office, despite the president’s initial lie that he didn’t know Jack Abramoff.

* Bush's refusal to testify under oath and on the record before the 9-11 Commission, and his refusal to provide officials and documents demanded by the commission regarding what the administration knew before the attacks and how it responded to what it knew. This obstructionism by the White House has been called close to an act of treason by former Sen. Bob Graham, who until the end of 2002 was the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and who has said if he were currently in the House would be the subject of a bill of impeachment.

Rep. Pelosi may think Americans don't want impeachment, but, like many Democratic leaders, ' simply out of touch. Indeed, the congresswoman will find a resolution on impeachment on her own ballot when she goes home to San Francisco to vote this November (a resolution that is likely to pass handily). Meanwhile, a new Newsweek magazine poll finds that fully 51 percent of all Americans believe that the president should be impeached--more than half of them saying this should be a priority. That same poll finds that 20 percent of Republicans think the president should be impeached, with one in four of those saying it should be a priority for the next Congress.

These are astonishing figures when you consider that support for impeachment of President Bill Clinton never got higher than 36 percent, even at the height of his impeachment process.

Maybe Rep. Pelosi should start listening to the voters, instead of to her campaign strategists.

More importantly, she and other Democratic—and Republican--members of the House should recall that oath they took when they assumed office, which commits them to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

The Constitution these days is under relentless assault by an enemy in the White House. Defending it is not a "waste of time" Ms. Pelosi; it is your sworn duty.
----------------------------
About the author: Dave Lindorff is co-author, with Barbara Olshansky, of “The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office” (St. Martin’s Press, June 2006). His work, and information about the new book, can be found at www.thiscantbehappening.net

Comments

I must disagree

  • Stand and Fight's picture
    Stand and Fight
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

I am in completely agreemnt, however, with Leader Pelosi. We cannot allow the Republicans a reason to mobilize their base. If Democrats were to come out before the elections and say that we plan to impeach Bush and company, then this would surely provide a rallying point for the Repubicans. We can change course on that AFTER conducting investigations. After all, we cannot help it if we uncover high crimes and misdemeanors and are forced by LAW to pursue impeachment. No one would blame Nancy Pelosi if that were the case, but we cannot come into the election saying we'll pursue impeachment when we've not even investigated anything.

Stand and Fight, while the nuances and shell

  • Frank Ranelli's picture
    Frank Ranelli
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

game of "let's hide the impeachment ball" may be beneficial to winning an election --to which I do not agree -- it fails the core issue of what Congress' duty is: To honor and defend the Constitution.

It has been proven numerous times -- and the polls show it -- people support impeachment and candidates running on a pro-impeachment platform are winning. Impeachment is not a taboo, fringe-edge idea; it is a core principle of our way of government to check power run amock.

To state, "we have not invrstigated anything" is patently false. Allow me to bring you up to speed and I would encourage you to read it this:

The Constitution in Crisis; The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Coverups in the Iraq War, and Illegal Domestic Surveillance -- John Conyers.

Everything that you and the Congress needs to know about why we must impeach Bush and Cheney is in this text. Conyers has carefully done all the investigation needed to pass an impeachment resolution and to send it to the senate for trial.

I can point to many more, but let's start here.

Link to Book:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/constitutionincrisis

-Frank

"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"

You said the truth Frank

  • SLadd's picture
    SLadd
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Yes, to fool around with the constitution and claim ' political strategy ' by refusing to make Bush and Cheney accountable for their impeachable offenses is fundamentally wrong, and it's the sort of gutless inaction that the Republicans love about the DLC Democrats, and I consider Pelosi to be one. How many thousands of people must lose their lives because of the diabolic intentions of this president and vice president before impeachment is deemed credible ?

Stand and Fight.....

  • tseving's picture
    tseving
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

While I agree that a promise to impeach Bush could give Republicans a tool to use in mobilizing, there's a big difference between taking a wait and see attitude. Pelosi could have deferred, saying we won't know until after some investigations are done. She didn't do that. I watched her on 60 minutes say that impeachment is "off the table" and "will not happen."

If she changes course now, she makes herself a liar, and that's not acceptable. If Democrats gain power, we'll have to demonstrate that we're more honest that the GOP has been.

- Surviving Bush one day at a time.
tomcatsbox.spaces.live.com

No Dancing In The End Zone

  • ZUELGO's picture
    ZUELGO
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

No Dancing in The End Zone

We do not need to be doing any "dancing in the end-zone." We don't need to do that even if we win big in both houses of Congress.
What we “NEED TO DO,” is "the job we were elected to do for the people who elected us." If we don't do this then our dancing will turn into a voodoo dance that will cause us all kinds of ills and ailments, and spew even more poison into the electorate population.
Work on impeaching George W. Bush and Cheney, by all means, if that helps the United States.
Work on restoring Constitutional protection to all of us.
Work on bringing the troops home from Iraq.
Work on curbing Federal spending.
Work on making Medicare more universal and affordable.
Work on curbing corporate and lobbyist elitism.
YES, YES, YES to all of these....... But FIRST
Work on solving our independence on foreign oil
Work on better education for our children
Work on saving jobs of the American working middle-class
Work on restoring our credibility with our allies
Work to solve and fix the border crisis with Mexico
Work on the Immigration and Social Security related problems
Work using the power inherent in gaining control to make government work for the common good, even with “the other party!”
Don't start the dancing before we have the orchestra, director and music needed to make the victory a success. And the entire victory will be owed to the American people, who, for too long, have not been heard in the Halls of Congress nor the White House.
Vindictiveness, should mirror that of the recently devastated Amish people who were so brutally abused. Were they vindictive? NO!... Did they capture the heart of America with their understanding and forgiveness? YES, they did.
We “MUST NOT” however, allow ourselves to be portrayed as "wimps." We do understand about how the country was mislead into war. Nor portrayed as “sniveling cowards” for forgiving human nature in its trek through the gutter.
Instead we need to use that “POWER to OVERCOME” these types of government behavior. But in going down that road, please remember, "we ALL live in glass houses,” and we must use discretion when we are tempted to throw rocks at our opponents, lest we also succumb to the same situation they find themselves in now. We WILL NOT be perfect in our POWER, but neither should we be portrayed as weak!
With POWER comes RESPONSIBILITY. Let us use both wisely on November 8, 2006. Otherwise we "fly our own human nature" into the lofty towers and they too will collapse, crumble and dissolve in smoke and rubble just as surely as the terrorists did to the “twin Towers” on September 11, 2001.

Timothy Porter txpje@yahoo.com
October 30, 1006

A question to Stand and Fight....

  • Frank Ranelli's picture
    Frank Ranelli
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Have you read Dave Lindorff's book? Its a pretty damning indictment of why Bush and Cheney should be impeached, footnoted and an appendix with a littany of supporting documents.

Besides what you perceive as poltical expediency, what other reason could you possible use as a reason not to impeach Bush & Cheney?

"If being liberal means critical thinking and informed dissent, instead of blind obedience and ignorant nationalism, then I am all for it!"

Trying to recall--

  • Real American's picture
    Real American
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

where I read that Murtha is making a bid to be democratic house leader.... if so, then what Pelosi has to say won't matter so much. If the dems take the house by a good margin... she can vote against impeachment to avoid the appearance of waffling without impeding justice.

I support Murtha taking that role.

Its called legislate for veto

  • Changeling's picture
    Changeling
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

What I have heard from a very knowledgable source is that her comments may reveal a stradegy known as "legislate to veto". If the dems take both houses they will be in a position to submit new stem cell research bills, reformed medicare prescription legislation, enviromental protection and Iraq war resolutions all designed to not only repair the damage but to force W's hand to veto very popular policy. The veto's will further tarnish the gop's reputation and set the stage for a democratic party sweep in 08.

This explains McCains comment the other day about the dems taking the 06 senate," I would commit suicide" he
coughed........

If the dems take both houses you can stick a fork in him......

..............YYYEEEEEEAAAAAAAARRRRRRGGGHHHH !!!!!