Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Republicans Keep Kucinich's Impeachment Resolution Alive

Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet at 2:30 PM on November 7, 2007.


Joshua Holland: Be careful what you wish for.
dennis
dennis

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Back in April, Dennis Kucinich announced that he would file articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney.

The story was largely ignored at the time, the leadership wanted nothing to do with it and the resolution was on a fast-track to nowhere.

Until yesterday, that is, when a frustrated Kucinich used a privileged resolution to force a vote on the matter. This was when the 'serious' members of the party -- those who understand that protecting America's ability to wage trumped-up wars unchecked was more important than petty partisanship -- were supposed to step in and join a loyal GOP in tabling the motion.

But something interesting happened along the way. First, there was much more support for the measure among rank-and-file Democratic lawmakers than anyone had expected. What was supposed to attract the dozen or so legislators who make up the infamous "far left" of the party garnered support from 86 Democrats.

But it got stranger still. As the vote to table the motion dragged out, one-by-one Republicans started switching their votes an keeping the resolution alive. According to Raw Story, this was a calculated move to force the issue to a vote, a move that the GOP believed would hurt the Dems. Raw Story quoted Georgia Republican Jack Kingston explaining the maneuver to Roll Call:

"We don't wish to save the Democrats from themselves when their left wing exposes themselves," Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) told Roll Call, noting that Democratic leaders were trying to draw as little attention as possible to the impeachment issue by voting to table the resolution. "When there's an opportunity to show their strong left base, it's important for it to be seen," he added.
I applaud this thinking. That the GOP believes it hurts Democrats to debate the role a VP with an approval rating lower than that of gonorrhea played in launching a war that's as unpopular as Vietnam was in the final years is a sign of how out-of-touch they are with Americans' fury. That the Dem leadership feels similarly -- Steny Hoyer offered the motion to table the resolution -- is depressing, too, in that is shows the degree to which the leadership drinks from the same fountain of conventional Beltway wisdom.

Kucinich's resolution was recommended to the Judiciary Committee, where it will likely die a lonely death. But perhaps not -- unlike Nancy Pelosi, John Conyers, the House Judiciary Chair, has been ambiguous on the issue. He issued a report that laid out a road-map for impeaching Bush, but he also penned an op-ed in the Washington Post in which he reassured jittery colleagues that he was in "no rush" to impeach anybody.

As I said, Kucinich's resolution is almost certain to disappear into a black hole in the Judiciary Committee.

But wouldn't it be nice if the whole thing backfired -- if millions of people let their lawmakers know that they support impeaching Darth Cheney and the Repubs' whole procedural game backfired. After all, the only thing that makes the move to impeach a marginal idea is the fact that the traditional media keeps telling us it is. If the notion that lying about a blow-job was a grave offense worthy of impeaching a duly-elected president of the United States could gain traction, surely the idea that lying the country into a disastrous and illegal war can't wouldn't be that hard to sell.

Today, Kucinich's resolution, and the millions of Americans who support impeachment, are being marginalized from all sides. CBS is running a column today lumping impeachment in with a belief that UFOs are frequent visitors -- 'it's crazy,' they say -- and the Huffington Post features a piece by Gold Star Mother Rosemary Palmer accusing Kucinich of gamesmanship and chiding him for seeking "vengeance" (an argument one never hears for letting lesser crimes go unpunished).

There's a lot of anger out there, and it appears that many among our media and political class just can't seem to grasp the reasons why. It will be interesting to see in what ways that disconnect plays out in the next few years -- to see which groups turn out to vote and what issues really fire up the electorate. I have a feeling there are going to be more surprises in the future.

UPDATE: According to Brad Friedman, Robert Wexler, a Florida Democrat who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to his constituents today in which he called for immediate impeachment hearings:

I will urge the Judiciary Committee to schedule impeachment hearings immediately and not let this issue languish as it has over the last six months. Only through hearings can we bring begin to correct the abuses of Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration; and, if it is determined in these hearings that Vice President Cheney has committed High Crimes and Misdemeanors, he should be impeached and removed from office.
It will be interesting to see how Conyers plays all of this.

Digg!

Tagged as: impeachment, cheney, pelosi, hoyer, kucinich, conyers

Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.


Breast Flaunting for Jesus
The life of a failed California beauty pageant contestant gets even weirder.
Post by Thers. November 11, 2009.
Dobbs to Quit CNN
Dobbs, under fire, to seek greener pastures.
Post by Staff. November 11, 2009.
Under Pressure From Tea Party Activists, Charleston GOP Censures Lindsey Graham For Bipartisanship
Part of the fury from the right against Graham is being spurred by the oil and coal industry.
Post by Lee Fang. November 11, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
One minor edit...
Posted by: Xynyx on Nov 7, 2007 11:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In "surely the idea that lying the country into a disastrous and illegal war can't be that hard to sell", you should probably replace the word "can't" with the word "shouldn't".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I have a question. Posted by: mindportal1
» RE: I have a question. Posted by: ad132
» RE: I have a question. Posted by: left nut
» RE: I have a question. Posted by: VannaLaRoche
Good to see a Joshua Holland perspective
Posted by: antoniomo on Nov 7, 2007 11:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I always appreciate your analysis.

And it would be great, though unlikely, if the impeachment process actually took hold against Cheney (and Bush, for that matter).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yeh, Josh is good Posted by: Ripcord
» RE: Yeh, Josh is good Posted by: Joshua Holland
» I hope you are wrong, too! Posted by: alternetrose
Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
However, he isn't the "official" decider
Posted by: brunowe on Nov 7, 2007 12:28 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Elizabeth's Holtzman's fine book on impeaching books makes a convincing argument for not going after Cheney instead of Bush. However much of a role Cheney played in selling the war, he was not the one who ultimately signed-off on the order sending in the troops, Bush was. Same with rendition, torture, warrantless wiretapping, etc.. This holds up even if you argue that Bush is only Cheney's sock-puppet. Impeachment is designed as a check on abuses of executive power, Cheney has none, not formally anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yeah, except... Posted by: Chickensh*tEagle
» RE: Yeah, except... Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Yeah, except... Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: He will. Posted by: oregoncharles
If The Angler falls in the woods...
Posted by: eddie torres on Nov 7, 2007 12:33 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and there are no corporate news models there to spin it...

...did it make a sound?

There must be some kind of "all Iran all the time" standing blackout order on corporate news coverage of the Fourth Branch, because Kucinich's impeachment resolution made absolutely zero impact on the networks' NYC news headquarters.

Nothing on CNN, MSNBC, FAUX, or PBS.

Olbermann? No.

Stewart and Colbert? Nope - writers strike.

Hannity & Colmes leaping to the defense of Uncle Dick? No way - Dog Chapman dropped an "I'm black, too" bomb (really) right in front of Sean Hannity.

If democracy falls in the woods, will Katie Couric be pouring champagne at the funeral?

Only The Angler knows for certain...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» At least announce everything Posted by: Knowmad
» As it turns out ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» To be fair ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» You're right... Posted by: eddie torres
Backfire
Posted by: rocketman on Nov 7, 2007 1:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You would think SOME in our congress can think. Who would ever think that our spinless congress would go along with that..Now the republicans are giving the democrats the rope to further politically hang themselves with!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Frontfire Posted by: Ripcord
YOU JUST NEVER KNOW
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Nov 7, 2007 2:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It isn't as though there aren't enough good reasons for this acton. We're not accustomed to gutsy people and there are too few of them. Let's hope Dennis picks up more backers in the next few days. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impeachment move bad for Hillary
Posted by: herbal on Nov 7, 2007 2:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and Pelosi and all other apologists of the Bush Administration; torture, bombing Iraq with nukes, etc. So is Holland right in his assessment that the Democratic 'leadership' is embarrassed by Kucinich? Hopefully in the same way that Ron Paul embarrasses the Republicans. We may be living in the last possible time of reprieve from the one party system of which this cross over vote of Republicans may be evidence. What are the prospects that some or many of these crossover votes are sincere??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impeach Cheney Call congress in the next 24 hours
Posted by: jeaninemolloff on Nov 7, 2007 2:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's make this thing happen! Call the congressional switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and ask for each congressman on the House Judiciary Committee. The Committee members are as follows: (last names mostly)
Democrats
Chair- John Conyers
Berman
Boucher
Nadler
Scott
Lofgren
Jackson Lee
Waters
Delahunt
Wexler
Sanchez
Cohen
Johnson
Sutton
Gutierrez
Sherman
Baldwin
Weiner
Schiff
Davis
Wasserman Schultz
Ellison

Republicans below
Lamar Smith--Ranking Member
Jordan
Gohmert
Franks
Feeney
King
Forbes
Pence
Issa
Keller
Cannon
Lungren
Chabot
Goodlatte
Coble
Sensenbrenner
Other ranking House Members to harass:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer
House Majority Whip Rahm Emanuel (Note: Rahm Emanuel was a Bill Clinton staffer and top fund raiser. He is squarely in the Hillary camp).

Hope this helps. Don't just get mad--GET EVEN! Time to restore constitutional government. Even if the impeachment attempt fails; it serves notice on these 'bums' that they could be next.
Jeanine Molloff
GMWIW

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Great Job! Posted by: higginslads
black holed into a committee
Posted by: Lauren on Nov 7, 2007 4:11 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Commettees can launch things into the stratosphere tomorrow too, if they want to.

I called my congresswomans office to ask for fair treatment for finincial aid and discussed the pending impeachment measure with her staff who sounded like she wanted me to think it was getting positive attention. I told her to I wanted it hurried up, she said it was a slow process.

* * * * * * *
Two years ago from Feinstein,

October 20, 2005

Dear Mrs. Unruh:

Thank you for writing to me to express your views on the
medicinal benefits that marijuana can provide. I appreciate the
time you took to write to me.

Please know that I do not support the legalization of any
narcotic drugs, including marijuana. My convictions on this matter
have been developed over many years of experience in criminal
justice, including nine years as Mayor of San Francisco, when I
worked very closely with the law enforcement community. I know
the tragedy that drug abuse causes in the lives of the addicted and
on victims of drug-related crimes and their families. I have seen
the devastation drugs can inflict on a community.

I do recognize that marijuana may have medicinal
properties that could alleviate conditions such as AIDS-related
wasting and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. I do not
oppose further research on the potential medical efficacy of
marijuana and support compassionate use in medical situations
when prescribed by a physician in writing for serious and/or
catastrophic illnesses.

Again, thank you for writing. If you have any further
questions, please visit my website at http://feinstein.senate.gov, or
contact my office in Washington, D.C. at (202) 224-3841.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: entheogen Posted by: surfreality
Do it
Posted by: pkricker on Nov 7, 2007 5:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I understand at least some of the arguments for not attempting to impeach either Bush or Cheney, but I contend that these arguments are shortsighted and pander to convenience rather that good sense. If we keep letting these evil idiots get away with what they are doing they are going to keep on doing it. I understand that impeachment procedings would tie the government up considerably, but frankly I think that this government needs to be tied up. Bush/Cheney and their servants in the House and the Senate are not going to allow any decent legislation through anyway, so why not go after them and expose their misdeeds to the light of public scrutiny? Just a thought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Do it Posted by: Lauren
At least it gets a mention...
Posted by: higginslads on Nov 7, 2007 5:16 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It would have been nice if Kucinich's impeachment proceedings got some attention the day before they were up for a vote, not the day after. I mean, I would expect this from a MSM outlet, but an "alternative" to the mainstream? Geez...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: At least it gets a mention... Posted by: Joshua Holland
Great Job!
Posted by: higginslads on Nov 7, 2007 5:25 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's up to us. Let's make ourselves heard...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why?
Posted by: oregoncharles on Nov 7, 2007 10:51 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why would the Democratic leadership be so determined to suppress impeachment? None of their excuses make any sense.

One possibility is simple: they support what the Bushies are doing and hope to benefit from it when it's their turn. Heaven knows they mostly voted for it, or at least made sure it had just enough Demo votes to pass.

More immediately: they believe that Bush is destroying the Republican Party, and they want to give him enough rope. I agree with them about that. I just think our liberties and a few hundred thousand lives, to say nothing of a potential Armageddon, are too high a price to pay for a Democratic landslide next year.

They also forgot a couple of things: first, a free ride for the Dems is also a free ride for the Greens, or any other alternative party. If there is no danger of electing a Republican, people will feel free to vote for whoever they want. Second: they are now, themselves, polling worse than Bush. The people who put them in office to DO SOMETHING about Bush and the war see them doing, deliberately, nothing at all. They're only pretending (so far), and it's become really, really obvious.

It's going to be a wild election year. At the very least, we can expect to see a president elected with a disastrously small percentage of the vote, and probably 3rd party members in Congress.

I suppose I should be grateful, since I'm a Green. But I'm just not as amoral as they are: I'd rather see Bush impeached and the war ended.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A change of heart, Mr. Holland?
Posted by: asilsfable on Nov 7, 2007 11:47 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You were against impeachment before. Something change your mind?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Putting Up a Fight Posted by: Tim Brown
» RE: Putting Up a Fight Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: We all flip-flop ocassionally Posted by: Joshua Holland
AN EASY WAY TO MAKE YOURSELF HEARD
Posted by: higginslads on Nov 8, 2007 5:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's an easy way to take some action on this issue, if you so desire. Of course, I think phone calls to the Capitol offices are always a good thing, too.

IMPEACH CHENEY EMAIL ACTION FORM

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Uphold the Constitution and Impeach Shooter
Posted by: topview on Nov 8, 2007 6:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We must insist Congress uphold their oath of office and remove (The Shooter and The Decider) from office and restore the Constitution and the rights of the people.
Kucinich did it right, by going after Cheney first then Bush. If we impeach Bush 1st then we get Cheney as Pres. and that would be a disaster.
Those two have ripped the power of the peoples Government and gave it to Corporate America for their personal gain and lied to everyone while their actions have destroyed millions of peoples lives. The war on terror is a fallacy and what we have to fear is these lying bastards. The sooner they are removed from office the sooner we can restore our rights and the Constitution, which is the law of the land and must be placed back in that position as our forefathers had intended it's purpose.
Remember, Corporations don't have a vote, the people do and if our laws arn't followed, we have the right to also replace the elected officials that won't due their duty, with people that will do what they are elected to do.
We have to join the bandwagon and force this through congress and the Senate so our lives can be restored without all the fear mongering Bush and Cheney spit out all the time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Contact Your Representatives to Press the Issue
Posted by: tommy1957 on Nov 8, 2007 7:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps congress is truly unaware because the voices of the people have not been heard. If you support this idea; contact your representatives (democrat or republican) and let them hear your voice on this matter. Remember what they did to Bill Clinton. He would have surely gone down in history as one of the greatest presidents ever, if it were not for the impeachment proceedings brought my republicans who only wanted to destroy the man. Many of them hypocrites who were themselves involved in affairs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Talk has it ...
Posted by: Joshua Holland on Nov 8, 2007 9:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... that Conyers' office is being deluged with pressure from the outside -- from citizens like you -- to move ahead, and getting equal pressure from the leadership to kill the measure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who's on first?
Posted by: willymack on Nov 8, 2007 9:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the recent machinations on Capital Hill are an accutate reflection of the TRUE intentions and mindsets of our elected officials, then the rethugs just may be ready to dive off bush's sinking ship. As usual, the Demos need to keep their intentions covert until the time to pounce has arrived. Of course, georgiepoo will pardon quasimodo if he gets into any REAL trouble.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

energy scam
Posted by: launcher on Nov 8, 2007 3:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A Cheney impeachment would force an investigation into his secret back room meetings with the energy industry. Certainly, the oil companies are in several ways complicit in Cheney's setup of the Iraq invasion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I cried
Posted by: justicenow on Nov 8, 2007 5:25 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when I got the e-mail that HR 333 had not been tabled I burst into tears of joy. I have been extremely stressed out about Cheney apparently, feeling that all that I care about is under attack from a destructive force that is manifested in human form.

I was so relieved that we have this opportunity to make this happen...
Let the floodgates of dissent open.. in the spirit of change and renewal. We can do this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I cried/ me, too Posted by: m/r
The difference between Dems and Repubs is that...
Posted by: jimidee on Nov 8, 2007 6:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
during the Clinton impeachment proceedings the Repubs would stoop as low as necessary to get him for anything that turned up in their $60 million taxpayer funded investigation. They found nothing, so they had the audacity to set a trap for him in an unrelated deposition...which he fell into.

The Dems refuse to develop this "go-for-the-jugular" approach, even though they actually have a good case that could be made against Cheney. Somehow they seem to consider it beneath them to start impeachment hearings on this...it is all about attitude. Someone has to make those responsible for this fiasco accountable...shucks, the outing of CIA operative Plame should have been enough. But I don't think that the civil Dems are going to be the ones to do it...they don't have the stomach for it.

If the Repubs could have had the ammo on Clinton that the Dems have on Cheney, they would have impeached him and the Senate would have ratified it. The difference is between a pit bull and a Mexican hairless. It is all about attitude.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ufo Distraction
Posted by: m/r on Nov 12, 2007 10:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
google " House Judiciary Committee"
click 'contact' - e mail your sentiments to the whole committee- Impeach Now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]