Russ Feingold announced on Meet the Press that he will sponsor two motions to censure the President and likely the Vice President and Attorney General for their egregious conduct in (1) misleading the country into war and mismanaging the occupation of Iraq and (2) undermining the Constitution and the rule of law by violating criminal laws, manipulating the administration of justice and defying Congressional authority to conduct legitimate oversight.
These are serious, weighty charges with plenty of evidence and history behind them, but you wouldn’t know that from the media’s immediate response — mostly silence.
With the President’s abysmal standing in the polls and what they say about the nation’s readiness to hold Bush, Cheney and Gonzales accountable, it would be easy for the media to find plenty of ordinary Americans willing, no, eager to say “thank you, it’s about time someone said ‘enough!’ And don’t stop there! Throw these scoundrels out of office!” But our media heads don’t want us to hear that.
Instead we are forced to listen to Repubican shills like David Brooks (also on MTP), echoing the Washington Post’s Fred Hiatt, condemn first Harry Reid and then Russ Feingold for promoting partisan stunts that only prevent the oh-so-reasonable bipartisan majority from reaching a consensus that could resolve the Iraq quagmire and move the country forward. What transparent gibberish.
What these White House shills are concealing is that if President Bush were willing to change his Iraq policies in accord with the so-called “consensus” view, all he would have to do is pick up the phone and give Secretary Gates and his Generals the orders to redeploy our troops. Bush has steadfastly refused to do this, and warned Congress they have no right to tell him what to do in matters of war, despite persistent pleas from frightened members of his own party that he give them some political cover from the public’s anger over their war. Yet the President’s shills expect us to believe that Harry Reid, the Majority Leader whose every move is obstructed by the Senate Republicans, is preventing Bush from making that call. Why would anyone take Brook’s/Hiatt’s nonsense seriously?
The Republican shills know that this war is their legacy, and George Bush’s crimes against the Constitution are implicitly on their resumes as enablers and accessories after the fact. Along with Reid’s maneuvers in preventing Republicans from casting face-saving votes for toothless amendments, Feingold’s announcement will force Republicans either to abandon George Bush — highly unlikely, but if it happened, it could open the door to changed policies — or cast obstructionist votes that implicitly endorse the Bush Administration’s egregious and hugely unpopular conduct.
No wonder Brooks was practically in tears explaining their predicament on MTP. Expect a lot more whining from White House shills and attempts to smear Harry Reid. (btw, Reid might want to check with Dick Durbin, who got the message right.)
Photo screenshot of Feingold on NBC’s MTP, via C&L
Related posts:
- Republicans Furious Bush/Cheney Didn’t Win Nobel War Prize
- Hey, Harry Reid, Stop Protecting Democrats Who Want to Filibuster the Public Option
- Liz Cheney Warns Against “Walking Away” from Afghanistan, Apparently Forgetting that Dick Cheney Walked Away from Afghanistan
- The Anti-Bush, Or Bush Lite?
- Rockefeller Jumps on the “Blame Reid for Killing the Public Option” Bandwagon
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
First?
yep.
Good morning Scarecrow!
Woo-hoo! My first time being first!
Okay, now to the serious stuff…I did appreciate seeing Bob Woodward grow a spine and lambaste Brooks for pulling some imaginary casualty number out of the air. If Brooks is going to be a cheerleader for more blood, the least he can do is read the reports of Bush’s puppet-generals and rehearse the ludicrous talking points.
Good morning Scarecrow and fellow lakers.
It would seem to me that a censure resolution is akin to pouring a bucket of water on a forest fire. Or perhaps using a teacup to bail out the Titanic.
Well, that’s my first Thunderbird. Welcome, and good morning all.
Have you censured your President today?
Anyone who was here for the conversation with Dr. Maryam last evening knows that is far too lenient! While I suppose it is a start, I am irrevocably bound to impeachment.
btw, if you didn’t participate in that conversation I strongly recommend you read the Doctor’s remarks, I am sure you will be as shell shocked as we were.
edit: Where are my manners? Good morning, dawgs! (I always wanted to be say that!)
RevDeb @ 5
Of course it is, and that’s exactly the reaction Feingold is hoping the media hears. He did the same in 2006 wrt to the warrantless surveillance, and it kept the conversation going a couple more weeks after it would have died. It may not catch this time either, but it’s worth a shot. Is the country ready? Will the media catch up?
Morning Scarecrow!
If we censure, then let’s censure for impeachable offenses.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to see if the enablers in the media praise Feingold for his “moderate” approach to the rising movement to impeach?
Morning everyone. Great post, scarecrow — there is so much swirling around at once these days that it hard to know which way to turn first. But Brooks and Hiatt have been the Wurlitzer testing grounds this past week…and it shows.
These shills are simply liars. Everything about this war has been a lie.
Am I the only one who thinks that censure is a bad idea? I mean, historically it might be important, but Bush will just say that it doesn’t mean he has to do anything. Do you think he’d even listen if he were being impeached? I think he thinks he can get away with anything.
Nice op-ed in the NYT, by the way, about the imperial presidency.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07…..ref=slogin
the NYT has yet another whistle blower article. I hope there will be a steady stream of these. As Christy said above, there is so much rot in this administration it is hard to know where to start.
This is a real mistake. What is Russ thinking? The effects will be to:
1) Create a justified appearance of grandstanding on the part of the Dem’s.
2) Cause the reThugs to dig in their heels before there are any impeachment hearings which could actually bring enough pressure to turn some of them into supporting conviction.
3) Make it look like the Dem’s are impotent since this will of course be filibustered and no one will blame the reThugs for doing so.
Is he trying to sabotage impeachment efforts?
I think censure is a slap on the wrist. Perhaps Feingold’s movement will create a larger discussion about whether or not MORE needs to be done to this criminal cabal.
radiofreewill @ 9
These are impeachable offenses — I’ve seen a couple summaries (final text not yet drafted) and they cover a lot of ground.
Thunderbird @ 10
Interesting thought? But I expect the shills/wurlitzer to cast Feingold as an extremist, and the media will just play the tune. That’s why Reid’s reaction was disappointing. See Taylor Marsh.
Thunderbird @ 15
It is worse than a slap on the wrist. It undermines any real drive to get rid of these crooks.
If the President embezzled ten million dollars into a personal account, would they just censure him?
GeorgeSimian @ 12
It would be very helpful if all of you who think censure is not enough to let your media know that. I’m sure Russ wouldn’t mind.
Scarecrow @ 16
Thanks for that link, Scarecrow.
Scarecrow @ 16
Again, we are bringing boxing gloves to an all out gang war.
They are not playing by the Marquess of Queensbury Rules.
congressional hearings weekly update –
the big hearing scheduled for this week abu gonzales at the SJC – i wonder, will he show up? will miers and bolton be subpoenaed?
lots of hearings are scheduled for this week (over 60), many on topics i think of interest to firepups: habeas corpus, oversight on privacy issues by the DHS, the ballot integrity act, global warming and the national foreclosure crisis.
this week, i did something i bit different – i listed all the congressional committee hearings i could find… so firepups have them all in one place (with helpful links and listed chronologically) to glance through.
check out this week’s list here.
Thanks Selise.
the question i have is: does russ’s move to censure help or hinder 1) constraining (or getting rid of) bushco? and 2) end the occupation of iraq?
i just don’t know.
but, sounds like scarecrow thinks it helps (if we continue to push for impeachment), so i’m gonna go with that.
GeorgeSimian @ 18
no. and they wouldn’t impeach either. they’s tell us it’s a good reason to vote D in 11/2008.
My hope is that the GOP overrreacts to the censure resolutions by trying to block them creating enough anger in the general public that when impeachment roles around, they have spent their energy fighting censure.
Time to back up my laptop before it goes into the shop this afternoon. Jerelyn, it seems didn’t do so.
See you all later.
Good Morning.
Scarecrow, a Caw-CAW for you, once again!
Selise,
I agree with you. I’m for whatever it takes to get rid of BushCo, and end the occupation. After reading Mayam with Siun last night — we’ve got to leave Iraq now!
Cokie Roberts on NPR this morning said it looks like Hillary will be president and that the only thing stopping that would be the Dems over-reaching with their power….lol
RevDeb has it right – censure is like pouring a teacup of water on a raging firestorm in a dry forest.
The Repugs will mock this, the media will too, it will be a stunt, and the failure to take this seriously will be used as justification for ignoring impeachment. Further justifying Pelosi leaving it off the table.
They are criminals. They have committed crimes against the government. They need to be impeached – it is the mechanism the Founding Fathers gave us to remove would-be tyrants from office.
We need a statesman, and a leader, who loves this country more than they love their cushy government provided health care to stand up for the Rule of Law and the basic principles this country was founded on.
Morning, all. While I’m pleased that a motion to censure shows the Dems are serious, I’m less than thrilled that it’s not a move toward full impeachment. This administration will simply laugh at mere shots across the bow.
RevDeb @ 27
sounds like all she had was a hard drive failure, which could be a disaster, but she has duplicates of everything (although in inconvenient locations). ‘course it’s easy to panic and over react (i say this as someone who had a HD failure a few months ago).
ccmask @ 29
Wow, I’m glad I didn’t have a mouthful of coffee when I read that. Another Beltway hack with no clue of what is truly going on.
Censure is only acceptable if you (1) are willing to give up on ever holding Bush and Cheney accountable via the impeachment mechanism and (2) believe that a toothless statement of disapproval will have any effect on Bush and Cheney whatsoever.
ccmask @ 29
yeah, and as an example of over-reaching? russ feingold’s proposal to censure. can’t have the dems “pileing on” a president who is already so low in the polls.
that’s when i turned off NPR.
every few days i turn on NPR. usually it doesn’t last more than a couple of minutes before i turn it off in disgust.
Scarecrow rocks again. Thanks.
There’s a basic strategy issue here, I think. Do you refine and refine and refine and finally come forward with The Big Move, or do you throw up everything you have, hoping something sticks and/or attracts MSM attention.
Do you realize how often we lament the failure of MSM to speak our truth?
However much we love our blogs (and I blog, too, in my tiny little corner of the progressive world), we are not reaching enough people even yet. Not even FDL, one of the premier sites in the country.
So the parallel piece to moving off dead center in D.C. is how to get the word out early, often, and with a large measure of honesty.
What I’m asking, I guess, is how, exactly, do we make our voices heard? What’s happening on our blogs is exceptional. It’s why I spend far more time reading at FDL than even thinking about reading the rag that passes for a newspaper in the Twin Cities.
But I think we’re deluding ourselves if we think we’re reaching a large-enough audience. Someone at Smirking Chimp wrote a rambling piece about joint efforts and a panel of sages and, and, and.
How can we combine our efforts and push up from the blog roots?
I’d like to know who authored the *opinion* from the Justice Dept to the effect that the prez doesn’t need to worry about complying with subpoenaes, and have him/her/them hauled before the SJC to answer as to what instructions were given, and by whom, before that *opinion* was written.
Any decent lawyer can take a given set of facts, and construct a legal argument that leads to the conclusion the client desires.
Who gave the order that the Justice Dept wanted to take the position that duly issued congressional subpoenaes may be ignored?
Thunderbird @ 33
Well, I guess it’s “out there” now.
Good mornin’ all.
I could see using Censure as a torch to rapidly enlighten the still generally slumbering populace.
But, the bottom line is – we aren’t going to save the Republic unless the Repubs step-up for the Rule of Law with US.
“The history of failure in war can almost be summed up in two words, too late. Too late in comprehending the deadly purpose of a potential enemy. Too late in realizing mortal danger. Too late in preparedness. Too late in uniting all possible forces for resistance. Too late in standing with one’s friends.”
~ Gen. Douglas MacArthur
P.S. You can’t begin to imagine how much I regret that I’m not going to YKos2, and now it’s too late.
Thunderbird @ 33
selise @ 24
If you’ve got an entire Senate afraid of censure I’m betting they’re not exactly itchin’ for impeachment.
Hard to know how it will play out.
I really wish we would not waste our time on censure. Too much energy for a result that will seem more like a fly that needs swatting.
I begged him to watch Moyer’s special or perhaps he should have read and participate in the blog with Dr Maryam. I begged him to speak to the constitutional issues. But he has not.
This is just going to make dems look like ineffective weak whiners, who are more worried about winning elections that actually saving the country.
UGH. I am not happy and I don’t want to hear the incessant attacks aimed at feingold for his “weak” approach. Don’t you see, it fits the already laid groundwork that dems are weak. The only solution must be to fearlessly speak truth to power. Censure is so “democrat” by their branding. It will stick. Not smart public relations and not smart politics.
barbara @ 36
Excellent comment.
Where are the patrons and sponsors to fund and amplify the progressive voices? All of the top-notch investigatory and analytical writing
by many denizens of the progressive blogosphere never ripples outward to the general public. Glenn Greenwald has written about that. In my view, that’s a major limitation.
two places we can leave russ a message with our thoughts on censure and impeachment:
his dkos diary
his website (he is asking for input on censure)
jayt @ 37
It wasn’t even legal in the first place. Link to EmptyWheel’s excellent analysis. That’s why they had to run further to the current “You can’t do anything to us!” stance based on the Gorsuch imbroglio.
I will be spotty in my lake presence today. many, many chores are lined up before me like giggling goblins…
Thunderbird says
July 23rd, 2007 at 6:03 am
Cokie Roberts on NPR this morning said…
Another Beltway hack with no clue of what is truly going on.
Mentioning the name Cokie Roberts is enough. The second sentence is redundant.
I too am concerned that censure will be taken as a slap on the wrist. What after all is any real penalty from being censured? On the other hand, if it finally gets the press talking about WHY anyone would even want to censure the president, or gets them asking the majority of Americans if they want the president censured – or would rather see impeachment – well, it might have the effect of opening the door.
The inside the beltway crowd still doesn’t get it though. In their view Bush, Cheney, etc. really haven’t done anything serious enough to warrant any real consequences. It’s still Okay If You’re A Republican – and it would hurt the country and be divisive to actually attempt to rein them in.
Cokie Roberts on NPR this morning was pushing the Common Wisdom of the Beltway. It will hurt the Democrats if they are seen as “piling on” an unpopular and weakened president. Roberts is completely oblivious to the fact that Bush doesn’t act as if he regards himself as weakened. (And tell me, would it be a better idea to “pile on” a popular and strong president? Does she remember the Clinton years at all?)
If anything, the lower his ratings go, the more determined he seems to be to ignore them and the consequences of his actions. His criminal acts become even more audacious every day as the clock runs down – and Roberts still seems to think Bush will prove reasonable and act prudently.
I say start talking up censure – and use it to start making a case for impeachment as well.
Impeachment, I’m sorry, is a bad idea.
We could impeach Bush and/or Cheney in the House, but it wouldn’t mean anything because the votes aren’t there in the Senate to remove them from office.
For an excellent alternative, go to this Mark Kleiman post. Seriously, this is a must read: I wish I could shove it into the hands of every Democratic Congressperson.
ccmask @ 29
Yep THAT’S what’s driving them all. They’re afraid that GOP bullies will accuse them of “overreach” and they’ll lose in ‘08.
I was going through archives for some reason and came upon an old post about how Russ Feingold was blowing it for Democrats in ‘06 with his censure motion (I think that TNR guy who screwed Christy over wrote it, what’s-his-name).
I think we saw how that worked out.
ChristianPinko @ 49
I’m sorry, that link didn’t work for me.
new thread
ChristianPinko @ 49
CP you have one too many http: in that link. it takes you to a URL graveyard instead.
And instead of messing around with defunding, try this from The Next Hurrah’s MimiKatz.
Hi Jane! How ya feeling today?
ChristianPinko @ 49
The Repugs didn’t have the votes in the Senate to remove Clinton from office, but they went ahead with it anyway. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Elliott @ 51
delete all the http stuff in the link in your browser’s address bar and it’ll be fine.
Censure or Impeachment? I do not know which strategy will get down to business and hold this administration accountable for their crimes against humanity and the constitution. Which ever method gets us there that is the critical issue.
Holding those responsible for dragging this country into a war based on WMD false intelligence is what is important. This is the very least THE VERY LEAST that our reps can do for those who have lost their lives, been injured or displaced in this war of choice? We can not truely move forward until this happens.
They held a President accountable for lying under oath about a BJ. The obvious question is do our Reps (Republican, Democrats and Independents) have the integrity the conscience the soul to hold those responsible for a WMD INTELLIGENCE SNOWJOB accountable. We all know that the direct outcome of the manipulation of intelligence and the sale of this war has resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead, injured and millions displaced.
If they try to force this nation to move forward without holding those responsible accountable we will be a shell of a country. Maybe we all ready are!
jayt @ 52
not for me there isn’t?
Censure would stall, or possibly kill, any possible impeachment proceedings. If the House can’t pass impeachment, then the Seante should censure, but not before.
althespook @ 56
you know, I tried that and ended up at this address
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Http.
Obviously my computer has a mind of it’s own.
althespook @ 58
Scarecrow post – accidentally put up a little early – it’ll be back at 9:30
Scarecrow @ 19
Pelosi seems to have heard that everyone wants Bush impeached, but she still says she isn’t doing it. What we need is a posse of think tankers to go out and start spreading the word on every news outlet like it’s already happening, or as Rove would say, that impeachment is a “no-brainer”. How do we get that started?
ccmask @ 29
Gore has the potential to roll over Hillary in the fall. Gore stood solidly against the invasion long before it started, all ready won an election, and has made his enviromental commitment a priority.
Re-Elect Gore!
althespook @ 58
A slight glitch; the next post will magically reappear about 9:30 a.m. EDT. My fault.
barbara @ 36
local organizing.
i think we’ve got to do more to work on organizing in our local communities (me too!)… and i don’t just mean just w/in the D party… i mean participating in local nieghborhood/community grass roots organizing… that we can connect to the blogosphere.
i haven’t figured this out for myself (there’s lots of amazing organizing being done in my community that i am not supporting as i should), but that’s my thinking at the moment.
oh oh oh
one of my epiphame’s;
fiengold needs to add to his resolution;
“We have no idea how many people died due to the conpromise of our national security from Irving Libby.
“
EXCELLENT!
then we HAVE to get whoever we can get to ASK every single time they have a chance to ANYONE who advicates for the adminstration;
“is the president willing to tell us none of our assets have lot their lives from the security breach”
if we cab get any of the gaggle to ask outright’
“Mr. President, do you know how many people lost their lives due to the security breach Irving Libby covered up?”
OH BABY!
this is a NO win question for the president
if he says “he doesn’t know” then the follow up;
“HOW CAN YOU COMMUTE THE SENTENCE?”
if he says “that’s classified” then the follow up;
“you actually pardoned a man who isresponsible for covering the tracks of a security breach and you don’t want to say if it caused the loss of life?
if he says “nobody lost their lives” the follow up is “so there was an after action report?”
man, this is too good, we HAVE to get someone to ask him that question
Elliott @ 60
http://www.samefacts.com/archi…..plan_b.php
jayt @ 47
I love the smell of conventional wisdom in the morning.
Seriously, why does this person continue to draw a paycheck?
We’ve got to make those calls to Conyers and our reps to get impeachment started. Censure is a waste of time, and we’re running out of time.
althespook @ 67
thank you!
Scarecrow @ 64
Not to worry as along as we don’t have to shelter in the 404 cave like last time. (Not that we didn’t have a blast, but I don’t think Jane has restocked the cooler or the freezer…)
Barbara at 36 said
“…
What I’m asking, I guess, is how, exactly, do we make our voices heard? What’s happening on our blogs is exceptional. It’s why I spend far more time reading at FDL than even thinking about reading the rag that passes for a newspaper in the Twin Cities”
Did you see the Sunday Mpls. Star and Tribune and read the front page favorable essay on Michelle Bachmann (Bush kisser extrodinaire)? I found it disgusting. The paper is a disgrace. But I blame the paper for keeping our state kinda purple.
TJ @ 69
Has anyone ever found out if the “three more and I’ll start impeachment proceedings” is real and who is to be the target and what is meant by 3 more?
Morning Scarecrow.
Terrific post.
That faux-pathetic tremor in his voice, the nervous little smile he adopts – Brooks has been peddling that routine as long as I’ve been watching him. He’s often at his most vicious, right after feinting with that schtick. I can’t stand watching, listening to, or reading anything from him any more, even for purely informational purposes.
I have no doubt he prides himself on sliding across many a threshold with that guise, where others get the door slammed in their faces for bringing the same message in a less artful package. I’m not buying any of his snakeoil!
2nd thot of the day (still no cuppa yet, so please have patience as my mind slowly searches for morning gear):
Is there any chance that Feingold, by teasing with the proffer of censure, is HOPING that a groundswell of emotion will drown him out all across the land, and demand full (!)IMPEACHMENT(!)?
oh puleeze let it be so….
I think we should concentrate on impeaching Gonzales. They might have more of an appetite for that.
TJ @ 69
It is worse than a waste of time. It will undermine the effort to impeach. It will provide lots of rhetoric with no disclosures. A lot of speeches with no evidence. We need to hit the airwaves with the evidence over and over again and that can only be done in impeachment hearings.
Censure is the appetizer to the main course of multiple impeachments, with side dishes of indictments for obstruction of justice, corruption, and criminal conspiracy. The day you think about backing up your data and don’t, is usually just before your hard drive crashes.
I wonder if we could get a panel at YearlyKos (with our best!!! local lawyers and great thinkers (emptywheel comes to mind) to do a panel about impeachment. If the media is going to cover Chicago (and I bet there is some kind of blackout on it), setting forth the reasons for impeachment in a public forum might get some traction.
barbara — you’re right about not reaching enough people. the Spotlight function can help overcome some of that, but I’m not sure people use that as much as we did during the 2006 campaign.
OT – UK’s Brown won’t rule out military action in Iran
And just to comment — I am really excited about Chicago. Ten days — that is all I have to wait to attend with my brand new (and now good) friend from Missouri, GrandmaJo. Waving to Jo…
Sorry, my excitement is getting the best of me.
“Impeachment, I’m sorry, is a bad idea…. it wouldn’t mean anything because the votes aren’t there in the Senate to remove them from office.”
But censure doesn’t remove them from office either. We must at least try to impeach and keep these clowns in the administration from doing any more damage.
I also heard Cokie (kooky?) Roberts on NPR this morning. I also had to turn off the radio before her report was even finished. I think that the collective MSM has gone insane.
GrandmaJ @ 78
Oh there won’t be a blackout, far from it. Bill O’Slimy has received his marching orders and you can bet Teh Beard and Tweety and Fussert and all the rest will take great pains to paint the YKOS as “Markos’ Little Hate Kingdom” and spew up only the most hate-filled comments from DKOS. You see, the spin masters of the Conglomerate Media has settled on this as the way to safely demonize blogging: It’s all about hate! No attempt to explain why the hate is there, why everyone should hate what this administration has done and is doing, just the simple meme taught to every first-grader “Hate is bad. Don’t Hate!”
Won’t work of course, but you heard it here first.
althespook @ 67
The point that is missed here is that impeaching Bush and Cheney does not mean that the Pelosi is president. A deal has to be negotiated with the reThugs to put one of theirs in in the place of the current crooks. This was part of what was done with Nixon. The most important point is that this imperial presidency must be curtailed. If not now, when? If not us, who?
realworld @ 84
why wouldn’t simultaneously impeaching and convicting both leave Pelosi as Prez?
I’ll put money on that the question that will not come up tonight during the debates will be ..Are you willing to deal with the Isreali/Palestinian conflict in a more fair and balanced way?
Let’s all watch and listen for this question. Place your bets.
How long will our nation and our Reps ignore that this issue is an ever present thorn in the side of all negotiations in the middle east.
Scarecrow @ 64
Is this what’s causing a 404 error? I’ve gotten it on both of Scarecrow’s posts this morning.
Adie at 74: I think Brooks is really good at that “I’m just agonzing over this,” just before he comes down on the wrong side, again. What a tortured soul.
Waccamaw @ 87
It should be fine now. Can you get into the next post?
Why would anyone take Brook’s/Hiatt’s nonsense seriously?
Yeah, unfortunately, my local paper has been repeating that nonsense, claiming that the Democrats are preventing reasonable moderates from coming up with innovative solutions. When they reprinted an LA Times article that pointed out the vote totals the Democrats still need to get, my reaction was: “Gimme the long, hard slog over faux compromises any day!!!”
Scarecrow -
Heading up to try it for the third time.
Waccamaw @ 87
althespook @85.
It depends on the order in which things are done. Impeach Cheney, Impeach Bush, Convict Cheney, reThug delegation marches to the WH and tells Bush. You are nominating non-controversial reThug X as the new VP. Senate ratifies the new VP. Convict Bush.
The key to this is a really strong set of impeachment hearings. The hearings would get more than the current 50% behind impeachment. More like 65% and when the reThugs see that they will realize that removing BushCo is their only hope of not losing the Senate totally.
In the end, I say, we need to do it because it’s right. We cannot stand by and watch the rise of the imperial president and not act. However, I also believe, if executed well, this is also a wining strategy.
Please point me to remedial reading for my fog about this idea:
Why aren’t the Repugs (espcecially those up for re-election in 08) wanting Cheney and Bush gone? They are undermining pretty much the Repubs, too, except where the lobby and corporate interests intersect and overlap. Why aren’t the Repubs calling for Cheney’s impeachment and re-enacting the Nixon scenario, more or less?
typically he says asks further in the show “did Hillary turn the dept of defense guy into a political punching bag” or something similar. Did he not read the guy’s letter to Hillary? She didn’t control what he wrote. the guy was out of line.
sonate @ 82
Cokie Roberts is part of the “groupthink” MSM team. Never reports outside of the box.
Janda @ 26
Exactly. When Feingold proposes this, he can be called the one crazy lefty. When all the Republicans oppose this, they are all linked, again, to a deeply unpopular president. let if go nowhere. Let them filibuster. It is all the more rope for the Republican self-hanging of 2008.
This is the real prize – Democratic control of house, senate, white house.
Don’t forget Russ is soliciting input on the resolutions. Scroll to bottom.
Last week I saw toll-free phone numbers listed here for the Congressional Switchboard. I called and was asked “to whom do you wish to be connected?”, so I guess you could ask for anybody there.
I suggest you call Pelosi, Reid and Feingold and just tell’m:
Censure is no Substitute. Impeach!
As has been pointed out repeatedly: impeachment begins with a trial and introduction of evidence. For all those who have no faith at all in the wisdom of The People, you can go on believing the number of votes in the House is the all important thing. The Constitution needs defending whether you think you can win or not. The oath of office says “defend”, not “defend only if you think it’s a slam dunk”.
Evecutive Privilige/ Executive Power on the Diane Rehm show
Bruce Fein on NOW
send in your questions 1800-433-8850
e mail drshow@wamu.org
http://wamu.org/programs/dr/
realworld @ 14
I had a similar thought. Censure will probably be rejected and dismissed, making it harder still to effect a serious vote on impeaching anyone at some later date. “Look,” they’ll say,”why start down the road to impeachment when you couldn’t even get a simple censure of the behavior you now want to call ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’.” The public will eat that up.
Diane dealing with Harriet Miers contempt. They are on it.
I signed my question to the Rehm show a Firedoglake commenter
GrandpaR @ 94
All true. Conyers is publicly endorsing impeachment and needs 3 more representatives to get on board publicly. Three more! Can he budge Pelosi? I don’t know, but it would far, far more meaningful for Conyers to succeed at this juncture than Feingold.
Addressing Feingolds censure movement
kathleen @ 104
Here is was the second question I asked
Bruce you recently said that “Impeachment is the cure for a constitutional crisis” Can you explain what you mean?
I’m for censure. John Q. Public is just starting to awaken to what is going on according to the recent polls. Take it one step at a time. Incremental steps, build the outrage…
Of course both Cheney and Bush should be impeached. But there needs to be real momentum built for that, and where are not there yet.
I’m for censure.
John Q. Public is just starting to awaken to what is going on according to the recent polls. Take it one step at a time. Incremental steps, build the outrage…
Of course both Cheney and Bush should be impeached. But there needs to be real momentum built for that, and we are not there yet.
Censure, NO. It’s not even close to good enough. I used to have some respect for Feingold, but his timidness is starting to irk me. Why can’t he just go the whole way and sign on for impeachment. Don’t these people get that it’s time to pony up? There is one tool left in the toolbox; impeachment. They either use it, and use it soon, or we get to see the end of our democracy before the end of shrubs term.
No, no, no…censure is not a start, it’s an end. In the Clinton impeachment move on started as a movement to censure and MOVE ON. I think Feingold’s censure resolutions are an effort to short circuit impeachment.
nonplussed @ 7
NO.
Impeach, Try, Convict, Try in Judicial Branch, Convict,
IMPRISON.
They should not be out on the street, these perps.
radiofreewill @ 9
Now there’s an interesting idea. If the Senate Repubs vote for the censure, then they’ll be half way to impeachment. And, if they refuse, then they stand closer and closer to Bush.
Either way it’s win win for Democrats and America.
GeorgeSimian @ 18
No, that’s not the idea at all.
I think Feingold (and others) want to keep testing the waters to see whether any Repubs split off from Bush. When there are enough, then the impeachments can begin in earnest.
No, Bush and Cheney should not be censured.
They should be impeached.
Thunderbird @ 33
MHO is the Democratic Party (and it’s money backers) have already DECIDED that HRC will be the party’s nonination.
You can tell this by analyzing EACH AND EVERY MSM clip, article, and debate as we move forward (looking back, it’s kinda obvious too methinks) . . . the other candidates will get a FRACTION of the coverage, and that seals their fates, no matter WHAT the blog progressive left try to do about it . . .
I mean, the polls are showing Edwards with a lead in Iowa, since the beginning!! And what kind of coverage does THAT get? Zip.
Instead, it’s all about two primary’s down the road that HRC is leading . . .
Granted, IOWA ain’t THAT full of Electorals, but, still . . . the pattern fits.
HRC has already BEEN elected, and there’s not much the public can really do about it other than split the ticket.
I’ll be voting against HRC, but that’s a personal choice . . .
If BoyKing rules now, The New Queen has already been crowned. By by Republic.
Harumph.
barbara @ 36
Hound the senators and representatives on a daily basis, hound the MSM for not acknowlidging the fact that there IS a constituency out there that IS hounding the senators and reps . . . phone calls, daily.
Of course, demonstrations and protests in large numbers in the streets is the OBVIOUS way, but america as I knew it seems not to have the stomach for that anymore, other than isolated instances of low turnouts that the MSM just won’t cover . . .
I’ts gonna take millions in the streets, just like the last time . . . we SHOULD have had millions in the streets for Iran/Contra, and for Ford’s pardon of Nixon, but, we were sleeping at that point.
IMHO.
ChristianPinko @ 49
Thanks for sharing that link, that WAS a good read.
But, again, it does NOT push them far enough, fast enough methinks . .
Why do methinks?
Because until this nation comes to grips with the reality that this admin WILL create a false flag incident, and impose the unitary executive they’ve created, until this nation comes to grips with this, it will happen.
Impeachment, whether it can be successful or not, to be STARTED, might set them back on their heels a bit, and stall any false flag potential . . . and if they DO false flag us, then we the people, pretty much know where we stand, and what we need to do if we want our Republic back.
I think, the buildup and CACHE of Executive Privilage that presently exists is of such OBVIOUS intent, it’s time to pull both barrels on them and either REIN them in, or force their hand to play it out MUCH sooner than they want.
Then, as AlfredK has said many times, it’s up the each and every individual to decide how to respond and survive . . .
The past two weeks have certainly revved up the rhetoric on all sides of all issues . . . I fear the upcoming calm of recess . . . I fear it greatly. I’d MUCH prefer Congress filed Inherent in the House, and impeachment in the House, across the board. BEFORE recess.
Post recess, it may all be over one way or the other.
Jane Hamsher @ 42
It’s not who wins or loses, it’s how you play the game! *G*
A forceful, VERY forceful move, by Congress BEFORE Recess (and cancelling recess) such as inherent and impeachment will keep the pressure on . . . anything less, is an open invitation for this admin to implement the next stage of thuggery NONE of us would have believed they would do . . . and they’ve done PLENTY to us, haven’t they.
At this point, it’s NOT about winning anything. It’s about DOING. Anything. To throw them off pace and buy time. Or force them into revealing their next step before they might want to.
I’m pretty sure, they want to already, though.
But I’m tired of waiting, let’s move on and either force this, or let them take over.
althespook @ 53
I’d seen that and another article a day or so ago about the Debt Ceiling . . .
Really good, intricate stuff to factor into WHAT WILL THEY DO, if we do nothing, or start pushing back . . .
Thanks for bringing Mimikatz’s points to top of mind awareness . . . the game of chicken thing is SO all over it . . . great posits . . .
Hmmm . . . if we DO force the BushCrimeFamily’s hand in this admin by doing inherent, impeachment, cut funding, etc., we force them to GO to their next step, be it false flag or Iran or Pakistan, won’t the ECONOMIC blowback of that pretty much screw up THEIR fortunes as much as anyone else’s???
We’re gonna go the way of USSR . . . spend ourselves into a break up . . . of sorts.
I keep checkin yer site, Spook . . . ready for next round!! ;-)
Good thread, thanks for it all folks.
Thunderbird @ 55
The Repugs didn’t have the votes in the Senate to remove Clinton from office, but they went ahead with it anyway. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
In a sense, that’s as good as ANY reason!!!
BadaBOOM! BadaBING!!!
NAIL THEM!
*G*
mc @ 54
Ooh, thanks for jolting me aside . . . I’m remiss once again . . best of health, Ms. Hamsher . . .
kathleen @ 63
He’s really the only hope that money will back and I certainly hope he’s working behind the scenes with the money folks of the Dem Party, and elsewhere.
Perhaps, he’ll bring Kuch or Edwards with him at the right time . . . thanks for the headknock reminder.
TJ @ 69
Congressional recess, and Iraqi Parliment recess, equals open window for evil doing’s-false flag.
realworld @ 84
The prize is of no value if there are no elections.
That is a REAL threat.
To ignore it beyond anything else, is to give up The Repbublic.