Pelosi pressed to put impeachment back on table

[babsbunny]

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Californians_prepare_to_confront_Pelosi_Democrats_0425.html

When the California Democratic Convention begins this weekend, party progressives both inside and outside the San Diego Convention Center will be pressing hard to bring impeachment back on the table as a means of holding the presidency of George W. Bush accountable for crimes they allege have been committed since 2001.

"I've been blown away by the response. People are wanting to organize and rally behind one single thing at the convention, and that's impeachment," said Joye Swan of the Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party, who is helping lead an effort to pass a resolution expressing the California Democratic Party's support for impeaching President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

[elocs]

1. Pelosi won't be the one to put impeachment back on the table, hearings and investigations will.

Yes impeachment may very well come for those who can delay gratification and be patient and wait for the hearings and investigations bear fruit. The very most important people needed now to sign on in favor of impeachment are Republicans, yes Republicans. The entire point of impeachment is conviction. As the hearings and investigations bring wrongdoing to light, more Republican representatives will be under pressure to support impeachment. Do impeachment too soon, before there is any chance of conviction in the Senate, then these same Republicans will get their backs to the wall when if there is some patience these same Republicans might waiver and fall in line with Democrats.

Impeachment--do it right and at the right time, not just because you are capable of doing it. I want Bush convicted, not just impeached.

[Peace Patriot]

2. "Do impeachment too soon"?

I admit that it's a tricky business, with this Diebold-ES&S-shaped Democratic majority (which includes about 40 "Blue Dog" Democrats* who want to cut funding for everything except the military budget), and many Bushite "pod people" still in the House and Senate (only 1/3 of which was up for election this time). It's tough putting together a coalition to end the war and curtail tyrant Bush when his good buds at the e-voting corporations are "counting" all the votes under a veil of corporate secrecy.

Thus, 75% of the American people oppose the Iraq War and want it ended, but--even with the people trying their best to outvote the machines--they were only able to achieve a 50/50 Congress, which is now giving Bush $120 billion more with which to ESCALATE the war even more (and don't think he won't! --you think he gives a flying f@#k about Democratic "timelines"?).

Gee, why don't the Democrats in Congress put an end to "trade secret" vote counting by rightwing Bushite corporations? Dunno. You tell me.

In my opinion, Diebold/ES&S was the coup that guaranteed, a) continued war, and b) no impeachment.

My guestimate (and that of statistical experts): They're putting a 5% to 10% "thumb on the scales" for Bushites, warmongers and corporatists. When we get angry enough, we can sometimes outvote the machines, sometimes not. We did better in '06, at outvoting the machines, than we did in '04, when most people didn't know dick about the rigged electronics. This handicap is being placed on American voters in both the primaries and the general elections. It is in addition to the filthy campaign contribution system, corporate lobbying and the war profiteering corporate news monopolies (the direct beneficiaries of the filthy campaign contribution system, which is mostly for exorbitantly expensive TV ads on our public airwaves). Electronic vote tabulation, under a veil of corporate secrecy, with virtually no audit-recount controls, is the coup de grace. The guarantee of endless war, with impunity.

So, yes, the "good guys" in Congress have a tough row. Granted. Buy why--with 75% of the American people opposed to the Iraq War, and a 84% (!) opposed to any US participation in a widened Mideast war--is it so tough? That is the question.

And until they answer it honestly, I have little sympathy for their dilemma, except for this: I DO think that the gangsters in the White House are the most dangerous people on earth, capable of anything, including (but not limited to) spying, blackmail and black ops against Congress members. I think our Democratic leaders may have more of a problem than just Diebold/ES&S vote counting--although why they didn't START with solving THAT problem is beyond my comprehension. Some of them have my "benefit of the doubt" on the fear front.

The lesson for the rest of us is: Pay attention to power. Our power. Our vote. We need a ballot for every vote, and a 100% handcount. Now!

In California, Diebold/ES&S corrupted country registrars are opposing MINIMAL reform of the e-voting system: thorough testing of the machines. Story here (post #7): http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x471486

We need to address this corruption at the local/state level. Nobody's going to do it for us.


---------------------------

*("Blue Dog" Democrats. Think: Gary Condit.)

[Tippy]

9. Impeachment--do it right and at the right time

While I agree with what you say, I think it is important to let our Congressional leaders know how we feel...as soon as our new Congress was seated I began writing our leadership, and my Congressman about Impeachment. I remind them once a month of the crimes that have been committed, and remmind them of their sworn duty to up hold the constitution. We have to start sometime and why not sooner rather than later...

[ClassWarrior]

3. Set the table, Madam Speaker. The people are hungry...

...for justice.

NGU.

[burrowowl]

19. Nice analogy!

IMPEACH! NOW!

[ClayZ]

4. Kick and R

[Ruzicka Nemchinov]

5. Hey peace Patriot

There's nothing wrong with blue dog Democrats. I myself would be considered a blue dog voter and alot of those rep support my conservative views and those are the more helpful dems that can reach out to conservative and rural areas.

The Democratic Party is a "big tent" party, we welcome all opinions in our party, atleast what you can do is have the decency to respect that wing that makes up the party, I know I do.

[Pyrzqxgl]

6. Respect them when they vote like Democrats should, not otherwise.

[Ruzicka Nemchinov]

13. I respect then because there are more inclined with my view

And there part of the party. Remember the Democratic Party is not a lockstep party, it's a big tent party we respect all views.

[FiveGoodMen]

15. "Respect all opinions"?

Really?

Nazis?

KKK?

Theocrats?

No, no, no. We may be more tolerant of differences than the other side, but if we respect all opinions, then we are without any position at all.

He who stands for nothing will fall for anything.

[mikelgb]

7. press harder

call her everyday

[Kurovski]

8. K&R. (nt)

[tmlanders]

10. I know it's hard, but...

we have to let the process work. What do you think would have happened if Pelosi and Reid started this Congress off by saying upfront that they were going to go for impeachment? We aren't getting alot of cooperation from the Republics now -- how much would they cooperate if impeachment was on the table? If we went into all of these wonderful investigations with the stated intent of impeaching the Pretender-in-Chief? Investigations first, and the impeachments will follow. The Speaker and the Majority Leader will be compelled by the Constitution to impeach.

By the way, I am not a patient person, and I CAN'T WAIT for the impeachment hearings to start! It's hard for me to wait, too...:bounce:

[Joe Fields]

11. The pressure needs to stay on her, until she changes her mind.

IMPEACH NOW!

[lonestarnot]

12. Keep reminding her!

email some more!

[AtomicKitten]

14. The reckoning of impeachment is deserving and long overdue.

And hopefully it will be the natural course of events following the blizzard of subpoenas excavating irrefutable proof of the myriad of impeachable offense committed by this administration.

[partylessinOhio]

16. Madame Squeaker will either set the table OR

she will be a ONE TERM speaker.

The public is no longer willing to tolerate the BushLies and harm he has done to America.

[brentspeak]

17. What do they mean by "back" on the table?

Pelosi never said it was ever on the table, in the first place. The "progressives" pressing to thwart good legislation in favor of a shot-in-hell aren't doing the nation much of a favor.

[chknltl]

18. And we shall continue pressing her

by writing our local politicians and newspapers and posting our views whenever and wherever we can.
I firmly believe had Madam Speaker put Senator Waxman and Representative Conyers to the task of investigating the bfee for purposes of impeachment...well we would be addressing her as Madam President AND the chaos in Iraq would no longer appear as bleak and America would see a shift in world support.

In my view: thank you footdraggers for what we have presently. Should we eventually impeach the bfee out of their jobs or worse wait for their jobs to end...the world will be in an even worse position than it is today by that point...many MANY more will have died and America will have lost even more respect and those who would see harm done against America will have grown even stronger. Thanks for that! Oh, and be sure to explain your views to those civilians daily dieing over in Iraq before you flame me please.

No not impatience...I lost that just after bush took office the first time. I choose NOT to side with osama bin laden.... ask yourself who he would prefer to see in the White House right now and until '08, bush or Pelosi? (bush's record is quite clear on osama bin laden...actions speak volumes louder than his words...I choose not to believe his words any longer because his actions so often contradict them.) Nancy Pelosi has made claims that osama bin laden needs to be America's focus once again.

WE THE PEOPLE voted for change. WE THE PEOPLE did NOT vote to stay the course and maybe at some point cull out a few crooks here and there on occasion!

Support America by supporting IMPEACHMENT NOW :patriot:

[grannylib]

20. I think she's right to say that, and here's why: she puts herself in a position

of looking 'reasonable, not radical' and saying she wants to move forward with things the Democrats want to accomplish, and all that, while the grass roots movement grows exponentially, to the point where she can say, "it wasn't something I wanted but clearly the American people have spoken, and we serve the people, and clearly there have been violations of the law so we will impeach" or something to that effect, and it's win win, or am I nuts??

[Vidar]

21. K&R.