When will Conyers introduce articles of impeachment for illegal wiretappin

[Tanyah]

I just can't stand it any longer. Bush admitted to an impeachable offence on national TV, and said he was going to keep doing it. What is the House of Representatives waiting for?

I appreciate Conyer's efforts, but I don't think that the court case against Bush over the legislation will work.

The fastest way to stop the war in Iraq, the war on Iran etc. is to remove Bush from immediately!!

Illegal wiretapping is the way. Why did Conyers introduce a censure resolution over Iraq, but he has not introduced a resolution over the illegal wiretapping? The evidence is cut and dry! No investigation is needed.

Conyers already held a hearing ...This is Former NSA Lawyer Jonathan Turley at the NSA Hearing...

"Now I want to be absolutely clear, what the President ordered in this case was a crime. Now we can debate whether he had a good or bad motivation, but it was a crime.

The federal law makes it clear- you cannot engage in this type of domestic surveillance without comitting a crime.

We can debate the wisdom of that, we can debate why the President may have done it, but in my view, the President committed a crime, and we have to deal with that as citizens. And unfortunately, you have to deal with that as members of Congress.

It strikes an alarming circumstance when the President can go into a press conference and announce that he has violated a federal statute 30 times, and promises to continue to do so until someone stops him. That is the most remarkable admission that I have ever heard from a President of the United States…

I was shocked at what I saw , I was convinced the judge would sign anything that we put in front of him, and I wasn’t entirely sure that he actually read what we put in front of him. But I remember going back to my supervisor at NSA and saying that place scared the daylights out of me. And my supervisor said, “you know what, it is scary, but we’re here. We won’t let a president exceed his authority.”

Well, this president has exceeded his authority.

Under FISA there are three exceptions that allow in one case, to engage in surveillance and proceed later to get approval.

The suggestion that, “time is of the essence”, is a ludicrous one.

I’ll just remind this instutition of it’s duty. Despite any affiliation to the President, it’s Congress duty to protect it’s authority.

What’s at stake is not a president that has committed a crime- it’s much more serious than that. What’s at stake is a president who is committing a crime under the pretense of legality, he says he has the authority to do that.

Very few members have faced this type of test of faith, but you’re facing it now. And as citizens and as members, it’s now up to us, we’re called to account. For the many benefits that we have gotten from this system, we’re called to account to do something."

[Terran1212]

1. He's leading the call for impeachment investigation

Has about 33 cosponsors.

[Tanyah]

3. I haven't heard anything about this recently

Is he still pursuing it? It seems like we finally caught Bush on an obvious impeachable offence, but it is just going to fall off the radar.

Nixon resigned for illegal wiretapping. FISA was created to stop it from happening again. Bush blows off the FISA court and admits it. What more do we need? Every day people are dying. Every day they are planning more death and destruction.

I mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!

[Terran1212]

2. He's leading the call for impeachment investigation

Has about 33 cosponsors.

[CrazyOrangeCat]

4. Welcome, Tanyah!

I know. It's incredible what the jerk has gotten away with, and continues to get away with.

He and his cabal have committed high crimes and treason.

Traitors and murderers used to wind up on the end of a rope.

[Tanyah]

5. thanks

We have got to force congress to do their jobs.

[madokie]

10. I got rope, pretty dam good with carpenter tools also.

[WhiteTara]

6. I got a letter from my dem congresscritter in CA

last week regarding this. He said that he wasn't supporting impeachment at this time for 3 reasons. 1) If we get rid of bush, we have cheney or at the least, Hastert 2)it will backfire in the elections and 3) I can't remember at this time.

I think this is what a lot of the dems are thinking. We have to wait until after elections. I don't know. I think we need to preempt them because of John Dean's assertion that we will have an "October Surprise" from *co and that Iran is immenent. Besides, Hastert is dirty too. Need to get those stories about his Korean ties out and about.

[Tanyah]

7. standard excuses

We impeach Cheney too. Pursuing impeachment will help the dems win the elections, even Republicans want accountability at this point.

I totally agree with you about preempting them. I am sure they have something planned.

[Tanyah]

8. must repeat...

Now I want to be absolutely clear, what the President ordered in this case was a crime. Now we can debate whether he had a good or bad motivation, but it was a crime.

The federal law makes it clear- you cannot engage in this type of domestic surveillance without comitting a crime.

We can debate the wisdom of that, we can debate why the President may have done it, but in my view, the President committed a crime, and we have to deal with that as citizens. And unfortunately, you have to deal with that as members of Congress.

It strikes an alarming circumstance when the President can go into a press conference and announce that he has violated a federal statute 30 times, and promises to continue to do so until someone stops him. That is the most remarkable admission that I have ever heard from a President of the United States…

[madokie]

9. As John Dean put it, the only president to admit to an impeachable offense

I watch the hearing you are referring to and you are so right. btw welcome to DU, i'm liking what I am reading that you are posting.
:hi:
edit: spelling