No Rush to Impeachment
John Conyers has an op-ed in today’s Washington Post titled “No Rush to Impeachment”. Does this mean he’d rather drag it out until September, 2008? Let’s take a glimpse of what he has in mind:
As Republicans have become increasingly nervous about whether they will be able to maintain control of the House in the midterm elections, they have resorted to the straw-man strategy of identifying a parade of horrors to come if Democrats gain the majority. Among these is the assertion that I, as the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, would immediately begin impeachment proceedings against President Bush. I will not do that. I readily admit that I have been quite vigorous, if not relentless, in questioning the administration. The allegations I have raised are grave, serious, well known, and based on reliable media reports and the accounts of former administration officials.
Representative Conyers, Do you really expect us to believe you? Do you expect us to forget about the banner you had plastered on your congressional homepage? You remember it, don’t you? Let me refresh your memory. Here’s what it said:
CONYERS RELEASES REPORT ON MISCONDUCT OF BUSH ADMINISTRATION CONCERNING IRAQ WAR
H. Res. 635, H. Res 636, H. Res 637
Calls for the creation of a Select Committee to make recommendations, if warranted, regarding grounds for possible impeachment
and the censure of President Bush and Vice President Cheney
Surely you haven’t forgotten the accompanying press release, have you? Let me reread some of it to you:
“In brief, we have found that there is substantial evidence the President, the Vice-President and other high ranking members of the Bush Administration misled Congress and the American people regarding the decision to go to war in Iraq; misstated and manipulated intelligence information regarding the justification for such war; countenanced torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in Iraq; and permitted inappropriate retaliation against critics of their Administration. There is at least a prima facie case that these actions that federal laws have been violated – from false statements to Congress to retaliating against Administration critics.
In response to the Report, I have already taken several initial steps. First, I have introduced a resolution (H. Res. 635) creating a Select Committee with subpoena authority to investigate the misconduct of the Bush Administration with regard to the Iraq war and report on possible impeachable offenses. In addition, I have introduced Resolutions regarding both President Bush (H. Res. 636) and Vice-President Cheney (H. Res. 637) proposing that they be censured by Congress based on indisputable evidence of unaccounted for misstatements and abuse of power in the public record. There are a number of additional recommendations in the Report that I expect to be taking up in the coming weeks and months.
Representative Conyers, What were you saying about a straw horse argument that the administration is making about you starting impeachment proceedings? How can we believe you when we’ve got your press release stating that you’re already preparing to impeach the President and Vice President? Why should we believe you when your own words betray you? Are we supposed to believe that the words are empty when you say “I have introduced Resolutions regarding both President Bush (H. Res. 636) and Vice-President Cheney (H. Res. 637) proposing that they be censured by Congress based on indisputable evidence of unaccounted for misstatements and abuse of power in the public record“?
The Agenda Media might well let Representative Conyers get away with those types of comments but he won’t get away with it on the blogosphere. I’m not a willing conspirator to the Moonbats’ agenda of investigation and misrepresentation.
But none of these allegations can be proved or disproved until the administration answers questions. For example, to know whether intelligence was mistaken or manipulated in the run-up to the Iraq war, we need to know what information was made available to, and actually read by, decision makers and how views contradicting the case for war were treated.
Representative Conyers, Don’t backtrack from your press release. You said that you had “indisputable evidence of unaccounted for misstatements and abuse of power in the public record.” Those statements don’t sound like they mesh at all.
You wouldn’t be lying to the public and saying something entirely different to your moonbat admirers, would you? Because if you were, I’d have to call you a liar and a fraud. I wouldn’t call you a con artist only because you aren’t that good at it. Besides, I don’t want to impugn the reputation of con artists with someone as sleazy as you.
Representative Conyers is seething with Bush-hatred. He’s totally consumed with the most vile of motivations imaginable. This op-ed is filled with lies that don’t deserve to be thought of as anything approaching credibility.
He’s a liar and should be treated accordingly.
Technorati Tags: John Conyers, impeachment, Bush, Joe Wilson
Cross-post at LetFreedomRingBlog
May 18th, 2006 at 1:03 am
I agree with the comment about conyers, he is a liar, to say that he will not start impeachment hearings, that is what he lives for, the audacity to even write the article, this is what i have been saying all along, we republicans even thought we may not agree with congress or BUSH all the time, we better get out in november or we are going to have a speaker polosi, chairman conyers, chairman rangel, and leader reid, what a nightmare it will be, all these gop that say they are angry and are going to stay home, what is wrong with you, do you actually think it will be better with the democrats in charge, like RUSH said today, we better not do that, we have to go out and vote in november and we will work it out , but to let the democrats get in charge is wrong, and they are so sure they are going to win, they have the press and media behind them, they are all salivating over winning in nov, i do not beleive these polls at all, so republicans you better think before you do not show up to vote, do you really want the democrats in power?????????????
May 18th, 2006 at 4:41 am
Generally speaking, I find most accusations of “lying” made on blogs to be unethical hyperbole. A valid accusation of lying requires solid supporting evidence, as well as motivation. It is often a high bar to clear.
Unfortunately for Rep. Conyers, you have cleared that bar easily.
May 18th, 2006 at 6:08 am
I believe he will wait a week or two before starting.
May 18th, 2006 at 6:16 am
Since when is censure the same as impeachment?
And are you admitting that “a Select Committee with subpoena authority to investigate the misconduct of the Bush Administration with regard to the Iraq war and report on possible impeachable offenses” would actually find these offenses?
In the words of you right-wing extremists regarding surveillance “You’ve got nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide”. So unless the administration has something to hide, they should welcome a real investigation (not a Pat Roberts whitewash) to prove the likes of Conyers wrong.
What are you afraid of?
May 18th, 2006 at 6:50 am
Conyers may well be lying, but you haven’t proved that he is. You have merely conflated “investigation” with “impeachment.”
May 18th, 2006 at 7:13 pm
Let me explain Conyers’ statement.
they be censured by Congress based on indisputable evidence of unaccounted for misstatements and abuse of power in the public record
Here he’s saying he’s got indisputable evidence to support censure. I don’t doubt him for a minute, since anyone with 10 fingers could do the necessary research to dig up such evidence from the White House web site alone.
Representative Conyers, Don’t backtrack from your press release. You said that you had “indisputable evidence of unaccounted for misstatements and abuse of power in the public record.â€
Gary, you need to read these statements a bit more carefully before commenting about something that wasn’t said. In his statement today, Conyers said he wouldn’t immediately pursue impeachement. The way I read it, he said he’d pursue investigations, followed by impeachment if warranted. On the other hand, in his previous statement, he said he supported censure now. Can you understand the distinction?
Representative Conyers is seething with Bush-hatred. He’s totally consumed with the most vile of motivations imaginable.
If restoring the rule of law in this country is the most vile of motivations imaginable, then you are sick. I assume you supported Clinton’s impeachement, so that makes you a hypocrite to boot. But look at it this way: If BushCo aren’t guilty of anything, they have no reason to worry about investigations, right? Right? I mean, that’s the rationale they give us for their NSA spying scheme.