Yesterday, WriteChic put up a post simply titled Congressman Conyers, Impeach! She highlighted the fact that, once again, the Vice-president is asserting his Fourth Hybrid Branch of Government status in order to get out of answering to us, through Congress ... only, he won't even come out of his hidey-hole to do it. He's sending some attorney out to do it. The attorney argues that Congress has no authority to regulate what a vice-president recommends to a president. The arrogance of this position is only exceeded by its irrelevance. Cheney has now said, through this attorney, the laws of the land do not apply to him by virtue of his office. Au contraire, DICK! Congress is the legislative body and you're damn straight it can tell a vice-president and a president what shall and shall not be legal in the United States, no matter who the actors are.
In my more philosophical moments, I think the vice-president's attorneys should have their respective licenses to practice law revoked since they, just as I did, took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution when they were sworn in. This absurd legal argument flies in the face of the Constitution and the concept of checks and balances, and they know it.
Again, thank you, Speaker Pelosi. While the rest of us watch in horror while members of the executive branch authorize activities that are unconstitutional and illegal (torture and wiretapping of American citizens, just to name two), find attorneys and Attorneys General who will try to give them cover, and bestow upon themselves the power of a monarchy - the very thing our founders designed the Constitution to protect against! - you have taken the only apt remedy "off the table." In so doing, you have not only weakened the populace (always a bad thing in a democracy), but you have made the Democratic party look bumbling, weak, and inept. History may judge harshly the rubberstamp Republicans who have brought us to the brink of economic disaster and helped keep us in a quagmire in Iraq, but don't for a minute think that history will regard you and your inaction much more kindly.
Let's do a partial review of a comparable time in our history:
On June 13, 1971, the Pentagon Papers began to be published in the New York Times.
On June 17, 1972, the Watergate break-in occurred.
On January 30, 1973, Liddy and McCord, Jr. are convicted for their roles in the break-in.
On April 30, 1973, Haldeman, Erlichman, and the A.G. resign over the scandal.
On May 18, 1973, the Watergate hearings began to be televised.
On June 3, 1973, the president's involvement was made public.
On July 23, 1973, President Nixon refuses to co-operate and turn over White House tapes.
On October 23, 1973, Nixon fires the special prosecutor and the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General resign ("the Saturday night massacre")
On July 27, 1974, the House Judiciary Committee passes the first of three articles of impeachment for obstruction of justice.
So, within about 36 months of the first signal that the Nixon administration was, in fact, "crooked," the House Judiciary Committee did its duty. If I go back 36 months in order to parse the scandals, signals and related resignations, which one would you like me to focus on? By my calculations, that would take us only as far back as February 2005. Would you like to discuss Harriet Miers' letter to Kyle Sampson about firing 93 U.S. Attorneys dated that month? Or the fact that that is the same month then A.G. Alberto Gonzales signed off on a torture memo? Or that the "Plamegate" investigation was heating up - an investigation that eventually led right into the bowels of Cheney's office? And, no, we don't have an 18 1/2 minute gap in a tape; we have millions of missing White House emails that may or may not relate to any one or all of these shameful scandals. What other parallels? Let me think. Did anyone resign and/or get convicted as a result of any of these scandals?
Well, there's much much more than that from which to choose - check out this very impressive dirty laundry list, also from WriteChic. What's the difference between the Nixon administration and the Bush administration, aside from the sheer numbers of scandals that are connected with this most current regime? The major difference, I think, is that in Nixon's time, there were still men and women of principle in the administration, in Congress, and in the Department of Justice who cared more about the Constitution than they did party politics.
Either way you slice it, Congress, you are so far behind, and so failing the country you are supposed to serve. But there is still time.
IMPEACH NOW! BEFORE IT'S REALLY TOO LATE. ...
In my more philosophical moments, I think the vice-president's attorneys should have their respective licenses to practice law revoked since they, just as I did, took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution when they were sworn in. This absurd legal argument flies in the face of the Constitution and the concept of checks and balances, and they know it.
Again, thank you, Speaker Pelosi. While the rest of us watch in horror while members of the executive branch authorize activities that are unconstitutional and illegal (torture and wiretapping of American citizens, just to name two), find attorneys and Attorneys General who will try to give them cover, and bestow upon themselves the power of a monarchy - the very thing our founders designed the Constitution to protect against! - you have taken the only apt remedy "off the table." In so doing, you have not only weakened the populace (always a bad thing in a democracy), but you have made the Democratic party look bumbling, weak, and inept. History may judge harshly the rubberstamp Republicans who have brought us to the brink of economic disaster and helped keep us in a quagmire in Iraq, but don't for a minute think that history will regard you and your inaction much more kindly.
Let's do a partial review of a comparable time in our history:
On June 13, 1971, the Pentagon Papers began to be published in the New York Times.
On June 17, 1972, the Watergate break-in occurred.
On January 30, 1973, Liddy and McCord, Jr. are convicted for their roles in the break-in.
On April 30, 1973, Haldeman, Erlichman, and the A.G. resign over the scandal.
On May 18, 1973, the Watergate hearings began to be televised.
On June 3, 1973, the president's involvement was made public.
On July 23, 1973, President Nixon refuses to co-operate and turn over White House tapes.
On October 23, 1973, Nixon fires the special prosecutor and the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General resign ("the Saturday night massacre")
On July 27, 1974, the House Judiciary Committee passes the first of three articles of impeachment for obstruction of justice.
So, within about 36 months of the first signal that the Nixon administration was, in fact, "crooked," the House Judiciary Committee did its duty. If I go back 36 months in order to parse the scandals, signals and related resignations, which one would you like me to focus on? By my calculations, that would take us only as far back as February 2005. Would you like to discuss Harriet Miers' letter to Kyle Sampson about firing 93 U.S. Attorneys dated that month? Or the fact that that is the same month then A.G. Alberto Gonzales signed off on a torture memo? Or that the "Plamegate" investigation was heating up - an investigation that eventually led right into the bowels of Cheney's office? And, no, we don't have an 18 1/2 minute gap in a tape; we have millions of missing White House emails that may or may not relate to any one or all of these shameful scandals. What other parallels? Let me think. Did anyone resign and/or get convicted as a result of any of these scandals?
Well, there's much much more than that from which to choose - check out this very impressive dirty laundry list, also from WriteChic. What's the difference between the Nixon administration and the Bush administration, aside from the sheer numbers of scandals that are connected with this most current regime? The major difference, I think, is that in Nixon's time, there were still men and women of principle in the administration, in Congress, and in the Department of Justice who cared more about the Constitution than they did party politics.
Either way you slice it, Congress, you are so far behind, and so failing the country you are supposed to serve. But there is still time.
IMPEACH NOW! BEFORE IT'S REALLY TOO LATE. ...
Thanks to Steve over at Out of the Binjo Ditch for linking to this post.
Hidey-hole is a man-size safe, right?
ReplyDeleteWell, it's a safe at least the size of a man's head.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if Cheney wants these powers extended to the next DEMOCRATIC Vice President!
ReplyDelete