Thursday, November 29, 2007

Only a few HJC Dems are blocking impeachment. It's still alive ... KEEP CALLING!

The Democratic Activist
It seems the Cheney impeachment resolution is still very much alive.

I just got off the phone today, an uneventful Thursday, with the office of House Judiciary (HJC) Chairman John Conyers. Initially, I had called to indicate once again my support for the Cheney impeachment resolution being considered by the HJC, and was shunted over to a "House Judiciary Committee Comment Line." Turns out ... the comment line voice mail was filled to capacity, and wasn't taking any more messages. I then called back Mr. Conyers's office to let them know that I was unable to leave my message for Mr. Conyers because their comment line message box was full.

What follows immediately below (roughly paraphrased) is the conversation I then had with a member of the HJC Chairman's staff:

"That's probably because we've been receiving hundreds of calls today," the staff person told me. "You're supporting the Cheney impeachment resolution, right?" he went on. I said that I was, and asked what Mr. Conyers was doing to move the resolution forward to a hearing. "He is trying to move it forward. There's a fight going on right now among the Democrats on the committee," the staff person went on to say. I asked who specifically was holding up the resolution, and was told "The fight is between those Democrats on the committee who favor the resolution, i.e. those who've co-sponsored it, and others who oppose it."

It seems that the pressure on the HJC in support of the Cheney impeachment resolution now before the HJC hasn't slackened over the past couple of weeks, but on the contrary, has at least held steady! We now know that Conyers has felt compelled to go to the trouble of installing a special "comment line" to save his staffers from having to take all the calls he was getting in support Cheney's impeachment, so numerous have they become.

It's working, people ... keep it up!

Given the massive public support for Cheney's impeachment that the Chairman Conyers is continuing to receive, and the apparent fact that it's only opposition from a few Democrats on the HJC that's holding up hearings, we all now really need to keep those calls and letters going to those Dems on the HJC who opposed the most recent incarnation of the Cheney impeachment resolution (H. Res. 799).

Please ... pass along this information to as many people as you can, and make daily rounds of calls yourself to the "Ninny Nine" (those Dems on the HJC who've showed opposition to impeachment), Chairman John Conyers, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer supporting the Cheney impeachment resolution now awaiting a hearing in the HJC. It seems we've almost got this ball rolled to the top of the hill; with a just little more effort, another big push or two, we may actually be able to get it over the top and rolling down the other side.

We're getting there. Imagine ... impeachment could actually happen!

Click here for full information on exactly what to do, and how to do it.

Thank you.

Pass it on.
The Democratic Activist


  1. If the Democrats need a wake-up call, remind them: Until the impeachment resolution triggers an investigation, the effort to remove Pelosi as Speaker -- now, before the election -- will continue: ( Details )

    Notes For HJC

    The issue of removing Pelosi isn't an "either or" position: But the opposite: Until impeachment investigations occur, Pelosi and others are presumed to be blocking the investigation. Feel free to remind the House Judiciary Committee members who oppose impeachment:

    A. Impeachment Denies GOP of Pardon Option

    Once subject to impeachment proceedings, both the President and VP are denied a pardon. Why does the DNC want to keep the door open to a pardon; but close the door to an investigation?

    B. Oversight Requires Fact Finding

    If they want to block investigations, then they'll have to explain why they claim they're for "fact finding" and "oversight". What is the DNC really afraid of with an impeachment: That the public -- that supports impeachment -- is going to change it's view? Without investigations on impeachable offenses, the DNC is acting like the GOP. That's not change, but capitulation masquerading as oversight.

    C. The Illusory Backlash

    For there to be a backlash over impeachment, there would have to be people who are going to change their support for either the GOP or DNC: But that's not going to happen. A backlash, if it were real, would require a change in position, not the status quo. Ask the HJC staffers to be specific with the demographics of those who are going to simultaneously change their position, support the GOP, and oppose the DNC.

    D. Material Information For Voters

    Impeachment is needed to wake up the DNC: We, the public, need facts to decide which Presidential candidate is going to best embrace the needed reforms to prevent this from recurring. What is the DNC afraid of: The voters can't handle facts; that the DNC isn't positioned to find facts; but the voters should -- on blind faith, without facts -- trust the DNC to better do something than the GOP? From all accounts, the DNC and GOP are -- on the narrow issue of Presidential oversight -- not sufficiently different to inspire confidence in the DNC "alternative".

  2. Thank you Annonymous for your detailed and insightful comment.

    Several of your points were ones I'd never thought of before. I especially liked these two related remarks:


    Without investigations on impeachable offenses, the DNC is acting like the GOP. That's not change, but capitulation masquerading as oversight.


    From all accounts, the DNC and GOP are -- on the narrow issue of Presidential oversight -- not sufficiently different to inspire confidence in the DNC "alternative."


    Really excellent, thoughtful analysis.

    Again, thanks for sharing these ideas with us.

  3. Chris,

    You're welcome. Glad your readers may enjoy some other views.

    Thank you for your calls and efforts to work with the HJC. My view is the effort to challenge the DNC leadership needs to include a credible threat: Unless impeachment investigations begin -- as called for in the resolution -- then the Speaker herself, before the election, needs to be challenged. It will be interesting to see how many are inspired to open their own comment threads to discuss this option to open all the doors to the impeachment investigation.

    Other Links

    It would be interesting to hear the reactions of readers to this proclamation in light of the links provided here. Also, consider the comments listed above 2:32-time here. Perhaps you and others reading this may be interested in sharing your views on this effort at this Kos Diary. What will it take for We the People to challenge the Speaker directly? Not much.

    Well Established State Proclamation Process

    Also, note these proclamations aren't coming out of the blue, but are linked with the similar proclamation process at the state level in re impeachment. Look at the number of states/US citizens familiar with the state proclamation process: It will not take much to share with them the new proclamation, can open discussions at the state level on proclamations calling on the House to challenge Pelosi.

    Consequences For Inaction, Before the Election

    This effort to remove Pelosi, unlike an impeachment, does not involve the Senate or a trial. It's only a House-related action, which can be triggered by a proclamation. Kucinich, when he heard the public discussion in re proclamations on impeachment, knew, in part, there was support for his effort to impeach.

    It's hoped another Member of Congress will heed the public discussion on Pelosi, and introduce a resolution calling for the Speaker to be challenged.

    The goal here isn't to only challenge her and do nothing about the President or VP: But to make her attach her leadership to that decision not to open all the doors, as the majority of the House have called. That's not leadership, and needs to be challenged now, before the election. In my view, it doesn't matter that the GOP "supported" the impeachment resolution: They voted for it. Time to adjust the strategy, and accept (what appears) to be a DNC decision not to listen. There is a way to make them listen: Enough of the public used the same proclamation-process in re impeachment to tell Kucinich there was popular support, regardless what the DNC wanted in the House.

    Member of Congress Like Kucinich Could Lead Challenge To Pelosi

    State proclamations isn't the only option. It's just a means to start the discussion: What can be done. Indeed, this isn't an issue which only has to be considered by private citizens. Someone reading this blog could forward the links to their Member of Congress -- even in the GOP -- to encourage the House to challenge the Speaker. In exchange for supporting a challenge to the Speaker, the GOP and DNC may agree to some interesting choices for new leadership -- now, before the election -- then make way for an investigation.

    Public discussions: We the People Have Options To Set House Agenda Before 2008 Election

    The goal is to open more discussions of other options outside Congress: And remind the public if the Congress will not respond, We the People have options, including leading an effort to shift the focus of the debate from whether the Speaker should keep the impeachment investigation off the table, to whether the Speaker should be shown the door. If she will not confront the VP, then its time We the People lawfully confront her with this proclamation process.

    Thanks again to you and your readers; and for any support/reactions you provide to this additional information.