Impeach Bush and Cheney, and: We shall come from the shadows and we shall overcome!

Back In The Vietnam Era The Voice Of Another Woman Led The Way. She said: “We shall come from the shadows, and we shall overcome”.

-Joan Baez-

Let us emerge and act now!

Dear Friend,I just signed a petition calling on my Representative to reject the Bush Administration's sweeping claims of executive privilege and to take whatever steps are necessary to enforce these subpoenas, including supporting a resolution holding Harriet Miers and Josh Boltoon in contempt.

Our President and Vice President keep trying to reshape the Constitution and declare themselves above the law.

Congress must stand up for itself and protect our constitutional checks and balances!

One of the next steps Congress can take is to vote to hold Miers and Bolton in contempt.

President Bush is trying to block Congressional oversight with blanket claims of executive privilege.

The president has even ordered the Department of Justice not to enforce charges of Contempt of Congress. But Congress needs to fight this fight and send the president a message that its authority will not be ignored.Click here to sign the petition:

http://www.pfaw.org/go/ContemptOfCongressThanks for your help,

It's Up to Us

Journey for Humanity and Accountability

Day 14
Cindy Sheehan

I am lying in my hotel bed at the end of a very busy, productive, yet sad day.
About 300 people gathered today and marched the 3 ½ miles from the entrance of Arlington Cemetery to Congressman John Conyers' office to demand impeachment and accountability from one of the leading figures in American politics for the last four decades.

We were so thrilled with the turn-out and the energy of the group.

There was great media coverage and about one dozen freepers on the opposite corner with signs like: "Traitors go to Hell" and "Cindy Sheehan go to Hell."

Nice. I have learned that hell can be on earth and if there is anything worse than burying a child, I don't want to know about it.

At the end of the march, Reverend Lennox Yearwood, President of the Hip Hop Caucus, Ray McGovern (retired CIA analyst) and I met with Congressman John Conyers to implore him to institute impeachment proceedings against the pretenders to the White House who are destroying our democracy, making a mockery out of our rule of law and who are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

This was my third meeting with Congressman Conyers about impeachment. I hold a special place in my heart for him and I revere him for his decades long service to this nation but for the life of me, I cannot understand why he will not go forward with impeachment now.

A year ago he introduced HR635 to impeach George Bush while he was Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee and not even chairman. He wrote the book on impeachment called: The Constitution in Crisis and he readily admits that Bush Co have committed impeachable offenses.

It's about partisan politics, pure and simple. The Congressman claims that there is absolutely no way that impeachment can go forward and when I was nearing the end of my hope I cried out: "So, if the people's house won't help us then we the people have no recourse against the executive branch."

To which he replied: "Yes you do, vote the enablers out in '08."

Firstly, Congressman Conyers told us to put Democrats back in Congress to end the war and impeach Bush Co.

We did that and instead of ending the war, they gave George Bush more money to wage it and to conduct his deadly and tragic surge.

Secondly, '08 will be too late to hold George and Dick accountable.

Thirdly, thousands of more people will die in these last months of the worst Presidency in American history and lastly: after Dick proclaimed that he was not part of the executive branch and that his office does not have to comply with requests to turn over documents to the National Archives: 435 Congress Reps should have signed onto H Res 333 to impeach Cheney.

Only fourteen have co-signed Congressman Kucinich's bill, so that makes 421 elected Congressional officials enablers of the crimes of the Bush Regime.

At the end of this day, Speaker Pelosi has not supported impeachment and has not upheld her oath of office to "protect and defend" the Constitution. Like Congressman Conyers said almost a year ago, our Constitution is in Crisis and we can't wait for more meetings and more stalling from Reps who think theproblem will go away in '08. The Middle East is rapidly falling apart under this regime and our country is sliding rapidly into a state of one-branch tyranny while our "heroes" the Democrats fiddle.

It was with very heavy hearts that Rev. Yearwood, Ray, and I reported back to the media that the Congressman had said that with over one million signatures on petitions and with one phone call coming into his office every 30 seconds supporting impeachment and with 300 activists in the hall to support him, he was still not going to move forward with the most urgent duty of his career.

The Rev and I were particularly disheartened and broken because we do love the
Congressman so much, but we love our country and the people of Iraq and the Middle East more. The Rev and Ray spent many years serving their country in the military and the CIA and I had a son who gave his life to do what the Congress is supposed to do: protect our freedoms, not hand them over to the mob that runs our country.

It is also with a heavy heart that I announce my candidacy against Nancy Pelosi in California's 8th.

If anybody would dare think that I am not serious, I would hope that they would look back at the last three years of my life and everything that I have sacrificed to restore our nation to one that obeys the rule of law and can be looked up to with respect once again in the international community and not as the hated laughing stock on the block.

I am committed to challenging a two party system that has kept us in a state of constant warfare for the last 60 years and has become more and more beholden to special interests and has forgotten the faces of the people whom it represents.

I am committed to using our strength as a country to wage peace and to elevate the status of every citizen in our country by converting the enduring war economy to a prosperous one with lasting peace.

Someone needs to step up to the plate to do this and I challenge other Americans to do the same. Challenge the status quo, because the status quo is no good.

We need to become plugged into our government once again as active participants not just passive voters.

It is up to us.

Please donate to help us along the way https://secure.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/gsfp/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=864

Subscribe to our Listserve
http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/gsfp/signUp.jsp?key=559
Unsubscribe
http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/gsfp/unsubscribe.jsp?key=559

Published on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 by CommonDreams.org
Congressman John Conyers Betrays the American People
by Medea Benjamin

I remember before the 2006 election being at a fundraiser in Los Angeles for the Democratic Party when one of the featured guests was Rep. John Conyers. The issue of impeachment came up and the crowed roared in approval when Conyers said that if the Democrats took control of Congress, he would become head of the powerful House Judiciary Committee and would initiate impeachment proceedings. That, he said, was one of the reasons why it was so important to go all out to get Democrats elected.

Fast forward to July 23, 2007. About 300 of us gathered at Arlington Cemetery, convened by peace mom Cindy Sheehan, to march to Cong. Conyers office to demand that seven months after coming to power, he fulfill his promise about initiating impeachment proceedings. Shouting “Conyers, Conyers need a reason? Torture, lies, war and treason,” the angry crowd packed the halls outside the Congressman’s office while Cindy, former CIA analyst Ray McGovern and former Conyers’ protégé Reverend Yearwood met with the Congressman inside.

A hour later, they emerged stone-faced and disillusioned. Cindy said that Conyers had told them that “impeachment isn’t going to happen because we don’t have the votes” and that “our only recourse was to work to get a Democrat in the White House.” The crowd booed and 45 people sat down inside and outside Conyers’ office. They were arrested by the Capitol Police as the supporters shouted “Shame on Conyers” and “Arrest Bush and Cheney, not the peacemakers.”

While the arrestees were being booked, about 40 activists visited the office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi. We know that from the day she became Speaker, the Congresswoman has insisted that impeachment was off the table. She has refused to support H. R. 333, the bill introduced by Cong. Dennis Kucinich to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney for high crimes and misdemeanors. With 13 co-sponsors, the resolution is destined to languish without ever coming to a vote, thanks to both Conyers and Pelosi.

We told Pelosi’s chief of staff, Terry McCullough, that it was totally irresponsible for the Speaker to say that impeachment was off the table. When her chief-of-staff replied that the Speaker’s priority was ending the war, not impeachment, we all insisted that the two were intertwined and certainly not mutually exclusive. We also reminded her that the people of Pelosi’s district were overwhelmingly in favor of impeachment, and that they would start looking to newly announced candidate Cindy Sheehan for representation.

The arrest of impeachment activists and their forcible eviction from Conyers’ office today is proof of the bankruptcy of the two-party system. It is shameful that Conyers and Pelosi are putting their perceived interests of their party above the Constitution, which clearly makes impeachment the remedy for dealing with presidential “high crimes and misdemeanors”. With the Democratic leadership refusing to rein in an administration run amok, it is crystal clear that we, the people, must uphold the Constitution. People’s power, like the kind in evidence today in the normally solemn halls of Congress, is our only hope.

Medea Benjamin (medea@globalexchange.org) is cofounder of Global Exchange (http://www.globalexchange.org/) and CODEPINK: Women for Peace (http://www.codepinkalert.org/).

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Discuss this story Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article

23 Comments so far

1. chico July 24th, 2007 12:18 pm

congress is made up of all the big brothers who hold up the toy mom got you-right out of your reach and keep taunting, ” see. i’m in charge-i was here first ”they don’t care if you’re right or the urgency of it all-they just run things, and you ” can’t have it. ”time for this territorial brain based system to end. to hell with the ” US government ” it’s killing us all.

2. goner July 24th, 2007 12:19 pm

It’s funny that the Dems say we should concentrate on getting a Democrat into the White House. It hasn’t done us a damn bit of good to give them control of Congress, so what difference would it make to give them the White House? Bunch of Republican lapdogs.

3. jndstinn July 24th, 2007 12:20 pm

the “election event” of 2000 was not an election. was a coup, these nazzi’s won’t leave in ‘09, or any other year, the money never relinquishes power voluntarily. we must shut down their cash cow, or show willingness to do so.

4. NMBill July 24th, 2007 12:25 pm

Kuchinich and Gravel ought to get out of the Democratic Party because it’s impairment to their credibility.—The two did pretty good last night on CNN/YouTube debates.
Gravel, was allowed half the time of the others, I thought that wasn’t funny!

5. Bill from Saginaw July 24th, 2007 12:26 pm

I agree with these sentiments entirely, but question one key piece of the chronology.
Nancy Pelosi as I recall announced that impeachment was “off the table” prior to the 2006 Congressional elections, not just after formally becoming House Speaker. To my recollection, Rush, Hannity and the usual neo-con demagogues were rabidly fear mongering the notion that liberals were planning a “coup” that would make Pelosi the President. Taking impeachment “off the table” (and having Nancy Pelosi keep an incredibly low public profile prior to the 2006 balloting) was a way of blunting that right wing propaganda campaign.

Please correct me if I’m wrong about this chronology.

In any event, I wholeheartedly agree that that was then, and this is now. The Democratic leadership should have responded to Bush’s surge/escalation by putting impeachment very much back on the table. Not only is the threat of impeachment intertwined with ending the occupation of Iraq, it remains the trump card for purposes of actually forcing the White House to begin the withdrawal process prior to Bush leaving office.

Conyers should start the hearings, while the Senate should focus on repeal of the AUMF and the most noxious provisions of the Patriot and Military Commissions acts.
Bill from Saginaw

6. Ron July 24th, 2007 12:28 pm

Conyers and Pelosi can’t be as unprincipled as they seem to be. Did they receive a visit from a couple of guys, five feet eight, 250 pounds, saying “Now, we wouldn’t anything bad to happen to youse guys…” or were more sophisticated techniques used to frighten them into the abject submission they now display?

7. Jaded Prole July 24th, 2007 12:32 pm

Dims always have the same answer as they sell us out — elect us and contribute to our campaigns . . .

Repugs never worry about “having the votes,” they know how to push even the most horrendous legislation through.

8. fpal July 24th, 2007 12:36 pm

“…proof of the bankruptcy of the two-party system…”
Exactly. It’s nonsense to believe that the greatest democracy on the planet can only have 2 viable political parties. This only leads to oligarchical collectivism, hence, impeachment is off the table.

Also, note that no other country on the planet has an American form of government. The 231 year old form of government is past its prime. It’s time for a new American revolution.

9. lksafford July 24th, 2007 12:41 pm

Conyers told you why he will not move to impeach. He’s not unprincipled. It’s the same with Pelosi. They don’t have the votes. It would be futile and useless and they’d look like buffoons. And, occupying his office won’t help.

He told you what to do if you want him to move to impeach. Get him the votes. Start turning GOP reps and senators. Put the pressure on them. Get them to propose impeachment.
Any other tactic and you’re preaching to the choir. Convert the GOP.

10. Jeremy Wells July 24th, 2007 12:43 pm

DUMP THE DEMOCRATS!UNITE INTO A NEW THIRD PARTY NOW!
We the people, opposed to the destruction of the planet and it’s peoples, now atomized and powerless in “grass roots” and “special interest” groups, must unite our efforts and resources into a new party to replace the corrupt Democratic Party! A new party that rejects corporate funding in order to end the corporate plunder of the federal government.

A new party explicitly opposed to the Project for the New American Century. Opposed to unending war for profit and power. Cut the military budget by 50%, shut down the 700 military bases around the world. Re-instate taxes cut by Bush gang.

A new party that commits the entire resources of the country to end global warming, end imperialist wars, implements true non-profit universal health care. promotes mass transportation, develops renewaable energy, and produces the essentials for human survival.
A new party that promotes an economy that works towards fulfilling the economic needs of all the people, not just to profit a tiny minority of super wealthy. No more people living on the streets! No more hospitalized people being dumped into the streets when they have no money or health insurance! (See the film SICKO)

A new party to unite all of the oppressed people of this country. A new party that cuts across all the false social and cultural divisions that keep us forever powerless (racial, ethnic, age, language, etc.). A new party to unite us against the unending destruction of peoples and planet.
A SOCIALIST HUMANIST PARTY to promote the end of gangster capitalism, run-amok capitalism, which is supported by both Democratic and Republican parties.

A new party to support the labor movement and all working people. We urge the labor movement to stop supporting the Democratic Party (already besotted by corporate money), and to focus its precious resources to fund a new national radio and television network. By being on the air 24 hours a day the labor movement can provide the latest news, information, education and current affairs analysis desperately needed by all working people. This effort, combined with the formation of the new party, will be a bold step towards reviving the organized labor movement.

For years we have listened to radio programs like DEMOCRACY NOW! that has discussed with numerous “grass roots” groups desperately struggling to make a positive change in society. Anti-war protest groups, civil rights groups, union struggles, affordable housing groups, teachers unions, health care access, seniors about Social Security, have involved millions of people.

Now is the time to unite the energy and resources of the people into a new party.
The new party provides a means of uniting the “special interest” agendas of each group into the platform of the new party. The new party candidates, selected from the various individuals and groups, would become the candidates representing their cause and the new party. The new party will contest for office at every level of government in order to take power. The new party will provide the new leadership and new programs this country desperately needs.

There is still time before November 2008 elections to start this process. Even the announcement and preparation for a founding convention of such a new party will shock both Democrats and Republican incumbents. They will know that their days are numbered!
The needs of all previous “minority” and “special interests” people now become the platform of the new party representing the vast majority of people. Can the existing activists of so-called “minority” and “special interest” groups overcome their existing powerlessness, and link up with each other to start this new party?

This all-inclusive struggle will attract millions of atomized working people, often non-voters and uninvolved people, who have been atomized, exploited, brain-washed by corporate media and ultimately destroyed by gangster capitalism.

11. claudius July 24th, 2007 12:43 pm

This is why we need to urge other voters NOT to vote Democrat or Republican. Get the word out. If someone somehow can get on television at the next Democratic Party debate, sequester Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich (they are the good guys) and blast the rest of the panel. Let the public see our outrage and expose the other candidates for the myopic, feckless, corrupt, corporate sellouts they are. Support the blast with a laundry list of irrefutable facts.

Tell Conyers, Pelosi & Co. to enjoy their remaining days in office because we will vote them out.

Seriously folks, it is time for the blitz, or I apologize for the term, but “shock and awe” politicians by seeing millions of people vote them out of office.

We need to deliver the referendum and recall on these idiots. And we need to do it now! But the only way is by expanding our base and sending Washington an unmistakable message: your days are numbered in political office!

12. Nathan Andover July 24th, 2007 12:45 pm

We need to change the democratic system in this country to be based less on economic value and more on democratic value.

The same goes for the mainstream media. We need to keep the internet open and flourishing.
Then we will have leaders who will be more in line with the goals of peace, legitimate governments, fair markets, and healthy environments.

We shouldn’t be shocked that the current system has us in this type of environment. We also shouldn’t give up. We need to be active, not passive.

13. claudius July 24th, 2007 12:46 pm

I totally agree that we need a Third Party and this is the time to do it. More than 40% of voters in this country actually are ready to vote for an Independent candidate. We need to capitalize on this!

14. fd32 July 24th, 2007 12:52 pm

As soon as I learned that Pelosi was a tool of AIPAC, I reckoned she was irreconcilably damaged goods. Unfortunately, this does not distinguish her in Washington. Nothing she has done since this revelation has countervailed my lowest expectations of her politics and her morality. The Clintons, Pelosis, Feinsteins, and Liebermans of the world are not now, nor have they ever been Democrats, progressives, populists, or legitimate statesmen. They are professional scammers, virtually indistinguishable from the slightly more rabid Republicans. Expect very little. Conyers doesn’t know what time zone he’s in.

15. greenman July 24th, 2007 12:56 pm

the POINT of the impeachment proceedings is to GET THE VOTES, it’s like evidence at a trial, you convince the jury. Perhaps if they started the proceedings and the media had to pay attention some people might wake up and lean on their reps, isn’t this how it’s supposed to work.The problem is with Pelosi, she is one of the top 10 wealthiest members of congress(both houses), do you really think she has your best interests at heart? These people live in such a different world they don’t really know we exist.

16. Earthian July 24th, 2007 1:03 pm

Read Charles Derber’s framework in his book Hidden Power. There are two kids of Democratic Party politicians: corporate and progressive. We need to replace the corporate, militarist Democrats with progressive Democrats *and* strengthen the Green Party. A two-party strategy wouldn’t be necessary if we had legislatures that were structured with proportional representation like Germany, New Zealand and Ireland. But we don’t. So we progressives need to work with both from precinct to county-level to state-level to Congress.

17. canuckchuck July 24th, 2007 1:11 pm

the Dems and Repubs are wearing out their fingers washing each others backs

18. canuckchuck July 24th, 2007 1:12 pm

its a shell game with only two shells, and no pea.

19. Josh July 24th, 2007 1:24 pm

1. Impeachment.The House’s appointment of a special counsel would garner publicity and public outrage as evidence of impeachable offences would be gathered and exposed. The American majority now supporting impeachment of Cheney would increase considerably, as would the current near majority in favor of impeaching Bush. This public support would, in turn, force reluctant Democrats and possibly even some Republican members of the House to support impeachment.

The public airing of the administration’s crimes in this process, and impeachment by the House, even without conviction by the Senate, would be sufficient to destroy the legacy of the administration in the public mind. It would help to jell the public preception of this presidency as a dark one, at least as bad, as Nixon’s. It would also discredit the senior people and policies of the administration and help to ward them off in the future.

2. Electing a Democratic President.Getting Hillary or Obama elected will not solve the basic problems. Hillary has pledged to keep tens of thousands of US tropps in Iraq even AFTER the war is over (Washington Post, July 16, 2007,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/15/AR2007071501112.html?nav=hcmodule).

She would continue her Republican-lite political tactics and give a fresh face and a Democratic seal of approval to many of the Bush policies by continuing them, not apologizing for supporting the war, not exposing the extent of the NSA eavesdropping, etc. Only an impeachment process can expose the extent of these policies and repudiate them.

20. obonodori July 24th, 2007 1:25 pm

As a lifelong Democrat (I’m 63) I gave up entirely on the two party system this past year. It’s completely obvious to me that the two parties are simply two sides of the same ruling class and our only salvation is to create a multi-party system. Oh, yes, AND we MUST impeach the violators.

Do we prosecute criminals only when we’re convinced that we will win the case? Refusing to impeach the violators is tacit approval of the violations.

21. ezeflyer July 24th, 2007 1:29 pm

“Pelosi’s chief of staff, Terry McCullough”. That explains the DLC’s meathooks on both Pelosi and Conyers. It’s about corporate campaign cash, as usual, with some threats thrown in for good measure. They may know something we can’t know. But let’s face it. Politicians can’t save us. Only we can save ourselves. And that means direct grassroots democracy, as in the Green Party. Vote for progressive Dems, but switch2greens.

22. Poet July 24th, 2007 1:39 pm

Welcome to the world of Ernst Roehm, Leon Trotsky, and Lin Biao. All three represented the more radical elements of the Nazi, Soviet Communist, and Chinese Communist parties.
All three and their followings were tolerated as necessary head count on the way to siezing control on behalf of their movements. All three were ultimately banished and subsequently executed by those movements whose power they helped to build.

Common dreamers you will be tolerated for as long as you are an interesting side-show in the circus of power. The moment you seek to move to the main ring you better either be willing to die, have way too many people to be easily killed, or have way more guns than “they” do.
As for those Democrats like Conyers and Pelosi, my bet is that if anyone’s life was threatened it wasn’t their own but rather the lives of their children and grand children. That’s how organized criminals do it.

As for Cindy and Medea and all the other brave leadership in the peace movement. Know that you have been infiltrated from the beginning and are not only being closely watched, but also being carefully influenced buy “them”.

Case in point Ray McGovern “former” CIA operative (as if anyone in that “comnpany” is ever “former” short of being in the grave).

23. sigma July 24th, 2007 1:47 pm

One problem is the well know “Potomac Fever” that hits politicians after a few years in Washington. They get the power, lobbyists are sending them on cool trips, they are paid150,000+ for what should really be a part time job, they are surrounded by synchophatic ass-kissers, and they get treated like rock stars. Pretty soon they forget the people that sent them there, except 6 months before election time. Once an incumbent, trying to defeat them is like joining a 100 meter race where your opponent gets a 25 meter head start.

Bring back the idea of term limits. Put it in the Constitution,since we remember how many Republicans and Democrats that took the pledge to not run again actually kept their word.
Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)

Published on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 by Consortium News

John Conyers Is No Martin Luther King
by Ray McGovern

What do Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, chair of the House Committee on the Judiciary, and President George W. Bush have in common? They both think they can dis Cindy Sheehan and count on gossip columnists like the Washington Post’s David Milbank to trivialize a historic moment.

I’ll give this to President Bush. He makes no pretense when he disses. He would not meet with Sheehan to define for her the “noble cause” for which her son Casey died or tell her why he had said it was “worth it.”

Conyers, on the other hand, was dripping with pretense as he met with Sheehan, Rev. Lennox Yearwood and me Monday in his office in the Rayburn building. I have seldom been so disappointed with someone I had previously held in high esteem. And before leaving, I told him so.

Throwing salt in our wounds, he had us, and some 50 others in his anteroom arrested and taken out of action as the Capitol Police “processed” us for the next six hours.

As we began our discussion with Conyers, it was as though he thought we were “born yesterday,” as Harry Truman would put it. With feigned enthusiasm he began, Let’s hold a Town Hall meeting in Detroit so we can talk about impeachment. Get out my schedule; let’s see, we need to hear from everyone about this.

Been there, done that, I reminded the congressman.

On May 29, 2007, Col. Ann Wright and I were among those who flew to Detroit for a highly advertised Town Hall meeting on impeachment, because we were assured that John Conyers would be there.

That Town Hall/panel discussion was arranged by the Michigan chapter of the National Lawyers Guild less than two weeks after the Detroit City Council passed a resolution, cosponsored by Conyers’ wife Monica Conyers-calling for the impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. We had hoped that Monica’s clear vision and courage might be contagious.

I had to remind the congressman that he did not show up for the Town Hall.
Apparently, that incident was of such little consequence to the congressman that he had completely forgotten about it. Small wonder, then, that he has apparently forgotten the oath he took to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Selective Alzheimers? I don’t know. What was clear was that he had forgotten a whole lot.
When I raised James Madison’s role in crafting a Constitution that mentions impeachment no fewer than six times, he replied: Madison did not say Conyers has to impeach every one. Why, if I had to impeach everyone for high crimes and misdemeanors, that’s all my committee would have time to do.

I learned in Rhetoric 101 the name of that technique: reductio ad absurdam.

How about just Bush and Cheney, we suggested.

Conyers protested that he would need 218 votes in the House and complained that the votes are not there. His priorities showed through in his loud lament that if he fell short of the 218 votes, the Republicans and Fox News would have a field day.

There was no getting through to Conyers, who seemed astonished at the direct questions we were posing.

In reflecting on this later, the dictum of my father, also a lawyer, began to ring in my ears: “When you reach the age of ‘statutory senility,’ you do everyone a favor if you retire.”
He followed his own example, when he retired as Chancellor of the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York, long before senility-statutory, or otherwise-set in for him.
Septuagenarian Conyers (and, for that matter, 80-year-old Senator John Warner, R-Virginia, who has also forgotten his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution) would do well to heed that advice.

Toward the end of the meeting, Conyers showed uncommon chutzpah in referring to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. That was too much for me.

You’re no Martin Luther King, I found myself wanting to say. Instead, I quoted a portion of Dr. King’s famous address at Riverside Church almost 40 years ago:

“We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak….there is such a thing as being too late….Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, and dejected with lost opportunity….Over the bleached bones of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: ‘Too late.’”

I used that quote in a letter I left with Conyers’ aides on Monday, in which I tried to express why my colleagues in Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity feel it is URGENT to find some way to apply the Constitution to restrain a run-away Executive.

The text of that letter follows:

A Note to Congressman John Conyers:On Impeachment and the Edmund Pettus Bridge

Dear John,

We each have our favored crime for which President Bush and Vice President Cheney should be impeached. Many of us have several.

But the real challenge is to look AHEAD. What are Bush/Cheney likely to do in the coming months if the impeachment process does NOT begin?

One often hears, Oh, they will do what they want anyway, impeachment process or not. Not true.

If we the people and our representatives in Congress choose the course given us by our Founders and impeachment proceedings begin, important swaths of our body politic AND military will be less likely to follow illegal orders from the White House.

These important constituencies will become sensitized to the peril into which this administration has brought us and to the extra-constitutional orders they may be asked to carry out.

NEW ELEMENT: Even the Scaife-owned newspapers have begun to question Bush’s MENTAL STABILITY.

What could be more important at this juncture?

We Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have been applying all of our analytical techniques to assess the Bush/Cheney administration. We have helped to establish the long record of abuses and usurpations of the past. What about the future?

Iraq is going to hell in a hand basket. A Tet-type incident becomes more and more likely. The Green Zone is being hit by mortar fire more frequently than before. It may be just a matter of time before the Resistance gets lucky and lobs a shell onto our spanking new $600-million embassy, killing a bunch of Americans in the process.

What then? Will Cheney tell the president the US military has found Iranian markings on the shell fragments and we need to retaliate…and, actually, while we’re at it, let’s implement Plan A and hit all Iranian nuclear-related facilities.

With Congress voting resolution after resolution against Iran, how would the president react to such a suggestion from Cheney?

Many of us intelligence analysts have found utility in relying, in part, on short studies applying psychoanalysis to develop profiles of foreign leaders. (This marriage of psychoanalysis and intelligence work actually goes back to the early 1940s, when the OSS commissioned such studies on Hitler.) We called them “at-a-distance personality assessments.”

Three years ago Justin Frank, M.D., a psychiatrist here in Washington, wrote a book “Bush on the Couch” in which he provided keen insights into the president’s mode of thinking-or not thinking.

Eager to use every tool at our disposal, VIPS recently asked Dr. Frank to update his observations, with a view to forecasting, to the extent possible, how Bush is likely to react to the building pressures of the coming weeks and months. We will issue, perhaps as early as this week, Dr. Frank’s latest analysis, fortified by our own input. But we already have his preliminary analysis; there is no other word for it: Scary.

In a quick note to us this morning [July 23], Dr. Frank noted we are “dealing with a potentially cornered man [who] could lash out, and it is possible that the best way would be to bomb Iran…. Whatever the root causes of Bush’s pathology, we have a dangerous man running things…grandiose and unchecked.”

Some snippets from the Memorandum that Dr. Frank is drafting for issuance under VIPS auspices:

“George W. Bush is without conscience…and destructive, willfully so. He has always likes to break things…most shocking is the way he is breaking our armed forces.

“He doesn’t care about others, is indifferent to their suffering…He is almost constitutionally missing the ability to sympathize or empathize…More indifferent to reality than out of touch with it, he makes up whatever story he wants.

“Ultimately, he is psychologically unstable…His goal is to destroy things [and he can do that] without experiencing anxiety or a sense of responsibility. An equally important goal is to protect himself from shame, from being wrong, from being found small and weak.”

So what do we do?

At a similarly critical juncture, Dr. King was typically direct: “We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak…. there is such a thing as being too late…. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, and dejected with lost opportunity…. Over the bleached bones of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: ‘Too late.’”
There is today another Edmund Pettus Bridge to cross, John. And it has fallen to you to lead us across.

With respect,

Ray McGovern (for VIPS)

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in Washington, DC. He is a 27-year veteran analyst of the CIA and co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).
© 2007 Consortium News

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Discuss this story Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article

11 Comments so far

1. arpedkedarki July 24th, 2007 12:23 pm

I live and work in Nancy Pelosi’s district. Based on her cowardly inaction, I will vote for Cindy Sheehan, if she should run.

I understand that Nancy is about to publish a memoir. What can she possibly say when she hasn’t done the most important thing in her career? What will be her legacy? I think we know the answer to that already.

Two words: Incredibly disappointing.

2. NMBill July 24th, 2007 12:43 pm

There is no cause at this time to consider impeachment proceedings against the Vice-President. He has served this nation honorably and to the best of his ability. Furthermore, the casualness with which impeachment is thrown around simply for partisan purposes over policy differences should be a concern to all American’s and the future of our politics.Steven Pearce (R-NM) 7/17/07—-You impeached Clinton when a little head never killed anyone.

3. Ron July 24th, 2007 12:45 pm

NEW ELEMENT: Even the Scaife-owned newspapers have begun to question Bush’s MENTAL STABILITY.

There’s a video on You Tube showing W. performing rather brilliantly in a 1990 debate, speaking fluently without notes, tossing out statistics, appearing normal in all respects. Then a current video shows the obvious mental deterioration. The diagnosis is pre-senile dementia. Here’s the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRhhtkRp8aM or just search youtube for bush presenile dementia.

4. lksafford July 24th, 2007 12:45 pm

Rep. Conyers said what he needed to impeach: votes. Get him the votes start preaching to the unconverted Reps and Senators. Make sure he has the votes to pass the resolution and a reasonable chance to convict in the Senate. Then watch the fur fly.

Your demonstrations in Conyers office are terribly misguided. Go get him votes then come back.

5. fatfreddyscat July 24th, 2007 12:50 pm

lksafford - This is a bit of a catch 22 since one of the biggest reasons they don’t have the votes is that the Dim leadership is opposed to it.

6. Earthian July 24th, 2007 12:56 pm

I hope Sheehan’s strategy magnifies and spreads. She will run against Pelosi in San Francisco in the Democratic primary. I’d love to see McGovern or some other very credible progressive run against Conyers. Progressives need to target the corporate, militarist Democrats in the primaries–and then if a given election fails, to do the same in the actual House and Senate races on the Green Party ticket.

7. Thomas Albright July 24th, 2007 1:00 pm

The good people of Michigan need to start looking for a replacement for Conyers. Every dem traitor must be replaced or we may wind up in civil war. No one wants that.
8. kegbot1 July 24th, 2007 1:01 pm

Hey Ray, I appreciate your chutzpah in Conyers’ office. I bet he WAS taken aback because people in his position aren’t used to being spoken to as he was. That being said, well, did you look around his office? Did it seem comfy? Did the Congressman seem well-heeled, well-fed? Well then, you have one big clue as to why Conyers won’t put this at risk. Of course, you nailed the other one:

Conyers protested that he would need 218 votes in the House and complained that the votes are not there. His priorities showed through in his loud lament that if he fell short of the 218 votes, the Republicans and Fox News would have a field day.

Where have we come to as a nation when a leader of the people is more afraid of a morally bankrupt news organ than the fallout to our posterity? But Fox News is a metaphor of sorts here - Conyers and the Dems don’t trust the American people not to fall for Fox spin. They feel it would upset their careful electoral triangulation for 2008. If this is true, that is to say, we have reached the point where Fox News sets the agenda for political activism in this country, then we as a people are truly finished.

9. jaymarx July 24th, 2007 1:09 pm

Iksaford has it backwards. Conyers is purposefully making it difficult to mobilize public pressure by blocking the bill from hearings.

As Chair of the Judiciary Committee, John Conyers has absolute power over H. Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment on Dick Cheney. The next step for the bill is to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, chaired by Rep. Nadler (D-Manhattan), for hearings and markup. By sitting on the bill like a mother hen, Conyers alone prevents hearings and the momentum that hearings would bring.

Moreover, how can Conyers say he “doesn’t have the votes”?!How can he know for sure? There have been no hearings, no one has see evidence in the subcommitte, because he is preventing it!Actually it is neither John Conyers’ job nor his concern whether impeachment could pass the full house at this moment. His only job is this: to forward the bill to the relevant subcommittee under his jurisdiction.

As the evidence comes forth, more votes will become evident.Or not, in which case at least he will have done his job, and he’ll be able to look people in the eye as he says “I told you so.” Right now he is only blocking the Constitutional democratic process, and making himself look like a hypocrite. The question is, why? What have they got on him? What does he hope to gain, by fronting for Pelosi and the leadership–in contradiction of his evident feelings? (That is, his feelings before the election. Or does having actual power turn everyone into a . . . ?)
Seriously, What’s Going On, John?

10. Saila July 24th, 2007 1:13 pm

I am surprised to see Mr McGovern to have had a different opinion of John Conyers than until he just met him. All Repugnants and almost all Democraps are crooks representing some corporations or others. I thought McGovern should have been the first to know.

The fact that Conyers and 80-year-old Senator John Warner, R-Virginia, and other senile politicians are still holding office is an undeniable indication of electorate stupidity. I have always pleaded on this site to people not to re-elect career politicians because they are crooks. Nobody listens to what has proven to be obvious.

If the present regime in Washington again does anything disastrous then the BushCo and the entire likeminded minions and procrastinators in the Congress should be hanged in Washington, D.C. as a reminder that people are still in power.

11. ezeflyer July 24th, 2007 1:42 pm

He’s either being threatened physically or economically by our Mafia government, or he has some information he can’t share with us because it could cause a panic. Peak oil? The fall of the dollar? Gravel’s National Initiative could circumvent these problems. Even if you don’t vote for him, it would pay to learn about this most important piece of legislation that would let the people decide.
Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)