Rep Conyers: 55,000 Have Signed as Citizen Cosponsors for Impeachment

55,000 Have Signed as Citizen Cosponsors for Impeachment Investigation

Over 55,000 people have signed up to become Citizen Cosponsors of my House Resolution 635 which would create a Special Committee to investigate whether any crimes committed by the Bush Administration rise to the level of impeachment. The creation of a special committee is the same deliberative step taken by former Judiciary Committee Chairman, Sam Ervin, to review the Nixon Administration's conduct prior to deciding whether to pursue articles of impeachment. If you haven't signed yet, or know others who should, this is the link:

http://www.johnconyers.com/citizencosponsors

Senator Feingold Has Just Joined Me Calling for Censure

On ABC's This week with George Stephanopolous, Senator Russell Feingold has just joined my call for censure of the President. Many of you remember that I introduced a resolution, House Resolution 637, last December to censure the President at the same time I introduced House Resolution 635 to investigate the President's Administration for possible impeachable offenses. The Senator announced on the show that he planned to introduce his bill at the beginning of the week.

As you know, the Senate tends to move much more slowly on issues such as these. While Senator Feingold has not come to the same position as I have - calling for a special committee to investigate impeachable offenses - he didn't rule it out. And when asked, he didn't rule out pressing for impeachment. It is a good sign that there are others catching up with us in the call for accountability for this White House. While some are impatient for immediate action, we need to understand that pursuing this in a measured fashion will give us the best chance of success. The emergence of Senator Feingold in taking this stand is a broad and positive step toward our ultimate goal.

Link:

http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000400.htm

In his ill-informed "rebuttal" to Senator Feingold's censure motion, Senator Specter falsely claimed that FISA conflicts with the President's Article II authority. It's an argument we've heard since the defenses of the program first began "evolving," but Specter's invocation of an patently false legal claim proves this horse isn't dead yet, so allow me to beat it one more time.

Ever since the scandal broke, the wailing banshees on the right have asserted that no one--not even a co-equal branch of government--can in any way interfere with the President's inherent authority to conduct warrantless wiretapping in a time of war. It is In re: Sealed Case that this administration has most frequently cited for the proposition that the President has an unrestrainable inherent power to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance, relying on the following passage:

Much more of Georgia10's essay at the link:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/13/20331/1414

Like all Americans, I woke up on the morning of September 11th, 2001 as though it was simply another day. The horrific events that unfolded made it anything but, and our lives were changed forever. In the days after 9/11, I was proud to stand with the President in strong support of the authorization to use force against those who attacked us. During those days our President showed great leadership. Politics were put aside, the country pulled together and for a brief time we were united.

In the four-plus years since, everything changed. The President exploited the climate of anxiety, misusing the trust he was given in the wake of the attacks on 9/11 to, among other things, grab intrusive powers in the Patriot Act, and take us into a war in Iraq that has been a diversion from the critical fight against terrorism.

Much more at the link to the Senator's essay at dKos plus over 400 comments:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/13/114144/941

... FIGHT.

<clip>

This is an election about throwing the bums out and Democrats need to make a clear statement of fundamental values, not policy differences. Some strategists insist that Democrats must adopt the religious code words that Republicans use to signal character and values to evangelical voters. I would suggest that all Americans, religious and secular alike, share a language that is full of words that describe character and values. How about we start using some plain English words like unethical, dishonest, unfair, untrustworthy, dishonorable and lies. I think everybody can understand what those mean.

More of Digby (at his very best):

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_digbysblog_archive.html#114228282699552384