Impeachment Coalition Taking Shape

Re: Impeachment Coalition Taking Shape

You know, I've never understood the rationale for NOT seeking Impeachment.  The excuse of ”We've got more important things to do.  This will be a distraction” just doesn't cut it.

Why?  Because the administration and congressional Republicans have been and will continue to stop anything and everything they can.  If something DOES get passed by Congress … Bush will just veto it anyway.

So the “framing” of this message should be ”We must Impeach because we'll never get anything meaningful accomplished as long as this president is in the White House.”

Bush and Cheney Cornered; The Need to Impeach Before Iran Attack

Re: Bush and Cheney Cornered; The Need to Impeach Before Iran Att

What does a cornered animal do? Lashes out without fear of consequence…

Why does congress stand twiddling their thumbs, looking skyward?

Is it the “create a crisis” syndrome?
Create drama because our existence is so boring?
I hang my head…

Re: Bush and Cheney Cornered; The Need to Impeach Before Iran Att

I've been writing about this for months.

Your use of the word “cornered” is very apropos.  But it's less the fact they're cornered … and more to do with them losing their power.  They were essentially castrated in November of 2006 with the elections.  Castration, however, doesn't take all power away.

The US White House today is is crisis mode, fighting off attacks from every direction.  So, yes, they are cornered.  They're like the old wagon trains of the wild west days of our past … they can't go anywhere.  Any forward motion is impossible.  Their wagons are in circle formation, watching for and fighting off any attacks.

Eventually their defenses will be breached.  There's little or nothing left.  They lost the American people a long time ago.  They lost the world population long before the US population woke up.  Congress is gone.  Business is abandoning them increasingly as evidenced by campaign contributions where donations to Democrats outnumber Republicans two to one.  They still have the courts but there's growing discomfort and the Gonzo problem is bringing all this to the surface.

Foreign policy … at a stand-still.

Legislative agenda … dead.

Respect of the American people … decimated beyond repair.

With control of the military and the courts … they're still very dangerous.  Very dangerous.  So we must persevere still.  If we could somehow remove these two “toys” from them, we could weather the next year and a half.  Until these are safely removed, we're still in danger.

We have two bright spots.  The Justice Department is essentially crippled at present.  Sad, but true.  I'm thinking that Gonzo will hold off till Congress goes into their regular summer recess, then he'll resign so Bush can make a recess appointment to avoid confirmation hearings.  Not a very bright move, but quite political.  He'll want another “yes man” in that office.  The last thing he'll want is a functional Justice Department.  But any hint of politicization will not be tolerated by Congress or the US population.  They must re-build their crushed reputation.

And hearings were held today to confirm the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Michael Mullen, who does not appear to be a “yes man”.  He may bring some sanity to our military.

Re: Bush and Cheney Cornered; The Need to Impeach Before Iran Att

Thanks - that sounds promising.
You don't think it's part of their strategy? Pretend to be conered and strike from behind?
I made a comment earlier about Blackwater. Is it of any significance in your view?
Could they use in what they'd term an “emergency”? The compound is half the size of Manhatten!

I tend to try and understand dysfunction from what childhoods were like. Georgie blowing up frogs with crackers doesn't bode well. Plus the majority of Americans who might just think it all a well produced movie. Or the evil arabs…

Then there are the Moore's and Gore's and many others who obviously give a damn.

But what is sad to me is to be found in the end of George Monbiot's book “Heat”
Air travel by jet is what is going to spell the end of the planet as we know it.
According to this author, who is VERY credible, carbon emissions have to cut by 90% by 2030. Air travel proportionately produces the Lion's share of these emissions.
I just can't see anyone considering cutting air travel by 90%. They'll laugh in your face, even if the water is up to their chin…

Re: Bush and Cheney Cornered; The Need to Impeach Before Iran Att

It is interesting you bring up the topic of jet emissions.  My intuition told me this a long time back.  Every time I look up I see this broad white line painted across the sky.  You can't tell me this isn't a huge, huge part of our global warming problem.  Yet … not one word.  Nothing.  All we hear about are automobiles.

Thanks for confirming what I already knew.  I can say I read it first from Pierre!!!

WH strategy?  Who knows.  Some feel a “surprise al Quada attack” will magically occur at some point between now and November of next year that will give Bush the ability to in essence take over everything by declaring martial law via his executive orders.  This could explain all the arrogance and cockiness.

Re: Bush and Cheney Cornered; The Need to Impeach Before Iran Att

Aargh. Not what I wanted to hear… :)

You'll see that you are now a Mod on GW site. I've just invited all my friends to Deep Economy.
You can too. Get as many people in the loop as possible.

Peace brother!

Kucinich to Submit YOUR Impeachment Petitions!!!

Thursday, August 02, 2007

BREAKING: Kucinich (D-OH) to Submit Your Impeachment Petitions into the Congressional Record

Gonzales, Pelosi, and the Survival of Congress

Gonzales, Pelosi, and the Survival of Congress
David Swanson August 1, 2007

Speaker Nancy Pelosi said today that if she were not Speaker she would probably back impeachment. Other Congress Members are of course free to do what even she admits she would do in their position. They should, I think, start taking her advice and ignoring her ban on impeachment.

The reason Pelosi is being questioned about impeachment has to do with Gonzo, Alberto Gonzales, and a proposal just introduced to impeach him. In the movement to impeach Cheney and Bush, is this a distraction or an opening act?

Fifteen principled members of Congress, all Democrats, have signed a bill to begin the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney. Hundreds of other Congress Members have stubbornly refused to heed the clear demand of the majority of their constituents.

But suddenly a completely new group of Congress Members, again all Democrats, has announced support for impeaching Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. This groups includes Congress Members who are not usually leaders in the cause of justice. And it includes Members who have been lobbied intensely to impeach Cheney and Bush but who have resisted in favor of heeding Speaker Nancy Pelosi's ban on using the Constitution in Congress.

The initial sponsor is Jay Inslee of Washington State who less than six months ago had to lobby the leadership of his state's legislature not to permit a vote on a pro-impeachment resolution. One of the initial cosponsors is Tom Udall of New Mexico, whose state legislature also came close to passing such a resolution. There were rumors in New Mexico that - as in Washington State - pressure against the resolution had come from DC.

Other cosponsors are Xavier Becera, Michael Arcuri, Ben Chandler, Dennis Moore, Bruce Braley, Earl Blumenauer, and Peter DeFazio. From this list of names it should be clear that this is not a statement against illegal war. This is not a declaration of progressive principles in opposition to illegal spying, detentions, torture, and murder, much less the plundering of the poor to enrich a corporate oligarchy. Rather, this is statement at long last of a minimal willingness to defend the rule of law and the power of Congress. These House Members did not raise impeachment when Gonzales backed illegal spying, torture, and detentions, or when it first became clear that he had used the Justice Department as a wing of the Republican National Committee. They spoke up after Gonzales repeatedly lied to Congress and refused to answer Senators' questions.

Of course, there may be a confluence of influences behind this decision. Two forces are pushing impeachment forward. One is American citizens, who have recently become much more aggressive, sitting in Congressional offices, and standing in front of them with Honk-to-Impeach signs that have a tendency to disrupt entire days of work. The other is the Bush-Cheney administration, which has in recent weeks refused to comply with subpoenas, announced that it will refuse to cooperate with contempt citations, and of course commuted the sentence of a top staffer convicted of obstructing justice.

Now, merely impeaching Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would fall as short of what's needed as merely convicting I. Lewis Scooter Libby. Both men are covering up the crimes of Cheney and Bush. But impeaching Gonzo and sending him packing might just open the door to impeachment, might in fact restore impeachment in many people's minds to a place of honor (rather than sex scandal) in our system of checks and balances. If the Democratic leadership allows Gonzales to be impeached, or is forced to see it happen, we may jump a big step closer to impeaching Cheney, whether Nancy Pelosi intended that to be the result or not. Timing in this will be a factor. If Congress takes all of August off and then drags Gonzales' impeachment out for weeks, the clock may tick too far ahead. Our job is to speed them along. Another factor may be Senate conviction or acquittal. Our job is to push for Senate conviction while praising the House already for impeachment and demanding that Cheney's impeachment get underway.

Inslee's resolution is short and sweet, but a blank slate that opens itself up to any tangential time-wasting investigation imaginable. And there are the usual two problems with investigations: they're not needed and they can't pry anything out of the Bush-Cheney administration. After all, that's why we're impeaching Gonzales: for refusing to answer questions and lying. Inslee's bill reads as follows:

RESOLUTION

Directing the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate whether Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States, should be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors.

1 Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary shall

2 investigate fully whether sufficient grounds exist for the

3 House of Representatives to impeach Alberto R. Gonzales,

4 Attorney General of the United States, for high crimes

5 and misdemeanors.

We have a petition to Congress people can sign at Democrats.com and AfterDowningStreet.org that lists several of Gonzo's crimes. One relates to torture.

On 1/25/02, Gonzales wrote a memo to President Bush authorizing the commission of war crimes by claiming the war against terrorism “renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions.”

On 8/1/02, Gonzales commissioned a memo to President Bush which defined “torture” only as an interrogation that causes “injury such as death, organ failure, or serious impairment of body functions.” This definition is contrary to The War Crimes Act and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Unusual or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, a treaty ratified by the United States. Although this memo was retracted on 12/30/04, it remained in effect for over two years and authorized an unknown number of acts of torture.

Gonzales knew or should have known that, pursuant to memoranda written by, commissioned or concurred in by him, prisoners in United States custody would be subjected to willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment; and great suffering or serious injury to body or health, in violation of The War Crimes Act.

COUNT II involves Military Commissions

Between 9/11/01 and 11/13/01, Gonzales helped draft the Military Order establishing the Military Commissions, signed by President Bush on 11/13/01. This order mandated conduct by members of United States military forces which constitute war crimes under The War Crimes Act.

Gonzales knew or should have known that the Military Commissions, in whose creation he participated, would deprive prisoners in United States custody who will be tried before them, of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the Third Geneva Convention and Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions.

On 1/18/07 Gonzales testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the U.S. Constitution does not provide the right to habeas corpus, but rather only bars the government from taking that right away (except in the case of rebellion or invasion). This logic would overturn many of the rights that U.S. law has based on the Constitution for over two centuries, as well as overturning rights positively expressed in the Sixth Amendment.

COUNT III relates to Illegal Domestic Surveillance

Since the inception (date unknown) of the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretap program, Gonzales has defined, condoned, concealed and defended the administration's continued violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution.

On 2/6/06, Gonzales testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the Authorization for the Use of Military Force enacted by Congress on 9/18/01 authorized warrantless domestic surveillance. However, the secret programs may have been launched earlier, the AUMF did not grant the President the right to violate FISA and the Fourth Amendment, and Congress has since amended FISA four times without granting the President those rights. On 1/17/07, Gonzales informed Congress the illegal wiretapping was approved by an unnamed Judge of the FISA Court without providing any evidence that illegal acts had actually ended. On 7/24/07, Gonzales informed Congress there was more than one secret program.

COUNT IV: Corrupting the Department of Justice

Investigations by the Senate and House Judiciary Committees in 2007 established a pattern of firing U.S. Attorneys who failed to implement the corrupt plans of the White House to steal elections through highly-publicized prosecutions of non-existent voter fraud. At the same time, U.S. Attorneys who filed such prosecutions kept their jobs.

COUNT V: Perjury

In multiple appearances before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees in 2006 and 2007, Gonzales deliberately misled Congress about the firing of U.S. Attorneys and the warrantless wiretapping program.

My advice to the House Judiciary Committee is this: Stick to perjury - just do it and do it quickly. Include other counts if you can do so quickly. Your goal is to impeach efficiently and move on to your important business of… well, whatever that important business is you're always talking about. Your goal is not to drag Gonzo's crimes in front of us for months. We are painfully aware of them. That's why we've finally been able to force you to take a stand. Please don't imagine that you are going to discover new evidence or that Gonzales is going to squeal on his bosses, or that we need any evidence we don't already have in order to subsequently impeach and convict them. But, and this is important too, if you impeach Gonzales only for perjury, please take steps to make clear to the public that perjury is not somehow a uniquely impeachable offense - just because Clinton and Gonzales were both impeached for it. An impeachable offense is treason, bribery, or any other high crime and misdemeanor.

Could this all be a distraction? Maybe, but I think it's a lot less dangerous in that regard than Censure of Cheney or Bush. This is the right tool: impeachment. It's just not yet addressed to the right people. If we impeach Gonzales, we can and logically must then impeach the men for whom he committed his impeachable offenses. But there is no time to waste.

And there is no time for a month-long vacation.

The people of Iraq cannot expect any summer vacation. Nor can the U.S. troops occupying their country. Nor can the people of New Orleans STILL without homes.

August should be a time for Congress to reclaim some measure of respect from the American people by accomplishing something that cannot be vetoed or signing statemented: the impeachment of the Attorney General and as soon as possible the Vice President.

A group of 9-11 widows recently sent a letter to Congress that read, in part:

“Watching Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testify before Congress on July 24, 2007, for the third time, was excruciatingly painful. During Gonzales' testimony, it became abundantly clear that Americans were witnessing the unraveling of the fabric of America. We do not feel that this is an overstatement. The Attorney General, a man who supposedly personifies America's rule of law, obfuscated, committed perjury, and belittled the very institution, the Congress, which makes America a great Democracy. Over and over, we publicly witnessed Gonzales' refusal to answer the questions posed by you - a Committee authorized to conduct oversight duties. You were made to look frustrated and foolish as your attempts at Executive Branch oversight were thwarted by the bizarre, circular non-answers of Attorney General Gonzales. For the third time, you were unable to penetrate his stonewalling. We want to know, is it not a crime to mislead and outright lie to the Congress? How many more opportunities will you give Attorney General Gonzales to make a farce of our system by denying Congress information that would allow you to do your job and properly perform your oversight role?

“….it appears that you are becoming unwittingly complicit in your own undoing. It is evident that what we are watching is the U.S. Congress in the process of making itself irrelevant. When the Executive Branch alone is allowed to act without any oversight, or any accountability, then what we will become is a dictatorship. And once all Americans realize that Congress is unable to perform any oversight, whether it is due to lack of will or complicity, you will no longer be needed. Once it becomes apparent that the Executive Branch is not only making the laws but also deciding which laws to follow, the Congress will be just a quaint, unnecessary and useless artifact.”

I couldn't have said it better, so I'll leave it at that.

Search

Greens: Democrats, retreating on impeachment

Greens: Democrats, retreating on impeachment and withdrawal of US troops from Iraq

GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES

For Immediate Release: Thursday, July 26, 2007

Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, mclarty@greens.org">mclarty@greens.org ; Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene@gp.org">starlene@gp.org

Greens: Democrats, retreating on impeachment and withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, don't deserve votes in 2008

• By refusing to impeach, Democrats acquiesce to Bush-Cheney high crimes and misdemeanors, say Greens
• Greens criticize Congress's silence on Bush executive order criminalizing antiwar protest and demand repeal of the order

WASHINGTON, DC – Green Party leaders reaffirmed the party's support for impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney and demand for immediate withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, and sharply criticized Democratic Party leaders for retreating on impeachment and troop withdrawal.

Greens also demanded that Congress act to repeal President Bush's July 17 executive order titled “Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq,” which effectively outlaws antiwar protest by allowing the White House to confiscate the financial assets of anyone who openly opposes the war.

• Carl Romanelli, Pennsylvania Green candidate for the US Senate in 2006: “Democrats are pretending to be the party of opposition to the Bush agenda. They have pretended to oppose the war, while joining Republicans in Congress to pass recent legislation for renewed war funding. They refuse to consider impeachment for the Bush Administration's numerous high crimes andmisdemeanors. Much of the Bush agenda will remain in place even if Democrats retake the White House and prevail again in Congress in 2008. The only hope for changing the political direction of our country is for the Green Party to advance, with a few Green victories for congressional seats. Voters who support troop withdrawal and impeachment are throwing away their votes if they vote Democrat in 2008.”
• Daniel Brezenoff, Green candidate for Congress in California's 37th District: “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats have opposed the Iraq War only in their rhetoric. They've ignored widespread public demands for a rapid pullout of US troops, and only favor bills for delayed withdrawal plans and leaving some troops in Iraq to protect US interests. Democratic leaders have endorsed benchmarks like passage of the Iraqi oil law, which would place 2/3 of Iraq's oil resources under the control of ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco, BP, and other western corporations. Rep. Pelosi and her fellow Dems know that these companies will need a strong US military presence in Iraq as they plunder Iraq's oil reserves. Greens have declared their support for Iraqi labor unions and the tens of thousands of Iraqis calling for defeat of the oil law and an end to the US occupation.”

• Sedinam Kinamo Christin Moyowasifza-Curry, Green vice presidential hopeful for 2008: “Despite direct entreaties by Cindy Sheehan, Greens, and other antiwar Americans, Rep. John Conyers [Mich.], Rep. Nancy Pelosi [Calif.], and other Democratic leaders are refusing to initiate impeachment proceedings against President Bush and Vice President Cheney. Democrats are rebuffing the call to hold Bush and Cheney
  
  accountable for some of the most worst abuses of power in US history. The Democrats' refusal to
  impeach can only mean acquiescence to the Bush-Cheney-Rove crimes. That's why we Greens have taken the lead on projects like the opening of the National Impeachment Center in Los Angeles
  to ensure the American people have a place, program, and plan to get heard. Some Green Party members have joined Cindy Sheehan in peaceful civil disobedience, for which they were arrested on Monday. In December, 2006, the Green Party endorsed an impeachment motion introduced in the House by Rep. Cynthia McKinney [D-Ga.].

• Peter L. Thottam, Executive Director of the Los Angeles National Impeachment Center, former Green

• Kristen Olson, co-chair of the Green Party of the United States: “Why have Congress members who claim to oppose the Iraq War remained silent on President Bush's July 17 executive order giving the White House the authority to confiscate the assets of whoever engages in antiwar activity? The order potentially criminalizes anyone who protests the war. For instance, language targeting of persons who undermine “efforts to promote economic reconstruction” can be used against anyone who criticizes the Iraq oil law, enabling the pillage of Iraqi oil by US and UK oil companies. The executive order is a vicious assault on the US Constitution. We demand that Congress act to overturn the order immediately.”

MORE INFORMATION

Green Party of the United States
202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN
Fax 202-319-7193
• Green Party News Center

• Green Party Speakers Bureau
• 2007 national Green Party meeting in Reading, Pa.: video footage, blog and media coverage

Green Party Peace Action Committee (GPAX)

Presidential Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq, and here.

“Iraq War is Impeachable, Not Just a 'Strategic Blunder'” Green Party press release, February 20, 2007

Impeachment resolution passed at Green Party National Meeting, July 2003

“Impeachment now – as a defensive tactic” By Alan Kobrin [Florida Green Party], OpEdNews.com, July 19, 2007

“Bush Executive Order: Criminalizing the Antiwar Movement” By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, July 20, 2007

Re: Impeachment Coalition Taking Shape

Activists in Vermont town want Bush, Cheney subject to arrest

• Story Highlights
• Group in Brattleboro petitioning to put item on town meeting agenda in March
  
• Activists allege war crimes; item would subject Bush, Cheney to arrest if they visit
  
• White House hasn't responded to requests for comment
  
• Vermont AG says move is “of very dubious legality”
  
• Next Article in Politics »

MONTPELIER, Vermont (AP) – President Bush may soon have a new reason to avoid left-leaning Vermont: In one town, activists want him subject to arrest for war crimes.

Kurt Daims of Brattleboro, Vermont, speaks Friday about his movement against Bush and Cheney.

A group in Brattleboro is petitioning to put an item on a town meeting agenda in March that would make Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney subject to arrest and indictment if they visit the southeastern Vermont community.

“This petition is as radical as the Declaration of Independence, and it draws on that tradition in claiming a universal jurisdiction when governments fail to do what they're supposed to do,” said Kurt Daims, 54, a retired machinist leading the drive.

As president, Bush has visited every state except Vermont.

The town meeting, an annual exercise in which residents gather to vote on everything from fire department budgets to municipal policy, requires about 1,000 signatures to place a binding item on the agenda.

The measure asks: “Shall the Selectboard instruct the Town Attorney to draft indictments against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against our Constitution, and publish said indictment for consideration by other municipalities?”

The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday. The press office did not immediately respond to an e-mail.

Support for the measure is far from universal, even in Vermont, where the state Senate voted earlier this year to support impeaching the president. Anti-war rallies are regular occurrences here, and “Impeach Bush” bumper stickers are common.

“I would not be supportive of it,” said Stephen Steidle, a member of the town's Selectboard, which oversees its government.

“It's well outside of our ability. From my perspective, the Brattleboro Selectboard needs to focus on the town and the things that need to be done here.”

Daims has been circulating documents that claim the community acquires a “universal jurisdiction” to take such steps “when governments breach their highest duties.”

“We have the full power to issue indictments, conduct trials, incarcerate offenders and do all other acts which Independent jurisdictions may of right do,” the statement says.

Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell, a Democrat whose office has repeatedly sued the Bush administration over environmental issues, said the move was “of very dubious legality.”

“I have not seen the proposal, and I've done no legal research on any of the issues,” Sorrell said. “But at first blush, if this passed, they'd have really uphill sledding trying to have it be legal and enforceable.”

Re: Impeachment Coalition Taking Shape

Way cool!!!  GO Vermont!!!!

Re: Impeachment Coalition Taking Shape

Move to Impeach Cheney Gains Support in Congress

More Democrats signing on to the idea of a Vice-Presidential impeachment, could it really happen?

By Tim King

01/02/08 ”Salem-News” – – (SALEM, Ore.) - A House Resolution to impeach U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney, Dennis Kucinich's H.R. 799, is gathering more support. The national impeachment continues to grow and generate increasing interest since being referred to the House Judiciary Committee last month, a Kucinich spokesperson said.

As a member of that committee, Representative Robert Wexler and two other committee members, Luis Gutierrez and Tammy Baldwin, have joined together in demanding that the legal action against Cheney moves forward.

Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida is just one elected official who says the charges are too serious to ignore.

“There is credible evidence that the Vice President abused the power of his office, and not only brought us into an unnecessary war but violated the civil liberties and privacy of American citizens. It is the constitutional duty of Congress to hold impeachment hearings”

He went on to say that he believes Vice President Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration have demonstrated a consistent pattern of abusing the law and misleading Congress and the American people.

“We see the consequences of these actions abroad in Iraq and at home through the violations of our civil liberties,” Wexler said.

Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, stated in August that published reports identify, “the Vice-President's willful and repeated disregard for the rule of law, international treaties, environmental protections, and the common good.”

Wexler and Baldwin joined Congressman Luis Gutierrez in penning an Op-Ed that calls for committee hearings on a bill to impeach Dick Cheney on a variety of charges that include allegations of manipulating intelligence to boost the case for the war with Iraq, a very serious charge.

The Op-Ed that ran in the Philadelphia Enquirer December 27th (Impeach Cheney now- The allegations that he abused power are credible.) states, “The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that if proven may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under our constitution.”

“The charges against Vice President Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens.”

House leaders and the leading Democratic presidential candidates don't support impeachment. One thing they point to is the timeframe and expense that surrounded the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton, citing how the business of politics in the U.S. ground to a near standstill as the nation's attention was diverted by the effort to expose the President over a sex act with a White House intern. Gutierrez saying hearings, “need not tie up Congress for a year and shut down the nation.”

The White House, in a statement, said Democrats were shirking responsibilities on issues such as childrens' [sic] health insurance “and yet they find time to waste an afternoon on an impeachment vote against the vice president. … This is why Americans shake their head in wonder about the priorities of this Congress.”

But Kucinich and Wexler and others in Congress say they won't be swayed as they utilize an existing arm of the Democratic system to see that impeachment proceedings are brought forward against the elected leader of out nation's second highest political office.

Salem-News.com