Sunday, November 04, 2007

Voices in the wilderness

The National Lawyers Guild recently voted overwhelmingly for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney. Kucinich has drafted a resolution for the impeachment of Cheney. John Conyer quite some time ago wrote up reasons for impeachment. Dozens, if not hundreds of towns and cities across the U.S. have issued proclamations in favor of impeachment. It is perfectly obvious except perhaps to the deaf, dumb, and blind (and probably not even all of them) that Bush/Cheney have committed acts that clearly constitute serious violations of law and the constitution, as well as violations of the Geneva Convention and the Charter of the U.N. So how is it that nothing has happened? Pelosi has declared impeachment "off the table," and so far, at least, it has been off the table. Kucinich is reportedly going to try to force the issue shortly but it is not at all clear what will happen. Probably nothing, as usual. There is supposed to be a Constitutional obligation to impeach a President who is out of control and violating the Constitution. But I guess that as Bush has declared the Constitution is "just a goddam piece of paper," it no longer has any relevance in the lives of U.S. citizens, Congress, or the Courts.

I confess I do not understand this. Why is it that Pelosi and so many others are protecting this criminal President and his chief henchman, Dick Cheney? What is it that seems to make them above the law and the Constitution? I don't know anything about the National Lawyers Guild, but presumably they are all lawyers. And as lawyers they presumably know something about the law, and the Constitution as well. They unanimously (I think) recommended to Congress the impeachment of Bush/Cheney. Will their recommendation fall once again on deaf ears. Will members of Congress continue to ignore the will of the public and the advice of the legal profession? And if they do so, what is the reason? I know, I know, there are those who argue it is too close to the election to bother about impeachment (this is about the most feeble argument there can be), and those who argue that it might fail (who cares if it did, it would still serve an extremely useful purpose). Interestingly enough, I don't hear anyone arguing that Bush/Cheney are not guilty (although I suppose there must be some fools out there still). We might hope that if seriously threatened with impeachment Bush/Cheney might, following Nixon, resign (but in their case probably not as neither one of them has any shred of decency or interest in the well being of our nation, and besides, they are probably worried about being tried for war crimes if they are out of office). As most of the Senators and members of the House were in some way complicit with our illegal attack on Iraq, and thus in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, perhaps they are all too afraid of the consequences that might result from taking action.

I doubt the Founding Fathers ever conceived of a situation quite as dismal as this one. I think I can hear them calling from their graves - impeach, impeach, impeach. No one seems to be listening to them either.

LKBIQ:
"In a democratic society like ours, relief must come through an aroused popular conscience that sears the conscience of the people's representatives."
Felix Frankfurter

No comments: