Posted on 03/31/2006 2:45:19 PM PST by RetiredArmy
Democrats' Impeachment Agenda
By Jeff Kuhner, Mar 31, 2006
President Bush beware: Democrats are gearing up for an impeachment campaign. This may seem ridiculous. But if the Democrats capture control of Congress in the November elections, then this nightmarish scenario is very likely to become a reality.
Sen. Russell Feingold, Wisconsin Democrat, is proposing that Mr. Bush be “censured” for approving wiretaps on al Qaeda terrorist suspects without a court warrant. Leading congressional Democrats are distancing themselves from the idea. But liberal bloggers and grassroots activists are strongly supporting Mr. Feingold’s initiative. His bold attacks are resonating with Democrats, especially with the Howard Dean-MoveOn.org-Michael Moore voters that increasingly make up the core of the party.
In fact, should they retake the House or Senate (or both) censure will serve to pave the way for formal impeachment proceedings.
The logic of the Democrats’ rhetoric and their intense—almost pathological—hatred of Mr. Bush ensure that this will happen. The arguments of Mr. Feingold, Al Gore, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California all boil down to the same point: Mr. Bush broke the law. They assert that the president illegally authorized the National Security Agency to engage in domestic electronic surveillance without a warrant from a secret court, thereby violating the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Their claims are false. Contrary to their assertions, from the program’s inception the NSA wiretaps were disclosed to leading members of Congress, including top Democrats; judges on the FISA court were made aware of the program’s existence; and the attorney general’s office and lawyers from the Justice Department closely monitored the program to make sure no abuses took place.
Yet this hasn’t stopped Democrats—or the mainstream media—from denouncing Mr. Bush’s actions as “illegal spying.” Having outflanked and outmaneuvered the Democrats ever since coming into office in 2000, the president has become public enemy number one. The liberal establishment is desperately searching for a way to cripple the Bush presidency.
Impeachment is their ticket. Currently, prominent liberal journals, such as Harper’s Magazine, and influential leftist blogs like the Huffington Post are making the case for impeachment. Cities and towns are passing resolutions supporting it.
More importantly, the issue is gaining traction among prominent Democrats.
In a highly publicized speech on Jan. 16, Mr. Gore laid the groundwork for an impeachment campaign. “A president who breaks the law is a threat to the very structure of our government,” (I wonder if he was talking about his former partner in crime, Bill Clinton??) he said.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, California Democrat, last year asked four leading scholars for their opinion on whether the NSA wiretaps are impeachable.
Yet the key figure is Rep. John Conyers Jr., Michigan Democrat and ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee. Mr. Conyers is leading a small but growing caucus of House liberal Democrats calling for a formal investigation into the administration’s alleged abuses of power. He has introduced a resolution, which has 33 co-sponsors, demanding the establishment of a “select committee,” whose ultimate purpose is “to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.” Should the Democrats win back the House, Mr. Conyers will become the new chairman of the Judiciary Committee. And Judiciary is the House committee in which formal impeachment proceedings must begin and then proceed to the floor.
Key Republicans are beginning to take notice. “The Democrats' plan for 2006?" Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman wrote in a fundraising e-mail last week. "Take the House and Senate and impeach the president.”,p>
All of this means nothing as long as the congressional Republicans remain in power. In theory, impeachment should be about the law—namely, whether a president’s ethical and legal transgressions rise to the level of a “high crime and misdemeanor.” Clearly, the Democrats’ case against Mr. Bush is without legal merit. In reality, however, impeachment is about politics, and whether there are enough votes in Congress to go forward with it.
A Democratic victory in November will unleash a maelstrom of liberal support, first for censure, and then finally for impeachment. As the 2008 presidential campaign and fierce Democratic nomination fight nears, the momentum of the Bush-bashing, pro-impeachment forces will become unstoppable. More mainstream candidates, such as Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Kerry and maybe even Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, will feel compelled to follow the lead of left-wing firebrands like Mr. Feingold and Mr. Gore, lest they risk alienating the party’s leftist progressive base.
Mr. Bush may find himself spending much of the latter half of his second term fighting for his very survival just like Bill Clinton did from 1998 until February 1999—a point that is not lost on many Democrats.
Mr. Feingold’s censure proposal is in fact a boon to the GOP; it should sound as an alarm bell foretelling the dangers awaiting Republicans should they lose in November. What is at stake is not only their status as the majority party, but the ability of Mr. Bush to effectively conduct his duties as commander-in-chief in a time of war. Republicans cannot say they were not warned.
This article first appeared on Insight on the News.
Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a regular contributor to the Commentary Pages at The Washington Times and editor of Insight on the News where this article originally appeared.
Did you think this started 21 Jan 2001?
No, but since then there have been as many illegal immigrants as during the entirety of post-WW2 history combined. Under Bush the invasion has accelerated to a breathtaking pace. Make no mistake - this President has been actively encouraging it with word and deed and because of that we have far more illegal aliens here than if he had merely maintained the status quo.
Cite your sources for this allegation. Otherwise it sounds like a talking point from the Dems, when they are playing their deck of race cards.
Look it up for yourself - your inexplicable "race card" comment which betrays your lack of honesty in asking the question, so you'll get no effort from me.
You're no effort to begin with.Keep the lying and dodging the question for the rest of your lost cause compatriots. Go ahead, admit you'd be thrilled if the Democrats regain Congress, admit you and your ilk can't wait to see this President in extremis. Trot on over to LPP or that other waste of , wait sorry, that other bastion of the "true and principled" conservatives, you know, the friends of the Democratic(read Communist slave master) party. Enjoy the ride.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.