DEMOCRAT'S IMPEACHMENT AGENDA

Townhall News.com ^ | March 31. 2006 | Jeffrey T. Kuhner

[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.

[sinkspur]

You have GOT to be kidding. Please say you are kidding.

Nope. One of them just outed himself right here on this thread.

[conservative blonde]

They would lose badly if they based a case on Article 4,Sec. 4

[COEXERJ145]

Read any immigration thread and you'll see who they are.

[thoughtomator]

I'm talking about the responsibility to defend the country from invasion... 20 million Mexicans constitutes an invasion by any reasonable definition of the term.

[onyx]

BUMP!

[onyx]

Seven?

[Osage Orange]

influential leftist blogs like the Huffington Post

HHAAAQAWWWAAAAAHHHHHAAAAAHHWWWWAAAAAAHH!!!

[Howlin]

at least a half-dozen

Gross undercount. I've seen about 30 myself.

[COEXERJ145]

I'd say it is closer to 100 but 50 of these all signed up within the last few months.

[Flux Capacitor]

----I'm keeping a list----

I don't doubt it.

You know what I'll do if impeachment ever gets going under a Democrat House? I'll sit back and say, "Fine." Because I no longer care what happens to this sell-out of a president. He's made his bed, and he'll lie in it.

And then I'll watch you and the rest of the GWB-fanwanker contingent at FR (which, I regret to inform you, is shrinking daily as Bush continues to characterize Americans as lazy slobs) foam at the mouth over your Golden Boy being called on the carpet.

And then I'll laugh. :)

-Dan

[Howlin]

If they get both, you can bet your last bottom dollar that they will do everything in their power to pay back for Clinton, everything!

The first thing they will do is dismantle the Electoral College.

[tobyhill]

I've been looking at the type of language each and everyone of these idiots use and I'll bet it's one or two that are just switching screen names.

[Howlin]

For the life of me, I can't understand what the HELL is wrong with some of the posters on this forum.

I apologize to you for that crappy remark.

[tobyhill]

Since you don't care what happens to this President, why are you still here talking about it?

[Howlin]

Make that at least seven. :)

Let me get this straight: you're FOR impeaching Bush?

[sinkspur]

I'll sit back and say, "Fine."

Translation: I'll lay low lest I get my ass banned.

[Modok]

Understood. The case on the electronic eavesdropping though is nothing but hot air and will not go forward.

[Jim Robinson]

If you want to impeach Bush, go join the trolls at DU. Keep it OFF FR.
Jim

[Howlin]

You have GOT to be kidding. Please say you are kidding.

There's more than half a dozen.

[NeoCaveman]

There will be a contingent on this website cheering him on.

Posters cheering Feingold's impeachment is as improbable as posters cheering a Kennedy immigration bill.......

Wait, that has happend? No way!

OK, you could be right.

We are in some sort of strange twilight zone of politics