Op-Ed
Congressman Jerrold Nadler, Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties, said today that there is no question that the warrantless wiretaping engaged in by the Bush Administration is a felony offense and that the President and Attorney General engaged in a criminal conspiracy worse than Watergate. Nadler was referring not to the mysterious program that the Acting Attorney General refused to support, but rather to the program the Attorney General approved of. Nadler said he finds the lack of attention to the obvious criminality of the President "incredible." The same could be said of Nadler's failure to support impeachment.
VIDEO
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/014509.php
TRANSCRIPT
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/23392
MARSHALL: Hi, this is John Marshall from TPM Media. We're here this morning with Congressman Jerrold Nadler of the 8th District of New York, which covers...lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn?
VIDEO
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/014509.php
TRANSCRIPT
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/23392
MARSHALL: Hi, this is John Marshall from TPM Media. We're here this morning with Congressman Jerrold Nadler of the 8th District of New York, which covers...lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn?
I looked up when Ed pointed to the butte that loomed suddenly in the bend of the mountain road and said, “See. That’s where they should go, right there.”
And for an instant I imagined them towering against the big sky over Los Alamos, N.M.: two white granite “peace obelisks” 30 feet high, signaling to everyone entering or leaving the Atomic City, birthplace of The Bomb and home for 60-plus years of the national weapons lab that bears its name, that a counter-consciousness has staked its claim in the heart of the nuclear weapons industry. Their inscription begins:
“Welcome to Los Alamos, New Mexico, the United States of America, the city of fire. Our fires are brighter than a thousand suns. It was once believed that only God could destroy the world, but scientists working in Los Alamos first harnessed the power of the atom. The power released through fission and fusion gives many men the ability to commence the destruction of all life on earth. . . .”
And for an instant I imagined them towering against the big sky over Los Alamos, N.M.: two white granite “peace obelisks” 30 feet high, signaling to everyone entering or leaving the Atomic City, birthplace of The Bomb and home for 60-plus years of the national weapons lab that bears its name, that a counter-consciousness has staked its claim in the heart of the nuclear weapons industry. Their inscription begins:
“Welcome to Los Alamos, New Mexico, the United States of America, the city of fire. Our fires are brighter than a thousand suns. It was once believed that only God could destroy the world, but scientists working in Los Alamos first harnessed the power of the atom. The power released through fission and fusion gives many men the ability to commence the destruction of all life on earth. . . .”
In March 2006, former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter posted an article online proposing that the antiwar movement learn techniques from warriors. Ritter developed the article into the recently released book "Waging Peace: The Art of War for the Antiwar Movement." At the same time, Ritter has just posted online a new provocative article urging the impeachment movement to advocate instead for "repudiation." There is some reason to hope that this new article will not come back as a book in 2008.
Whatever Ritter writes about peace and impeachment, he has already done tremendous service through his truth telling about Iraq's lack of weapons of mass destruction. Ritter spoke up prior to, as well as during, the occupation of Iraq. He and I have spoken on panels together, and I find him a much better speaker than writer. While the peace movement is very far from victory, it has made more progress than Ritter believes, and he himself has been a significant part of that.
Whatever Ritter writes about peace and impeachment, he has already done tremendous service through his truth telling about Iraq's lack of weapons of mass destruction. Ritter spoke up prior to, as well as during, the occupation of Iraq. He and I have spoken on panels together, and I find him a much better speaker than writer. While the peace movement is very far from victory, it has made more progress than Ritter believes, and he himself has been a significant part of that.
Dear Mr. President,
From the mind’s prison, I release you – consider your time as served. However, Mr. President, be mindful that your freedom was not earned, nor was it reward for good behavior. Rather, your freedom was granted of my epiphany, after more than six years, that a mind consumed with holding one captive is a mind itself held in captivity.
I, as the jailer, had become as imprisoned as the jailed.
You were taken prisoner when you took the presidency, winning the best out of nine despite the least out of millions. I first considered your release in the days following that bright and terrible blue sky morning in September, when the eloquence of your words and the newfound poise of your presence guided our nation through its grief. Then you misled our grief to war, waged on a people who played no part in our tragedy.
For that despicable deed I condemned you, in the court of my mind, to a life sentence in my mind’s prison, without chance for parole.
I held you in the same manner that you hold your “enemy combatants”, without due process or appeal. Shameful, that, I must now admit.
From the mind’s prison, I release you – consider your time as served. However, Mr. President, be mindful that your freedom was not earned, nor was it reward for good behavior. Rather, your freedom was granted of my epiphany, after more than six years, that a mind consumed with holding one captive is a mind itself held in captivity.
I, as the jailer, had become as imprisoned as the jailed.
You were taken prisoner when you took the presidency, winning the best out of nine despite the least out of millions. I first considered your release in the days following that bright and terrible blue sky morning in September, when the eloquence of your words and the newfound poise of your presence guided our nation through its grief. Then you misled our grief to war, waged on a people who played no part in our tragedy.
For that despicable deed I condemned you, in the court of my mind, to a life sentence in my mind’s prison, without chance for parole.
I held you in the same manner that you hold your “enemy combatants”, without due process or appeal. Shameful, that, I must now admit.
Eighteen months ago Congressman John Murtha and other pro-war Democrats had not yet developed even a muddled half-hearted opposition to the occupation of Iraq, Joe Lieberman had not lost a primary, MoveOn.org and the Center for American Progress were pretending there was no such thing as Iraq, and the Democratic Party had shoved its collective head so far up… well, let’s just say the pretense was alive and well that Iraq was not the central issue in American politics.
Eighteen months from now, in November 2008, the political scene in the United States will look drastically different from what we see today. We can't predict with certainty what it will look like, but we can be sure of one thing: if we stay focused now on the election coming in 18 months, the election will go badly for us. If, instead, we focus now on trying to end the occupation, we could quite conceivably succeed in doing so before the election, and in any event significantly move the nation's political debate in a direction that will benefit humanity as well as the electoral interests of those closest to us.
Eighteen months from now, in November 2008, the political scene in the United States will look drastically different from what we see today. We can't predict with certainty what it will look like, but we can be sure of one thing: if we stay focused now on the election coming in 18 months, the election will go badly for us. If, instead, we focus now on trying to end the occupation, we could quite conceivably succeed in doing so before the election, and in any event significantly move the nation's political debate in a direction that will benefit humanity as well as the electoral interests of those closest to us.
Advocates for impeachment can take some measure of encouragement not just from the 85 cities and towns and 14 state Democratic parties that have passed impeachment resolutions, or the 11 state legislatures that have introduced them (Maine was #11 on Tuesday), but also from comments made Tuesday evening in Detroit by House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers.
For about a year now there have been two Congressmen Conyers, the defender of our Constitution and the follower of Nancy Pelosi in her ban on impeachment. Citizens in Detroit organized a town hall forum on impeachment and invited the Congressman. Both John Conyerses came on Tuesday, and they both left partway through the event. But, judging by the Associated Press story, Conyers the impeachment advocate was winning the internal battle.
There's a very short version of the AP report posted on websites including http://www.wlns.com/Global/story.asp?S=6583728&nav=0RbQ and http://www.wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=6583728
For about a year now there have been two Congressmen Conyers, the defender of our Constitution and the follower of Nancy Pelosi in her ban on impeachment. Citizens in Detroit organized a town hall forum on impeachment and invited the Congressman. Both John Conyerses came on Tuesday, and they both left partway through the event. But, judging by the Associated Press story, Conyers the impeachment advocate was winning the internal battle.
There's a very short version of the AP report posted on websites including http://www.wlns.com/Global/story.asp?S=6583728&nav=0RbQ and http://www.wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=6583728
Over the past two months of repeated Congressional votes to fund the occupation of Iraq, culminating in President Bush's signing the bill on Friday, what – if anything – have we learned? Have we learned anything about individuals or political parties or activist organizations to trust or despise, or have we learned better what to demand of them regardless of such emotions? Have we learned anything about policies to support, battles to lose, pyrrhic victories, or how to talk about ending the occupation?
A clear and growing majority of Americans wants to end the occupation. Yet many people are opposed to defunding it. So, not enough of us have learned that you cannot end this occupation without defunding it. And far too few of us fully understand that ultimately we'll need impeachment before the occupation actually ends.
A clear and growing majority of Americans wants to end the occupation. Yet many people are opposed to defunding it. So, not enough of us have learned that you cannot end this occupation without defunding it. And far too few of us fully understand that ultimately we'll need impeachment before the occupation actually ends.
I picked up a pamphlet the other day that said "Just for You" at the top, so I assumed it was just for me. Much of the front page contained an image of soldiers marching, and next to them the words "What's your exit strategy?" That's easy, I thought. Impeachment, removal, indictment, and conviction. But was this really a pamphlet about peace? I read the text at the bottom of the front page:
"In the 1960s and 1970s, the United States had thousands of troops in Vietnam. Citizens sharply criticized the government. The United States wanted out, but found it hard to develop an exit strategy. More recently, the United States government came under attack for not having an exit strategy in Iraq. One writer has said that a general…"
OK, so I had to open it. And I immediately saw a bunch of quotes from "your Lord and Saviour [sic]." It turned out to be a pamphlet about personal strategies for "exiting" your life and flying off to Never Never Land.
"In the 1960s and 1970s, the United States had thousands of troops in Vietnam. Citizens sharply criticized the government. The United States wanted out, but found it hard to develop an exit strategy. More recently, the United States government came under attack for not having an exit strategy in Iraq. One writer has said that a general…"
OK, so I had to open it. And I immediately saw a bunch of quotes from "your Lord and Saviour [sic]." It turned out to be a pamphlet about personal strategies for "exiting" your life and flying off to Never Never Land.
The cave-in on Capitol Hill -- supplying a huge new jolt of
funds for the horrific war effort in Iraq -- is surprising only to those
who haven’t grasped our current circumstances.
Public opinion polls aren’t the same as political leverage. The Vietnam War went on for years after polling showed that most Americans opposed the war and even saw it as immoral.
Slick phrases about the need to bring our troops home can easily become little more than platitudes on wallpaper in media echo chambers.
No matter how many Democrats are in Congress, they won’t end this war unless an antiwar movement develops enough grassroots strength to compel them to do so.
Unfortunately -- and unnecessarily -- for years now the Internet powerhouse MoveOn.org has often functioned as a virtual appendage of the national Democratic Party. That close relationship has largely squandered MoveOn’s opportunities to help build strong deep independent activism for the long haul. And, on crucial issues of the Iraq war, MoveOn has failed to back the positions of such gutsy progressive visionaries as Reps. Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters.
Public opinion polls aren’t the same as political leverage. The Vietnam War went on for years after polling showed that most Americans opposed the war and even saw it as immoral.
Slick phrases about the need to bring our troops home can easily become little more than platitudes on wallpaper in media echo chambers.
No matter how many Democrats are in Congress, they won’t end this war unless an antiwar movement develops enough grassroots strength to compel them to do so.
Unfortunately -- and unnecessarily -- for years now the Internet powerhouse MoveOn.org has often functioned as a virtual appendage of the national Democratic Party. That close relationship has largely squandered MoveOn’s opportunities to help build strong deep independent activism for the long haul. And, on crucial issues of the Iraq war, MoveOn has failed to back the positions of such gutsy progressive visionaries as Reps. Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters.
Another day, another impeachable offense. If this one were on a television show we'd all flip it off in disgust as too unlikely. The President phones up a hospital to demand that the ailing Attorney General (who has turned over his duties and is disoriented) admit the President's legal counsel and chief of staff so that they can ask him to sign off on an illegal spying program. The AG refuses to sign off. The acting AG, who is fully conscious but considers the program illegal, also refuses to sign off. The White House goes ahead and launches the program anyway, a program that involves the FBI, a program so dramatically illegal or offensive that the serial criminals running the Justice Department refuse to go along with it.