Conyers: Judiciary Committee not holding ‘impeachment hearings’

Nick Juliano
Raw story
Friday, July 25, 2008 

The chief dispute early in Friday’s Judiciary Committee hearing on George W. Bush’s “imperial presidency” seemed to focus on whether it was or not actually an “impeachment hearing.”

Although the hearing’s catalyst was Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s introduction of dozens of articles of impeachment against Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, many Democratic committee members seemed hesitant to even utter the dreaded I-word.

A committee aide tells RAW STORY that members were cautioned to abide by the Rules of the House, which prohibit lawmakers from “impugning” the president’s character during official debate. Some apparently took this to mean they could not explicitly call for Bush’ impeachment. None of this would stop Republicans from accusing the committee’s majority of seeking just that.

(Article continues below)

The prepared text of Chairman John Conyers opening remarks referred to Congress’s “power to impeach.” When he spoke before the committee, Conyers modified that line to the “power to remove through the constitutional process” officials who abused their powers.

Kucinich was similarly circumspect in his testimony to the committee.

“The question for Congress is this: what responsibility does the President and members of his Administration have for that unnecessary, unprovoked and unjustified war?” he asked. “The rules of the House prevent me or any witness from utilizing familiar terms. But we can put two and two together in our minds. We can draw inferences about culpability. …

“I ask this committee to think, and then to act, in order to enable this Congress to right a very great wrong and to hold accountable those who misled this nation,” he concluded.

Kucinich’s colleague Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) was far more straightforward.

“Based on all of the things this administration has done, it is probably the most impeachable administration in the history of America,” said Hinchey, who appeared alongside Kucinich and North Carolina Reps. Walter Jones and Brad Miller.

In his opening statement Friday, Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL), a Kucinich ally in his push’s for impeachment, also threw caution to the wind, outlining an array of Bush administration abuses, he said “certainly include high crimes” including ordering illegal torture and authorizing warrantless wiretapping.

“I am convinced the most appropriate response … is to hold hearings for impeachment,” Wexler said.

Similarly undeterred from mentioning impeachment was Rep. Hank Johnson (D-TX), who echoed Wexler’s sentiment and warned of the potential consequences of not pursuing impeachment now.

“If this administration during the last 6 months decides to attack the sovereign nation of Iran,” he said, “then Americans will look back and think and rethink whether it would have been worth pursuing impeachment at this time, to deter any further misdoing by this administration.”

Committee Republicans weren’t having any of the Democrats’ hesitance.

“These are impeachment hearings before the United States Congress,” said Rep. Steve King (R-IA), pointing out that Conyers’s essentially called for impeachment himself even if he didn’t precisely say the word.

Several other Republicans echoed the same sentiment, defending Bush from accusations of “high crimes and misdemeanors” that weren’t actually the primary issue Friday.

“To the regret of many, this is not an impeachment hearing,” Conyers said, pointing out that the full House has not voted to authorize such an inquiry as House rules require.

Hundreds gather for hearing
More than 100 spectators, including dozens of representatives of anti-war group Code Pink, began assembling outside the hearing room more than an hour before the hearing began. The Capitol Hill hearing room was packed to capacity, leaving dozens of activists out in the hallway, unable to enter; some chanted “Shame!” or “We want in!”

The hearing began about 15 minutes after its scheduled start time with Conyers’s opening statement.

“We know the executive branch can and does overreach during times of war,” Conyers said. “As one who was included on President Nixon’s enemies list, I am all too familiar with the specter of an unchecked executive branch. And the risks to our citizens’ rights are even graver today, as the war on terror has no specific end point.”

More than a dozen witnesses were scheduled to testify, beginning with Kucinich, who accuses Bush and Cheney of lying to Congress in their pursuit of war in Iraq, among a host of other abuses.

“The decision before us is whether Congress will endorse with its silence the methods used to take us into the Iraq war,” Kucinich will say, according to his prepared testimony. “The decision before us is whether to demand accountability for one of the gravest injustices imaginable.”

The committee’s top Republican, Lamar Smith, mocked the proceedings, comparing them to last month’s hearing featuring former White House spokesman Scott McClellan, who recently wrote a tell-all memoir about his time as Bush’s spokesman.

“If last month it appeared we hosted a ‘book of the month club,’ this week it seems that we are hosting an anger management class,” Smith said. “Nothing is going to come out of this hearing with regard to impeachment of the President. I know it, the media knows it, even the Speaker knows it. … This hearing will not cause us to impeach the President; it will only serve to impeach our own credibility.”

The American Civil Liberties union praised Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers for convening Friday’s hearing.

“Every year this administration has been in power has compounded the damage to our ideals and Constitution,” Caroline Fredrickson, director the ACLU’s Washington legislative office, said in a press release. “An executive branch that demands and holds too much power tips the scales of our system of checks and balances.”

• 
• Social bookmarks
• 
• Email this article
• 
• Print this page

Comment Terms Of Use

5 Responses to “Conyers: Judiciary Committee not holding ‘impeachment hearings’”

1. elephant memory Says:
   July 25th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

   John Conyers is total paid for scum.just look at the guy ,you can tell he is so compromised just looking at the guy.

2. andy in fla Says:
   July 25th, 2008 at 2:06 pm

   DICKS WITH EARS

3. TrumanShow Says:
   July 25th, 2008 at 6:18 pm

   I think Conyers is one of the few honest people in Washington. Like he said, the House has to vote to have impeachment proceedings. Its not up to Conyers by himself.
   Dont be too hard on him.

4. dave Says:
   July 26th, 2008 at 12:52 am

   You guys should support the few congresspeople who are brave enough to take a stand on this, a stand which you supposedly support. If you don’t understand congressional procedure, buy a book and read it. But don’t spout off nonsense, which frankly can’t even make sense to you, when you don’t have a clue what is going on there.

5. changedname Says:
   July 26th, 2008 at 9:25 am

   If Conyers has been threatened somehow by these leaders who stole their way into office it will not matter what he does…In the end he will pay a huge price anyway! As the mobster’s say in the movies when they snuff someone…It’s nothing personal..It’s just business!