John Conyers, writing in today’s Washington Post, explains his plans for BushCo. if and when he becomes the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
…rather than seeking impeachment, I have chosen to propose comprehensive oversight of these alleged abuses. The oversight I have suggested would be performed by a select committee made up equally of Democrats and Republicans and chosen by the House speaker and the minority leader.
The committee’s job would be to obtain answers — finally. At the end of the process, if — and only if — the select committee, acting on a bipartisan basis, finds evidence of potentially impeachable offenses, it would forward that information to the Judiciary Committee. This threshold of bipartisanship is appropriate, I believe, when dealing with an issue of this magnitude.
Conyers reasoning for this is interesting. I’m not sure whether to take him seriously or whether to chalk it up to political calculation.
It was House Republicans who took power in 1995 with immediate plans to undermine President Bill Clinton by any means necessary, and they did so in the most autocratic, partisan and destructive ways imaginable. If there is any lesson from those “revolutionaries,” it is that partisan vendettas ultimately provoke a public backlash and are never viewed as legitimate.
impeachment
Perhaps nothing is as contentious as the debate over the Republican’s drive to oust Bill Clinton from power. The media seems to see the effort as a quixotic failure. I have never understood their reasoning. It’s true that the GOP suffered moderate losses in the 1998 elections. But they so tarnished Clinton’s presidency that it undoubtedly cost Al Gore the chance to succeed him. The Republicans had to wait two years, but their malicious and relentless attacks on Clinton eventually overwhelmed the Democrats and drove them from power in any branch of government.
The Democrats are facing a much different situation. The Republicans were faced with an effective President that had personal failings. The Democrats are faced with a criminal that has run our country into a ditch economically, politically, and militarily. Even more disturbing, this administration has challenged the traditional balance of powers and has violated the constitution by ignoring treaties, inflicting cruel and unusual punishment, holding citizens without charges, and conducting unreasonable searches.
A bipartisan select committee with an equal number of Republicans and Democrats strikes me as a recipe for another whitewash. Maybe it is the best way to move forward, but I am skeptical that the Republicans will work cooperatively to compel the type of testimony that we need to establish the case for multiple articles of impeachment. And I have no doubt that impeachment is the only way forward with this administration. Conyers is correct that we can’t put the cart before the horse. First we win the midterms, then we investigate, then we build a case so unassailable that the public will demand removal from office. The GOP is terrified and they should be terrified. Will offering them a chance to sit in equal judgment on a select committee give them a chance to wiggle off the hook? Or is it the perfect way to ensure that an impeachment is seen as bipartisan and not some vendetta?
My instincts tell me that it would be a mistake to give Minority Leader Hastert the power to appoint members to a select committee in equal numbers to Speaker Pelosi. I’d much rather John Conyers just bulldoze it through his Judiciary Committee where he has the power to compel testimony. I do understand his desire to make any investigations appear to be bipartisan but sometimes it pays to use the power you have rather than immediately turn around and give it back to your opponents.
What say you?
in November, the Republicans left in Congress might see that they have to go along, or they’ll be in even worse shape in 2008.
I honestly don’t think that Conyers would stand for a whitewash…but he’s enough of a pragmatist to know that anything less than a bipartisan effort is just going to re-invigorate the Faux News folks into screaming about political dirty tricks and the Pat Robertsons to proclaim that the evil Democrats are persecuting God’s Chosen Leader…
Conyers’ colleagues across the aisle will stop at no lengths to retain their power at the top. They will undermine all efforts to genuinely, bi-partisanly get to the bottom of things [not necessarily the truth whatever that means].
I’m with you BooMan, Conyers has to take this thing into his own hands in the House JC and clean house.
I mean, it seems to me like even if he has an equal number of Republicans on the committee, he’s the one who can direct subpoenas, compel witnesses to testify under oath and the like.
Now me, I think I’d have an equal number of Democrats and Republicans on the committee, plus Conyers. That way he’s the deciding vote.
We shall see.
I don’t know how that would work. The Ethics Committee would be the example I’d look at, and that doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies.
and what I figured he would do…he just has to work with whomever is in the Democratic leadership to make sure we have solid Democrats on the committee who wouldn’t defect to the other side if it came down to a party line vote…
My take: Conyers is out-Rethugging up the Rethugs to take away the fear card (fear as in “Aiyeee! They’re gonna impeach him, they’re gonna impeach him!!”). After the mid-term Democratic sweep, he’ll convene the solidly Democratic Judiciary Committee and send W whining back to Connecticut, this time to a country-club prison.
Right-I don’t know the M.O. of all the players, but if Conyers doesnt play HARDBALL ( which he is free to do in a velvet-glove way) it will be an embarrassing whitewash. How much worse if he plays the Gentleman and the bad ones play along, then stab him in the back.I know- unthinkable! One thing I think Dems haven’t internallized is the Pubs play for keeps and do not play nice, and dammit even REPUBLICANS would respect democrats more if they didn’t act like- lets face it- wusses! I hope this is political judo and not another “earnest” democrat why-cant-we-all-just-get-along move. Kumbaya indeed!!
And I am not a troll so don’t misread me.
I supect Conyers is going for something bigger: the right of Congress to unconditional oversight. Impeachment derives from that, but more important so does restraint of the Executive branch.
What bothers me most about this moderation in the the face of massive criminality is the backdrop of a press that imputes legitimacy to all Republican actions no matter how heinous, not because of any cultural bias but because the press itself is central to the “conservative” project of privatizing public welfare and security.
for oranginess.