Speaker of the House - nominal "leader" of Congress - NANCY PELOSI's REFUSAL to use ANY MEANS other than LITIGATION (long, drawn out civil lawsuits) against the Bush administration/Mukasey "Justice" Department OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESSIONAL SUBPOENA, is COWARDLY and COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE to the Democrat's long-term political goals of wresting power (congressional majorities) and combating the "NARRATIVE" that Conservatives know what is best for America. (When, left to their own, laissez-faire devices, Conservative policies historically result in RECESSIONS if not GREAT economic DEPRESSIONS.)
Unless, of course, Ms. Pelosi more closely identifies with her "top 2%" economic status, than she does with the fight of rank-and-file Democratic voters for jobs, wages, health-care, a free and competent press/media, health-care, access to higher education, clean food and water, an education system based on science and rational investigation and not authoritarian interpretations of the bible and church...
IF Ms. Pelosi is indeed a "MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE" Republican out to RUIN the Democratic Party, in the near-term and long-term, her PATHETIC decision to resolve administration CRIMINAL OBSTRUCTION of JUSTICE by RESORTING TO LITIGATION will indeed be a "successful" Republican-in-Democrat's clothing agenda.
==================================================
Democrats: Impeach, or Face Humiliation in November
Written by R.W. Behan
by Richard W. Behan
http://atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3540/32/
If the Democrats persist in stonewalling the impeachment of George Bush and Richard Cheney, they invite a humiliating defeat in the presidential election this fall.
For more than a year, the Democrats have gamed the system of Constitutional democracy, refusing to impeach—“It would be too divisive”—in order to assure a Democratic victory in 2008. But the year produced some surprises, and now their scheme stands an excellent chance of backfiring.
A year ago, John McCain’s candidacy languished. Today he is the Republican nominee and a formidable opponent. A year ago, Hillary Clinton’s nomination was “inevitable. Today she clings to a minuscule possibility of succeeding in her vitriolic campaign against Barack Obama, who holds a commanding lead in pledged delegates.
The savage nature of the contest is polarizing the Democratic party—to Mr. McCain’s considerable benefit.
And the Democrats’ refusal to impeach has now become a grave liability: it adds enormously to Mr. McCain’s advantage.
Failing to impeach leaves unchallenged and intact the manufactured, distorted “reality” the Bush Administration has imposed on the country—of a perilous and fearful world, necessary warfare, and unending militarism. This is the result of seven years of conscious and effective propagandizing by the Administration, to justify its monstrous deceit: the so-called war on terror. But this bizarre “reality” of fear is now the base-datum of political discourse.
The fear-mongering has succeeded. “Keeping America safe in the war on terror” remains a slogan of great power, and it bolsters Mr. McCain’s stature—and his campaign—with political potence.
Current tracking polls show the general election tilting slightly toward Mr. McCain. Can he sustain and widen this advantage, and win in November?
Start with the pall of fear and a decorated war hero, and add a Bush Administration announcement, say two weeks before voting day, of a red-alert terrorist threat; a Democratic victory is far from certain. Now add the full court press of a Republican presidential campaign—spin, hype, smear, attack ads, deception, Swiftboating, and voting fraud; a Democratic victory is in greater jeopardy still.
Finally, add the Fox television network, which Mr. McCain can reliably include as part of his campaign staff. A recent AP story reported the Fox network is now the most popular in the country, averaging two million more viewers per week than its closest rival.
In an election drama staged by the Bush Administration and produced by Fox television, a Democratic success is remote.
The point of major vulnerability here is George Bush’ staging: the base-datum of fear, militarism, and warmaking.
If this staging can be deconstructed, the way is clear for a Democratic victory, and for desperately needed new trajectories in both foreign and domestic policy, as well.
But the staging is deeply embedded. Not a murmur of protest was registered when President Bush said in his State of the Union speech, “The advance of liberty is opposed by terrorists and extremists—evil men who despise freedom, despise America , and aim to subject millions to their violent rule
Following along faithfully, Mr. McCain decries the Democratic candidates’ pledge to bring the troops home. “I believe that would have catastrophic consequences,” Mr. McCain said. “I believe al Qaeda would trumpet to the world that they had defeated the United States of America , and I believe that therefore they would try to follow us home.”
Worldwide, al Qaeda numbers some 18,000 operatives in 60 different countries, according to the UK ’s International Institute for Strategic Studies. Suppose in fact they “try to follow us home.”
By what means of transportation will 18,000 terrorists reach the homeland of 303 million people—who are protected by the mightiest military in history? Also unexplained is how, thereafter, we might be made “subject to their violent rule.” But the imagery and the words are now widely accepted—rarely scrutinized—and they can’t be quickly deconstructed.
Successful deconstruction can be done only with an abrupt, even explosive eruption of truth, done in full view of the mass media.
The Congressional Democrats have a unique institutional ability to do this. George Bush and Richard Cheney must be impeached. There is no other forum where their hideous violations of law and the public trust can be displayed—and their staging collapsed—with such immediacy, visibility, and integrity.
The Bush Administration distorted reality to justify and rationalize its signature violation: their so-called “war on terror.” The Administration’s true priority, however, was not counterterrorism but Middle East energy assets, according to countless news stories, books, and testimonials (shamefully few of which appeared in the U.S. mass media). They were all written by people constrained by libel laws to tell the truth.
Truth about a standing offer from the Taliban to surrender Osama bin Laden, awaiting President Bush when he took office. Truth about the Bush Administration spurning the offer three times before September 11, 2001, and twice thereafter.
Truth about the Bush Administration meeting repeatedly with the Taliban in early 2001, unsuccessfully negotiating a pipeline route in behalf of the Unocal Corporation. Truth about the Administration notifying Pakistan in July of 2001 “…military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.” Truth about the Administration finally telling the Taliban, “ Accept our offer of a carpet of gold or we bury you under a carpet of bombs”—five weeks before 9/11. Truth about repeated written proposals to invade Iraq , spanning the two Bush Administrations and made by four people who served in both—prominently including Richard Cheney. Truth about their triumph when the National Security Council, seven months before 9/11, formalized the commitment to invade Iraq . Truth about Richard Cheney’s Energy Task Force studying maps of the Iraqi oil fields in March of 2001. Truth about the Administration designing the privatization of Iraq ’s nationalized oil industry, fully a year before Congress authorized military action.
Truth about the Bush Administration rejecting a peaceful regime change in Iraq —by denying Saddam Hussein’s offer to leave the country for exile in Egypt or Saudi Arabia . Truth about former consultants to the Unocal Corporation serving as the president of Afghanistan and the second US ambassador there; the first ambassador was a Unocal vice president. Truth about the Bush Administration’s readiness in 2003 to finance a pipeline across Afghanistan and station troops permanently to defend it. Truth about Exxon/Mobil, Conoco/Phillips, Shell, and BP/Amoco poised today to profit immensely from 81% of Iraq ’s undeveloped crude.
The conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq are territorial wars for energy dominance, not acts of counter-terrorism. At George Bush’s sufferance, the arch-terrorist Osama bin Laden remains free, but Afghanistan and Iraq are administered today by puppet governments and dotted with permanent military bases.
The Congress has finally confronted the Administration’s duplicity. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 expressly prohibited the permanence of military bases in Iraq , and denied funds “to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq .” President Bush nullified both provisions with a signing statement.
The “war on terror” is the mega-lie, from which all the other lies flowed—about weapons of mass destruction, aluminum tubes, mobile laboratories, Nigerian yellowcake, and Saddam Hussein harboring al Qaeda. The mega-lie brought torture, suspension of habeas corpus, domestic spying, cronyism and no-bid contracts, destruction of video tapes, outing an undercover CIA agent, “rendition,” murder and rape by contract U.S. mercenaries, and so on beyond counting. 34,000 young American men and women dead or wounded; hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghanis killed; millions of refugees fleeing their homes; economies and cultures in shambles; infrastructure in ruins; sectarian violence; a destabilized region; a half a trillion dollars squandered; America’ prestige destroyed and her citizens defamed.
Mr. McCain, the Fox network, and most Republicans reject such truths as the manic rantings of “liberals.” They accept the Bush Administration staging instead, and all the consequences as justified. No amount of journalism or literature will persuade them otherwise, but they cannot escape proof.
In a situation so severe the Democrats should seek no less, and it is in their power to provide it.
Proof can be developed in our set of public institutions only in venues of jurisprudence, through legally admissible evidence and sworn testimony, and then declared by a jury’s decision.
Impeachment is such a proceeding. There is no other way to show as well or as quickly the “war on terror” to be the Bush Administration’s monstrous deceit—and to prove it, with legally admissible evidence and sworn testimony in the House of Representatives and a jury’s declaration in the Senate.
Aside from maintaining the sanctity of the Constitution—and holding accountable a criminal Administration—three immediate benefits will accrue:
· Exposing and proving the truth will lift the veil of fear the Bush Administration has imposed.
· The proven fraudulence of the war will mandate its immediate termination.
· John McCain’s candidacy will be destroyed.
No one has been a more enthusiastic champion for George Bush’s ”war on terror” than Senator McCain. When it is displayed as appalling deceit, Mr. McCain will be shown a willing accomplice—or a tragic fool—and wholly unfit to be president.
But time is short, and the Democratic party is engaged in a civil war. With their demonstrated genius for losing elections, Mr. McCain might well stroll to the presidency. Unless he is proven to be unfit.
Democrats, impeach. Or expect to be humiliated.
For a fully documented, detailed history of the “war on terror,” see the author’s 117-page electronic book entitled “The Fraudulent War.” It is available at no cost, in PDF format, at http://coldtype.net/
Richard W. Behan lives and writes on Lopez Island, off the northwest coast of Washington state. He has published on the Internet over two dozen articles exposing and criticizing the criminal wars of the Bush Administration. He can be reached at rwbehan@rockisland.com .
