Representative John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, is unleashing a potential s*** storm.

 

(Forewarning: It's a Raw Story link, for those of you who don't care for that outlet. They do get scoops sometimes though).

 

Ranking House Judiciary Democrat Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) has introduced a motion to censure President Bush and Vice President Cheney for providing misleading information to Congress in advance of the Iraq war, failing to respond to written questions and potential violations of international law.

 

The resolutions were quietly introduced Sunday evening along with a third resolution (HR 635) to create a Select Committee to investigate the administration’s intent to go to war prior to congressional authorization. The committee would also be charged with examining manipulation of pre-war intelligence, thwarting Congressional oversight and retaliatory attacks against critics. As part of this resolution, House Judiciary Democrats seek also to explore violations of international law as pertaining to detainee abuse and torture of prisoners of war.

 

. . .

 

House Judiciary Democrats issue report alleging gross misconduct by Bush over Iraq

 

. . . "In brief, we have found that there is substantial evidence the President, the Vice President and other high ranking members of the Bush Administration misled Congress and the American people regarding the decision to go to war with Iraq; misstated and manipulated intelligence information regarding the justification for such war; countenanced torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and other legal violations in Iraq; and permitted inappropriate retaliation against critics of their Administration.

 

There is at least a prima facie case that these actions by the President, Vice-President and other members of the Bush Administration violate a number of federal laws, including (1) Committing a Fraud against the United States; (2) Making False Statements to Congress; (3) The War Powers Resolution; (4) Misuse of Government Funds; (5) federal laws and international treaties prohibiting torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment; (6) federal laws concerning retaliating against witnesses and other individuals; and (7) federal laws and regulations concerning leaking and other misuse of intelligence.

 

While these charges clearly rise to the level of impeachable misconduct, because the Bush Administration and the Republican-controlled Congress have blocked the ability of Members to obtain information directly from the Administration concerning these matters or responding to these charges, more investigatory authority is needed before recommendations can be made regarding specific Articles of Impeachment. As a result, we recommend that Congress establish a select committee with subpoena authority to investigate the misconduct of the Bush Administration with regard to the Iraq war detailed in this Report and report to the Committee on the Judiciary on possible impeachable offenses."

Edited December 20, 200520 yr by FlaSoxxJim

Representative John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, is unleashing a potential s*** storm.

 

(Forewarning: It's a Raw Story link, for those of you who don't care for that outlet.  They do get scoops sometimes though).

 

Here we go the wacko liberal attempt to do what their "voting machine" couldnt. The hatred for Bush is so deep in the liberal wing of the democrats they want to impeach bush.

 

Conyers has no credibility he is as left as you can get. The only wacko that has less is Dennis Kucinich, who is probably already jumping up and down like a muppet.

 

Maybe they can get Ramsey Clark back from defending the enemy and we can have the entire anti-war nut group back.

 

 

Conyers has been planning this for a while

 

2003 Conyers started to work up the impeachment crap

Edited December 20, 200520 yr by southsideirish71

John Conyers can suck a fat one. This BS motion is going to get slam dunked right back in his face.

Southside and Nuke- lots of name-calling, not a lot of substance.

Representative John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, is unleashing a potential s*** storm.

 

(Forewarning: It's a Raw Story link, for those of you who don't care for that outlet.  They do get scoops sometimes though).

 

While they are at it why don't they ask Bush what happened to Jimmy Hoffa?

Here we go the wacko liberal attempt to do what their "voting machine" couldnt.  The hatred for Bush is so deep in the liberal wing of the democrats they want to impeach bush. 

 

Conyers has no credibility he is as left as you can get. The only wacko that has less is Dennis Kucinich, who is probably already jumping up and down like a muppet. 

 

Maybe they can get Ramsey Clark back from defending the enemy and we can have the entire anti-war nut group back.

Conyers has been planning this for a while

 

2003  Conyers started to work up the impeachment crap

Southside and Nuke- lots of name-calling, not a lot of substance.

 

 

Conyers talks about impeaching bosh in 2003 with the likes of Ramsey Clark and the anti-war bandwagon. He holds a mock Impeachment hearing over the summer. And now this.

 

Sounds like an agenda and that agenda is hate and it has no substance.

Southside and Nuke- lots of name-calling, not a lot of substance.

 

You want balance. Tell the s*** bag dem Sens.(Durbin Dorgan and Levin) to allow the Barret report to be published without redactions, save anything that is classified.

 

That might put a bad light on the most popular man in the world and his wife. HillBill.

Southside and Nuke- lots of name-calling, not a lot of substance.

 

The Democratic Party's message can be totally summed up in 3 words : I hate Bush

 

.........and you talk about substance.

 

 

LOL!

Hey, I know we've debated a lot of the issues that Conyers raises until we're blue in our proverbial faces. But I don't think you can simply dismiss the accusations he makes by calling him a wacko.

 

If you think he's lying, why not show some evidence that he's lying? I think there's enough evidence in the public record to, at the very least, support an investigation into the conduct of which he's accusing the Bush administration.

 

And Cknolls, why is it that whenever there's a serious allegation leveled against a prominent Republican, the best many Republicans can do is to try and change the subject to Clinton?

Hey, I know we've debated a lot of the issues that Conyers raises until we're blue in our proverbial faces.  But I don't think you can simply dismiss the accusations he makes by calling him a wacko.

 

If you think he's lying, why not show some evidence that he's lying?  I think there's enough evidence in the public record to, at the very least, support an investigation into the conduct of which he's accusing the Bush administration.

 

And Cknolls, why is it that whenever there's a serious allegation leveled against a prominent Republican, the best many Republicans can do is to try and change the subject to Clinton?

 

 

Your name says it all baby. Balance.

Hey, I know we've debated a lot of the issues that Conyers raises until we're blue in our proverbial faces.  But I don't think you can simply dismiss the accusations he makes by calling him a wacko.

 

If you think he's lying, why not show some evidence that he's lying?  I think there's enough evidence in the public record to, at the very least, support an investigation into the conduct of which he's accusing the Bush administration.

 

And Cknolls, why is it that whenever there's a serious allegation leveled against a prominent Republican, the best many Republicans can do is to try and change the subject to Clinton?

 

 

He holds make believe impeachment hearings more than 6 months before he comes with this. Sure lets take that for what its worth.