Once again: Where is our Barbara Jordan?

[choie]

Nancy Pelosi continues to be against impeachment despite the ongoing threat to our democracy posed by Trump. She claims that the American people are not clamoring for the impeachment. Again, I post Barbara Jordan's speech from 1974 during the Watergate hearings. She was only a junior congresswoman at the time, yet she had the voice of moral authority that, sadly, Pelosi and others lack. THAT is what is needed now, not cowardice.

&feature=youtu.be

[dweller]

1. this should be on the greatest by now

have you listened?
Nancy, are you listening?
😔

on edit, anyone have link to full video?
this one cuts out at 13+ mins...

✌🏼

[dweller]

2. here is the full video

https://m.

Nancy, are you listening ?

✌🏼

[Hermit-The-Prog]

3. transcript, and a little more ...

http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/blackspeech/bjordan.html

[ ... ]

Justice Story: "Impeachment is intended for occasional and extraordinary cases where a superior power acting for the whole people is put into operation to protect their rights and rescue their liberties from violations."

We know about the Huston plan. We know about the break-in of the psychiatrist's office. We know that there was absolute complete direction on September 3rd when the president indicated that a surreptitious entry had been made into Dr. Fielding's office, after having met with Mr. Ehrlichman and Mr. Young.

"Protect their rights." "Rescue their liberties from violation."

The Carolina ratification convention impeachment criteria: those are impeachable "who behave amiss or betray their public trust."

[ ... ]

[5starlib]

4. She was powerful!

Thank you for posting! We need a Barbara Jordan right now. She was a captivating person!

[malaise]

5. ITTMF

RFN

[Hermit-The-Prog]

9. "A President is impeachable if he attempts to subvert the Constitution."

The Constitution charges the President with the task of taking care that the laws be faithfully executed, and yet the President has counseled his aides to commit perjury, willfully disregard the secrecy of grand jury proceedings, conceal surreptitious entry, attempt to compromise a federal judge, while publicly displaying his cooperation with the processes of criminal justice.

"A President is impeachable if he attempts to subvert the Constitution."

If the impeachment provision in the Constitution of the United States will not reach the offenses charged here, then perhaps that 18th-century Constitution should be abandoned to a 20th-century paper shredder.

Has the President committed offenses, and planned, and directed, and acquiesced in a course of conduct which the Constitution will not tolerate? That's the question. We know that. We know the question. We should now forthwith proceed to answer the question. It is reason, and not passion, which must guide our deliberations, guide our debate, and guide our decision.

-- Barbara Jordon
July 25, 1974

Amazing how well that fits today. TrumPutin has gone far beyond the acts she listed.

[malaise]

12. +1,000

Way beyond the acts she listed

[JustAnotherGen]

6. No is calling her

I have. I've expressed the need to impeach to Malinowski, Booker and Menendez. I've also called the Speaker's office.

Go back to the basics. Twitter, Facebook and DU are not swaying the Speaker.

[Vinca]

7. She was an amazing woman.

[Codeine]

8. Cowardice?

Madame Speaker may be many things, but a coward is not one of them.

[Hortensis]

10. She's not against impeachment, she's for victory when acting.

She's said it again and again. We have to get our armies properly equipped and deployed before we open fire.

I don't understand the eagerness to rush to defeat, or to deny the very possibility. Action is likely to result in failure, not victory. So #1, why is there no determination to win? There's plenty of agitation for action, all right, but not for that.

Also, we are in an era of toxic, massive contempt not just for science but for expertise of all types. It was embedded on the right to enable denial of the obvious truths coming at them from all sides, but we also know it's become dangerously pervasive on the left.

Is that one of the factors manifesting in these anxious, outraged threads? Certainly blanket contempt for and denial of expertise would be exacerbated when the leader is female. We're not yet advanced past that little problem half the human race endures and all suffer the consequences of.

Btw, this passionate, electoral will-denying thread, one of many dozens bred and/or planted in DU's nest, comes as the story ramps up that the president may have made a promise to a foreign leader that poses an "urgent concern." Perhaps it may constitute an attempt at betrayal. My first thought was to wonder if this would become a means of removal, a sea change in the current guaranteed failure.

[choie]

15. oh please

it has nothing to do with the fact that Pelosi is female. The house is supposed to hold the executive branch accountable - if they KNOW that the constitution is being breached, it is their responsibility to act REGARDLESS of whether the other body is delinquent in doing so. Do you think that the house committee in 1974 knew that the senate would vote for impeachment? No they didn't. At some point, you have to have an ethical backbone - you know, what they didn't have when Bush Jr. et al committed war crimes?

[Hortensis]

18. In you, maybe. Anyway, I was just talking about additional

fuel on this fire. Again, WHY is there no determination to win in all these threads?

Shouldn't there be far more discussion of how to win and end goals? FAR more? Nothing but using impeachment to gain them?

One thing I didn't accuse anyone here of was wanting Trump reelected and the Republicans taking back the house and a bunch of state goverments. Making sure that CAN'T happen, that we elect a Democratic president, keep all our gains in the midterms, and get control of the senate HAS to be an implacable goal. It is Pelosi's.

Yet it's not on these threads, never even mentioned... Imo, way past time to wonder why.

"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." Nancy Pelosi quoting Justice Louis Brandeis to the nation at the opening of the 116th congress.

[brooklynite]

11. Perhaps we don't have a compelling case for Impeachment...

Jordan didn't give this speech at the front end in order to "sell" impeachment to an undecided Party Caucus. She gave it months later at the end of the Hearing process.

[choie]

17. kidnapping children alone

should be enough for impeachment - let alone obstruction of justice etc. etc. etc. If there aren't reasons to impeach Trump, what is impeachment for?

[leftyladyfrommo]

13. She was one of a kind. We need some more

Like her.

Wonderful woman. I remember her well

[LexVegas]

14. Attacks on Pelosi. That's novel.

[choie]

16. If you mean accusing Pelosi

of not using her power to hold Trump accountable, call it what you want. But like the house is supposed to hold Trump accountable, so are we supposed to hold our representatives accountable.

[Hotler]

19. Kicking................ nt