Reply #104: Pelosi stated, "It's a waste of time", Coyers said, "I'm not going to [View All]

[bjobotts]

impeach anybody." They are just admitting they are not going to hold this administration accountable. How can you respect anyone who refuses to fight because they might not win especially when there is so much at stake. Conyers see that it all leads to the WH and is busy pointing his finger at the WH and saying , "see. see where it leads". But they DO nothing. The WH has not once, ever been cooperative or compromising with the congress. It ignores subpoenas and blocks investigations. Saying "I'm not going to impeach anybody" does not make me feel confident in Conyer's ability to set things right.
You say the speaker has a lot on her plate...well this is the number 2 issue of importance from the '06 elections...to stop the corruption and make this administration accountable.. She needs to clear her plate for it. She says she is too busy trying to stop the Iraq war. She doesn't even call it an occupation. But she has done nothing to do that.
Pelosi desperately needs to reconsider her position because there is no downside to impeachment and this is what she will be remembered for. It would strengthen the Democratic party as having the balls to defend the constitution against the worst, most corrupt and unpopular Administration in our history. It would (with the appointment of a special prosecutor) bring out the corruption running rampant in the WH. It would tie the president's hands making it more difficult to attack Iran. It would bring out the widespread corruption of all the federal agencies. It would unite Americans against an administration dedicated to destroying our democracy. It would more effectively help in ending the occupation in Iraq than anything else Pelosi and others have tried.

Pelosi is preventing it from getting on the table since it is she who hands out assignments and offices and delegates the "importance" of issues. She claims the reason is because "it is a waste of time." Because it 'might' not be successful in the Senate. Because we 'might' not win. Maybe Pelosi has plans for higher office in 2012 and doesn't want to take a chance on losing. Whatever her reasoning, she is wrong. She is waiting for the elections to remedy the situation and hoping Bush will not do too much more damage before he leaves office. This is not practicality it is cowardice. If she gets re elected it will be as the lesser of two evils but certainly not out of support for her refusal to impeach, to make Cheney/Bush accountable, or her oath to defend the constitution. Her re-election is as a congressperson not Speaker of the House.
I cannot respect her if she continues to refuse to re-consider the issue of Impeachment with all that is on the table now. To me it means she is ignoring the voice of the people for the petty reason of ...It's just too inconvenient and we might not win anyway. Some principles are worth fighting for. The constitutional crisis is already happening with Cheney/Bush and impeachment IS the constitutional remedy. Too important to ignore.
Bush and Cheney have sold us out to the corporations, have destroyed our freedoms, and caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands unnecessarily, without regard for the American public. They have politicized all federal agencies, replaced science with propaganda, threatened the world, demolished our treasury, stole money from our retirement(Social security) to pay their war profiteers, and all but destroyed the equality of Justice in America and they NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, MISS SPEAKER. Put impeachment back on the table!