<http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34921> that she's against it

because she's "bipartisan", and by Barack Obama, who says

<http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/32750> it should be "reserved

for exceptional circumstances", and by John Conyers who claims that

<http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/33936> if he upheld the

Constitution Fox News would call him mean names, not to mention Harold

Ford who alleges <http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34926> that

"The Constitution doesn't poll well," and Cass Sunstein who argues

<http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34920> against ever holding Bush

or Cheney to account for anything, and Chuck Schumer who insists

<http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/2385> that

voters don't care about detentions and torture and such things.

On top of that problem with impeachment, there was the problem of the

war. The Congress that was elected in 2006 to end the war, expose the

truth of its origin, and hold people accountable for it has very

carefully avoided holding any hearings on the topic. During the previous

Congress, Barbara Lee led a push along with Kucinich to investigate the

White House Iraq Group. I asked her early in 2007 why she wouldn't do

the same in the majority, and she claimed, rather half-heartedly, that

she would do so, but never has.

The problem with the second name for the hearing was perhaps what I

pointed out last week: it's oxymoronic. If you're going to have an

imperial presidency, why not a presidential emperor? And since when has

it become acceptable to acknowledge the empire in the halls of Congress?

People could begin questioning why we pay to maintain a half million

soldiers in 1,000 bases in 150 countries at great expense and to the

serious endangerment of ourselves, generating resentment and hatred

around the globe.

So the third title was arrived at: "Executive Power and Its

Constitutional Limitations." This handily avoids any reference to Bush

or Cheney or impeachment or war or empire. And yet it's that much more

absurd, since we have no executive and really do have an imperial

co-presidency. And then there's the Constitution problem. The

Constitution brings up impeachment in six places but never once mentions

censure. Never does the Constitution propose a remedy of redundantly

recriminalizing crimes once a criminal president is out of office. Never

does the Constitution mention political parties or loyalty to them.

Never does the Constitution place the election of an excutive ahead of

the importance of maintaining an executive rather than a king. It's very

hard to imagine how several of the speakers Conyers hopes to have on

Friday, on the topics he wants them to discuss, are going to be able to

fit the Constitution into their remarks.

Here's the lineup, give or take:

Rumor has it there are two (maybe three) panels being planned for the

hearing, one consisting of Kucinich and four other members of Congress

(Jane Harman, Walter Jones, Brad Miller, and Maurice Hinchey), and the

other consisting of non-Congress Members (Elizabeth Holtzman, Bruce

Fein, Frederick Schwartz, John Dean, Bob Barr, Ralph Nader, Rocky

Anderson).

These speakers can be expected to favor impeachment:

Dennis Kucinich

Elizabeth Holtzman

Ralph Nader

Maybe Bruce Fein

These speakers can be expected to favor impeachment and other supposed

solutions:

Maurice Hinchey

Rocky Anderson

Maybe Walter Jones

These speakers can be expected to spit on the Constitution:

Jane Harman

Brad Miller

Frederick Schwartz

John Dean

Bob Barr

These members of the House Judiciary Committee can be expected to speak

for impeachment:

Robert Wexler

Sheila Jackson-Lee

Tammy Baldwin

Keith Ellison

Steve Cohen

Hank Johnson

Maxine Waters

Luis Gutierrez

Anthony Weiner

Maybe Zoe Lofgren

But, all of the above is subject to change and subject to public

pressure as well as pressure from Pelosi-Conyers. If you know any of the

scheduled speakers, please urge them to renounce good-Germanism, please

urge them to read the Constitution on which they are being asked to testify.

And please contact the members of the Judiciary Committee and insist

that they be there on Friday the 25th and that they speak up for

impeachment:http://afterdowningstreet.org/judiciarycommittee

And please get in line very early Friday morning to attend the hearing!

(Rayburn Room 2141, 10 a.m) or join us in front of the Rayburn Building

at 9 a.m. Bring impeachment shirts and posters! For more information

contact ningroup@gmail.com <mailto:ningroup@gmail.com>

If you can't be there on Friday, please freeway blog the word IMPEACH

everywhere you can that day:http://www.freewayblogger.com

<http://www.freewayblogger.com/>

Whether you can be there or not, please take these steps between now and

Friday:

Contact your member of Congress in support of impeachment

<http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/bushaction>.http://afterdowningstreet.org/bushaction

Ask the media to cover the hearing

<http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/1084>. And ask them to please

ask Pelosi and Conyers to respond to this question: Can you name one

thing that WOULD constitute an impeachable offense?

http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/1084

Sign the petition at Congressman Kucinich's website

<http://impeachment.kucinich.us/petition/>.