IVAW’s Adam “Fallujah” Kokesh confronts Conyers
Former lance corporal Adam Kokesh (who’s been to Falluja) and his merry band of geriatrics from the Veterans for Peace pressed John Conyers on the impeachment of the President and Vice President on Capitol Hill last week. Conyers tells the gang of imbeciles that he hasn’t made up his mind yet what he’s going to do about impeachment.
Let me translate that for those of you who don’t know Conyer’s history; Conyers has nothing to impeach Bush and Cheney for. It’s that simple. If Conyers had something on them, he’d be shouting it from the rooftops.
Conyers was part of the crew who tried to slow the Senate’s “advice and consent” of Vice President Ford so the House could impeach Nixon leaving the Presidency slot to the Democrat Speaker of the House and overturning the 1972 election. Conyers is a purely partisan hitman for the Democrats. If he “hasn’t decided” what to do about impeachment, it’s because he’s empty-handed.
The YouTube video;
It seems that since Kokesh has been busted publicly on his misuse of the rank of sergeant, now he begins every conversation with the fact that he’s been to Falluja to wrap himself in the glory of the heroes of that battle. The story he tells Conyers sounds suspiciously similar to the story Logan Laituri told at Winter Soldier, and his story was meant to tug at Conyer’s heart strings.
Believe me, boys, Conyers doesn’t need to see your disappointed faces to convince him to impeach. What he realizes that you gumballs of the Left can’t seem to grasp is that there’s no impeachable offense. But Conyers blames his reticent behavior on that nebulous “corporate media”. You’ve used that excuse to cover up your shortcomings, too, so you should recognize it as camoflage when someone else uses it on you.
But the IVAW and VFP and Code Pink and all of the rest are just using the impeachment fantasy to raise money from the ignorant masses anyway.
Impeachment advocates in Michigan met with Conyers last week and got the same cock-and-bull story from Conyers along with a hint that Conyers has tricks up his sleeve;
“He has sent mixed signals all along,” said David Redemann, a citizen supporter of impeachment. “This meeting was more of the same.” Conyers said that he and Kucinich would discuss the matter with the other House members to see if there was any support for it. But he warned that the conservative Blue Dog Democrats, as well as Democrats who are serving their first term in Congress, would be unlikely to support impeaching Bush for crimes he committed while in office.
Conyers also hinted that alternative measures could be taken so that Bush and his allies could be tried for crimes after they leave office.
The Milwaukee advocates argued that impeachment proceedings would help Democrats in the November election, since voters want the president and vice president to be held accountable for their actions in office.
Well, folks, welcome to the real world. You can wish on a star all you want, but dreams don’t always come true – especially when your fantasies have no basis in reality.
Conyers, Pelosi, Reid, Kucinich and all of the rest are just stringing you along like they did to get your vote in 2006. Remember how they promised to end the war in Iraq? Here we are nearly two years later and all they’ve done is make empty gestures. Remember this video:
The Democrats know they can’t impeach, but they also know you’re stupid enough to believe that they can impeach the President and Vice President. Hey, you fell for it once. They figure you’ll forget all about it after the Bush Administration is gone. And you will.
Category: Antiwar crowd, Code Pink, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Politics
I well know it’s about votes and other stuff (read money), but impeachment remains a singular puzzle to me. The chorus seems to be getting louder the closer Bush is to going bye bye?
The notion that Bush, et, al. will be tried AFTER they leave office is preposterous on the surface, but maybe the UN or The Hague will weigh in.
Perhaps it’s no more complicated than this: FEAR. What’ll the yahoos do for a villain when everywhere they turn they see themselves or their ilk? The current congress is the case in point…
No basis for impeachment?
USC TITLE 50, CHAPTER 36, SUBCHAPTER I, § 1809
(a) Prohibited activities
A person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally—
(1) engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute; or
(2) discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic surveillance, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through electronic surveillance not authorized by statute.
(b) Defense
It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section that the defendant was a law enforcement or investigative officer engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction.
(c) Penalties
An offense described in this section is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.
(d) Federal jurisdiction
There is Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section if the person committing the offense was an officer or employee of the United States at the time the offense was committed.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/usc_sec_50_00001809—-000-.html
What that statute describes “electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute” is exactly what the warrantless surveillance program did. There was no statutory basis, no warrants, and it was conducted “under color of law.”
Unless you subscribe to the “If the President does it, it’s not illegal” school of legal interpretation, then by ordering that program George Bush committed a felony.
Jonn wrote: I’m not going to debate legal points with you. What I’m saying is that Democrats are dangling impeachment in front of the Left to attract voters. The carrot they’ll never get to bite. It’s the Democrats’ style – they’ve admitted they’ve done it in the past and apparently the Democrat voters don’t care.
No basis for impeachment?
You did miss the point some. Your allegation is not new! Congress, a Democratic Congress no less, has chosen not to pursue this issue.
Even if you are correct it’s up to Congress to act and they haven’t. Cast your net wider.
Inibo,
I’m going to make a Citizen’s Arrest on you for treason.
“I’m going to make a Citizen’s Arrest on you for treason.”
Because I quoted a law and pointed out that someone broke it?
Did you consider dialing whine-one-one and requesting a waaaambulance?
ROF. That was outstanding! Meanwhile these same moonbats defend Clinton, who WAS impeached. LOL.
Inibo,
LOL, because all you moonbats keep mouthing off that you’re entitled to act on such nonsense.
I really liked the VFP threatening Conyers with war if he didn’t impeach Bush. That was a laugh riot.
Jonn,
They should be allowed to impeach Bush and Cheney. Though there was no crime, the left tried really, really hard you know.
One of the “crimes” charged at the “World Tribunal on Iraq” was “Failure To Listen to The Will of the Global Anti-war Movement”. I kid you not.
So the Global Anti-war Movement has devince rights, just like a King. And they sputter about “King George”.
Should have asked Conyers how the bribery investigation into his wife is doing.
“2Inibo Says:
July 13th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
No basis for impeachment?”
Hate to burst your bubble, libtard, but the FISA law has been passed and reafirmed every time it’s challenged.
Individuals and organizations are targeted for their threats to national security; intelligence gathered on them has indicated activity in plots, money laundering, and weapons smuggling.
FISA has also been used for this:
Domestic surveillance freed FARC hostages:
http://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2008/07/12/domestic-spying-frees-farc-hostages/
I’m quite sure the rescued people won’t quibble over the “spying” hype, or demand impeachment.
We’ve thwarted countless terrorist plots in this country by thugs who want to pick up where the 9/11 hijackers left off.
You libs snivel about FISA and the Patriot Act as if the government has nothing else better to do than to eavesdrop on your phone sex and conversations with Grandma.
You guy keep on thinking only liberals are disgusted with the long train of abuses and usurpations. It makes that much easier to sneak up from the right.
It would be nice if you could do something beside name calling. Ad hominem is much easier than debate I suppose. I posted the statute and indicated that portion which the Bush administration violated. Can you please tell me why you think what they did was not engaging “in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute?” Which court issued the order authorizing it or which statute authorizes surveillance without warrants?
And perhaps you’d care to tell me why John Ashcroft, James Comey and Robert Mueller threatened to resign rather than sign off on a program that they knew was illegal?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/15/AR2007051500864.html
Who gives a rat’s patootie about the FARC? That’s Columbia’s problem not ours. They are no more threat to us than the gangbangers in Southeast DC. Where would you phony conservatives be without third world boogie men to fear?
Inibo,
“Who gives a rat’s patootie about the FARC?”
Get out of my country you commie rat batard.
They held how many American’s hostage for five years?
Yeah, you’re tired of “Ad hominem” but not to the point you stiffle yourself and not say, “…would you phony conservatives be without third world boogie men”.
$5 says you know what Hugo Chavez’s shorts taste like…
This is pointless.
Mr. Lilyea, you keep quite some interesting company here.
Best of luck to you.
Jonn wrote: I’m not surprised. You continued to miss the point for three days. Bye.
Inibo,
Don’t let the server hit you on the ass on the way out…
Inibo’s gone? Damn. I wanted to post more references in direct response to his FISA paranoia.
In case he comes back:
Inibo:
I posted information that proved FISA is put to good use. It isn’t just FARC hostages that benefited. It’s national security, sweetpea. If you can unwrap your brain from the ‘phony conservative’ accusations, you’d realize that eavesdropping on terorists who use U.S. communications,including Internet sites and cell phones, is a necessity. Thanks to internal and external threats to national security, the wiretapping laws had to be overhauled. Period.
We’ve thwarted countless terrorist plots in this country by thugs who want to pick up where the 9/11 hijackers left off. FISA is part of that.
I’m not going to lose any sleep over your senseless paranoia regarding “abuses and usurpations” or that you cannot sustain an argument without resorting to your own name calling.
Go ahead. Take your toys and go home.
BTW, if you click on the link attached to “Inibo’s” name you’ll find him lost in a Ron Paul la la land. He’s a dyed in the wool “troofer”. What a nutcase.