I have never seen such week leaders in my life playing it safe by making it a political decision to preserve the party for presidency that might not even win.
Bush has admitted breaking the FISA law. It's an open and shut case. Get them out before they can do what another great Bush trick - send troops into another country just as he is leaving office. Remember what the the SOB's father did after the 1992 election - blindly sending troops into Somalia as a parting fu? More proof that they don't give a damnm about the men in women who serve our country.
I think John Conyers is just a plain and simple coward, who is afraid to loose his job. What is his reason for not doing this?? I think if he does not go through with the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, then American people should charge him with obstruction of justice!!!
fuck you and you reason that if you impeach the democrats wont win elections,the democrats are the same as the republicans, this is bullshit. he doesnt want to because he has been told not to, he is a fucking shill. welcome to america.
Conyers must do HIS duty, not everyone else's, he is ignoring his oath. He's a traitor. Call, email and fax Conyers and your reps and all of the Judiciary and demand Impeachment: houseDOTgov SenateDOTgov judiciaryDOThouseDOTgov You can send a FREE fax at faxzeroDOTcom Media contacts: fairDOTorg Get real news at afterdowningstreetDOTorg Share the video on here titled "the prosecution of george bush for murder" And do what you see at this site: freewaybloggerDOTcom SILENCE IS COMPLICITY !
jp You are clearly a Karl Rove operative, all you do is trash Conyers and Democrats that look forward to a LEGAL CONSTITUTIONAL ELECTION to DEFEAT MCCAIN & OUST THE NEOCONS.
jperry U confirmed once again that u abuse the word "nonpartisan" (like that makes u some sort of sanctimonious self-proclaimed "saint"~ NOT!) U hate Conyers just becuz he is a Democrat, so u r just a hypocritical GOP Neocon-ass-kisser . Not honoring YOUR AMERICAN RIGHT TO VOTE in the election is the height of dishonoring what Our Forefathers died for AND The Constitution of the United States of America. Our Forefathers DIED so we could ALWAYS VOTE, not so we could impeach once in a blue moon
jperry And my direct ancestor was in the Am Rev War, even was captured and ESCAPED the British to go on to live a looong life, so don't you dare even say, suggest, infer, or imply that I have no right to vote in any AMERICAN ELECTION.
jperry VOTING IS THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT, impeachment only belongs to Congress. READ THE ENTIRE CONSTITUTION!!! So if you want impeachment, then PERSUADE CONGRESS for THEIR VOTES, because YOU HAVE NO VOTE FOR IMPEACHMENT. But if YOU want the Neocons OUT, THEN YOU WILL VOTE FOR CHANGE IN NOVEMBER 2008, unless of course, you are a hypocritical "nonpartisan".
Please send us a postcard from whatever planet you're on. The view must be wonderful. I have never suggested that the the people have a direct vote for impeachment. I have tried to persuade my rep for his vote. Multiple times. Called, faxed, emailed, shook his hand and told him to his face. He won't even consider it. He's a freshman rep following Nancy's lead who wants to keep his committee position. He will not rock the boat. It's up to Conyers to start hearings and create the votes he needs.
jperry What planet is your district on? You can't get your own district Congressman to vote for impeachment!? In your own planetary playbook that makes you as evil as what you claim Conyers is . He said, like you, that the votes aren't there, and you can't even get ONE vote to be there, so you are complicit with war crimes, and a traitor to the Constitution, as you say about Conyers.
A prime example of your complete detachment from logic and reality. You say people need to lobby their reps on impeachment. I have done exactly that repeatedly, and mine just continues to refuse to do so because he's playing the game instead of honoring his oath, just like Conyers. And that makes ME complicit in war crimes and a traitor? Please. I am not encouraging people to gang up on you nor am I slandering Conyers. I am honoring my responsibility as a citizen by holding him accountable.
jperry Liar, liar , pants on fire. U most certainly have childishly namecalled and encouraged others to gang up on me(elsewhere). U r a typical bully, JP, u can dish it out, but u can't take it.(waa waa) You do NOT honor actual real history, you do NOT follow First Amendment rights RESPONSIBLY, you do NOT respect other people's RIGHT TO VOTE for whomever they choose (even if, "god-forbid" in your planetary "bible", their candidate is in a Party of some sort), u make silly things up as u go along
"Liar, liar, pants on fire," and I'M the childish one? That's a real hoot. I have never once encouraged people to gang up on you. I have exercised my right to speak freely, which I will continue to do. If others want to join the discussion, that's THEIR right. If you can't handle the critcism, stop inviting it with your ridiculous rambling nonsense. Like this crap about how I supposedly don't respect peoples' right to vote for whomever they want. The charge is completely false and nonsensical.
jperry If the shoe fits... I tailor my conversation with u as I would any bully. If you can't stand the heat, or the truth, then get out of the kitchen. What you call criticism of Conyers is actually a violation of First Amendment since it is illegal slander of a public official. You have no proof that he is complicit in war crimes and treasonous to our nation. If you have proof, then take it to a prosecutor . Ur silliness diminishes the REAL EVIDENCE of war crimes & treason by Bush/Cheney.
jperry If you do not take your so-called "proof" to a prosecutor that Conyers is "complicit in war crimes" and a "traitor" , then you are aiding and abetting a war criminal and a traitor.
jperry Conyers is intelligent, wise and experienced enuf to NOT allow war criminals to just walk, like OJ, and NIXON!!! He wants a REAL case that will stick, not just phoney expensive motions that does not have the votes . Conyers does NOT want to jeapordize any FUTURE ACTIONS that the US and international courts can take against these Neocon war criminals.
jperry Its bs that you care about this country. You want to jeapordize EVERYTHING Conyers has worked hard for since 2005 , when Downing Street Memos came out, just because it will make you feel like some sort of a bigshot if he succumbed to your childish temper tantrums .
EXACTLY yank! The REAL EVIDENCE that Conyers REFUSES TO ACT ON, because he would rather play spineless politics than honor his oath to support and defend the Constituiton! And every time you bring up the ridiculous "the votes aren't there" argument, you restate YOUR OWN preference for self-serving party politics over accountability. It's disgusting and shameful. The First Amendment, which you clearly still do not understand, guarantees my right to say that Conyers' inaction makes him complicit.
jperry U refuse to acknowledge this FACT: THE VOTES AREN'T THERE. Chair John Conyers is a man , NOT A MAGICIAN. THERE HAS TO BE THE VOTES. U know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the process , it has to get out of Judiciary Committee FIRST. THERE IS NOT A MAJORITY OF VOTES IN THE J. COMMITTEE EITHER! Only 4 Members of J.C. have signed Wexler's Petition. Ur repulsive & ignorant slams, at OUR RIGHTS TO VOTE in CONSTITUTIONAL ELECTION PROCESS that can remove these Neocons FOREVER, makes me want to puke.
I have explained to you multiple times that the only way to GET the votes is to START HEARINGS and put the evidence into the record. It's the ONLY chance Conyers has to bring accountability for Bushco's crimes. You have yet to respond directly to that point, like you have yet to respond to the point that the way you landslide McCain is by forcing him to defend the crimes for which Bushco faces impeachment. What are you afraid of yank? Stop thinking politics and start thinking accountability.
jp & I have explained to u MULTIPLE TIMES HISTORICAL FACTS & CIVICS (which u have NO comprehension of at all) not MYTHOLOGY that u make up & spew as fractured fallacies, that impeachment is NOT started without enuf VOTES by Members in the Judiciary Committee, and then IF YOU WOULD CLEAN THE WAX OUT OF UR EARS, then it goes through a Special Committee in the House. & if you WOULD LISTEN, Conyers says its NOT OFF THE TABLE, so HELP DRUM UP MORE SUPPORT FROM CONGRESS instead of UR VILE TACTICS.
jperryam Grow up. If you want to be a lying bully towards me, that's just sad. But trying to recruit people to join your bullying tactics with you on your slanderous witch-hunt is PLAIN EVIL.
jperry And it is a LIE that this is the ONLY chance to hold these Neocons accountable. They have committed CRIMES against the US and International Laws. There is NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS on what these Neocons have done. A doomed impeachment is NOT our only venue of justice. But we have to get into a position where JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL, NOT FAIL.
jperryam What am I afraid of? I am AFRAID of Neocon trolls and ignoramuses , both can and will screw up EVERYTHING that Conyers has worked for since 2005 (as you have proven).
jperry I am NOT afraid of a Chairman that has 44 more years experience, wisdom and knowledge in Congress, and with impeachment processes, than YOU who was born when Conyers started in Congress!!!
You clearly have no grasp of common sense on this issue. MILLIONS of Americans are angry, because we gave Dems in Washington a majority with a CYRSTAL CLEAR MANDATE in 2006: To get us out of Iraq and hold the Bush administration accountable. They in turn have accomplished NOTHING. Because of this, what SHOULD be a HUGE landslide for Dems in November will be close, which will only make it EASIER for the neocons to STEAL ANOTHER ELECTION. Conyers' failure to act is playing right into their hands.
Conyers is either as clueless as you appear to be, or you're both angling to give a Democratic president the same completely unconstitutional powers that Bush has crafted for himself. With so much on the line, it's easily the most disgusting display of partisan politicking this country has ever seen. This is the view of MILLIONS of us, about which there is NOTHING illegal, unconstitutional or slanderous. Of course, Conyers can easily prove us wrong by starting impeachment hearings.
jperry Conyers has already proven YOU wrong. He does NOT have the votes, and he has experienced two impeachment processes prior to this, so clearly the man knows what he is talking about> a FAILED impeachment would play right into the hands of the Neocons and give them MORE POWER. This is self-explanatory except to you, who needs to be told the obvious MILLIONS of times.
jperry You are NOT expressing MILLIONS of Americans with your Un-Constitutional illegal slanderous tactics against Conyers, what MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of Americans want is the chance TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS AND VOTE THESE NEOCONS OUT. You would inhibit OUR RIGHTS with your one-man-show to shove a DOOMED IMPEACHMENT down everyone's throat. I am not buying your SNAKE-OIL, and neither are MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of Americans.
How many times are you going to repeat the ridiculous lie that I'm somehow trying to inhibit peoples' right to vote? I have never said or implied any such thing. And how many times are you going to repeat the ridiculous lie that by excercising my right to free speech, and by honoring my responsibility as a citizen to hold elected officials accountable and encouraging fellow citizens to do the same, I am somehow slandering Conyers? The fact that you don't like the method doesn't make it illegal.
Stop ignoring the history that proves you wrong. Anybody can watch my video reply here (Truth About Impeachment) and see that you're WAY off with your ridiculous claims. I didn't make up the history. I just recited it. You keep saying that a failed impeachment would help neocons, but you fail to grasp that doing NOTHING to even TRY to stop them is worse! Conyers might as well be rolling out the red carpet for McCain. It's called being an enabler. Oh wait, is THAT "slander" too? Jeezus, wake up.
jperryam ur vids R NOT, I repeat, NOT "history"... your audacious repeating of things that are not true during times you were NOT even old enough to barely comprehend (how old were you during Watergate Hearings - 7 ???) WATERGATE HEARINGS WERE NOT IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS , I repeat over and over again. Judicial Committee back then KNEW they had the votes before Impeachment Hearings even started, THAT IS WHY NIXON QUIT!!! Clean the wax out of ur ears, CONYERS SAID IMPEACHMENT IS NOT OFF THE TABLE!!!
jperry Yes, MILLIONS of Americans have put the blame for taking impeachment "off the table" squarely where it belongs>>> PELOSI.
Conyers and Pelosi are NOT Siamese Twins. It is childish and downright schizoid to do what you do. In psycho-babble terms what you are doing is called "Transference", blaming someone else for another completely different person's actions and words. In other words, SEEK HELP!
I am calling for John Conyers to honor his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, by acting on the overwhelming evidence of impeachable offenses committed by the Bush administration. He prefers to do NOTHING, hoping instead that the Democratic candidate can get just enough votes to win the White House, simply by virtue of the fact he's not Bush or McCain. Conyers and you are the ones "crystal balling it."
jperry You must be bored out of your gourd by your mindless minions that ignorantly "adore" you on your own Youtubes. How does it feel to be the Pied Piper of Ignoramuses?
jperry And you proved once again that you care NOTHING about ridding this PNAC hijacking of our Constitution. Congress does NOT have the votes for an impeachment, but WE THE PEOPLE HAVE THE VOTES TO UNITE AND GET THOSE NEOCONS OUTTA THERE. But you are doing everything possible to stop American people from uniting and voting against McCain. YOU are nothing but a nasty NEOCON TROLL AND OPERATIVE.
jperryam And for you to BLASPHEME and DISHONOR our FOREFATHERS who FOUGHT AND DIED for OUR PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO VOTE , by insulting with your phoney phrase "self serving party politics" , then you know what JPerry, if you hate the CONSTITITUTIONAL PEOPLE's RIGHT TO VOTE so much, then you need to find yourself another country, preferably one where they don't bother you with that "self-serving" RIGHT TO VOTE.
jperry And what you shamefully and disgracefully call as "self-serving" is in reality MY CONSTITUTIONALLY-GIVEN RIGHT TO VOTE and is what keeps me from being a SERF or a SLAVE, so you damn straight I am going to exercise MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE. And again, DON'T YOU DARE DISHONOR MY ANCESTOR WHO FOUGHT IN AM REV WAR FOR OUR (even yours) RIGHT TO VOTE.
Again, I have NEVER disparaged anyone's right to vote and I never would. When I said "self-serving" I meant democrats placing the politics of their party before the needs of their country, which is reprehensible. Forgive me for thinking you had at least enough of a clue to figure that one out. Go ahead and call me whatever you want, yank. Pour on the ignorant trash talk. I'll let the record speak for itself. I'm the one fighting to preserve the integrity of the Constitution while you ignore it.
jperry You are so bad at lying because you have made it DISGUSTINGLY clear that you have no comprehension that WE THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT to throw these Neocons out with OUR VOTES . I am putting MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS before your VILE DESTRUCTIVE SLANDEROUS WITCH-HUNT, which is UN-CONSTITUTIONAL. You are just angry that I am not joining your SLANDER CAMPAIGN against Conyers. I am joining the campaign against the Neocons instead!
jperry And it is RIGHT AND CONSTITUTIONAL that I can and will join the Democrat Party to campaign against McCain and the Neocons. You are just a McCain-ass-kisser. You are WRONG and UN-CONSTITUTIONAL for your ILLEGAL SLANDEROUS WITCH-HUNT against Conyers! Your behavior is destructive and unconscionable to our cause of ousting these Neocons. YOU ARE HELPING THE NEOCONS by slandering Conyers.
jperryam You are the KING OF IGNORANT TRASH TALK, when I was completely civil with you is when YOU showed your true colors of your potty mouth . You have NO "integrity" , far from it, your modus operandi is SLANDER, so you are just show-boating again.
Jeezus, talk about making it up as you go along! When have I EVER suggested, implied or inferred that you have no right to vote in our elections? I have never done that, yank, and you know it. And when have I EVER suggested that I would not honor my own right to vote? Looks like you need to take more time to make sure you understand peoples' posts before you respond with your misguided rants.
jperry You can't POSSIBLY vote, or you would be sinning against your own self-imposed "JP NonPartisan bible" . You make up silly "rules" for other people that you don't even follow yourself! lol, that made me laugh
Looks like you still haven't looked up the definition of "partisan," because you still clearly don't get it. Aside from that, there are more choices in this election than the two major parties, both of which people will continue to abandon for as long as they continue to fail us. I haven't made up any rules. Keep spewing the false garbage, and I'll keep calling you on it. You'll reply with the same charge, of course, unable to back it up, because that's exactly how neocon trolls operate.
JP Yes , u should know how Neocon Trolls operate since u clearly work for them with ur illegal slander against Conyers who SPEARHEADED impeachment against Bush. Clearly u just want to push so hard for a doomed impeachment by suckering ppl into a mob mentality. Then Bush/Cheney could just gleefully walk away & thumb their noses at WE THE PEOPLE after that. Also, the choices I've seen ALL BELONG TO A PARTY. So I guess u won't be voting, cuz if u do, u will be a HYPOCRITE (too late, u already r).
jperry, AND ALSO, you do not seem to GRASP the delicate strategy that Conyers has to deal with in order to get these investigations TO STICK (without LOSING, or being PARDONED) :
BREAKING NEWS~ ROVE SUBPOENAED:
w w w. msnbc. msn. com/id/21134540/vp/24778953#24778953
jperry And if you are so "non-partisan" as you claim, John Perry, then you need to find yourself a new hobby, because so far I only see you on political blogs and youtubes.
Something else you clearly don't understand. "Non-partisan" means not biased toward any particular political party. As anyone can read on my YT channel, I am registered independent. Always have been, always will be. Because the Constitution says NOTHING about political parties, and because it's clear that self-serving partisanship, on both sides of the aisle, has this country on the brink of complete moral and financial collapse. And your support for Conyers' hopeless strategy doesn't help.
jperry So now being non-partisan is some sort of phony pedestal? I have been Dem , GOP, Indy & Dem again. Big deal. U end up voting for someone in a PARTY, so unless u don't vote at all (which is UNAMERICAN in MY book) then u r hypocrite pretending to be something u r not. Most politicians r in PARTY that U vote for, so unless u do write-in votes for people who could never win in the first place, then you are PARTISAN.
And I AM a patriotic American for fighting to vote these Neocons OUT!
jperry For someone who doesn't know the difference between Watergate Investigations (that happened) , and Nixon impeachment hearings (that NEVER happened), you are the LAST person to be telling ANYONE about "history" ... As Nixon would say "let me make this PERFECTLY CLEAR"...YOU DO NOT GET IT >>> PERIOD.
jperry, you want to know WHO gets it? CHAIRMAN JOHN CONYERS, that's who. I would bet Bush's stimulus rebate on Conyers knowledge, wisdom and experience of the Constitution before I would on your infantile ignorance ANY DAY.
You're right, yank. I don't get it. I don't get how you can expect anybody to take you seriously when you say you want impeachment, you say you want to win, yet you advocate AGAINST starting hearings and PUTTING THE EVIDENCE INTO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, because there is not already a majority committed to voting for impeachment. How can you possibly expect to have ANY chance of GETTING the necessary votes without showing the evidence? Failure is GUARANTEED if you refuse to play offense.
jperryam You're just playing a phoney attention-getting charade with your "Witch-hunt Conyers" youtubes. You are NOT playing offense against Bush/Cheney and the Neocons, you are just being OFFENSIVE with childish ILLEGAL SLANDER against Conyers, which VIOLATES the First Amendment of the Constitution, which YOU DON'T GET!
I am telling the truth. Conyers is failing America. He swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, not the Democratic party. He has overwhelming evidence of crimes against that Constitution, that he refuses to act on, which puts him in violation of his oath. I don't care if you think my pointing that out is offensive. I'm offended by Conyers' pathetic inaction and your blind faith in him. Your own words here prove you don't have the first clue about the First Amendment.
jperry Ur constant lies with NO proof validate that you have no clue about the First Amendment. John Conyers wrote the "Constitution in Crisis" , so its clear he wants impeachment more than ANYBODY. But it is also clear he is not going to go forward with a doomed impeachment that will jeapordize the nation to be handed over to the Neocons AGAIN, only worse next time. Thank God Conyers is Chairman of Judiciary Committee, and not some whackjob like YOU. U r just mad I'm not one of ur dum minions
JP> U r NOT sincere about impeachment, u just want to make a big name for urself, "THE Conyers Witch-Hunter". Conyers is in his RIGHT MIND & clearly possesses his full faculties of LOGICAL & LEGAL processes, so there is absolutely no way he is going to be pushed around by your illogical, bullying & unethical methods. Why u DESTROY any CONSTRUCTIVE EFFORTS to DRUM UP SUPPORT for more votes w/Congressional signatures on Wexler Petition and MORE co-sponsors on Kucinich's H Res 333, IS STRANGE!!
jperryam Get real, we HAVE the evidence, NOT the votes for an "offense". Failure is GUARANTEED if you go in pre-maturely and without the votes. HISTORY SHOWS THIS!!!
You're IGNORING the history of impeachment that I have carefully explained to you I don't know how many times now. You NEVER answer the relevant questions. You just call me a slanderer because I have the nerve to speak the truth to power. Sorry to burst your partisan Conyers ass-kissing bubble yank, but there is nothing illegal or slanderous about me sharing my opinion that Conyers is ignoring his oath. People are dying and our country is being destroyed while Conyers plays disgusting politics.
jperry You are ignoring history that PEOPLE HAVE EYEWITNESSED, not you!!! Sorry to burst your arrogant egotistical illogical ignorant uneducated wrong fallacies, but just because you make up stuff as you go along does not change WHAT REALLY HAPPENED with Nixon, and just because you say such and such , does not make it "history" , or legal by First Amendment standards when you slander a public official WITHOUT proof. Good grief, are you trying to compete with Hagee? Whose side on your on? Not us.
jperryam I'm IGNORING everything you say because you don't know what the hell you are talking about, you are just babbling anti-facts and making stuff up! What you self- proclaim as your "nerve" is in reality just brazen lies. We will burst your Neocon-ass-kissing bubble because WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE will not hand a failed impeachment to McCain to celebrate four more years of a Bushie third term. But you would rather slander Conyers. If you were sincere to impeach, you would persuade Congress
Are the neocons paying you to spew your ignorant garbage, or are you doing it in hopes of some lucrative payback later? I have stated my opinion, with evidence that I believe backs it up. All you can do is ignore the history that proves you wrong, avoid EVERY specific question I have ever asked you, and make up things that I've NEVER said or suggested. All your tactics, including the claim that I hate Conyers, which is not true (I AM very angry with him), come directly from the neocon playbook.
jperry John, you are lying about me all the time with your childish name-calling and your malicious methods to get people to gang up on me, that's how I know you are lying about Conyers with your illegal slander. You are just trying to make a name for yourself... but you are generating a very bad reputation instead. You could be persuading Congress to sign Wexler's Petition, and co-sponsor Kucinich's H Res 333, but you would rather destroy the FOUNDER of "Constitution in Crisis" instead... hmmm.
jperry Funny, I think same thing about u. Ur destructive focus on slandering Conyers is not going to MAKE Conyers do anything that is counter-productive to ridding the Neocons from White House, so u are wasting ur breath, unless U r getting $ NOW as a Neocon Troll. U trash American ppl who actually want to VOTE IN PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION (u act like that is some sort of "sin" or some other weirdo thing like that, even tho our PEOPLE's RIGHT TO VOTE IS MANDATORY IN THE CONSTITUTION).
jp If Conyers prematurely did a costly impeachment that was sure to fail because there are not the votes, that could divide the country before the election, and keep a third Neocon term in White House because Conyers LOSES the impeachment, you would be the first one to make demonizing videos of Conyers for going forward with an impeachment that he knew in advance going to fail.
You have proved once again how little you actually understand about the history of impeachment. A lost impeachment does not guarantee a lost election. Actually quite the opposite. Funny thing about Americans. We actually like it when Congress at least TRIES to do its job. This is why reviewing the entire history of the process is so important. It's NOT about what Conyers "knows" in advance. It's about him honoring his oath to support and defend our Constitution, which he is NOT currently doing.
jperryam You are simply spouting rhetoric and propaganda, by inventing some "oath" that Conyers is supposedly breaking. You never mention SPECIFICALLY WHAT oath Conyers is breaking, and please do not be coy and say "The Constitution", because impeachment is NOT mandatory in the Constitution, it is purely a judgement call. Needless to say, I trust Chairman Conyers judgement, wisdom AND experience (he's been there done that, and so have I).
jperryam Now you are twisting words (intentionally no doubt). This is not about something that Conyers "knows" , this is about a quorum. Any experienced entity will take a quorum before they go ahead with an actual vote... Labor Unions do this all the time, they NEVER take an actual vote without having a quorum ahead of time , the risk of losing is too great, so they have people sign cards before the official vote takes place on ballots . U know zero of the importance of quorums. Conyers DOES.
Initiation of the impeachment process is NOT dependent on whether John Conyers or anybody else thinks the case for impeachment in he House and conviction in the Senate is iron clad. It is dependent on THE EXISTENCE OF EVIDENCE OF CRIMES AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTION, committed by those sworn to uphold it. Evidence documented BY CONYERS HIMSELF, in the book he put out two years ago called "Constitution in Crisis." His inaction violates his own oath. Michigan's 14th district needs to vote him out.
jperryam Disagreeing with his timing is one thing, but that does not make John Conyers in violation of his oath. In fact, premature impeachment would be more dangerous to the country, which would definitely be in violation of his oath. Conyers stated himself there are compelling reasons why he is not impeaching right now, and he also said impeachment is NOT off the table. Voting this particular Chairman of Judiciary out would be foolhardy.
Conyers is not in violation of his oath because of the timing. He's in violation of his oath because he has a mountain of hard evidence against the Bush administration that he refuses to act on. He did not swear an oath to the Democratic party. He swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, which he is NOT doing with his idiotic refusal to act. If you would just take a rational, UNBIASED look at ALL the facts (which you have yet to do), you would see that you are completely wrong.
jperryam There is nothing in Constitution that says impeachment and conviction are mandatory. What IS mandatory is THE REMOVAL of the president after impeachment leads to a successful conviction. An impeached president CAN continue to sit in the Oval Office, as we have seen with Clinton. But he was not convicted after his impeachment, Clinton was acquitted. Nixon , on the other hand, the votes were ironclad to impeach AND convict, even before they took the votes. That is why Nixon resigned.
jperryam In order to successfully attain impeachment and conviction of George W Bush and Richard Cheney we need to unite in solidarity and persuade our Congresspeople to sign Congressman Wexler's petition and to co-sponsor Congress Kucinich's H Res 333.
And if the Chairman of the House Judiciary would stop sitting on his hands, start impeachment hearings and start putting the evidence on the record for the world to see, it would energize a LOT more people to do EXACTLY what you suggest. He does not need all the votes before he starts. He needs them when the hearings are done and a vote is taken. For as long as he continues to do nothing, there is NO chance of getting the votes. He needs to honor his oath and get started NOW.
John Conyers put evidence on table already : "Constitution in Crisis". It did not make blip on network news radar. The people who matter, members on Judiciary Committee, are ONES needing energized. JC's done everything a human can do, he can take Judiciary Committee to water but he cannot make them drink. The opposite was true for Nixon, majority of Judiciary Committee voted to hold an impeachment. Everyone knew House would impeach and Senate would convict. Nixon had to be told to step down.
We need to energize ourselves and UNITE and continue to put the pressure on the members of Judiciary Committee and Congresspeople who have not yet signed onto impeachment bill and Wexler's Petition. Conyers needs our POSITIVE ENERGY to be able to do this thing successfully.
Can you do ANYTHING other than make the same lame excuses over and over again for Conyers?
Do you not realize that Conyers is ignoring MULTIPLE MEMBERS of the Judiciary committee who are urging him to initiate impeachment?
THEY understand that the SUREST way to get the votes needed to impeach is to start hearings and PUT THE EVIDENCE ON THE RECORD, where it will be harder for the media to ignore it.
Your Conyers ass-kissing schtick is getting pretty old. The man is NOT doing his job.
jperry Ur malicious vilification of Conyers does great damage. U know NOTHING of impeachment, except the "blue dress stain", u are only 44 , for crying out loud! U know nothing about REAL impeachment & what it takes. LISTEN to Conyers for a change, instead of running your mean ignorant mouth. This man has tried everything possible to make this impeachment happen, he is working in REAL WORLD, not ur fantasy. And UNITING to persuade votes from Congress sure beats ur divisive hateful methods.
Your schtick really IS getting old. My age does not prevent me from reading the FULL history of impeachment that you're ignoring, which proves without exception that the party seeking impeachment (whether or not it happened) has been successful in subsequent elections. Conyers has tried EVERYTHING? Has he convenened impeachment hearings? For as long as he refuses to act on the evidence THAT HE HAS DOCUMENTED HIMSELF, he will be in violation of his Constituional oath. He SHOULD be vilified.
John Perry History? YOU WERE NOT THERE BUDDY! EVerybody was ready to hang Nixon out to dry, INCLUDING THE REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS BACK THEN. You are CLUELESS, go read Mother Goose, you are into fairy tales, you know nothing of even RECENT history. You lies and slander were old the first time. Grow up.
I'm not trying to destroy John Conyers. I'm trying to get him to do his damn job. If you don't like the way I go about it that's your problem. The longer he refuses to act on THE EVIDENCE HE ALREADY HAS, the greater his chances are of DESTROYING HIMSELF. I've been through far worse than you, yank. Trash me all you want. Go for it. But the more you attack the messenger without even trying to refute the message with anything resembling rational thought, the more you reveal your own cluelessness.
jperryam John Perry, you have trashed Conyers, me and anyone who does not agree with your childish illogical temper tantrums. I don't like your methods BECAUSE YOU LIE ABOUT HISTORY, YOU LIE ABOUT THE CURRENT FACTS and NUMBERS, you SLANDER Conyers w/ "traitor" "complicit in war crimes" on other forums, which completely destroys any credible arguments against the REAL WAR CRIMINALS. Conyers IS doing his job by NOT following kneejerk irresponsible bullying by your destructive propaganda.
jperryam You are bullying Conyers all the time to stick his neck out to do foolhardy things such as proceeding with a failed impeachment. You are drumming up A LOT of support for your self-promoting propaganda and vilification witch-hunt against Conyers. You are just mad at me because I think things through instead of following your malicious mob mentality tactics.
Temper tantrums? Now there's a real hoot. I have provided facts and expressed anger with a representative of the people who I and many others see as failing to do his job. You have responded with NOTHING but endless whining about how we're picking on Conyers. Now you're calling me a liar. Forgive me if I don't hold my breath waiting for you to back that one up. Conyers has the evidence. He's refusing to act. I say that makes him complicit. Sorry, but it's just too bad if you don't like it.
jperryam Your childish attacks and name-calling at me are reminiscent of what I went through in my neighborhood when I was a pre-schooler (before you were born, so please don't claim you know) , and is laughable. You are easy to shrug off, as far as your pathetic bullying goes.
jperryam And on this note , I have to laugh: "I've been through far worse than you, yank." Again, you are clueless and you have no idea what I have been through, yet you claim that you "know". Whenever anyone claims to be all-knowing and omniscient , all my red-flags go up.
jperryam And if you must continue to use negative energies to vilify someone, then go after Nancy Pelosi. Otherwise, I truly wish you would use your outreach resources for a more positive honest approach towards impeachment, by persuading Members of Judiciary Committee and Congress to sign Wexler's Petition and to Co-Sponsor Kucinich's H Res 333 .
I never claimed to know what you have been through. I was talking about my own experience, and how having to endure the ignorant rants of someone like you doesn't even come close to the things I've had to deal with. Jeezus, are you that detached?
jperryam No John, you are detached. I started out here and on other forums with rational arguments why slanderous vilification of Conyers is not only morally wrong, but detrimental to the impeachment cause as a whole. You decided to turn this into personal attacks with your "ass-kisser" and "neocon troll" name-calling. You lost credibility with me with your distortion of history and lies of current facts and numbers, but you lost all my respect with your malicious slander of Conyers .
You're sounding more like a neocon operative all the time. Complete avoidance of any and all facts that don't fit your argument, try to create distraction with irrelevant tit-for-tat.
Mob mentality? Please. I am NOT advocating violence, nor have I ever, nor WILL I ever. I'm doing my part as a responsible citizen, which is to hold our elected representatives (INCLUDING CONYERS) accountable, and I am encouraging others to do the same. Call it whatever you want. He's NOT doing his job.
John Perry, u have done the last straw, u are trying to destroy the FATHER OF BUSH IMPEACHMENT, you waste our time spinning your wheels with your sanctimonious witch-hunt against Conyers, you get some sort of self-promotion from this destructive distraction. I'm saving my venom for THE NEOCON WAR CRIMINALS. Instead you vilify & slander Conyers for being the messenger of the FACTS> he doesn't have the votes. Let's get those votes! I trust him, NOT YOU!
If John Conyers is the "FATHER OF BUSH IMPEACHMENT" somebody better call child protective services. He's being a lousy parent. Last time I checked, the Pretender-in-Chief was still squatting in the White House.
I will spare no venom for any man who swears an oath to support and defend our Constitution and then refuses to honor that oath.
He doesn't need a single vote to START the impeachment process. He needs HARD EVIDENCE, of which there is a mountain against the Bush administration.
jperryam You lie , and badly, because Conyers DOES need the votes. HISTORY SHOWS US THAT (but I remember anyways) : "On February 6, 1974, The Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives was authorised by Resolution 803 of the House "to investigate fully and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States of America."...
...The motion was carried by 410-4 and instructed the Committee to "report to the House of Representatives such resolutions, articles of impeachment, or other recommendations as it deems proper."..."
In other words, Judiciary Committee HAD the votes BEFORE Impeachment Hearings even began for Nixon, by an overwhelming LANDSLIDE, that included even a MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS. It would be foolhardy for Conyers to proceed without quorum for impeachment, which is why he is Chairman, AND U R NOT.
There is not even majority among Members of Judiciary Committee for impeachment, only 4 members have signed Wexler's Petition for even HEARINGS on Cheney.
Conyers cannot FORCE members of Judiciary Committee, and Congress to vote our way... if he did, THAT would be UnConstitutional. The fact that Conyers is willing to tell us the TRUTH that there are not enough votes to proceed makes him a WISE, HONEST STATESMAN, not a childish slanderer as yourself, John Perry. U keep blaming the messenger.
You're right. Conyers cannot force them to vote a certain way. But he DOES have a responsibility to act on the evidence. Whether or not he has the votes before he even starts IS NOT RELEVANT. The Constitution mentions impeachment six times. NOWHERE does it say that the votes must be there before officials who have committed crimes against our Constitution are subjected to accountability. You and Conyers are hung up on the politics, yank. You're ignoring ACCOUNTABILITY completely.
jperry THERE IS NO ACCOUNTABILITY WITHOUT THE VOTES. They cannot be held accountable with a failed impeachment, in fact a failed impeachment will make USA WORSE. Going into an impeachment knowing it does not have the votes and will fail IS VERY RELEVANT. Conyers would be held accountable for doing a failed impeachment to the country. Hung up on politics? You bet your damn bippy I am! You may not give a damn if the Neocons stay in the White House, but I sure do!
You're wrong, yank. You cherry pick single sentences to back up your ridiculous logic and ignore everything else. You need to look at the ENTIRE history of impeachment, going back before Lincoln, which proves you have no clue what you're talking about.
jperry U R WRONG, and you know it. Now you are trying to go back before Lincoln because you know you have been proven wrong about Nixon. You thought I wouldn't pick up on that? You are obvious. You can go back to before Lincoln in your dreams, I am sticking to what u claim to call "history", which is really what happened during Conyers' life experience, & my lifetime memory.
You have proven nothing. I didn't make up the history (with my video response here), yank. I just recited it. If you're going to say it's wrong and that I'm lying, you need to be specific, or you're the one whose credibility suffers. If you are unwilling to consider any history regarding impeachment other than what has occurred during your own lifetime, that pretty much cements your lack of credibility. But I must say I'm in awe of your ability to make lame excuses for Conyers' inaction.
jp U r not willing to concede that u r totally wrong about Nixon's resignation, that "history" of numbers for votes in fact existed LONG BEFORE ACTUAL IMPEACHMENT OF NIXON, & THAT IS WHY NIXON RESIGNED 1st, BEFORE AN IMPEACHMENT EVER TOOK PLACE. Now u claim that a post-civil war impeachment in 1800's is more applicable than what Conyers experienced w/ same players in the background (Cheney was in Nixon White House). Ur credibility has gone from arrogantly wrong to downright silly.
You've already been proven wrong on this score(over on ADS). The votes did not exist to impeach Nixon until after the hearings started. And you're intentionally distorting my comments. I did not say that impeachment in the 1800's is more applicable. I said you need to review the ENTIRE HISTORY of impeachment, right through Clinton, which proves that the party seeking it, WHETHER OR NOT THE IMPEACHMENT WAS SUCCESSFUL, has been victorious in subsequent elections. Stop ignoring proven history.
jperryam Once again you are clueless about "history" because you did not live it... Impeachment Hearings NEVER started for Nixon, Watergate Hearings commenced and ended (NOT Impeachment Hearings, which you are clearly getting confused) , and Judiciary Committee drew up and INTRODUCED Articles of Impeachment... Impeachment Hearings NEVER got off the ground, because White House was informed by Republican Senators that they knew there were enough votes, AND THAT IS WHY NIXON RESIGNED.
Fine. I'll take your word on this one. But only because it DOES NOT MATTER whether they're called "impeachment" of "Watergate" hearings, if EVIDENCE IS BEING PUT INTO THE RECORD AND THE WORLD IS WATCHING, and members of Congres are forced to come to a decision about how they would vote on impeachment. Conyers would GET the votes that he and you keep talking about if he would just do his damn job and start the hearings. Doing NOTHING is UNACCEPTABLE.
jperry Don't take my word > google. All I have to do is REMEMBER. Another thing, read ur ACLU Protestor's Rights brochure (or google , don't take MY word for it) EVEN THE ACLU says there r LIMITATIONS ON FREE SPEECH WHILE PROTESTING: "...Also unprotected r malicious statements about public officials & obscene speech..." So u've maliciously slandered w/vilifying witchhunt against PUBLIC OFFICIAL who has done nothing wrong! U have aroused a mob mentality with other ppl to do it too, on site & YT .
You're going WAY over the line with this kind of stuff, yank. I have not "maliciously slandered" ANYBODY, nor am I arousing a "mob mentality". I am HONORING MY RESPONSIBILITY AS A CITIZEN to hold elected officials accountable to the people they're supposed to be serving, and I have encouraged others to do the same. That's called being an advocate, and there is NOTHING wrong with it. Telling someone to honor their oath and do their job is not a malicious statement, nor is it obscene. Get real.
jperryam You are a fine one to talk. You crossed the line months ago with legal slander against Conyers . You have falsely claimed Conyers is "not honoring his oath", that he is a "traitor" that he is "complicit in war crimes" , all without documentation and evidence. You just say rhetoric "its in the Constititution" then you re-word stuff in your own words. Conyers has done nothing LEGALLY wrong. You may disagree with his judgement and timing of impeachment, but NOT his legal standing.
It's my OPINION (which I am entitled to, thank you very much) that John Conyers' REFUSAL TO ACT ON THE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE he has against the Bush administration makes him complicit in their crimes. Could he be held legally responsible? I don't know. But I do know that if someone has information that could help solve a crime and refuses to come forward with it, they could potentially be charged and go to jail. Mr. Conyers needs to do his job.
jperryam No , John Conyers canNOT be held legally responsible for not going forward on something that even a majority of the Members of the Judiciary Committee does NOT want. John Conyers cannot FORCE the issue. He has done everything humanly possible to generate and present the evidence thru "Constitution in Crisis", but the Members of Judiciary are not of one mind, not even a SIMPLE MAJORITY. Conyers hands are tied, he cannot do MORE than what the MAJORITY on Judiciary Committee want.
jperry U never say its YOUR OPINION. You make it sound like the Constitution has made impeachment mandatory, when its NOT, impeachment is a JUDGEMENT CALL, only elections are MANDATORY in the Constitution. That is what Conyers is up against, he needs to make a decision to NOT go forward with a failed impeachment that will surely jeapordize a MANDATORY election. Conyers did NOT make these rules up, he simply has to use his judgement to live within JUDGEMENT CALLS and MANDATORY ELECTION.
jperry Do you read before you send your stuff? Conyers HAS come forward with information about Bush/Cheney war crimes "CONSTITUTION IN CRISIS", he has had Downing Street Memo Hearings, he is having Hearings NOW even. He cannot squeeze votes out of these stonecold Congresspeople. Conyers HAS come forward with every bit of information that he has in his possession ! So you lie BIG TIME, that Conyers has held back information about Bush/Cheney war crimes. Conyers has held back NOTHING. U get real.
jperryam you sound like a Bible-thumper who quotes the Bible then misinterprets it on purpose with your own words. Defending the Constitution will NOT happen with a FAILED impeachment, it will be the OPPOSITE of defending the nation, it will put the Neocons at an ADVANTAGE to show that there are not enuf votes to impeach them. Conyers IS defending the nation by assuring that the election BY THE PEOPLE is NOT jeapordized by a kangaroo court that YOU want.
JPerry says THIS, NOT the Constitution: "Which means he's BOUND BY HIS OATH TO ACT on the evidence. Not having the votes before he starts is NOT an acceptable excuse. " U are NOT a god, for crying out loud. You cannot just make up stuff as you go along and claim its in the Constitution. Conyers IS defending the Constitution from domestic enemies by making sure this election goes forward BY THE PEOPLE. Ridding the White House of the Neocons LEGALLY with an election IS defense against enemies.
It's not a question of holding back evidence. It's Conyers' REFUSAL TO ACT ON THE EVIDENCE that has him in violation of his oath. You tell the biggest lie of all when you say he needs the votes to impeach before he even starts hearings. It will NEVER be true, no matter how many times you say it. You also say a failed impeachment would automatically hand neocons another term in the White House, but THE HISTORY PROVES YOU WRONG. McCain's BEST chance is for Conyers to continue to do nothing.
jperry Conyers is NOT refusing to act on evidence that HE HIMSELF COMPILED; Members of Judiciary Committee ARE NOT . There are only FOUR that have signed Wexler's Petition for Cheney Hearings (when you LIED on prior post and said MULTIPLE members have . Conyers cannot hold anyone accountable with ONLY 4 VOTES in Judiciary Committee, and when the majority of Members of Judiciary Committee don't want this thing to even get out of their Committee at all!. U keep falsely accusing w/o false info.
jperryam HISTORY proves that your fallacy of a "theory" (not fact-based at all) only works with QUORUM OF VOTES TOWARDS A SUCCESSFUL VALID IMPEACHMENT . HISTORY has NEVER proven that your hairbrained "theory" works with an impeachment with no votes that is DOOMED FOR FAILURE . You need to start watching the TV show "Numbers" , it may be so-called "fiction" , but its more logical than any Twilight Zone "theory" you have presented .
One more time, yank: There have been multiple attempts at impeachment throughout our history. It has been successful twice (Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton). Without exception, the party attempting impeachment has been successful in subsequent elections, WHETHER OR NOT IMPEACHMENT WAS ACHIEVED. This is not theory. It's FACT.
The ONLY chance Conyers has at getting the votes he needs is to START impeachment hearings. By not doing so, he is neither supporting nor defending the Constitution.
jperry AGAIN, 2 times in our lifetimes, one of which u were way too young to remember which is why u call it "history", a resignation & impeachment of 2 prez's took place cuz the votes were known BEFORE the impeachments began. CLEARLY Conyers does not have the votes now, EVEN within Judiciary Committee, which is why it has not gone to the House for impeachment, let alone the Senate for conviction. If Conyers prematurely moved on an obviously doomed impeachment, the Neocons would WIN.
Your claim that vilifying Conyers is morally wrong is the height of hypocrisy. You want to talk about what's morally wrong? Conyers is sitting on his hands, ignoring the overwhelming evidence, allowing blood to spill, lives to be destroyed, and Bushco's reign of terror continue unchallenged. He is showing more concern for his party than his country. It is easily one of the most disgusting displays of partisan politics this country has ever seen. And you're supporting him. Way to go, yank.
jperryam Conyers is putting the soldiers lives before YOUR agenda, which is impeachment at any cost , even the cost of failing impeachment due to lack of votes, even the cost of losing the White House to a third McBush term, which would cause MORE WARS and loss of lives. Conyers has much more experience andforesight and wisdom than you. You were barely born when he started in Congress.
My agenda is "Impeachment at any cost, even the cost of failing impeachment"? Do you actually read your posts before you submit them? My agenda is accountability, which is John Conyers' job as House Judiciary Chairman. It cannot be done by doing nothing.
jperryam Obviously you know nothing of current events as well , John Conyers is currently subpoenaing Karl Rove. He will hold him in contempt of Congress if he does not respond.
w w w . huffingtonpost. com/2008/05/15/conyers-on-rove-someones_n_101998. html
John Conyers IS doing his job, but you don't care because you are not paying attention. He just won't be foolish and do what YOU want him to ...thank God for Conyers common sense.
And Karl Rove is laughing in Conyers' face, because he knows the Bush lackey who heads up the Justice Department now (Mukasey) will not enforce a contempt citation for Rove, just like he has refused to enforce it for Bush Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former White House Counsel Harritte Meyers, both of whom have ALREADY been found in contempt for their refusal to respond to subpoenas regarding the U.S Attorney firing scandal. I am quite confident I'm paying better attention than you, my friend.
jperryam First of all, my REAL friends do not call me a "Neocon troll" or exhibit other bullying behavior or instigate others to gang up as U have , so please spare me the phoney salutations. Secondly, you just proved my point that Conyers is NOT at fault here for the spider's web that the NEOCONS have contrived with their multi-layered pre-planned PNAC conspiracy , and thirdly , pay attention to what? You can't even count!
jperryam Conyers WROTE the challenge "Constitution in Crisis", and all you can do is vilify a man who is using his judgement on the timing of impeachment. He wants impeachment more than you and I and everyone combined, but HE DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES. Conyers did not say he does not want impeachment, in fact he said its still on the table, he is saying right now HE DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES. You lie and cherrypick what Conyers says, for your video propaganda.
"HE DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES" is like "the dog ate my homework." It's a pathetic, UNACCEPTABLE excuse for not honoring the oath to support and defend the Constitution. If Conyers REALLY wanted impeachment, he would initiate impeachment hearings, start putting evidence on the record, force media coverage, and motivate people to STAND UP AND DEMAND THE VOTES. Jeez yank, why is that so hard for you to understand? You're still calling me a liar, but you have yet to say what I've lied about.
jperryam The height of hypocrisy is that you are doing witch-hunt videos with lies to make false charges that Conyers is not following his oath, when he is using his princples and judgement to not be bullied into an impeachment that is sure to fail without the votes. You don't listen to Conyers at all, he has compelling reasons, and they are not "partisan reasons", (unless of course u consider losing again to the Neocons as being "non-partisan", which is just foolish grand-standing on ur part.)
It's not a false charge. It's a fact. He is doing NOTHING to hold the Bush adminsitration truly accountable, which proves he is neither supporting nor defending our Constitution, which he swore to do. His own work proves it. He wrote the damn book. He knows the evidence better than anyone. He is ignoring it. We keep hearing the words "compelling reasons," but we have yet to hear a single one of them described. More smoke and mirrors. Conyers is aiding and abetting war criminals by default.
jperryam Your disgusting display of witch-hunting Conyers is VERY partisan, your behavior shows that you don't give a damn that impeachment would fail due to lack of votes and you make it clear you don't CARE if McCain gets the third Neocon term cuz u are "non-partisan" . You sound more and more like you are an operative working for Karl Rove, because you are certainly not working for votes for a REALLY successful impeachment, or a White House without McCain.
Please read: HER NAME IS MS. ANN (On You Tube). It will change your life! It's by Rev. James Manning. He speaks the truth!
peteykkk 2 years ago
conyers should impeach his porch monkey wife for fraud. him and her are headed for jail!
peteykkk 2 years ago
the guy is tallking about spin control
grant8567 3 years ago
I have never seen such week leaders in my life playing it safe by making it a political decision to preserve the party for presidency that might not even win.
rsouthern 3 years ago
Conyers is a goddamned pussy!
thefreeassociation 3 years ago
Conyers needs to get his shit together.
datalorez 3 years ago
Bush has admitted breaking the FISA law. It's an open and shut case. Get them out before they can do what another great Bush trick - send troops into another country just as he is leaving office. Remember what the the SOB's father did after the 1992 election - blindly sending troops into Somalia as a parting fu? More proof that they don't give a damnm about the men in women who serve our country.
fnorple 3 years ago 3
We CANNOT let this stand people!, These traitors need to go, if we can't do it legally.....!
montanainsurgeant 3 years ago 3
DO NOT ELECT THIS COWARD AGAIN
timluns 3 years ago 6
I think John Conyers is just a plain and simple coward, who is afraid to loose his job. What is his reason for not doing this?? I think if he does not go through with the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, then American people should charge him with obstruction of justice!!!
jedirock 3 years ago 5
WE need to stand up to these cowards from the DEMS They need to FEEL The HEAT.
timluns 3 years ago
fuck you and you reason that if you impeach the democrats wont win elections,the democrats are the same as the republicans, this is bullshit. he doesnt want to because he has been told not to, he is a fucking shill. welcome to america.
gyco7 3 years ago 7
Old cowardly traitor.If we do not ALL stand for what is right, we all will fall.
Email + call + fax your representative + Conyers and DEMAND they IMPEACH immediately.
Their contact is at houseDOTgov & senateDOTgov & judiciaryDOThouseDOTgov faxzeroDOTcom is a place you can send an online fax FOR FREE.
"the prosecution of george bush for murder" is a great video to watch on here.
3 places with info + stuff to do: fairDOTorg & afterdowningstreetDOTorg & freewaybloggerDOTcom
Silence is complicity
vegekug 3 years ago 3
This Guy Needs To GO. No Guts No Job And He is off the Table
SOLUTION!
timluns 3 years ago 4
Conyers is worthless.
The entire democratic party is worthless.
DarWT26 3 years ago 4
Wow, Conyers get it done already!
Steadno 3 years ago 3
seyaso 3 years ago 4
it is time to clean house.
carl250r 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is supposed to be a democracy, you must DEMAND IMPEACHMENT: Please call your congressional representatives today - Demand
impeachment hearings for Bush and Cheney - Capitol Hill Switchboard:
(202) 224-2131 , (800) 828-0498
(Repost this message so the numbers stay on top of the comments list!) And check out the wikipedia page "Movement to Impeach Bush."
nadermatrixs 3 years ago
Johnny baby your wife is off the hook. They got you by the balls you start impeachment your dirty laundry gets front row.
pimp12345678901 3 years ago
jp You are clearly a Karl Rove operative, all you do is trash Conyers and Democrats that look forward to a LEGAL CONSTITUTIONAL ELECTION to DEFEAT MCCAIN & OUST THE NEOCONS.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
h t t p : / /portland. indymedia. org/en/2008/05/376053. shtml
24.May.2008 00:43 The New American Century has been suspended
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
him and especially his wife are idiots. search monica conyers city council you'll see what i'm talking about. they both need to resign
drick321 3 years ago
jperry U confirmed once again that u abuse the word "nonpartisan" (like that makes u some sort of sanctimonious self-proclaimed "saint"~ NOT!) U hate Conyers just becuz he is a Democrat, so u r just a hypocritical GOP Neocon-ass-kisser . Not honoring YOUR AMERICAN RIGHT TO VOTE in the election is the height of dishonoring what Our Forefathers died for AND The Constitution of the United States of America. Our Forefathers DIED so we could ALWAYS VOTE, not so we could impeach once in a blue moon
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry And my direct ancestor was in the Am Rev War, even was captured and ESCAPED the British to go on to live a looong life, so don't you dare even say, suggest, infer, or imply that I have no right to vote in any AMERICAN ELECTION.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry VOTING IS THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT, impeachment only belongs to Congress. READ THE ENTIRE CONSTITUTION!!! So if you want impeachment, then PERSUADE CONGRESS for THEIR VOTES, because YOU HAVE NO VOTE FOR IMPEACHMENT. But if YOU want the Neocons OUT, THEN YOU WILL VOTE FOR CHANGE IN NOVEMBER 2008, unless of course, you are a hypocritical "nonpartisan".
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
actually its up to the senate
drick321 3 years ago
Impeachment happens in House, trial after an impeachment happens in Senate.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
true
drick321 3 years ago
Please send us a postcard from whatever planet you're on. The view must be wonderful. I have never suggested that the the people have a direct vote for impeachment. I have tried to persuade my rep for his vote. Multiple times. Called, faxed, emailed, shook his hand and told him to his face. He won't even consider it. He's a freshman rep following Nancy's lead who wants to keep his committee position. He will not rock the boat. It's up to Conyers to start hearings and create the votes he needs.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry What planet is your district on? You can't get your own district Congressman to vote for impeachment!? In your own planetary playbook that makes you as evil as what you claim Conyers is . He said, like you, that the votes aren't there, and you can't even get ONE vote to be there, so you are complicit with war crimes, and a traitor to the Constitution, as you say about Conyers.
You are the pot calling the kettle black.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
A prime example of your complete detachment from logic and reality. You say people need to lobby their reps on impeachment. I have done exactly that repeatedly, and mine just continues to refuse to do so because he's playing the game instead of honoring his oath, just like Conyers. And that makes ME complicit in war crimes and a traitor? Please. I am not encouraging people to gang up on you nor am I slandering Conyers. I am honoring my responsibility as a citizen by holding him accountable.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry Liar, liar , pants on fire. U most certainly have childishly namecalled and encouraged others to gang up on me(elsewhere). U r a typical bully, JP, u can dish it out, but u can't take it.(waa waa) You do NOT honor actual real history, you do NOT follow First Amendment rights RESPONSIBLY, you do NOT respect other people's RIGHT TO VOTE for whomever they choose (even if, "god-forbid" in your planetary "bible", their candidate is in a Party of some sort), u make silly things up as u go along
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
"Liar, liar, pants on fire," and I'M the childish one? That's a real hoot. I have never once encouraged people to gang up on you. I have exercised my right to speak freely, which I will continue to do. If others want to join the discussion, that's THEIR right. If you can't handle the critcism, stop inviting it with your ridiculous rambling nonsense. Like this crap about how I supposedly don't respect peoples' right to vote for whomever they want. The charge is completely false and nonsensical.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry If the shoe fits... I tailor my conversation with u as I would any bully. If you can't stand the heat, or the truth, then get out of the kitchen. What you call criticism of Conyers is actually a violation of First Amendment since it is illegal slander of a public official. You have no proof that he is complicit in war crimes and treasonous to our nation. If you have proof, then take it to a prosecutor . Ur silliness diminishes the REAL EVIDENCE of war crimes & treason by Bush/Cheney.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry If you do not take your so-called "proof" to a prosecutor that Conyers is "complicit in war crimes" and a "traitor" , then you are aiding and abetting a war criminal and a traitor.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry Conyers is intelligent, wise and experienced enuf to NOT allow war criminals to just walk, like OJ, and NIXON!!! He wants a REAL case that will stick, not just phoney expensive motions that does not have the votes . Conyers does NOT want to jeapordize any FUTURE ACTIONS that the US and international courts can take against these Neocon war criminals.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry Its bs that you care about this country. You want to jeapordize EVERYTHING Conyers has worked hard for since 2005 , when Downing Street Memos came out, just because it will make you feel like some sort of a bigshot if he succumbed to your childish temper tantrums .
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
EXACTLY yank! The REAL EVIDENCE that Conyers REFUSES TO ACT ON, because he would rather play spineless politics than honor his oath to support and defend the Constituiton! And every time you bring up the ridiculous "the votes aren't there" argument, you restate YOUR OWN preference for self-serving party politics over accountability. It's disgusting and shameful. The First Amendment, which you clearly still do not understand, guarantees my right to say that Conyers' inaction makes him complicit.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry U refuse to acknowledge this FACT: THE VOTES AREN'T THERE. Chair John Conyers is a man , NOT A MAGICIAN. THERE HAS TO BE THE VOTES. U know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the process , it has to get out of Judiciary Committee FIRST. THERE IS NOT A MAJORITY OF VOTES IN THE J. COMMITTEE EITHER! Only 4 Members of J.C. have signed Wexler's Petition. Ur repulsive & ignorant slams, at OUR RIGHTS TO VOTE in CONSTITUTIONAL ELECTION PROCESS that can remove these Neocons FOREVER, makes me want to puke.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
I have explained to you multiple times that the only way to GET the votes is to START HEARINGS and put the evidence into the record. It's the ONLY chance Conyers has to bring accountability for Bushco's crimes. You have yet to respond directly to that point, like you have yet to respond to the point that the way you landslide McCain is by forcing him to defend the crimes for which Bushco faces impeachment. What are you afraid of yank? Stop thinking politics and start thinking accountability.
jperryam 3 years ago
jp & I have explained to u MULTIPLE TIMES HISTORICAL FACTS & CIVICS (which u have NO comprehension of at all) not MYTHOLOGY that u make up & spew as fractured fallacies, that impeachment is NOT started without enuf VOTES by Members in the Judiciary Committee, and then IF YOU WOULD CLEAN THE WAX OUT OF UR EARS, then it goes through a Special Committee in the House. & if you WOULD LISTEN, Conyers says its NOT OFF THE TABLE, so HELP DRUM UP MORE SUPPORT FROM CONGRESS instead of UR VILE TACTICS.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam Grow up. If you want to be a lying bully towards me, that's just sad. But trying to recruit people to join your bullying tactics with you on your slanderous witch-hunt is PLAIN EVIL.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry And it is a LIE that this is the ONLY chance to hold these Neocons accountable. They have committed CRIMES against the US and International Laws. There is NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS on what these Neocons have done. A doomed impeachment is NOT our only venue of justice. But we have to get into a position where JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL, NOT FAIL.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam What am I afraid of? I am AFRAID of Neocon trolls and ignoramuses , both can and will screw up EVERYTHING that Conyers has worked for since 2005 (as you have proven).
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry I am NOT afraid of a Chairman that has 44 more years experience, wisdom and knowledge in Congress, and with impeachment processes, than YOU who was born when Conyers started in Congress!!!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry Conyers explanations of the Constitutional processess of a SUCCESSFUL impeachment make truckloads more common sense than YOUR NONSENSE.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You clearly have no grasp of common sense on this issue. MILLIONS of Americans are angry, because we gave Dems in Washington a majority with a CYRSTAL CLEAR MANDATE in 2006: To get us out of Iraq and hold the Bush administration accountable. They in turn have accomplished NOTHING. Because of this, what SHOULD be a HUGE landslide for Dems in November will be close, which will only make it EASIER for the neocons to STEAL ANOTHER ELECTION. Conyers' failure to act is playing right into their hands.
jperryam 3 years ago
Conyers is either as clueless as you appear to be, or you're both angling to give a Democratic president the same completely unconstitutional powers that Bush has crafted for himself. With so much on the line, it's easily the most disgusting display of partisan politicking this country has ever seen. This is the view of MILLIONS of us, about which there is NOTHING illegal, unconstitutional or slanderous. Of course, Conyers can easily prove us wrong by starting impeachment hearings.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry Conyers has already proven YOU wrong. He does NOT have the votes, and he has experienced two impeachment processes prior to this, so clearly the man knows what he is talking about> a FAILED impeachment would play right into the hands of the Neocons and give them MORE POWER. This is self-explanatory except to you, who needs to be told the obvious MILLIONS of times.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry You are NOT expressing MILLIONS of Americans with your Un-Constitutional illegal slanderous tactics against Conyers, what MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of Americans want is the chance TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS AND VOTE THESE NEOCONS OUT. You would inhibit OUR RIGHTS with your one-man-show to shove a DOOMED IMPEACHMENT down everyone's throat. I am not buying your SNAKE-OIL, and neither are MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of Americans.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
How many times are you going to repeat the ridiculous lie that I'm somehow trying to inhibit peoples' right to vote? I have never said or implied any such thing. And how many times are you going to repeat the ridiculous lie that by excercising my right to free speech, and by honoring my responsibility as a citizen to hold elected officials accountable and encouraging fellow citizens to do the same, I am somehow slandering Conyers? The fact that you don't like the method doesn't make it illegal.
jperryam 3 years ago
Stop ignoring the history that proves you wrong. Anybody can watch my video reply here (Truth About Impeachment) and see that you're WAY off with your ridiculous claims. I didn't make up the history. I just recited it. You keep saying that a failed impeachment would help neocons, but you fail to grasp that doing NOTHING to even TRY to stop them is worse! Conyers might as well be rolling out the red carpet for McCain. It's called being an enabler. Oh wait, is THAT "slander" too? Jeezus, wake up.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam ur vids R NOT, I repeat, NOT "history"... your audacious repeating of things that are not true during times you were NOT even old enough to barely comprehend (how old were you during Watergate Hearings - 7 ???) WATERGATE HEARINGS WERE NOT IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS , I repeat over and over again. Judicial Committee back then KNEW they had the votes before Impeachment Hearings even started, THAT IS WHY NIXON QUIT!!! Clean the wax out of ur ears, CONYERS SAID IMPEACHMENT IS NOT OFF THE TABLE!!!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry Yes, MILLIONS of Americans have put the blame for taking impeachment "off the table" squarely where it belongs>>> PELOSI.
Conyers and Pelosi are NOT Siamese Twins. It is childish and downright schizoid to do what you do. In psycho-babble terms what you are doing is called "Transference", blaming someone else for another completely different person's actions and words. In other words, SEEK HELP!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam You clearly don't REMEMBER the Nixon resignation. I trust John Conyers EXPERIENCE far more over your crystal balling it.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
I am calling for John Conyers to honor his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, by acting on the overwhelming evidence of impeachable offenses committed by the Bush administration. He prefers to do NOTHING, hoping instead that the Democratic candidate can get just enough votes to win the White House, simply by virtue of the fact he's not Bush or McCain. Conyers and you are the ones "crystal balling it."
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry You must be bored out of your gourd by your mindless minions that ignorantly "adore" you on your own Youtubes. How does it feel to be the Pied Piper of Ignoramuses?
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry And you proved once again that you care NOTHING about ridding this PNAC hijacking of our Constitution. Congress does NOT have the votes for an impeachment, but WE THE PEOPLE HAVE THE VOTES TO UNITE AND GET THOSE NEOCONS OUTTA THERE. But you are doing everything possible to stop American people from uniting and voting against McCain. YOU are nothing but a nasty NEOCON TROLL AND OPERATIVE.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry And if you are just an IGNORANT LOOSE CANNON, you make want to consider working for the dark side of the Neocons,
1) Because you sure as hell aren't doing our side one damn bit of good
2) The Neocons would borrow money from China to pay you to continue your obvious dirty tricks for them
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry And of course the Presidential Election is a political event....NO DUH , SHERLOCK! geez, louise
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
I swear, JPerry, you'd make a fine poster child for KIDS WHO NEED CIVICS LESSONS.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam And for you to BLASPHEME and DISHONOR our FOREFATHERS who FOUGHT AND DIED for OUR PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO VOTE , by insulting with your phoney phrase "self serving party politics" , then you know what JPerry, if you hate the CONSTITITUTIONAL PEOPLE's RIGHT TO VOTE so much, then you need to find yourself another country, preferably one where they don't bother you with that "self-serving" RIGHT TO VOTE.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam Because anybody like you who intimidates AMERICAN people about their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE, is a TRAITOR.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry And what you shamefully and disgracefully call as "self-serving" is in reality MY CONSTITUTIONALLY-GIVEN RIGHT TO VOTE and is what keeps me from being a SERF or a SLAVE, so you damn straight I am going to exercise MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE. And again, DON'T YOU DARE DISHONOR MY ANCESTOR WHO FOUGHT IN AM REV WAR FOR OUR (even yours) RIGHT TO VOTE.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Again, I have NEVER disparaged anyone's right to vote and I never would. When I said "self-serving" I meant democrats placing the politics of their party before the needs of their country, which is reprehensible. Forgive me for thinking you had at least enough of a clue to figure that one out. Go ahead and call me whatever you want, yank. Pour on the ignorant trash talk. I'll let the record speak for itself. I'm the one fighting to preserve the integrity of the Constitution while you ignore it.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry You are so bad at lying because you have made it DISGUSTINGLY clear that you have no comprehension that WE THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT to throw these Neocons out with OUR VOTES . I am putting MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS before your VILE DESTRUCTIVE SLANDEROUS WITCH-HUNT, which is UN-CONSTITUTIONAL. You are just angry that I am not joining your SLANDER CAMPAIGN against Conyers. I am joining the campaign against the Neocons instead!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry And it is RIGHT AND CONSTITUTIONAL that I can and will join the Democrat Party to campaign against McCain and the Neocons. You are just a McCain-ass-kisser. You are WRONG and UN-CONSTITUTIONAL for your ILLEGAL SLANDEROUS WITCH-HUNT against Conyers! Your behavior is destructive and unconscionable to our cause of ousting these Neocons. YOU ARE HELPING THE NEOCONS by slandering Conyers.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam You are the KING OF IGNORANT TRASH TALK, when I was completely civil with you is when YOU showed your true colors of your potty mouth . You have NO "integrity" , far from it, your modus operandi is SLANDER, so you are just show-boating again.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Jeezus, talk about making it up as you go along! When have I EVER suggested, implied or inferred that you have no right to vote in our elections? I have never done that, yank, and you know it. And when have I EVER suggested that I would not honor my own right to vote? Looks like you need to take more time to make sure you understand peoples' posts before you respond with your misguided rants.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry You can't POSSIBLY vote, or you would be sinning against your own self-imposed "JP NonPartisan bible" . You make up silly "rules" for other people that you don't even follow yourself! lol, that made me laugh
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Looks like you still haven't looked up the definition of "partisan," because you still clearly don't get it. Aside from that, there are more choices in this election than the two major parties, both of which people will continue to abandon for as long as they continue to fail us. I haven't made up any rules. Keep spewing the false garbage, and I'll keep calling you on it. You'll reply with the same charge, of course, unable to back it up, because that's exactly how neocon trolls operate.
jperryam 3 years ago
JP Yes , u should know how Neocon Trolls operate since u clearly work for them with ur illegal slander against Conyers who SPEARHEADED impeachment against Bush. Clearly u just want to push so hard for a doomed impeachment by suckering ppl into a mob mentality. Then Bush/Cheney could just gleefully walk away & thumb their noses at WE THE PEOPLE after that. Also, the choices I've seen ALL BELONG TO A PARTY. So I guess u won't be voting, cuz if u do, u will be a HYPOCRITE (too late, u already r).
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry, AND ALSO, you do not seem to GRASP the delicate strategy that Conyers has to deal with in order to get these investigations TO STICK (without LOSING, or being PARDONED) :
BREAKING NEWS~ ROVE SUBPOENAED:
w w w. msnbc. msn. com/id/21134540/vp/24778953#24778953
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry And if you are so "non-partisan" as you claim, John Perry, then you need to find yourself a new hobby, because so far I only see you on political blogs and youtubes.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Something else you clearly don't understand. "Non-partisan" means not biased toward any particular political party. As anyone can read on my YT channel, I am registered independent. Always have been, always will be. Because the Constitution says NOTHING about political parties, and because it's clear that self-serving partisanship, on both sides of the aisle, has this country on the brink of complete moral and financial collapse. And your support for Conyers' hopeless strategy doesn't help.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry So now being non-partisan is some sort of phony pedestal? I have been Dem , GOP, Indy & Dem again. Big deal. U end up voting for someone in a PARTY, so unless u don't vote at all (which is UNAMERICAN in MY book) then u r hypocrite pretending to be something u r not. Most politicians r in PARTY that U vote for, so unless u do write-in votes for people who could never win in the first place, then you are PARTISAN.
And I AM a patriotic American for fighting to vote these Neocons OUT!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry If you are so "non-partisan" that you would not vote so that these Neocon Nazis are OUTTA THERE, then you are a Neocon tool.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
It's pretty clear you're not paying attention, yank. I've told you repeatedly exactly how to send McCain packing. You have yet to respond.
jperryam 3 years ago
You still clearly don't get it.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry For someone who doesn't know the difference between Watergate Investigations (that happened) , and Nixon impeachment hearings (that NEVER happened), you are the LAST person to be telling ANYONE about "history" ... As Nixon would say "let me make this PERFECTLY CLEAR"...YOU DO NOT GET IT >>> PERIOD.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry, you want to know WHO gets it? CHAIRMAN JOHN CONYERS, that's who. I would bet Bush's stimulus rebate on Conyers knowledge, wisdom and experience of the Constitution before I would on your infantile ignorance ANY DAY.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You're right, yank. I don't get it. I don't get how you can expect anybody to take you seriously when you say you want impeachment, you say you want to win, yet you advocate AGAINST starting hearings and PUTTING THE EVIDENCE INTO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, because there is not already a majority committed to voting for impeachment. How can you possibly expect to have ANY chance of GETTING the necessary votes without showing the evidence? Failure is GUARANTEED if you refuse to play offense.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam You're just playing a phoney attention-getting charade with your "Witch-hunt Conyers" youtubes. You are NOT playing offense against Bush/Cheney and the Neocons, you are just being OFFENSIVE with childish ILLEGAL SLANDER against Conyers, which VIOLATES the First Amendment of the Constitution, which YOU DON'T GET!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
I am telling the truth. Conyers is failing America. He swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, not the Democratic party. He has overwhelming evidence of crimes against that Constitution, that he refuses to act on, which puts him in violation of his oath. I don't care if you think my pointing that out is offensive. I'm offended by Conyers' pathetic inaction and your blind faith in him. Your own words here prove you don't have the first clue about the First Amendment.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry Ur constant lies with NO proof validate that you have no clue about the First Amendment. John Conyers wrote the "Constitution in Crisis" , so its clear he wants impeachment more than ANYBODY. But it is also clear he is not going to go forward with a doomed impeachment that will jeapordize the nation to be handed over to the Neocons AGAIN, only worse next time. Thank God Conyers is Chairman of Judiciary Committee, and not some whackjob like YOU. U r just mad I'm not one of ur dum minions
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
JP> U r NOT sincere about impeachment, u just want to make a big name for urself, "THE Conyers Witch-Hunter". Conyers is in his RIGHT MIND & clearly possesses his full faculties of LOGICAL & LEGAL processes, so there is absolutely no way he is going to be pushed around by your illogical, bullying & unethical methods. Why u DESTROY any CONSTRUCTIVE EFFORTS to DRUM UP SUPPORT for more votes w/Congressional signatures on Wexler Petition and MORE co-sponsors on Kucinich's H Res 333, IS STRANGE!!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam Get real, we HAVE the evidence, NOT the votes for an "offense". Failure is GUARANTEED if you go in pre-maturely and without the votes. HISTORY SHOWS THIS!!!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You're IGNORING the history of impeachment that I have carefully explained to you I don't know how many times now. You NEVER answer the relevant questions. You just call me a slanderer because I have the nerve to speak the truth to power. Sorry to burst your partisan Conyers ass-kissing bubble yank, but there is nothing illegal or slanderous about me sharing my opinion that Conyers is ignoring his oath. People are dying and our country is being destroyed while Conyers plays disgusting politics.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry You are ignoring history that PEOPLE HAVE EYEWITNESSED, not you!!! Sorry to burst your arrogant egotistical illogical ignorant uneducated wrong fallacies, but just because you make up stuff as you go along does not change WHAT REALLY HAPPENED with Nixon, and just because you say such and such , does not make it "history" , or legal by First Amendment standards when you slander a public official WITHOUT proof. Good grief, are you trying to compete with Hagee? Whose side on your on? Not us.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam I'm IGNORING everything you say because you don't know what the hell you are talking about, you are just babbling anti-facts and making stuff up! What you self- proclaim as your "nerve" is in reality just brazen lies. We will burst your Neocon-ass-kissing bubble because WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE will not hand a failed impeachment to McCain to celebrate four more years of a Bushie third term. But you would rather slander Conyers. If you were sincere to impeach, you would persuade Congress
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Are the neocons paying you to spew your ignorant garbage, or are you doing it in hopes of some lucrative payback later? I have stated my opinion, with evidence that I believe backs it up. All you can do is ignore the history that proves you wrong, avoid EVERY specific question I have ever asked you, and make up things that I've NEVER said or suggested. All your tactics, including the claim that I hate Conyers, which is not true (I AM very angry with him), come directly from the neocon playbook.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry John, you are lying about me all the time with your childish name-calling and your malicious methods to get people to gang up on me, that's how I know you are lying about Conyers with your illegal slander. You are just trying to make a name for yourself... but you are generating a very bad reputation instead. You could be persuading Congress to sign Wexler's Petition, and co-sponsor Kucinich's H Res 333, but you would rather destroy the FOUNDER of "Constitution in Crisis" instead... hmmm.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry Funny, I think same thing about u. Ur destructive focus on slandering Conyers is not going to MAKE Conyers do anything that is counter-productive to ridding the Neocons from White House, so u are wasting ur breath, unless U r getting $ NOW as a Neocon Troll. U trash American ppl who actually want to VOTE IN PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION (u act like that is some sort of "sin" or some other weirdo thing like that, even tho our PEOPLE's RIGHT TO VOTE IS MANDATORY IN THE CONSTITUTION).
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jp If Conyers prematurely did a costly impeachment that was sure to fail because there are not the votes, that could divide the country before the election, and keep a third Neocon term in White House because Conyers LOSES the impeachment, you would be the first one to make demonizing videos of Conyers for going forward with an impeachment that he knew in advance going to fail.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You have proved once again how little you actually understand about the history of impeachment. A lost impeachment does not guarantee a lost election. Actually quite the opposite. Funny thing about Americans. We actually like it when Congress at least TRIES to do its job. This is why reviewing the entire history of the process is so important. It's NOT about what Conyers "knows" in advance. It's about him honoring his oath to support and defend our Constitution, which he is NOT currently doing.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam You are simply spouting rhetoric and propaganda, by inventing some "oath" that Conyers is supposedly breaking. You never mention SPECIFICALLY WHAT oath Conyers is breaking, and please do not be coy and say "The Constitution", because impeachment is NOT mandatory in the Constitution, it is purely a judgement call. Needless to say, I trust Chairman Conyers judgement, wisdom AND experience (he's been there done that, and so have I).
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam Now you are twisting words (intentionally no doubt). This is not about something that Conyers "knows" , this is about a quorum. Any experienced entity will take a quorum before they go ahead with an actual vote... Labor Unions do this all the time, they NEVER take an actual vote without having a quorum ahead of time , the risk of losing is too great, so they have people sign cards before the official vote takes place on ballots . U know zero of the importance of quorums. Conyers DOES.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
w w w. cbsnews. com/stories/2008/05/15/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4099723. shtml
Conyers: 'We're Closing In On Rove'
By Ryan Grim
May 15, 2008
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Initiation of the impeachment process is NOT dependent on whether John Conyers or anybody else thinks the case for impeachment in he House and conviction in the Senate is iron clad. It is dependent on THE EXISTENCE OF EVIDENCE OF CRIMES AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTION, committed by those sworn to uphold it. Evidence documented BY CONYERS HIMSELF, in the book he put out two years ago called "Constitution in Crisis." His inaction violates his own oath. Michigan's 14th district needs to vote him out.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam Disagreeing with his timing is one thing, but that does not make John Conyers in violation of his oath. In fact, premature impeachment would be more dangerous to the country, which would definitely be in violation of his oath. Conyers stated himself there are compelling reasons why he is not impeaching right now, and he also said impeachment is NOT off the table. Voting this particular Chairman of Judiciary out would be foolhardy.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Conyers is not in violation of his oath because of the timing. He's in violation of his oath because he has a mountain of hard evidence against the Bush administration that he refuses to act on. He did not swear an oath to the Democratic party. He swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, which he is NOT doing with his idiotic refusal to act. If you would just take a rational, UNBIASED look at ALL the facts (which you have yet to do), you would see that you are completely wrong.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam There is nothing in Constitution that says impeachment and conviction are mandatory. What IS mandatory is THE REMOVAL of the president after impeachment leads to a successful conviction. An impeached president CAN continue to sit in the Oval Office, as we have seen with Clinton. But he was not convicted after his impeachment, Clinton was acquitted. Nixon , on the other hand, the votes were ironclad to impeach AND convict, even before they took the votes. That is why Nixon resigned.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam In order to successfully attain impeachment and conviction of George W Bush and Richard Cheney we need to unite in solidarity and persuade our Congresspeople to sign Congressman Wexler's petition and to co-sponsor Congress Kucinich's H Res 333.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
And if the Chairman of the House Judiciary would stop sitting on his hands, start impeachment hearings and start putting the evidence on the record for the world to see, it would energize a LOT more people to do EXACTLY what you suggest. He does not need all the votes before he starts. He needs them when the hearings are done and a vote is taken. For as long as he continues to do nothing, there is NO chance of getting the votes. He needs to honor his oath and get started NOW.
jperryam 3 years ago
John Conyers put evidence on table already : "Constitution in Crisis". It did not make blip on network news radar. The people who matter, members on Judiciary Committee, are ONES needing energized. JC's done everything a human can do, he can take Judiciary Committee to water but he cannot make them drink. The opposite was true for Nixon, majority of Judiciary Committee voted to hold an impeachment. Everyone knew House would impeach and Senate would convict. Nixon had to be told to step down.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
We need to energize ourselves and UNITE and continue to put the pressure on the members of Judiciary Committee and Congresspeople who have not yet signed onto impeachment bill and Wexler's Petition. Conyers needs our POSITIVE ENERGY to be able to do this thing successfully.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Can you do ANYTHING other than make the same lame excuses over and over again for Conyers?
Do you not realize that Conyers is ignoring MULTIPLE MEMBERS of the Judiciary committee who are urging him to initiate impeachment?
THEY understand that the SUREST way to get the votes needed to impeach is to start hearings and PUT THE EVIDENCE ON THE RECORD, where it will be harder for the media to ignore it.
Your Conyers ass-kissing schtick is getting pretty old. The man is NOT doing his job.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry Ur malicious vilification of Conyers does great damage. U know NOTHING of impeachment, except the "blue dress stain", u are only 44 , for crying out loud! U know nothing about REAL impeachment & what it takes. LISTEN to Conyers for a change, instead of running your mean ignorant mouth. This man has tried everything possible to make this impeachment happen, he is working in REAL WORLD, not ur fantasy. And UNITING to persuade votes from Congress sure beats ur divisive hateful methods.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Your schtick really IS getting old. My age does not prevent me from reading the FULL history of impeachment that you're ignoring, which proves without exception that the party seeking impeachment (whether or not it happened) has been successful in subsequent elections. Conyers has tried EVERYTHING? Has he convenened impeachment hearings? For as long as he refuses to act on the evidence THAT HE HAS DOCUMENTED HIMSELF, he will be in violation of his Constituional oath. He SHOULD be vilified.
jperryam 3 years ago
John Perry History? YOU WERE NOT THERE BUDDY! EVerybody was ready to hang Nixon out to dry, INCLUDING THE REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS BACK THEN. You are CLUELESS, go read Mother Goose, you are into fairy tales, you know nothing of even RECENT history. You lies and slander were old the first time. Grow up.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam You are out to destroy Conyers, very clever way to go about impeachment...NOT!!!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
I'm not trying to destroy John Conyers. I'm trying to get him to do his damn job. If you don't like the way I go about it that's your problem. The longer he refuses to act on THE EVIDENCE HE ALREADY HAS, the greater his chances are of DESTROYING HIMSELF. I've been through far worse than you, yank. Trash me all you want. Go for it. But the more you attack the messenger without even trying to refute the message with anything resembling rational thought, the more you reveal your own cluelessness.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam John Perry, you have trashed Conyers, me and anyone who does not agree with your childish illogical temper tantrums. I don't like your methods BECAUSE YOU LIE ABOUT HISTORY, YOU LIE ABOUT THE CURRENT FACTS and NUMBERS, you SLANDER Conyers w/ "traitor" "complicit in war crimes" on other forums, which completely destroys any credible arguments against the REAL WAR CRIMINALS. Conyers IS doing his job by NOT following kneejerk irresponsible bullying by your destructive propaganda.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam With "friends" like you, impeachment movement doesn't need friends.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam You are bullying Conyers all the time to stick his neck out to do foolhardy things such as proceeding with a failed impeachment. You are drumming up A LOT of support for your self-promoting propaganda and vilification witch-hunt against Conyers. You are just mad at me because I think things through instead of following your malicious mob mentality tactics.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Temper tantrums? Now there's a real hoot. I have provided facts and expressed anger with a representative of the people who I and many others see as failing to do his job. You have responded with NOTHING but endless whining about how we're picking on Conyers. Now you're calling me a liar. Forgive me if I don't hold my breath waiting for you to back that one up. Conyers has the evidence. He's refusing to act. I say that makes him complicit. Sorry, but it's just too bad if you don't like it.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam Your childish attacks and name-calling at me are reminiscent of what I went through in my neighborhood when I was a pre-schooler (before you were born, so please don't claim you know) , and is laughable. You are easy to shrug off, as far as your pathetic bullying goes.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam And on this note , I have to laugh: "I've been through far worse than you, yank." Again, you are clueless and you have no idea what I have been through, yet you claim that you "know". Whenever anyone claims to be all-knowing and omniscient , all my red-flags go up.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam And if you must continue to use negative energies to vilify someone, then go after Nancy Pelosi. Otherwise, I truly wish you would use your outreach resources for a more positive honest approach towards impeachment, by persuading Members of Judiciary Committee and Congress to sign Wexler's Petition and to Co-Sponsor Kucinich's H Res 333 .
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
I never claimed to know what you have been through. I was talking about my own experience, and how having to endure the ignorant rants of someone like you doesn't even come close to the things I've had to deal with. Jeezus, are you that detached?
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam No John, you are detached. I started out here and on other forums with rational arguments why slanderous vilification of Conyers is not only morally wrong, but detrimental to the impeachment cause as a whole. You decided to turn this into personal attacks with your "ass-kisser" and "neocon troll" name-calling. You lost credibility with me with your distortion of history and lies of current facts and numbers, but you lost all my respect with your malicious slander of Conyers .
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam What have you accomplished ? Impeachment of Bush/Cheney? NO!!! Just a mob mentality WITCH-HUNT after Conyers. Thanks for NOTHING, Perry.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam 26 co-sponsors for H Res 333 -
h t t p : //thomas. loc. gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HE00333 : @@@P
20 members of Congress (4 of 'em members of Judiciary Committee) signed Wexler's Petition:
w w w . wexlerforcongress. com/news. asp?ItemID=230
This is not a simple majority, not even with your math. If you REALLY want impeachment, then we need to UNITE to work at persuading Congress.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You're sounding more like a neocon operative all the time. Complete avoidance of any and all facts that don't fit your argument, try to create distraction with irrelevant tit-for-tat.
Mob mentality? Please. I am NOT advocating violence, nor have I ever, nor WILL I ever. I'm doing my part as a responsible citizen, which is to hold our elected representatives (INCLUDING CONYERS) accountable, and I am encouraging others to do the same. Call it whatever you want. He's NOT doing his job.
jperryam 3 years ago
John Perry, u have done the last straw, u are trying to destroy the FATHER OF BUSH IMPEACHMENT, you waste our time spinning your wheels with your sanctimonious witch-hunt against Conyers, you get some sort of self-promotion from this destructive distraction. I'm saving my venom for THE NEOCON WAR CRIMINALS. Instead you vilify & slander Conyers for being the messenger of the FACTS> he doesn't have the votes. Let's get those votes! I trust him, NOT YOU!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
If John Conyers is the "FATHER OF BUSH IMPEACHMENT" somebody better call child protective services. He's being a lousy parent. Last time I checked, the Pretender-in-Chief was still squatting in the White House.
I will spare no venom for any man who swears an oath to support and defend our Constitution and then refuses to honor that oath.
He doesn't need a single vote to START the impeachment process. He needs HARD EVIDENCE, of which there is a mountain against the Bush administration.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam You lie , and badly, because Conyers DOES need the votes. HISTORY SHOWS US THAT (but I remember anyways) : "On February 6, 1974, The Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives was authorised by Resolution 803 of the House "to investigate fully and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States of America."...
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
...The motion was carried by 410-4 and instructed the Committee to "report to the House of Representatives such resolutions, articles of impeachment, or other recommendations as it deems proper."..."
In other words, Judiciary Committee HAD the votes BEFORE Impeachment Hearings even began for Nixon, by an overwhelming LANDSLIDE, that included even a MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS. It would be foolhardy for Conyers to proceed without quorum for impeachment, which is why he is Chairman, AND U R NOT.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
There is not even majority among Members of Judiciary Committee for impeachment, only 4 members have signed Wexler's Petition for even HEARINGS on Cheney.
Conyers cannot FORCE members of Judiciary Committee, and Congress to vote our way... if he did, THAT would be UnConstitutional. The fact that Conyers is willing to tell us the TRUTH that there are not enough votes to proceed makes him a WISE, HONEST STATESMAN, not a childish slanderer as yourself, John Perry. U keep blaming the messenger.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You're right. Conyers cannot force them to vote a certain way. But he DOES have a responsibility to act on the evidence. Whether or not he has the votes before he even starts IS NOT RELEVANT. The Constitution mentions impeachment six times. NOWHERE does it say that the votes must be there before officials who have committed crimes against our Constitution are subjected to accountability. You and Conyers are hung up on the politics, yank. You're ignoring ACCOUNTABILITY completely.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry THERE IS NO ACCOUNTABILITY WITHOUT THE VOTES. They cannot be held accountable with a failed impeachment, in fact a failed impeachment will make USA WORSE. Going into an impeachment knowing it does not have the votes and will fail IS VERY RELEVANT. Conyers would be held accountable for doing a failed impeachment to the country. Hung up on politics? You bet your damn bippy I am! You may not give a damn if the Neocons stay in the White House, but I sure do!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You're wrong, yank. You cherry pick single sentences to back up your ridiculous logic and ignore everything else. You need to look at the ENTIRE history of impeachment, going back before Lincoln, which proves you have no clue what you're talking about.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry U R WRONG, and you know it. Now you are trying to go back before Lincoln because you know you have been proven wrong about Nixon. You thought I wouldn't pick up on that? You are obvious. You can go back to before Lincoln in your dreams, I am sticking to what u claim to call "history", which is really what happened during Conyers' life experience, & my lifetime memory.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You have proven nothing. I didn't make up the history (with my video response here), yank. I just recited it. If you're going to say it's wrong and that I'm lying, you need to be specific, or you're the one whose credibility suffers. If you are unwilling to consider any history regarding impeachment other than what has occurred during your own lifetime, that pretty much cements your lack of credibility. But I must say I'm in awe of your ability to make lame excuses for Conyers' inaction.
jperryam 3 years ago
jp U r not willing to concede that u r totally wrong about Nixon's resignation, that "history" of numbers for votes in fact existed LONG BEFORE ACTUAL IMPEACHMENT OF NIXON, & THAT IS WHY NIXON RESIGNED 1st, BEFORE AN IMPEACHMENT EVER TOOK PLACE. Now u claim that a post-civil war impeachment in 1800's is more applicable than what Conyers experienced w/ same players in the background (Cheney was in Nixon White House). Ur credibility has gone from arrogantly wrong to downright silly.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You've already been proven wrong on this score(over on ADS). The votes did not exist to impeach Nixon until after the hearings started. And you're intentionally distorting my comments. I did not say that impeachment in the 1800's is more applicable. I said you need to review the ENTIRE HISTORY of impeachment, right through Clinton, which proves that the party seeking it, WHETHER OR NOT THE IMPEACHMENT WAS SUCCESSFUL, has been victorious in subsequent elections. Stop ignoring proven history.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam Once again you are clueless about "history" because you did not live it... Impeachment Hearings NEVER started for Nixon, Watergate Hearings commenced and ended (NOT Impeachment Hearings, which you are clearly getting confused) , and Judiciary Committee drew up and INTRODUCED Articles of Impeachment... Impeachment Hearings NEVER got off the ground, because White House was informed by Republican Senators that they knew there were enough votes, AND THAT IS WHY NIXON RESIGNED.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Fine. I'll take your word on this one. But only because it DOES NOT MATTER whether they're called "impeachment" of "Watergate" hearings, if EVIDENCE IS BEING PUT INTO THE RECORD AND THE WORLD IS WATCHING, and members of Congres are forced to come to a decision about how they would vote on impeachment. Conyers would GET the votes that he and you keep talking about if he would just do his damn job and start the hearings. Doing NOTHING is UNACCEPTABLE.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry Don't take my word > google. All I have to do is REMEMBER. Another thing, read ur ACLU Protestor's Rights brochure (or google , don't take MY word for it) EVEN THE ACLU says there r LIMITATIONS ON FREE SPEECH WHILE PROTESTING: "...Also unprotected r malicious statements about public officials & obscene speech..." So u've maliciously slandered w/vilifying witchhunt against PUBLIC OFFICIAL who has done nothing wrong! U have aroused a mob mentality with other ppl to do it too, on site & YT .
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
You're going WAY over the line with this kind of stuff, yank. I have not "maliciously slandered" ANYBODY, nor am I arousing a "mob mentality". I am HONORING MY RESPONSIBILITY AS A CITIZEN to hold elected officials accountable to the people they're supposed to be serving, and I have encouraged others to do the same. That's called being an advocate, and there is NOTHING wrong with it. Telling someone to honor their oath and do their job is not a malicious statement, nor is it obscene. Get real.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam You are a fine one to talk. You crossed the line months ago with legal slander against Conyers . You have falsely claimed Conyers is "not honoring his oath", that he is a "traitor" that he is "complicit in war crimes" , all without documentation and evidence. You just say rhetoric "its in the Constititution" then you re-word stuff in your own words. Conyers has done nothing LEGALLY wrong. You may disagree with his judgement and timing of impeachment, but NOT his legal standing.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
It's my OPINION (which I am entitled to, thank you very much) that John Conyers' REFUSAL TO ACT ON THE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE he has against the Bush administration makes him complicit in their crimes. Could he be held legally responsible? I don't know. But I do know that if someone has information that could help solve a crime and refuses to come forward with it, they could potentially be charged and go to jail. Mr. Conyers needs to do his job.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam No , John Conyers canNOT be held legally responsible for not going forward on something that even a majority of the Members of the Judiciary Committee does NOT want. John Conyers cannot FORCE the issue. He has done everything humanly possible to generate and present the evidence thru "Constitution in Crisis", but the Members of Judiciary are not of one mind, not even a SIMPLE MAJORITY. Conyers hands are tied, he cannot do MORE than what the MAJORITY on Judiciary Committee want.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry U never say its YOUR OPINION. You make it sound like the Constitution has made impeachment mandatory, when its NOT, impeachment is a JUDGEMENT CALL, only elections are MANDATORY in the Constitution. That is what Conyers is up against, he needs to make a decision to NOT go forward with a failed impeachment that will surely jeapordize a MANDATORY election. Conyers did NOT make these rules up, he simply has to use his judgement to live within JUDGEMENT CALLS and MANDATORY ELECTION.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry Do you read before you send your stuff? Conyers HAS come forward with information about Bush/Cheney war crimes "CONSTITUTION IN CRISIS", he has had Downing Street Memo Hearings, he is having Hearings NOW even. He cannot squeeze votes out of these stonecold Congresspeople. Conyers HAS come forward with every bit of information that he has in his possession ! So you lie BIG TIME, that Conyers has held back information about Bush/Cheney war crimes. Conyers has held back NOTHING. U get real.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
From Article VI of the Constitution:
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned...shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution."
And the key words of the oath Conyers has taken 21 times:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."
Which means he's BOUND BY HIS OATH TO ACT on the evidence. Not having the votes before he starts is NOT an acceptable excuse.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam you sound like a Bible-thumper who quotes the Bible then misinterprets it on purpose with your own words. Defending the Constitution will NOT happen with a FAILED impeachment, it will be the OPPOSITE of defending the nation, it will put the Neocons at an ADVANTAGE to show that there are not enuf votes to impeach them. Conyers IS defending the nation by assuring that the election BY THE PEOPLE is NOT jeapordized by a kangaroo court that YOU want.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
JPerry says THIS, NOT the Constitution: "Which means he's BOUND BY HIS OATH TO ACT on the evidence. Not having the votes before he starts is NOT an acceptable excuse. " U are NOT a god, for crying out loud. You cannot just make up stuff as you go along and claim its in the Constitution. Conyers IS defending the Constitution from domestic enemies by making sure this election goes forward BY THE PEOPLE. Ridding the White House of the Neocons LEGALLY with an election IS defense against enemies.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
It's not a question of holding back evidence. It's Conyers' REFUSAL TO ACT ON THE EVIDENCE that has him in violation of his oath. You tell the biggest lie of all when you say he needs the votes to impeach before he even starts hearings. It will NEVER be true, no matter how many times you say it. You also say a failed impeachment would automatically hand neocons another term in the White House, but THE HISTORY PROVES YOU WRONG. McCain's BEST chance is for Conyers to continue to do nothing.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry Conyers is NOT refusing to act on evidence that HE HIMSELF COMPILED; Members of Judiciary Committee ARE NOT . There are only FOUR that have signed Wexler's Petition for Cheney Hearings (when you LIED on prior post and said MULTIPLE members have . Conyers cannot hold anyone accountable with ONLY 4 VOTES in Judiciary Committee, and when the majority of Members of Judiciary Committee don't want this thing to even get out of their Committee at all!. U keep falsely accusing w/o false info.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam HISTORY proves that your fallacy of a "theory" (not fact-based at all) only works with QUORUM OF VOTES TOWARDS A SUCCESSFUL VALID IMPEACHMENT . HISTORY has NEVER proven that your hairbrained "theory" works with an impeachment with no votes that is DOOMED FOR FAILURE . You need to start watching the TV show "Numbers" , it may be so-called "fiction" , but its more logical than any Twilight Zone "theory" you have presented .
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
One more time, yank: There have been multiple attempts at impeachment throughout our history. It has been successful twice (Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton). Without exception, the party attempting impeachment has been successful in subsequent elections, WHETHER OR NOT IMPEACHMENT WAS ACHIEVED. This is not theory. It's FACT.
The ONLY chance Conyers has at getting the votes he needs is to START impeachment hearings. By not doing so, he is neither supporting nor defending the Constitution.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperry AGAIN, 2 times in our lifetimes, one of which u were way too young to remember which is why u call it "history", a resignation & impeachment of 2 prez's took place cuz the votes were known BEFORE the impeachments began. CLEARLY Conyers does not have the votes now, EVEN within Judiciary Committee, which is why it has not gone to the House for impeachment, let alone the Senate for conviction. If Conyers prematurely moved on an obviously doomed impeachment, the Neocons would WIN.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperry AND, you would be the FIRST to blame him for it.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
Your claim that vilifying Conyers is morally wrong is the height of hypocrisy. You want to talk about what's morally wrong? Conyers is sitting on his hands, ignoring the overwhelming evidence, allowing blood to spill, lives to be destroyed, and Bushco's reign of terror continue unchallenged. He is showing more concern for his party than his country. It is easily one of the most disgusting displays of partisan politics this country has ever seen. And you're supporting him. Way to go, yank.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam Conyers is putting the soldiers lives before YOUR agenda, which is impeachment at any cost , even the cost of failing impeachment due to lack of votes, even the cost of losing the White House to a third McBush term, which would cause MORE WARS and loss of lives. Conyers has much more experience andforesight and wisdom than you. You were barely born when he started in Congress.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
My agenda is "Impeachment at any cost, even the cost of failing impeachment"? Do you actually read your posts before you submit them? My agenda is accountability, which is John Conyers' job as House Judiciary Chairman. It cannot be done by doing nothing.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam Obviously you know nothing of current events as well , John Conyers is currently subpoenaing Karl Rove. He will hold him in contempt of Congress if he does not respond.
w w w . huffingtonpost. com/2008/05/15/conyers-on-rove-someones_n_101998. html
John Conyers IS doing his job, but you don't care because you are not paying attention. He just won't be foolish and do what YOU want him to ...thank God for Conyers common sense.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
And Karl Rove is laughing in Conyers' face, because he knows the Bush lackey who heads up the Justice Department now (Mukasey) will not enforce a contempt citation for Rove, just like he has refused to enforce it for Bush Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former White House Counsel Harritte Meyers, both of whom have ALREADY been found in contempt for their refusal to respond to subpoenas regarding the U.S Attorney firing scandal. I am quite confident I'm paying better attention than you, my friend.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam First of all, my REAL friends do not call me a "Neocon troll" or exhibit other bullying behavior or instigate others to gang up as U have , so please spare me the phoney salutations. Secondly, you just proved my point that Conyers is NOT at fault here for the spider's web that the NEOCONS have contrived with their multi-layered pre-planned PNAC conspiracy , and thirdly , pay attention to what? You can't even count!
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam Accountability will NEVER happen with a failed impeachment that does not have the necessary votes! If you doubt it, ask OJ on a golf course.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
jperryam Conyers WROTE the challenge "Constitution in Crisis", and all you can do is vilify a man who is using his judgement on the timing of impeachment. He wants impeachment more than you and I and everyone combined, but HE DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES. Conyers did not say he does not want impeachment, in fact he said its still on the table, he is saying right now HE DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES. You lie and cherrypick what Conyers says, for your video propaganda.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
"HE DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES" is like "the dog ate my homework." It's a pathetic, UNACCEPTABLE excuse for not honoring the oath to support and defend the Constitution. If Conyers REALLY wanted impeachment, he would initiate impeachment hearings, start putting evidence on the record, force media coverage, and motivate people to STAND UP AND DEMAND THE VOTES. Jeez yank, why is that so hard for you to understand? You're still calling me a liar, but you have yet to say what I've lied about.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam The height of hypocrisy is that you are doing witch-hunt videos with lies to make false charges that Conyers is not following his oath, when he is using his princples and judgement to not be bullied into an impeachment that is sure to fail without the votes. You don't listen to Conyers at all, he has compelling reasons, and they are not "partisan reasons", (unless of course u consider losing again to the Neocons as being "non-partisan", which is just foolish grand-standing on ur part.)
Yankhadenough 3 years ago
It's not a false charge. It's a fact. He is doing NOTHING to hold the Bush adminsitration truly accountable, which proves he is neither supporting nor defending our Constitution, which he swore to do. His own work proves it. He wrote the damn book. He knows the evidence better than anyone. He is ignoring it. We keep hearing the words "compelling reasons," but we have yet to hear a single one of them described. More smoke and mirrors. Conyers is aiding and abetting war criminals by default.
jperryam 3 years ago
jperryam Your disgusting display of witch-hunting Conyers is VERY partisan, your behavior shows that you don't give a damn that impeachment would fail due to lack of votes and you make it clear you don't CARE if McCain gets the third Neocon term cuz u are "non-partisan" . You sound more and more like you are an operative working for Karl Rove, because you are certainly not working for votes for a REALLY successful impeachment, or a White House without McCain.
Yankhadenough 3 years ago