All this time I thought that a big part of our problem was convincing the Democratic "leadership" that there is a strong case that Bush lied to start the war in Iraq. I was wrong. According to Nancy Pelosi, the case is "well known". Where we differ is that Pelosi believes it is simply NOT an impeachable offense for the President to take the country into war based on lies. I never imagined that we could be in this position where we have to convince a Democratic Congress to hold a Republican President accountable about a "well known" case that he lied to start a war.
Pelosi's point of view is incredibly shocking to me, and she's got some serious explaining to do. Her statement that the case is "well known" raises a lot more questions than it answers. For example, what would be an impeachable offense? If lying to start a war doesn't make the list, then what does?
A youtibe video & transcript are below, and also my questions for the Speaker.
The transript.
First, here is exactly what she said that deeply concerns me, starting at 4:13 in the video. All emphasis is mine.
BLITZER: So are you telling your angry base out there the Democratic Party that wants to see this war over with, wants to see the U.S. troops home that you as speaker, there is nothing you can do? You have to just throw your hands up and say ...
PELOSI: I didn't say that at all.
BLITZER: Given the legislative problems in the Senate and the president's stubborn refusal to back down, that there is nothing you could do?
PELOSI: How could you ever have gotten that impression when I have said, for those who pay attention, is that we will hold this administration accountable, time and time again for the conduct of this war in Iraq.
I don't have to discuss how we went in on the false premise. That's well known to the American people.
What we do have to do is show them every step of the way how the president is taking us farther down a path from which is going to be harder to redeploy out of Iraq.
BLITZER: But when you hold the president accountable, I just want you to explain what does that mean, besides just complaining and holding hearings? Specifically, is there anything else you can do?
PELOSI: Holding hearings and the oversight that we have on the corruption and contracting in Iraq, the hearings that we're holding and the harm to the readiness of our troops that the president is causing with his obstinence in this war in Iraq.
Dear Speaker Pelosi,
I am one of those people paying attention. I've seen you hold hearings, but you haven't held Bush accountable. How Bush took us to war IS part of the conduct of the war. If Bush had not lied about WMD and Saddam's ties to Al Qaeda, there would not be a war in the first place. Your job is not to simply show us how bad the path is that Bush has taken us down. We can see that for ourselves. I would much prefer that you actually change what is going on. In the interview you stated that the accomplishment of the Democrats has been to "change the debate". That is certainly necessary to do, a minimal first step that should be automatic when Democrats take control of both the House and Senate in an unusual wave election.
Your expressed point of view, that it is "well known" we went to war based on a false premise, raises some serious questions and you have some serious explaining to do.
Madam Speaker, explain to me why do you believe that our troops should continue to die without justice for what Bush and Cheney did to them? To have justice for our slain and injured troups, Bush and Cheney should be held accountable through impeachment in the House and a conviction in the Senate.
Madam Speaker, please explain to me: why have none of the Lied-into-Iraq whistle blowers had a hearing, yet there is time to debate an ad from MoveOn that was mean towards General Petraeus? Explain those priorities to me. It was mean to almost 4,000 troops that they had to die in Iraq because the President lied. Which is the greater transgression?
Madam Speaker, please explain to me: Is your message to brave whistle blowers something like "Stifle your bravery and dedication to America, go home and keep it to yourself". Is that what you want? Do you want America to be a place where a President can lie to start a war, and whistle blowers never get a hearing?
Madam Speaker, please explain to me how could Bush and Cheney veto an Iraq-withdrawal bill, after they are removed by the conviction that would inevitably result from a thorough review of the evidence that they sent our soldiers to die based on bald faced lies?. The evidence should be easy to get. You said yourself that the case is "well known."
Madam Speaker, please explain to me how can you be strong on national security while being content to allow a war criminal to command our troops and the world's most powerful military?
Madam Speaker, please tell me, in your opinion, if America goes to war based on lies and nobody is held accountable for it, does that make American more likely or less likely to get into another war in the future, also based on lies? The correct answer is that if you don't hold somebody accountable, the bad behavior will be repeated sooner. Think about the precedent you are setting for Presidential power.
Madam Speaker, please explain to me how it would be best for America if you let Bush and Cheney off the hook for the worst thing that they have done to our troops, our national security, and our national reputation around the world?
Madam Speaker, besides the moral and practical national security reasons for persuing impeachment that I have hopefully got you thinking about, there is a political benefit to impeachment as well. The persuit of impeachment would show America that a Republican President lied to start a war, that a Republican Congress helped cover it up, and that Democrats exposed the wrong doing because they believe it is wrong to lie to start a war, and people should be held accountable for it. Wouldn't that benefit the Democratic party to show those kinds of moral values?
Madam Speaker, explain why I should have 1 iota of trust that you will hold a future Democratic president accountable for wrong doing, when you are deliberately letting a Republican president get away with lying to start a war? Your actions tell me that you would let a Democratic president get away with anything, including lying to start a war. My trust in you is evaporating more each day you delay holding Bush and Cheney accountable for the "well known" case that the war is based on a false premise.
Madam Speaker, the way to end this war is to hold hearings on how Bush and Cheney deliberately lied to America to get support for a war we should not have fought. You could easily gather the evidence, since you say it is "well known". You would have millions of us rally to your side, if you were to choose to get justice for our troops, restore America's reputation, restore the Office of the President, defend the Constutition, and improve our national security. But by taking impeachment off the table, you are removing the sharpest arrow in your quiver, and giving Bush a clear message that he (and future Presidents) can get away with anything. Having hearings about the "well known" case would make it easier politically to leave Iraq, and it would get Bush and Cheney out of the way.
If you don't want to look like a power-grabber, the way to do this is to persue Cheney first, get him out of the way, let Bush nominate a Republican for VP, who would need approval by the Democratically-controlled House and Senate. You and Harry Reid would control whether Bush could nominate another war monger or not. Then get Bush out of the way, and you'd be much closer and more able to end the war.
I hope I have convinced you and any other impeachment waverers that starting a war based on a false premise is worthy of impeachment, and that it is worth while to prioritize the impeachment of Bush and Cheney.