Letter to John Conyers

[Michael Hayes]

Below is a letter that I emailed to Mr Conyers. We need to start bombarding him with emails, letters and calls to get him off of his seat and start Cheney's impeachment!

Mr Conyers,
it is imperative that Impeachment procedures begin for Dick Cheney. Most polls show over 50% of Americans feel that Mr Cheney has comitted crimes that deserve investigation. if only half of the accusations made against the Vice-President are true then you will find even more citizens joining the call for his removal. We are living in a time of the public having almost no confidence in either this administration or Congress. If you and Congress fail to start the impeachment procedings then our government will continue to descend into bankruptcy, morally and otherwise. The longer Congress, and specifically the House of Representatives, stalls on this subject the more the public disapproval of our government grows. Most public opinions are already assuming that the major Democratic leaders in Congress(Pelosi, Reid, yourself, etc) have taken payoffs or are being blackmailed into stopping impeachment proceedings. Our Constitution is screaming at you to impeach both Cheney and Bush as well as our corrupt Attorney General and others involved in this administrations treachorus and traitorus actions. The Bush administration is dragging our once great nation down into a cesspool of unbelieveable size. Allowing them to complete their term without any attempt to bring them to justice is a crime in itself. Please look inside yourself and try to find your patriotism, integrity, and honor. You do remember your solemn oath you took when you were sworn in as a Congressman, don't you?

[gordon kobayashi]

Agreed. We need to contact Conyers relentlessly.

[warren pease]

Yesterday, Conyers was quoted as saying he's "on the edge" of starting impeachment proceedings. Given his track record of burying H Res. 333 since last April, and again when DK introduced it last November, I think that " on the edge," translated into our native tongue, actually means:

The honorable Congressman has decided to form an exploratory committee to kick-start the process of beginning to consider the possibility that at some point in the unforeseeable future it might be an idea to look into the positives and negatives that a thorough investigation might uncover regarding an effort to take into account the feasibility of forming a task force to determine if there's any remote chance that impeachable offenses have been committed by the president of vice and his slack-jawed marionette and that said task force be granted subpoena power just in case they're not completely ignored again and if they are there's already a working draft of a strongly worded statement sitting near the bottom of the same pile of paper where H Res. 333 / H Res. 799 has been gathering dust for months now just waiting for the light of truth to point the way to a new blue ribbon fact-finding panel charged with helping the task force and the exploratory committee determine if it's politically advantageous to launch hearings that might eventually result in some form of sanctions, including but not limited to IMPEACHMENT.

Sound about right?


wp

[Michael Hayes]

Warren, I would say that was right on the nosey! You know if we still had a "free press" this would be all over the front pages and the lynch mobs would be roaming our land. I doubt that half of Congress and all of Georgie boys administration would escape the mobs rath. Oops! I must be day dreaming again. I must say you write an even longer sentence than I do(Tee-Hee!)! Thanks!

[UsQueersdotcom]

ZZZZzzzzzz..... Yep, sounds about right for Conyers so far. We have to keep questioning him: "What is the 'compelling' reason" you keep referring to while sitting on your gavel? (If you haven't seen the latest Conyers hallway interview vid, please check it out). And "we might fail" doesn't qualify as an answer.

[linda]

Yours was more polite than mine.
I take their tack that it IS too late:

"It's too late. Don't bother, Just keep your blindfold on, your fingers stuck in your ears and your sock in your mouth and let history remember you for what you are: the man who made noble empty speeches and recanted when the time came to fulfill them, the man who said he would not stand silent in the face of tyranny and when the moment came to act, bowed and scraped, shucked and jived, made excuses and whispered tut-tut! to torture. Never let it be said you are a man of your word. It's too late. Your chapter has been written."

[Shannon]

Well-written Linda!!

[Monique Frugier]

Now, we are speaking about the Commander in Chief!
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/02/11/conyers-said-hes-on-the-ed...

My letter to Conyers:

Dear Mr. Conyers,

I understand that - again- you are considering impeachment hearings? Please do what is good for our country, show us and the world that you care about the Constitution of the United States. Articles of impeachment against George W. Bush must be brought out immediately, this is not a partisanship issue but an American issue. Do not make us complicit of this administration's crimes. The more than 3,900 U.S troops who lost their lives in Iraq took an oath and kept it until death, while our president abused of his "executive privilege" and lied.
Do not make me more ashamed than I am today for having chosen to become American citizen. Impeachment is long overdue. Stand up!
Sincerely,

[UsQueersdotcom]

Ripped from here: http://www.democrats.com/node/15492

[N]o one says aloud what the reasons are for opposing impeachment. That Cheney and Bush have committed impeachable offenses is universally understood. But the arguments against impeaching them (other priorities, bipartisanship, we don't have the votes, etc.) usually sound like lame cover for whatever the real reason is. I suspect the real reason is built into Nadler's plan of wasting a year in order to pass bills next year. He assumes that in 2009 there will be either a better Congress or a better president (he backs Hillary Clinton), or both.

Sadly, history says otherwise. For 230 years, the party that brings impeachment wins, and the party that fails to do so when it's called for loses. Conyers was there when the Democrats moved to impeach Nixon and then won big. He was there when they refused to impeach Reagan and then lost. And most of the current committee was there when the Republicans impeached Clinton against the will of the public for a non-impeachable offense and still won both houses of Congress and the White House.

When the Democrats held back from impeachment during Iran Contra, they lost the next elections. When the Democrats led the effort to investigate and impeach Nixon, they won big in the next election, even though Ford was running as an incumbent. When the Republicans tried to impeach Truman, they got what they wanted out of the Supreme Court and then won the next elections. Articles of impeachment have been filed against 10 presidents, usually by Republicans, and usually with electoral success following. When the Republicans impeached Clinton, impeachment was actually unpopular with the public. Even so, the Republicans lost far fewer seats than is the norm for a majority party at that point in its tenure. Two years later, they lost seats in the Senate, which had acquitted, but maintained their strength in the House, with representatives who had led the impeachment charge winning big.

Parties that seek to impeach are not punished at the next election. In fact, they frequently improve their position -- as evidenced by the Democrats in 1974, Republicans in 1952, and all the way back to the Whigs of last century. In every election back to 1842 where House members of an opposition party to a sitting president have -- as a whole or a significant caucus within the party -- proposed impeachment of the president, that opposition party retained or improved its position in the House at the following election. There is no instance of voters responding to a significant impeachment effort by sweeping its advocates out of office. In fact, history points in a different direction, suggesting that voters frequently reward parties for taking the Constitution and the rule of law seriously.

[Monique Frugier]

Emailing the Congressman is out, because he has stopped accepting Emails, at least at this address [e-mail]. I could tell you some of his staff members' Email addresses, but then they wouldn't be able to work for a week.

Faxing the Congressman is very much in, but you have to set your fax machine to repeatedly redial until it gets through. The fax number is 202-225-0072.

READ MORE at:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/30952

[Monique Frugier]

The Democrats are cowards and give Bush what Bush wants. Although we all know that Impeaching those criminals should not and must not (sic) be a partisanship duty! Look at waht they have done yesterday, giving Bush immunity for his crime ( again!):

19 Dem. voted for it! Casey + Specter included!

By a vote of 68 to 29, the Senate gave final approval to a
bill that expands the government's spying powers and gives
legal protection to phone companies that cooperated in
President Bush's warrantless eavesdropping program.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na

Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---68
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)


NAYs ---29
Akaka (D-HI)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Wyden (D-OR)


Not Voting - 3
Clinton (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Obama (D-IL)

[Michael Hayes]

Below is my second letter to Mr Conyers. We need to keep pushing our points!

Mr Conyers,
How are you or any other person in Congress going to justify your presence in Congress if you do not impeach Cheney and Bush. It is not a question of what might happen afterward or if it will hurt your electability. It is a question of your integrity, honor, and responsibility to the American people and the Constitution. Despite Mr Bush's assertion that the Constitution is "just a God damn piece of paper" it is in fact the backbone of what was the greatest nation todate on this planet. That the current administration is gutting it and defiling everything it stands for is more than grounds for impeachment. It is the law of this land and the Bush administration has broken almost every part of it. If you do not stand up for this countries honor and integrity now there very well may not be a country left to defend. Please read the names of our great patriots and past presidents and try to summon some of the guts and fortitude they had when they protected our nation. In the name of everything right please save our country! Impeach Cheney, Bush, Mukasey, and anyone else involved in the destruction of our once great nation.

[Shannon]

Hi Michael~ Are you sending these letters via postal mail or email (or both)?