Is impeachment dead or alive? With the referral of Congressman Kucinich’s impeachment resolution to committee, Speaker Pelosi says the issue is “disposed of.” Majority Leader Hoyer says, “Congress is not going to proceed with impeachment.” And Judiciary Chairman Conyers says:
The Conyers statement illustrates very well what Democrats intend on impeachment: They want to patronize and encourage the base, while telling the mainstream that impeachment is dead. It’s not by accident that Conyers says that “committee staff” will consider the issue; it sounds like impeachment is alive, without requiring debate, hearings, or a vote. The Washington Post considers the question as well:
The fuzziness, and the varying responses from different members, allows Democrats to say one thing to the grassroots out of sight of the cameras, and another thing for the record. For example, is freshman Democrat Tim Walz (D-MN) really committed to voting to impeach Vice President Cheney, as he told one pro-impeachment lobbyist? Walz won a close race in 2006, and his district is rated as having a slight Republican tilt. Does he really want the Senate to hold an impeachment trial, or is he just speaking from both sides of his mouth? Congressman Bob Wexler (D-FL) is actually receiving plaudits from impeachment supporters even though he was among the 81 House Democrats who hypocritically voted to take up impeachment, only to later block such a debate when it became clear that a debate might actually begin. Note the duplicity in his statement:
No mention that he was among those voting to send it to committee! You have to wonder too, whether Members in marginal districts–like New Hampshire’s Carol Shea Porter and Paul Hodes–will be asked why they flipped their impeachment votes. It’s in the interest of both impeachment supporters and opponents to get a clear answer.
