
[FDL is thrilled to welcome Rep. Jerry Nadler to chat with us this morning. As with all Blue America chats, please stay on topic and be polite -- any off-topic conversations should be taken to the prior thread. Please join me in welcoming Rep. Nadler! -- CHS]
It could have been because we were born within a year of each other and not far from each other (in Brooklyn) but I think the bond I felt yesterday towards Congressman Jerrold Nadler (NY-08) had more to do with his ideas and his outlook. You're about to meet him this morning because he's joining us here for a chat from Manhattan. I want to fill you in on a little background first.
He went to Columbia University in the late 60s, campaigning for Eugene McCarthy, along with his roommate Dick Morris. He was elected -- with a margin of 73 votes -- to the New York State Assembly at 29 and in 1992 he was elected to Congress in similar circumstances. He immediately became the progressive point person to keep the hated bankruptcy bill at bay. He managed to do that for 8 years -- despite the fact that all the Republicans and almost a third of the Democrats favored it. In 2000 when it finally passed, he was able to persuade Hillary Clinton to talk her husband into vetoing it.
One of the blessings that came with the Democratic victories last November was that Congressman Nadler, a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, became chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution (immediately changing the name to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties). I asked him what he's doing with his subcommittee. Half an hour later, I said I had enough material for my story. He was just getting started.
First, what he hopes to accomplish with the subcommittee: a reexamination of the restrictions on habeas corpus, a re-examination of the Military Commissions Act, an examination into "extraordinary renditions," properly defining "enemy combatants," a look at what this whole business of "national security letters" is all about, warrentless wiretaps, torture, speedy trials... oh, and a look at the whole concept of evidence obtained under coersion and duress.
"There's so much to undo," he explained. And even if Bush vetoes everything, he hopes to use hearings to help re-educate the American people about why things like habeas corpus are important even before we have a Democrat in the White House to help restore it. "I never thought I'd be in Congress when it repealed the Magna Carta!"
What's more, with the Democrats controlling the congressional agenda, instead of playing defense again hideous Republican schemes to penalize gays and minorities and take away rights, it is possible to move forward. And Rep. Nadler hopes to do so by cleaning up the incredible mess made by the Bush Regime and its rubber stamp Congress and moving the public debate back towards the center.
Before the victories in November, Rep. Nadler often felt "very dispirited" going to work at the Judiciary Committee several times a week
"to know that no matter how horrible the proposal, no matter how good your argument, you're going to lose every single vote. And we were the first line of defense when they wanted to remove the right to sue for people in industrial accidents, to push through their anti-gay amendment, their 'fetal personhood' bills... I feel like I've been released from purgatory."
Now what about Bush's war? Jerry Nadler represents one of the most Jewish districts in the country -- from Manhattan's upper West Side down through Chelsea, the Village, Wall Street, and over to Brooklyn all the way down to Coney Island.
I watched with dismay as other Jewish progressives around the country -- from Henry Waxman in L.A., Shelley Berkley in Nevada, Tom Lantos in the Bay Area, Sander Levin in Michigan to Debbie Wasserman-Schultz in South Florida Robert Wexler -- abandoned the Democratic Party on October 10, 2002 to vote with Tom DeLay and Denny Hastert to authorize the use of force in Iraq. But not Congressman Nadler. He was the only white Democrat in downstate NY to vote against the war and he helped draft the Spratt Resolution that could have prevented the war.
"Saddam was more of a nuisance than a menace. Iran was a menace and taking Iraq out of the equation unbalanced the Middle East to our detriment, as well as to Israel's."
Since then, as a member of the Progressive Caucus, he has been working hard to start the long, hard process of winding the war down. He was very instrumental in changing the terms of debate from "power of the purse" (which the Republicans and their media machine interpret to mean denying supplies to our boys and girls in the field) to funding the protection of the troops and the costs of bringing them home. He changed the rhetoric the Democratic leadership uses and helped convince them that timelines are essential.
Congressman Nadler isn't here to ask us to finance his bid for re-election. He usually garners around 80% of the vote -- and last year, after his strong anti-war stand, it was 83%. But what I'd like to ask you to do is help fund the congressman's leadership PAC. Why? Because we want people like Jerry Nadler in leadership positions within the Democratic caucus.
To a great extent that is determined by his ability to help other Democrats running for office.
If you click on our Act Blue page, you can add one cent to your contribution to indicate to Rep. Nadler's committee that you want your donation to go to his leadership PAC.
Which reminds me...I did a story on one of the congressman's constituents last week, Jonathan Tisch, someone being touted by many Democrats as a good candidate to succeed Bloomberg as mayor of NYC. He wrote a book called Chocolates On The Pillow Aren't Enough -- Reinventing the Customer Experience and he autographed a box of them for us to give away to the first contributors to Congressman Nadler's leadership PAC (in other words, if you want a book this week, add .01).
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Welcome, Rep. Nadler — we are so pleased to have you here with us this morning.
Hello from Jerry Nadler
That was a great intro, CHS — welcome, Congressman Nadler! :)
Congressman, I’m not a constituent, but would like to thank you for all you are doing to bring a bit of sanity back to Washington.
Hello Representative Nadler. It is a great honor to have you here with us.
thank you very much I appreciate your comments
Its great to be here
Rep. Nadler — Just wanted to thank you for having such a wonderful backbone when it comes to sticking up for Constitutional and civil liberties issues. There are far too few voices standing up for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights these days — elected officials appear to think that those of us in the voting ranks don’t care about that issue — but they could not be more wrong.
Yours has been a consistent voice, and I wanted to thank you very much for that.
Good morning and welcome Congressman Nadler. I am a New Yorker, in Congresswoman Maloney’s district, but wish I were represented by you instead.
Welcome to the Lake. The water is warm. Come on in.
Rep. Nadler: Good morning from Battery Park City! Thanks for coming to talk today!
Welcome to Firedoglake, Congressman Nadler. There was so much we talked about that I didn’t include in the intro. Especially the stuff you told me about how the Bush Regime has politicized every agency in government. That’s something that has become a big topic at this blog.
Civil liberties are perhaps the cheif reason for this country’s existance and it is important not to sacrifice it in the name of the war on terror or anything else
Welcome, Congressman. For so long, it was a breath of sane fresh air to see you on television during the GOP’s impeachment power grab. Welcome to our community.
Yes, tying in with howieklein@12, I’m thinking that Ds need to tame the process of Rs turning the federal government into a gigantic R machine at taxpayer expense. How do you view the progress to date?
Yes, Howie, every agency of Govt from the EPA to the FDA to the Just. dept has been politizied the judgements of career civil servants on regulating drugs, or on climate change are routinely overruled by Bush political appoointees and Rt-wing political ideologues
jerry nadler @ 13
To what extent do your Republican colleagues share this view? Are any of them as dismayed by what’s been done to our Constitutional liberties as we are? And if so, are any of them now ready to make a public stand?
To date we are just starting the first step obviously, is to discover and publicize improper political actions and why they were done and who ordered them from various govt agencies
My question is rather unsubstantial so feel free to disregard. Who in your opinion are the most compelling congressmen making their arguments on the floor of the house, yourself excluded?
Building on what Howie said at 12 (and knowing you may be limited in what you can say due to ongoing investigations) — can you say a few words about the politicization of administrative agencies and the sort of “political fealty” that the Bush Administration has begun to require? And how that may differ from prior Administrations in your view? I have been particularly concerned about the USAtty mess, but have been told repeatedly about the push on electoral math and other political issues as an overarching question for agencies as diverse as the Department of Agriculture, the GSA, and many, many others. I’d love your thoughts on that.
mrsmarks @ 16
I suspect very little in reality. There are a few - very few - Repu’s who will exert any effort on this.
jerry nadler @ 20
Jeff Flake for one of Ariz.
Neil @ 18
Neil: Barney Frank - in a class by himself very persuasive and extremely witty.
That’s really staggering. What a terrible shame.
jerry nadler @ 22
Also very good in debate, Henry Waxman, Steny Hoyer, Ed Markey
Congressman, if there is any way we can help with the discovery and publicity, please tell us. From public review of large document dumps to in depth analysis, you will find people here eager to lend their effort.
Congressman Nadler, what are the chances that Financial Industry Free Lunch bill (otherwise known as the “Consumers can’t use Bankruptcy” bill) can be reversed or at least substantially modified to offer consumers financial protection against catastrophic events (serious health problems, unexpected unemployment, etc.)?
Given that our Leader, the Prince of Pampers will of course veto it (gotta protect his good ol’ boys with all the cash), can you tie a repeal of the existing law with something that he can’t veto?
I’m at work and won’t be able to participate in this discussion though I am proud to have mr. Nadler here at the lake and will surely read over the comment section when I get a chance
I would like to make a very important point;
the democratic net root constituents are NOT fringe, we are main stream, what we want is what the Majority of Americans want and we are NOT extreme in any sense of the word
in fact, WE are the concervatives, WE are for concerving our nationaly defense, WE are for concerging our national resources, WE are for concervative economics, WE are for lowering the tax burdon on the majority of Americans, WE are for concerving our envirnment, WE are for sound education for ALL americans
we are the concervatives, NOT this new republican party
I also want to point out that EVERY time a democrat goes on the record with SHARP critisism of the administration their poll numbers GO UP
oh, Halelujah! Thank you, Congressman Nadler!!
Christy Hardin Smith @ 19
Christie: We know all about the US Atty mess. In addition the substitution of politics for science for climate change and the “morning after pill” also Just. Dept. approving clearly discrimatory redistricting plans for Tx and Ga what the courts ruled was a poll tax in Ga. All against the advice of the career civil servants.
This may be impossible to answer, but which Congress member on the other side of the aisle do you respect for a combination of the courage to stand by their beliefs at the same time as having a respect for the role of government and the rule of law?
In light of the recent change in Congress, do you think there are any GOP members who could be convinced to switch to Democratic?
Hi Congressman,
I have been in contact with Barney Frank about the attack on Mexicans and their culture. It has gone over the line on the radio and needs to be challenged.
Any thoughts?
Good morning, Congressman.
What an incredible assignment your subcommittee has. How on earth do you decide where to begin? Have you set a list of “top priorites” that you are addressing first?
Have you found that your Republican colleagues on this committee (Franks, Pence, Issa, King, Jordan) have been generally supportive of investigating issues facing your committee? I’m curious if there is a strong political bias in the committee regarding how to protect the constitution, civil rights, and civil liberties.
Thank you so much for your service to our nation.
TJ @ 25
Tj: You probably know better than I but helping analysis of large documents dumps would be a great help to Congressional committees or sub committees without huge staffs
perris @ 28
Excellent point. The corporations and super-wealthy individuals who have received the benefits in the last 6 years are not the majority of Americans.
jerry nadler @ 33
pointing out relevant nuggets of info in 1000’s of pages of documents can really help the Cong. staff and of course, publizing info on the internet has been shown to be able to bring grteat pressure on the mainstream media to print it.
Cong. Nadler at 30 — We’ve done some reporting on the poll tax issues, and the Delay redistricting in Texas. And quite a bit on the USAs as well. What a mess. I understand that the civil rights division at the DoJ has lost close to 60% of its former career staff — and I’m wondering if you can talk a bit about the impact that such a loss can have in terms of civil rights enforcement? And what plans may be in the works in terms of oversight on this?
And also if you have any thoughts about Alice Fisher, the head of the Political Corruption division that is currently leading the Abramoff investigation, despite her close ties to Tom DeLay and others who are at the center of that mess. I understand she was a recess appointment, but I wonder if any oversight is planned on why there has been so little movement on the Abramoff investigation to date?
I’ve noticed Frank, Waxman and Hoyer’s debate skills. Hoyer was particularly effective during the emergency appropriations bill. Waxman has been tremendous in Oversight hearings. He dispenses with disruption and keeps the committee on track. I’ll watch for Markey. I like his agenda; Banning Torture, Network Neutrality, Nonproliferation, America’s Energy Challenge.
jerry nadler @ 34
Congressman, What’s the best way to offer our efforts to official parties? Most of the efforts so far are documented on blogs. But we don’t know if the right people are seeing it.
Rep. Nadler,
How do you determine who will receive funds from your Leadership PAC? Is it someone’s stands on particular issues? Their own fundraising needs? Their past fundraising ability? Their opponent (primary or general election)?
Congressman Nadler @ 34
Are you aware of what some of the blogs have done wrt documents released for USA scandal? Talkingpointsmemo got volunteers to go thru the docudump & one found the 18-day gap, among other prizes. Another example, it seemed that some D aide was reading this site when we were live blogging during a hearing (Doan?) because questions posed here were subsequently asked in the hearing. Can this type of activity be coordinated better & if so how?
Mad Dogs @ 26
Dear MD: I don’t know. Since unforunately about 1/3rd of Dems joined all of the Reps. in supporting Brkcy Bill it is difficult to see at this point a good prospect repealing it. We are going to take a close look to see if we can cherry pick provisions that are really damaging That we can dramatize and assemble a majority for repeal or amendment.
. In addition the substitution of politics for science for climate change and the “morning after pill” also Just. Dept. approving clearly discrimatory redistricting plans for Tx and Ga what the courts ruled was a poll tax in Ga. All against the advice of the career civil servants.
There has also been systematic flouting of the law at the EPA, among other places–where political apppointees have directed civil servants to not comply with statutory requirements. The administration is unwilling to enact legislation reversing environmental protections because it knows how unpopular such legislation would be. So it simply doesn’t follow the law as enacted.
congressman nadler,
this brooklyn native has always been impressed by your stands. you have never disappointed me.
my question: we have seen the all but total takeover of nonpolitical agencies by corporate/political idealogues, everything from justice dept. to epa to the science/medical research arms. i fear it will take more than the 08 election to clean house. i.e., is this now a long-term problem, and if so, how best to solve it?
p.s. how about those mets?
Welcome Congressman Nadler. I don’t know if you have seen it, but the University of Virginia has a collection of Thomas Jefferson’s letters, and it is always enlightening to me to read them. He was such a visionary that it is sometimes like a bolt of lightening when I read them. Hope this is helpful. Jefferson’s Letters.
Congressman Nadler.
Thank you for your service.
You are one of my heroes. ;->
Christy Hardin Smith @ 36
the subcomm held a hearling two weeks ago on the subversion of the civ. rts. Div. at DOJ. All the obvious facts were brought out. It garnered a fair amount of publicity including about the 60% of carreer staff who have left. We will continue oversight. I am not aware of any leg. proposals that could materially affect the appointment process.
perris @ 28
Beautifully said.
welcome and thanks for all you do….wish you were my congressman. Wally Herger isn’t interested in anything I have to say.
Peterr @ 40
I’d love to hear an answer to that too. By the way, anyone who would like to help out with that effort, need only click here to get directly to the Act Blue page for Jerry. And there are still plenty of signed books.
eCAHNomics @ 40
The way this type of activity could be better coordinated would be to talk to relevant Cong. staff people on an ongoing basis.
jayackroyd @ 42
You are exactly right. We are currently scheduling hearings on the deprivation of substantive due process of law by the EPA when it lied to NY-ers about the air being safe to breath after 9/11 as an example.
nadler@52
Could someone senior at this site get the introductions?
One issue not yet mentioned here, but central to your subcommittee’s work, is Bush’s consistent practice of substituting a “signing statement” for a presidential veto.
As I view the dynamics of the recent battles over the Iraq supplemental funding bill, I can easily envision a scenario where the president reluctantly accepts some version of what was recently passed, but attaches a signing statement saying basically “I’ll do whatever I want in my capacity as C-in-C, including ignoring the end date in this act for redeploying troops.”
Where do things stand in your subcommittee, or the full committee, on examining Bush’s use of signing statements, and holding him accountable for actually enforcing and living by the laws that have been properly adopted by Congress and signed by himself?
dmg @ 43
Yes this is a very real problem. It will take two things to reverse it. 1) Wholesale new appoontments by a Dem Pres. in 2009. 2) Ongoing and energetic oversight by Congress regardless of which party is in power in the exec. branch. You can’t pass a bill to do this.
Congressman Nadler — Good on you for all you do. I’m fairly well represented in my MA district but I would prefer to be represented by Barney Frank (or you, were I from NY).
To the extent that you can, would you consider commenting on some views I’ve been expressing to other progressives (albeit those suffering more from “normaloia” than I am) :) To wit:
At that point, senior members of the “real” Repubs (remember Senators Golwater, Hugh Scott, Nelson Rockefeller et. al. walking to Nixon’s WH to tell him he must resign?) will realize that they must eject Bush/Cheney if conservatism is to have any chance for at least a decade.
Then if the Repubs can manage it somehow, some other Repubs would step in for the balance of the term, or Pelosi and the Dems would step in. Either way, I think the Repubs would accept it, given that they might survive to fight another day, and perhaps even pin more of the Iraq debacle on the progressives. I tell my friends that I think the probability of this is about .5 and rising, as more and more stinking revelations are exhumed. Whaddayathink?
howieklein @ 50
Thanks for the reminder, Howie. I just chipped in $25. Anyone want to match me?
Are NY reps planning on being helpful in revealing Giuliani’s post 9/11 shortcomings as he runs for prez? Digging up lower West St. to look for 9/11 human remains can’t do G. any service. Can we make that more of a national news item?
Congressman Nadler,
Thank you for all that you’ve done and continue to do. There are many reasons to be a proud New Yorker…you’re one of the top ones. I’m not in your district, but my heart votes for you every two years.
eCAHNomics @
53
Congressman, if that is possible, we will all take direction from whoever gets the introductions.
G’mornin’ Congressman! I don’t envy the mess you have to untangle, but I’m sure many people - myself included - appreciate your efforts.
Just a couple of questions asked from personal curiousity…Does the topic of the application of presidential signing statements to legislation fall within the bounds of your committee? If you can comment on that topic, what do you think of that practice?
jerry nadler @ 21
Are they worried about the GOP primary voters, then? Grover Norquist was quoted recently as saying that the issue for them isn’t Iraq, it’s Bush — and that they want their Republicans to obey Bush no matter what, even if it means they get their asses kicked in ‘08.
howieklein @ 49
It is a combination of factors 1) progressive politics, 2) need, is a Dem progressive incumbent in danger or is there a real possiblity of replacing a Rep. with a progressive Dem. 3) Obviously don’t waste money on candidates with plenty of money without help 4) influence within Congress. Can helping a certain candidate increase progressive influence generally or my own influence in Congress.
Congressman, thank you for your fine work. I was wondering if there is any real possibility that election funding can be addressed in Congress in the realistic future. I look at the amounts disclosed by the Presidential candidates and am appalled - we need representatives (like you) responsive to citizens, not well-financed interest groups. I think this is at the root of many of our problems, not the least of which is the Iraq war - contractors, mercenaries etc. Thanks for your comments.
eCAHNomics @ 52
Sure we could probably arrange that.
Which congressmen would be most receptive to a citizen inquiry about whether imported minimine-tainted food grade wheat gluten has found its way into our (human) food supply?
Rep. Nadler at 65 — Howie and I would be more than happy to help coordinate on that, I’m sure. And I’m certain that your staff has Howie’s contact information. Anything we can do to help…
Mr. Sunshine and I would like to know what can persuade your delegation colleague Hillary Clinton to stop triangulating on the Iraqle Debacle and speak out strongly for bringing troops home, alive and whole and soon.
Senator Edwards is showing real leadership on this and other issues… Senator Obama is showing leadership in vision, too.
Where’s Hillary’s leadership?
jerry nadler @
65
Christy, Can you arrange that with the Congressman?
TJ at 69 — Most likely, but it certainly won’t be on the chat thread. *g*
Christy Hardin Smith @ 57
Matched plus $0.01, of course.
Peterr @ 53
The Pres.’s misuse of signing statements is a real problem. The Judiciary Committee had a hearing on this 6 or 8 weeks ago, you cannot prevent a Pres. from saying anything he likes when signing a bill. First Amendment etc. On the otherhand, that cannon justify disobeying the law or ignoring his duty to enforce the law. That is contempt for the law and if egregious enough grounds for impeachment. Short of impeachment the only recourse is the court.
Congressman Nadler, as one of your constituents I just wanted to say Thank You! for all your work for us and your service to the nation!
Prairie Sunshine @ 68
I’m pretty disappointed at Obama’s statement that if Bush vetoed the spending bill, they’d pass one without timelines. That’s just inviting the veto. I’m behind Reid and Feingold.
Mike at 71 — Thanks much! I’m sure Rep. Nadler’s PAC will put it to very good use. Every little bit helps!
Congressman Nadler, what do you think about Rep. Pelosi pulling out the language that would require the Bush administration to consult the congress before pre-emptively attacking Iran based on unsubstantiated claims being repeated by the “cakewalk in Iraq” radicals about an “alleged” nuclear weapons program in Iran?
I know that Senator Webb has now put forth Senate Bill 759 that would require that the Bush administration get an o.k. from the congress before pre-emptlively attacking Iran.
What is your thinking about this issue?
Christy Hardin Smith @ 70
Smiles. No, I didn’t think so. But I wanted to make sure that you were still here!
How is is legally possible for the administration to flout administrative law?
I understand that agencies create the regulations that enable the laws just passed. Once created and published - through the administrative process of hearings and so on - the regulations ARE law. That’s what we learned in Admin. Law. No administrator can decide willy-nilly to ignore or defy administrative law or a regulation.
Progressives love our rules. I’m outraged that this administration defies the rules as if they aren’t actual laws. They treat laws like suggestions and it drives me crazy!
jerry nadler @
63
Well said.
You might want to have a campaign staff person continue to check out these Blue America threads — both past threads and those to come. Howie brings a great collection of candidates around to chat, and I for one have found some wonderful progressives flying underneath the DC radar.
jerry nadler @ 63
The object of increasing Congressman’s Nadler’s influence in Congress– and the handful of others like him– is as important as electing generic Democrats. A Congressful of Rahm Emanuel clones catering to Big Business isn’t what we’re looking for. Helping Congressman Nadler take a bigger role in Democratic Caucus leadership is why I was eager to help raise some money today. Again, the Act Blue Page is here. Add a penny if you want to Jonathan Tisch signed book.
S.O.S. from MA @ 55
I tell my friends that I think the probability of this is about .5 and rising, as more and more stinking revelations are exhumed. Whaddayathink?I think the probability is much less. The timing is wrong. The odds would be much better if this were the first half, not the second half, of Bush’s term. To pursue impeachment we would have to have all sorts of investigations to find impeachable offenses for the balance of this year. This we will do in any event. But I personally doubt that the country will have much stomach for actually persuing an impeachment next year in the middle of a Pres. campaign with only a few months left on Bush’s term.
congressman,
it would be a great service to the country if your committee could provide hearings on all the bushites’ faux logic and illegal activities masquerading as legitimate readings of the executive’s constitutional authority.
from yoo/gonzales “torture is ok” memo, to warrantless wiretaps, to signing statements that ignore the legislation they are attached to, it is at the very least time to show the nation just how discredited these power grabs are. and beyond the civics lesson, it is powerful material to assemble to thoroughly expel this type of behavior from future administrations as well.
Congressman Nadler,
I’ve become such a cynic during this administration. I cannot believe that anything they endorse or promote can be good for anybody other than their well-heeled corporate buddies.
A story in today’s NY Times about food aid to Zambia has me quite perplexed. The Bush admin’s proposal to send some direct cash to help alleviate a food shortage seems, on its face, to make sense. Yet business interests have been lobbying successfully against changing the law that requires all US food aid to be grown here, and shipped via US shipping companies.
So, part of my brain thought, wow, Bush got one right. Then the other part kicked in, “no way. what’s the catch?”
What do you think about this issue?
eCAHNomics @ 57
There will be hearings in several different committees in both the House and Senate on the environmental and health aspects of 9/11. Giuliani’s failure to enforce the OSHA laws and the consequent reality of 50,000 or more first responders suffering severe health consequences may very well figure in one or more of these hearings
When one’s state is small enough that the Congressman takes time from the state Dem convention to drop by one’s daughter’s wedding reception, it’s hard to visualize the disconnect that most people have with government.
From your perspective, Cong. Nadler, what are the best tools we can apply to involve people in their government? Is the “they all do it” “my vote [voice] doesn’t count” mindset too entrenched? What would you consider the top three in an action plan to restore integrity and honor to our federal government?
Rep Nadler @ 72
The distinction between what Bush says in a signing statement and what he does after issuing the statement is indeed a critical distinction.
Has your committee staff compliled a list of situations where Bush may have gone beyond simply “saying” what he believes the limits of a given law are and moved into the territory of disregarding a law’s provisions? Or was that recent hearing a starting point for this whole discussion?
Nadler@85
Bless you and all the Ds.
Phoenix Woman @ 61
I don not know. Rep primary voters historically have been very loyal even to disastorous republican Presidents. The pattern may very well hold.
howieklein @ 80
Done! And Howie, thanks for arranging for my Congressman to be here today. This is thrilling.
jerry nadler @ 81
I think the probability is much less. The timing is wrong. The odds would be much better if this were the first half, not the second half, of Bush’s term. To pursue impeachment we would have to have all sorts of investigations to find impeachable offenses for the balance of this year. This we will do in any event. But I personally doubt that the country will have much stomach for actually persuing an impeachment next year in the middle of a Pres. campaign with only a few months left on Bush’s term.
Congressman Nadler, If Bush and Cheney are not impeachable at this point. What about lower level officials in the Bush administration who have “allegedly” committed impeachable offenses. John Dean wrote a three part series (@JohnDeanfindlaw) on impeaching these lower level officials who have been able to move in and out of administrations (doing their dirty work) and have never been held accountable for past crimes.
Impeaching Rove, Feith, Perle, Wolfowitz and others so that they cannot hold any office in a future administration.
tom tom @ 63
Public financing of campaigns or even better the clean elections act introduced by Cong. Tie