August 19, 2008
by Robert Fantina

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is busy flitting around the country promoting her new book, Know Your Power: A Message to America's Daughters. While doing so, audiences coast to coast are demanding to know why she refuses to impeach President George Bush.

After becoming Speaker of the House following the 2006 elections which ejected the war-mongering Republicans from power, and replaced them with the spineless, mealy-mouthed Democrats, Ms. Pelosi immediately said that impeachment was 'off the table.' She has never adequately expressed why this is the case. Perhaps in the heady excitement of being the first female Speaker of the House she did not feel she needed to answer to anyone.

But perhaps there is another reason, and one that Ms. Pelosi herself exposed during her tour. Asked again about impeachment when appearing on the television program 'The View,' she made this incredible statement: "If somebody had a crime that the president had committed, that would be a different story."

Madam Speaker has now clearly demonstrated that she doesn't know what is going on in the world around her, much less in the nation she was elected to help govern. She is apparently unaware of Congressman Dennis Kucinich's thirty-five articles of impeachment, introduced on June 9, 2008, as H. Res. 1258. These articles include the following, among others:

• Creating a secret propaganda campaign to manufacture a false case for war against Iraq.
• Invading Iraq, a sovereign nation, in violation of the U.N. charter.
• Torture: Secretly authorizing, and encouraging the use of torture against captives in Afghanistan, Iraq and other places, as a matter of official policy.
• Imprisoning children.
• Spying on American citizens, without a court-ordered warrant, in violation of the law and the fourth amendment.
• Obstruction of the investigation into the attacks of September 11, 2001.

One would think that these alone might be worth looking into; apparently Ms. Pelosi disagrees.

Mr. Kucinich has charged Mr. Bush with thirty-five crimes, which Ms. Pelosi would have the world believe she is unaware of. The accusations have been made; it is now the responsibility of Congress to investigate them.

Why is Madam Speaker so willing to let Mr. Bush off the hook? In addition to her disingenuous statement that, if somebody knew that the president had committed a crime, she would pursue the matter, when Mr. Kucinich, among many others does know this, she says that impeachment would be too divisive for the nation. It was not so long ago that President Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about a sexual affair with an intern.

(Article Continues Below)

Was his 'crime' so much more serious that it was worth impeaching him for? Was lying about a matter that in no way impacted national or world politics, that did not cause the death of anyone, much less a million people, and that should have been a personal matter between Mr. and Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky, so much more vital than lying the U.S. into a disastrous war?

Mr. Bush reign of terror has nearly five more months to go. Certainly, with the slowness for which Congress is famous, impeachment hearings would not start until very late in his presidency, if not after it. But why should the president of the United States not be held responsible for crimes he has committed, even if those crimes are only investigated after he leaves office? Mr. Bush has trampled the Constitution at every turn, not to mention the Geneva Conventions, U.N. regulations and U.S. law. Why does Ms. Pelosi allow this to happen and then say on national television that she is unaware of any violations of law that he has committed? One wonders how stupid she believes the U.S. voters to be.

Although she refuses to seek evidence against Mr. Bush, she may have hard evidence regarding the intelligence of the U.S. voter. Although Mr. Bush was appointed president in 2000, he was (probably) elected in 2004. Perhaps she feels she can hold her position of power by ignoring the will of the people and the Constitution she has sworn to uphold; sadly, she may be right.

But if she wants to remain in power, what does she plan to use it for? Is her role as Speaker of the House nothing more than a publicity vehicle for her newest book? Does she, like Mr. Bush, have her eye constantly on the almighty dollar, and does she act only in that interest?

The message she is sending to America's daughters is not a positive one; she could, had she chosen to do so, changed the course of history. She has repeatedly refused to defund the war, and has steadfastly abetted Mr. Bush in his crimes. History will forget her; had she acted according to the laws of the land, she would have been a hero not only to America's daughters, but to much of the world, for generations. What her goal is cannot even be guessed; but it is clear that governing, upholding the Constitution and being an advocate for the people are not her motivations.

If you enjoyed this post, please make a donation to help keep this website active:

Click Here for the Free Populist Party Newsletter

Robert Fantina [send him email] is a long-time activist for peace and social justice. He has worked with the Coalition for Peace Action in New Jersey. Following the 2004 presidential election, he moved to Canada, where he now resides. Robert is the author of Desertion and the American Solder: 1776-2006.

More Articles from Robert Fantina