On Passive Aggression

Armando says we are making progress on a variety of fronts by using a strategy of passive aggression. What this means in the context of the Downing Street Leaks is that we should apply something more akin to Chinese Water Torture, a kind of drip-drip-drip approach, rather than coming out and calling for hearings, resignation, or impeachment.

Armando told me yesterday that he thinks the case for impeachment has not been made, and that I am taking the legitimacy of the recent election too lightly. We shouldn’t so cavalierly attempt to overthrow a democratically elected government.

Of course, I can’t imagine any act more impeachable than fixing the facts around a policy of invading a sovereign nation, and cynically using the UN inspections process to try to entrap Saddam into creating a phony casus belli for war.

So, Armando and I disagree about whether the case has been made. But I agree with Armando that is not productive for our Democratic leadership to call for impeachment hearings based on the evidence we currently have. It will go nowhere. But that doesn’t mean that everyone else in the bloody world can’t say it. There is no reason for ordinary citizens to muzzle themselves. Passive aggression might be a viable strategy for Pelosi and Reid, but is sucks for the rest of us.

In a May 31st, column in the Boston Globe, Ralph Nader and Kevin Zeese wrote:

The president and vice president have artfully dodged the central question: ”Did the administration mislead us into war by manipulating and misstating intelligence concerning weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to Al Qaeda, suppressing contrary intelligence, and deliberately exaggerating the danger a contained, weakened Iraq posed to the United States and its neighbors?”

If this is answered affirmatively Bush and Cheney have committed ”high crimes and misdemeanors.” It is time for Congress to investigate the illegal Iraq war as we move toward the third year of the endless quagmire that many security experts believe jeopardizes US safety by recruiting and training more terrorists. A Resolution of Impeachment would be a first step. Based on the mountains of fabrications, deceptions, and lies, it is time to debate the ”I” word.

That’s not passive aggressive. And neither is this:

Wisconsin Democrats are calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

Loyalists at this weekend’s state party convention in Oshkosh passed a resolution calling for Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against the three officials for their role in the war in Iraq.

The resolution contends that the administration “lied or misled” the United Nations, Congress, and the American public about the justification for the war. It cites the so-called “Downing Street memo” from British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s government, as well as reports from U.N. weapons inspectors as evidence of widespread deception.

“Democrats, not only in Wisconsin but throughout the U.S., have been outraged by what we believe has been a clear cover-up of why the U.S. went into Iraq,” said newly elected state party Chairman Joe Wineke.

:::flip:::

Or this:

The Santa Cruz City Council on Tuesday became the nation’s first local government to ask Congress to look into impeaching President Bush on charges he deceived the American public about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and has used the Sept. 11 attacks as an excuse to crush civil rights.

In a 6-1 vote, the council decided to send a letter to members of the House Judiciary Committee asking the panel to investigate the president.

Santa Cruz Mayor Emily Reilly, at right, and Vice Mayor Scott Kennedy, left, conduct a meeting of the City Council in Santa Cruz, Calif., on Tuesday, Sept. 9, 2003. The Santa Cruz City Council is considering becoming the first local government in the country to ask Congress to look into impeaching President Bush. Dozens of activists cheered the decision, even though the letter was a muted version of their proposal for a council resolution in favor of impeaching Bush and other top members of his administration.

“It’s a courageous action,” said Sherry Conable, leader of a coalition of 10 local groups that support impeachment of all top administration officials.

Conable held a sign saying: “Love your country and the world. Impeach Bush/Cheney.”

Or this, from Paul Craig Roberts, one of Reagan’s assistant secretaries of the Treasury:

What is interesting about the Pinochet case is that everything the former president of Chile is accused of, George W. Bush and his cronies are guilty of. Indeed, why is Senate staff wasting its time on 30-year-old alleged crimes of an elderly Chilean when the president of the United States ought to be in the dock? The prosecutor’s brief—the Downing Street Memo—is already written.

Or this by Greg Palast:

Here it is. The smoking gun. The memo that has “IMPEACH HIM” written all over it.

Or this:

In a letter sent to each member of the U.S. House and Senate, Veterans For Peace (VFP) stated that “this administration’s war on Iraq, in addition to being increasingly unpopular among Americans, is an unmistakable violation of our Constitution and federal law which you have sworn to uphold. In our system, the remedy for such high crimes is clear: this administration must be impeached.”

Or this from the Toronto Sun:

The litany of lies produced by the White House and its neo-con allies would be farcical were it not for the deaths of so many Americans and Iraqis.

Of course, all politicians lie.

But lying to get one’s country into an unnecessary war is an outrage, and ought to be an impeachable offence.

Or this from Doug Thompson of Capitol Hill Blue:

Yes, George W. Bush should be impeached. If we can impeach Bill Clinton for lying about spraying ejaculate all over an intern’s face and dress then we can damn well impeach a President whose illegal actions qualify him as a war criminal.

I don’t think Pelosi and Reid, or Dean and Conyers for that matter, should be using these talking points. But I can think of nothing more brilliantly passive aggressive than politely asking for Bush and Cheney’s resignation.

Author: BooMan

Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.