Skip to main content

I recently had a phone conversation with House Judiciary Chair John Conyers.  I'm including a link to the audio from our conversation below.  He was particularly interested in GWU Professor Jonathan Turley's conclusion that the Democrats in the FISA and impeachment cases are evidently guilty of "collusion".  Conyers did not dismiss or contradict the allegation.  He asked me to forward him references to Turley's argument.  

This is a critical time.  At this moment, multiple front-page diaries refer to unconstitutional behavior by the Democratic Congress.  One refers to Turley's even more damning assessment yesterday - of Democrats' conflicts of interest in their readiness to offer immunity for FISA violations.  In both the FISA and impeachment cases, Congressional leaders were silent accessories to the illegal behavior being charged.  

It's time to set aside our partisan bias and admit that even Democrats shouldn't be allowed to rule on crimes they have witnessed, kept secret, or committed.  Conyers, Wexler or Kucinich - or Senator Obama, whose staff says it is reviewing the new FISA proposal - needs to make that argument publicly in the capitol.

Last week, inspired by compelling arguments that Congressional leaders including Nancy Pelosi and Jay Rockefeller have a severe conflict of interest in their willingness to rule on both FISA legislation and impeachment prosecution, I called House Judiciary Chair John Conyers' office.

At first an intern put me on the phone with a press handler, who soon became  defensive, declined to identify himself, and then disappeared.  But I called back and suddenly there was gracious Chairman Conyers on the line:

Over the phone, we had trouble sharing the complex Raw Story URL I was looking at, containing Turley's June 10th Countdown appearance.  That's one reason it's critically important that we get Conyers' staff's attention today.

Turley's appearance on Olbermann's Countdown yesterday was even more powerful.  

(If the YouTube embed expires, visit the MSNBC link above it.)
Democrats are "changing the law to conform to past conduct".  They are protecting themselves from prosecution and almost getting away with it.  In the front-page poll I linked, most of us consider them criminals.

Members of Congress simply must not be deciding on cases in which they are witnesses - whether they were accessories, co-conspirators, whistleblowers, or innocent bystanders.  They need subpeonas, not power to grant immunity or take prosecution "off the table".

This is not rocket science.  In a democracy with a functioning justice system, the House Judiciary Chair would graciously point out that those members - including Pelosi and Rockefeller - can not participate in granting immunity in those cases.  They must acknowledge their apparent or potential conflict of interest, suspend any efforts to grant immunity, and recuse themselves.

Until now, party members have been protecting party leaders.  But now that Turley has gone public, the ground is shifting.  Congressman Wexler now has a frontpage diary opposing the FISA immunity, but he must go further.

Wexler, Conyers, Kucinich, even Obama - any of them can finally expose the deep conflicts of interest that threaten the passage of corrupt laws designed to let legislators "protect themselves".

Let's make sure Congressman Conyers and his staff see Turley's compelling argument.  Call his office at (202)225-5126.  Let's give him no choice except to respond.

Originally posted to David L on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 08:27 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site