I Thought We Didn't Negotiate With Terrorists

Yesterday, in response to an essay arguing for impeachment, I got the following comment:

"If anything, the start of impeachment proceedings might force Bush to start the war against Iran early or cause him to bring about the false flag attack you mention. What better way to show the country how the Democrats engage in devisive partisan politics than to have them impeach him while the country is at war. Bush could also use the threat of impeachment as a pretext for declaring martial law and sweeping aside all opposition. It's better to just let Bush leave office quietly than to risk the horrors that he could unleash on us before then."

What is he talking about?

Well, both Ralph Nader


and attorney, longtime activist and 24-year public defender Bob Fueur


say Congressman John Olver disclosed that Congress is terrified that -- if Bush or Cheney are impeached -- they might bomb Iran, declare martial law and suspend the 2008 elections.

Indeed, leading neocon Daniel Pipes said in a recent interview posted at National Review Online, that if Obama is elected in November, Bush will attack Iran in the remaining ten weeks of his term.

If what Olver or Pipes say is true, then Bush and Cheney are literally terrorists. And Congress is literally negotiating with them by saying - in essence - "please don't bomb Iran or declare martial law and suspend the elections, and we won't impeach you".

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists.

Impeaching, removing and convicting these guys is the safest approach. Covering up their crimes - which Congress is currently doing - is like telling a terrorist that we won't spill the beans on his last terrorist attack if he doesn't blow us up . . . an approach which will backfire and lead to more terrorism.

Disclosing their crimes, taking away their ability to carry out further mischief, taking away their base of power, and imprisoning them is the way to protect ourselves.