Once again it's time for "What if we impeach and less than 67 senators vote yes"

[LynneSin]

Once again we get all the threads about how the democratic party is 'weak' and 'ineffective' because they aren't impeaching yet.

Right now if we impeach we will have a long, drawn out affair, televized and hyped by the media as 'a waste of taxpayer moneys' (lead by the screeds at Fox News) and eventually we'll get it to pass in House and possibly even the senate but not enough Senators to warrant Bush actually removed from office.

So we'll slap Bush on the hands and say "You're Bad".

I'm sorry, that's not good enough for me.

We need to hound the investigations left and right - we need to expose the crimes of the Bush Regime ad nauseum until some of those 22 Republican Senators up for re-election realize that the Bush Boat is about to sink big time and taking them with it.

We do not have the votes to remove Bush from office. Congress needs to continue with investigations (and they're getting to everything) and you'll see the impeachment come naturally when it comes to republicans saving their jobs.

[redqueen]

1. Yes - investigations first, then the impeachment.

Seems pretty logical to me.

DA's build their case before going to court, so should we.

[AshevilleGuy]

2. Well put. LynneSin. That's how we got Nixon. n/t

[AndyA]

3. I agree with investigations first, impeachment next. BUT...

do not forget that the GOP was widely criticized for pursuing impeachment of Clinton...and look what happened to them. They took over EVERYTHING soon after.

So, there can be a positive bounce to the party because of impeachment as well. People know deep down inside it's the right thing to do to restore the integrity of our Constitution.

Plus, IT'S NOT AN OPTION. IT'S MANDATED BY THE CONSTITUTION. IT'S REQUIRED.

[LeftishBrit]

4. As I remember, the GOP had taken over Congress already, in 1994

and actually suffered some losses post-impeachment.

What they did gain soon afterwards was the presidency; and this seemed to have a bit more to do with the fact that Georgie's brother was Gov of Florida, than with a real electoral surge!

[LynneSin]

5. In 2000, Democrats actually picked up seats in Congress

We lost the White House; however, we had Katherine Harris & Diebold who actually took care of that one.

So what you said is correct

[AndyA]

7. And then, soon after had the Executive Branch, and both houses.

Impeachment hardly hurt them.

And again, it's not an option to decide whether to do it or not. If facts indicate wrongdoing on the part of Cheney/Bush, it's required.

[LynneSin]

11. Wrong Doing of What?

A lawyer fresh out of Law School could easily slap that one down.


Just because you and I and countless other folks sit here on DU discussing all the issues what is 'Right and Wrong' doesn't actually mean we have the proof.

We need impeachment but we need a solid case where we can actually remove the guy from office, not slap his hand

[AndyA]

17. If you read my first post, I agree with investigations first.

But what do they have to do to force Congress to turn up the heat?

Rape and torture people in the Rose Garden?

The signing statements that change the laws passed by Congress and the intentional lies to Congress leading up to the war in Iraq should be enough to get started. More will come once underway.

[LynneSin]

20. One thing we should not do is back down with investigations/impeachment

In no way am I opposed to impeachment, I just don't want to fuck it up by rushing into it without a solid case that would get support from the Repblicans.

But then I read threads about people wanting to start a recall on a democrat senator because he/she isn't screaming impeachment and I think "What a fucking waste of time". Would time be better served not only continuting to push these democratic senators more into the investigation (and hopefully into impeachment) but also doing the same within the public by writing to our local papers, going to protests, getting people involved and getting more 'non-political junkies' out there demanding impeachment and writing their senators.

We here at DU represent only a very minute part of the voting populations of the US. We need to get Ma & Pa Voter demanding impeachment with us if we're to make this happen!

[AndyA]

25. I think we're in agreement.

The problem, of course, is how to get Ma and Pa involved when the corporate owned news media won't report the dirt on Bush and Company. After all, it's the "liberal media" in this country that is responsible for all things bad about the GOP.

I do want these Dems to go on record as to why they aren't considering impeachment, though. Why exactly is it not a possibility?

Not enough time?

Creates bad PR for the Democratic Party?

I just want them to explain why they aren't keeping the impeachment option open. Yes, they need to investigate before they go further, but to say it's off the table at this point is premature. What do they know that allows them to make such a statement?

And it would appear that New Mexico is getting closer to forcing the issue on Congress whether they like it or not.

[LynneSin]

30. I think that's why they use the "Off the Table" phrase

I mean, I keep my Salt & Pepper off the table when I'm not using them because my cats will knock em over and make a mess. But trust me, if I need Salt & Pepper - they aren't that far away.

"Off the Table" is not as evil as it sounds

[onenote]

27. they already had both houses...they lost ground in 1998 and 2000

they didn't pick up up ground until 2002 and 2004, thanks to their portraying Democrats as weak on terror and the media playing along.

[Sammy Pepys]

6. At this point....

I really don't think it's in the Dems best interest to push impeachment. For all intents and purposes, Bush has one year and 8 months left. Campaigns for 2008 are already commanding a big chunk of media headlines.

I think more people are interested in what the Dems will do as legislators and candidates, not as Law & Order: Impeachment Unit. I also think that most Congressional Dems would rather focus their energies on formulating and executing a longterm agenda. Impeachment can't and won't be part of something like that.

I won't be complaining if an impeachment movement takes hold, but I don't think it's worth it at this point.

[LynneSin]

9. I think of the Bush Administration as a brick wall

And right now our Congress, controlled by the democrats and run by Pelosi & Reid, are doing their best to start pulling out all the bricks in that wall. I can't even begin to list all the investigations that the democrats have started with the leak, Walter Reed, the War mis-information, energy contracts, and many many more to boot but I would guess every single committee in DC has a democrat doing some form of investigation into the Bush Regime.

And as we pull out the bricks that wall will become weaker and weaker to the point that even the republicans will know to jump ship.

I want Bush removed more than you can imagine but I don't want another 'handslap impeachment'. It is simply not enough in my book

[ShortnFiery]

35. If they don't act soon, I'll bet on the side that they are looking out for their careers.

They OWE us to try. Nothing is a "safe bet" in this world but we all know that PROMPT investigations and Impeachment Proceedings are the MORALLY SOUND path to follow.

History will judge us by what we do here TODAY! There's plenty of evidence and if ever there was a time to prove their MORAL COURAGE in the Congress, that time is NOW!

[peacetheonlyway]

8. You've got to be kidding that investigations will work?

With Bush in power, he can pardon any person that an investigation finds
guilty.

With the lawyers fired and the US Court having had some 15% new Bush appointees in the Bush years,
what court in this country is still holding judges that are not going to be Bush sympathetic?

I believe we can try 20 methods and see which ones stick.

So what if it's on TV.

So what if it wastes time, both the CLinton and the Nixon impeachment hearings were only 4-5 months.

The American people demand impeachment and investigations are icing on the cake but too vulnerable
to Bush whitehouse manipulation.

Why can't we do both incase the pardons derails the investigation process?

My perspective on the Subpoena's for fired attorneys, is HO HUM, which administration going back to Washington, did not fire the old guard and place in the new? This focus of our congressional staff, John Conyers, Waxman, etc. is a total friggin waste of time and tells the American people that the Dems sadly have NO STRATEGY whatsoever, and from a big picture perspective, going after hiring practices of any administration is slippery slope because even dems hire their guys into office and fire the old guys so what do we buy ourselves with this silly waste of time?


Who cares if we don't have the votes. Nobody knows if we have the votes or not until we get the impeachment proceedings underway!!

it's time to do the right thing for America, and if dems lose this chapter of history without impeachment, they will be as implicated in the crimes in Iraq as the Bush Administration.

it'll be a very sad day to call yourself a democrat if they continue to cower in times we need real courage!!!

[LynneSin]

10. This is why I trust them more than folks like you who post here on the board

We can all play 'Armchair Quarterback' and decide what is the best course of action but what you're asking for will only empower the Bush administration.

There's alot of stuff that go on in DC that none of know about - that's call strategy. I can almost guarentee that Reid & Pelosi would love to pull the impeachment but know that right now any attempt at impeachment (and trust me, we have one shot at this) would be an embarassing failure.

We don't have the 2/3rd votes in the Senate to succeed and if we fail at removing him we could feasibly boost the republican party for 2008. Although we lost the White House (with help from Katherine Harris & Diebold), democrats picked up seats in Congress.

There is way too much at stake if we rush in quickly

[onenote]

28. Congressional investigations aren't criminal investigations

You clearly need to do some homework. If Congress, exercising its oversight authority, conducts investigations and hearings, the goal isn't to convict someone of a crime, its to bring to light the actions taken. The concept that LynneSin and other likeminded folks have been trying to convey, I believe, is that by conducting public investigations and oversight hearings, the electorate at large will begin to appreciate the scope of the administrations mis and malfeasance and will demand appropriate action. Chimpy doesn't have any "pardons" to grant with respect to this process. In theory, he could pardon someone who was prosecuted for contempt of Congress, but the parallels to the Nixon Saturday Night Massacre (not precise, but they'd still be made) would be spell trouble for chimpy.

[ShortnFiery]

36. Investigations WILL shine the light of truth on this Administration and Educate Americans.

This is a Win-Win situation if OUR Democratic Representatives have the stamina and moral courage to dedicate themselves to beginning Impeachment Proceedings.

Any other happy talk about "keeping our powder dry" is Bull Shit! Look where that has gotten us (in the minority) for the past twelve years?

Do it now Congress or be willing to pay a high price! :grr:

[PVnRT]

37. How do you gather evidence without investigation?

Just curious.

[sinkingfeeling]

12. It's good enough for me. The country is in the worst Constitutional crisis in my lifetime. It is the

duty of the Democratic Party to lead the charge. If not enough Repubs have the balls to vote for impeachment after all the evidence has been presented, then the American people will remember that the GOP puts party and ideology above the country.

[MonkeyFunk]

13. small correction...

you'll need 67 votes to convict in the Senate, not 60.

[KingofNewOrleans]

14. Not to nitpick but it's 67 Senators to convict

not 60.

[LynneSin]

15. You know I screw that up everytime

I never remember if it's 2/3 or 3/5 - but I do know it's a number that we clearly do NOT have available right now in the Senate

Thank you for correcting me!

[DrDan]

33. not to nitpick, but it is 67 only if all 100 senators vote.

one abstention, and it is 66 needed to convict.

[peacetheonlyway]

16. democrats.com is best source for information....

has already exposed over many crimes, it's only time for Congress to act.

Congress has more power than everyone gives them credit. It's time they use it.



By David Swanson
www.TomDispatch.com

Democratic leaders may prefer to claim they tried but failed.

The shortest route to ending the Iraq war (and preventing additional wars) is almost certainly through Congress. Influencing the White House directly is unimaginable, and stopping the war through the courts unlikely. Clearly, Congress is the way to go. But what specifically can Congress do?

How We Got Here

The peace movement lobbied a Republican Congress without success for four years. Then, on November 7, 2006, the American public elected a Democratic Congress in a clear mandate delivered at the polls. Not a single new Republican was elected, and 30 new Democrats were ushered in, with voters overwhelmingly telling pollsters that they were voting against the war; and by "against the war," they meant "against the war," not "against the escalation." Remember, the President's "surge" into Baghdad had not yet been announced.


http://www.democrats.com/

[Stinky The Clown]

18. Lynne ...... I disagree with you .... but hope to do so respectfully .....

You and I don't disagree much .... and much less argue. So ...... here's my take on impeachment ....

We can argue about the right time to have the House vote the articles. We can argue when we might have the votes - or if not the votes, the sympathy and support of the majority of the nation. (I actually think we have the latter already.)

But look at what impeachment in modern times has and has not gotten us.

We failed to impeach Nixon. Instead we watched him slink away. And rehabilitate himself to some degree ...... and today we have members of his adminsitration - actual criminals, most likely, like Kissinger - still holding functional positions of influence and respect. Yes, there were members of his close staff that served time in actual prisons, but in the end, nothing really changed.

We failed, next, to impeach St. Ronnie. What he did and in what he was knowingly complicit were impeachable. Instead, Poppy covered it up and pardons were set out, much like a barfly buys a round of shots for the house. The second rate actor with the gift of gab was elevated to patron saint of the reactionary, regressive right and to this day his dessicated carcass is used to flog us about what a 'great president' looks like.

We failed to impeach Poppy. He and his fixers did more to raise the level of the dust lump swept methodically under the national rug than any gang of court jesters and myth-making troubadors could ever hope to do. They simply mythologized the evil that was and is the reactionary right and covered it all up. Poppy's involvement in this sort of thing goes back to 1963 Dallas ...... at least.

On the other hand, **they** impeached a duly elected two term president who was wildly popular all over the world and who gave us unprecedented economic and international peace and prosperity. For this, it is arguable if they even suffered any setback, and if you think they did, it was minimal at most.

So, the result of impeaching is nothing that hurts the impeachers in any particular way, even when it is for the idiotic crime of a blowjob.

The result of not impeaching is a rapid descent into geopolitical and economic Hell. Not impeaching has led to the vilification not of the criminals, but of the 'spineless wonders" (us) who failed to do it when it was needed .... no, not needed, but **demanded**.

Impeaching and following through with criminal prosecutions to the full extent of the law is our moral imperative. If we want to gain even a modicum of the respect the Democrats had for decades, we MUST impeach.

WE SIMPLY HAVE NO CHOICE.

Or we can continue to be Mr. Right Wingie's bitch.

And we all know the reasons for impeachment are VERY real right now. There is NOT ONE DAMN THING trivial involved. It isn't even political.

So, we can discuss strategy. We can wait a bit longer to start to use the word in public conversation. But in the end, impeachment is mandatory.

[LynneSin]

19. You know I so agree with everything you posted

I just think the timing is too soon right now and I know how this media works - if Bush gets away with a handslap I highly doubt we'll have a second chance at trying an impeachment.

Don't ever ever think that I'm totally opposed with the idea of impeachment - your thread sums up just a small part of how I and so many others here at DU feel. But right now we don't have the numbers - we need the Bush Administration to become the Titanic and trust me, the republicans will start jumping ship.

[Stinky The Clown]

21. And I'm not unmindful of the strategic pitfalls of the whole process ......

... my job, as I see it, right now, is to keep the flame of impeachment lit. Little more than a matchflame .... but lit and ready to burst into a political conflagration that will see all the shit swept down the sewer along with the water used to extinguish the impeachment flame at the end of the process.

[Moderate Dem]

22. I think that Impeachment

would be a really stupid move for Democrats in Congress

[caligirl]

23. just get those state attorneys back into their offices so *can't thwart

anymore investigations.

[AtomicKitten]

24. I say investigations first

.... and then take a look at the support for impeachment. I would rather the Democrats shine a light on the crimes of this administration than to make a ham-handed attempt at impeachment and fail.

The Dems have much on their plate: this, Iraq, undoing much of the legislative "magic" done by the former GOP Congress, and securing the vote for 2008. I am not qualified to declare with certainty what takes priority, but I do know they need to get busy.

[dkofos]

26. you would be right it would be a massive waste of time

we only have to impeach him before he leaves office for good

And then it's off to the Hague!!

[Dr Fate]

29. One day we will craft WAYS to fight as opposed to excuses for not fighting.

I'm waiting for that day.

[pat_k]

31. Every Senator who votes to remove Breaks the Bonds of Complicity!

Each Member of the House who votes to impeach Bush and Cheney and each Senator who votes to remove (or pushes for resignation) is a victory.

"It's futile; we'll lose in the Senate" -- NOT!

Since no human can "know" how events will unfold until the events are behind us, the confidence with which Pelosi, Reid, and all the rest of our so-called leaders declare "It's futile. We'll lose in the Senate" is not grounded in reality. The pervasive pessimism disguised as realism in the Democratic Party has long been a major barrier to advancing our common interests.

It is impossible to know how Senators will come down until articles of impeachment are before them and they are forced to make the choice:

• defend the indefensible to save the necks of War Criminals or
• throw Bush and Cheney overboard.

When the rubber hits the road and the leadership gets serious about impeachment, Bush and Cheney could be gone stunningly fast. Republicans in the Senate are likely to be VERY motivated to force them to take the resignation "exit strategy" to escape having to go on the record to support men that have so outraged the nation. ("For the good of the party"; "To keep the WH in Repub hands"; blah, blah.).

Even if you buy the notion that impeachment would be a "charge of the light brigade," declarations of certain defeat must be rejected simply because they are self-defeating -- they sow hopelessness, the enemy of civic action. They make defeat more likely. Such declarations also ignore the rewards and intermediate victories that are inherent in taking a stand and fighting for our collective principles, win or lose (if only the respect a leader earns when they demonstrate strength and conviction).

Rewards of Impeaching Bush and Cheney, whatever the outcome.

The personal rewards of knowing you are doing the right thing are incalculable. The political rewards are more concrete. Impeachment is an unprecedented opportunity to become champions of the People's Government and the Constitution. I challenge anyone to come up with anything more inspiring. Or an act that would better demonstrate strength and define the overarching principles at the heart of the Democratic Party (and thus deal with the Number 1 and Number 2 problems plaguing Dems -- i.e., the perception that they are weak and their inability to define themselves in a way that inspires.)

Being on the right side of history is something that each and every citizen who advocates the impeachment of Bush and Cheney can be proud of. Each and every Member of Congress who acts to make it happen will reap both personal and political benefits. Voting articles of impeachment out of the House will boost the Democratic Party as a whole. When we consider the cost of being on the wrong side, it becomes clear just how big a deal it is. (We need look no further than the damage the leadership's failure to oppose the AUMF has done to the Party as a whole and the individual members who voted for it.)

Whatever the outcome, every single Member of the House who votes for articles of impeachment against Bush and Cheney, and every single member of the Senate who votes to remove Bush and Cheney (IF Bush and Cheney aren't forced to resign before it goes to a Senate vote) breaks the bonds of complicity with the subversion of our Constitution and the War Crimes being committed in our name. Just as Sen. Barbara Boxer is the only Senator who isn't complicit in Bush's stolen second term.

Insiders declared it impossible, utterly impossible to "get" a Senator to stand up on January 6th. Even people on "our side" dismissed and even ridiculed the effort. But ordinary people were undeterred and the fight gained momentum. It inspired people to connect with each other; people who continued to fight for believable elections. Tragically, mainstream groups refused to be enlisted -- to busy "looking forward not back." Then they jumped in at the end when they realized the snowballing energy was something they could cash in on. Who knows how things would have played out had they been in it from the start.

We are up against the same brick wall. Like the so-called leadership, the groups with more clout like MoveOn are refusing to jump on the impeachment bus. They are missing a golden opportunity. Fighting for our treasured principles, win or lose, ALWAYS yields benefits along the way. Every person inspired to act is a victory -- they are more likely to act in the future and are a source of hope for others.

Dems happily cite votes they cast on the losing side as very meaningful things. The Members who voted against the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) cite that vote at least once a day. When a politician can define clear princioples though their votes they have a clear advantage.

Inexplicably, when Democrats are called on to take independent action in a fight for principle, it is suddenly "meaningless" or a "waste" to act (unless of course there is no perceived risk).

If a vote against the AUMF is so meaningful, why then would a vote for impeachment be "meaningless" or a "waste"? Their refusal to act seems to be driven by a pathological aversion to risk. The power of that aversion makes their refusal to act "a given" that must be rationalized. The belief that action would be a waste is just one of the many illegitimate rationalizations they cling to to excuse their dereliction.

Making Impeachment a Reality -- be ready to play "Whack-a-Mole" with rationalizations

Every single one of their immobilizing beliefs is either the opposite of reality or is or simply can't be rationally defended (for a partial list, see http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=336489&mesg_id=337814"> Collective denial and shared delusion.). When challenged, their poisonous notions will fall -- but only if challenged directly and persistently, both "out here" and "in there." (Yep. Some of us need to request meetings and actually talk to our leaders and their staffers. There's a reason corporations spend so much for lobbyists. Nothing can substitute for person-to-person contact.)

Breaking down the system of rationalization for inaction is like a game of "Whack-a-Mole." As you knock down one, another pops up -- sometimes ones you thought you'd already whacked. But there is every reason for hope. We are making inroads. More people are picking up a clue stick and whacking away every day.

Every action, large and small, makes a difference. (We don't need a movement, we just need to move!)


_________________________________

Related:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=336489&mesg_id=337814"> Collective denial and shared delusion.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k/20"> Lobbying for Impeachment: Take along a Big "Clue Stick" !

http://january6th.org/saving-ourselves.html">Saving Ourselves from Ourselves

[Vinca]

32. If we impeach and don't get 67 votes, at least we'll know they tried

and we'll know who to blame for the continuation of this nightmare. Plus, it will be a footnote in the history books in the chapter about the worst president ever.

[ShortnFiery]

34. Though the Impeachment Process, the American Public will get smart

We must TRY or at least begin Impeachment Proceedings.

I kid you not, if our Democratic Representatives in The House AGAIN opt to keep their powder dry, their a**es will be voted out, with extreme prejudice. EVEN IF they ultimately fail, they OWE us the courage to try. We didn't elect them to look out for their careers first BUT to represent their Democratic constituencies.

Albeit the present members in our Democratic Congress knows that we want this war to end, they don't fully realize how ANGRY the American People are becoming about the criminals taking even more liberties within The Unitary Executive.

I'm as mad as hell and I have firmly but politely emailed my representatives.

Please, everyone here, consider doing the same? :hi: