Contact info for Nancy Pelosi. She is really starting to piss me off.

[Maraya1969]

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/mail/?id=447&type=CO&state=CA Use THIS link

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/?id=447 This one costs $3.95 if you want to put a messge on the site


For Constituents
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/contact/contact.html


We need to tell this woman that the people of the US are the ones who decide that the president needs to be impeached NOT HER. I go around DU now and I see "IMPEACH" all over the place and all the polls say to "IMPEACH" if the president lied about Iraq. Well damn it they better do it. Or they had better do something radical to stop the slaughter of at least another 1,000 US soldiers in the coming "surge".

Please everyone write to her and tell her she needs to leave her ego on the table and revoke what she said about not impeaching the chimp. Things are different now than what they were when she said that.

She needs to act. This congress needs to act. Too many of us worked too long and hard to get her where she is for her to ignore us. Time to sh** or get off the damn pot.

Edited to add new contact

ZIP code in California if you don't have a printer.

http://www.50states.com/zipcodes/california.htm

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. What percentage of Iraqis believed as of 6 months ago that

attacks on outsiders were "acceptable"??? These people need to get a clue.

[rodeodance]

2. this Off the Table gives Bushco a green light. Tony Snow Laughed

when a reporter asked about impeachment.

I wanted to sack him. when he said Nancy said it was off the table.

[bobbolink]

21. EXACTLY!! This is exactly what Pelosi enabled.

She has to be accountable for what she created with this mess, and do some straightening out.

I see this as make-or-break for Dems. If the party can't get its act together to speak STRAIGHT, the American people will just put them in the same bin as the RW, and give up.

We need to have a party that, first of all, says what it means!, and second, that it acts accordingly.

Enough of all the politickin', and triangulatin', and nonsense-speakin'.

[rodeodance]

3. k

[EFerrari]

4. This is a really difficult moment. but, can we stay on the same team?

The Republicans would like nothing better than for us to splinter all over the place. In fact, they seem to be trying to do just that.

I get frustrated and now, this situation is downright scary.

Let's stay together. If we do a mailing campaign, let's keep it clear, direct AND civil and supportive.

I'm in, Maraya, and it would be cool to foil the Republics AND help the majority take appropriate action.

:)

[stevedeshazer]

5. For Pete's sake

It's been, what, a week now? Investigations are just getting started.

[Maraya1969]

6. Well it is on the Front Page that Bush is going to send the troops in no matter what anyone

says. I think the only way to stop him now is to start an impeachment. Here is my letter


Dear Congresswoman Pelosi. George Bush made a statement to 60 minutes, (will air on Sunday) that he will go forward with the surge no matter what anyone does. If this happens we are going to have thousands more dead or wounded US soldiers and that is not acceptable. I know you said that "impeachment is off the table" but I would like to remind you that YOU are supposed to represent the will of the people also. It should not be YOUR decision but the extremely high percentage of US citizens who want Bush impeached who make the decision. We have suffered too long under this administration. And we breathed a sigh a relief when the Democrats took charge on January 7, 2007. Ms. Pelosi, we elected you and we pay your salary. We expect nothing short of excellence from you and that means getting this crazy and inept administration out before they can do anymore harm. I think the very act of starting an impeachment proceeding will tell the world that the citizens of the United States of America do not approve of the mass killings that we are now known for. And that can only help the way we are perceived and stop at least a portion of the violence against a country that is currently seen as barbaric.

[stevedeshazer]

8. I think impeachment will happen, but it will take some time.

As long as Bush continues to ignore the will of We, the People, the chorus will keep getting louder.

Don't get me wrong, I agree, but Nancy hasn't pissed me off yet. I think she's doing a good job.

When it happens, it will come from John Conyers.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. he already sent them

The first wave of troops left for Iraq as soon as that speech of his was over Wed night.

[EFerrari]

7. Maybe they should go "investigate" in Somalia where we just killed

a bunch of nomads and no "al Qaida".

:(

[yurbud]

45. "The al kitey is sneaky. They appears wheyever they's promising oil reserves, so we gotta go

deprive them of using that oil for terraced purposes."

George W. Bush

[EFerrari]

59. That whole "we have to investigate" deal gets me going.

Junior stole 2000. He stole 2004. He didn't protect us on 9/11. He's torturing and assassinating people all over the world. He lied us into Iraq. He let New Orleans drown by not notifying anyone the levies were breeched FOR A WHOLE DAY. We seem to now be provoking Iran.



Why don't we just "do the math" instead of "investigate"?

What does he have to do, eat blond Christian babies in the Rose Garden?

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. Why? Do I really have to explain this

Yes we COULD storm the palaces... (That would be a revolution a violent revolution by the way)

But that is not the LEGAL way to proceed.'

Unfortunately, as much as I wish we could impeach AND convict like yesterday, I realize there is a process to be followed

What you propose mob justice and I hate to tell you this, but you do not have the political capital for that one either

[EFerrari]

83. No, you misread my post. I certainly don't propose or condone

mob justice. That's just silly.

/ly

[yurbud]

95. yes. what did it accomplish in South America besides reversing a coup and running Bechtel out of a

country?

[EFerrari]

102. LOL!

Hey -- that cost me $ marching for divestment on strike at Cal.

And Bechtel can kiss my socialist remote. :)

[yurbud]

108. since corporations are legally persons, Bechtel has more than earned a trip to old sparky

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. No I did not misread it

You need to do the investigations, it is a procedural thing.

Got it now?

I know it is hard to be patient, since we all would love to get it over with like yesterday, but the rest of the country has to catch up... they are starting to, but they still need to catch up.

[EFerrari]

101. Yes, you did misread if anywhere you gleaned that I advocate mob justice.

And I personally have a great deal of patience, thanks.

There is a difference between observing the obvious and ignoring the obvious to go on a hunt for evidence that is everywhere visible -- what one might term "avoidance".

They don't need to investigate, they need simply to name Junior's crimes. To say them out loud and on the record.

Let's see how much encouragement and support they need to simply say it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

106. What part of procedure are you purposely missing?

Also I went from the words YOU POSTED.

If that was not your intent. I am sorry.

[yurbud]

94. those babies may have already been dead, and the president has difficulty remembering where the

dining room is. We must investigate.

[TankLV]

10. you noticed that too, huh?

the circular firing squad roaches are comming out of the woodwork again, I see...

I guess us Democrats are nothing but failures now that we have this horrible record of accomplishment for the past few hours...

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. You mean like oh raising the minimum wage

and stem cell research.... and ethics, there are days.

Also most of the impeach now crowd don't get it

It is off the table for now

you cannot impeach without investigations and the numbers in the senate for conviction are starting to gel

[ellisonz]

39. Bingo.

In a week and a half we've pulled 10 GOP Senators publicly into our orbit. We need to seal those deals and find the other 7 the hard way in due time.

Bold Prediction: Impeachment by April Fools Day.

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. I'd say resignation

bush will pull a nixon...

I don't if by April, but this year definitely.

He is not gonig to end his term, and Chenney will go as well...

By the way last numbers in the senate were 12... and I do NOT count on Lieberman on our side so we need a minimum of ten republicans

[ellisonz]

57. He's just too arrogant to resign.

Nixon didn't have a Cheney standing behind him. If we wanted to try to force him to resign our best path would be to impeach cheney first. I prefer to take the 4-8 months impeachment will take just so he doesn't slip away like that rat bastard Nixon into the history books.

12, sweet, but we can't be definite in the count. Harry Reid is going about this calmly, deliberately, beautifully and hard hitting.

"Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee." - Muhammad Ali

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. Nah, he will pull a NIxon and I will tell you why

in later years Nixon and his defenders could make the case, (technically they were right) that he was never impeached.

[dragonlady]

149. A resignation scenario (fantasy)

Bush will set up a state visit to Argentina, and on the way there (with Laura and the twins and Barney, of course) will order Air Force One diverted to Paraguay, where he will make a resignation speech and send the Secret Service home on the return flight. (A battalion of KBR bodyguards will already be in place to escort him to the new ranch there, and a good supply of brush to clear will already be laid in.)

[nadinbrzezinski]

150. that I don't consider illogical actually

in fact, that is the only way he can avoid both US Courts and the Hague

[Maraya1969]

76. Passing Stem Cell funding is just another reason the Chimp needs to go fast!

Because he has this VETO thing that he has used TWICE and I am sure he will use it again to stop the good that the Dems are doing. How many people will die or continue to suffer because he uses his ill begotten power to stop this research? We've already lost 6 years.

I wonder how many people were sad like me when they heard that the stem cell measure passed this time. Sad because it will be crushed by the dictator's hand.

[nadinbrzezinski]

86. Flashbac,k to 1990 congress

the congress passed many laws that were vetoed by Bush senior

In the campagin that got Clinton elected they ran on the prospect of telling folks, see if we had a Dem president we woueld not get vetoed

Some of this is classic political gamemanship

[LSK]

9. its doesnt happen in one week

sheesh!

[beyurslf]

11. Actually, I am pretty sure the Constitution says it is up to Congress,

specifically the House, to vote on matters of impeachment, not the people of the US.
I think the Speaker has the right idea. If she comes in and starts impeachment hearings first things, it will look like a witch hunt. Let them investigate, hold hearings, and build a true ground swell of support for impeachment. If you build the support from all parts of the electorate (not just us on the left), then you impeach and remove from office (or he resigns like Nixon). If you just start impeaching without all the support, you have Clinton, who was more popular after impeachment than before.
Let them do their work.

[Maraya1969]

34. The Congress is supposed to represent the will of the people. I am so tired of

signing petitions and I start to think that they don't matter. They should matter. I do realize that this is a republic and that once you elect your officials they take over the reigns. But they should steer in a way that reflects what the people who elected them want.

[beyurslf]

90. I agree they should represent the will of the people. But that does not

change the Constitutional role of who impeaches a president.

[Rosemary2205]

12. Mind if they investigate first?

Good god..........:crazy:

[MsUnderstood]

13. Anyone have a contact for my gardner

I mean sheesh! He's been here for 20 minutes and my grass is still not cut. Oh sure he's trimmed the edges and checked the plants but I WANT MY GRASS CUT NOW!

He owes it to me! Just wait til I get a hold of him!

[Auntie Bush]

112. Now that's what I call a good attitude!

You and I speak the same sarcasm.

[EstimatedProphet]

14. Impeachment is not an on-off switch!

There have to be investigations first, and they will take time. A LOT of time. That's just the wy it is. The Constitution is not a microwave oven.

If Pelosi had come in saying that the first order of business is impeachment, no matter how you would like it to be so, the press (which is a wholly-owned sibsidiary of the military-industrial complex) would scream day and night how this was a clear attempt at a coup. Somewhere around 60 million people in this country are still so brainwashed and stupid that they would not only believe that line, they would carry water for the Republipress and parrot all the talking points 24 hours a day. IF you think rightwing email spam is bad now, imagine what it would be after something like that happened! Every two-bit retarded inbred freeper would be screaming about how they knew the Democrats were just trying to take away all their power in order to convert them all into gay farm animals.

The impeachment process is delicate. It requires tact and political strategy, especially at a time when the country is as divided as it is. It can't be done with a sledgehammer. The investigations have to come out first, they have to be totally public and transparent, or else the Republipress will use any impeachment effort as a weapon against us, and they automatically have 40% of the country that will back them up. Just win over a little more than 10% more of the country and impeachment falls flat on its face. They can get those people easily just by continually bitching and sending out stupid spam emails.

I want impeachment as much as anyone else. However, I want it done right, so that it will work. If it's done wrong, we'll have 50 more years of this crap, and the freeptards will do everything in their power to set up liberal re-education camps, complete with Zyklon-B just like thier heroes did.

[BearSquirrel2]

16. I watched "Mr. Conservative" ...

I watched "Mr. Conservative" the other day, a biography on Barry Goldwater. During the impeachment process Goldwater continued "light public support" for Nixon even though he hated the man. When it came time to lower the axe, it was Goldwater who delivered the message to Nixon on behalf of the Republicans. He was going to be impeached.

In order to be taken seriously during the process, you have to appear judicious. Indeed you should BE judicious and take your job seriously. The Clinton and Johnson impeachment are widely regarded as political farces. By contrast, the Nixon impeachment is considered to be a serious constitutional process (for everyone but a few right wing loonies).

So if there will be an impeachment, it must be a serious deliberative process. The demeaanor should always be that it should NOT happen unless it is not a constitutional mandate. That is the Congress should be able to say that they HAD NO CHOICE but to do so as it is a Constitutional imperative.

There is more than enough ammo out there from illegal wars, illegal domestic spying, unilateral abrigation of treaties, inteference of laws, undermining of law through signing statements, and of course TONS of domestic and war related graft where the White House (and particularly the Vice President) has been awarding contracts as political favors with no real expectation that the work should be actually completed.

Give the Congress time to work. In the meantime, a public grass-roots movement is a good thing. Just don't chastise the Democratic leadership so bluntly. If they do not proceed with vigorous investigations, then it is time to put their feet to the fire.

[EstimatedProphet]

19. Exactly

It has to look like it comes from the people, and not from a party. After Clinton, if it looks political it will be guaranteed to fail. And then the Democratic party will be out of power for years, and any hope we have of real reform will be dead forever.

I think part of the problem people may have here is that they see Bush as illegitimate. there's certainly reason to think so, but whether or not he was legitimately elected in either 2000 or 2004, he was still legitimately installed as president. this means, whether we like it or not, we have to follow the guidelines set forth in the Constitution to impeach him. As you say, we have all the evidence we need. We just have to make sure that it is open, transparent, and seen to be unbiased.

[KharmaTrain]

22. Remember, Impeachment Is A Political Process

The justice (and in some cases the vengance) we desire here wouldn't be satisfied with a mere impeachment. As you astutely point out, the corporat media will turn any rushed impeachment into a personal, not a political process...or should I say circus. Next, there's the Chenney situation...if boooshie is impeached, do we really want Chenney? OK, then Chenney has to be impeached first...then who decides who replaces him. The constitutional hurdles that could be thrown in our way could easily allow booshie to "run out the clock" as any serious impeachment hearings and votes would have to happen clear of the 2008 elections.

Also, impeachment is simply saying to booshie to "go home". It does little to hold him or any of his henchmen accountable for all the destruction they've created. There's criminality here that needs to be brought to light through investigations, there are enablers that have to be rooted out and if not prosecuted, discredited and there has to be pressure on this regime to use its pardon power very judiciously. Be assured booshie will use his pardon power in a way that will make Poppy's last minute pardons look like nothing. Our game is to investigate as much as we can and bring out as much as possible...see if criminal procedings can be brought...before booosh's clock runs out and he tries to sweep the past years under the pardon rug.

A great point about the difference between the Nixon and the Johnson and Clinton impeachments. This process has to be used carefully and avoid appearing as a political lynching or else the fall-out could hurt Democrats right as we're starting to chip away at the messes of the past 12 years. Playing this smart will elect even more Democrats in '08 and assure Repugnicans stay in minority status for years to come.

One more interesting factoid is that in the wake of Nixon's impeachment/resignation...which you point out was one of a constitutional nature and a majority saw this impeachment as justified and needed...the Repugnicans took a pounding in the '74 elections. When the Repugnicans impeached Clinton, it was viewed as partisan and personal and resulted in big Repugnican losses in '98.

Cheers...

[BearSquirrel2]

141. Just imagine ...

Just imagine what would have happened to the Republicans if ALL The evidence was brought forward on the Senate floor and the Republican Senators voted innocent. Imagine what would have happened to the Republican party.

The modern Republicans liked to point to the Republican Senators in '74 as an action of "bipartisanship". In fact, they were scrambling to save their own asses. A lot of nasty shit went unsaid under the deal that allowed Ford to assume the presidency. The Republicans were merely saving their own ass. During the impeachment hearings, Clinton's ratings stayed strongly the mid 60s. The Democratic Senators in Clinton's impeachment saw no penalty for keeping Clinton in office. THIS is why he stayed.

[MzNov]

15. You can be sure Pelosi is considering impeachment

but they must have proof of their charges. Investigations and hearings must take place. Every congressman, woman and fly on the wall know he deserves impeachment. I agree with the posters who say it's just not that easy! And the pressure on leadership is crushing, so just let it ride out for a little while. Personally I'd like to see him forced to resign. It's much more humiliating for his maniacal ego.

I get really pissed at her too, but Nancy Pelosi, by herself, can't fix this mess, they need votes in the Senate. And they JUST DON'T HAVE THEM.


You know damn well this Iraq/Iran thing is going to blow up (no pun intended) in the Bush Crime Family's collective ugly faces. I am convinced something worse than impeachment will get him out of the WH, along with his other SS men. But then again, what do I know?

[bluewave]

17. Have to investigate first and find something damning (moreso than now)

Or we hand Congress and Presidency to the NeoNuts.

[earth mom]

20. I SO hear you!

A lot of us around here have been saying pretty much the same thing since the dems won in November and it's been such a frustrating experience! Oh sure the dems have "only" been in power for a short time, but they have had 6 years of watching * break the law and shred the Constitution, how much more god damn "evidence" do they need?!

:wtf:

Oh yeah, those dems think they are getting things done, passing minumum wage increases, etc., etc., etc. Meanwhle * is vetoing or will veto every damn thing they do that he doesn't agree with! When will Congress get a fucking clue that the dude actually thinks he's Dictator or is that King?-of the United States!

Impeach already!

:banghead:

[Maraya1969]

23. For everyone here saying that I and others are jumping the gun what else can be done to stop this

surge? I was not this frazzled about impeachment before bush looked straight in the eyes of the entire country last week and announced he was going to sacrifice more of OTHER PEOPLE'S LIVES AND LIMBS AND FAMILIES BECAUSE HE HAS SOME MIND DISEASE THAT APPARENTLY NO ONE CAN PROTECT THEM FROM.

And now we find out he has already started sending them in, some are not even going to get through their whole training so they can be send in, the Pentagon has lifted the cap on the amount of time a soldier can be in battle so they can be sent in, and....he doesn't care what the country or the MILITARY EXPERTS have to say.

He certainly is not acting leisurely when it comes to putting other people into harms way.

It is one thing to prosecute a mass murderer it is another thing to try and stop a slaughter.

[EstimatedProphet]

29. The ONLY thing that will stop this surge is

people taking to the streets. You can't use impeachment to stop an event. You can use an event to begin an impeachment though.

You want to stop the surge? It's going to take all of us in the streets, and we won't be just having a protest either. Bush acts like he is above the law, so attempts to use civil regulation to stop things won't cut it. You don't stop a bully by telling him you're mad. You stop a bully by puinching him in the face.

[EFerrari]

129. It has gotten to that point. See you in DC, EP

My family seems to think this is very important and we're making group reservations.

Up with this we cannot put.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[yurbud]

41. I agree with your evidence, not your conclusion. It will take time (at least for impeachment) but

we should keep yelling until it is done. Especially when they equivocate, even if it is a defensible tactical move. The effect can only be positive.

• If we yell and the democrats plan to do the right thing anyway, they know we are behind them, and can even use us as the "bad cop" when talking to Republicans and make themselves look moderate by comparison.
  
  
• If we yell and the democrats don't plan to do the right thing, they know there's still room on the lodgepoll for their scalps next to the Republicans.

Frankly, the best example was Cindy shouting down Rahm Immanuel and making him scamper back to his office. There is nothing for him to say--he needs to ACT not talk.

[NotGivingUp]

26. the will of the people DEMAND TO IMPEACH!!! We refuse to live in a dictatorship!

[EstimatedProphet]

30. The will of less than 50% of the people

For it to work, the rest need to be won over.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EstimatedProphet]

31. OK, that's just silly

[fishwax]

40. that's the most absurd explanation for not impeaching that I've ever heard n/t

[EFerrari]

61. No, she isn't.

[mvd]

28. I used to be for investigations first, just..

so the proper procedure is followed and we don't anger the voters. But this is no ordinary case: so many blatant violations of the Constitution that it's not funny. After that surge speech, I say start impeachment hearings now.

Thanks for the contact link.

[EstimatedProphet]

32. I would agree with you, but for one thing

Bush still has a lot of supporters.

I wan an impeachment, But I want it to work, and if we rush it it won't.

[mvd]

33. Not that many hard-core ones

I think if we lay out the case well, listing all the crimes, it can work now.

[mvd]

36. BTW

I'm not going to get mad if they start investigations only. That would be a big step. It's just that the case is so obvious that even the known crimes are enough IMO, and that speech showed that he has no intentions of avoiding full scale war in the Middle East.

[EstimatedProphet]

37. Oh yeah, it can

But as you say, it will require laying out the case which is still going to be an involved process. We can't simply go in and say "We're impeaching, yes or no?" That won't cut it.

[mvd]

38. See my post titled "BTW"

I think some time will be required to draw up the case, but that full scale investigations aren't necessary.

[EstimatedProphet]

43. OK, I can see where you're coming from

It's possible you're right too - just starting the investigations may open floodgates, and people will support impeachment or drown. That's something we'll know more about when the investigations start. That is also a huge difference from saying that impeachment hearings should have already been open and shut, and it is Pelosi trying to suck up to Bush that is keeping them from happenning at all.

[mvd]

48. As far as I know, investigations are scheduled, right?

I remember Conyers talking about it. Not sure about the time frame.

[EstimatedProphet]

50. I certainly hope so

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. YES they are scheduled

on both the HOUSE and the SENATE

[ellisonz]

47. 67.

Nuff said.

[mvd]

55. Yeah, but impeachment can be drawn up sooner

May take more than one try, but 17 in the near future isn't impossible. We need one more because Lieberman might be hopeless. These are possibilities:

Murkowski
Lugar
Snowe
Collins
Coleman
Hagel
Sununu
Voinovich
Specter
Warner
Smith
Specter

That's a good start.

[ellisonz]

73. "Don't start what you can't finish" - Mother Says.

It's still not 17 and they aren't guaranteed votes, especially Warner and Sununu on conviction.

That's Republican math, it just doesn't add up.

[mvd]

80. Starting things might accelerate the process

Here's a saying of my own: "you gotta start somewhere."

When we start, me might not have any Repuke votes. But a well-laid out case could draw in those I mentioned and more.

[ellisonz]

98. Or lose it all.

How are you going to have a well-laid case if you don't have serious investigation especially now that we have SUBPOENA POWER. Leahy and Rockefeller are already threatening to employ it if they don't get the documents they want.

[mvd]

113. We already have a good case

We just have to get it on paper. I could list 10 illegal things right off the bat:

- Domestic spying/illegal wiretapping
- Iraq lies
- Torture
- Abuse of power (signing statements that say he won't enforce laws of the land)
- Holding "non-combatant civilians"
- Harassment by Secret Service at Bush appearances
- Violation of international law
- Katrina response
- Energy policy
- Outing of CIA Agent

[nadinbrzezinski]

117. To do that you need to hold hearings

it is this pesky procedural thing

[mvd]

118. Not when it's so clear

I edited 10 things that can be easily researched into my last post.

[nadinbrzezinski]

119. what part of they need to be in the official record are you

missing and to do that you need to hold HEARINGS are you purposely missing?

Also you need the votes to INDICT in the senate, we don't have them YET... even if it looks like they are starting (OPERATIONAL WORD HERE STARTING) to get

[mvd]

121. Get them in and start impeachment

Again, I'm not saying I'm opposed to investigations, but Bush's crimes are out there and easily entered into the record.

[nadinbrzezinski]

123. No they are not on the recrod

we know of them, because there have been UNOFICIAL investigations... but we DO NOT KNOW OF THEM in any official capacity.

They will get to that part of the process once they have people UNDER OATH...

And at that point they will do what is BEST FOR THE COUNTRY... not party, not you or me, THE COUNTRY... and as I posted above, once they have the votes
to both IMPEACH and INDICT I suspect Bush will choose to resign.

[mvd]

124. But any congressperson can call for impeachment

I say get it going.

[nadinbrzezinski]

126. And I can guarantee you that

in 2008 the Repugs will win a clear majority back

[mvd]

127. I disagree, though we do have some agreement

The thing I agree with you on is that hearings will not hurt. Maybe get more votes sooner. And you're right about the OFFICIAL record.

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. Well I believe we will move to impeachment

only after they get it on the record and they have the votes to convict in the Senate, not a second earlier.

And for that there are two things to watch

Special orders, that is where the talk of Impeachment during Watergte started, aka floated the balloons

GOPers turning in the Senate

That will be your best signal

The next step after those steps are taken, you will see them form a special SENATE committee, just like Watergate and negotiaatiions behind closed wars to get Chenney to go and appointment of a Ford Like Figure.... and for the life of me I can only think of one repug, the guy who headed the ethics committee until Delay fired him.

[mvd]

130. I'm willing to be patient

If so, I hope the media covers things appropriately like they did then. That worries me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

146. Don't count on the media

I know I am not

[EFerrari]

133. I agree that the Dems have much better tools now.

But there is no way we will "lose it all" because most Americans loathe what is being done in their name.

Don't let the opposition spook you. We are not only on the right side of this, we are in the POPULAR right side of this.

[ellisonz]

138. Right now.

We need a landslide in 2008 to really turn it around. White House, filibuster proof in the majority in the Senate, and a solidified house.

People are fickle as we all know by now.

:evilfrown:

[nadinbrzezinski]

144. What some folks do not get yet

is that DU is a huge echo chamber, but the country is NOT where many of us are.

The last even half credible poll told us that we barely broke the 50% for impeachment

A process like this requires a 70+ and that can only be gotten though investigations

Cheers

[mmonk]

35. This is a democratic party last stand IMO.

Cynicism will greatly increase in the U.S. if things go along unattended and unchecked as far as neocon foreign policy goes. I don't think the votes that brought this majority will be there in 08. They were elected to change this country back.

[AtomicKitten]

42. the cart goes AFTER the horse

Investigations first.
Impeachment is inevitable.
Patience.

[mmonk]

46. "Impeachment is off the table" contradicts your post.

We'll have hearings like the Iran Contra hearings and in the end, nothing done it appears.

[ellisonz]

52. You're certainly optimistic! [/sarcasm]

Yes, history may "repeat" itself, but it is rarely identical if ever in its repitition/revolution. Deja vu is a but a sense, and as we all should know, our senses are extremely fallibale. Hint: This is what make's us different from the fundies who believe Jesus will "return" and believe in a strict literal reading of the Bible inspite of its antiquity.

[mmonk]

68. I've watched this administration go unchecked

for years. When the other party takes over and one of the first things said is impeachment is off the table (indicating that people already know or believe impeachable offense have occured by its mention), am I to feel real happy and giddy?

[ellisonz]

79. Mr. Bob Dylan and the great patriot Patrick Henry...

I've learned to hate Russians
All through my whole life
If another war starts
It's them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side.

http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/withgod.html

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/henry-liberty.html

No you're just supposed to take it for what it is, nothing more. Impeachment is off the table and in the breast pocket, that's the political reality.

[AtomicKitten]

60. Nancy Pelosi stated on Meet the Press

that investigations will begin in earnest and if they lead to impeachment, so be it. In my mind, the "impeachment is off the table" talk was proffered to shut up the sniveling Republicans.

I will wait to see how this plays out before summarily declaring the impending proceedings a fait accompli.

[mmonk]

62. And I will gladly quit calling for it

when I receive the proper signals.

[AtomicKitten]

66. hey, knock yourself out

I never asked you to stop and, quite frankly, count me in on continuing to demand it.

[MzNov]

84. Thank you Atomic Kitten. I rest my case.

She will begin impeachment proceedings in the near future IMHO. More Repubs are coming along every day. We need them to do this. I still say the big "I" isnt' good enough, although I don't have any answers either.

[mvd]

88. If that's the case, I'm happy

I understand where the "hearings first" crowd is coming from. I just feel an urgency coming since it looks like Bush is going to try to be a complete dictator on Iraq policy.

[EFerrari]

64. I tend to disagree. Most "investigations" in this joint are theater anyway.

The decision is made in a backroom, then the squalid show is performed for the cameras.

We know this sonuvabitch is a criminal. The House needs to be encouraged to move and to move now.

[AtomicKitten]

67. I agree with that

except for the part about having no confidence in the new Democratic Congress on this issue. I believe they should continue to be pressured to impeach. I think the only difference between my point of view and some others is that I am willing to give them more than 15 minutes to accomplish it. :)

[EFerrari]

85. True. I can't even get dressed in 15.

lol

[ronnykmarshall]

139. I can ...

but I look like ca-ca when I do it!

[ellisonz]

99. I beg to disagree...

theatre ---> backroom

just like (if we want to get anthropological/sociological)

ritual ---> belief

I don't agree with this strictly of course, I'm a historian, but I see its point. If they get smacked around in public, they can't ignore it in the backroom is the point.

Edit: Subpoena power! Please see Nixon vs. United States, decided 8-0 by SCOTUS.

[EFerrari]

105. Hmmm. I was thinking of it the other way around.

backroom--->theatre

belief---->ritual

but of course, it's really circular: backroom--->theater----->backroom------>theater and repeat.

You're right, if I'm understanding you. It's a balancing act and I hope those of us who demand impeachment can help keep the balance while being, um, persuasive.

[ellisonz]

110. Correct.

The converse statement is much more true...but there are fewer smokey backrooms now thanks to Speaker Pelosi.

indeterminate political context (backroom--->theater----->backroom------>theater and repeat.)

I don't think you're not being persuasive, and there is a role to play for hollerin', but too much of it on this website has been premature IMHO.

Edit: The rule of causation/effect of course still applies, but Descartes major point is the realization of the importance of time in relation to conception of space/existence. It's all in the method.

[EFerrari]

114. There is nothing premature in the demand to impeach Junior.

We should have done it after 9/11 when he failed to defend this country.

And, I hope Nancy has all the backrooms she needs to get her job done. :)

[nadinbrzezinski]

115. Pray tell me exactly how could we do it after 9.11

when we did not control the gavel and the repigs were obviously against any oversight?

This is a critical question.

On edit what we shuold do at times does NOT match the political reality... and after 9.11 you could not get even barney to join you

[ellisonz]

116. Agreed. But the echo chamber effect on DU is somewhat grating and misleading.

As always.

I think the reason Reid tried to axe earmark reform in this round of reform is for exactly that reason, we may need to "buy off" some GOPers to get the Chimp impeached and convicted. The caucus is going to want to hear, "we have the votes" before they move forward. But the former is speculation, the latter is likely not.

[EFerrari]

120. I trust Harry Reid and I trust Nancy Pelosi.

I trust them both in their capacity as politicians and as leaders.

They will get our input and that may or may not be inconvenient for them. But I trust them to do their best to handle what must be the worst out of control executive in the history of this nation.

Imo, those of us that demand impeachment and demand a cessation of international war crimes have the responsibility to keep up the pressure, to give them information and to do that in a consumable manner.


Once they have that, I trust them to act in the better interests of their party, which coincidentally will also be in the better interests of most Americans -- most urgently in the interests of our service people who are today sitting ducks in this "war" and for whom George W. Bush has never shown one milisecond of real concern.

Let's see how we do.

[nadinbrzezinski]

125. The problem is that many

yes even those who take away the ability to respond directly to them, think that the DU echo chamber reflects the country

As a Historian I also know that there is this little thing called procedure that needs to be done... but they cannot see it or understand it

They are fans of mob justice, not the kind of reasoned and careful proceedings needed in an organic process.

(and yes you know exactly who you are, and for the record it is not you)

[fishwax]

44. I think I'll give the first democratic majority leader in 12 years more time than

a week before I fly off the handle.

Investigations have to come first anyway. Contacting Pelosi is a good idea, as is keeping the heat on the democrats in congress, but I won't participate in Pelosi bashing when the right is desperately trying to attack our leadership and our leaders in any way they can to undermine their progress.

[MonkeyFunk]

49. what a dumb post

it's been a week.

And even if the House COULD have already passed articles of impeachment, the conviction would fail in the Senate giving Bush a "See? I'm innocent!" claim.

How do people who have no understanding of politics find their way to political discussion boards?

[mmonk]

51. What part of "impeachment is off the table"

do you not understand?

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. What part of the current manouvers paralell

Watergate to a T are you missing?

[mmonk]

58. The "Impeachment is off the table" part.

He has no incentive to leave office (no consequences in remaining).

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. Go read on early watergate

impeachment was off the table too.

They cannot put it on the table until three things happen, perhaps concurrently given what is going on

1.- Demand from the people (check) this gives them political capital to spend... by the way I am not so sure that the demand is yet organic and overwhelming... though it is starting to go in the right direction.

2.- Investigations. Yes we know what they have done, but, here is the big BUT, they don't have it under any official hearing, so you have to have hearings... early watergate did not hold these hearings in the special impeachment committee, but in several unconnected committees (check they are under way)

3.- You have nothing unless you have the votes to convict in the Senate, or the Pres will just walk away with a real big smile in his face and due to double jeopardy you will NOT be able to touch him EVER again. Those votes are starting to gel up.

A reminder, we NEED 60 votes in the Senate, and we have only 51 RELIABLE votes in the Senate... I am not couinting on Lieberman to do the right thing.

Those who refuse to learn from history are condenmed to repaet it, bush so far has refusedd to learn from that period, but it sems so has a large manority of the circular firing squad.

Patience is the order of the day.

I also suspect this will take on some steam faster than Watergate did, mostly Watergate came as huge freaking surprise... in some ways we are just going through the motions

By the way, PESTER your congress critter and remind them that we want them investigations ok.

[MonkeyFunk]

69. it's a little worse than that

we need 67 votes in the Senate. It's 2/3rds to convict, not 3/5ths.

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. Thank you for the correction

still last time I checked there were 10 pubbies signaling their change and two teetering on it, still short

[mmonk]

72. 1 & 3 are incorrect.

1 on it's face.
3 is conviction (removal from office). Investigated and charged (articles of impeachment) is impeachment no matter what the senate says. With investigations and charges (impeachment), the evidence shown publicly probably would pressure the senate into removing him from office (though not required for a president to be considered impeached).

[nadinbrzezinski]

77. If you cannot convict he will remain in office

PERIOD.. END OF DISCUSION... what part of you need the votes in the senate are you purposely missing

Clinton was impeached, he still remained in office, didn't he?

The reason Nixon resigned was he was kindly told by the elders in his party that there were votes present to both IMEPACH and CONVICT

As to number one... they STILL NEED TO HOLD THE HEARINGS... why is this so difficult to grasp I have no clue

[mmonk]

82. Who said I was against hearings? I'm just against hearings

with an announced predetermination of no consequence. If the office is being investigated with the possibility of consequences and crimes against the constitution publicly revealed, it's much more difficult for him to continue to violate the constitution. I personally would like our constitution to be defended and not shirked for political posturing and cowardice.

[nadinbrzezinski]

87. Again Impeachment was off the table in early

watergate too...

Once they got what they needed it moved on the table

You do not announce your strategy BEFORE you are ready to go that way.

And just like Watergate do not be too surprised if the Special Committee is a SENATE committee.

I would expect Leahy to head it this time around

[mmonk]

91. There was no public announcement that impeachment

was off the table by the democrats that I recall.

[nadinbrzezinski]

93. In the relay days there were signals given

by the leadership that they had to investigate. Implied was that it was off the table, and I have looked at the time line, they did not announce any intention until they had done six months of SOLID investigation.

Their announcement came when the Special Senate Committee was formed

Nancy had to say what she had to say to get the monkey right off her back.

That is the way I read it, and given that the hearings ARE SCHEDULED... they are moving in that direction. They are just not going public and you cannot pull that trigger a week after they take the gavel

You do, you can kiss that majority away in 2008

Just as bush may have as well surrendered the Presidency to the Dems for a generation (a comment from one of the talking heads after the speech)

Keep the pressure but HAVE PATIENCE... real impeachments, not the Clinton and Johnson Jokes, are organic...

[mmonk]

103. I have no choice and I don't make the definitive

assessment it will not happen. A public announcement that impeachment is off the table instead of something like there are no plans to impeach will kind of put the dems in a rhetorical battle (that will play out in the media as an issue itself) if there is a decision to impeach. Anyway, I as a citizen will continue the call and I guess, continue to annoy people.

[nadinbrzezinski]

109. Well Nancy also said on MTP that

investigations will be done and IF they lead to Impeachment so be it.

Again, PATIENCE and procedure is the order of the day

And no, there is no 50% that desires it AT THIS MOMENT, the function of those investigations is to also INFORM the public

Here in DU you have an overwhelming desire for the I word, but we are AHEAD of the general population, we have been for years now

[mmonk]

134. The meme that being in favor of impeachment

means not being in favor of investigations before deciding to draft the articles is a straw dog argument made alot around here. Some of us become concerned when someone says impeachment is off the table for the simple reason that it is a declaration that bush will not face any charges through articles of impeachment although he will be investigated. If you cannot understand that concern, I can't say anything to make you understand why we're calling for impeachment hearings.

[nadinbrzezinski]

143. It is not a meme

the same happened back in the 1970s

teh reason why some of us are concerned about the PROCEDURE and beign CLEAR on procedure is exactly what happened with the two jokes we have had in US History that have involved impeachment and for the record neither of those cases led to a removal from office

If you cannot understand that, I aan't help you either

[Maraya1969]

56. You do not have to be nasty to make your point.

[MonkeyFunk]

70. oh

but telling Nancy Pelosi that she has to shit or get off the pot after a week and a half in office isn't nasty?

Sorry, but I find the whole thing ridiculous.

[Maraya1969]

151. Telling someone that they are dumb and do not understand politics

is mean. We are not talking about Nancy Pelosi here. I was referring to the way you spoke to me. Obviously I am not the only one who feels the way I do. So is everyone with a different opinion than yours dumb? And do all the people who do not agree with your opinion not have an understanding of politics?

[MonkeyFunk]

152. I didn't say you were dumb

I said the thread was dumb. And it is.

Demanding that Nancy Pelosi "shit or get off the pot" regarding impeachment after 10 days in office is entirely unreasonable, and displays an utter lack of understandng of political realities.

[ronnykmarshall]

137. She's almost become ...

oh shall I say it ????

HILLARY!!!!


Oh my god!!


The evil DLC rays have got her!!!!!

:eyes:

[Ladyhawk]

75. It says if I'm not a constituent, my letter will be sent to my rep.

Radanovich is a neocon. It's pointless to tell him anything.

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. Actually it is not pointless

this is how you develop the pressure from bellow

Send it.

I sent it to mine, she is a Dem, but so weak kneed in this respect it ain't even funny. Her response to the issue was almost laughable.

She'll get another one from me next week. This is the way it works

[Maraya1969]

81. I came across that too. You can write a letter that they will put in a form for you

to print out and send or you can go to the 3rd(?) link and post a comment on her site. It costs $3.45 to post a comment. :shrug:

You can't use a California zip code and pretend you are a constituent. That is why I put the link up there.:evilgrin:

[NNadir]

92. The ravoli I intend on eating tonight is "off the table."

Later it will be on the table, and I will eat it then.

I want Bush impeached and tried and convicted. The same for Cheney. I want them both arrested and tried and convicted for crimes against humanity as well, and I want them imprisoned.

But I don't think if I were in Nancy Pelosi's position I would simply blurt that out at every opportunity. There is such a thing as calculating one's options to an unstated goal.

I don't know how Nancy Pelosi feels privately about this matter, but I do know that I want her to think subtly. I really don't think her purpose is to make you feel continuously that she feels exactly as you do. Even if she does feel as you do, I hope she's sensible about how she approaches her goal.

If you were Speaker of the House, I don't think you'd last 15 minutes.

[sendero]

96. Show me a poll..

... that says a solid majority of Americans are for impeachment today. No such poll exists.

The polls you cite have CONDITIONS, that lies were told and that HAS TO BE ESTABLISHED to the public, not just folks on DU.

Get a clue already. Pelosi has a ten mile clue train to your single caboose.

[ChiciB1]

100. Perhaps She's NOT Pushing It All That Much Because The Dick

will have to go too! And that's leaves HER as President.

Given the flack over what Boxer said recently, could you just imagine WHAT they will trot out about Nancy Pelosi??

And Boxer prefaced her comments by saying that SHE was not going to be impacted by the war either. But WHAT did THEY do??? All they reported was how Boxer attacked "poor little Condi!"

I don't know if this is the best reason, but it may factor into some of the reasoning. Personally I WISH she would just go ahead and DO IT!!

[LeftCoast]

104. People blindly supporting impeachment need to explain how we're going to get enough R's supporting

a President Pelosi. Unless you're saying you're ok with Pres. Cheney.

For the record, I am appalled by the illegal behavior of the Bush administration and hope that they will be charged with crimes, but I simply see no practical way to impeach them at this time. Now, it is possible that as investigations commence and the Bush team shows it's growing intransigence to change, that enough repubs may come around, but that is NOT going to happen if Dems charge forward under the banner of impeachment.

[mmonk]

107. Public awareness of crimes against the constitution

and lies told to the American people most likely will have an effect on republican office holders. As far as "blindly supporting impeachment", you dang right, because I support the constitution and value my freedoms supposedly protected in it.

[LeftCoast]

111. The public is quite aware of the Bush administration misdeads

Impeachment means nothing else happens in Congress for the next two years. If all you want is more airtime about Bush crimes then why not support extensive investigations? That allows other things to take place, such as Medicare reform, universal health coverage, better environmental regulations, etc.

[mmonk]

131. So you're saying impeachment

means the government shuts down and there is no legislation? You're saying everybody knows about bush's misdeeds (I'm not buying that since I know people that are unaware of most of the transgressions or don't think there's been any wrongdoing)? And the one that really gets me, if I'm for impeachment, I'm against extensive investigations (quite a ridiculous straw dog argument). I don't think people understand impeachment. No, I don't think the freedoms and protections afforded American citizens should be disregarded like that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

145. That is exactly what happened in the 1990s

mind you, that was a republican goal, but the government essentially shut down

In the 1970s, UNTIL impeachment went on the table OFFICIALLY all other issues went on as usual on top of the at times "unconnected hearings"

Moreover, since they have gotten a groove as it were, with all unconnected hearings they were able to keep the government functioning with critical thigns such as... oh I don't know budget hearings

This is what it looks like they are doing... exactly what they are doing

[jgraz]

122. Done

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=3114765&mesg_id=3114765

[WritingIsMyReligion]

132. OH MY GOD * IS STILL IN OFFICE AFTER A WHOLE WEEK OF DEMS IN CONGRESS!

AHHHH! RUN AWAY!

:eyes:

For the twelve billionth time, we can't just fire away with "Impeach!" cannons now that we have power. We have to make the case for impeachment, so solidly that even Limpballs is struggling to find the spin. If you just run in there and impeach without the case, without support, you're no better than a Republican, even if you do have the proof. It's not enough to say "We suspect." You have to say "We KNOW so-and-so's guilty, and here's how."

[Madspirit]

135. Book 'im Dan-o

All people accused of crimes are allowed due process which, in the president's case, is investigation and then impeachment. ...UNLESS The Accused creates a clear and present danger to themselves or others. Then the law is allowed to take them out of circulation right then and there. I think Bush qualifies. Why can't someone just slap the cuffs on him. ...put him in a rubber room. He's a deranged and dangerous man.
Madspirit

[Warren DeMontague]

136. I think they're all doing a GREAT job.

I understand how these things work. No complaints with my Congress!

[Raine]

140. No, I won't

Pelosi hasn't even been in for two weeks. I believe she deserves time to set things straight.

[BlooInBloo]

142. Does one ever hear the phrase "We need to tell this man...."?

[Selah]

147. Who expected more than this?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

148. With All Due Respect, Your Declaration Couldn't Possibly Be More Wrong In Its Accuracy.

You said:

"We need to tell this woman that the people of the US are the ones who decide that the president needs to be impeached NOT HER."

That is as wrong as wrong can be. In fact, when it comes to impeachment as per the constitution, the people of the US have ZERO say in the decision, and in fact the SOLE power of that decision rest with the House of Congress, and in this case Nancy Pelosi.

So in reality, it is the exact opposite of what you spoke, therefore why you couldn't possibly have been more wrong in that declaration.

As far as getting so pissed when Congress has been back in session all of a week, excuse me if I find the premise to be a tad extreme and over the top.

[Madspirit]

153. Literal Much

I thought the the folks here who are saying it's up to us/the people, if someone is impeached...meant that since these politicians are beholden to THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE THEM INTO OFFICE and we want impeachment that Pelosi should listen to us. I didn't think they meant that all it took was a petition from us and the investigation/impeachment should start.
Whatever.....
Madspirit