|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
kpete (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 05:40 PM Original message |
Impeachment Without A Conviction? Hell Yes! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 05:55 PM Response to Original message |
1. Impeachment is a wrench in their gears. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kpete (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 06:00 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. more |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blayne (341 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 01:38 PM Response to Reply #2 |
49. I agree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
warren pease (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 01:59 PM Response to Reply #1 |
50. Exactly! That's my main reason for getting after these bastards NOW... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 02:31 PM Response to Reply #50 |
54. Break the line of succession. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elocs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:00 PM Response to Original message |
3. No, no, no. There will be no impeachment unless there is a chance of conviction. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Qutzupalotl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:14 PM Response to Reply #3 |
6. Al Franken suggested impeaching him in early January 2009, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elocs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:19 PM Response to Reply #6 |
8. Al has a good sense of humor. I hope he becomes Wisconsin's 3rd senator |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Connonym (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 11:29 AM Response to Reply #8 |
41. Wisconsin's 3rd Senator lol |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrklynLiberal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 10:16 AM Response to Reply #6 |
40. I would l ike to see the Dems do it, just to prove they can...Conviction or not!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vincardog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:51 PM Response to Reply #3 |
11. How many independent, swing voting Americans do you think there are? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Usrename (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 05:19 AM Response to Reply #11 |
25. Yes, exactly. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vincardog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-18-07 03:17 PM Response to Reply #25 |
84. You got that right. We have to make them face the facts. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 08:19 AM Response to Reply #11 |
35. and can you offer any support for your contention that there is no "middle" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vincardog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 02:21 PM Response to Reply #35 |
53. No one can prove a negative. The burden of proof is on you sir. The vast undecided independent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 10:48 PM Response to Reply #53 |
76. that depends on what "your" side is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vincardog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-18-07 03:05 PM Response to Reply #76 |
83. AS to Ned do ya think it had anything to do with the DINO DLC support he received? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
John Q. Citizen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 12:44 PM Response to Reply #3 |
42. Of course meaningless timetables with no teeth was serious? A "no confidence" vote |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
burythehatchet (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:19 PM Response to Reply #3 |
66. wronger words have never been typed. you ought to look into a career at the DLC |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elocs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:35 PM Response to Reply #66 |
68. No, cowardice is name-calling, using buzz words to discredit somebody's opinion. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
burythehatchet (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:41 PM Response to Reply #68 |
70. I'm sorry |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
babylonsister (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:08 PM Response to Original message |
4. I could get behind that, just so the history books might reflect what an |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 06:40 AM Response to Reply #4 |
27. if the effort is truly one without a chance in hell of a conviction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 07:10 AM Response to Reply #27 |
28. its beyond me that you just know for a fact there can/will be no conviction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 07:20 AM Response to Reply #28 |
29. the premise of the OP is to impeach 'no matter what the outcome may be' |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 07:29 AM Response to Reply #29 |
30. Just what do you propose we do |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 07:48 AM Response to Reply #30 |
32. I've got eyes and ears |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 07:53 AM Response to Reply #32 |
33. what frustrates me is saying we shouldn't because we don't have the votes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 08:16 AM Response to Reply #33 |
34. well, the votes are part of it - the most important part, in my view |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 08:24 AM Response to Reply #34 |
36. I think we are totally on different pages |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 08:48 AM Response to Reply #36 |
37. this is the problem madokie: folks getting ragged on for having reservations |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
John Q. Citizen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 12:53 PM Response to Reply #37 |
44. Have you read HR333? It contains specific charges. Go read it if you haven't already. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 03:01 PM Response to Reply #44 |
57. I've got my own set of charges, but there haven't been any presented |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
immoderate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 01:19 PM Response to Reply #37 |
47. What madokie is suggesting is that the system might actually work. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 03:18 PM Response to Reply #47 |
60. I want to know how any process will affect the goals we have set out |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
immoderate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:22 PM Response to Reply #60 |
67. A good question. Legislation is blocked by the Senate... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:39 PM Response to Reply #67 |
69. also, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
immoderate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 06:46 PM Response to Reply #69 |
72. OK, let's test it out. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 07:51 PM Response to Reply #72 |
73. I think that the legislative process isn't as static as you think |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elocs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 11:52 PM Response to Reply #37 |
79. "DU Orthodoxy"--now that term says it all. I'll have to remember that one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
John Q. Citizen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 12:51 PM Response to Reply #34 |
43. No Confidence, if passed would have effected what? Toothless timetables would have done |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 03:10 PM Response to Reply #43 |
58. I don't think you have any ground at all to distinguish a process that doesn't intend to convict |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
John Q. Citizen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 11:16 PM Response to Reply #58 |
78. The pace isn't the issue. Condi is ignoring her subpoena at the same pace |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Qutzupalotl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:11 PM Response to Original message |
5. I fully agree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karlrschneider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:14 PM Response to Original message |
7. I'll put it on my wish list, right next to winning the Powerball tonight. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 10:49 PM Response to Reply #7 |
18. "Most of whom just sit on their fat asses"-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 07:31 AM Response to Reply #18 |
31. madokie turns to look and guess what, no fat ass here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hootinholler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:35 PM Response to Original message |
9. Impeachment without conviction is a positive step. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lyonn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 11:53 PM Response to Reply #9 |
21. Another good reason for impeachment Hoot... you stated: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vincardog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:47 PM Response to Original message |
10. Impeach them all. After open public thorough investigations and the highlighting their |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mz Pip (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:52 PM Response to Original message |
12. I think the GOP knew |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 02:18 PM Response to Reply #12 |
52. And the impeachment of Clinton worked in so far as |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
walldude (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 08:58 PM Response to Original message |
13. Why is this still even a debate? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Amonester (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 10:45 PM Response to Reply #13 |
17. Don't forget the fact that they "receive" contributions, BIG ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Amonester (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 10:56 PM Response to Reply #13 |
20. (I forgot to add:) never. Until the day contributions will be regulated |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Individualist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 12:59 PM Response to Reply #13 |
46. DLC doesn't want Bush to be impeached |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vidar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 09:05 PM Response to Original message |
14. Absolutely agree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirrera (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 09:36 PM Response to Original message |
15. Agree, if not now when? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 10:52 PM Response to Reply #15 |
19. Agree completely. Get the goddamn ball rolling before it's too late-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kurovski (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jun-16-07 09:40 PM Response to Original message |
16. K&R. (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 12:00 AM Response to Original message |
22. Impeach, indict. Say goodbye, it's time to go! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
calimary (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 12:45 AM Response to Original message |
23. HELL YES!!!! I'm sorry I don't remember who said it here - deep apologies |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
immoderate (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 01:30 PM Response to Reply #23 |
48. Yes! Failure to impeach is a tacit admission that the system does not work! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 10:55 PM Response to Reply #48 |
77. That's exactly right. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OneBlueSky (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 03:28 AM Response to Original message |
24. the first rule of politics is self-preservation . . . when the evidence is presented . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bigtree (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 06:02 AM Response to Original message |
26. if one occurs, it won't be some omnibus collection of charges |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 09:11 AM Response to Original message |
38. I say we need to cover all the bases to stop the destruction of America. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tierra_y_Libertad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 09:52 AM Response to Original message |
39. The radical Republicans failed to convict Andrew Johnson but they crippled his presidency. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EVDebs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 12:58 PM Response to Reply #39 |
45. Yes, the modernday equivalent of a 'tarring and feathering' as you can get nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 02:14 PM Response to Original message |
51. It will move the focus from the Republican candidate in 2008 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Harry Monroe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 02:52 PM Response to Original message |
55. I agree completely |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EstimatedProphet (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 02:57 PM Response to Original message |
56. Would you take an unsuccessful impeachment now over a successful one later? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ThomWV (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 03:29 PM Response to Reply #56 |
61. Yes because it would bring them to a screeching halt until 2008 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EstimatedProphet (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 08:55 PM Response to Reply #61 |
74. That's where we have our disagreement then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sicksicksick_N_tired (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 03:12 PM Response to Original message |
59. Ummm,...that didn't work out so well, last time. Convictions are NECESSARY, this time. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
libodem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:07 PM Response to Original message |
62. I say jump on it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AtomicKitten (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:09 PM Response to Original message |
63. I agree -- it is clear only impeachment will stop this war (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Canuckistanian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:14 PM Response to Original message |
64. I see no reason to avoid impeachment proceedings |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-18-07 11:47 AM Response to Reply #64 |
80. "legally, impeachment is a slam dunk"? What does that mean? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Canuckistanian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-18-07 12:10 PM Response to Reply #80 |
82. I meant "the case for impeachment" is a slam dunk |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sampsonblk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:16 PM Response to Original message |
65. Investigate, then impeach |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bjobotts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 04:49 PM Response to Original message |
71. Excellent. Release the Hounds. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sarah Ibarruri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Jun-17-07 10:12 PM Response to Original message |
75. What's the worst that can happen? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Jun-18-07 11:50 AM Response to Reply #75 |
81. several things |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Mon Sep 16th 2024, 03:14 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC