IMPEACHMENT - if not now - when?

[radfringe]

The three main arguments coming from Dems for NOT impeaching are:

1. it would take too long

2. There's an election coming up

3. Not enough votes and it will split the country

To those reasons I say BUSH*T

1. it would take too long
No it won't. How long is too long? Isn't 2 more years of bush and his destructive administration too long to wait?

If bush can invade Afghanistan within 2 months of 9-11, and set plans into motion to invade Iraq within that time - we have enough time to get moving on impeachment.

2. There's an election coming up
So what? We have national elections every two years - does this mean impeachment is never going to be an option for any president?

Seems to me the major consideration for NOT impeaching is one of POLITICS and not for the good of the country. Do politics TRUMP people - is that what's being said?

3. Not enough votes and it will split the country
HORSE HOCKEY! Bush/Cheney are averaging 34.3% approval. Doesn't that say enough American are disgusted by bush/cheney?

The grass roots - the American People - are smoldering. We went to the polls in November 2007 and voted for change - not more of the same and certainly not for a tap dance recital.

Yes, the republics will balk at the notion of impeachment - however their jobs are on the line too. Don't you think there would be pressure from their constituents to support impeachment?

Republics made a big hooo-haa over Clinton's lie - isn't bush's lies just as, if not more, egregious? Are the republics willing to put their jobs on the line to protect a LIAR? is bakcing liars one of the republic's values?

America is hungry and thirsting for leadership, for a BIG change and we want it NOW, not in 2 years. We can't wait 2 years, we can't afford to wait for bush to invade another country before 'something' is done.

Impeachment would not SPLIT the country - it would invigorate Americans.

[radfringe]

1. steal this graphic

[helderheid]

22. LOVE that. Recommended

[GenDem]

28. You need to market this

I would gladly pay $1.98 and proudly display that car magnet!

[radfringe]

104. T-shirt, Magnet, bumper stickers

http://www.cafepress.com/radicalfringe

T-Shirts: FRONT



Back : across shoulders

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Bumper sticker:
has Ribbon graphic on the left side, and text is the above quote from the constitution

Magnet: (sorry folks - Cafe Press has no "ribbon" shaped magnet - did what I could with what they have:

Rectangle magnet with the Ribbon design on it

[radfringe]

46. The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

[Lobster Martini]

2. The Fourth Reason Not to Impeach Bush

Assuming that Bush is impeached and convicted--two different things--wouldn't Dick Cheney then become President? I don't particularly want to see that torch passed.

[izzie]

4. I wonder if Congress has the will. I am waiting to see them really

get going in turning this country back to the people. We need first to get rid of a standing army and go to a citizen army. Boy was I wrong on the draft. People have to care and they would if their son had to go. These money people will take this country down.

[radfringe]

5. impeach them both - problem solved

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. We have to impeach BOTH of them

And there is probably a stronger case against Cheney.

[Omphaloskepsis]

3. I hate to break it to you...

Isn't going to happen.. Your outrage might be better spent in another direction.

[radfringe]

6. if i had that attitude

then I might as well dig a hole and cover myself up until the rapture comes

[Omphaloskepsis]

11. Or spend some time working at a soup kitchen...

We didn't have a big win.. It was really close. Tester and Webb got contested IIRC. This election was not a landslide. It was getting lucky.

[dkofos]

48. Either will get the same outcome

NOTHING

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. And what direction should that be?

Should we instead be outraged by the loss of our constitutional rights? The treatment of the detainees at Gittmo? The illegal invasion of Iraq? Katrina? Valerie Plame?

Sorry but every other thing that outrages me would be dealt with quite well if we impeach these mother fuckers.

[Omphaloskepsis]

14. Sorry, I don't see the connection between impeachment and...

fixing the problems they have created. I'm open to ideas.. The whole impeachment thing reeks of wanting revenge. I don't find that helpful.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. Which problems have WE created?

And which problems has bushco created?

[Omphaloskepsis]

19. You know what I mean..

Problems they have created.. See your post (#10).

[proud2BlibKansan]

20. So how will impeachment NOT address those problems?

And if not impeachment, then how do you suggest we solve these problems?

You know, I am sitting here watching the Rory Kennedy film on Abu Ghraib. Rumsfeld (who reported to bush) ordered the torture and inhumane treatment of these detainees. How can anyone watch this and NOT believe impeachment is more than warranted? And Abu Ghraib is just ONE offense.

[EFerrari]

31. There is a difference between revenge and accountability. n/t

[madokie]

15. and start it right now,

we owe it to the people of the world to do what is right, this time ;-)

[Raskolnik]

68. And which item on your list is going to serve as a basis for impeachment? n/t

[Crabby Appleton]

7. 67 votes in the senate required to convict nt

[radfringe]

8. so?

if enough pressure is put on republics, and they know their job is on the line - don't you think they would "reconsider"?

It's time for AMERICANS to take back America.

It's WE THE PEOPLE, not WE The Bushies

[dkofos]

49. All the pressure in the world will not change their minds.

Only after they loose the next election will they realize they screwed up.
Too late for them, too late for us.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. And every single one of those Senators was ELECTED to REPRESENT

constituents who have the right to demand representation.

Every single one also has to raise money to get elected again.

[madokie]

13. Plus I see through impeachment to be the only way for us Americans to even have a chance to

regain our good standing in the eyes of the worlds people we must. And we don't have much time to do that so now is the time to do it. imho

[radfringe]

16. The way I see congress at the moment

(this includes republics as well as DEMS)

bush and cheney are pissing on congress, and pissing on all of america -- and all we are doing is thanking him for a shower.

enough of non-binding resolutions, enough of meaningless rhetoric, enough of tap dancing posturing

We voted for change and we want change NOW, not sit around with our fingers stuck up our butt waiting for 2008. We've waited long enough and I'm damn F**king tired of being TINKLED down on

[Hubert Flottz]

18. K&R Very well done...

All great points!

Every day the democrats WASTE, more lives are WASTED in Iraq! Every day the democrats WASTE, more soldiers WASTE away in some cockroach/rat/mold infested SHIT HOLE...while Halliburton's shareholders have record quarters and CEOs retire with 100 million dollar tax free paychecks! Are the democrats with a DEMOCRATIC law abiding America, or against us? Are they for the corporations and lobbyists who buy them off with campaign contributions and perks, or are they patriots who will defend the Constitution and the people who can least defend themselves, like they swore on the BIBLE to do????????????????

[KharmaTrain]

21. What Justice Is Really Served?

Let's dream the impossible...that there are 67 votes to convict in the Senate (anything less makes this into another political inquisition like Clinton's)...and booshie is kick out. Then what? As someone noted above, Cheney would take over at this point...or let's dream even finer dreams...Cheney is also impeached (each would have to be tried separately...thus we'd have TWO impeachments AND convictions to deal with)...then who? The Catch 22...go after Cheney first and boooshie gets to nominate a successor and all but annoints a GOP front-runner who can be clear of this crap...play a Gerald Ford, issue pardons and "our nightmare is over", right? And this scenario is working with the best case situation...and totally unreal as there aren't the votes to convict.

Getting a vote in the House without one a conviction in the Senate will be seen by the corporate media as a VICTORY for boooosh, just like most of us not only don't see Clinton's inquisition as being an impeachment as he wasn't removed from office. It wasted a year of our government's time and resources. Be assured that this would take the air out of important things as getting our troops out of Iraq, fixing the screwed up health care system and other issues that have a real impact on people's lives. Play impeachment and be prepared to shut down Washington and be prepared for the corporate media to call this a political vendetta, an attempted coup by the Democrats and, if the Democrats don't convict and boooshie walks free, as an embarassing defeat. Now if this is what you support, go for it.

Once again, the only justice this regime deserves must be in the judicial system, not the political one. Investigations finally starting or getting started to look at a wide variety of criminal enterprises by this regime...an impeachment would surely slow down these investigations and provide cover for this regime as they would "play out the clock"...stonewall, use executive privilidge and other antics that could easily prevent any Congressional action well into next year's elections.

In the end, even if boooshie is impeached, he goes home and gets to write his "memoirs" (he promises the color the pictures himself) and sit unaccountable for the real crimes he committed. He walks from having to be held accountable for all the deaths on his hands, all the abuses of power he ordered or were done in his name and would be viewed as someone who was driven from power by the opposition in a political vendetta in an election year. Criminal investigations would be compromised and many of the real criminals in this regime...Feith, Rove, Wolfowitz, Rummy and others also would walk free as all the focus would be off them...in the end the situation would be worse than what happened after Watergate where pardons and the public's fatigue led to Nixon walking from his crimes scott free.

Cite all the polls you want, but the only one that matters is the one cast in November '08...that will determine not only where this country is headed after 8 years of the worst regime ever, but also where this country is heading for the next 8 years and longer. Democrats have the chance to make major gains next year...get more Progressive and Liberal candidates nominated and elected...all this would be overshadowed by a political passion play/circus that would make ALL of our candidates run strictly looking backwards, not forward. It'd eliminate discussion about issues voters really care about...health care, education, helping veterans and many other very important issues.

Without a conviction in the Senate, impeachment is a waste of time and money as it doesn't remove booosh and will be viewed by our corporate media as an attempt by Democrats to "overturn an election" and a power grab. Without vanquishing the right wing spin and hate machine by using the next two years in re-regulating broadcasting and forcing them to defend real criminals facing real criminal investigations with real trials and real verdicts.

Once again...impeachment is a political process, not a criminal one. This regime has committed serious crimes that have cost thousands of lives...impeachment doesn't address these crimes. It just feeeels good...and could cost the Democrats the House & Senate in '08. Now if this is what you want...go for it.

[radfringe]

24. the way the dems are going now

there's no difference between who controls congress

I don't give a flying crap if impeachment is a political process or not, impeach the f**kers and then file criminal charges

as far as I'm concerned anyone who DOES NOT support getting bush-cheney inc out of office is at the least a bush enabler - because doing nothing enables bush to continue

if you don't support impeachment then you have no reason to complain when bush-cheney continue with their crimes

[KharmaTrain]

25. If There's No Difference

That's even more reason to believe there'd be no conviction...no conviction means boooosh not only walks free to continue his crimes. Now whose "enabling"?

Impeach then file? Uh, and how are you going to file charges when a pardons have been issued? All the Impeachment hounds here don't seem to have an answer for that one. Also, as usual, you avoid the reality as to the fact there won't be a conviction and how this would impact the REAL criminal investigations...going after the crimes not the politics.

You, my friend, are the enabler...giving a major weapon to the corporate media to bash Democrats and portray boooshie as a martyr involved in a political witch hunt. I WANT JUSTICE. I want investigations using our subpoena power that will then be refered to the few remaining Prosecutors who aren't political hacks that can issue REAL supboenas, convene REAL grand juries, present REAL evidence and get REAL convictions. You, on the other hand, want a TV show.

BTW...got a poll on how many people really support impeachment? Popularity polls means zero. These are crimes...and the real place that these crimes need to be presented and prosecuted is in the Hague. You are more than happy to give him and his cast of criminals a pass. Now whose the enabler?

Peace...

[radfringe]

27. Justice? and how are you going to prosecute bush for crimes

when he's firing anyone who doesn't do what he wants?

when he's packing the courts with his cronies?

are you expecting Gonzales to file criminal charges?

there no longer exists a office of Special Prosecutor - the bushies dumped that the first year in office

[KharmaTrain]

30. Follow The Trials in Europe

According to you, there won't be any justice. So why even bother at all. Why even hold hearings this week to bring the recently fired Prosecutors to testify how they had been forced out by a political vendettta....this surely would be a futile exercize, right? And let's pull the plug on Fitzgerald as well as what he's uncovered so far is just a cottage industry for a small fringe of bloggers and we haven't learned anything. Let's just go into a political circus instead. Surely a feeeeel good impeachment would solve everything.

As I posted above, I see the real justice this regime deserves is on an International level...in the Hague where all the victims of the boooosh pillage can get redress and the case can be free of the corporate media circuses here.

Now your turn...what does your coveted impeachment do to make this country better? Does it bring our troops home a day earlier or keep one more needless death from happening? Will it help in getting much needed health care, education reform and other doable and worthwhile legislative projects moved forward? Would it unite a nation or further divide it.

I truly understand your frustration, but now let's see how your solution is a solution and not a bigger problem.

[onenote]

59. special prosecutor law expired in 1999, while chimpy was still in Austin

There are plenty of things to blame on chimpy, but if you want to maintain your credibility, you need to get your facts right. The independent prosecutor statute expired June 30, 1999 when Congress did not renew it.

[GOTV]

58. Do you want Bush adn co. removed? Or just impeached - there's a difference you know.

if you want him removed you need 67 Senators

[GOTV]

57. I think you're one of the few that get it....

... especially the part about how impeachment without conviction would actually be GOOD for the administration and so we should make damn sure when we start the process that we have the muscle to finish it. From good to bad here are the possible outcomes

1) Bush and Cheney impeached and convicted
2) do not impeach
3) Bus and Cheney impeached only

[porphyrian]

23. If we don't impeach, we are willfully letting this administration abuse its power.

The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves. Future generations will curse our names. It is our fucking duty to stop these traitors now, once and for all. Impeachment is the LEAST we should do, and we're already dropping the ball on that.

[glitch]

29. Which makes us complicit. nt

[EFerrari]

33. Exactly. n/t

[porphyrian]

34. I, for one, won't have that on my conscience. But what can we do if our representatives...

...refuse to take this most obvious and necessary course of action?

[glitch]

35. Can't say it here but Thomas Jefferson highly recommended it.

This government is our responsibility until they prove to us it isn't by becoming openingly totalitarian.

However, for the record I haven't given up on our representatives just yet. I do know the process takes some time and they have begun the investigations. But if those investigations don't lead where we know they should and if we allow their crimes to go unpunished, we as a people will be viewed as complicit.

[porphyrian]

53. When the reality of this economy sinks in with the general public...

...they're going to have to move fast if they don't want their heads on pikes (figuratively, of course). If part of the problem is that they can't get things done fast, they better start now.

[EFerrari]

41. We're not there yet. First, ya gotta try.

:hi:

[porphyrian]

45. True enough.

;)

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. Keep writign, keep putting pressure

watergate did not come becuase a heroic representative introduced the articles, but becuase the people wre clamoring at the doors

[porphyrian]

62. I suppose you're right. My patience has just worn thin. - n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. Yours mine and many others

but we need to realize that this is a process and we are far more integral to it than we think

[brentspeak]

26. Pelosi, Conyers, and Kucinich all stated PRIOR to the elections: no impeachment

They've got a thousand investigations they're preparing, but they already said there would be no impeachment.

Why is it some people just can't seem to understand that simple fact?

[EFerrari]

32. That's the wrong question. The right question is, how tainted

by authoritarianism is Pelosi that she feels she has the right to make that pronouncement? She's my representative, not my Decider, and she needs to be reminded of that simple fact.

[dkofos]

50. Not their call

It is up to the people.

Unfortunately As much as the people want bushco impeached,
it would be a massive waste of time. It would be a waste of
time because repubes will not vote to impeach.

[GOTV]

60. And even the people have not been particularly hot for impeachment....

... http://pollingreport.com/bush.htm

[onenote]

61. under the constitution, it is their call

The Constitution gives the House of Representatives the "sole power" of impeachment; it doesn't permit impeachment referenda or direct recall votes by "the people". We have a respresentative democracy and if we don't like what our representatives do, we can always vote them out. But the fact is that virtually none of those representatives, elected less than six months ago, campaigned on a platform that called for impeachment. Even Democrats in "safe" seats didn't make impeachment part of their campaigns. If they had thought that's what was being demanded of them by their constituents and that it would distinguish them from their opponents, they would've done so.

[ShortnFiery]

102. Then THEY should be prepared NOT to be re-elected.

Screw seniority, all reps who voted for the IWR and stated categorically that there will be NO impeachment should be OUSTED in their next Primary by a Democratic Representative who supports their constituents BEFORE they choose to groom their f**king careers. :grr:

[nadinbrzezinski]

85. Hmmm you mean to convict in the senate

impeachment is poossble, since we do have a simple majority in the House... it is the Senate, where you need 67 votes to convict, where things get tricky

[ShortnFiery]

103. Bringing the evidence to the American People is NOT a waste of time.

Investigate and Impeach NOW, with extreme prejudice!

Again, damn this representative B.S. because, in essence, THEY serve US. :thumbsup:

[ShortnFiery]

100. It's NOT truly up to them if THEY KNOW the people demand it!

We need to make it clear to our illustrious Democratic Leaders that their election is NOT the "end all."

Dammit they work for "The People" and the lion's share of us want these criminals investigated and impeached. THEY (the politicians) are the only ones who care about the elections, i.e., the continuation of their careers.

Change your minds and get going Congress!!!

[pat_k]

36. Dems as 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.)

Only impeachment.

There is no escape. They must choose. Now.

Impeachment or Impotence.

Duty or Complicity.

Conviction or Cowardice.

[Kurovski]

37. K&R.

Restore respect for the Constitution: impeach, indict, imprison.

[WillyT]

38. Hey Rad... Have You Checked This Out Yet ???

Link: http://www.a28.org/

:hi:

[EFerrari]

40. And this one:

www.impeach07.org

:hi:

IMPEACH THE DECIDER!

[Senator]

39. kick

[earth mom]

42. K & R!

:thumbsup:

[Decruiter]

43. Not just invigorate, just might possibly UNITE!

"the people, United, will never be Divided!"

Investigate, Indict, Imprison.

Impeachment is the only Solution. Without the removal of this administration by any means necessary is the end of the US and what "we" believe it stands for.

on edit: I failed to add, the world is watching and waiting.

[mmonk]

44. This is a textbook impeachment matter.

If not now, never. No administration in our history has committed more impeachable offenses that I'm aware of. There are NO good arguments against it.

[porphyrian]

51. Agreed. - n/t

[dkofos]

47. Bring me the names of 10 repube senators that will vote FOR

impeachment and we will proceed immediately.

Otherwise it will end up like the clinton impeachment.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. For the sake of argument

not that I buy this school of thought at the present time

There were not enough Republican senators either in 1973

Once the people demanded it, the votes materialized, as they realized... loyalty to Nixon or my job....

If the proceeedings begin OFFICIALLY, mind they have begun, all those investigations are the prelims for that since Impeachment is a process, all those votes may magically materialize.

I'm not counting on it, but here is how you bing them to the table... all those DU'ers who keep complaining need to write a letter a week demanding it

[radfringe]

56. you got it

the people became the parade and the congress critters followed

remember uproar Dubai Ports? What got Congress moving? was it Congress themselves - no - it was the Category 10 hurricane of letters, phone calls, e-mails, faxes from THE PEOPLE that got their butts moving

If WE THE PEOPLE didn't contact our congress critter, what do you think Congress would have done? Nothing, zippo, nada

[Senator]

64. Comparing with Clinton is Oxymoronic

(Note: And BTW, it's exactly what the Euphemedia is training people to think/fear. So it is not my intent to single out this poster.)

It's not just apples and oranges, the circumstances are diametrically opposite.

Clinton was a popular, twice-elected president -- impeached for less-than-trivial reasons -- by a party in danger of being seen as extremists.

Bushcheney is an unpopular, never-elected, never-legitimate regime -- being impeached for torture/war crimes, spying on Americans, and terrorizing the nation into war -- by a party that might be in danger of being seen as conscious or vertebrate.

Realistically, we can expect "Reverse Clinton" results. Perhaps even on conviction/removal.

--

[porphyrian]

52. I'll kick this again. - n/t

[porphyrian]

63. kick - n/t

[porphyrian]

65. Why do some of the fucking coulter threads have five times more views than this one?

And why are there ten or more of those to every one of these?

[librechik]

67. I've been over on the other impeachment thread that thinks its a bad idea

lots of posts there, sadly.

God, can we not just enforce the fucking law in this country?

Impeach now, and let the hearings begin!!

[Raskolnik]

69. "God, can we not just enforce the fucking law in this country? "

Ok, what issue do you think will justify and be feasible for impeachment?

[librechik]

70. Illegal invasion of a sovereign country, for one, lying to Congress, for two

abusing detainees, ignoring treaties, operating outside the Geneva Convention--where does it stop?
There are many many articles of impeachment, and any one of them would do for me. But heres' "another point of view " (from Digby's Hullaballoo)
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2007/03/democrats-without-conscience.html

Testimony for Impeachment Hearing

By David Swanson

FOR THE WASHINGTON STATE SENATE HEARING CALLING FOR THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO INVESTIGATE AND CONSIDER HEARINGS ON EVIDENCE THAT COULD LEAD TO THE IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH AND VICE-PRESIDENT RICHARD B. CHENEY

MARCH 1, 2007

I live in Charlottesville, Va., the home town of Thomas Jefferson, who feared we would not be able to maintain a republic and would slip into elected despotism. I am the Washington (DC) Director of Democrats.com and of ImpeachPAC.org. I am a co-founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition, creator of MeetWithCindy.org, and a board member of Progressive Democrats of America, and of the Backbone Campaign, an activist organization based on Vashon Island in Washington State. I was the organizer in 2006 of Camp Democracy. I serve on the steering committee of the Charlottesville Center for Peace and Justice and on a working group of United for Peace and Justice. I have worked as a newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, Media Coordinator for the International Labor Communications Association, and three years as Communications Coordinator for ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. I am a member of and have served on the Executive Council of the Washington Baltimore Newspaper Guild. I obtained a Master's degree in philosophy from the University of Virginia in 1997.

Democrats.com and After Downing Street have been keeping large lists of citizens in Washington State informed of the progress of this resolution. Generating enthusiasm has not been a problem. This is something people are passionately behind. It's important to understand that passion, and I'm sure that many speakers today will help to communicate it. Jefferson and his colleagues in framing the Constitution intended the body of our federal government closest to the people, the House of Representatives, to have the power of impeachment in order to check abuses by the executive and judicial branches. And Jefferson's Manual, rules used by Congress to this day, allows for a state legislature, a body still closer to the people, to petition the House to begin impeachment. Impeachment is supposed to arise from public concerns at the local and state levels. While an impeachment is merely an indictment, and initiating an impeachment hearing is only the equivalent of convening a grand jury, there is nothing more serious or solemn than this process. And my impression is that the vast bulk of the public enthusiasm for impeachment today is appropriately serious.

We must pursue impeachment of Cheney and Bush, not because of any animosity toward those individuals, and certainly not for electoral advantage. Rather, we must impeach because if we do not, we will be rewriting the rules for all future administrations. The greatest concern of those who put impeachment in the Constitution was that an executive could needlessly take the nation into war. We now face a case in which the President and Vice President began a war in secret with misappropriated funds, intentionally misled the Congress and the public about the need for war, launched a war that is patently illegal under the U.N. charter and U.S. law, began the construction of permanent military bases in a foreign nation with no consultation with Congress and continued that construction after Congress forbade it. Through the course of this war, which US intelligence and international studies conclude has made the world far more dangerous and the United States far less popular, and which has put our great grandchildren into financial debt, the Bush Administration has sanctioned illegal spying, kidnapping, extraordinary rendition, detentions without charge, torture, murder, the use of illegal weapons, and the illegal targeting of civilians, hospitals, and journalists. Numerous attempts by Congress to temper these policies have been unconstitutionally reversed by presidential signing statements.

Evidence of these crimes has been collected at afterdowningstreet/keydocuments

Please take some time to study it. No summary does it justice.

If we do not impeach, we can expect the same behavior Bush and Cheney have engaged in, and worse, from future administrations.

The President has made clear that he will not end the war or place himself under the rule of law. The Congress has made clear that it will not seriously attempt to end the war or to investigate the fraud that initiated it. The people of the United States and of the world are looking to state governments like yours for heroic leadership. And there can be no doubt that history, should our species weather the current storms, will look back on your actions as heroic if you successfully initiate the impeachment of Bush and Cheney.

Congress will not act without you. You are the people's last recourse. If you let them down, democracy lets them down.

Please do not be like the neighbors who watch a murder out the window and all assume that someone else is phoning for help. Everyone else is failing. We are looking to you for leadership.

Please heed the warning of Congressman Abraham Lincoln, who heroically challenged President Polk's fraudulent and aggressive war on Mexico:

"Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose – and you allow him to make war at pleasure. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much as you propose. If, today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us' but he will say to you 'be silent; I see it, if you don't.' The provision of the Constitution giving the war-making power to Congress, was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons: Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us."

[Raskolnik]

71. With all due respect, you responded with a list, not anything specific

What are the grounds you feel would be both feasible and sufficient to use for impeachment?

[Dr Fate]

72. Specific? How about the forged documents presented to the UN & Congress?

Please explain how presenting forged documents to the UN, Congress, and then basing a war on them to the Amercian People, is not impeachable under the GOP/media 1990's impeachment standards.

[Raskolnik]

73. Are you referring to the Niger documents?

I think those documents are grounds for a focused investigation to determine exactly who knew the information was incorrect/forged and when they knew it. An impeachment hearing is not the venue for that investigation, but the venue for prosecution once the investigation has shown Bush's culpability.

By attempting to do both simultaneously, I believe we would accomplish neither.

[Dr Fate]

75. So starting a war based on documents known to be forged is not a "misdemeanor"?

Especially among the literally thousands of other "high crimes & misdemeanors"- and especially in light of the new Impeachment standards set by the GOP/media themselves?

I'll bite- when are we going to ask them, under oath- "who forged them and why?" Or "Why did you not investigate who forged them & why before you invaded?"

And how long will take to impeach after no one gives us an straight answer?

You are talking in circles- they are not going to do either one- and you know damn well that basing a war on forged documents, whether they can prove who forged them or not, is a "misdemeanor"-especially when the public is clear that Bush invaded even after the forgeries came to light in the public record.

The reason why no one is even going to investigate this is because "impeachment is off the table"- and they know that the answers to that question will indeed warrant impeachment.

[Raskolnik]

79. You're taking the possible end result of the investigation as a given in your basis for impeachment

What investigation has shown that Bush knew the documents were forged? I fully agree that it may be possible to go up the chain of custody to Bush, but you don't impeach until you *know* you can do it. If you bring impeachment on that issue, and fail to connect Bush to the possibly forged documents, he is vindicated.

[Dr Fate]

83. Bush knew they were forged before the invasion- it was a matter of public record.

Many major media outlets reported it before the invasion- including CNN.

Bush went forward with the invasion largely based on this "smoking gun" rather than investigating who forged them and why.

In other words, a "misdemeanor" if not a "high crime" under 1990's impeachment standards- if not 1700's standards.

Okay- now come up with another excuse.

[Raskolnik]

91. Oh, I didn't realize you had evidence that Bush knew of forgery prior to

the statements made to Congress.

You should probably contact your Congressman--I'm pretty sure they'd like to know that you've completed the investigation.

Carry on.

[Dr Fate]

96. He knew about it prior to the invasion-it's a matter of public record. Are you defending him now?

Bush and anyone with access to news knew about the forged documents before the invasion. It was reported on CNN and elsewhere before the invasion.

Why not let the Republicans split hairs over whether ignoring and out-right refusing to investigate that was a "misdemeanor" or a "high crime" according to their own 90's era standards?- your desparate excuses almost seem to be doing it for them...

[librechik]

74. how is any one of the things I mentioned not an impeachable offense?

and why does it make it less reasonable to impeach when there is a long list of impeachable offenses?

The point is to start hearings, and go from there. Let the evidence determine what is impeachable. But first we must hold hearings.

[Dr Fate]

76. Sometimes us DEMS are better at crafting excuses for NOT fighting than WAYS to fight.

I am sure you have noticed this trend over the past 8-10 years or so.

[Raskolnik]

77. Or, perhaps, there are very good reasons why impeachment is the wrong answer

both strategically and tactically.

[Dr Fate]

80. Translation: "I am frightened of & intimidated by Republicans and the media."

Or- "If we uphold the Constitution, we will have to fight them both-they will be mean to us- and some DEMS will have to fight harder to get elected again-boo-hoo-hoo."

Sorry- but I've heard the "very good reasons" for supporting Bush's invasion of Iraq from "cautious" DEMS too- I also heard there were "very good reasons" for not filibustering Alito fromthe same timid DEMS-etc, etc, etc.

This crowd always has a "very good reason" for not fighting Republicans.

I dont think they know what they are talking about.

[Raskolnik]

92. Your prolific use of "quote marks" and non-sequitors has bested me.

[Dr Fate]

97. No- the Republicans & media have bested you.

But I am sure you and the other "cautious" Democrats have some "very good reasons" for letting them trample over you. Some focus group probably told you all that swing-voters prefer calculated push-overs to fighters.

[librechik]

87. we could change. We used to be fighters.

sigh

[Raskolnik]

78. According to your own words, you want to use impeachment hearings to find grounds to impeach

That's not the way the process works.

[nadinbrzezinski]

84. Actually hearings are part fo the process

those hearings are now underway... and just like '73 they are not impeachment hearings

People who are unaware how the process works, or don't open a book don't realize that the process has begun.

Now the only way it will lead to impeachment is the only way it did in '73 and that is when we, the people, clamor for it

Oh and as to the matter of senators to covict, there were not enough in the early stages either

[Raskolnik]

95. I'm certainly in favor of investigations--investigate the fuck out of them

What I'm not in favor of is some vague impeachment based on a laundry list of grievances that has no chance of accomplishing anything constructive.

[Dr Fate]

98. It's not "vague"- what is "vague" about how he lied us into Iraq?

Let him go under oath and try to explain his way out of it- you will have enough "lying under oath" in 15 minutes to impeach him.

I'll bite- when are the DEMS going to request that he go under oath? In 3 months? 6 months? Oh wait- I forgot- it's "off the table."

But hey- I'm just arguing for the sake of it- I know that the "cautious" DEMS are too frightened of Bush & the media to try anything aggressive or creative like they always do to us.

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. Why do you think they are holding the hearings

They are not just going to hold impeachment hearings (as in the formal kind) until and that is UNTIL they can formally do it... aka all the laundry list of things we know they have done... are on the official record

I keep explaining to people the rabid pro impeachment crowd and the if we do it is revenge crowd, this is a processs... and as much as I know what they have done, and you know what they have done, they need it on an official record

This is a process and you and I are seeing the first stages of it

Now they are on a time line. There is no way either party willfully will hold FORMAL impeachment hearings in 2008... no way (unless the pressure from we the people is so great they have no choice) So they have a window to do it, and it is slowly closing

But if you think these hearings, we are at 80+ by the way, are just simply hearings... I have a bridge to sell you...

Pelosi said something significant in one of the MTP appearances about a month ago. She said, impeachment is off the table, but if the hearings lead to it, so be it.

Let me repeat this, and I am paraphrasing, if the hearings lead to impeachment, so be it

[librechik]

86. you don't have a clue, do you?

so long. Have a nice life!

[Raskolnik]

93. Thanks for the warm wishes.

I enjoyed discussing this with you. You weren't at all flip and/or dismissive of different viewpoints, and you didn't end the discussion with rude comment.

Take care.

[porphyrian]

82. Try the illegal wiretapping, as proven by the two FBI whistleblowers...

Hold on, link...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x342835

The thing is that there is no question that this administration has committed numerous impeachable offenses.

[porphyrian]

106. I guess he's got me on ignore... - n/t

[porphyrian]

88. Really. What does it say to the world and the future generations...

...if we let those in the highest positions of our government break the law unchallenged and disregard the Constitution they're sworn to uphold?

[EFerrari]

66. Kick

[David Zephyr]

89. I agree.

The House can impeach the President independently from the Senate having to remove him. Most people don't understand this and I appreciate your thread.

Impeaching the President in the House is easy as we have the votes. Also, he has clearly broken the law (FISA) and that's enough.

I also agree that it will "invigorate Americans". The country is sick of Bush.

[MonkeyFunk]

90. yadda yadda yadda

When?

When you have 67 votes in the Senate.

[walldude]

94. Well maybe when some of the office holders hear from

these guys at the FBI http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x342835
they might pull their heads out of their asses.

Of course many of them want to wait till we attack Iran. You know start another fake fucking war and kill a few hundred thousand more then then we should really go after them.

[EFerrari]

101. Kick

www.sfimpeachnow.com

:)

[porphyrian]

105. Kick - n/t

[radfringe]

107. ON TO IMPEACHMENT? What say you?

[porphyrian]

108. I say yes, impeachment is the least we can do. - n/t

[porphyrian]

109. How about now? - n/t

[radfringe]

110. last night when my partner came home from work

she looked at me, big smile and asked "can we impeach now?"

[porphyrian]

111. It's ridiculous what it's taking to do so.

If bush were a Democrat, he'd have been impeached in 2001. It's like Congress would rather try to invent a new element for the periodic table than do their obvious duty. If I were Homey the Clown, I'd already be beating the shit out of them with that stick of his.