Paraguayan president's ouster not a coup: US

[Enrique]

Source: NY Daily News

Washington, June 26 — The US has not determined the ouster of Paraguay's President Fernando Lugo by impeachment as a coup in the South American nation but is closely following the events there, the US State Department has said.

Responding to a question about whether Washington has determined the impeachment constitutes a coup, spokesperson Victoria Nuland said: "We have not."

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez described the ouster a "coup", as Lugo was forced out and his deputy Federico Franco was sworn in as new president following the Paraguayan Senate's vote Friday in favour of impeaching Lugo on charges of "poorly discharging his duties", Xinhua reported.

Nuland also said that Washington has not made a decision about whether to recall its ambassador to Paraguay for consultations, as most Latin American governments have done.



Read more: http://india.nydailynews.com/business/ae302634d3e30d790c5f2d3f1f144a01/paraguayan-president-s-ouster-is-not-coup-us

[Dont call me Shirley]

1. Wasn't jenna bush there recently on behalf of her father?

Wherever the bushes go coups follow. Don't they own (probably stole) a huge hunk of land sitting atop a massive freshwater aquifer?

[Posteritatis]

11. Because foreigners can never do anything for their own reasons.

[freshwest]

26. Yep, there was that Bush, Rummy, Reverend Moon plan. And during that time I read we had bases there.

I mean, we're everywhere, I tell you everywhere! Don't know whether to laugh or cry when I imagine all of that...

Anyway...

[Octafish]

31. Time Flies...2007

She had a sit down with the last machine president. Uncle Neil, too, with the Rev. Moon's man. Somebody got a picture.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3183814

[Freddie Stubbs]

2. The headline doesn't accurately reflect the content of the article

The State Department spokesman said that they have not made a determination.

[joshcryer]

28. They will half heartedly come out against it, but it'll get a 2 post thread here...

...and the US will still get blamed by conspiracy theorists.

[EFerrari]

3. If President Obama was given less than 24 hours to respond to an impeachment

before being forced out of office, I imagine he'd consider that a coup pretty quickly.

[Bacchus4.0]

4. he might consider it as such but what could he do??

and Obama would never be removed because he has Congressional backing. Lugo didn't have any.

[EFerrari]

5. So if Congress turns on Obama, you think it would be okay to oust him

without due process and overturning the will of the voters? Really?

[Bacchus4.0]

6. Democrats won't turn on Obam so thats completely hypothetical

although, if you read this board sometimes you might beg to differ. I would have been fine with throwing out Bush. Nixon was probably going to be thrown out and he was elected.

however, if any president is impeached by the House and convicted in the Senate he is removed from office period. There is no requirement that the impeachment process last a few weeks at least. I recall that Clinton was not present or offer a defense at his "trial". He could have been kicked out with or without a defense. Its all about the votes not "due process". Clinton had congressional backing, Lugo did not.

[EFerrari]

8. No, that's backwards. It is all about due process

of which the voting is only one element.

[Bacchus4.0]

9. really? so in the US there is more to an impeachment than votes in the House and Senate?

tell me where you see that the impeachment needs to take at least a couple of weeks, the president gets to present a defense, and that foreign governments must concur.



Clause 5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Clause 6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Clause 7: Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

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.

[EFerrari]

12. In the United States, we have the right to face our accusers.

That is what a trial is.

Or rather, that is what a trial used to be when we still enjoyed due process.

[Bacchus4.0]

13. thats not how impeachment works though

I suppose a president could ask to to defend himself at the Senate trial though there is no requirement for the Senate to have the defendent present.

In the US, an impeachment is not a criminal or civil case and does NOT occur in a courtroom. Its a political measure. Obviously a president who has no political support is susceptible to impeachment. Seems Paraguay has something similar.

[joshcryer]

29. Precisely. People don't understand that impeachment is removal from power.

The charges come later. It's common damn sense.

OK, charge a sitting President, who has all the power of the military under their disposal.

Sitting President declares "counter revolution" or "rebellion" and has everyone ousted from power who went after him.

There is precedent for this sort of thing.

The whole point for impeachment is removal from power. Full stop.

As it stands now the American people wouldn't stand for a President that ousts an entire cabinet using trumped up charges, but this shit goes on all the time in Latin America.

[EFerrari]

7. This was the reporting in Amy's headlines:

U.S. Undecided on Whether Lugo Ouster was a Coup
Facebook_20 Twitter_20
Reddit_20 Email_20 Addthis_20

On Monday, the Obama administration issued its first substantive comments on the removal of Paraguayan President Fernando Lugo, saying it does not believe his ouster constitutes a coup. Speaking to reporters in Washington, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said the United States is concerned over the events in Paraguay but has not yet determined whether Lugo was removed illegitimately. Nuland also says no decision has been reached on whether to recall the U.S. ambassador to Paraguay, James Thessin. In addition, Nuland confirmed Lugo had met with Thessin on Thursday, the day of Lugo’s impeachment. A 2009 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks shows U.S. officials believed Lugo’s opponents were planning to remove him through the same channels as they did last week. The cable described Lugo’s opponents’ "goal" as: "Capitalize on any Lugo missteps to break the political deadlock in Congress, impeach Lugo and assure their own political supremacy."

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/6/26/headlines#6266

[clang1]

10. golpeachment is one term

A merging of coup and impeachment

In Paraguay, Democracy’s All-Too-Speedy Trial

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/24/world/americas/in-paraguay-democracys-all-too-speedy-trial.html

RIO DE JANEIRO — "In the span of a few hours on Friday, Paraguay’s Senate convened its members, read a list of accusations and put President Fernando Lugo on trial. Dismissing his request for more time to mount his defense, the senators abruptly voted to oust him from office, spurring a fierce debate across Latin America over the fragility of democratic institutions in a region with a long history of dictatorships.

Various takes on that assertion quickly surfaced around the region, including descriptions of the ouster as a “parliamentary coup,” a “constitutional coup,” even a “golpeachment,” merging the Portuguese terms for “coup” and “impeachment,” which spread throughout social networks in Brazil. "

[EmeraldCityGrl]

14. How Obama's Admin responds to this will be watched very closely.

Paraguay's right, elite would not risk American military and financial support.

At the crux of this coup is the peasants ongoing battle with police over land rights.
So similar to what is happening here just far more transparent.

[clang1]

15. At least some of them have land to fight over

there are millions of Americans with less than that and no land to fight over depending on how you look at it.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

16. They won't have it for much

longer once Lugo is gone. American's lost their homes. I'm sure most felt as
displaced and criminally defrauded as the Paraguayan peasants.

[may3rd]

17. Paraguayan president's ouster not a coup: US

who is this " US " person making policy decisions without the one in the oval office ?

[Ken Burch]

18. Of course he's not going to say it's a coup.

Removing Lugo puts the rich back in power and restores the old order. The U.S. government will NEVER admit that anything which produces that result is a coup.

It's what our leaders wanted to have happen.

[mia]

19. You nailed it. n/t

[EmeraldCityGrl]

20. Very fortunate turn of events for the Bush Cabal

who were hindered by Lugo. I don't recall the details but there was the matter of an
American military base Lugo wouldn't allow built in 2009. So the Bush Family now has
hundreds of thousands of acres of land on a major aquifer neighboring a US military base.
How perfect for them.

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. So, this was a victory for President Obama?

[Ken Burch]

23. It's not that personal...I'm not blaming Obama personally(and you knew that, of course).

What it means is that, once anybody gets into the U.S. presidency, they seem to get forced to decide that they are obligated to fight for the rich against the majority of humanity.

The last potentially electable candidate who looked like he might question that was Bobby Kennedy in '68. In my view, that had a lot to do with the decision some people made to have him killed.

They know that market economics and "free" trade cause nothing but misery to most of the planet, yet they are driven to try to impose them anyway, whether the planet wants them or not.

Doesn't that ever bother you? Don't you ever get a little queasy that our leaders, no matter how "progressive" and enlightened, ALWAYS seem to end up taking the side of the banks and the ceo's against the majority of the world? Against the values that we as Democrats hold most dear(values that include social equality and social justice for at least MOST of us).

We were never meant to be a country that evangelized for global corporate dominance. And doing so always ends up working against the values people like FDR, Truman, Kennedy and Johnson claimed to be speaking for in the world.

I'm not trashing Obama in saying this...I'm trashing the structure he's obliged to work within. We need to smash that structure and make this a country that works to make life better for the global majority...not the privileged few. Working for the few against the many ALWAYS ends up meaning that a Democratic president, in terms of foreign policy, checks her or his soul at the door.

[truthisfreedom]

21. Translation: We did it.

So it's not a coup.

[geek tragedy]

25. Obama controls Paraguay's legislature?

The man has super powers.

[freshwest]

27. Hey, I noticed that, too. Makes me feel all... Er, that is... I won't say.

[geek tragedy]

24. There were overwhelming votes in Paraguay's legislature

which itself is comprised of duly-elected respresentatives.

Certainly, it was ugly and disquieting, and not the way a rational government behaves.

But it is not a coup--there were no guns or threats of violence. Just voting carried out in ful compliance with Paraguay's constitution.

[joshcryer]

30. The whole thing boils down to this "no defense was possible" argument.

People don't understand that impeaching presidents don't get to defend themselves. That's the whole point of impeachment, to render the ultimate power of a state... powerless.

Next thing you know the President declares a coup or a fascist overthrow and then ousts the entire government in one fell swoop.

[Octafish]

32. ''People don't understand that impeaching presidents don't get to defend themselves.''

Right you are, joshcryer: Paraguay, Honduras, Haiti. All saw the first democratically elected leaders in decades toppled. They never had a chance to say "Boo."

Of course, the new governments just happened to have restored the 1-percent's stooges in each nation. Like control of the judiciary and land, ex-presidents and the people who elected them had nothing to say about that, either.