Why we should not impeach

[knight_of_the_star]

I am going to make a very simple argument why we shouldn't impeach Bush.

First, for the record I would like to state that I think Bush deserves an 8x10 maximum security cell for the remainder of his natural life. That said, here is my reasoning:

There is the time issue. In every attempted impeachment in history, it took two years to get the ball rolling. Once we have things moving the way we want them to, it will already be November 2008. It would simply be a waste of time.

There is the matter of approach. If we dive headlong into impeachment, it will hurt us in '08 because it will look like we only wanted blood, not to help the country like we said we would. That will blow up in our faces and put us back to square one.

Finally, there is the opportunity we have here. With control of Congress we can push for Democratic reforms and push for things that are good for the whole nation. By doing so, we can further establish more strengths for us and weaken the GOP by making them look like what they are: partisan hacks. Couple these reforms with serious investigations and we turn Bush and the remaining Republicans in Congress into a captive punching bag: they can't resign without looking like cowards, and we have two years backed up by supeona power to whale away at their misdeeds. Two years of them trying to spin their way out of the hole they've dug. Two years of being a bug on a plate. And once those two years are done, so will the GOP.

[William769]

1. It's nice to see a level head around here.

:applause:

[knight_of_the_star]

3. We have here a golden opportunity

We are in an ideal situation not just to take out Bush, but to take out the GOP permanently. If we charge headlong without heed to other options and go for Bush, we lose both. If we hold back and savage them mercilessly while pushing good, needed reforms, then the GOP won't stand a snowball's chance in two years and we'll net Bush after he's out.

[davidwparker]

4. "If we charge headlong without heed " - these are your words and drama.

There's two years to show the american people, if the evidence supports it, that the House should deliver articles of impeachment to the senate.

[knight_of_the_star]

8. Bad idea

We would be playing right into what the GOP said we would do, especially after our leaders said it won't happen.

Besides, I would rather see Bush stand trial in a criminal court, where we know we can convict his ass, than before the Senate, where he will most likely be save by a partyline vote.

If you want to bag a target, you want to be sure you can get them.

[dmosh42]

32. I agree

The normal process should be followed, but what may happen is the publicity will expose what has happened over the last six years. Then if the public sees that there are 'high crimes' which need to be addressed, there will be a message to the congress. In this case, it might be better to react than appear to want to lead the country into this process. In the meantime, maybe some high admin officials can be removed for crimes, and this will keep things fresh in the public's mind for the 2008 run. I believe this is what is part of the Pelosi plan.

[Mythsaje]

2. Nice to see someone saying the same basic thing that I've been

saying for two days now.

[Pachamama]

25. I agree...unfortunately, so many of us have been so sick and angry for 6 long years that we are

wanting "revenge". However, having us stand around like the peasants with pitchforks at the gates and wanting blood and impeachment is not going to be how we move forward and achieve what needs to be done. I don't have all the answers, but I have been someone who for along time was wishing for impeachment and now I don't think that is the thing to be pushing for, atleast not for the near term.

For now I'm going to bask in the euphoria I have been feeling for the last 48 hours and enjoy it a bit. Then I'm going to catch up on sleep and then roll up my sleeves, because we all have much work to be doing over the next 2 years.

Namaste :hi:

[MGD]

5. I agree 100% I don't mind the good cop bad cop routine though so long as "we" understand, it's just

a routine.

[Barack_America]

6. Glad to see that a couple of people opted not to take the trolley..

...to the Land of Make-Believe.

I agree, but be prepared to be bashed by people who only see the world in black and white. They think it is the duty of Congress to impeach Bush even if it will fail and even if it will destroy the Dems.

Hopefully this issue will die down now that Conyers has said that impeachment is off the table for him too...

[OKNancy]

7. It's a moot point anyway, because the leadership

isn't going to go that direction. They want to get something done for the people who elected them.

[knight_of_the_star]

9. Exactly

That's their jobs is to represent all the people, not just members of their party. I would much rather see the GOP dead and buried than us bloodied in a phyrric victory.

[elocs]

10. A voice of reason and wisdom in the DU impeachment wilderness.

If the next 2 years is all impeachment all the time, then our stay in power will be a short one because many millions of those independents who voted Democratic expect more. They expect more than revenge and payback from the Democrats. They expect us to be leaders and to give some direction to this country. So have the oversight hearings and investigations along with moving forward Democratic ideas. Let these hearing crescendo into a public outcry by more than just Democrats for impeachment. Apparently most of the public is clueless as well that impeachment does not mean conviction and removal from office. Ultimately there is not enough time for impeachment without having it totally consume the next 2 years. Putting impeachment in its place will help to make Democratic gains in 2008 as well as winning back the White House. I would rather have that than indulging in an impeachment orgy for the next 2 years.

[Old and In the Way]

12. Hmmmm.....Impeachment didn't hurt the Republicans in 2000/2002/2004

Guess those Independents didn't have a problem rewarding a Party who impeached a sitting President who lied about consensual sex.

But allow 3000 Americans to die on 9/11 because you choose to ignore the warnings? OK.
Or start an immoral and unethical war that kills 100's of thousands? No problem.

Sorry, we are Democrats and we can do a new agenda while we do investigations. I think you all miss a critically important reason why we have to pursue these investigations. There may be future Presidents with dictator tendencies who will look at Bush's legacy. If we take a hike and don't hold Bush accountable, what's the signal and precedent that we establish for future nutcases? Can a President do any damn thing he pleases and get away with it?

I just want to know what are your personal thresholds for impeachable actions. What are your personal benchmarks that compel accountability for Executive actions?

[elocs]

15. Hmmmm....Why does Pelosi say impeachment is off the table?

I think that I prefer to go with the experienced opinion of the new Speaker of the House than the opinions of the many armchair political experts here.

[Barack_America]

17. Actually it DID hurt the Republicans...

They lost 4 senate seats in 2000 and Chris Shays (R,CT) was interviewed on C-SPAN today and pinpointed the impeachment as the thing that derailed the Republican agenda and sent them into a tailspin of power-mongering and corruption.

Would you like to repeat that history?

[Old and In the Way]

19. Impeach Bush over consensual sex?

Nay, I'm not into abusing the Constitution for superfluous political gain. But if the investigations prove that terrible crimes have been committed by this administration, we have to be prepared to uphold our Constitutional duty. I'm not prepared to demand impeachment now....no one should. But I do expect honest and vigorous investigations into all facets of this administrations actions since they were selected in 2000.

[onenote]

11. I agree.

You have to consider the situation with your head, not your heart

[BrewAz]

13. I disagree....

In the United States we have a Constitution that is pretty explicit about how the government should be set up to administer the will of the voters. We have laws of the land that have been formulated and enacted by the congress.

Part of the process of being a Democracy is ensuring that the 225+ years of history is not trampled on by a "renegade" politicians who happens to have power....that is why the Constitution of this land provides for Impeachment...with very specific rules and processes.

Why in the name of Democracy should the Democrats who are trying to put the rule of law back into the politics of Washington ignore the constitution on this matter?

Ignoring this process because of potential fall out in the next political election ...Doesn't that smack of hypocrisy?

BrewAz

[knight_of_the_star]

16. No

For a very simple reason:

For impeachment to work we need broad public support from both parties.

Read what I posted again, I said more than once here and elsewhere we SHOULD investigate EVERYTHING the Bushies did. Then we can impeach them in all but name, and considering the time and effort it would take to mount such a move, and the time we have left, we don't have what we need to do so. That and it wasn't just Bush who was at fault for this, it was the entire Republican Party. We can't impeach the whole party, but we can make it so they will never be a threat to democracy again by exposing them and moving forward to help this country.

Indirect approach is the best form of offense, it is harder to predict and block for the defender.

[mogster]

27. Well, if the Dems don't impeach

They might lose the momentum and support from progressive democrats? :shrug:
What's happening now is that the Dems again adjust to rw politics instead of pushing the mandate they got from the lw grass root.
That may backfire, even though I agree there are important issues that can only be reached by cooperation, not confrontation.
Tell me one thing; after 2008, will it be possible to prosecute Bush and co under normal law or are impeachment still the only option?

[pretzel4gore]

14. the pigmedia must be destroyed; anything else is just smoke/mirrors

hell, name the goddam cointry after bush, the WSA, for all it matters; jusging from the eagerness of the dems to sukk bush's arse.....the dems aren't going to do anything, just like clinton let limbah-humbug heap abuse on him for years w/out using any of the power at his command.
the usa is now the wsa (dubia states of amerka) which is actually a nice change, when you think of it

[knight_of_the_star]

18. Dude, that was immature

I would have expected such a thing out of a FReeper, not someone here.

What I'm saying is we move forward to help the people of this country move forward and raise them out of their current situation. Combine that with in-depth investigations and we will ensure this never happens again. We have to look to the future as well as the present and what is good for both, not one or the other.

[pretzel4gore]

22. well it sure aint 'United...'

as in 'United States of America'....therefore a (WSA) 'Dubia States of America' would relect the faith based community who feel so put upon by fortune/elections/rerality etc....listen to rush limbah-humbug to get an idea of the insanity at work...today. limbah-humbug was saying 'scientists' have discovered that people's politics is determined genetically etc (thus 'liberals' abort themselves so much they must take over the schools to indoctrinate liberalism in the kids, not THEIR kids, but ordinary peoples' kids! that's so that 'liberalism' stays alive, otherwise it die out with abortions) etc!
you call me immature. but i listened to this on the radio, and while i regret sounding like a goddam freeper, maybe the freepers need some of their own medicine?
just a suggestion, mind you....

[knight_of_the_star]

23. Why were you posting that then?

That had nothing to do with what I posted. Besides, if we make republicans untenable to the majority of the public, Rush can say or do whatever he wants to, he'll just be viewed as some crazy with a mic.

[pat_k]

20. For your consideration. . .

. . .http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2595234&mesg_id=2595474

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

21. It should be a two-year symposium on "Bad Government"

Issue by Issue. Line by Line.

House and Senate Committees (using their subpoena powers) should expose what was wrong (catostrophic) about the policies pursued by the Bush Administration. The point being the conservative policies are bad for the country, lest some more-intelligent conservative try to convince voters that "Bush's policies were right, they just executed it poorly."

No, no, no.

It should NOT be about Bush and what he did wrong. It should be about his policies (those widely shared by Republicans) and why THEY are wrong.

[Laelth]

24. Waste of time ...

I hope I never consider standing up for the Constitution of the United States of America to be a "waste of time."

I hope I never consider resisting fascism a "waste of time."

I hope I never have to tell the families of soldiers who perished in a senseless war that to indict the people who sent them off to die would be a "waste of time."

You have got to be kidding me.

I simply cannot believe I am hearing this argument here, of all places. Standing up for what is right is never a "waste of time." Who cares if we can convict him before Nov. 2008? People want justice, and they want it now. Justice may not work conveniently on our electoral calendar, but what's more important, really?

... in utter frustration ...

-Laelth

[angry_chuck]

26. WTF!?! Waste of time?

WTF WTF! That is the goal, apathy! The most dangerous thing to this elitist, collectivist machine is an informed and active left. I wish more people would echo what you have posted Laelth. I love America but I wish people weren't so confused. It is high time to whoop these liars for confusing and belittling all the rest of society.

The problem is bigger than we care to imagine...The problem wants your submission...will you go quietly into the night?

[OneBlueSky]

31. impeachment is NOT about justice . . .

that's what the courts are for . . . impeachment is a POLITICAL action designed to protect the nation from irresponsible, corrupt, and/or criminal leaders . . . the only result of impeachment is removal from office -- no jail time, no fines, nothing else . . .

what we need to do in the next two (short) years is demonstrate that Democrats can govern . . . if we initiate impeachment proceedings, they will consume the government and the nation and nothing else will get done . . .

a better approach is to investigate, gather evidence, build a case, and then haul their asses before the appropriate U.S. and international courts at the right time . . . which is probably after they've left office . . . by the time impeachment proceedings concluded, their terms will be pretty much over anyhow . . .

[Senator]

28. These "Reasons" are Simply Rationalizing Euphemisms

NOTE: It is not my intent to single this poster out personally. This OP is simply illustrative of pervasive attitudes many display.

There is no "time issue" as the "ball rolling" has been going on for years. The charges have already been investigated and even adjudicated.

They have admitted violating FISA -- and have tried to "defend" it (mutually exclusively) by claiming inherent authority and congressional approval. GOP Senator Specter himself has already scoffed at the defense.

The (formerly) Supreme Court has already ruled in Hamdan that Geneva applies to Gitmo. Behind the Euphemedia smokescreen of tribunal tinkering lies the reality of the decision: Three Years of War Crimes had already been committed.

Similarly, the lies about WMD that terrorized the nation into war are already "old news." There is no fig leaf left.

The articles of impeachment are already written. There is no hearing necessary. They can be brought up for vote on Jan 4th (though I'd prefer Jan 6th to commemorate the 2 Stolen Elections). Should they not resign and demand a Senate trial, it need not take more than a week. There are no "fact witnesses" required.

Whatever is meant by "matter of approach," I can see someone being concerned about a "dive headlong" looking "like we only wanted blood," especially if it "will blow up in our faces." I just don't see how that connects to any reality.

The neofascists forced a failed impeachment, over nothing, against the wishes of 70% of the nation from Dec '98 to Feb '99 and still "won" the White House in 2000. This one would likely garner 70% support and the display of backbone could swing as much as 10% of the white male vote to the Dems permanently, out of respect for the principled action (as opposed to decades of empty rhetoric).

And speaking of empty rhetoric, that's pretty much all "push for Democratic reforms" amounts to -- even with a shiny new non-veto-proof majority. Unless someone's come up with the magic potion to circumvent "rule by signing statement," what DC Dems are realistically looking at is 2 years of no results and a further erosion of public trust in "both sides" due to the "tone in DC."

And they'd be right. Endless hearings with no real accountability or punishment imposed is pretty much the defintion of partisan hackery. It's a great way to funnel taxpayer money into the pockets of beltway lawyers, consultants, lobbyists, and strategists. But it does very little for the millions who demanded change on Tuesday.

Impeachment IS Our Positive Agenda.

It is our ONLY moral, patriotic option.

--

[cali]

33. Whatever.

That's not gonna happen- thank god. Investigations, yes, a rush to impeach immediately after taking the Congress, no, no, no.

[LiberalPartisan]

29. You are 100% correct

All the talk of impeachment is wasted energy - it will never happen.

[rman]

30. "will look like we only wanted blood" - not if a majority

wants impeachment. And it very much looks like majority does want impeachment, or criminal investigation or something like that.

[lawwolf]

37. Where do you get that

Were do you get that "it very much looks like a majority does want impeachment." Just because people voted for Dems to take over congress doesn't mean they want impeachment...it means they wanted a change.

[rman]

39. MSNBC poll

A year old, and things haven't exactly improved since.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904 /

Do you believe President Bush's actions justify impeachment?
316353 responses

Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.
87%

No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high crimes and misdemeanors."
4.4%

No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.
7.2%

I don't know.
1.8%

[Irreverend IX]

40. Not at the moment they don't...

I think the public is supportive of investigations and subpoenas, which should definitely happen, but unless something utterly damning comes out of those investigations and the media runs with it, there will be no groundswell of public support for impeachment. We all know the administration has committed tons of crimes, but unless a majority of Americans understand that and get angry, no impeachment can happen. The average citizen knows nothing about FISA or other details of how Bush has shredded the Constitution. If the Dems move for impeachment without broad public support, they'll be seen as petty; fortunately, they aren't about to do something so foolish.

[FredStembottom]

34. Neo-con desertion, Rumsfeld resignation, Cheney under attack...

This is a very lonely president! If Cheney goes, I believe we will have removed the real threat. I am still strongly convinced that Bush was never more than a ceremonial head. The real power tri-umvirate behind him is now dissolving.

If fresh outrages surface and America takes to the streets demanding removal....fine. But the real evil may already be defeated and soon removed.

Let investigations bring up whatever they bring up. Let us begin to govern. Let George quietly sit and finally get to finish that story about the goat. Let 2 years pass.

[In Truth We Trust]

35. WTF!? Rule of Law! Principle! Justice! Integrity! The Constitution! Impeach and Prosecute!

[Anita Garcia]

36. NO! Impeach!

[Barack_America]

38. Impeachment is officially not on the Democrats agenda...

I just wanted to update everyone, in case they missed this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2955071

I'm not trying to be preachy, I just want to make sure everyone understands that impeachment is not going to happen anytime soon.