If we can't impeach, can we repeal all the crap * has enacted?

[Xenotime]

Don't we have that power now?

Edit: forgot my question mark.

[subterranean]

1. Well, we can (and should) try, but * can break out his veto pen

which he used but once during his first six years.

[porphyrian]

2. And a veto can be overridden by Congress. - n/t

[Dob Bole]

3. If I'm not mistaken, some things will expire without any action at all...

As long as Repubs aren't in office to re-enact them, some of the tax cuts, etc, will simply expire.

[AndyA]

4. Why can we not impeach?

Congress, as part of its job, is supposed to monitor the activities of the Executive and Judicial Branches, and perform investigations to ensure the law is being upheld. This oversight has been missing for the past few years, due to the do-nothing GOP-led Congress.

Now that the Dems have both, they can open investigations to make sure the Constitution is protected, and if those investigations indicate wrong doing, then the appropriate action must be taken.

There isn't enough factual data right now perhaps for impeachment, but once they start looking into Iraq, the missing $9B, the oil prices, the Bush Energy Policy, the signing statements, etc., they will find enough to take action. And the Republicans are going to have to cooperate, or else be labeled as part of the corruption problem, which kills their chances for the future.

Give them time, I suspect there will be investigations. Haven't Conyers and Biden already said so? They will work with Pelosi to do the right thing, and not ignore illegal activities.

[mmonk]

5. We have both the power

and duty to impeach.

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. But we need to do it right. Work with all the little investigations,

re-examine the whitewash commissions, like 9/11, and all the Abramoff connections that have not been followed up on -- we know where the buck stops, and even if we aren't pursuing impeachment, impeachment will become inevitable.

[mmonk]

14. I expect it. Of course, impeachment includes investigations.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

19. correct...

... let the investigations begin, what does the GOP have to hide? har dee har har! When the public sees the GOP stooge denials versus the evidence against them, it will turn to widespread requests for indictments and impeachments. It took long enough for America to notice what we know about the GOP so far. Their curiosity has been piqued.

[PATRICK]

6. The power of the Congress

to investigate and control the purse is the institutional way to begin. That is the primary job that has not been done at all, and also challenging the President's signing statement rejection of enacted legislation.

An investigatory assault on the stonewall can be tied up helplessly by stonewalling, delay and Bush courts until 2008 so practically that could be a waste of time trying to shoot the gone to ground lame duck. Also Cheney's power group is being disemboweled. That may open up the real opportunities.

Aha, one last Hitler analogy! The failed bomb attack did more to ruin the final defense of the Reich than
removal would have accomplished. Leaving the lame duck as power broker for the GOP, which astoundingly he would still be because of the dictatorial depth of his control over the rubber spined, rubber stamped GOP Congress, would accomplish more good than anything. Perhaps. Maybe one would have the national mood shift inexorably to IMPATIENCE that Bush and Cheney be held to account is a better twist of the knife than an idealistic frontal assault against the background of the MSM anti-Dem spin.

The saving of lives in Iraq is the only immediate concern AND pressuring for live-savings and nation saving legislation. The only fast thing in reversing a dictatorship is taking out the dictator, but that in itself may not be the fast way to resolve all the cancers. In fact it creates a new one in the continued life of the GOP machinery. Let Bush take it all down, slowly and massively. Get the business of good government restored. Maybe they can get him to resign. That is the best civilized solution for all parties. And in time MORE truth will flood out as opposed to what will be concentrated into articles of impeachment.

[KaryninMiami]

7. Who said we can't impeach?

Nancy Pelosi has confirmed that John Conyers will now become Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Congressman Conyers has been working on the case for impeachment since 2004 and I sincerely doubt that he is not going to take full advantage of the fact that all of this work now has an opportunity to come to fruition. Finally, he will have the authority to begin hearings and investigations that could (will) lead to censure and then could (hopefully will) lead to impeachment.

Finally, we now have the power to do something about this- beforehand, we could not even get an investigation started. The groundswell for impeachment will begin to grow once people realize this- watch, see and please participate because this will require help from all of us. It's not going to be easy- but at least now, we have hope.

[longship]

8. Who said we couldn't impeach?

Pelosi *has* to say that impeachment is off the table because she will be third in line of succession!!! But the stupid reporters won't stop asking her about it. She has to respond this way. She knows what the Repukes will say if she doesn't discount impeachment in the House.

Impeachment, if it happens, will start on the floor with a privileged motion for an investigation which will take place in the Judiciary Committee. Does anybody expect John Conyers to quash any investigation simply because Pelosi says we can't impeach? In the matters of impeachment, the Speaker does not have the power to stop these things. That's the way things work.

[90-percent]

9. Compromise

If you just axe the unconstitutional stuff GWB has enacted into law, that would hold me for a couple of years.

Include that god damned "patriot act" in the list of unconstitutional crimes against the AMerican People to the batch, too!

-85% Jimmy

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. No no no! We can't do that!

Now's not the time. It'd destroy our country.

:eyes:

[wiggs]

12. Sibel question: can congress somehow either revisit the Sibel

gag order or protect her from prosecution should she decide to spill the beans?

What do the election results mean to Sibel?

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. We cvan repeal quite a bit of the crap

we can start with things they will vote for (minimum wage) becasuse it would be political suicide not to

I am going to write a long letter to my delecation stating the things that they NEED to work on

Like go line by line on the USPA... there are very limited sections that were a good idea (strenthening FISA) but most of it should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

We need to resotre Habeas Corpus

We need to restore the cvil rights of Americans, yes even Bush's

So there are things on the agenda that are far ahead of impeachment his Highness

That said... remember this... they are going going hold hearlings. What they have done, at lest some, will come out.... and when the American people DEAMND it in sufficient numbers, it may still happen. It is a political act.. one you do not carry without having political capital to spend and right now it would look like Pelosi wants to be President... (and what she wants is irelevant)

In fact, if his assholeness is impeached, I expect a FORD kind of a compromise

[michreject]

15. I think gridlocked for two years

A majority of one is not enough to overide a veto. Needs 67. We don't have that. I don't think anything will get done for two years. On the bright side. They can't get anything passed either.

[cooolandrew]

16. I think they need to bargain no investigations in return for passing our bills

[RaleighNCDUer]

17. We let them slide after Iran/Contra --

No deals with the undead. They WILL rise again unless staked through the heart.

[bertha katzenengel]

18. Yeah. How about the wall?

Asshole. Everyone who supported that is a flaming asshole. x(