To all of you NOT calling for impeachement...

[boolean]

I ask a few simple questions.

Were you against trying Ken Lay? (Theft)

Were you against trying O.J. Simpson? (Murder)

Were you against trying John Walker Lindh? (Treason)

One of these escaped by death. Another escaped by acquittal. Another was convicted and sent to prison. All three committed crimes that Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney have committed. Sometimes, justice is not done. Sometimes, it is. But were you against even pursuing justice? Was it worth the time and effort to try and convict Mr. Lay, even though he died? What about O.J.? Oh, what a waste of time and money! No point!

Bush and Cheney must be impeached. They are CRIMINALS. Even if it's "political suicide" (It's NOT, by the way...) Even if the chances of them getting convicted are slim. (They're NOT).

Start investigations, collect the evidence, go through all the steps that need to be gone through...But make no mistake that the end goal here is to throw these two men in jail where they belong. IT DOES NOT MATTER if it's unlikely, or if it's hard, or if it looks bad, or if this and if that and if whatever.

Otherwise, let's just give up on the entire fucking justice system. No point in trying criminals.

Edited to say that I understand it's not a one to one analogy here. I know impeachment is not the same as a regular criminal getting his day in court. I'm trying to address the ATTITUDE of you people against impeachment. You seem willing to let these thugs get away with their crimes against humanity. These guys deserve to get hit hard for what they have done, and I say fuck all the details.

[porphyrian]

1. Oh, I'll definitely kick that. Maybe they'll hear you. - n/t

[mike_c]

2. agreed-- bushco MUST be confronted with their crimes and driven...

...from office.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

3. I'm with you!!!

Impeach, then throw them in jail!!

[gully]

4. Unfortunately most Americans don't equate Bush to OJ.

We'll see what happens. In a Democracy the voice of the people should determine what is done about Bush, and I expect Democrats will heed that voice.

[porphyrian]

8. The people have spoken. The law of impeachment is written.

All we need to do is follow procedure. Not doing so would be breaking our own law to protect a law-breaker.

[gully]

35. The people didn't vote to "impeach"

51% of Americans were in favor last I heard, I expect that discussion will come. However, I agree with Dean - the only thing worse than a President Bush is a President Cheney.

[porphyrian]

41. They didn't vote against it, either. Impeachment is already on the books.

And our laws are presumably all the will of the people. That isn't the question, however. If we are a nation of laws, and if those laws have been broken by the highest ranking officials in our government, impeachment is imperative lest we send the message that our laws, thereby our nation, are meaningless. What the politicians say today doesn't really matter. WHEN evidence is forthcoming (and it's forthcoming like a motherfucker) of criminal activity in the highest positions of our government, impeachment will happen.

[gully]

52. Can't argue with that

!

[Morgana LaFey]

89. Protect a law breaker is exactly right. EXACTLY right.

And that is NOT justice, nor is it standing up for the Constitution, OR the AMerican people.

[TahitiNut]

65. Yeah. The 'score' is 700,000 to nothing.

Hard to draw an equivalence relationship there. Maybe Ted Bundy would be a more apt comparison?

:eyes:

[gully]

66. People voted to get us out of Iraq

not to impeach Bush.

[TahitiNut]

68. Horse shit.

They were told "San Francisco values" ... and they voted for it.
They were told about Conyers' hearings and the voted for more of it.

The invasion of Iraq was a war crime.
The occupation of Iraq IS a war crime.
Torture is a crime against humanity.

Justice delayed is justice denied.

[gully]

69. Bullshit. Show me evidence that people voted to impeach.

I'll won't hold my breath.

[TahitiNut]

71. Iraq + corruption + 35% approval = impeachment

Do the math.

FURTHERMORE, over half of those polled recently supported impeachment if it were shown Bush LIED. He lied. Q.E.D.!!

For Immediate Release: October 11, 2005

Poll: Americans Favor Bush's Impeachment If He Lied about Iraq

By a margin of 50% to 44%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he lied about the war in Iraq, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

The poll was conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs, the highly-regarded non-partisan polling company. The poll interviewed 1,001 U.S. adults on October 6-9.

The poll found that 50% agreed with the statement:

"If President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable by impeaching him."

44% disagreed, and 6% said they didn't know or declined to answer. The poll has a +/- 3.1% margin of error.

Among those who felt strongly either way, 39% strongly agreed, while 30% strongly disagreed.

"The results of this poll are truly astonishing," said AfterDowningStreet.org co-founder Bob Fertik. "Bush's record-low approval ratings tell just half of the story, which is how much Americans oppose Bush's policies on Iraq and other issues. But this poll tells the other half of the story - that a solid plurality of Americans want Congress to consider removing Bush from the White House."

http://democrats.com/bush-impeachment-poll-1

Even that's secondary to the Constitutional DUTY to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

It's hypocritical in the extreme to FIRST claim you can speak for why folks voted and THEN DEMAND 'proof' of another viewpoint on the same thing.

[gully]

73. Note the word "IF"

What we have to do is present EVIDENCE for impeachment to the American people - However, with troops in Iraq waiting to come home, it's a matter of prioritizing.

[TahitiNut]

81. Bullshit again! See my thread. GAME! SET! MATCH!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2666087&mesg_id=2666087

Squirm all you wnat - you've spewed total bullshit.

[gully]

84. Again "IF"

It's our job to present a case against him before the American people, and the question becomes - can we do that as well as bring the troops home!

[TahitiNut]

88. "Majority of Americans Support Impeaching Bush for Wiretapping"

That "if" disappeared looong ago.

[gully]

94. I'll await the evidence

.

[RethugAssKicker]

5. I agree, but... Did Pelosi say that the dems

will not pursue impeachment?... IF she did, I say lets impeach her ass !

[Just-plain-Kathy]

61. I was hoping everytime she said

she didn't want to go for impeachment, yet said she was going to investigate, was code for we were going to go for impeachment.

:eyes:

Both Bush and Cheney should do time.

[rinsd]

6. Cool straw men mixed in with non understanding of the process

"Even if it's "political suicide" (It's NOT, by the way...)"

Suicide? Likely not. Politically risky? Certainly.

"Even if the chances of them getting convicted are slim. (They're NOT)."

You are aware that it requires a 2/3 majority to convict aren't you?

Impeachment proceedings aren't a criminal trial, they are political ones. To not recognize that is willful ignorance at best.

[BuyingThyme]

13. High crimes are crimes.

To not recognize that is willful ignorance at best. And it's easy to figure out because CRIMES and CRIMES, if you look closely, are actually the same word.

[rinsd]

44. And a non sequitar to boot

The high crimes part does not change that impeachment trials are political show trials.

They should begin Congressional investigations. Hell revive the special prosecutor law.

[Warpy]

7. This is just a littledifferent than an ordinary criminal case

tried before an impartial judge and jury.

I am against impeachment because it will bog Congress down when they could be doing much more important work, like investigating just how corrupt this bunch is, handing down indictments of the inner circle, and picking them off one by one so that the blivet becomes isolated and ultimately neutered.

If the blivet forces their hand by trying to declare martial law, dissolving them, or if he picks a fight with Iran, or if he simply vetoes everything that crosses his desk, that will be another matter entirely.

I prefer death by a thousand cuts. It's more effective as a cautionary tale for future men who would be king.

[Morgana LaFey]

90. No, we tried death by a thousand cuts for all his ancestors

who were treasonous bastards, and too like vampires, they lived to lie, steal, raid the Treasury and get us into war again.

[liberal N proud]

9. I would love to see him impeached - just worried about the general voters

The Democrats need to prove to the American voter that they are going to do some honest work FOR THE PEOPLE. If it can be done while actually passing some legislation that means something to the voters without dragging this country through the mud, then bu$h should pay for his crimes.
THIS IS THE DEMOCRATS BIG SHOT to show the voter they can get something done.
Prosecution of bu$h will not do that at this time.

The problem lies in the fact that election cycles are too damn short and if the Democrats don't have something to show in 08, it's all over and right back to the neo-cons. You know they will be coming after the Democrats with everything they have including the "liberal" media.

[marions ghost]

64. would you not consider

bringing the hijackers of the entire country to justice to be honest work for The People? These criminals have cost us billions, untold lives have been lost, the basic principles of democracy have been violated, many laws have been broken, and we are despised around the world. Shouldn't these grievances be addressed? It could be argued that leaving this undone would be the gravest failure, as far as prevention in the future.

I think many people expect this to be done as well as much other work. It doesn't have to be finished before 08.

[madrchsod]

10. for one thing there is not enough time

should we focus on impeachment or moving this country forward? it will take years to get this country back to where it was before 2000 so should we alienate the american people by impeachment or fixing things? i would love to see impeachment hearings but there are different ways to render him impotent with less division in our country. as i see it is far more important to make sure the democrats do what they say they are going to do than worrying about george.
oh yes we still have libby`s trial....

[tavalon]

60. Bush has veto power

We don't have a veto proof majority. Bush has his traitorous signing statements. We have no recourse against that. He needs to be removed from the equation or at least hobbled massively. That said, we can get a lot done while we are investigating their collective asses. And when all of this stuff gets to John Q. Public, the public will demand their removal. Simple. Oh and Libby's trial will be a part of the whole equation.

[oasis]

11. Dems were elected to get on with the people's business. America has spoken.

Bread and butter issues are agenda priorities.

Impeachment must be placed on the back burner.

[maseman]

22. I agree 100% Oasis

The original poster made a compelling argument for the judicial system. Congress is not the judicial system. I agree that the CEO in Chief and his VP are both very horrible people for the crimes they have committed.


However I believe it would be a bigger crime for the Democrats for taking their eye off the proverbial ball which is to work on the healthcare for all, helping save social security, making sure vets have their benefits reistated, making tuition for college easier to pay including Pell Grants, increasing science for stem cell research, keeping the fundie nuts from filtering back into the system, protecting a women's right to choose, getting out troops and loved ones out of Iraq, dealing with Iran, dealing with N. Korea, reducing global warming, and much more.

Impeaching the President is at this point nothing more then an emotional response of a pissed off electorate. By the way...I am one of those pissed off people. I hate the administration for what they have done.

But the bottom line is the bigger goal is for overall better government. 2/3 of the Senate will NOT vote to impeach Bush. It would backfire.

[oasis]

26. I recommend your list of Dem priorities to other posters on this thread.(eom)

[txindy]

39. What maseman said. Absolutely.

:applause:

[caseycoon]

56. Also, maseman...

Much as I would like to see the creep blasted, we have to think ahead to '08. If our Dems do as you are saying we will have a MUCH better chance of doing well in that election. If we spend the time & the millions of tax dollars it would take to TRY to impeach we'd be out on our butts.

[WI_DEM]

12. first steps in impeachment is when dems hold hearings

we can't just go in there and impeach. Hearings will be held and we'll see what comes out of that.

[warrens]

14. Try them, then

I want the fuckers impeached, but I'm not willing to distract from getting stuff done I want more. We have a moment in time to end the corruption, kill the far right dead, and get financial relief for the middle class, among others. That's more important to me than to unsuccessfully impeach a lame duck. If he committed crimes, he's liable, and we are going to have plenty of investigations that will call their behavior into question. If they committed crimes, let the courts have them.

Remember what happened to the Repukes when they shut down the government to go after Clinton.

[Beaverhausen]

15. People are dying in Iraq- we have to stop that first

Health care costs are too high.

Minimum wage needs to be increased.

Poverty and hunger need to be eradicated.

These issues are too urgent to waste time impeaching these people. If we get a handle on the war, then sure, impeach. But I say there are more important things to do first.

[Mythsaje]

16. CONGRESS first...

I'll keep saying until people get the point.

The exit polls show that CORRUPTION was one of the voters' primary concerns. Congressional approval is in the toilet We can do what the voters asked, investigate corruption and take care of the country's business at the same time.

By investigating Congress and rooting out corruption there, we can also collect evidence against Bush at the same time, but by a more circuitous route. He will block any direct attempts at investigating HIM, but by leveraging our investigations and evidence of Congressional misdealings, we can force the issue behind the scenes and make the Republicans starting pointing fingers at each other.

The last thing we can afford, as a country, is to let them scapegoat the President and walk away more or less unstained by the experience.

Impeachment isn't a bad goal, but we have to think big picture here. He's NOT the whole of our problem.

[Ellis Wyatt]

17. Winning the battle vs winning the war

having Congress divert attention away from actual legislation so everyone on the left can get their retribution on Bush & Co runs a very large risk of alienating the swing voters who made this 40+ congressional swing happen.

Is it really so important to you that you'd be willing to risk the political fall-out if the investigations don't reveal the significant corruption and lies you feel they will?

Willing to risk giving back the Congress because of it? Willing to risk losing the white house in '08 because of it?

I don't think Democratic leadership is, and I think they're right.

[bryant69]

18. I think there's two questions here

Should the House immediately begin impeachment hearings when the new congress convenes? Some people would like to see that. I don't - because that's stupid. Impeachment is a longshot at bet (despite your reassurances) if pursued in that manner.

On the other hand I'm in favor of investigations, and I am not sure there's many who don't think it woudl be a good idea to investigate Bush and his Cronies. If impeachment comes, and I hope it will, than let the investigations drive the impeachment - rather than political retribution.

This is one of those issues where I don't see that much difference between the two sides- certainly not enough difference that it justifies the belligerence.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[noonwitch]

19. I'm against it unless something new comes up.

I don't think the american people want impeachment of Bush any more than they wanted Clinton impeached.

If there was to be some new situation, or if new evidence were to surface of wrongdoing, I'd likely change my opinion, especially if it was something really bad.

[longship]

20. Not against impeachment; against Dems saying their are "for"

Dems saying they are for impeachment is like the Red Queen saying, "First the punishment, then the trial."

It would be *STUPID* for Pelosi, Conyers, or any other Dem House member to be advocating impeachment at this time.

I support Nancy, and I support John on this.

[baby_mouse]

21. I hear you, assuredly, but it will not simply be a trial, whether you and I like it or not.

Impeachment is going to be more than that, impeachment is the symbolic castration of the country's leader, and consequently all the people who supported him. I know it sounds overblown, but there it is. It IS how it will be seen.

If OJ Simpson had been trapped in a mansion with no way of getting out *and* had had the power to swing the country through mass hypnosis to the favouring of all murders over innocents ONLY if he was tried but not otherwise, AND it would only be a matter of two years before he lost that power, would you have him tried before or after those two years were up?

What do you want? The trial, or the conviction?

*I* want the conviction. I don't think it's out of the question to have the lot of them done for war crimes in the Dems win in 2008. It's only a matter of signing up to the World Court, which the Dems will do.

Don't get me wrong. Seeing him impeached at the will of the populace would be bloody amazing, and *might* be on the cards. I just think we need to be sure that that's what they were voting for a few days ago...

[mmonk]

23. In honor of the leadership saying no to impeachment,

I will make a donation to the Center for Constitutional Rights. They will fight. They will take the lawbreakers in our government to court. Pray they get judges that don't believe in "unitary executives" and other such unconstitutional bullshit. The CCR will fight for me and every American.

[Greyhound]

38. Here is a direct link to their donation page.

I see the points that both sides of this issue make, and neither one is completely wrong nor right.

Your idea has merit, but I'm not sure it is possible to carry out until after the cabal has left office. Anyway, here's the link;
https://secure.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/ccr/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=166&t=CCR%20donate.dwt

[bvar22]

24. Impeachment??? Not yet.

Lets get "the evidence" first.

1) Investigate.

2) Collect "Evidence".

3) Compile "Testimony".

4) If the evidence warrents, file charges.

5) THEN (and only then), IMPEACH with an airtight case for criminality.

Sorry, but the "Impeach NOW!" crowd has the cart before the horse.

[elehhhhna]

28. DING DING DING You win. Spot on.

[ourbluenation]

33. exactly. let it reveal itself to the People.

drip by drip...

[Morgana LaFey]

93. Pssst. Don't tell anyone -- the People already know!

A majority were in favor of impeachment over the wiretapping, and a majority over the lies to get us into war.

The People appear a lot smarter than some better-informed DUers after all.

[baby_mouse]

36. Just so.

"And it was in this PRECISE fashion, O Best Beloveds" granny will say on 2040 to her grandchildren, "that the New Era began..."

Having said that, it might not take a particularly long time to get the horse in front of the cart at ALL. I smell fear in them thar republican message boards...

Not that it makes any difference. :-) The Dems can take exactly as long as they LIKE over getting the horse WHEREVER THEY DAMN WELL WANT.

[porphyrian]

37. I think there's a lot of confusion about this very thing.

Many of the people who appear to be against impeachment probably aren't against it, just more inclined to follow the steps you outline before calling it. Many of the people who appear to be for impeachment probably do want to follow the procedure you outline, but are calling for it now as the wheels of Democracy spin slow as a motherfucker. I think emotions are high and people are doing more shouting than listening, but who am I to criticize?

[baby_mouse]

57. :-) Indeed... NT

[Mr_Spock]

50. I've been saying this repeatedly

There is a procedure to go through.

I'll be shocked if there are no investigations. If the result of the investigation shows that they have committed impeachable offenses, then is it the duty of the Dems to impeach.

One step at a time...

[hughee99]

62. Excellent point, but I don't think Bush will leave office...

The Dems will take over in January, collecting evidence and compiling testimony can be a lengthy process. It can also take a considerable amount of time to set the charges and get the trial going. Once that happens, we'll still need a 2/3 majority in the Senate for conviction. It's not that I think they shouldn't try, but I would be VERY surprised if they can A) get this all done in under 2 years, and B) get the 2/3 majority in the senate to kick him out.

Given that there's only 2 years left, and we don't hold a veto-proof majority, I think the Dems in office will find it more attractive to use the threat of impeachment to prevent * from vetoing their agenda. They'll do the investigations, but I doubt it will actually get * removed from office.

Just my 2 cents.

[BelgianMadCow]

67. I agree. BUT

I'sm sure you too are aware of enough facts to warrant impeachment.
It's not like we only have a feeling they're bad guys. DU knows.

So after all the frustration, the call for instant gratification u-is understandable.

The process you described should be followed. There are people who value the law and the constitution.

[gully]

75. Hear hear!

!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jillan]

96. Exactly!

It seems like everyone wants to walk in on the first day on the new Congress and start impeachment hearings.

[BlueEyedSon]

25. I ask you, was what Bush&co did worse than a BJ???

[jgraz]

depends on who's giving the BJ

[earth mom]

27. I question the motives of anyone NOT for Impeachment. Dino? DLCer? or ?

:grr:

[babsbunny]

29. CHIMPEACH!

:grr:

[Stinky The Clown]

30. Hear Hear!

K&R

[Vincardog]

31. The pRetzelnet admits to violating every one of our constitutional rights

Darth Cheney refuses to share his secret meetings with the oil companies for our energy policy. The mis-administration has ignored the courts and congress hundreds of times. WHAT THE HELL ELSE IS IMPEACHMENT FOR?

[Greyhound]

42. Exactly, and people wonder why we have no respect for the law anymore?

Our society has undergone a transformation over the last 30 - 40 years where it has become clear and accepted by the majority of the sheeple that the law only applies to those without the mean$ to hire competent counsel and the finances a vigorous defense.

We have turned our backs on those that do not have the means to protect themselves, apparently without understanding that they are us. Think about it, how many here have the tens to hundreds of thousands of $$$ it now takes to defend yourself from a criminal prosecution.

While we have made it easier and easier to prosecute by lowering the bar to the point that we have now reached where the mere accusation by virtually anyone can ruin the rest of your life, even if you did nothing and are eventually found to be innocent.

How many innocents are in jail for the supreme crime of poverty? How many of the guilty are walking free simply because they did have the means? Do we believe that this situation bears no consequences?

[Vincardog]

46. GReyhound is correct. How many black persons have been taken off the

vote rolls by the "War on Drugs"? That is part and parcel of the war on the middle class. We have to stop letting them make us fight each other and start to hold them accountable. aWoL was wrong the "Accountability moment" was not the general stolen election of 2004 it was the one where we won too big to steal in 2006. Now we have the power WE need to set the policy and steer the course.

[casus belli]

32. OK, so we spend the next two years forcing impeachment hearings...

and then we can throw away the next 30 years of political leadership in this country.

What you are asking people to do, is ignore the American people's will for change in favor of a plan for revenge.

Impeachment is NOT a new course for America. The cons have been there and done that. We need to redraw, and redefine what it is to be a majority party in this country. Spending two years seeking revenge and further dividing the country is not the way forward.

[ArmchairMeme]

34. It is not about retribution

I think the American people need more education about just what impeachment is about.

There are crimes that when committed by people in government are required by the constitution to be addressed. I believe treason and high crimes and misdemeanors. Congress needs to educate people through open investigations just what those crimes against the U.S. have to be.

I think a lot of people just don't understand the seriousness of impeachable crimes.

It begs the question if we the people tolerate treasonous crimes by those in power this time. What is to keep the next person in power from committing those crimes and then using the non-action in a previous administration as a precedent to hold themselves guiltless.

[bulletsandspikes]

40. WOULD YOU REALLY LIKE MR. I SHOT MY FRIEND IN THE FACE AND HE SAID HE WAS SORRY, FOR PRES?

[Greyhound]

43. What difference would it make?

You say it like somehow he is not already making the decisions... :shrug:

[Vincardog]

47. Darth Cheney goes down with the shrub. Every Body knows that.

Quit scaring us,It does not even want to be precedent cause it would have to disclose its' finances.

[Individualist]

51. Reality check. Darth already IS pres.

Little Lord Pissypants is merely a puppet, but Darth will go down when Pissypants does.

[greenohio]

45. Excellent post.

Now is the time.

[cassiepriam]

48. Why let Bush off the hook for his crimes and incompetence?

It just doesn't make sense to me.

[EnviroBat]

49. Right Fuggin ON!

I'm totally with you on this.

[EstimatedProphet]

53. I'd love to see an impeachment

This is a textbook situation for impeachment

[longship]

54. I'm for impeachment.

However, the House Dems *CANNOT* express that they are for impeachment. It would be like they were the Queen of Hearts, "Sentence first! Verdict afterwards." The Republicans would utterly *roast* any Democratic representative who professed to support impeachment before investigations, let alone even before the 110th Congress convenes.

They *have* to say that impeachment is off the table, because it literally *is* off the table.

The impeachment process is clearly outlined in the Constitution. Our representatives must all abide by that.

Now, us DUers do *not* have to abide by that.

Let the groundswell begin...

Impeach ChimpCo!!!

We may get there. There's precious little time, but let's first push for investigations in both the House and the Senate. We'll see how things develop.

[jgraz]

55. Impeachment is NOT a criminal trial

It's a political trial. Bush can be removed from office for many things that he can't be jailed for, and he can still be jailed whether or not he's impeached.

Personally, I'd rather see Pelosi keep his nuts in a jar on her desk for the next two years, then have President Feingold send Bush to the Hague in chains.

Could happen -- two years ago did you think we'd take the senate?

[SwingVoter2006]

58. Please, no.

Speaking as someone from the "middle" who voted party-line Dem for the first time since 2002, I would hate to see impeachment. Not because I think Bush smells like roses. But because it would come off as thinly-veiled political revenge. And I for one did not vote for political revenge. I want this Dem majority to get to work on issues that matter. Bush is dead. He's been dead since 2004. Especially now, he has ceased to matter. I don't care how much people hate him. I want to see more to this Democrat Revolution than hate. I didn't vote for hate. I voted for change, and forward progress. Impeachment does not contribute to either of these things, especially since it would fail.

This Democrat Revolution needs to focus on taking the White House in 2008. The best "revenge" that can be gotten is to excercise a total Dem majority, from the White House to the Capitol, and sweep back much of the damage Bush and his Republican majority have done. The Republicans clearly lost their way. And I think a lot of it started with the Clinton impeachment.

Dems need to show America they are made of better stuff. No impeachment. Just get to work repairing the damage, legislatively, and get ready to take the White House in two years. Bush and his people will soon be a footnote. Let them fade out with a whimper, instead of a bang.

[Morgana LaFey]

92. No. Heavens no.

Why do some people insist on "interpreting" seeking justice as "revenge"? Absolute nonsense. Are you SO afraid criticism, objections from a few, hurting people's feelings, potentially making them angry?

And the public won't be fooled about this impeachment, just as they haven't been fooled when a majority of them said they'd be for impeachment over the wiretapping and would be in favor of impeachment if it were shown Bush lied us into war.

Did you not get a good feel for the overwhelming turnout to get these bastards out of office? According to Exit Polls the #1 reason was the CORRUPTION. Voters want accountability. The #2 reason was Iraq. THey also want us out of Iraq.

Accountability REQUIRES that wrongdoing be investigated, exposed, and consequences meted out. That means punishment. Consequences (punishment) is not revenge, it's justice.

If we do NOT hold these criminals accountable -- FULLY accountable -- we only embolden them and enable them to rise again and do more and worse, just as has been happening within the Bush Crime Family since the 1930s (Samuel Prescott helping finance the Nazis and even when we were already at war with them), if not before.

[GeorgeGist]

59. One more question for you audience...

why are you afraid of a Constitutional Crisis. After all, it was that fear that the SCOTUS used to justify Bush's selection.

[Sgent]

63. Who said anything about trying Bush

Impeachment isn't a realistic option.

If a US Attorney wants to indict him for violating the Geneva Conventions in 2009 I'm all for it.

W/O 2/3rd's of the Senate, impeachment is meaningless -- and unless bush is caught shooting his wife on national camera, there is no way that 2/3 of the senate will agree.

[roamer65]

70. I am for doing investigations...

and building a solid, airtight case against GW Bush and Dick Cheney for war crimes. If they are in office when the investigations are complete, then impeach, convict and then try them in the Hague for war crimes. If they are not in office, then they need to be directly tried in the Hague. Nonetheless, we have to take the time to do the complete investigations. Then we'll go from there and one small note...when they leave office, they lose most if not all of their immunity.:evilgrin:

[BootinUp]

72. You sound like the repukes that impeached Clinton n/t

[SwingVoter2006]

76. Gotta agree

Vengeance should be a low priority for the Dem leadership.

America cares where it is GOING, not where it has BEEN.

Headhunting Bush might feel good, viscerally, but what good does it do the average American?

None.

[bridgit]

82. welcome to du, SwingVoter2006...

:toast:

[Laelth]

77. In case you forgot ...

... Clinton couldn't get anything done during the last 3 or so years of his presidency, precisely because of the impeachment. That's exactly where I want Bush ... completely hamstrung.

And this isn't about vengeance. It's about standing up for people sent to a war based on lies. It's about standing up for the Constitution. It's about showing the American people that we do, in fact, have a spine and can fight the Repukes. How can they trust us to fight against terrorists if we don't even dare to fight the Republicans?

-Laelth

[Laelth]

74. Hear, hear!

Nicely said.

:applause:

-Laelth

[bridgit]

78. three of the best reasons to consider something other than impeachment...

especially in the case of OJ; no...i do not want endless CNN, Fox, MSNBC, CourtTV coverage of an issue that negatively impacts time-wise on a host of issues that need to be turned around right now!!

OJ doesn't give two figs for proper prescription drug benefits, as doesn't Lindh, or did Lay, or dumping out fossil fuels in lieu of rewnewables

Time Is Of The Essence ~

i am therefore not willing to see days, months, and perhaps years being chewed up while the meters of precious air time are seen spinning for the ad dollars they produce

let the essentials of the people's business go forth first, impeachment flows from within an over-all sense of process, while important for the world to be known that we will not abide by such antics even in a president; impeachment is not imo a singular stance, not our only reason to exist...

when bush can always be dragged to the Hague in either case

[H2O Man]

79. Good questions.

Great post. Thank you.

[Major Hogwash]

80. Let our Congressmen know WE expect justice to be served.

And that includes IMPEACHMENT!!

[CarbonDate]

83. Bush is a PUPPET.

Impeach him and his network of conspirators will replace him with another puppet. Nothing gained, nothing resolved.

Take out his network of conspirators until all that's left is Bush and Cheney. Insist on moderate Republicans to fill the emptied slots when confirmation time comes.

THEN impeach.

[BlooInBloo]

85. They don't care about what's right - they just wanna play the wussiest...

... political-don't-rock-the-boat-triangulating-don't-step-on-any-toes-be-as-plain-wonder-bread-as-you-can-avoid-controversy-at-all-costs game that they possibly can.

And they project that cravenness onto Senator Clinton - rofl!

It's amazing that we won with that kind of cowardice. It's clear they don't read (or else care about) what Glenn Greenwald has to say.

[sendero]

86. Find some real..

... criminal actions that the VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS agree is impeachable, and I'll change my mind.

For the time being, I believe in fighting hard like Repukes, I believe in steamrolling the opposition when possible, like the Repukes, I believe in tough rhetoric like the Repukes but I don't believe in actions that will APPEAR TO MANY AMERICANS as vindictive tit for tat.

[NotGivingUp]

87. all criminals should be tried for their crimes...ESPECIALLY

those at the top.

[CrazyForKucinich]

91. Recommended.

Good points.

The President is not above the law.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

95. Do we pursue justice... or is it we the

sheeple. The egregious crimes and overt nature demand that we investigate and prosecute to the full extent of the law. NO ifs, NO buts, or the integrity of America becomes severely compromised!

:evilfrown: :evilfrown: :grr: :grr: :shrug: :shrug: