Pelosi and Conyers are right: No impeachment.

[hiaasenrocks]

I’m not concerned that the new Democratic majority is going to attempt impeachment, but those in favor of it should stop and think.

There is no way the American people are going to stand for another impeachment process. The majority of the public was against it when Clinton was impeached. Some of that was due to those who were loyal to Clinton, but some of it was just simple pragmatism on the part of the people. Reasonable people know that it’s bad for the country.

The Democrats have been out of power for a dozen years and have finally regained control. Impeachment would shatter this progress.

If you want to lose potential votes in the “red states” then encourage impeachment.

If you want to lose potential votes in the light blue states then encourage impeachment.

If you want to chase away moderates—people who voted for positive change—then encourage impeachment.

Bush’s hands are somewhat tied at this point. He has lost the entire legislative branch of the federal government. He is now in a position that forces compromise on nearly every issue facing this country.

The Democratic Party is now in a position to set the table for 2008. With 21 Republican senate seats up for re-election in 2008, we can’t afford to blow the opportunity to expand the current majority. We can’t afford to lose these hard fought seats in the House. And we can’t afford to send a Democratic presidential candidate into the general election with the baggage of having to defend impeachment.

We can’t blow this. And it appears that Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Conyers are smart enough to recognize all of this.

[davidwparker]

1. How about if the evidence is so strong that all those who joined the

Dems to vote out the republicans also join the Dems to favor impeachment/removal?

[hiaasenrocks]

8. Doubt it.

Put simply, it's unlikely that anything of the sort will come to light without impeachment hearings. The process would already be started. It's too risky.

Again, as I said, it's bad for the country and bad for the party. We can be much more effective in shaping the policy, riding out his last two years and setting the table for '08 to ensure that none of these neocons are in power after '08.

[AndyTiedye]

26. Congress Can INVESTIGATE and Call Hearings to INVESTIGATE

There will be no impeachment hearings until we start uncovering evidence of impeachable offenses.
They won't have to dig very deep to find them. The regime has gotten away with all this so
far because the Republican Congress does not dig at all.

[hiaasenrocks]

28. That's fine. I'm not against hearings. I want them.

What we can't do (and what Pelosi and Conyers said they won't do, thank goodness) is start on some blind hunt of impeachment.

It would be stupid to do so. I trust the leaders that got us to this victory and it looks like they have their eyes on the future.

[AndyTiedye]

31. Actually DO The Investigations Already Mandated for 9/11…

…I bet they'll find plenty of impeachable activity there.

[hiaasenrocks]

33. If they do, then start drafting bills of impeachment.

I would totally agree with the process you've described, which seems far and away from what some DU'ers are calling for.

By the way, thanks for being civil and serious minded.

[elocs]

40. No sense in putting the cart before the horse.

If impeachment is going to happen, then it is a far better idea to strongly build the case for it until public clamors for it. In practical terms, there most likely is not time for any kind of impeachment that does not look like anything other than payback for Clinton. Because if impeachment is called for then it should stand on its own merits and not be compared to why Clinton was impeached. If impeached, Bush, like Clinton, would not be convicted and would serve out his term. Oversight hearings and investigations would accomplish the same thing without making the Democrats seem like they are only about impeachment 24/7.

[yurbud]

83. without getting their behavior judged and punished as criminal, they ...

will be back sooner not later.

Democrats have too often made the opposite mistake--forgive & forget (& find a knife in your back).

[Pharaoh]

2. Bullcrap

impeachment for a blow job was nuts!

For war crimes and robbing the treasury it is apropos

[hiaasenrocks]

10. You won't get that kind of evidence without

starting an impeachment process blindly.

I agree with you about Clinton's impeachment, but I think a large part of the majority that opposed it did so on the principle that it was bad for the country.

This is just my opinion. If you want to risk the future of the party's potential for power, it looks like you're out of luck.

[elocs]

32. That's exactly it. Many would prefer to make the next 2 years all about

impeachment, risking the Democratic Party's future potential for power. Sure the Dems could impeach Bush, but he would never be convicted. Have the oversight hearings and investigations along with doing the other things needed to further the Democratic ideas and issues which is what the American people expect. Or is impeachment the only Democratic issue to the exclusion of all else?

[hiaasenrocks]

34. Right. And if something comes up that is

glaringly illegal or against the Consitution, then impeachment won't be a problem. Setting off on a blind hunt for evidence, however, would be insane, and that seems to be what some people around here were calling for.

[Howardx]

44. why wouldnt he be convicted?

why is there a massive wave of people on here arguing against impeachment? almost like it was organized or something.....

[earth mom]

51. Exactly-organized by Dinos or DLCers or perhaps the rethugs themselves. eom

[Howardx]

60. seems a little curious

doesnt it?

[earth mom]

63. I used to spar with freepers on another site-not freeperville-and

I've gotten pretty good at sniffing them out if I do say so myself!

[hiaasenrocks]

59. Does common sense need organization?

Perhaps in some circles.

What you're seeing is a response to the calls for impeachment that make no sense at this stage. Don't worry, there's no conspiracy here.

Now, I'm going to eat! I'll check back later to defend my post and inject some more common sense here. :)

[earth mom]

65. Common sense dictates not letting the criminals off scot free.

Otherwise this is not a Democracy-BY AND FOR THE PEOPLE-and the Constitution may as well be shredded just as the criminals have been trying to do.

p.s. Conspiracy has nothing to do with any of it. Don't even go there.

[hiaasenrocks]

70. Who is suggesting that we let them go "scot free"?

The reason I used the word conspiracy is because that's exactly what it was looking like in this subthread. Talk of DLCers or anyone else launching an "organized" effort here would amount to exactly that. But you knew that.

[elocs]

67. Where exactly will the 67 votes to convict in the Senate come from?

Why did the new Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, say that impeachment is off the table? Is she just stupid or part of a massive anti-impeachment conspiracy?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

68. I care less about the party and maintaining power than I care about the truth

Having ALL the truth come out is far, far more important to me than the future of the Democratic Party itself. I only adhere to the Party because I think it's truer to my values than the other side. But I value truth above all and I want to know what happened under Bush. Personally, I'm like you in that I don't really care whether Bush gets impeached or not. But what I do care about is getting the true facts and ALL of the true facts about 9/11, the lead up to the Iraq war, Katrina, energy policy, ad nauseum out there before the American public in all their naked ingloriousness. We absolutely CANNOT let this pass. We CANNOT let Bush end his term without getting at the intimate details of his acts. We CANNOT let crimes and corruption, if they exist, go unnoticed and unreported forever. Whether it takes committee investigations, a Special Prosecutor, or impeachment proceedings, the process is not as important as the result which is knowing the true extent of all that Bush has done to this country.

[rainy]

71. exactly, justice is justice and peoples lives have been ruined

people have died and crimes have been committed.

[Gwerlain]

87. See, I agree with you here.

I care more about finding all this out than I do about impeaching Shrub. If you start with impeaching the pResident, you don't find these other things out. If you start with investigating, it ALL comes out; impeachment follows as a natural result. Meanwhile, what with all the investigating, and all the stuff they're going to have to do to start getting out of Iraq (and I don't think there's any question whether that's happening), and all the maneuvering they're going to be doing to try to deal with the Democratic majorities, they'll hopefully be too busy to get up to anything really evil. Not to mention, if they continue to do evil shit, it's gonna be subject to oversight, which is more hearings, and more subpoenas, and more busy-work.

KO was speculating last night that Darth Cheney is on the outs with this administration now. He can't be fired, but he can sure as hell resign. AND he can sure as hell be impeached. And if what CorpGovActivist and IdesOfOctober have been telling us here is right, he's sure to be. It's entirely possible that Plamegate will take him down; and that's not his only weakness, there is after all Halliburton. In any case, he's apparently gonna get the Cactus Jack treatment. For those not familiar, Cactus Jack Garner was FDR's vice president twice, and he later told LBJ that the vice presidency "isn't worth a bucket of warm spit." Drink up, Unka Prick!

[MUAD_DIB]

12. Agreed. BUsh is responsible for how much loss

of life and $$ in Iraq?


Is he going to get a free pass?


Start imvestigating, put him under oath, and screw him into the ground when he gets cuaght lying.

[wryter2000]

17. Yup, yup, yup

If we ever got to the point where the whole country was begging us to get rid of him and the Republicans didn't dare try to rescue him, then impeachment might be worthwhile.

That can only happen after extensive investigations, but seriously, by the time we got to that point, he'd probably have a week left in office, anyway.

[MUAD_DIB]

20. Then let him leave office in total humiliation.

Worst President ever. Period.

[elocs]

53. Impeachment without conviction means that Bush finishes his term.

I don't see 15 Republican senators joining the Democrats to vote for convictions after impeachment. Could we even be sure that every Democrat would vote for conviction? Plus, this is not like the old West where trial, conviction, and hanging all occur in a day. There is not enough time and if Democrats try and speed this through they will find a payback price by the voters in 2008 who expect more from the support they just gave the Democratic Party in throwing out the Republicans.

[elocs]

42. Impeachment of Bush should be about Bush and what he has done.

It should have nothing to do with Clinton's impeachment. Continually bringing up Clinton's impeachment as the reason why Bush deserves it more only makes it look like you are out for payback and revenge. Which is probably the truth.

[LTR]

3. Totally agree!

The cries for impeachment are far too short-sighted. Way too much potential to bite us in the ass and make Chimpy look like a martyr.

Better to bust ass, get stuff done, wrap-up Iraq and embarass him that way.

However, I have no qualms about the Democrats using their new subpoena power. And I hope they do.

[mvd]

4. Investigations are just sensible after all Bush has done

And if they lead to impeachment, that will be the way to go.

[Old and In the Way]

5. Remember how Clinton wanted to throttle back on Iran-Contra for

the sake of the country? Lot of good that did him....and us. Sorry, this is not about playing nice. This is about sending a message to future Presidential meaglomaniacs that, when you ignore warnings and let 3000 Americans die...you are held accountable. When you start wars on manufactured evidence to enhance your power and make your friends rich while destroying innocent people...you are held accountable.

For those that don't have the stomach for holding our elected officials accountable, let me ask you to define what constitutes an impeachable offense? How many Americans have to die before we hold our President accountable? Would 30,000 Americans dying on 9/11 be the threshold? 300,000? How many Iraqis?

Since when does justice take a backseat to table manners?

[pauldp]

37. Yep.

Going after the cancer is the way to start healing the country.

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. Breaking laws DEMANDS investigations.

They CANNOT break the laws of our land and get away with it. Reagan got away with it and THAT is why we are where we are today. IT MUST BE STOPPED!

[bahrbearian]

13. The Laws were not made to Punish the Privileged or Politicians

[in_cog_ni_to]

15. Oops...that's right. Silly me.

:crazy:

I'm praying they don't get away with all the crap they have done in the last 6 years.:(

[madfloridian]

7. I agree.

.

[BlueStater]

9. Since when is impeachment optional?

They all took an oath to defend the Constitution so when they ignore a law-breaking president they're clearly not doing their jobs.

[hiaasenrocks]

22. Since the Constitution was signed.

[PSPS]

11. Your premise is wrong, hence your conclusion

The majority of the public was against it when Clinton was impeached. Some of that was due to those who were loyal to Clinton, but some of it was just simple pragmatism on the part of the people. Reasonable people know that it’s bad for the country.

It had nothing to do with "pragmatism" or it being "bad for the country."

People knew that Clinton's impeachment was an attempted coup by the very real Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. The guys behind it are all crooks. Even "Horny" Hyde admitted as much adding that it was political payback for Nixon.

In this case, I think impeachment would be the best thing for the country, not bad at all.

In days gone by, criminal cabals like bush's would have their lifeless corpses strung up on lamp posts. These days, some prefer less draconian actions. But we'll have to do something to demonstrate to the world that we're not the rogue terrorist nation we've been for the last six years. If bush and his thugs skate, what will that tell the world about our proclaimed devotion to justice?

[hiaasenrocks]

18. Here's the reason for my premise.

I know at least two dozen Republicans and at least half of them opposed impeachment. These were Clinton haters, some of them family members, some co-workers. They opposed it because it was bad for the country. I remember seeing polls about this as well. I stand by the premise.

And you'll never get the type of evidence you're dreaming about unless you risk starting the process.

Thankfully, Pelosi and Conyers are thinking bigger and thinking long-term.

[wryter2000]

14. Plus

There's no chance of getting him removed, anyway. If we did impeach him, it would only be symbolic and some of the symbolism would be damaging to us.

I say, investigate the heck out of him.

[roseBudd]

16. I agree, I want to watch Dumbya stew for two years...

I want to see him reenact his debate performance for the next 2 years.

There are too many important things that need to be dealy with. Impeachment is a sideshow.

[hiaasenrocks]

30. Yep. He's already in a box.

Let's keep him there and set up for the future.

[kestrel91316]

19. Here's why I decided maybe impeachment is not the beat thing to do:

because TORTURING the SOB for the next two years will be so much more fun.

He himself decided torture was a-ok. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, *.

Make him squirm. Make him cry. Drag his sorry ass in front of one investigation after another. Document the perjury. And then once he's out of office, sic the dogs (prosecutors) on him.

[Wetzelbill]

21. there are things that have to be looked into

whether they lead to anything further I don't know. As for just blindly going for impeachment, I hope not. I think it is far more important to look into the Iraq reconstruction and intelligence problems, as well as the Katrina disaster. Look into the energy task force and so on as well, but do it fairly and objectively. Any decision on that stuff should be just and equitable, we can't be hatchet jobbers like the Clinton haters were. None of this investigating Xmas card list BS, you know? :)

[TahitiNut]

23. That's the kind of partisan apologetic that makes me glad I'm an independent.

Despicable. :puke:

[hiaasenrocks]

24. LOL

[TahitiNut]

25. Glad you think war crimes and the deaths of 700,000 are funny.

:eyes:

[hiaasenrocks]

27. Yes, of course, that's exactly what I was saying.

Please. Give me a f'n break.

You didn't have anything substantive to say. All you had was a personal swipe. Your post wasn't worth anything more than what I responded with. And I'll assume the same of your future posts.

Cheers!

Edit: spelling

[TahitiNut]

45. I've made my position clear.

It was YOUR choice to open yet another thread on impeachment rather than engage in the EXISTING discussion thread, so DON"T pretend to claim others haven't said something substantive. That's just arrogant BULLSHIT!

I find absolutely NOTHING of merit in your post. Nothing. It pretends to both read the minds of "the American people" and read the pseudo-consequentialist's crystal ball. On top of that, it raises partisan politics above both Justice and Constitutionality. That's MORE horse shit. It pretends that the impatience people had with the inquisition of CLinton had nothing to do with the lack of any merit in that Inquisition and was solely due to the impeachment process itself. That's EVEN MORE horse shit! The post was horse shit omn top of fallacies on top of the pretense of seeing into the future. Total garbage.

Like I say, there's absolutely NOTHING of merit in your post.

My position is clear ... in 100% agreement with H20 Man's thread and my post within it at http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2659066&mesg_id=2664677

So take your "assume the same" and stick it where the sun don't shine.

[hiaasenrocks]

54. To the poster in this subthread:

I forgot your name already, but wanted to let you know you're on my ignore list, so I didn't see your last response. Should have mentioned that earlier. :)

[TahitiNut]

58. !

Asshole!

[Last Stand]

29. If Conyers says it, it is so.

The man is the embodiment of justice. He has my goals at heart. It trust him implicitly.

[Gloria]

35. It's better to get all the facts out first....

then, with the Presidential race beginning in about a year, it may be better to skip impeachment and just hammer the facts. That will be political as it is and the GOP will whine like crazy. Add impeachment and they'll whine so much the FACTS will be forgotten....and the media will help them. We'll never get a "bipartisan" impeachment from this crowd like during the Nixon era. Impeaching Clinton didn't help the GOP, so we have to be careful not to be perceived as doing a revenge thing....

[Marr]

36. Investigations are what's important- and I don't think anyone is

seriously arguing against investigations.

Let's see what the political landscape looks like after a few rocks have been turned over, what do you say? I'm not anxious for impeachment, but I'm not averse to the idea either.

[hiaasenrocks]

38. Totally agree.

That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is to start off on impeachment. That's what some people want. It makes no sense.

[Marr]

41. I definitely agree with you there. I think it may just be that you're

making sort of a subtle point. People are pissed, and understanably so. But yeah- just busting into office and moving to impeach would not look good at all. It'd be alot of symbolism for little practical gain. And I agree that something like that would have negative political implications in 2008.

Yep. One step at a time. If impeachment is at the end of the sidewalk, fine. But I want a little more from this win than just an idiot frat boy's head on a plate. I want to see some practical advancement of populist economic policies.

[Vidar]

39. Bullshit. Let Conyers be Conyers!

[Swamp Rat]

43. No, YOU stop and think... better yet, get on a bus and come to New Orleans.

"There is no way the American people are going to stand for another impeachment process." - Speak for yourself. Every living and breathing American I know is demanding "IMPEACHMENT NOW!"

"Impeachment would shatter this progress." - your opinion, not based on fact. Clinton was a POPULAR president impeached over a BLOWJOB. Bush is COMPLETELY different.

Dammit! It is NOT about votes!!!

Americans want JUSTICE! We want the war to end, the torture prisons to close, the soldiers to come home, and our CONSTITUTION restored!

WE IN NEW ORLEANS DEMAND JUSTICE!

[hiaasenrocks]

48. Been there. Have family there.

When you tell me to speak for myself, you might try doing that as well.

I have five family members in N.O. (Three are Democrats, for the record.) None of them uttered one word about impeachment, and neither did any of their friends and neighbors that I met.

If there's any substantive evidence to support impeachment, fine, but we'll have to see about that. Until such time, I think you're in the extreme minority.

[Swamp Rat]

55. I AM speaking for my self and NEW ORLEANIANS. Your OP is in the subjunctive.

You are not in New Orleans.

I am.

Today I asked over a hundred people.

Every single one says IMPEACH.

[hiaasenrocks]

62. Wow! You did a poll of over a hundred people? Just today?

That's impressive. Congrats.

But my point still stands. You don't speak for "New Orleanians" on the whole, as you say you do. That's pretty arrogant.

Seriously, I do wish you the best in N.O.

[Swamp Rat]

66. Whether you like it or not, for many on this board I speak for New Orleans

Long ago, on numerous occasions, DUers stated that I "speak for" or "represent New Orleans," so I do not believe it is an "arrogant" stance to take at this time. In fact, this is the first time I have overtly made this determination, mainly because you say you are from New Orleans and are you telling me something quite different than my visceral experience.

I have not yet spoken with my republican friends, nor anyone from Jefferson Parish, nor the wealthy elite in the Garden District, so there may be a few here and there who tremble at the thought of impeachment, or are under the false impression that if we speak out against the president we will not get federal help. I challenge you to ask your relatives this question: "If impeaching George Bush would end the bureaucratic mess that is FEMA and free up the funds for rebuilding New Orleans, would you support the Congress in doing so?"

This of us who have immensely suffered here in New Orleans want impeachment. I regularly go to community meetings, I have spent a lot of time in Gentilly, 7th Ward, Treme, 9th Ward, Central City, I have gone door to door and looked into the eyes of my fellow New Orleanians - we want impeachment.

[TahitiNut]

75. You're far more qualified to speak for New Orleansians than ...

... some are for "Democrats" or "what the American people voted for" ... that's for damned sure. I agree ... the Bushtards ARE responsible for the deaths of hundreds upon hundreds of stranded people on the Gulf Coast. That's been mind-boggling malfeasance in office!

The freaking Tutucrats and "concern trolls" are thicker than cockroaches today.

[Geek_Girl]

46. I don't agree with this and here is why

Unless they Investigate, Impeach, and convict these ass hats will be pulling the same shit some time down the road only next time it will probably be worse. The past few years have been like the late 60's and it always seems to be the same old criminals pulling the strings.

[bread_and_roses]

47. and when the investigations prove that impeachable offenses have been committed?

what are they supposed to say? "oh, that's ok, georgie-porgy, we know you meant well"? Are War Crimes not impeachable offenses? Is disregarding the Law not impeachable? Manipulating Intellegence for Political ends?

Of course the Democrats are not going to open Congress by Impeaching that miserable little puppet because they don't like him. But it seems beyond possibility that genuine investigations will not reveal impeachable offenses. The Congress has the responsibility of protecting the Constitution, and that includes protecting it from disregard by the Executive Branch. The Congress also has a responsibility to the Nation and through the various International Laws to which we are signatory (including the Geneva Conventions) the World.

[hiaasenrocks]

50. I've addressed that question several times. n/t

[Gwerlain]

49. Pardon me for asking, but where did either of them say that? n/t

[Cleita]

52. Conyers and Pelosi are making nicey until they are actually

in power. Then it will be up to us, the people, to campaign for his impeachment by letters and petitions until they can't ignore us. I'm sure Conyers already has the list of treasonous offenses ready to go and it's up to us though to make sure they do it. That way it doesn't make the Democratic leadership look like they are out for blood.

In world politics, bringing this cabal of criminals to justice, is the only thing that's going to restore our standing in the world. We need to show them that we take care of our problems when the world has been adversely affected by them.

[Swamp Rat]

57. ¡Gracias a Dios!

Yo estaba esperando para alguien a decir esto. :applause:

[capi888]

56. Let the investigations begin...

As the investigations begin with evidence to the American People of treason, will demand that the present administration be impreached. WE MUST investigate FIRST!!! the people will cry out for impeachment...loudly.
We have so much on the table to undo, and our new speaker and Congress, wants to show the American People, we are doing the peoples business for a change, to give them a sense of leadership, and that they are creating a change. We have to regain trust before we even venture into a discussion of Impeachment.
One step at a time. We have control now, starting off with Impeachment is not what we need to do until trust in the new congress by the people is established. When they see wages going up, health care , etc and unified Dems, their trust will start coming back. The people have to be convinced by evidence of treason....and now they are just waiting to see what the Dems do...
I also feel in my heart...that the past 4 years, there is already established evidence, however, we still do not have vast trust of the people. they do not want the courts stopping policies that will benefit the people. Patience is needed....six months will make a big difference....

[Guaranteed]

61. Kick a politically sensible post. nt

[cushla_machree]

64. Impeachment is always bad for the country

But thats not why you should be for or against it.

There is no way the American people are going to stand for another impeachment process.

Thats not what it is about. First come investigations. Should we not do them because of the poor american people? If Bush is investigated and they find gross misconduct...then if impeachment is the right course it should be followed. Bush should not get away with high crimes and misdemeanors just for the sake of not putting the american people through it, or worrying about relection in 2008. If there is enough evidence uncovered...then he should face the music...our democracy is more important than being afraid to dig up dirt and get the american public 'angry.' This is not a blow job we are talking about here, we are talking about the death of the Iraqi people, our own soldiers, we are talking about torture and spying and lies. Frankly I think there is a whole pile of impeacheable offenses...but this isn't a witch hunt. If there is proof and evidence, then logically impeachment should always be an option. For clinton, they wanted to impeach so they basically tried and suceeded in entraping him. Impeachment for bush would not be a trap, it would be because of his actions and based on the law and public will.

[Disturbed]

69. "Bush’s hands are somewhat tied at this point.."

His hand can still sign his name to signing statements.

[NotGivingUp]

72. Clinton was impeached for bullshit. There is no comparison.

[NotGivingUp]

73. IMPEACHMENT!...i'm not settling for less! i cant' believe you

or anyone else are going to compare the impeachment of clinton to bush. one has nothing to do with the other. and if people want to continue to propagandise this bullshit...get your ass out of this country.

[LibertyorDeath]

74. Cheney needs to be impeached

The most Corrupt politician in modern American history
needs to be impeached no if's and's or but's
about it.

[upi402]

76. y.e.t.

:evilgrin:
shhhhh

[OneBlueSky]

77. impeachment is a POLITICAL action . . . what we need is justice . . .

and that comes by bringing the perpetrators of crimes before a court of law . . . or courts, as the case may be . . . and that can be done after they leave office . . .

two years is a very short time politically . . . if we don't focus on correcting some of the disastrous BushCo decisions of the past six years and establish a record that demonstrates that we can govern, our reign as a Congressional majority may be a short one . . .

people want solutions to the problems that affect them -- health care, the war in Iraq, environmental devastation, rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, protection of civil rights and civil liberties, etc. . . if we don't spend our time addressing these issues and at least making some progress toward solutions, the trust they have given us with this election will be squandered . . .

so lets investigate and establish the grounds for prosecution while we work to solve real problems . . . but let's not waste our time on a political action that will literally consume the government and the nation for the next two years and pretty much prevent anything else from happening . . .

[rman]

78. The majority was against impeached of Clinton because

they figured an extramarital affair is not an impeachable offense. That's why Clinton was so popular during the impeachment proceedings against him.

Treason, as in going to war based on lies and wrecking the constitution, is quite a different matter. Don't you agree?

[GeorgeGist]

79. You ought to get yourself...

a Baloney Meter before you make a fool of yourself.

[yurbud]

80. people aren't so stupid that they see impeachment of Bush & Clinton as

identical.

With a constant media drumbeat for Clinton's impeachment, public support for it never broke 30%. By contrast, the very first poll on impeaching Bush had over 50% support.

The supposed and actual offenses are as different as double parking and genocide.


Without at least an attempted impeachment, Bush's sins will not only be subject to whitewashing, but the dissent against his actions will be sanitized and then forgotten as well.

With impeachment, we put a permanent stain on this president and his war, and like Andrew Johnson, if Bush's name is remembered at all, it will be as the guy who was impeached for starting a war to give another country's oil to his cronies.

The democrats have not been out of power because they stood on principle, but because they triangulated, compromised, and stood by silently while our democratic system and middle class were methodically and openly raped and assaulted.

If Bush is not impeached, Dems will show the same contempt for the rule of law through inaction that the GOP showed through actions like ordering our soldiers to sexually humiliate Iraqi prisoners, 60% of whom the Army's own investigation found did nothing wrong.

Moderates and red staters understand the rule of law, and not all are potential members of a lynch mob. In fact, Bush is down to only one or two states where his approval rating is over 50%. The only people who will be offended by his impeachment will be the business interests he services like oil, rebuilding, and defense contractors, and those who are paid to be offended.

[Jawja]

81. The top priorities

of the 110th Congress should be to investigate the diasappearance of billion$ of taxpaper dollars in Iraq; pass legislation requiring federally mandated transparent and auditable elections with a PAPER TRAIL; investigate the intelligence "failure" leading to the illegal Iraq invasion and occupation; amend or repeal the Military Commissions Act; amend or repeal Patriot Acts I and II; investigate the violation of the FISA law by the Bush criminal government; and repeal or amend the "no child left behind" farce.

This is a start. The three investigations I mentioned could lead to impeachment. Investigations are top priority; impeachment could very well be the result when these crimes are exposed to the public.

[yurbud]

82. another analysis LINK

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2670712&mesg_id=2670712

[AliceWonderland]

84. Investigations are an excellent first step

But given: using lies to launch an invasion, 9/11, Military Commissions Act, NSA wiretapping, PATRIOT Act, proposal of TIA, signing statements, Enron, use of torture, energey scandals, even using the term "war" when a president does not have constitutional power to declare war, etc. ... this becomes more important than "politics." We all seemed to agree that the Bush administration is *dangerous* and has overstepped its constitutional boundaries. These are very serious issues that have to be addressed, most notably because they are continuing issues that aren't going away.

These are not issues to be bi-partisan about. This is not about some petty disputes on a House Committee. This is about an administration that overstepped its constitutional boundaries severely... most likely hard investigations would inevitably have to lead to impeachment.

[omega minimo]

85. PEOPLE WERE AGAINST CLINTON IMPEACHMENT B/C IT WAS A BULLSHIT CHARGE

"The majority of the public was against it when Clinton was impeached. Some of that was due to those who were loyal to Clinton, but some of it was just simple pragmatism on the part of the people. Reasonable people know that it’s bad for the country."


:puke:

[porphyrian]

86. If you believe in our Constitution, impeachment is imperative.

If we are a nation of laws, we cannot allow the highest ranking officials of our government to break those laws, lest our laws and thereby our nation be rendered meaningless. Impeachment isn't an option, it's an imperative.