The simplest way to get rid of Dipshit

[jmowreader]

This predicates on two facts:

Fact 1: Bush is addicted to using signing statements to overturn legislation he's just approved.
Fact 2: Using signing statements in this manner is unconstitutional.

I think the Bush boy will sign at least the first couple of things Congress sends up to him in a "display of cooperation with the new Congress." He'll then attach a signing statement that negates the new law he just signed. We then use this as a lever to open all of his signing statements.

Somewhere in there we can find a high crime or a misdemeanor. Overthrowing the Constitution because you can't get along with a Congress run by Your Own Party that gives you 99 percent of everything you want, much less the one we're going to seat in January, has to be worth escorting him out of Washington.

[knowbody0]

1. as I was falling to sleep last night

I fantacized about being a guard in the prison which held dickless and georgie, and imagined civilized ways to torture them.

many crimes against humanity and failure to uphold the US constitution.

without a doubt in my heart, these criminals will end up in prison.

[eleny]

2. He needs a short leash

[pat_k]

3. Every time they invoke Bush as unitary authoritarian executive. . .

. . .they confess to nullifying the Constitution. The abuse of signing statements is one of the symptoms we can indeed impeach on right now, but we can go right to the heart of it. Bush and Cheney invoke the fascist fig leaf of Bush as unitary authoritarian executive as cover for all their Unconstitutional and criminal acts -- abuse of signing statements included.

Here's one of the messages I will be sending to our so-called "leaders."

There is no magical solution to "rule by signing statement." As long as you allow Bush and Cheney to abuse their power by picking and choosing the laws they execute or enforce, you will not get my support to pass more laws for them to ignore.

BTW, Re: "Somewhere in there we can find a high crime or a misdemeanor"

We don't need to "find" a high crime. We the People, through our representatives in Congress, define what constitutes an impeachable offense. If we intended it to be a judicial process (i.e., in accord with the letter of the law), we would have vested the power to impeach in the hands of the Judiciary.

It is our will and the intent of the law, not the letter, that governs. If We the People decided a President's stupidity posed a clear and present danger to our Constitutional Democracy, we could impeach and remove for stupidity -- something there is no "law" against.

Impeachment is the weapon we gave Congress to allow them to fulfill their oath to defend the Constitution against certain types of threats: those that come from within the executive or judicial branches. (And when Nancy Pelosi took this weapon "off the table," she declared herself incapable of defending the Constitution and thus violated her oath.)

The branches are NOT co-equal. No member of the Judiciary or Executive Branch can remove a member of Congress. (Law enforcement can jail, sure, but not remove from office.) When we gave the power to impeach to Congress -- our representatives -- we put a big fat thumb on the balance to tip it in OUR direction.