Pros and Con of Impeachment

[A wise Man]

Like many DU members, I don't post many threads as others. I seek an analysis of the thought process of all of us. Logic,reasons,constitutional rights,the essence of law,the right to die for a real cause for this country and the inherent knowledge of determining the difference between right and wrong or Justice.

I've read many post on the subject of impeachment, some for and some against. To those that are against impeachment, I'd like to know, would it make you happy if the congress and senate did not impeach and Bush, Chaney, Condie, Rove and others get away with 2,000 plus military personnel could have died for a lie? Maybe it would satisfy you to see over 25.000 wounded and maimed for oil.

Of course there should be an investigation, you can't impeach without one.Yet there is enough infro out here that we all know that warrants impeachment now.

1.Making false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;

2.Withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;

3.Approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counseling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;

3.Interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees;

4.Approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payment of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry and other illegal activities;

5.Endeavoring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States;

The Downing Street memos have proven these elements as well as the media. I can only hope that no criminal invades you or your love ones and get away only to be caught and released by a jury that thinks there are more important things than "YOU".

[William769]

1. To begin with Rove & Rice can't be Impeached

Thats one hell of a good reason right there. I'll wait for the investigations to be conducted before I comment on the other two.

On edit: I only see the pro's listed no cons, is this a Faux news tactic?

[Kashka-Kat]

2. a "con" - what I keep coming back to in thinking about this is "what is the most effective way of

undoing the damage that has been done?" "What do we want to accomplish in this 2 year window"

We have two years.

I believe the election was not stolen this time bc of the degree of fanaticism necessary was not there & current disarray of repub party--when even the military & certain neocons and evangelicals were down on Bush and his sorry performance as president. But whose to say it can't happen again... in the blink of an eye. With maybe a president who, unlike Bush, is competenent enough to be truly evil. We can thank our lucky stars that Bush was, and is, an incompetent boob because now we have an opportunity to undo some damage.

I don't know if impeachment is most effective at addressing issues like: torture, loss of civil liberties, election fraud & "hackability" of election system, war profiteering and malfeasance, illegal occupation of foreign country for power and profit, disasterous dangerous foreign policy mistakes. Impeachment would polarize and re-entrench 2 sides into opposing camps. I believe we owe it to future generations to undo the damage.

As gratifying as impeachment would be on a psychological level, we have to think beyond that into concrete results--what would it accomplish. And could that be accomplished in another way, like prosecution later for crimes as investigation unfolds? We might think we have the evidence now... but is it enough to convict in a court of law? I don't know that for sure...

What did you think of Feingold's censure resolution? He was talking it up again the other day.


Like your style, wiseman, and how you phrased this issue as a question with two sides and 2 legitimate points of view.