If Bush broke the law, he must be impeached!

[IndianaGreen]

I am sorry Democrats, DLCers, and Republicans, but if a President breaks the law he must be impeached! Our Constitution does not give Congress the option of refraining from impeachment:

Article II

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html#section1

Article I

Section 2:

The House of Representatives... shall have the sole power of impeachment.

Section 3:

The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present.

Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section1

Senator Carl Levin was asked whether Bush should be impeached on Meet the Press today. Levin fumbled the answer and was evasive. We cannot allow our elected representatives to let this President, any President, to put himself above the law and the Constitution. By his own admission, Bush claimed that he had an inherent power as Commander-in-Chief to order the NSA to spy on Americans without a warrant. If Bush had such power, he wouldn't need Congress either and he could rule by decree.

We cannot put the cart before the horse! According to the Constitution, the proper procedure is for someone to introduce an impeachment resolution in the House. The House must hold hearings! The GOP majority cannot just shrug this off to one side, or else they will be violating the Constitution. The hearings will be to determine if an impeachment offense has taken place and if so, to vote on articles of impeachment to send to the Senate for trial.

Impeaching Bush is NOT a Constitutional crisis! Failure to impeach Bush is a Constitutional crisis for it will make Bush an emperor that will rule above the Constitution. The American Republic, or what's left of it, will cease to exist if Congress fails the American people now.

[shenmue]

1. With his party in charge...

how likely is it, do you think, that they'll do what they are supposed to do?

[IndianaGreen]

5. Will the GOP trust a President Hillary with Bush's powers?

I think there are enough conservatives out there that will be more afraid of seeing Bush's imperial powers in the hands of any Democrat, much less Hillary.

This is not the time for political triangulations or polls or focus groups. If you want an emperor, then let Bush succeed in asserting that as Commander-in-Chief he can do whatever he pleases in this country. You will find yourselves under Martial Law, with federal troops arresting dissidents, with concentration camps on our own soil!

[tecelote]

2. That's right.

It is not about spying it is about the President breaking the law. This is about the President being above the law and ignoring our nations proud tradition of checks and balances for government.

[C_U_L8R]

3. A Dangerous Precedent

would be set if congress lets Bush get away with breaking the law.
It would be bad news for both Dems and Pukes.
No president is above the law and this president
must be impeached and punished for breaking the law.

IMPEACHMENT NOW for the sake of the constitution and the country

[Zynx]

10. Indeed. A president cannot be allowed to break the law, Republican or

Democrat. If our next Democratic president breaks the law I will say throw them out as well. The president MUST obey the law at all times.

[GOPFighter]

4. But, you forget...

...this isn't any ol' President, this is a GOD-fearing President, so that makes it okay.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :puke: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

It's time to Impeach the Bastard!

[tecelote]

7. Yeah, Maybe someone should tell Bush that

the little voice inside his head that tells him to decalre war and plunge our country in to debt is not God. Hint, Hint.

[beaconess]

6. He should be, but he won't

unless a Democratic Congress is elected. Bush's Republican lapdogs won't touch him.

[IndianaGreen]

8. Democrats must introduce a resolution of impeachment

The issue must be forced on the House! If the GOP majority fails to allow for impeachment hearings, then you can turn "King George" into a campaign issue.

We cannot afford to wait until November '06, for a Bush dictatorship can cancel elections or arrest candidates.

If Bush can ignore one law with impunity, he will ignore all laws!

[Gemini Cat]

9. Yes he needs to be impeached.

We can't have one set of laws for we the people and another for presidents. No one should be above the law.
By not impeaching this pile of bushite, it sets a dangerous precedent.

[...of J.Temperance]

11. We as a party are in no position to Impeach Junior, you do know this?

Yes I agree that Junior should be Impeached, but HOW exactly are we supposed to do this when we DON'T control the Congress?

Of course Senator Levin didn't answer Russert's question, Russert is trying to trip us up. We shouldn't fall for this, and well done to Senator Levin...he probably agrees that Junior needs Impeaching, but he also knows that we're not in a position to be able to do this.

'Um, "I am sorry Democrats, DLCers..."

Last time I checked the "D" in DLC stood for Democratic as in Democratic Party as in Democrats.

[IndianaGreen]

12. Will the DLC urge House Democrats to introduce impeachment resolution?

I think not!

If you want Bush to be an emperor, he will act like an emperor!

Bush has ordered the Pentagon to spy on peace groups.

Bush has ordered the NSA to eavesdrop on Americans without a warrant, a clear violation of FISA.

How far are you willing to let Bush go before you write a complaint letter to the White House?

We already have a Gulag overseas, will you wait until the Gulag is within our shores?

The time to impeach is NOW, before Bush finds other laws to break and other Americans to "disappear" inside his Gulag.

BTW, the DLC is owned by its CEO Al From. It is a private entity!

[Donna Zen]

13. Exactly: using silence to condone the crimes

And there's this:

Al From, president of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, and pollster Mark Penn wrote a strategy memo to DLC supporters last week warning party leaders not to use Bush's problems as an invitation to call for an immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, or generally to steer a more liberal course that could alienate the middle-of-the-road voters the party needs.
(Source: Washington Post Don't Be Fooled by Bush Polls, Democratic Council Warns, Dec. 18, 2005.)

WaPo

[Clark2008]

30. Boy that DLC is just the epitome of ballsy fortitude, ain't it?

:sarcasm:

[...of J.Temperance]

14. I agree with Impeachment, but again I comment HOW can we do

This when we don't control Congress? At this point, what would the point be in House Democrats issuing an Impeachment resolution when they'd immediately get voted down?

What we should do, in my humble opinion, is gather all of the evidence we have together and yes draw up such a resolution...but after we've done this we should wait until we see what happens with the 2006 elections.

At this moment, can you name ONE GOP Congressman or Congresswoman that would support and vote for an Impeachment resolution?

[IndianaGreen]

15. You will never make it as an NFL football coach

If we were to follow your political doctrine and apply it to NFL football, your team will never take the field unless it was assured of complete victory by the opposing team.

Why is it that the DLC and its most rabid advocates always call for appeasement of the Bush agenda?

[Donna Zen]

17. I saved this quote by Cornell West:

The elites in the Democratic Party - especially in the Senate and the House - are not only liberal and centrist supporters of social equality and individual freedoms; more pointedly they are paternalistic nihilists who have become ineffectual by having bought intot he corruptions of the power-hungry system. Though they may wish that the system could be made to serve more truly democratic purposes, they have succumbed to the belief that a more radical fight for a truer democracy, battling against the corruption of elites, is largely futile. So they've joined the game in the delusional belief that at least they are doing so in the better interests of the public. Needless to say, they have much more to offer than Republicans, especially President Bush and his chief political strategist, Karl Rove, and they will play an indispensable role in the crucial anti-Bush united front needed to revitalize American democracy. Yet they are still more part of the problem than the solution to our impasse.

- from Democracy Matters


I think it sums it up. When someone tramples your Constitution you must fight back, because otherwise...well

Daniel Webster on the occassion of the one hundredth anniversary of George Washington’s birthday.


Other misfortunes may be borne or their effects overcome. If disastrous war should sweep our commerce from the ocean, another generation my renew it. If it exhaust our Treasury, future industry may replenish it. If it desolate and lay waste our fields, still, under a new cultivation, they will grow green again and ripen to future harvests. It were but a trifle even if the walls of yonder Capitol were to crumble, if its lofty pillars would fall, and its gorgeous decorations be all covered by the dust of the valley. All these might be rebuilt. But who shall reconstruct the fabric of demolished government? Who shall rear again the well-proportioned columns of constitutional liberty? Who shall frame together the skillful architecture which unites national sovereignty with State rights, individual security, and public prosperity? No. If these columns fall, they will be raised not again. Like the Colosseum and the Parthenon, they will be destined to a mournful, a melancholy immortality. Bitterer tears, however, will flow over them than were shed over the monuments of Roman or Grecian art. For they will be the remnants of more glorious edifice than Greece or Rome ever saw: the edifice of constitutional American liberty.

[IndianaGreen]

29. Excellent post, Donna Zen!

Cornell West is right on target in describing the reason why we are constantly thrown roadblocks by those that are supposed to be members of an opposition party.

[tx_dem41]

18. You on the other hand would finish 0-16.

And never be a coach in anything but high school again.

Why is it that Greens and their most rabid advocates always call for futile actions that only result in benefits for the Bush agenda?

[IndianaGreen]

22. Better to play and lose after doing your best, than to forfeit the game!

BTW, I am not a Green!

Your assuming that based on my screen name is as wrong as it would for me to assume that you are a Texan and a Democrat based on your screen name.

[tx_dem41]

24. And, thus, you condemn yourself to the obscurity that you embrace.

n/t

[IndianaGreen]

26. And your children will grow up in a totalitarian regime!

And you will find yourself in the same situation as Niemöller:

First they came... is a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) about the quiescence of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.

When they came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...

[tx_dem41]

25. Perchance...is your favorite color green?

:shrug:

[IndianaGreen]

27. Green is for Greenpeace, of which I am a long-time supporter

My favorite color is red.

[tx_dem41]

28. Ahhh...red and green....

Well...Merry Christmas to you, then.

:)

[Name removed]

31. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IndianaGreen]

32. I am Jewish, so that takes care of Christmas!

Happy Holidays to you!

:popcorn:

[tx_dem41]

33. Happy Holidays, indeed!

Good sparring with you, IG.

[...of J.Temperance]

34. You know, instead of asking Democrats to issue an Impeachment

Resolution in Congress, and instead of people making all of these comments because Democrats can't issue an Impeachment resolution...don't you think it might be better if we tried to get some moderate GOP politicians on our side instead?

Don't forget, Nixon was done in when the moderates in his own party turned on him.

[IndianaGreen]

38. Democrats can introduce an impeachment resolution in the House

at any time! The country can ill-afford 3 more years of dictatorship.

[tx_dem41]

16. Why do you put words in OJ.Ts mouth?

Where did she show herself willing to "let Bush go" or to "wait until the Gulag is within our shores"?

Do you have any sense of political reality? You say "The time to impeach is NOW". Well, I hate to tell you, it isn't time with the numbers in the House and Senate right now. And, if you understood politics, instead of only your own strident ideology, then you would know that OJ.T's point is exactly the correct political one. If you would rather score a futile ideological point, rather than do the heavy lifting that is required to effect political change in this country, then that is your right. Just don't drag the Democratic Party and progressive movement into your futile whirlpool.

[...of J.Temperance]

20. Darn...

Hey we're making sense. It's not our fault that we can realize that we don't control the House, thus we don't have the numbers to Impeach.

We can't help it if we understand this :)

[IndianaGreen]

21. We are not talking about elections, we are talking about the Constitution!

It is the Constitution that kept this country from having its own version of a Hitler or a Mussolini. It is because too many of you have urged caution, that Bush has gotten away with subverting the Constitution by assuming powers that no President should have, not even in times of war!

We have a President that rules by de facto decree, a "king" as Russ Feingold so eloquently stated yesterday. Is that what you want? Then you don't deserve a Republic and you are forever condemned to live under an American Caesar!

[tx_dem41]

23. No one here is urging caution. Urging reality maybe.

Is anyone urging not to criticize the Adminstration on the NSA issue? I haven't seen anyone urge that. Can you point out what I have missed?

I understand the political system set up by the Constitution that you claim to love. Perhaps, if you really do love it, you should learn it. Then YOU will deserve the Republic it sets up. Until you learn it though, you are condemning yourself and others to live under a Caesar.

[Odin2005]

39. IndianaGreen:

:yourock:

[Vinca]

19. He has to be impeached, pure and simple.

Clinton was impeached for lying about an extramarital affair. Bush has violated our 4th amendment rights. Which is more serious? Democrats in Congress must bring up the "I" word.

[MrPrax]

35. Won't Happen...

Let's recap:

-lied to Congress about the threat posed by Iraq
-revealed names of undercover agents (and then they complain about the NYTimes compromising national security for waiting more than a year to publish it's story at the request of the WH)
-sustained overbilling by contractors that employed and (still pay) top Administrators
-ongoing FBI probe into Israeli spy ring in the WH nd MilIntel (what's up with that...can Perle come home yet?)
-now the illegal home spying

The Press could have ran any number of things about this disaster and unfortunately the Democrats, save for great guys like Feingold, are not willing to get angry and blast away..."What the hell is going on with this Administration?"

No wonder the Press is suspect; they keep suger-coating this stuff and splitting hairs--their news format of being 'balanced' is really unsuited for straight up corruption like this...

I have NO DOUBT that in many places Democrats could easily be elected in '06 by simply saying,

"Send me to Washington so I can impeach these bastards"

or the funnier,

"You got the pitchforks and I got the torches...Let's Go Impeach Them"

or

going to DC with a rope...have I got your support

[SunDrop23]

36. Come on now his ENTIRE PARTY is composed of lawbreakers. Do you

really think they are going to let anything happen to him?

[GatoLover]

37. Instead of trying to impeach Bush

which is not merely futile, it's ridiculous, shouldn't the effort be put into trying to elect Democratic majorities in the House and Senate next year? If the Democrats controlled Congress, wouldn't it actually be possible to block Bush's policies?

[MrBenchley]

40. Wonder what Levin REALLY said?

[IndianaGreen]

45. Transcript of Levin's bumbling performance on Meet the Press

If Bush broke the law, he must be impeached! Now, why is such a Constitutional principle so difficult for Senator Levin to grasp?

Meet the Press

Transcript for December 18

MR. RUSSERT: You said the president acted above the law. Do you believe the president of the United States broke the law?

SEN. LEVIN: If he did not follow the FISA law, then I believe he would have broken the law. But I don't want to prejudge whether the president broke the law. We need an explanation, we need it fast. The American public is entitled to the protections of the law.

The president claims to have followed the law here. He says he acted on behalf of American security. OK. If that's his motive, that's what he claims his motive is. Others will justify that. History will justify or not justify that. But he claims that he abided by the laws and Constitution of the United States but he avoided going to the court which the laws require him to go to either before or immediately afterwards, and if he's claiming to be law-abiding and to abide by statutes, which he is, what are the statutes? The attorney general must inform us promptly. The president owes that to the American people.

MR. RUSSERT: If he in fact broke the law, what then?

SEN. LEVIN: We have to first decide if the law was broken before we then try to figure out what is the appropriate action to be taken.

MR. RUSSERT: But is that a constitutional crisis?

SEN. LEVIN: It hopefully is not, but we don't know. I don't want to prejudge that. We should avoid prejudgment. We should get all of the facts here and insist that the president and the attorney general come to Congress and explain what are the statutory authorities or constitutional authority that he claims to have exercised.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10479765/page/4/

[FtWayneBlue]

41. Since he has broken the law,

impeachment is mandatory - there is what I think they call
prima facia evidence - or some such -
'open and shut'
is what I call it.

He is no longer technically president, since he has violated the oath of office to uphold and protect the Constitution.

[zulchzulu]

42. That goddamn piece of paper called the US Constitution has a amendment

U.S. Constitution: Fourth Amendment - Search and Seizure

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Then you have this little thing called the Presidential Oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Bush sworn in 2001 (MP3)

[Independent_Liberal]

43. Impeachment a matter of life and death!

The future of the country and the planet depends on it! Do you want to live or die?

[IndianaGreen]

44. The DLC will oppose the introduction of an impeachment resolution

They will say that such an act would be reckless and it will offend the kind of voters that the DLC has been chasing for the last two Presidential cycles, without success I may add.