|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:14 PM Original message |
Charley Rangel said today on Sean Hannity's show bush should not be impe. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LisaM (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:15 PM Response to Original message |
1. I don't think Bush should be impeached either |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:16 PM Response to Reply #1 |
3. you werent paying attention in goverment class. he would have to be impeac |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:19 PM Response to Reply #3 |
7. Deleted message |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:20 PM Response to Reply #7 |
9. I cant spell but I know this for sure. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
arcane1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:20 PM Response to Reply #9 |
10. show me the law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:21 PM Response to Reply #10 |
13. Im not. Hannity asked Ragel if bush should be impeached and he said no |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
arcane1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:22 PM Response to Reply #13 |
16. well then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:23 PM Response to Reply #16 |
18. ya me to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LisaM (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 07:07 PM Response to Reply #3 |
24. Well it's not supposed to distract from his official duties |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
arcane1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:15 PM Response to Original message |
2. I agree, he shouldn't be impeached |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:17 PM Response to Reply #2 |
4. Deleted message |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:17 PM Response to Reply #4 |
5. Deleted message |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:19 PM Response to Reply #5 |
6. sorry i should not of called you a moron. But under US law he would first |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
arcane1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:19 PM Response to Reply #6 |
8. which law is this? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:21 PM Response to Reply #8 |
11. Its in article two of the constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shraby (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:21 PM Response to Reply #8 |
12. Read your constitution. He can only be removed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
arcane1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:22 PM Response to Reply #12 |
14. well that sucks |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:23 PM Response to Reply #14 |
17. ya it does and if Rangel wont support it there is now way in hell 2/3 of t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:22 PM Response to Reply #12 |
15. right |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Coexist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:28 PM Response to Reply #15 |
19. This is the funniest conversation on DU today |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
incapsulated (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:32 PM Response to Reply #19 |
20. I agree, heh. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tritsofme (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 10:20 PM Response to Reply #12 |
31. But remember, if convicted by the Senate, jeopardy is attached. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mcscajun (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:42 PM Response to Original message |
21. Well, since Rangel sits in the House, not the Senate, he's not the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coldiggs (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 07:08 PM Response to Reply #21 |
25. charges have to be brought by the house |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mcscajun (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 07:51 PM Response to Reply #25 |
28. I know that. Still, proportionately, Rangel doesn't have the clout. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
radio4progressives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 07:14 PM Response to Reply #21 |
26. you have it backwards... the house has to initiate this process. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mcscajun (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 07:51 PM Response to Reply #26 |
29. I know that. Still, proportionately, Rangel doesn't have the clout. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
quaoar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 06:44 PM Response to Original message |
22. The down side to impeachment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
driver8 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 07:05 PM Response to Reply #22 |
23. There couldn't be a more massive asshole as VP then himself, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
radio4progressives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 07:16 PM Response to Reply #22 |
27. The Veep doesn't have to go through the same process |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mcscajun (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-24-06 09:42 PM Response to Reply #27 |
30. We got lucky with Agnew. His indictment was on criminal charges |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 05:49 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC