If Dems come out for "Impeachment NOW" it's what Right Wing Repugs Want!

[KoKo]

I'm not a fan of either Pelosi or Reid...but we are stuck with them for now.
I know Pelosi stutters and I can't imagine why she's Minority Leader along with the "Read from Prepared Notes and Stutter, Reid)

BUT!!! BUT!!!! We need to understand they are the "army we are fighting with" (bastardizing a Rummy Quote) and so we need to go with them into the Mid-Terms and really the Repugs would like nothing better than for us to RUN ON IMPEACHMENT!

So, we on the lefty/Left who are so angry and spoiling for a fight need to recognize that until we REGAIN CONTROL OF SENATE AND HOUSE...we have NO CONTROL over IMPEACHING BUSH...or REPLACING REID AND PELOSI!

So...we've got to keep pressure on for our "Progressive Candidates" throwing them some dollars and support and walk the streets this Summer and Fall to work to get DEMS into places held by Repugs...and IF WE WIN...then we can start to do the dirty work of cleaning house and INVESTIGATION!!!!

Until then...we are trapped in what we've been trapped in before...which worries us Progressives...in that the Party wants us to shut up and yet give and walk the streets while they run ONCE AGAIN on the tired old platform of Jobs, "Healthcare, Minimum Wage and Accountability."

It sounds like the same old "prom dress" altered a few times by the seamstress who can do wonders if only we pay her enough." But, it IS what it IS and we should heap rabble on their heads and YET not ALLOW REPUGS TO ASK FOR US TO CALL FOR IMPEACHMENT. Let the disillusioned REPUGS DO THAT for us! Let the "Independents" do that for us.

We need to restrain ourselves on that ONE ISSUE of IMPEACHMENT while still lining up all the facts that will make it possible WHEN WE WIN.

:shrug:

[Tom Joad]

1. Nancy Pelosi is dead-set against impeachment.

Not only will she not promote it, even if she becomes speaker she will probably block it.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/10110

or here
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/ scroll down abit.



Monday, May 8, 2006
Pelosi is in for a Surprise in November

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the California Democrat and House Minority Leader who would likely replace Rep. Dennis Hastert in November if Democrats succeed in taking over the House of Representatives, made a snarky comment on NBC over the weekend when asked about impeachment and about Rep. John Conyers, who would head the Judiciary Committee in a Democratic House.

Asked by "Meet the Press's" Tim Russert about impeachment talk, Pelosi reportedly said, "Democrats are not about impeachment--Democrats are about bringing the country together."

Reminded that Conyers has all but invited submission of a bill of impeachment on his watch, having already filed his own bill calling for a select committee to investigate possible impeachable acts by the president, Pelosi said the Judiciary Committee is "not where the decision would be made" and added (sounding an awful lot like the Great Decider himself), "I am the leader. Our caucus will decide where we're going…I don't see us going to a place of impeachment."

[FrenchieCat]

8. Howard Dean said basically the same thing as Pelosi......

I agree that Pelosi is more wishy washy and vague and stuttering throughout her interview on TMP....but in the end, it is being characterized as the same message; Aim is not impeachment if the Dems win House.

That's because I think that is the Democratic message for now.....losta to do for the nation; we need investigations, but impeachment is not our "aim"....the Facts will determine where we end up.

Here's Howard Dean on This Week
link - http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/

Select VIDEO - "Dean: No Impeachment for Bush"

The discussion of impeachment starts 3:48 into the interview......

[Tom Joad]

13. Pelosi seemed to be even more adamant about stopping it.

I can understand starting with serious investigations. But Pelosi seems to be saying "there will be no impeachment, period."

But like the writer i cited, it does not matter. She will be supporting impeachment next year because the people demand it. Or she will face removal from office herself, by being unelected in 2008. There is a possibility of a serious Green Party opponent (Green Party is the second major Party in SF, not Repukers), and if she screws up by opposing impeachment, that is really popular in her cong. district, she will be toast.

She will do the right thing. Or else.

[FrenchieCat]

21. I'm taking what she said with a grain of salt......

Cause she stammered damn near through the whole thing.....

But I guarantee you that "we will concentrate on what's important to the American People....and yes, we will have investigations, and we will go where the F-A-C-T-S take us" is the Democratic message overall.

[zulchzulu]

25. The full transcript say she's not opposed to impeachment...

MR. RUSSERT: ...and let me ask you about that, because you told The Washington Post that there will be investigations if the Democrats regain control of the House. The chairman of the Judiciary Committee would be someone named John Conyers. I went up to his Web site and this is what’s on his Web site: “Stand with Congressman Conyers. Demand an investigation of administration abuses of power and make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.”

REP. PELOSI: Democrats are not about impeachment. Democrats are about bringing the country together. This is what we have to do.
(Note from me: This is spin so that Democrats aren't painted ONLY for getting Bush impeached.)

MR. RUSSERT: But that’s the man who would be chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

REP. PELOSI: Yeah, but that is not where the decision would be made. This is a—what I had told The Washington Post was that we will assume the responsibility that this Congress—this do-nothing, rubber-stamp Congress, rubber-stamp for President Bush—hasn’t done, has not exercised the congressional obligation and responsibility to have oversight.

MR. RUSSERT: So there would be investigations.

REP. PELOSI: Well, what I told them is we will have an investigation of energy prices. We will have an investigation. Then how that was done...

MR. RUSSERT: How about of the war?

REP. PELOSI: That would be if—I said we’d have hearings on the war. We’d have hearings on the war. But I don’t see us going to a place of an impeachment or all of that.
(Note: Again, trying not to paint Democrats as ONLY for impeachment. After all, hearings WILL lead to impeachment.)

MR. RUSSERT: Is impeachment off the table?

REP. PELOSI: Well, you never know where the facts take you, but the—for any president. But, but that isn’t what we’re about. What we’re about is going there and, and having high ethical standards, fiscal soundness and a level of civility that brushes away all this fierce partisanship.

MR. RUSSERT: Well, should John Conyers take his Web site down, talking about impeachment?

REP. PELOSI: John Conyers does what he does on his Web site. John Conyers is an enthusiastic advocate. I am the leader. Our caucus will decide where we go. But it’s not—you don’t decide to impeach. You—the facts support something like this, and that’s not where we’re going.
(Note: again, although not well-stated, she's trying not to suffocate the spin that Democrats are ONLY about impeachment.)

MR. RUSSERT: But the impression, Congresswoman, is that the Democrats take control of Congress it’s payback. They’re going to have the subpoena power...

REP. PELOSI: No. That’s not the case.

MR. RUSSERT: ...and there’s going to be investigation...

REP. PELOSI: Well, that’s wrong. Well, we will have subpoena power.

MR. RUSSERT: ...after investigation. You will have subpoena power.

REP. PELOSI: We will have subpoena power, and that’s why the Republicans are so afraid that we will be able to show the public how they arrived at a prescription drug bill that is born of corruption. The cost of corruption is, is huge to the consumer, whether it’s a sen—middle-income seniors paying more at the pharmacy, whether it’s the—all American consumers paying more at the pump, or home heating oil. How did we get to this place? Those—that is worthy of scrutiny. It’s not—investigation does not equate to impeachment. Investigation is the requirement of Congress. It’s about checks and balances.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KoKo]

5. I've never heard that Nancy had a disability as a child and stories about

how she overcame it. You are acting like I would have posted that Max Cleland would be able to walk to a podium and bang his fits to make a point.

Nancy and Harry both seem very unsure of themselves when I've seen them and I watch C-Span alot and have for years. I think Nancy's stammering could be attributed to Attack Dog Russert going at her like a prosecutor but I've also seen her in her OWN press conferences where she get's off track and seems unsure of herself. I don't believe she has a speech impediment but is just a person who get's flustered. I think we good do better for the Leaders of House and Senate.

[5X]

3. I don't give a flyin fuck what the right wing does or doesn't want...

bush, cheney, rummy are all guilty of war crimes.

[KoKo]

6. Well you can't Impeach them until you have an Investigation and you

can't have an investigation until you have enough Dems elected and take over House and Senate to call for Investigations and get them.

So...it's a dead point to ask our Dems to run around calling for impeachment every time they appear on a show run by the Media Whores.

HOWEVER! That doesn't mean that the courageous ones like Feingold and McKinney and Conyers can't keep calling for us to sign peititions and keep the heat on. It's just that neither Pelosi nor Reid as Leaders of House and Senate should be expected to be running around calling for Impeachment when they are asked to be on these shows...rare as that is. Nor, should Dean be expected to be shouting Impeach when he's head of DNC.

It's up to us out here in the "Fever Swamps" to keep working on getting the Bush Lies out there.

[FrenchieCat]

9. I give a Flying Fuck about winning back some power for the Dems.....

and you should too.

Screaming Impeachment, before the Dems can get investigative and subpoena power is a non starter.....and will only make the Rethuglicans come out in droves to vote in November to save their Prezidnt. Currently many are saying that they will stay home.

Remember, the seats we need to become a majority are currently held by Republicans....16 of them, just to tie.....in districts that usually vote Republican. This can be very tricky....but calling out War Criminals and nothing else, ain't gonna get done what needs to be done.

Plus it ain't about what you scream....it's about what you are able to do. Without a win in November by the Dems.....we will be able to do JACKSHIT....and we will then have to wait till 2008. There's a lot of damage that Bush can do till 2008 with congress not changing hands.

That, you should definetly give a "Flying Fuck" about....

[5X]

10. I give a flyin fuck about doing the right thing.

That would include doing everything humanly possible to get rid of
war criminals. It does not include being scared of the repubs.

[FrenchieCat]

11. You want to "say" the right thing.....I want to "do it."..and doing it is

more tricky but more fruitful in a long run if you are "wanting to do the right thing".

It ain't about being "skeered", it's about strategy.

Talking shit ain't the same thing as actually doing some shit that counts.

You give a flyin fuck about "saying" the right thing......not "doing" the right thing. Correct your subject line.

If you think that us screaming impeachment is gonna make it happen, you are wrong. Only Facts brought to the light will make it happen.

What you are talking about may "feel" good....but will accomplish absolutely not a damn thing....but make us lose the most likely last chance that we have.

Note: Only in the Twilight Zone of politics will screaming out a word during an election by a bunch of politicians end up bringing in a "guilty" verdict. We need the F-A-C-T-S to present for impeachment. Can't get those without subpeona power and investigations. It's that simple.

[peacetheonlyway]

14. i like your spirit 5x

you jive with me!

[FrenchieCat]

17. Ironic,

that your profile would contain this quote "the wheels of justice move slowly but always ensnare all who would try to outpace it's gentle wisdom...."

Who said that?

[peacetheonlyway]

19. it is my quote

but howard dean said something close once when I asked him about the patriot act. He said to look at things in 20 year cycles.

But my problem is we've had almost 6 years of investigations and detailed data .. more than enough to convict Bush now.

convict cheney now.

convict all the rest now...

what conyers asks for is correct.. it's just Pelosi and others have too big egos to let him be the one starting the impeachment hearings....

[FrenchieCat]

22. really? we had

we've had almost 6 years of investigations and detailed data

Evidence has to be official and come from a bonafide official source for a vote in the House to impeach......and until that's done, the people will not pay the kind of attention required to ever move towards impeachment.

It's not what I want....these are sadly just the facts.

and as long as the GOP controls the House.....there will not be any "Fair or complete" investigations.

But go ahead and demand impeachment now.....if you think that's how its gonna happen. :shrug:

[Generic Brad]

12. Amen to that, Brother

War crimes tribunal or bust!

[Harper_is_Bush]

4. fuck them. It's like Pelosi, asked about investigations

She should have said "so what?" when Russert asked her about subpoena power.

SO THE FUCK WHAT TIM??? PEOPLE WANT TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF ALL THIS SHIT, SO WHAT'S WRONG WITH A LITTLE SUBPOENA POWER?

[creeksneakers2]

7. Impeachment is a losing issue for 2006

Look at this poll:

NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll
Congressional approval

Which one or two of the following reasons best describe why you disapprove of the job Congress is doing?
(This table has been ranked by the highest percentage)
Tired of Republicans and Democrats fighting 44%
Nothing gets done on issues important to you 36%
Too many congressmen are corrupt and unethical 34%
Congress simply goes along with President Bush 22%
You disagree with specific legislation 12%
Other 2%



I don't believe speaking truth to power is a moral victory when it keeps the people who speak the truth from getting power. A case for impeachment hasn't been made with the public. Talk of impeachment now sends a signal to the public that the Democrats are more concerned with partisan revenge than doing anything positive.

If this is just about expressing anger, then lets keep it on the net. If Bush is ever going to be impeached, an overwhelming case would have to be built, one that could get a 2/3 vote in the Senate. We are nowhere near that.

I don't like the impeachment idea, because I don't want impeachment to become a regular feature of our political system.

But, if Democrats want Bush impeached, there is an easier way to do it and it might come up anyway - the Bugs Bunny trick.

When Bugs was confronted with a beligerent, thick headed, stubborn character like Bush, Bugs would draw a line in the dirt and dare the character to step across the line. Then Bugs would draw more lines and dare more times, until the character and crossed the last line, right over a cliff.

It could be the same thing with subpoenas. We send them. Bush refuses to comply. We go to court and win. Bush still refuses to comply. There would be no choice but to impeach then.

[The Magistrate]

15. People Often Say, Sir, What They Think They Ought To Say

This makes some classes of results suspect, and this is one of those classes, for the proper "civics lesson' nswer is to say you are tired of partisan bickering.

But the fact of the matter is that people love a good fight. A good political brawl is entertaining, and gathers people's attention, stimulating interest in political affairs.

[IndianaGreen]

16. Saving the Republic is more important than all the politicians!

This is our Republic and our Constitution! It is not Bush's Republic, or the GOP's, or the Dem's. It is the future of our country that is at stake, and that is more important than any political party or any politician!

[FrenchieCat]

18. Which means what exactly.......

Do we scream impeachment NOW, or do we scream impeachment AFTER the election?

Which one? :shrug:

[AtomicKitten]

20. I don't think any of the Dem leaders have a hard-on for impeachment.

And good thing because that's precisely what the GOP is praying for in the upcoming election. Don't give them the satisfaction of buying into that. Pelosi has it exactly right: investigations to provide the oversight the Republican Congress failed to do. If the investigations provide impeachable evidence, so be it. I have never heard her or Dean or Reid say anything unequivocal against impeachment. Playing it down is smart.

Face it, unless the Dems are screaming impeachment at the top of their lungs, some at DU won't be satisfied. But the truth is, it's smart strategy to not give them an election issue. Let Republicans stew in their paranoia. They know * deserves it and that's the most telling part of it all.

[FrenchieCat]

23. Thank you......

as you are correctomundo!

Of course the Republicans are setting the bait.....and personally, I'm glad that the Dems are not biting on it. All the GOP would need is some our Dems saying....yep, as soon as we get in there, it's bye-bye Bush. That would raise their fundraising numbers quite a bit!

If Howard Dean is holding back......we need to also.

This is politics, and there is a game to be played. Considering our lack of media on our side....we've got to have sound strategy, or else!

[ihelpu2see]

24. Agreed, I like Fiengold's approach and what Dean said about "Investigate"

Keep lining up more and more facts that the Republicants cant ignore and then let them take the ball. I would hope to see someone like the Senator from PA Arlen Specter, after he sees Santorum get beat, I would like to see him step up and support Impeachment in 07.... I know that the right wing NeoNuts what to whine about the Democrats taking back the house but it should not stop our party from shedding light on how the President and his administration has trampled on the US Constitution.