Impeachment - it is not a dream, but an imperative 'Step One'.

[Stinky The Clown]

Does America have a choice about impeachment? Actually, no, it doesn't. The choice we have, instead, is to continue our democracy or not.

The evidence is overwhelming. The underpinnings of our essential government functions are rotten and crumbling. Our elections are a sham, able to be controlled at will. Our rights are eroding faster than we even know. Our military is being transformed into a corporate security force tasked with defending corporate interests over common good. The free practice of religion - or not - is now controlled by the government; it is a subsidiary of the ruling class, not a class of its own. The media is arguably nothing more than an official state organ - the state being the ruling class of high powered people and the corporations they control. The incestuous interconnection between board rooms and the halls of government is painfully obvious.

Then there are the matters of good men, single bullets, and small airplanes. Since 1963, we have endured the grief of very public funerals. In the shadows, behind the mourners, in dark glasses, walk ..... who?

There is no time left for compromise. The slow motion coup that has been ongoing for at least 40 years is nearly complete.

The next Congress, which they have decided will be a planned hiatus from total one-party rule so as to perpetuate the illusion of democracy, must find its legs very quickly and move immediately to impeach the President and Vice President.

But that is only step one. The impeachment process - which will start with hearings and investigations - will uncover massive criminal activity by those both 'elected' and appointed to run our country. Impeachment itself is simply a political punishment. Criminal prosecution must follow. Appropriate punishment - no option should be 'off the table' - must follow. Within the LAW, we must be ruthless in dealing with the perpetrators of this slow motion coup.

Or we can go back to sleep and resign ourselves to embrace the horrible vision of George Orwell. And Benito Mousolinni. And Josef Stalin. And Adolph Hitler.

[Stinky The Clown]

1. Self-serving kick

Too harsh?

Impossible to achieve?

General sentiment to let the boy slide?

[Totally Committed]

2. Not too harsh. No way! In my opinion, it should be a two-fer, and

we should impeach Cheney while we're at it.

But, it will be impossible to achieve. We can't even manage to get them to call off a miniseries, using every trick we know, and we're gonna impeach Bush and/or Cheney? I don't think so.

TC

[Stinky The Clown]

3. Actually .......

...... I called for both of them to be impeached in the OP. That's mandatory.

...... we have a better chance for impeachment than we ever did to stop that miniseries. "I said it before and I'll say it again ........" Impeachment starts by bringing pressure on the House.

[IChing]

4. Can you imagine members of the black caucuses holding chairmanship?

Of key committees.

You bet they will investigate. We will have major stonewalling just as Nixon did, but it will be worse with this administration.
But each lie that they have built upon another lie will fall.

Go for it, I demand it, our republic demands it, and our children's children demand it.

[Stinky The Clown]

5. Thank you ......

..... more than a few on our side see what Nancy Peolsi (rightly, in my view) said oh so long ago on Meet The Meathead about not going for impeachment. Look back and you'll find what she *meant* was they wouldn't *immediately* go for impeachment. They'll first hold subpoena-charged hearings. Once that starts, impeachment is inevitable .... so long as our side doesn't cave. That's where we come in.

[IChing]

7. Katrina's diaspora on the black population and the negligent manslaughter

of it's population, the black caucus standing up for justice in the house of the 2000 election among countless other instances show that they will stand up against this regime.

I am not black but I know slavery when I see it in all of it's hidden forms including economic slavery.

"And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire."

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of
Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!

Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"³

[lumpy]

53. Hear hear

v

[alvarezadams]

23. I want a three-fer

Also impeach the legislators that, knowing damned well that the admin was angling for war, abdicated their constitutional powers anyways.

Ooops.

That means no impeachment.

[Stinky The Clown]

24. That could also be accomplished even more simply ......

..... any legislator can be charged criminally.

I want the courts working overtime. Three shifts a day. Clear the docket. Speed check-out lines for the obvious bad actors.

[calimary]

57. NON self-serving kick.

IMPEACHMENT is the start of our salvation as a nation.

Are you FOR accountability or aren't you??? That's the question every last one of our candidates should be forced to answer.

[RangerSmith]

6. While I agree 100% in principal

I hope it doesn't happen...

things are so fucked up and an Impeachement Hearing will freeze the govt for the next 15 months...

Besides, if the middle thinks this is inevitable if they vote for dems, some won't for many reasons including the above one I mentioned.

I'm all for trying these criminals, but not in a political court. It needs to be a court of law.

[IChing]

8. Freeze what government? The one we have now?

Give me a break.

[RangerSmith]

10. Reading comprehension issues?

The OP is speaking of the only Govt that would consider Impeachment and that would be a Dem controlled House. My response was addressing the what if.

Give me a break, indeed.

[Stinky The Clown]

9. Reread the OP ..... a court of law is the final step.

on edit ......

This has to continue even after the cabal is gone. REAL trials with real sentences for real criminals.

No 'Kumbaya' after they're gone. No pardon like Ford did for Nixon.

[speedoo]

13. Disabling this government with impeachment hearings?

What's wrong with that? We've had six years of horrible government, so "fucking things up" would actually be an improvement, IMO.

[civildisoBDence]

54. Best of both worlds

The House will probably be retaken by Democrats, which means impeachment is likely, hearings and subpoenas almost inevitable.

Whether the Senate changes hands or not, there aren't enough votes to convice (that takes a 2/3 majority.)

I have no problem with divided government or gridlock. Divided government maximizes checks and balances, and gridlock prevents either party from spending us into oblivion.

Newsprism

[many a good man]

11. It would surely look bad if we DIDN'T

The tiniest bit of oversight would open an enormous can of worms that would lead to only one logical conclusion: impeachment.

The crimes of this administration are so serious that anything less would be nonfeasance. Once the investigations get rolling there will be no stopping it. If it were to be stopped by a trial in the Republican Senate they would be discredited for the next generation.

Its vitally important that the criminals involved serve real jail time. They must be ousted from the halls of govt once and for all. The future of the United States of America is riding on it.

[Stinky The Clown]

12. "Its vitally important that the criminals involved serve real jail time."

I say 'no options are off the table.'

[ArbustoBuster]

15. It's vitally imporant that the criminals involved be executed.

No Club Fed for these traitors. Make the rest of the aristocrats-in-training fear for their lives if they ever again make a play for our government.

[CarlVK]

14. Right on!

Impeachment is not about party supremacy. It is a matter of ethics and the law, and the proper separation of powers that can correct unethical and or anti-constitutional behavior of those we trust to execute our democratic system.

It makes me crazy when I see Democrats wringing their hands about the "pragmatism" of impeachment rather than the moral and patriotic MANDATE of it.

[onenote]

16. why it won't happen

"I see the 4-year term as a unifying force of our Nation. Yet, this is the second time in my adult lifetime that we have had serious impeachment proceedings, and I am only 45 years old. This only occurred once in the entire 200 years prior to this time. Is this a fluke? Is it that we just happened to have had two `bad men' as Presidents? I doubt it. How will we feel if sometime in the next 10 years a third impeachment proceeding occurs in this country so we will have had three within 40 years?

I see a danger in this in an increasingly diverse country. I see a danger in this in an increasingly divided country. And I see a danger in this when the final argument of the House manager is that this is a chapter in an ongoing `culture war' in this Nation. That troubles me. I hope that is not where we are and hope that is not where we are heading.

It is best not to err at all in this case. But if we must err, let us err on the side of avoiding these divisions, and let us err on the side of respecting the will of the people.

Let me conclude by quoting James W. Grimes, one of the seven Republican Senators who voted not to acquit Andrew Johnson. I discovered this speech, and found out that the Chief Justice had already discovered and quoted him, and said he was one of the three of the ablest of the seven. Grimes said this in his opinion about why he wouldn't convict President Johnson:

I cannot agree to destroy the harmonious working of the Constitution for the sake of getting rid of an unacceptable President. Whatever may be my opinion of the incumbent, I cannot consent to trifle with the high office he holds. I can do nothing which, by implication, may be construed as an approval of impeachment as a part of future political machinery."

Statement of Senator Russ Feingold, February 12, 1999

"Let us resolve to learn the lessons of this long, sad year. Let us learn now, having come this far, the wisdom of the founders that impeachment is and must be a high barricade, not to be mounted lightly. Let us learn that because it requires the overwhelming support of the Senate to succeed, it cannot and should not proceed on a merely partisan basis. Let us learn that the desire to impeach and remove must be shared broadly, or it is illegitimate."

Statement of Senator Paul Wellstone, February 12, 1999

[Stinky The Clown]

18. I respect both men ... and Wellstone in particular .......

But that was then ..... and then was a blowjob.

Now is the worst crimes EVER perpetrated on our way of life, our Constitution, our people, the world.

This cabal is the embodiment of high crimes and misdemeanors.

[mwb970]

32. The idea of NOT impeaching Bush is simply obscene.

Clinton was impeached as the result of a private, consensual sex affair that had nothing to do with his job and was nobody's business. He brought us peace and unparalleled prosperity despite the constant screeching of his right-wing attackers.

Bush, never really elected in the first place, has killed and maimed thousands of our citizens in an unnecessary war, has repeatedly lied to the public, and has betrayed the Constitution he swore to uphold and protect (he called it a "God damned piece of paper"). He advocates torture and holds "enemies of the state" without trial or legal recourse. He has vastly increased the danger to America and Americans. He, and we, are despised around the world, thanks to his foolish and arrogant words and actions. He has worked tirelessly to overthrow our system of government and establish an imperial presidency with him as Emperor. His every act goes directly against the spirit of America and its people.

Come on now. Which of the two deserves impeachment?

[many a good man]

19. "destroy the harmonious working of the Constitution "

On the contrary, impeachment would be used to defend the Constitution. Bush and Cheney have violated Constitutional and International law. We are compelled out of respect for the Constitution to take due remedy and mark a clear boundary for future presidents.

The impeachment and subsequent trial should not be partisan. Rather it will draw a distinction between defenders of Constitutional democratic government and the authoritarians who seek to destroy it.

[onenote]

20. it will be partisan

you're dreaming to think otherwise.And the statements made by Wellstone, Feingold and other Democrats will be shoved down the public's throats in newspaper ads and television ads and the public will be turned off by the entire thing...just before the 2008 elections. It will be a disaster.

[many a good man]

21. Maybe I'm a dreamer

America IS a dream.

You are arguing the point based on political expediency. The offenses here, like Nixon, are so grave that Congress must transcend party. Failure to do so is an offense against the Constitution.

[Stinky The Clown]

22. Unlike Nixon, actually .......

Nixon was a misguided man who battled his own demons, but who, when one examines the totality of his presidency, clearly was not unamerican.

The current crop are bad actors to the core with no allegience to anything other than power and money. They would throw our nation over in a heartbeat .... and they're trying.

[lisainmilo]

25. UNLIKE NIXON....AND CLINTON...IT DIDN'T REQUIRE DIY!!!!

With an all Republican House and Senate Impeachment wont be intiated by any of our lawmakers!
The only way to make this, even a possibility is The DO IT YOURSELF IMPEACHMENT, based on Jefferson Manuel. This means me and you! I have already sent mine in, will you send yours? This is being done through an organization called www.impeachforpeace.org.

With Nixon and with Clinton, it didn't require my participation, lawmakers took it upon themselves, this time it is up to us.

[onenote]

33. no such thing really

Yes, its possible for the people to petition the Congress to initiate an impeachment proceeding. But it still requires a member of Congress to present the petition. And the petition will still be referred to a committee and it still won't go anywhere. If there was a member of Congress willing to start the ball rolling, he/she would do it on his/her own.

Its political realism. Sorry, but the real world is not always pretty.

[ClassWarrior]

39. Wrong! Citizens CAN initiate impeachment proceedings.

Maybe you need to read your Constitution. No, Jefferson didn't call it "DIY IMPEACHMENT," but it's all right there - a legal means for American citizens to initiate impeachment proceedings.

More at: http://impeachforpeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

NGU.

[onenote]

40. I've read the constitution. I've also studied this issue, which you havent

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1011916&mesg_id=1013183

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2586988#2589510

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2795155#2797085

[ClassWarrior]

47. Ahhh, you're a mind reader, too!

:rofl:

NGU.

[onenote]

48. and you are still uninformed!

:hi:

[ISUGRADIA]

52. One member can initiate impeachment proceedings

and then see it tabled in committee never to be seen again. No way to force the House to actually review impeachment charges.

[onenote]

35. Nixon=political crimes; impeachment=political remedy

Should it be this way? No. But the reason that Nixon had to resign was that his crimes were essentially political in nature -- an attempt, traceable directly to the white house and captured on tape, of his personal involvement in an effort to hide evidence of an effort to subvert the electoral process through a 'dirty tricks' campaign.

It was only when the public heard Nixon's own voice urging payoffs and interference with FBI investigations -- the smoking gun -- that the effort to remove him became truly bi-partisan and the die was cast.

The situation with chimpy is different. A bi-partisan effort to remove him will only arise if a smoking gun can be produced showing direct involvement by chimpy in one of two things: an effort to steal the election or to lie about WMD. Anything short of that, and the effort will remain divided along partisan lines. An American public that, according to polls, still believes in signficant part, that there is a Saddam-9/11 link are not going to countenance an effort to remove chimpy while troops are still overseas. If there isn't the political will and bi-partisan support needed to end the war, how in heaven's name can anyone think that there would be the political will/bi-partisan support needed to remove chimpy.

[ClassWarrior]

37. So we should fail to do the right thing for political gain.

Sounds like Bush**.

NGU.

[onenote]

41. Maybe to you, but not to me

Getting control of the government is far more important to me than whether chimpy serves two years and then faces the consequences of his actions as opposed to getting him out of office a year early and ensuring another decade of repub ruin.

[ClassWarrior]

46. Why do you keep suggesting they're mutually exclusive?

You can't get them out of office without "getting control of the government."

Most sensible Progressives tend to believe that letting these criminals get away with destroying our nation will "ensure another decade of repub ruin." Why do you say that bringing them to justice for their crimes will "ensure another decade of repub ruin?" That sounds like something Newt Gingrinch would say as a revenge threat.

NGU.

[onenote]

51. if we can't get them out of office without getting control of government

then are you acknowledging that we can't get them out of office? Or do you believe that the Democrats can magically gain a 2/3 majority in the Senate in 2006, even though that is mathematicaclly impossible. Again, quit ignoring my posts, which make clear that I believe that we can and should hold chimpy and gang accountable, but that strategically, the best way to do that is to pursue them for their crimes after the 2008 elections when they are not in office and, hopefully, Democrats control both the House and Senate AND the WHite House.

[onenote]

34. Political expediency = political reality

I'm not saying its the way it should be, just the way it is and will be.

The Democrats, assuming they recapture the House, should hold hearings on the run up to the war, on domestic spying, on all sorts of things. The I word should be investigations. There are two ways those investigations/hearings could play out in theory. One is that there is a smoking gun produced,a la the Nixon situation -- something that turns the public so viscerally against chimpy that a bi-partisan effort to remove him results. The other possibility is that nothing new turns up because the WH resists efforts to force them to produce documents etc. on the grounds of executive privilege and the Supreme Court sides with the WH. I think the latter scenario is far more likely than the former. And if I'm right, any effort to impeach would be partisan. The words of Democrats from 1999 would be plastered over every newspaper and tv screen. Democrats would find themselves playing defense, not offense. Contenders for the 2008 nomination would be put on the spot and the party would be divided within itself. In other words, a wet dream scenario for the repubs who would otherwise have to be the one's playing defense defending chimpy in the 2008 elections.

[ClassWarrior]

38. Why are you fighting so hard to protect Bush** & Cheney**?

All of your posts amount to, "Give up, it's hopeless."

Why is that?...

NGU.

[onenote]

42. why are you making stuff up?

I have never once defended chimpy and cheney. Find one time. If you want to post lies, go to freerepublic. They countenance such behavior.

There will be ample opportunity to go after chimpy, cheney, rumsfeld, and the rest of this gang after they are out of office. Indeed, the chances of successfully pursuing them will be greater then. I hardly consider it protecting them to argue for the strategy that most likely will result in their getting the just desserts.

[Stinky The Clown]

43. Whoa! Hold on a second. Onenote is NOT defending Il Dunce ......

but rather disagreeing with me on strategy - impeach fast VS wait for now then indict and convict after they leave office. HUGE difference.

If you're going to argue for one or the other side of that equation, fine. But don't call it a defense of Bush. It isn't.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[onenote]

49. search away

I have nothing to hide. I am a lifelong Democrat, a regular contributor to Democratic campaigns, host of Democratic fundraisers, with signficant experience in and knowledge of political realities. As I've said, if you can find a post where I've defended chimpy, show it.

I am realist. If others want to approach things on a more philosophical level, or disagree with my analysis, I understand. But simply calling me names and offering no rebuttal is, to use your term, Bullshit.



And, BTW, you have no idea why I'm called onenote.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[civildisoBDence]

56. Exactly. onenote has thought this through without being blinded by

emotion.

[Stinky The Clown]

44. I understand what you're saying ...... and could agree with it .... but ..

.... your whole argument is predicated on not finding a smoking gun in House hearings. I think that's the crux of our difference of opinion. You don't think one will be found. I do think one (actually, I think several) will be found.

If, on the other hand, one is NOT found, then at least the hearings will establish a shitload of evidence that can be used later in multiple courts of law.

I guess, in the end, the goal we both have is that the crimes of this maladministration should not go unpunished. That statement goes to a time well beyond the end of the Il Dunce era in January of 2009.

[onenote]

50. agree to disagree

As I said, if a smoking gun emerges that creates bi-partisan pressure for impeachment, I can see it happening. But short of that, I think any impeachment effort will be inherently partisan and that, I fear, could backfire on Democrats. But you and I are in complete agreement that chimpy and gang should be held accountable ultimately.

[CarlVK]

26. How much higher crimes and misdemeanors can you get than with Bush?

With all due respect to the memory of Sen. Wellstone, who was a great man, I don't think he was insinuating that you should NEVER use the impeachment process. He said it must rise to the bar. And if it hasn't already with the Bush crew, what would? Does the man have to stick babies on pikes on live TV to get the impeachment process going?

[Stinky The Clown]

27. 100% correct. Both those quotes were in relation to a political farce ....

.... about the non-event of a blowjob,

What we face today is no blowjob.

[elehhhhna]

17. Rec (10) & Kick

[lwcon]

28. Good to hear a strong call-to-action for impeachment

"You can't run impeachment" is one of my least favorite DU memes.

We don't necessarily have to "run on impeachment" (and I'm not sure who these nervous nellies think is likely to do that, anyway), but this country badly needs a new sheriff. If we win the mid-terms, the last thing we need to be are equivocators.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[TitanicWreck]

29. If Bush is impeached, doesnt Chenney gain control?

Is it possible Bush's handlers are setting him up te be a latter day Ernst Rohm-(a lowly toad turned into a martyr) so they'll give bush over to be impeached, but Chenney at rumsfeld will seize power and go after critics, labling dissent an act of terrorism?

[TitanicWreck]

30. If Bush is impeached, doesnt Chenney gain control?

Is it possible Bush's handlers are setting him up te be a latter day Ernst Rohm-(a lowly toad turned into a martyr) so they'll give bush over to be impeached, but Chenney at rumsfeld will seize power and go after critics, labling dissent an act of terrorism?

[Stinky The Clown]

31. From the OP, last line, 5th paragraph ......

" ....... and move immediately to impeach the President and Vice President."

[Doctor_J]

36. It will never happen

it's nothing more than a dream. This GOP rule will end only with lots and lots of bloodshed. Like Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany.