Impeachment backers: What do you hope to accomplish?

[calteacherguy]

Suppose for the sake of argument Bush and Cheney or either are impeached in the House, there is no way they would be convicted in the Senate. Hell, today there were only 56 voting to give the troops a decent time interval between deployments.

Seriously, what do you hope to accomplish? A statement of some sort? Do you believe the Pelosi will become President through this process? Do you seriously believe that?

I have very mixed feelings about the leadership starting impeachment proceedings. I think there are bigger issues that need attending...such as building support against the administration's war policy, and stopping it. Impeachment won't accomplish that.

Try to convince me otherwise...

[Vanje]

1. I want to see Dick Cheney answer questions under oath

I want to see george W Bush answer questions under oath.

Theres been almost 7 years and not a single question answered.

[Vanje]

3. And when enough quetions get answered,

i believe there'll be jail time.

[calteacherguy]

5. Do you know how many votes it takes in the senate to convict?

Cloture takes 60...and today the senate could only muster 56 to give troops a decent time interval between deployments.

Conviction would take 67 votes.

Do you seriously believe this is possible?

[Vanje]

25. just to see these untouchables under oath, facing down the american public

would ,in fact be enough.

we'll see what gets revealed in investigation.
A lot of laws were broken.

[MADem]

35. Impeachment doesn't jail people. It simply removes them from office. NT

[Vanje]

52. Of Course .impeachment dosnt jail anyone.

Its the ensuing investigation that willprobaby lead to SERIOUS legal trouble for major players in the present administration.

[onenote]

47. Did you "see" Nixon or Clinton testify in their impeachment proceedings?

You will never "see" chimpy or cheney testify. Even if impeachment hearings and a trial are held, any submissions that they make,whether under oath or not, will be written.

[Vanje]

53. Nixon resigned rather than face impeachment.

Of Nixon didnt answer questions.He had resigned to avoid them.

I want the questions asked, right there in the light of public scrutiny.I dontcare if they're written or oral questions.
I want the perps under oath. I want them to answer.


Resigning lik Nixon would be okay too.

[beaconess]

79. Impeachment does not compel a president to answer any questions

Bill Clinton never appeared before the House or Senate in any impeachment proceedings and was not asked nor did he answer any questions.

[AZBlue]

83. Oh, god, I have tears running down my face!! LMAO!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

As much as I'd love to see that, it will NEVER EVER happen. They won't even let their lowly aides testify, so they sure as hell aren't going to even show up!

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. I cannot say it nearly as well as WCGreen.......

This should be helpful:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3345462

[calteacherguy]

4. O.K., I just read that and I don't get it.

Do you seriously believe the senate will convict? Convince me that believing they will is not delusional thinking...given, as stated in the OP of that thread "the Republicans thwart us at every turn"

[CaliforniaPeggy]

8. Speaking for myself now...

I believe that if we can get some Republicans onto our side, we can impeach...

They are looking ahead at their re-election campaigns next year, and they are afraid...

They want to get on the correct side of history.......I hope...

[calteacherguy]

11. If that is true, there still aren't enough up for election to get the 67 votes needed. nt

[Mythsaje]

6. I want every one of these rat-bastards

dragged out in front of the American people and FORCED to either lie or refuse to answer. I want to see some of them break down and admit to something.

Their whole culture is corrupt and deceptive and the American People need to see it, once and for all. It must never be allowed to be swept under the rug for political convenience again. At this point even if a Dem does win and we retain congress, these fucks will just circle the drain a few times and crawl back out of the toilet to continue their bullshit, just like they did after Watergate.

Is it really that complicated?

[calteacherguy]

13. O.K., you've made the best argument for impeachment so far.

You acknowledge they will not be removed from office, but still clearly articulate why you would support the process.

[driver8]

21. Well said -- I feel the same way.

The people of this country need to know what these shitbags have done.

If they are allowed to continue, what good is the Constitution? There will be no more checks and balances.

Put them under oath and make them lie.

I want to see them squirm.

[proud2BlibKansan]

48. Best argument yet!

:applause:

[mike_c]

7. do you honestly think that if Congress can't find members...

...who will impeach leaders that have committed clear and unambiguous felonies, that they'll find the votes to do ANYTHING substantive about the war?

[calteacherguy]

9. Yes. nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

50. Good point Mike!

[terisan]

10. There are not the votes for conviction today, but investigation may reveal crimes so dreadful

that many Republicans will feel the need to convict and remove Cheney and Bush as soon as possible.

[calteacherguy]

12. The are not going to make Pelosi POTUS. nt

[terisan]

22. They will strike a deal with Pelosi that she won't run in 2008 or they will get rid of

Cheney first so that they have a hand in appointing a vp they want. Same thing happened with Agnew-Republicans got Democrats to agree to Republican Gerald Ford.

[calteacherguy]

23. Alice in Wonderland, how to you get to Wonderland....

:eyes:

[terisan]

30. Agnew was bounced out of vp and into jail. Cheney may well follow that precedent.

[beaconess]

81. Agnew didn't go to jail. He was never subject to any impeachment proceedings

And he was bounced out of office long before any impeachmentproceedings were brought against Nixon.

[terisan]

36. There is an upwelling among the people for impeachment-a tide that will not be denied.

The tipping point will be reached. In fact, Bush will push us all, including two thirds of the Senate, to the tipping point.

[AZBlue]

84. Actual hometown photo:

[calteacherguy]

15. And if it does not reveal such crimes, it hurts our chances in 08'. nt

[terisan]

28. This administration is being busted open like an overripe pumpkin dropped from a window.

Investigation will reveal enough so that Republicans will want to kick them out in order to save themselves.

If the situation were reversed the Republicans would have already moved in for the kill.

[calteacherguy]

38. hmmmmm....maybe. nt

[AZBlue]

85. Yeah, because I'm sure they haven't covered things up, will refuse to allow others to testify or

will cause the evidence to disappear. Nah, not in the Bush Administration!
:sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm:

[proud2BlibKansan]

51. That would go against history then

Impeachment has always helped the party that impeaches. Think back to what happened in elections following impeachments.

[MatrixEscape]

14. I am not against impeachment as

a catharsis for the disgruntled masses. Nor would it make a bad metaphor for the effigy to burn.

What I don't see is the convictions people hope for, regardless as to how titular the players out in front actually are.

I do fear that an impeachment would become an opiate-like debacle that would create even more distraction from what is becoming, (ever so gradually) more obvious to more people about the extent and nature of this game. After all, a LOT of money, time, and research has gone into perfecting the means and methods. News is mostly entertainment and entertainment is almost ubiquitous, along with the commercials and message it is designed to provide.

Outside the blatant social engineering that clearly maintains the image and control of the status quo, specific events only serve as side-show distractions. That is what they are meant to do, for those who observe very carefully how the total propaganda sciences delivered by the MSM works.

Or, maybe we are not much more than ant-like as social creatures? Sounds demeaning, but maybe it is even futile and senseless to bring this up? Ants follow chemical trails that other ants leave and they are all subject to various cues and the queen's needs in a totally collective, emergent form of behavior. It is possible that humanity works the same way, but we are endowed with the odd ability to pretend or believe we are individuals with original and independent thought. I mean, it starts to look that way if you peruse and scan American culture today. Preposterous, you say?

[rodeodance]

16. The impeachment process is a tool to be used by the American people and it

should NEVER have been removed from the table as a viable option!--not by Pelosi nor any Speaker. (i am not advocating using it now--but to remove it really depleats options).

[calteacherguy]

Well, that makes sense. Keep all options on the table is seldom a poor choice. nt

[Thothmes]

86. The American people

Impeachment is not the option of the people. It is a tool of the House of Representatives. Do you really believe that the American people wanted President Clinton impeached.

[autorank]

17. Impeachment, of course. There is nothing else that can be done without it.

I say this respectfully but please wake up.

Bush signs bills we like and adds a "signing statement." This is a stated intention to violate the
explicit and implicit intent of Congress. They've known about that forever. They've done nothing.
Legislation is now a joke, it merely serves the purposes of the crooks who run the country.

I heard two people talking the other day at a coffee shop. One said, "Why doesn't Bush just declare
marshal law?" The other responded, "He doesn't need to, he has the Democratic leadership?" I laughed
a little and they looked surprised I was even interested.

WE HAVE NO LAWS THAT MEAN ANYTHING. BUSH JUST SIGNS A LETTER SAYING BLACK IS WHITE AND THAT'S THAT

Any one who thinks we have laws in this country is kidding themselves; laws passed by Congress and
implemented by the Executive branch, We are a lawless nation with an empty Justice Department run

by a skeleton crew of 100 new hires from Regent University.

We have a president who selectively obeys laws.

AND CONGRESS DOES NOTHING.

Will they do it? Yes, with sufficient pressure or out of sufficient fear. Even if the prospects are
less than assured right now, impeachment is the only meaningful solution to the problems we have
(since the world's last SOMA pill was ingested in the Reagan administration).

[calteacherguy]

19. Not enought Republican senators are up for election in 08'

And I'm plenty awake, are you?

[autorank]

65. Wide awake. They don't have to be.

Impeachment works only if there's a huge smoking gun or a massive movement at their doors. It's worth
recognizing that nothing happening in the government will be anything other than what the WH wants until
the WH occupants are out of office. Sooner is better, impeachment is the solution, and, even if it
doesn't work, resistance has to start now. Another weakling will being WH after impeachment if it does
happen. The interests involved cannot go away, lest they face legal action.

[driver8]

18. These f*ckers need to be held accountable for their actions!!

We may never know the extent of the damage that these idiots have done to our country. They need to stand before Congress, under oath, and be held accountable.

I don't care if I convince you or not...if we don't impeach these thugs, who can be impeached?

[calteacherguy]

20. O.K., so you realize there will not be the 67 votes to convict, right? nt

[driver8]

26. Yes...you have made that quite clear.

It is not about convicting them. It is about getting the dirt out in the open. The majority of the American public has no idea what these criminals have been up to.

Put these thugs on the stand, under oath, and they will tell the truth or they will lie.

Once they lie, they are f*cked.

[calteacherguy]

27. O.K., I understand your point of view...but what if it doesn't work?

What if no convictable offenses are uncovered? Democrats will be accused of wasting time in a "partisan witch hunt" or some such thing.

[snot]

24. I'd be happy just to keep some of them too distracted to continue raping us. nt

[shraby]

29. BECAUSE THE LAW WAS BROKEN BY THE

EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND ALL INVOLVED SHOULD BE PUNISHED. Now can you understand why they should be impeached? It's that simple. They are not above the law, and if congress won't do their duty and institute impeachment proceedings, the whole bunch who are enabling and excusing the crimes should also be impeached. I'm talking about the Supreme Court, the House, the Senate and everyone in the Executive branch. Clean house!!!

[calteacherguy]

39. But can we PROVE that? nt

[IndianaGreen]

42. Bush publicly admitted that he violated FISA, a felony

In defending his warrantless search program, Bush admitted that he violated FISA, a felony.

What more do we need? The sob confessed on national television!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

76. Yes, they are above the law, sadly.

Don't confuse what should be the case with what actually is the case.

Bush has broken the law.

He is not going to be punished for doing so - even if every single Democrat united behind an impeachment attempt, it would still be completely doomed to failure.

A law only goes as high as it's enforced.

I wish that Bush *wasn't* above the law, but I don't see any evidence that he isn't.

[Alexander]

31. Republicans are bolting on the war and more scandals come forward every day...

If the scandals continue pouring out at this rate, we'll have impeachment by Christmas.

[CreekDog]

68. Not exactly, I'll believe it when I see it

If we had Republican one vote against funding the war for every Republican who complained and claimed to support bringing the troops home --well, they would be home by now.

They just never deliver.

Your Christmas prediction is about as realistic as Santa Claus and Rudolph.

[leftofthedial]

32. it's not like they're doing much of anything else either

there is no meaningful progress on ending the illegal occupation of Iraq

there is no meaningful progress on correcting the grotesque economic imbalances in this country

there is no meaningful progress on reigning in out-of-control corporations

there is no meaningful progress (in Congress) on addressing global warming

there is no meaningful progress on addressing campaign and election processes that are so broken they no longer work at all

other than a few lukewarm hearings that mostly serve to allow the bush gang to spew bullshit, there is no meaningful progress on anything except campaigning for president

what "agenda" (other than running for president) are the "democrats" pursuing instead of impeachment?

impeachment is a constitutional obligation, not a political option, despite how the repukes treated it a decade ago

[calteacherguy]

37. What if no provable crimes are uncovered? They will say it was all political. nt

[Vanje]

54. No crimes? No cover ups?

just who do you think told Libby ,Rove, and Armitage to let Novack and his pals out Plame.
Who do you imagine was behind the Justice deartment judge purge?
You think that was all Harriet Meiers idea? You think Gonzalas came up with that on his own?
do you think the wire taps were Gonzalas idea?.You dont think he got an okay from his bosses on that?

[leftofthedial]

55. what if?

you've just offered a rationale for never prosecuting another crime, investigating another problem or ever accusing anyone of anything.

sheesh.

[AndyTiedye]

33. Start With Gonzales. We'd Probably Get 67 For Him

Then next is Cheney!

[some guy]

34. At the very least

all the crimes of the administration should be made public, and those responsible linked to the crimes.

Nixon resigned in 1974, avoiding impeachment, and that allowed members oif his administration to slither back into power. Cheney and Rumsfield to name two.

The whole maladministration needs to be tainted *badly* with the stink of Bushco so that they never have another chance to wield power.

Any and all Senators who choose not to vote to convict, should be tainted by association, so they lose their seats, whether in 2008, or whenever they're next up for election.

And, of course, impeachment is the only real means for reasserting that the Constitution is the law of the land, and still viable.


edit: typo

[Greyhound]

40. I believe in playing the game before declaring a winner.

You discount the fact that 100% of Republik Senators want to be re-elected, 34 this cycle, and a public exposure of the crimes committed over 5 years, presented by a skillful and charismatic prosecution, just may make it imperative to vote to convict.

Even if it doesn't, it will be far better for us than to not even try, especially after sitting on our hands and allowing that totally partisan scum onto the SCOTUS. We haven't even begun to feel the pain that this court will inflict before it's through.

[IndianaGreen]

41. Impeaching Cheney will prevent a US-Iran War

Cheney is the head of the snake. Cheney is the mastermind behind the Plame leak and the firing of the US Attorneys. Cheney is the one that set policy regarding warrantless searches and torture. Behind every crime committed by the Bush regime, lurks the giant shadow cast by Cheney.

While impeaching Bush may not be practical, impeaching Cheney is not only doable but imperative.

Cheney is the one pushing for war against Iran. If we pressure John Conyers and Nancy Pelosi to allow for H Res 333 Cheney impeachment resolution to go forward, the one introduced by Dennis Kucinich, we will save American, Iraqi, and Iranian lives.

Impeachment hearings in the House will distract Cheney from his most evil deeds. If the House Judiciary committee were to pass Articles of Impeachment to be voted by the House, it will throw a big monkey wrench in the neocons' rush to war against Iran.

Impeaching Cheney will prevent a US-Iran War.

Failure to impeach Cheney will end in catastrophe for us, for our troops, for the Constitution, and for the Republic.

[Hippo_Tron]

43. I'd support commencing impeachment hearings for Cheney

Because I think that if the case is built properly, there may be a chance of getting a conviction. With a 13% approval rating, I don't think the Senate has much confidence in him anymore and if a good case can be built, we may have a chance of overcoming loyalty. Of course I'd have to take a look at the case built by the House Judiciary Committee before deciding that impeachment is a good idea.

Bush is a much harder fish to fry because he can get out of almost everything by having someone else take the fall. But if the Cheney impeachment proceedings are successful then perhaps enough information about Bush will come out to build a case against him.

Of course I'm not pissed at Pelosi because she hasn't commenced the impeachment proceedings yet. I'm pissed off because she's not doing enough keep up the pressure on Bush and make his remaining days in office as miserable as possible.

For example. Instead of funding the Iraq War for four months, she could've said that Congress will fund it in two week increments, each time adding amendments that Bush would not otherwise sign into law.

Or beginning the impeachment hearings on Cheney would be another way to keep the pressure on the White House.

[Vidar]

44. In a word, justice.

[ixion]

45. my thoughts exactly

[Perry Logan]

46. "Screaming at your fighter to knock the other guy out will not help in a close match."

It will only frustrate your boxer.

[Vanje]

56. i just want my fighter to put his/her fighting pants on

and get into the ring

[proud2BlibKansan]

49. I don't want Monica Goodling as our vice president in 30 years

Impeachment takes down ALL of them. There is a trickle down effect. If we had impeached Nixon, we wouldn't have Cheney or Rumsfeld or Kissinger today. (And man, every time they roll out Kissinger, my blood just boils!)

We need to get rid of these evil bastards once and for all. It's the best way to save our country and hundreds of thousands of lives.

[Lerkfish]

57. Crimes have been committed: is there supposed to be a choice whether to prosecute crimes?

Do the police say "you know, gee, I have all this evidence against this guy, but I don't feel like charging him because I feel the jury will let him off"

the point is: CRIMES WERE COMMITTED. If we do not impeach, we have become a country, not of law, but of political expediency.

[GreenPartyVoter]

58. *raises hand* Um.... Impeachment? Maybe we do have to build a solid case but

all I can say is the junta had better not leave the wh at the end of their second 'term' without having been impeached. I should think 8 years is enough time to build the case, eh?

[Stinky The Clown]

59. Let me ask you a similar question .......

.... how do you explain sitting by silently while this gang of thugs runs rough shod over our country, our treasure, our rights, and our constitution?

I'm not saying you're like them, and instead assume your question to be honest ..... but this kind of thinking was done by the 'good Germans' many years ago. We see, even today, their children and grand children and great grandchildren are making amends for that.

If we don't impeach, then "what do we tell the children?"

[Hideboh]

60. So the real question here is

Have Bush/Cheney ever committed any impeachable offenses?

[Lerkfish]

61. no, the real question is: what impeachable offenses have they NOT committed?

that would be a shorter list

[Forrest Greene]

62. Justice.

I know it's a quaint notion.

[CreekDog]

63. Impeachment supporters undercut their goal by going after Pelosi

Going after Pelosi set up a dynamic where a good portion of loyal Democrats stepped in to defend Pelosi against attacks. In so doing, impeachment supporters forced a decision on Democrats not yet convinced on impeachment as to whether they were:

1) going to support impeachment right now
2) going to support Pelosi right now

Because impeachment supporters made this an either/or, many Democrats stepped in to watch Pelosi's back and are ending up coming down on the side against impeachment.

This is so inept on the part of impeachment supporters that I wonder if Bob Shrum is coordinating their efforts.

[Vanje]

66. 54% want Cheney impeached

I can assure you they are not ALL "going after" Pelosi,whatever THAT means.
I think only one of these has offered to challenge Pelosi in an election.
I do wish every last one of them would write Pelosi a letter or email or call her though

[CreekDog]

67. I didn't say ALL

And the damage is done simply because enough impeachment supporters have done this and started this dynamic, which was easy to predict.

And it's making it less likely that the war will end and less likely that impeachment will happen.

Getting something done is a lot different than wanting something done. Sorry to lecture, but the logistics seem not to matter on the other side of this argument.

[rocktivity]

64. I hope to accomplish impeachment because impeachable things happened

The adminstration's war policy is ILLEGAL, and it's Congress' duty to DO SOMETHING when an administration's acts are illegal--whether they succeed or not--if only to get it on offical record. Which the Repubs are free to run on in '08. So even failure would be a good option.

:headbang:
rocknation

[CreekDog]

69. So, who do you convince to make it happen?

If it's Pelosi, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Get the Reps and the Moderates on board. Pelosi will act then, but not before. She isn't getting the ire of the left because she wants them to be mad at her.

[Thothmes]

87. War Policy

It was the Congress that gave the Administration the authority to launch the War. This war is no more legal or illegal that the one that President Johnson prosecuted in Viet Nam. I would recommend finding a more solid charge to impeach the President on.

[polichick]

70. I expect accountability...

What a precedent it would set to allow a criminal regime to get away with trampling the Constitution and manipulating the people with endless lies, murdering hundreds of thousands along the way ~ and stealing its way into office in the first place.

[Chemical Bill]

71. Publicity.

The corporate media will be overwhelmed with the issues they want to avoid. Some shit is bound to stick.

Bill

[Hosnon]

72. A conviction that results in removal is not the only valid reason to impeach.

Personally, the deterrent effect that the impeachment of Bush would likely have on future presidents is quite valuable. Such presidents would have a historical record of what likely will happen if he or she inappropriately invades another country.

On the flip side, I would not like to see the impeachment process turn into something that a President must go through if he or she is simply disliked. Following so closely on the heels of the Clinton impeachment makes this threat quite real.

In the end, I believe that Bush should not get a pass because his party inappropriately impeached his predecessor. I have enough faith in future Congresses to understand exactly which precedent an impeachment of Bush tried to set.

Edit: Content.

[ProudDad]

73. Nixon wasn't even "Impeached"

but he was made gone...


Because it was obvious that he'd lost the consent of the governed to be the "governor"...



"We are the Zapatistas of the EZLN (who) rose up in January 1994 because we were tired of all the evil the powerful did to us, that they only humiliated us, robbed us, killed us, and no one ever said or did anything. For all that we said 'Basta' (enough) we weren't going to permit that they treat us worse than animals anymore." The Zapatista commentary continues saying they want democracy, liberty and justice for all Mexicans, and to get it they organized to defend themselves and fight for it. And so they have. Their spirit of resistance continues in their ongoing struggle for autonomy and freedom"

"We have somehow forgotten that no government can rule without the consent of its people.

What is at stake in the struggle of the Zapatistas is an alternative approach to the prolonged combat which has
wracked the Third World. It is a moral force which disables all previous forms of power. It is the distant glimmer of an alternative to this global system of exploitation."

http://www.amazon.com/Zapatistas-Possible-Chronicles-Resistance-2000-2006/dp/1560258748

[ProudDad]

74. We only need 218 votes to Impeach

then they have to testify...or resign

Then their crimes will be on the front pages and the TV news (except maybe faux)

Then the pukes will suffer a defeat in '08 that would make 1964 look like a republican landslide.

All good reasons to proceed, nez paz?


On Edit:

Those are the tactical/strategic reasons...


The Moral Reason:

With which part of defending the Constitution against all enemies Foreign and Domestic do you take issue???

[PBass]

75. It doesn't matter if the Senate doesn't convict, we need the House to go on record

as taking action. Otherwise, it sends the message that breaking the law is acceptable, especially if an election is near. Political convenience is not what guides ethical people.

"But Bush did it, too...!" I don't ever want to hear an elected official or pundit say that, in the future, as a way of justifying a president's illegal activities.

I agree, the House taking action may not accomplish anything more than making future presidents "think twice" before they flaut the law, ignore Congress, ignore the Constitution, break long-standing treaties, lie to the public, ignore subpeonas etc. If "that's all impeachment hearings would do" then that is more than a worthwhile goal, it's an imperative.

To me, it's not about "removing" anybody, I don't expect that to happen. It's about Congress going on the historical record as opposing the president's conduct. This may or may not chasten Bush and Cheney, but it will serve as a reminder to future presidents, that they will be held accountable for their actions.

Impeachment is about protecting our Constitution, by imposing some previously-lacking accountability.

[bigwillq]

77. Accountability

This may be the only way to hold them accoutable for their crimes.

[burrowowl]

78. Honor!

and hopefully, indict and prison for Criminals: war, against human rights (whoops, U$A has no human rights, civil rights is not the same).
But, even if case is lost, SOME WILL HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO SAVE OUR HONOR!

[MrMickeysMom]

80. To save our constitution with a better future of a democracy, avoiding

...Marshal Law! :scared:

[PBass]

82. I want history to show that somebody stood up for the Constitution, and tried to stop them.

If they are thwarted by partisans in Congress who protect a criminal White House, then let the historical record show that, as well.