Suppose there was incontrovertible evidence of

[Lucky Luciano]

voting fraud - I mean not circumstantial, but confessions and other good hard evidence to the point where it became clear to all but the most hardcore of Freepers that there was fraud.

Do you think the polarized partisanship of Congress would avoid impeachment on grounds of party loyalty or would they have have the nuts and/or morals to cross party lines to impeach his ass?

I tend to think that they would not impeach him - that could lead to some heavy civil unrest.

[SmokingJacket]

1. I wonder.

It's possible to imagine that ANY kind of proof, as incontrovertible as you and I and any normal person may see it, could be twisted around by the right wing fanatics.

Oh, no! Those technicians weren't paid by Bush, they were paid by KERRY who's trying to undermine democracy! It's an evil left wing plot funded by Osama!!!

The LAPD planted that blood!!

I'm having a pessimistic day. I just don't see convincing any hardcore freepers of anything they don't want to be convinced of, and the dems will just roll over.

BUT it doesn't matter. We still have to fight the good fight, and who knows, eventually the tide may turn. (See? I'm totally bipolar these days.)

[cassiepriam]

2. Nothing at all would happen even with a smoking gun....

IT simply does not matter what the sociopaths in power
do. No one seems to care. Except a few of us who are
dismissed and discredited.

[dewaldd]

3. I doubt that the press would cover it.

[Carolab]

4. There IS hard evidence

what do you think Bev Harris has from Volusia County?

Did you not read her post about how she is being stonewalled and ignored by the Dems?

And do you think there is NO evidence in Ohio--just WAITING to be discovered through recounts? Why do you think Blackwell et al are trying to stop it?

We HAVE evidence. What we DON'T have is LEADERSHIP.

[politicasista]

5. The DNC leadership is a joke period.

They should have never let the RNC control the media.

[Chimpanzee]

9. There is no 'hard evidence' as we speak

If you have some you should post it immediately!

[Aussie_expat]

25. Bev Harris.....

Claimed voter fraud a week before the election. Hell she's already trying to sell a book.

[forgethell]

6. Get the

incontrovertible proof, and let's find out!!

[Liberalynn]

7. Maybe

I should phrase this as a question. Am I right in thinking that even if there were a successful impeachment meaning a guilty verdict on Voter Fraud, wouldn't the only effect be to make the Vice President, President? Then he would get to appoint his VP?

Or if the VP was found guilty on Voter Fraud as well then wouldn't the Speaker of the House become President?

The sad thing if this is the case, in either scenario you just get another Repug.

I still think the investigations should be pursued in any case.

[emcguffie]

11. if there were evidence of fraud

If there were evidence of fraud, and if one senator and one congressman then challenge the election -- sorry if you've already got this answer -- then it goes to Congress to decide whether or not to take, say, the recount from Ohio.

I can't believe they would really vote to keep him in, if vote fraud were proven.

[newyawker99]

15. Hi emcguffie!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[forgethell]

14. Yes, I think that you are right, n/t

[Chimpanzee]

8. No proof, short of film of Karl Rove hacking the CT/GEMS

would bring the pukes to abandon their Dear Leader.

[zann725]

22. What if there WAS a tape, or tapes at least of Hacking Coordination?

After all, there was taped evidence in the Ukraine election.
If Kerry is as good of a prosecutor as we know he, and he knew the kind of crimes that Bushco (and family) committed in BCCI, Iran-Contra, and 2000 Election...is it also not possible that he planned ahead, and arranged to have phones bugged, rooms (or areas where votes were counted) monitored electronically/secretly?

I don't think we should give up just yet...until all the evidence is in.

[emcguffie]

10. evidence of fraud

I think they would, because there are several Republicans who can't stand him either. If there were evidence of fraud, that would give them a good excuse to go against him.

And to look at it another way, that would demonstrate that Kerry won, which would also say that they might not be so popular if they were to wilfully go against the "will of the people" that put them in office in the first place.

[Chimpanzee]

12. Proof of fraud does not = Kerry really won

Even though I believe he did!

[hootinholler]

13. All we really need is

Documentation of State law being broken in multiple States and there may be a RICO case against the RNC. Check out the RICO statute. Especially sections 9-110.310 and 9-110.330.

Of course the dots have to be there and lead upward.

Is the testimony taken in Ohio available on the net yet?

-Hoot

[newyawker99]

16. Hi hootinholler!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[darthdemocrat]

17. I think you've found the crux of the larger issue

I think our election issues since 2000 may hang largely on what you mentioned at the end there - the possibility of unrest. We've seen move after move to shore up power and influencing this election is part of something bigger. I say it's a calculated move on their part taking into account whether we're really willing to risk our nice, stable, comfortable situations by demanding a shake-up of the system.

I believe it was weighed with this kind of thought - if they can stop someone from voting by making it take so long that they'd lose a job to wait in the line they can be fairly sure they can't manage time to protest or demonstrate.

I think they just never bet on the general population connecting the dots and seeing that if we're not targeted yet, we're next.

[Straight Shooter]

18. I cannot BELIEVE you used the word "morals" juxtaposed with "Congress"

:spank:

LOL.

[ailsagirl]

19. If enough Dem VIPs (and even moderate Repugs) jumped

on the bandwagon, and if the media stopped being so reticent, and if the people (at least, the 49 million of us who voted for Kerry) made enough of a racket, yes, I think he could not only be impeached (brought to trial) but he'd probably be convicted and he and his gang of goons would have to leave.

Plausible? Yes. Probable? No

But, I read that Jesse Jackson is planning a demonstration tomorrow in Ohio and he's going to call for an election investigation.

http://www.onnnews.com/Global/story.asp?S=2614285

That's why we need to keep the story going as much as possible. Keep circulating new stories, keep emailing people. My hope is that the longer this goes on, and the more information that comes out, that the more people in higher places will listen and start to act.

Snowball effect.

[progressoid]

20. Rove is too slick to let it go all the way to the top - besides

I don't think B* is smart enough to understand how it would work. Not to mention the fact that he thinks he has been ordained by God to lead this country, so the votes would naturally support him by divine intervention (I believe in the old testament this was called the plague of the voters)

[Mirwib]

21. The American public

will not stand to have a president who it believes as having personally committed a felony with respect to elections to stay in the presidency.

[MarkusQ]

23. There is a tipping point

There's a tipping point. Once that's passed, it's every politician for themselves. I think Bloggerman mentioned this a week or so back, but there are plenty of example throughout history. You push and push to get critical mass--and once you do, it takes on a life of it's own.

--MarkusQ

P.S. People asked the same thing about Watergate early on. Toward the end, I've heard that no one was even returning Nixon's phone calls. They were all busy working on their "Dick who?" faces, to make sure they looked natural.

[Gyre]

24. The rest of the repubs would turn on * in a heartbeat

hoping that their efforts "to get to the truth" will earn them leniency when it's time for sentencing. Besides being despicable traitors and opportunists, they're cannibals at heart.

Gyre