Anyone having any second thoughts on NOT impeaching Bush/Cheney when it mattered?

[omega minimo]

In post-November 2008 America, with no investigations into Bushco., no accountability ...
Dubya preparing his "think tank" to rewrite his story ...
Republicans clearly counting on the continuing success of their own insanity and spin machinery ...
Democrats unable to spine up to Republicans or corporate interests and forcefully run two branches of the government ...
Economic meltdown and installation of Banksters to "fix" it ...
Continuing and escalating Bushco. wars ...
Health care a shambles ...
Women sold out ...
Obama administration trying to privatize public schools ...
The open secret of 30 years of Reaganism destroying the nation (thanks Thom Hartmann :hi: ) ...
The open secret that we now have corporate government ...

Democrats gambled that it was worth it to not impeach and "look bad" in order to win the Presidency and a majority in Congress.

They speculated that those wins were impossible if the Bush administration was investigated and impeached.

We'll never know if the strategey was valid; no one knows what would have happened during a process of investigations and accountability.

They gambled and got their power. Bushco will never be held accountable now.

Any (second) thoughts?









http://www.thomhartmann.com

[Kutjara]

1. Look on the bright side:

We have the driest powder in history.

[omega minimo]

2. LOL

There's a horn joke there somewhere, but I'll leave it be.

[Laelth]

3. No second thoughts at all.

I said we should have impeached them long ago, and I still believe I was right about that.

Here: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Laelth/12">Bush MUST be impeached.

:dem:

-Laelth

[omega minimo]

4. Well put, Laelth. Thanks for linking. Thanks for trying.

[hypocrisyandlies]

40. Same here.

I always thought they needed to be impeached. That was (I believe) why Democrats won all those seats in 2006. That was their one job when we sent them to Washington. They failed to deliver.

[omega minimo]

50. You're right. It was. Wasn't it? Madame P took it Off The Table after the election.

:think:

[GreenStormCloud]

52. They still didn't have the votes to deliver.

It takes 67 votes in the Senate for a guilty verdict. Anything less is political capital wasted on theater.

[omega minimo]

55. "Anything less is political capital wasted on theater." So assuredly the strategerists make these

statements. That is a very astute one, more resonant than the oft heard "you just wanna impeach for the principle of it."

What I would love to know is how someone astute reconciles SELLING OUT THE CONSTITUTION and the public and history and justice and reality and integrity and all those "principles" with this stupid chuckleheaded vote counting myopia that views "anything less" than a slam dunk guilty verdict as "political capital wasted on theater."

Is that something they taught ya in collidge?

What about process? Is all of this in the abstract? Tim Russert's stupid white board, scribblings showing us how our election is being stolen before our eyes? Congressional scrimmage, a game of egos and whips and tallies and NO INTEGRITY, no balls, no allegiance to the sworn duties of the craft?

Answer the question the OP and thread raises about reconciling that strategery with the sworn duty to protect the Constitution and presumed hypocrisy of Americans who believe it's okay to sell it out and still assume that its protections apply.

[stray cat]

5. Republican house Republican senate - impeaching both Bush and Cheney?

Good luck with that! Maybe you should go check out republican sites and poll them as they would be the ones making the call.

[omega minimo]

9. We'll never know if the strategey was valid; no one knows what would have happened during a process

We'll never know if the strategey was valid; no one knows what would have happened during a process of investigations and accountability.

[winyanstaz]

6. Dang right we should have investigated them and we still should....

I think its a load of hooey that it cant be done. It can be done the second we want it bad enough.
Trouble is..by letting them get away with war crimes...we have destroyed ourselves in the long run.
Now they know they can get away with lying us into wars, torture, secret renditions and shitting on the Constitution...
and still we have people making excuses and wringing their hands.
We will never have our honor back..we can never be proud of America or trust the government or our legal system until it is done.

[GreenStormCloud]

7. The votes were never there, so the question is moot.

And the votes are not there for any kind of war crimes trial either. It simply isn't going to happen.

[omega minimo]

11. Prognosticating as if it's reality ahead of time is the same process used to not impeach criminals

that this OP reflects back on, now.


We'll never know if the strategey was valid; no one knows what would have happened during a process of investigations and accountability.

[GreenStormCloud]

53. Politics is the art of the possible.

A huge part of successful politics is knowing when not to bang your head against a brick wall.

[Mithreal]

54. Why go to all the trouble when you will lose.

Cheney was right about Obama. He wouldn't give up any of the new powers. And on the bright side, when President Obama leaves office he will not be held accountable for any crimes he might like to commit.

I agree with you, justice is political. No point in pretending anymore. Just ask Don Siegelman.

[omega minimo]

56. Subtle, Mithreal.

The post post post reality generation we must be.

[Sinti]

8. I believe now and believed then we should have done it

not just smirk and sneer, either, but the whole load of PNAC $#%^@.

If you look out there right now, there are so many people involved in this whole mess that need to be imprisoned, to protect the innocent citizens here and abroad, we could fill all the facilities KBR built to 'detain' our economic refugees awaiting trial. It would up them to good use at least. Citizens arrests eventually, maybe??

[omega minimo]

14. Aye

Thom Hartmann last Thursday:

Hour Two: THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT REAGAN'S BIGGEST TREASON AND THE OCTOBER SURPRISE? Independent investigative journalist Robert Parry Joins Thom with some explosive news.


http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/110609.html

The Crazy October Surprise Debunking
By Robert Parry (A Special Report) 
November 6, 2009

Patently absurd reasoning in someone’s argument can often tell you about the strength of the underlying facts. If an argument is deceptive on its face, you might suspect the supporting facts are pretty fragile, too.

Such was the situation in late 1992 as America reached an important turning point for whether the people would get to understand their recent history or not. A bipartisan House task force wanted to debunk allegations that Ronald Reagan’s campaign in 1980 had sabotaged President Jimmy Carter’s negotiations with Iran about freeing 52 Americans, who were taken hostage 30 years ago this week.

That alleged act of treachery, making Carter look weak and inept, set the stage for Reagan’s landslide victory on Nov. 4, 1980, exactly one year to the date after the hostages were seized. But the suspicions about this so-called October Surprise case only reached a critical mass in 1991-92 after several years of disclosures about the Iran-Contra arms-for-hostages scheme.

Despite Republican denials about any secret pre-election 1980 dealings with Iran – and the anger that the allegations drew from influential neoconservatives in the Washington press corps – a House task force was created to examine the case, although without much enthusiasm and mostly with an eye toward debunking the suspicions.

By November 1992, especially after President George H.W. Bush lost his reelection bid to Bill Clinton, the task force’s determination to proclaim the Republican innocence had solidified. The Democrats would be in control of the White House and Congress and were looking forward to bipartisan comity.

However, after Bush’s electoral defeat, the floodgates that had long protected the Reagan-Bush team gave way. To the dismay of the task force, evidence of Republican guilt poured in.

The new evidence was so powerful, including multiple corroborations of secret Republican meetings with Iranians behind Carter’s back, that task force chief counsel Lawrence Barcella saw no choice but to extend the investigation several months and to rethink the planned debunking.

More at link

[asjr]

10. Why didn't they impeach? I am still

angry about it. If they could impeach Bill Clinton for a personal blow job why in hell wouldn't they impeach Cheney/Bush for treason? And that is exactly what it is TREASON.

[omega minimo]

12. yup.

[MineralMan]

13. Impeachment and conviction were never a viable option.

Anyone who thought they were is deceived.

It's nice to talk about it, but there wasn't any chance at all that it could be done. Think about the attempt to impeach Clinton, and that was with a Republican Congress. We don't like impeachment in this country and it isn't going to happen except in cases where both sides are outraged at the person holding office.

[omega minimo]

15. We'll never know if the strategey was valid; no one knows what would have happened during a process

We'll never know if the strategey was valid; no one knows what would have happened during a process of investigations and accountability.



Comparing Bushco.'s crimes to Clinton's dalliance is silly.

[MineralMan]

29. Actually, we do pretty much know.

In the first place, there were never enough votes available to even have the investigation, much less get Articles of Impeachment to the House floor. Never.

Politics is the art of the possible. Hoping for the impossible is seldom a good idea.

[omega minimo]

34. You don't know that. They never tried. So that failure due to never trying means success?

:crazy:

You may remember Watergate and I submit again here that John Dean and others have some enlightening things to say about the UNFORESEEN and unpredictable outcomes of hearings and investigations that alter history -- and for those paying attention, their willingness to assume they know all beforehand.

[MineralMan]

36. Who was going to try? The Republican majority?

I don't think so.

Politics is the art of the possible.

[omega minimo]

39. You assume that there were no votes that would be swayed by criminal evidence. Perhaps.

No one knows.

[EFerrari]

46. If impeachment isn't a "viable" option, there goes American democracy.

Period.

And forget about "outraged", it isn't going to happen while the corporati own both parties.

[omega minimo]

48. Oh that's right, it was "off the table." The Congressional corporati castrati.

Tutti Fruitti My Damn Speaker!!

[H2O Man]

16. Not at all.

I favored it then, and continue to recognize it as a failure on the part of both houses of Congress.

[omega minimo]

19. Well put.

How are YOU! Consistent and well enough to be so! :grouphug:

[H2O Man]

21. Hi!

I'm still very weak, and limited in what I can do in even what was recently simple things. But, I'm hoping to be able to avoid the second surgery in a couple of weeks. (The real problem is that my family does not trust me to go to any appointments alone, or to report accurately what is going on. Darn them!)

[omega minimo]

25. Aha! They gotchore number...

:evilgrin: Infernal stoic Celts.

[H2O Man]

26. That lack of trust

hurts!

[omega minimo]

31. Don't take it personally

They need to hear for themselves. :hi:

You've got plenty of DU (((((((((( vibes )))))))))) headed your way. :thumbsup:

[omega minimo]

17. Any strategerists with insight on this? Rather than repeating the standard soothsaying. Now that the

deal is done? Has the outcome shifted your assessment of the big picture? :hi:

[Cleita]

18. I never had second thoughts. By not impeaching them we have

set up the stage for future generations of crooks getting into power again.

[omega minimo]

20. Ay, there's the rub.

Well put, Cleita, and how sad.

[katandmoon]

22. We were screwed under Bush and we're screwed under Obama. Both are cowardly corporate whores who

Protect the rich and powerful first and foremost. Democrats aren't quite as heartless as repugs, but when push comes to shove, they'll protect their corporate masters. And only a few will try to hold repugs accountable for anything. Obama, of course, isn't one of them.

The sight of Bush made me sick, the sight of Obama is beginning to make me just as sick, don't think it matters if the president has R or D after his name. We're screwed either way.

[omega minimo]

30. Even so

... or maybe more so, if all that is the case ... what do you think of the system itself, the protection of which these _______s are sworn to? Was it worth the gamble, to sell out the Constitution?

[katandmoon]

37. Don't you get it? If Bush/Cheney were impeached, NOTHING would have changed. NOTHING.

Just like it hasn't changed under Obama.

[omega minimo]

42. A lot would have changed.

I didn't disagree with your view presented in the first post. I asked:" what do you think of the system itself, the protection of which these _______s are sworn to? Was it worth the gamble, to sell out the Constitution?"


THAT right there is what would have changed, if and I mean IF nothing else did.

The American people and history would have changed, just as with Watergate, from seeing the process in action and almost even allowed to work as intended -- a much needed civics lesson, if nothing else.

[TreasonousBastard]

23. None at all-- I thought it was a stupid idea then and still do...

There has NEVER been a successful impeachment in the country's history.

NOT ONE!

Nixon was never tried by the Senate and resigned before trial when he realized his own party turned on him and he might well be the first President ever to be turned out of office. But he was still never impeached and tried.

With a Republican Senate adamantly opposed to impeachment, there is no possibility that Bush would have been turned out, and we would simply have been observers of a circus. Even if, by some miracle, he was tossed, we would have been left with Cheney-- and that would somehow have been better? At least they got rid of Agnew before jumping on Nixon. (Cheney resigning for some silly reason would have been the signal that the Republicans were willing to accept a regime change.)

[H2O Man]

24. Way wrong.

Starting with the error in perception, that there has never been a successful impeachment.

[TreasonousBastard]

28. Perhaps I should have specified Presidential impeachment...

and not assumed no one would confuse a few impeached judges with this argument.

Or do you know of another President who was impeached and tried successfully?

[H2O Man]

49. I know the history

of impeachment in the United States.

[omega minimo]

32. The lesson of Watergate was that no one knows what will come out during investigations/hearings.

(Read John Dean on this). Which IMHO makes the prognosticating and strategery "stupid" and negative self fulfilling prophecies, which violate the document the perps are sworn to protect, on top of their other crimes. We have a duty to honor that system also, or we are a nation of lazy "stupid" hypocrites. Talk about no balls. Geez.

How "stupid" do we have to be, to allow the dismemeberment of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, before our eyes AND assume that its protections still apply to us?

Who knows what investigations would reveal about both Bush and Cheney and others? Why assume we would have been "left with Cheney"? The simplistic logic is what seems "stupid."

Where do people get the notion they can predict the future so certainly?

[Atticus]

60. Your attitude is classic conservatism:

"Nothing should ever be done for the first time".

You solve the Cheney problem by impeaching him first. And, since I'm sure you think that a bad idea("Never been done!), why not prosecute and imprison the bastards NOW and seize their estates for the benefit of the nation they violated repeatedly and profitably for eight years?

[omega minimo]

64. Good question.

Could the answer be: It's an indictment of all those who went along for whatever reasons?

[earth mom]

27. I never gave up on the idea and neither should Congress or Obama. nt

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[Golden Raisin]

35. Pelosi's table, you know, the one

impeachment was off of, is still spotless and vacant. Not even a mote of dust, let alone impeachment. And I don't care that, "we didn't have the votes". We had an unelected, outlaw Administration that habitually spat and defecated on the Constitution, democracy and the rule of law. The Constitution should have been defended, for the sake of and as an example to future generations as well as for the ghosts of the Founding Fathers, even if the fight was a losing one. The effort, the visible and public PROTEST, the defense of the Constitution should have been made. Today we condemn all those who stood idly by while Germany marched towards Fascism/Nazism, and I don't think the comparison is too strong.

[omega minimo]

43. Beautiful.

Absolutely.

[G_j]

45. +1

[inna]

59. +1 and thank you. nt

[gleaner]

38. I always wanted to impeach Bush ..

I knew he was a liar and a crook and that he had stolen the elections both time. I never had any hesitation about seeing him go. I was afraid Cheney would be worse, but I figured that could have been dealt with somehow. I never understood why Congress hesitated, especially after they impeached Clinton for what was essentially a private matter and not a crime.

So my second thought is the same as my first though. Bush should have been impeached. His administration should have been prosecuted after he was, and that they should all be prosecuted for crimes against humanity, even though I know it isn't going to happen.

[Karmadillo]

41. Corporate Dems were never going to impeach their allies in the Republican Party

nt

[G_j]

44. yep nt

[EFerrari]

47. Starting with Nancy Pelosi.

[omega minimo]

51. OP spelled strategery wrong.

[Magginkat]

57. Impeach the Crawford SOB

Just goes to show how out of touch our elected/s-elected officials are with the general population of the U.S. Just like the health care issue probably 70%+ want accountability. We might as well not exist except for being useful pawns to make it look as though we elect the corrupt ones.

[inna]

58. too late to rec, but... a kick! nt

[omega minimo]

61. Hi inna

:hi:

[inna]

62. Where have you been?..

I haven't seen your posts for a while! I missed you!! :hi: :pals:

[omega minimo]

63. Obama Administration Patriot Act endorsement despite protests.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4158346

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7077204

[Egnever]

65. It will still mater if he is taken to court for crimes committed

and I think here will be renewed pressure for it when this hits the theaters, hopefully after health care is passed. Despite your denigrating it, it will help millions of people.