Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Impeachment?

Do you think it would be realistic to begin impeachment proceedings against bush and cheney at this point?

I have mixed feelings about it, especially with only a few months left in the term. As much as I would like to see it on record and see them to go out with world shame, I just don’t know how much good it would do now or what they might do in return and out of spite.

38 Comments:

Blogger FranIAm said...

Good point, but whether it is impeachment or not, they need to be brought to justice.

It is very disheartening. This country is so f*cked, truly f*cked in their evil wake.

That said, Dennis Kucinich remains my hero for even discussing it.

Yesterday I heard the form weapons inspector-turned agitator, Scott Ritter on the radio. He remarked that if we go to war with Iran, the Democrats have done more to advance that course than many Republicans.

I am not quoting him with precision here. It is just that there is so little willingness of our elected officials to actually advocate. They all fall in line like lemmings, except for a few.

June 11, 2008 2:31 AM  
Blogger ZILLA said...

Impeachment sounds yummy. I'll take mine with a scoop of vanilla, please.

June 11, 2008 4:09 AM  
Blogger The Donut Guy said...

Well, if they can impeach Bill for lying about a blowjob....they oughta at *least* make the attempt at making Bush pay for his stupidity

June 11, 2008 4:18 AM  
Blogger Sherry said...

i'd wait til after jan. THEN i'd bring charges against bush and cheney and see what happens.

June 11, 2008 4:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

first of all, slick didn't just lie about a blowjob, he lied under oath to a grand jury, that's perjury and is a "hig crime" as defined by the Constitution. Can you identify the "High Crimes" committed by President Bush?

June 11, 2008 4:56 AM  
Blogger fallenmonk said...

Frankly, the Rethugs are continuing to thwart any real progress on the issues in Congress (see yesterday's voter in the Senate on oil company windfall profits) and if we can't make any progress on real issues the Congress might as well spend their time impeaching the bastards now so that they won't have to waste their time when they have a majority in both houses and a Dem Prez and can get some real work done. Just sayin'.

June 11, 2008 4:57 AM  
Blogger diamondmc said...

Its to late. Dems need to try and unite a split party to win the white house first. The party is in bad shape right now. Some Hillary supporters will vote for McCrazy, others say they won't vote. If we don't unify the party come Nov, it won't matter anyways.

June 11, 2008 5:29 AM  
Blogger LeftLeaningLady said...

If an impeachment were attempted at this point and he was not found guilty, can he be retried in another court, or is that double jeopardy? Because Congress will not convict him, they can't seem to do anything else at this point, so even getting an impeachment would be a miracle.

anon, yes, Clinton lied to a grand jury about a blow job. Bush lied to the American people about everything, murdered over 4,000 and REFUSED to answer questions by investigators. Of course, the blow job was more important.

June 11, 2008 5:45 AM  
Blogger Weaseldog said...

I don't think they have time to finish an impeachment. They have let the clock run out.

Now they'll make noises about it as they run for re-election.

Will they fool as many people this time around, as they did last time?

Does it matter, or are we so sick of real Republicans that we'll vote in Republicans that are pretending to be Democrats?

June 11, 2008 6:32 AM  
Anonymous scott said...

Anony,

Revealing the identity of a covert operative of a U.S. intelligence agency is a felony. Conspiracy to obstruct justice is a felony.

That said, an impeachment would just further embarrass the country and I doubt that criminal prosecution is possible. It would be nice if the voters decide to turn out all the abettors.

June 11, 2008 6:48 AM  
Blogger Matty Boy said...

This is a nation of laws still.

Warrantless wiretapping is an unconstitutional act. If we have the precedent that an administration can do this (and more) with no penalty, it sends a bad message to the next president who thinks the laws can be bent.

We need to impeach.

June 11, 2008 7:08 AM  
Blogger Weaseldog said...

I've embedded a playlist of the articles of Impeachment on my blog.

Weaseldog's Lair

June 11, 2008 7:19 AM  
Blogger roger said...

should we let a mafia hit man off because "they" might react badly? i don't think so. history will, i hope, mark pelosi and other dems as abettors of the high crimes and misdemeanors of bush and cheney.

not that i have any sympathy for clinton, but the actual crimes of the current admin certainly overshadow lying to a grand jury about sex with a consenting adult.

June 11, 2008 7:21 AM  
Blogger two crows said...

given the lateness of the hour and the backlash that would occur if impeachment were attempted at this point, I doubt it would do any good at this point.
xxx
I DO think criminal proceedings should proceed on February 1, 2009 or thereabouts.
then, let the whole thing proceed up the chain all the way to the SCOTUS -- maybe that will keep IT from making any more mischief for the country.

and if, while all this is going on, if 1 or 2 conservative judges would retire before US vs BushCo was heard, well, so much the better.

**sigh** I know I'm living in "If-Only-Land."

June 11, 2008 7:23 AM  
Blogger mommanator said...

the country is already in a quagmire, why mess it more! hopefully we will find some sense of sensability soon!

June 11, 2008 7:28 AM  
Blogger robin andrea said...

I don't think it's the right time for impeachment. That should have been done years ago. I'd rather see Bush and Cheney brought before the world court in The Hague, after their term has ended and we are finally rid of them.

June 11, 2008 7:38 AM  
OpenID Heather said...

The Impeachment should have started when the Democrats took control of congress after the 2006 midterm elections, unfortunately Nancy Pelosi & Co. lacked the courage to do so.

Don't you find it incredibly ironic that they so feared Bush and the Republicans almost apologetic in a sense yet they wre full of brazen bravado when it came to not forgiving Hillary's vote on the war and literally castigating here throughout the Democratic primaries.

Impeaching Bush now is irrelevant too little too late andat the end of the day what does it accomplish, the only arguement one can make is mostly symbolic to she the American people that even Presidents are not above the rule of law and you can and will be punished for constitutional abuses.

--Heather

June 11, 2008 8:06 AM  
Blogger Spartacus said...

PoP - Please excuse my use of profanity here, but fuck yes!!! Earlier this year, I had the privilege of meeting and listening to Rep. Wexler speak on impeachment and he stated that a President and Vice President can still be held accountable via impeachment even after they leave office. It may seem like a useless effort given that the present administration has only 200+ days left. But by not taking this action, we give these bastards a free pass. Better late than never, I say.

June 11, 2008 8:06 AM  
Blogger Randal Graves said...

What matty boy and spartacus said.

June 11, 2008 8:11 AM  
Blogger Targa said...

What Randal said.

Also, I think someone should introduce a "stop-loss" bill that states:
1. A president that has just left office cannot leave the country for at least 6 to 12 months to preserve an orderly transition;
a) allowing for all unfinished DOJ work to be finalized, filed, and administered
b) This would also apply to the vice-president
c) This would also apply to all cabinet members
d) This would apply to all members of the administration at all levels including any and all NonCom officers working in the capacity of go-betweens for the White House and the Pentagon.

Also, should any of the above leave the country at any time during this "stop-loss" period, extradition agreements shall be in place requiring mandatory immediate extradition. Then, charges of sedition shall also be levied.

All this to ensure that if impeachment is not on the table, then charges of treason and high-crimes after their term could be levied.

I haven't really thought this through, but something to this effect should be in place... they did it to us with their Homeland Security bullshit... We, the people, should do it to them.
Scofflaws!!!! They're all scofflaws.

Probably.

June 11, 2008 8:30 AM  
Anonymous Joe the Troll said...

Something certainly needs to be done. We have to put the brakes on Presidential and Vice-Presidential power. However, the point a lot of people above seem to be missing is the fact that not all majorities are equal. The Dems have a majority now, yes, but a very slim one that is really not any better than an even split. There's not much chance that the impeachment is going to do more than make a few headlines, which is still fine with me. I think the Dems will have their solid majority back after this election, and maybe something can be shoved down the Rep's throats then.

And you just keep that Monica joke to yourself, hear? :-)

June 11, 2008 9:21 AM  
Blogger Weaseldog said...

Joe, I think the problem is that though the Dems have the majority, the leadership wants to please the and service the Republican leadership.

Maybe Larry Craig thought that was Nancy Pelosi in the next stall?

June 11, 2008 9:34 AM  
Blogger annie said...

dennis k. is one of very few democrats with courage or honor. compared to bush, clinton's sexual escapades seem inconsequential. bush has the blood of thousands on his hands. it matters. if impeachment doesn't fly, then look forward to seeing bush and friends tried for war crimes. or how about both?

June 11, 2008 9:35 AM  
Blogger Unconventional Conventionist said...

Justice is justice, pure and simple. Whatever it takes, we need to have justice. Impeachment is hardly but a wrist slapping compared to War Crimes.

June 11, 2008 10:05 AM  
Blogger Frederick said...

Somebody needs to ask Obama if War Crimes charges are off the table for Bush Inc.

June 11, 2008 10:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

look you idiots, To quote the Senate Intelligence Committee's unanimous report back in 2004, "The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, manipulate, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities."

June 11, 2008 10:51 AM  
Blogger SB Gypsy said...

Anon, you can quote the 2004 one, but you ignore the one that just was released, with the opposite judgment. Are you getting paid by McSame, or are you just throwing out the same old sh*t for fun?

Dems don't have a Senate majority, especially if you're counting LIEberhousie (I CT). If we cannot even pass the windfall profits tax on big oil, how in the world could we get a conviction?

On the other hand, it sure would make the republicans look bad - continuously - right up 'til the election. THEN the Hague!

June 11, 2008 12:03 PM  
Anonymous Joe the Troll said...

weaseldog, the Dems have a very slim majority. They can't overcome a veto and are vulnerable to filibusters. Just having a 50-49 advantage doesn't give them that much power.

June 11, 2008 12:34 PM  
Blogger eProf2 said...

I support the impeachment effort simply to get the indictment counts (35) into the Congressional Record now. There is little or no chance an impeachment will happen but the record should be there in the event the ICJ would want to prosecute BushCo. I'm of the opinion that the next president of the US will issue a pardon for these SOBs in order not to muck up any transition or reversals of policies, unfortunately. Think Ford on Nixon. Still, get it on the official record!

June 11, 2008 12:38 PM  
Blogger dogs eye view said...

I think censure, and a strong one, is in order for both Bush and Cheney.

Failure to perform due diligence -- or even consider it necessary -- before taking the country to war in Iraq.

History will tell our successors what we already know: these dudes lied, on a grand scale, and have just about gotten away with it.

Also think both should lose their presidential and VP pensions; dedicate that stream of funding to brain damaged war vets and those grieviously wounded.

June 11, 2008 3:02 PM  
Blogger Mike said...

I think history is going to judge them harshly whether they are impeached or not, but I would like to see them denied the whole "retirement" package that "ex's" get--including Secret Service protection.

I really don't want them having any benefits that tax payers have to pay for.

June 11, 2008 4:15 PM  
Anonymous via said...

"Can you identify the "High Crimes" committed by President Bush?" John Conyers himself said that lying to congress is an impeachable offense. Bush lied to congress about the reasons for invading Iraq. If it is true that impeachment can occur after a presidency, that will be fine with me. I want both Bush and Cheney brought to justice. There will be no justice for the innocent Iraqis and American troops who have and will continue to be maimed and killed. The very least we owe them is to try and convict these war criminals.

June 11, 2008 6:21 PM  
Blogger T&A said...

Hey if it can stick, I'm all for it!
But with the bastards on the other side of the aisle having the numbers they have, it's probably a waste of time, and a hinderance for Obama.

Personlly i think it should have been started as soon as Nancy "the weasel" Pelosi and Harry "I'm spineless" Reed took their oaths.

June 11, 2008 8:28 PM  
Blogger C-dell said...

No point they understand that their time is up and I doubt that they will cause much more trouble. It would take a lot of time to impeach them and it would only be for show

June 11, 2008 9:00 PM  
Blogger dguzman said...

The only reason BushCo can't be accused of lying under oath is that they don't have the courage to actually TAKE an oath. None of the key players have shown up to testify--let's get subpoenas, warrants, indictments, and nail these fuckers to the wall.

June 12, 2008 9:06 AM  
Blogger Weaseldog said...

Yes Joe The Troll. I understand Democratic Party Philosophy.

If it's hard, quit.

The Republicans on the other hand, get it done, no matter how hard it is.

Sadly, we're in this mess because the Democrats are quitters and the Republicans aren't.

That is why the Democrats have to do what they're are told to do, by their Republican owners.

June 15, 2008 8:29 PM  
Blogger Anon-Paranoid said...

Bush admitted that he had a suspect in out custody waterboarded. That is a War Crime.

They should have impeached both Bush and Cheney when they took power in 2006 elections.

I think that they were afraid that Bush would invoke the MCA of 2006 that gave him the power to label them Enemy Combatants which would strip them of any rights under the Constitution.

Like the right to challenge there detention in the courts.

Still they are all complicit in War Crimes now and they should all be charged with War Crimes for not stopping Bush and Cheney.

Also there may not be elections since I believe that we will end up in a War with Iran before the end of the year.

Or if there are elections he will still get the US involved in a War with Iran and have to declare Martial Law when the people rise up against him.

Right now the Congress and Senate are immaterial and irrelevant as they have totally surrendered their authority under the Constitution to the Executive Branch and the Fourth Branch {Dick Cheney's Branch}.

We as a country are no more and the people better wake up and smell the coffee before Blackwater starts patrolling streets of what once was America.

Just my two cents and I do look forward to trial in the Hague for all of them though I may not be around to see it.

God Bless.

June 16, 2008 8:20 PM  
Blogger Marjorie said...

It's a little late, thanks to Pelosi et al - and the current zeitgeist I'm afraid, throughout the world is BUSH FATIGUE.

This movie is not going to have a good ending. But, who knows, karma is a bitch.

June 18, 2008 12:29 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home