NOT A PRO-HILLARY THREAD: Obama Says "NO" To Impeachment- What Say You?

[Orwellian_Ghost]

Obama: Impeachment is not acceptable

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama laid out list of political shortcomings he sees in the Bush administration but said he opposes impeachment for either President George W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney. Obama said he would not back such a move, although he has been distressed by the "loose ethical standards, the secrecy and incompetence" of a "variety of characters" in the administration.

CAMPAIGN 2008: Barack Obama

...

Obama, a Harvard law school graduate and former lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago, said impeachment should not be used as a standard political tool.

"I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the president's authority," he said.

"I believe if we began impeachment proceedings we will be engulfed in more of the politics that has made Washington dysfunction," he added. "We would once again, rather than attending to the people's business, be engaged in a tit-for-tat, back-and-forth, non-stop circus."


http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-28-obama-impeachment_N.htm

[texastoast]

1. Weak--he and Hillary are weak people

and willing to let a criminal go free. Makes me :puke:

[papau]

29. When did Hillary say she was against impeachment? - She said Congress had no "appetite" for it

Clinton said there does not appear to be the “appetite or support” in Congress to try to impeach Bush, but “we’re going to have to reform the government and these unqualified cronies.”

[MADem]

2. Uh, oh. I hear the Cognitive Dissonance train, it's a-comin' down the track....

:popcorn:

[Sarah Ibarruri]

7. It's scary huh? They impeached Clinton for nothing, but won't impeach Bush and Cheney for crimes nt

[MADem]

18. Yep. You got it in one. nt

[readmoreoften]

12. There is no cognitive dissonance in religion.

God has his reasons. God has a plan. God is goodness so God will do only good and even if we don't like it it's still good because God is goodness so God will do only good...

:crazy:

[Straight Shooter]

45. I hear that train a'comin', it's rollin' round the bend ...

... and I ain't seen such dissembling since I don't know when
I'm stuck in GD Primaries
With supporters of Barrrrack
When I hear their rationalizations
I just can't help but laugh

:hi:

[THUNDER HANDS]

3. i agree with him

plus, it's like 3 years too late. He should have been impeached the day congress came back in session in January, 2005.

[nonconformist]

34. Well then actually, you don't agree with him.

He didn't say he should have been impeached 3 years ago. He's saying that impeachment should only be for grave offenses... which he apparently doesn't think Bush has committed.

[incapsulated]

4. I agree

I was never on the impeachment bandwagon.

It's too late now, it was too late a year ago, frankly.

[mtnsnake]

5. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Straight Shooter]

15. Save this thread for posterity. It's going to be a winner :)

[HeraldSquare212]

6. I think he's right, every president would have to suffer through impeachment

if we went after Bush. Two or three years ago, I could have seen it, but now it's more a matter of principle than actual effect on policy.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

11. In your view

has GW Bush violated the constitution?

Has he illegally curtailed-threatened US citizens civil liberties?

Has he violated international law?

What principle is it that you are referring to? Sounds more like political expediency.

[HeraldSquare212]

14. Are you saying he hasn't violated the constitution? nt

[Orwellian_Ghost]

20. Heh?

Let me put this straight.

In your opinion is George Bush an immediate threat to the US Constitution?

My answer is an unequivocal 'yes'.

What do you say?

[HeraldSquare212]

22. Yup, all those things are true. And he'll be out of office before an impeachment would happen.

Impeaching him at this point would just provide cover to Reps who would try to impeach the next Dem president. We would end up tangled for a few years in crap instead of getting things done. The greatest principle, to me, is actually getting things done for people.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

30. Wrong

Nixon- 3 months

More to the point if you answered as you did then you acknowledge the constitutional obligation and likewise the sworn duty of every Senator-Rep.

Speaking of cover.

Re-read the oath of office.

[HeraldSquare212]

31. But I also acknowledge the reality of what the impact on the Democratic agenda would be.

Live, if you wish, in the land of absolutes. I prefer to see tangible progress.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

52. How's that workin' so far

The ole "practical" bit is just avoidance. Not to mention that even on it's own terms it's a pretty awful deal.

Maybe you've got some inside info to show us some tangible progress from that agenda.

[HeraldSquare212]

60. So far? not well. Bt I'm working to get a Dem pres and hoping for a large majority in Congress.

I could just sit at home and bitch, though.

[BeyondGeography]

8. He's right, it would be a circus

better to let sleeping dogs lie and punish BushCo's party at the ballot box.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

61. Those dogs aren't sleeping

They are on the prowl every moment.

There is no opposition. We're on our own.

[cooolandrew]

9. I tried to back Kucinich for just this reason. Both candidates we have left are against it...

...BUT of the 2 Barack will support constitutional rights. The removal of impeachment was a tactic by congress to gain more seats and basically we cant fix the mess without those seats.

[Straight Shooter]

10. dupie-dupie

I'm going to have to have a chat with my Internet service provider :)

[Straight Shooter]

13. I think he needs to talk to a genuine Constitutional scholar like Jonathan Turley.

A chat with John Dean might help to clarify some issues about presidential authority, as well.

Barack is not going to rock any boats. No way. Come on, he voted to confirm Kindasleezy Rice.

[mdmc]

16. My man Kucinich and I say YES!

:kick:

[McCamy Taylor]

17. He is triangulating. The only way to end the war now is to impeach Cheney now.

[quiller4]

19. I think he is right. n/t

++

[Tweed]

21. Less than one year left; other legislative priorities given the messed up state of our union

[Orwellian_Ghost]

28. 3 months

Nixon was impeached in that time.

What exactly about forestalling the Bushies and the rest of Congress 3 months would you contest?

Oh and what about justice? What about the constitution?

It wasn't stated, "If we had the time", or "If the moment is aligned prpoerly with election cycles."

This is really wrong in so many ways.

[Tweed]

72. And another three months to impeach Cheney once he was President

[ProgressIn2008]

23. So, he doesn't feel that the Bush admin committed grave breaches

of presidential authority? No intentional breaches? Come on. Even if you don't support impeachment as a process, this admin has no grave intentional breaches of presidential authority??

I'd have more respect if he (or Hillary) said, "yeah, they're criminals, but going after them won't serve my political career." At least that would be honest.

No candidate can claim to be serious about change if they turn a blind eye to abuses by the powerful. And, how can some like that be trusted in a position of leadership?

[Mike Nelson]

24. A despicable position

for either Obama or Hillary to have. Bush/Chaney's crimes were grave. AND the graves are increasing. I do not understand why Democratic leaders don't mention this EVERY SINGLE EFFING DAY.

[mmonk]

25. I say we have no choice because both are against impeachment.

And neither are the nominees of any other party except maybe Nader. That's reality. Do I accept it? No. Will it lead me to allowing another republican in office while we have a dictatorial executive system now? No. That's why I'm going to get the party out that overthrew the constitution and then pressure the party that shined their boots.

[kdpeters]

26. I say he's wrong. Impeachment IS the people's business

[Auntie Bush]

27. Is this not exactly what bush and cheney did?

"I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the president's authority,"

He's just trying to get Rethug votes. He isn't thinking about ur country...he's thinking only about winning himself. And they say Hillary is all for Hillary and not the country. What are people thinking?

I want those bums brought to justice. We have to show the world we don't stand for Bushes policies and will punish any warmongers.

[harun]

32. I've always said no

The best course of action is legal proceedings after they leave office.

It is better to leave them in office, isolated and use the negative public opinion to increase the Dem's advantage in Congress. Which is exactly what Reid and Pelosi are doing.

[Neshanic]

33. Another block falls out of the foundation of our country.

"We would once again, rather than attending to the people's business, be engaged in a tit-for-tat, back-and-forth, non-stop circus."

I thought the government and it being run for the good of all was the "people's business".

Hillary is no better on this topic, but from bright shiny object candidate, the one that will promise change?

How fucking sad.

[Jed Dilligan]

35. At this point he is right

This was in issue for the beginning of 2007, not 2008. It's ridiculous to start all that nonsense now. I'd like to see justice but impeachment will be a circus and not end in justice.

[Neshanic]

36. Sure, that's a fantastic reason. The hearings will pre-empt LOST.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

37. Silly Constitution

Noone can predict the outcome.

Do you think there were crimes and misdemeanors committed by Bush Co?

Amazing how flippantly people take this and how ardently they support one who holds the constitution in such low regard.

This is trouble.

[Neshanic]

38. It is amazing that he gets away with this amazing response with his

"Bright Shining Path People" and they toss it off like it is no big deal. I know Hillary is wrong on this, but from him? Mr. BIG CHANGE? Truly sickening.

[Jed Dilligan]

39. Grow up and look at the country we live in

Rich white criminals walk every time you breathe. If you think justice will come out of our "justice" system I want some of what you're smoking.

My "low regard for the Constitution" comes from the fact that it barely applies to regular people anymore, and the rich are exempt from all the responsibilities of a citizen.

I'd like to see Bush and Cheney and Rice and Rumsfeld and a few others end in a televised hanging, but it ain't gonna happen.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

41. Good post

:toast:

[Jed Dilligan]

48. Was that

:sarcasm: ?

I thought we were arguing!

[Neshanic]

43. That's your defense? Rich white guys walk all the time?

I did grow up. I watched people who had balls that got Nixon out of office.

Don't blame others for your guys distain for the messiness of doing the business of the Constitution. You can't defend the indefensible.

[Jed Dilligan]

49. Your "people with balls" --> one-term Democrat -->

Reagan revolution --> the shit we're in

No thanks

[Neshanic]

51. What are you talking about? Carter?

[Jed Dilligan]

56. The political aftermath of impeachment

[Neshanic]

58. And that would be getting rid of a criminal? That kind of aftermath?

[ClassWarrior]

67. (see below)

NGU.

[nonconformist]

53. He SAID IT in 2007.

And he didn't say that it's too late, he said IT WAS NEVER WARRANTED.

[Neshanic]

55. Interesting.

[nonconformist]

40. Good grief, look at this shit.

DU was screaming for Bush's head on a pike for years.

But Obama says that impeachment should only be reserved for grave offenses, which means he doesn't think that Bush has committed "grave" offenses.

No, he's not saying "it's too late now", he's saying that he doesn't think it was warranted, ever.

And, shockingly, the Obama supporters are falling in lockstep, agreeing.

Jesus Christ.

[Neshanic]

44. Fucking amazing is it not?

[Straight Shooter]

46. Not amazing at all. He doesn't want to piss off the Republicans.

And his supporters don't want to admit he's wrong.

[nonconformist]

50. Well, he can't afford to piss off the Republicans....

they make up a significant portion of his base.

[Neshanic]

54. The "gotcha moment" for the Obama people will be spectacular when after a year

they realize he's just like all the rest. It will be sad for us because we will have a person learning on the job.

But that's OK.

"You know....for kids!"

[nonconformist]

57. All you need is hope, I guess. nt

[Neshanic]

62. It's going to be big, because they will all start posting about how he

did not mean that. Those things he promised are long term. His not taking the troops out of Iraq "for reasons that are different because of changes in the dynamics of the war" or some shit like that; they all will be regurgitated to why he's not doing things.

How did we get to this idiotic point?

[nonconformist]

64. Stupidity.

Seriously. Style over substance.

[fortyfeetunder]

42. Considering there are only 11 months left in this admin

Yes, I think it is impractical given the nature of the impeachment process.

[Neshanic]

47. Good thing the founders did not have a time limit. "Jesus, just leave out that part...

it's taking too much time!"

This is a very sad and pathetic day when the Obama supporters shove this one down their throats and do not throw up.

[ClassWarrior]

66. So from now on Presidents get a consequence-free final 11 months??

They can do whatever they damn please with no consequences whatsoever?

:eyes:

And what is your "given" "nature of the impeachment process?" You believe the RW shit about it being all-consuming and bogging down Congress?? They only reason it did that during the failed coup on the Clinton Presidency is because the Rape-Publicans in Congress wanted to bog down Congress.

NGU.

[Neshanic]

70. It's kinda like a bonus round. The "Obama rule".

[fortyfeetunder]

71. I personally don't believe the votes are there to make it stick.

This late in the game, they have access to a fast track impeachment? And no, I don't have a RW spin.

Can they pull it off before January 2009? What do you think>

[BrightKnight]

59. An unsuccessful impeachment would vindicate Chimpy.

The electorate does not want it and The Repugs won't support it.

It would probably put the corruption wing if the Repug party back in power.

[Neshanic]

63. 7 out of 10 fortune tellers agree. Impeachment is a non-starter.

[ClassWarrior]

65. How could it POSSIBLY be "unsuccessful??" And how could a true...

...Progressive ever believe it might be??

By the way, Obama may not support it, but here's one man who's awfully close:



On Thursday, Chairman John Conyers' House Judiciary Committee held a hearing at which Attorney General Michael Mukasey said that he would not investigate torture (video) or warrantless spying (video), he would not enforce contempt citations (video), and he would treat Justice Department opinions as providing immunity for crimes (report).

None of this was new, but perhaps it touched something in Conyers that had not been touched before. Following the hearing, he and two staffers met for an hour and 15 minutes with two members of Code Pink to discuss impeachment...

http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/30858

NGU.

[nonconformist]

68. I freaking love Conyers. nt

[ClassWarrior]

80. Why am I not surprised I didn't get an answer?

:eyes:

NGU.

[BrightKnight]

82. Didn't realize the votes were there!! Do you have a list of the Repugs

that are going to support it?

[Straight Shooter]

83. Ted Kennedy's pithy comment comparing the Clinton/Obama campaign styles:

"They believe if it works it's right. We believe if it's right it works."

In other words, Obama stakes a claim to the high road if it serves to put Hillary down, but when it comes to really putting his money where his mouth is, he does not believe that doing the right thing will work. How convenient.

You don't get the votes until you show the courage. Feh. They're all figureheads anyway.

[sjdnb]

69. Bush's crimes make Nixon's look almost trivial ...

and, certainly, impeachment over a few BJs looks downright silly. But, they're not 'grave' enough? Impeachment would be a 'tit-for-tat'?

So, we'd have a better case if Bush had an intern diddle him rather than deceive/manipulate the nation into war and undermine the Constitution - not to mention all of the underlying corruption, fraud, nepotism, greed, and power grabbing.

That would be almost laughable if the end results weren't so tragic.

[busymom]

73. WHY didn't we impeach Bush?

This is one of the things that just burns me up. Why do you guys think impeachment was never seriously on the table?

[mmonk]

77. It's scary to think why not.

The coup my be more complete than we first imagined.

[stevenleser]

74. Not to be technical, but isnt impeachment initiated by the House of Representatives?

I'm not sure why anyone is going to either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama for this. Here is where you SHOULD be going ---> http://judiciary.house.gov/

[Political Heretic]

75. I don't think impeachment is the best choice for the country right now.

Criminal investigations and prosecutions even after out of office? Sure.

[robcon]

76. I say no to impeachment.

Starting impeachment will lose us the presidency, and probably a lot of seats in the House and Senate. Ultimately it would lose us Roe v. Wade, if another SC justice retires or dies.

[Perry Logan]

78. It's like this: Obama's opposition to impeachment is OK; Hillary's opposition to impeachment is evil

[bklyncowgirl]

79. Unless Clinton comes out in support of impeachment, it's a draw.

I personally would like to see Bush & Cheney impeached, convicted and sent to the Hague for war crimes trials but non of the candidates still in the race are going to do that so I see no reason to support or not support a candidate based on that.

[Straight Shooter]

81. Kick for the morning crowd. Kick for Wexler who endorsed Obama.

Here's to accountability, which we will never see in an Obama administration.