I was also wrong about impeachment

[solara]

After the elections I argued for caution. I, too, felt that the American people might see any push for Articles of Impeachment against Bush/Cheney as a political ploy that would prevent other important legislation from moving forward.

But, time is running out. America is being held captive by a criminally rogue Administration whose High Crimes and Felonies, though well documented, must be validated as such by being entered into the Congressional Record and discussed openly in the House. The MSM will no longer be able to ignore the CRIMES of this Administration once they have been officially recognized.

Does it really matter anymore if the Senate convicts? Although once impeachment is back on the table I doubt the Rethug Senate will fight very hard to cling to their misplaced BushCo loyalties in the face of the long list of DOCUMENTED criminally impeachable offenses.

However, when the House initiates impeachment proceedings against the BushCo Axis of Evil, the Democratic Party should be well prepared for an extreme onslaught of vituperative spew from the RW. It is no secret that Faux news and it's psycho-fanatic lackeys manipulate the truth, so we should be forewarned that impeachment could precipitate a media war like none other and I worry that it could very likely cause the Clinton campaign to tank.

Regardless of what anyone thinks about Bill Clinton's Presidency, any talk about his "impeachment" is still amazingly incendiary and the RW pundits will use this opportunity to inflame popular opinion and obfuscate the real issues. Senator Clinton is not my choice for the Democratic candidacy, but I never want to see ANY Democratic candidate fall again because of the lies and manipulative propaganda of the RW asshats. It will be very bad for the Democratic Party if we spend the next year and a half on the defensive, so I sincerely hope that our "newly rediscovered" backbone is not only healthy but fortified.

I completely support Impeachment, Indictment and Incarceration, but, politically, it is a hard call so we absolutely MUST stand strong, united and unafraid no matter what happens...if we don't stop the dangerous Bush/Cabal now...we may never have another chance to do so.

[patrice]

1. I'm not active on Impeachment, but I'm leaning more and more.

If the Oil Gang attacks Iran, I know for certain I'd drop everything and work for Impeachment at the point. I haven't thought much about what other factor(s) might make me do that.

I took some snips from an interview with Noam Chomsky recently. He helped me see why BushCo fits the definition of a "gang" AND he points out that gangs are motivated by one thing and one thing only - Control. The will of the People is completely irrelevant, especially since they are a multi-national gang. We had a pretty good discussion of the Chomsky interview here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x277535 .

BTW, one of the things that turns up in that thread is that Cheney already has a tested plan for the invasion of Khuzestan, Iran.

[solara]

14. I hear you, but I think we must act BEFORE BushCo embroils us in another

horrifying, bloody, wasteful, belligerent, useless, expensive, immoral, un-winnable, obscene war for profit.

[patrice]

27. My reasons for refraining have had to do with "other things that we

hope to accomplish" in the 110th Congress, health care for example.

But with the invasion of Iran looming on the horizon, I can't imagine what woudl be more important. And waiting for "the smoking gun", to use an unfortuantely coopted metaphor, would be tragic.

So, is there anyone who might introduce articles of impeachment? I've seen petitions, but it'd be best if petitions had a specific target right?

[Daylin Byak]

2. Yeah it kinda does matter if the Senate convicts

Cause if they don't convict Bush won't get punishment for anything the Democrats charge him with.

I can't believe you would say that, it's a VERY big deal if the Senate convicts or not convicts cause they are the deciding factor in this matter(hey that rhymes).

51 does not = 67 votes they are not out there to convict so punishment will not be handed down if Bush get aquitted by the Senate.

I want to see him impeached but it won't happen, the votes aren't out there and I have learned to accept it and I know no rethug would turn on one of there own guys.

[lazer47]

4. The investigation is the Key

If the investigation ever takes place can an independent prosecutor be appointed, then he can be indicted, and actually charged with a crime,,, impeachment is secondary,, criminal procedure is the key

[solara]

8. I agree

Impeachment, Indictment, Incarceration

[solara]

6. I was trying to make the point that

the important thing is to go ahead and impeach NOW because crimes have been committed and it is absolutely the right thing to do. The Senate may or may not step up and do their duty, but we shouldn't keep impeachment off the table just because it seems, right now, there won't be enough votes to convict.

Personally, I believe the votes will be there once the articles of impeachment are read for the record. Sorry if I was unclear.

[EFerrari]

9. Well, there are consequences that simply go with prosecution.

Aren't there? I recall a president Nixon who was never impeached but who understood that.

[solara]

13. Exactly... impeachment and the consequences could bring the whole house of cards down n/t

[Double T]

3. Agreed, vehemently!!! NO MORE 'NICE GUY' DEMOCRATICALLY CONTROLLED.......

CONGRESS; it's NOW time to take the gloves OFF and start treating bushco like the CRIMINALS they truly are. Indictments-Impeachments-Trials-Incarcerations; it's THAT simple!!

[tavalon]

19. Yeah,

I've begun to suspect that Congress is actually complicit in this crap. We've told them loudly enough that we want this and yet it hasn't happened. Why?

[Kurovski]

5. K&R.

It's the only way to end the abuses, crimes, deaths and thefts.

Or at least put a dent in the whole mess, and begin to repair.

[EFerrari]

7. Great to have you aboard, solara.

:)

[solara]

10. Grateful to be here

:hi:

[spanone]

11. When a president fails to respond to congress or the people, he leaves little choice.

I M P E A C H M E N T

[porphyrian]

12. I'll kick that. - n/t

[omega minimo]

15. Thank you for posting this. You've raised very important points.

By the way, for the reluctant "IF there's an investigation" folks, there are app. 57 separate investigations into Bushco crimes currently going in Congress. Listen to Thom Hartmann-- he talks about it.



"America is being held captive by a criminally rogue Administration whose High Crimes and Felonies, though well documented, must be validated as such by being entered into the Congressional Record and discussed openly in the House. The MSM will no longer be able to ignore the CRIMES of this Administration once they have been officially recognized."

This is true. NO ONE can ignore it once impeachment and Congressional testimony have occurred. As SFExpat points out, the threat of impeachment got Nixon to resign.

So the "count the votes" people still don't understand the process or the consequences of not impeaching. Impeachment will also provide an education for the American people on the subject of government and the Constitution.

"Regardless of what anyone thinks about Bill Clinton's Presidency, any talk about his "impeachment" is still amazingly incendiary and the RW pundits will use this opportunity to inflame popular opinion and obfuscate the real issues."

It is important to educate people and encourage them (including susceptible DUers) to be CONFIDENT in stating that the impeachment of Bill Clinton was total BULLSHIT, intended to provide the sort of cover for ACTUAL impeachable crimes as it is now doing; intended to devalue the process as it is now doing. And falling for that, enabling the Republicon deception that "people can't handle another impeachment," MUST be resisted and identified as the propagandist nonsense that it is.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Once they have tehir ducks in a row

I suspect the I word will come back

;-)

In osme ways this is 1973 but they need to get this done before the end of the year

[solara]

18. Amen and Amen again to your excellent point and I quote because it bears repeating:

"It is important to educate people and encourage them (including susceptible DUers) to be CONFIDENT in stating that the impeachment of Bill Clinton was total BULLSHIT, intended to provide the sort of cover for ACTUAL impeachable crimes as it is now doing; intended to devalue the process as it is now doing. And falling for that, enabling the Republicon deception that "people can't handle another impeachment," MUST be resisted and identified as the propagandist nonsense that it is."

Brava
 
:applause:

[omega minimo]

23. Maybe you said

but what shifted your judgement on this?

:toast:

[SalmonChantedEvening]

17. As was I.

Mea culpa DU, I had thought that patience was called for, but the actions of these criminals in the wake of the elections has showed they refuse to accept the Will of the People, save when it puts them in power.

Impeach.

Now.

[Swamp Rat]

20. Yeah you rite!

Welcome aboard the Impeachment Train! (Jus' add the music from "Soul Train") ;) :D

[SalmonChantedEvening]

21. Merci mon frer!!

:hug: :pals:

[omega minimo]

24. The Will of the People

did not put them in power.

:hi: :pals:

[TheWraith]

22. It absolutely does matter if the Senate convicts.

If they're not removed, then the whole thing gets spun as Dem retribution for what the Repub congress did to Clinton, which is bad for us, and does almost nothing to put a halt to the Shrubettes' dumbfuckery, because we've then shot our biggest arrow. There wouldn't be the threat of anything bigger that we could do.

Impeachment is only relevant if there's a real chance of removing them from power.

[omega minimo]

25. You can not base your actions on "how the whole thing gets spun"

and that "retribution" thing is total bullshit-- please don't feed it.

"Impeachment is only relevant if there's" high crimes and misdemeanors committed by an administration.

Instead of fixating on what you think the Senate will NOT do under appropriate circumstances, maybe you should ask :wtf: why NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:kick:

[EFerrari]

26. Because the whole Clinton impeachment backfired so badly

on the Thuggery? On the contrary, the Republics got props for taking him on.

We can't stay defensive. We have to take risks and make them work for us. And, I guess I don't speak as a Dem because I'm not, but as a progressive.

[onenote]

31. actually, it did backfire

You can try to rewrite history if you'd like, but the facts are plain. The repubs lost five House seats in 1998 and failed to pick up any additional Senate seats -- results that were at odds with the typical result in the sixth year of a presidency (the president's party typically loses ground).

And in 2000, the repubs lost 4 Senate seats, another 2 house seats and, but for the S Ct, the presidency.

The OP's suggestion that "once impeachment is back on the table I doubt the Rethug Senate will fight very hard to cling to their misplaced BushCo loyalties in the face of the long list of DOCUMENTED criminally impeachable offenses" is naieve in the extreme. The failure of the administration's Iraq War policy is well documented, but it hasn't prevented the great majority of repubs from siding with chimpy in recent weeks. In fact, I have to wonder whether there would even be sufficient votes in the House to impeach at this point, since all it would take is 16 Democrats to vote against. (Hell, four repubs opposed the Clinton articles, and when you compare how disciplined the repubs typically are against how undisciplined Democrats often are, its not a big leap to 16 no votes -- at least not unless there was a broad, bi-partisan demand for impeachment based on information exposed through investigations and hearings -- investigations and hearings that will take months).

[solara]

28. Sorry, but I have to disagree because,

although conviction is the ideal outcome, the important thing is that the truth will come out. The TRUTH. There are long lists of BushCo CRIMES.... lists of actual impeachable and, I might add, indictable offenses. Articles of Impeachment will present these lists to the House, to the American public and to the MSM in irrefutable profusion. How will any elected official be able to sit before the House Committee on Impeachment and argue that the BushCo High Crimes and Felonies are irrelevant? We absolutely cannot refuse to Impeach just because we assume there won't be enough votes to convict. Once the truth is laid out, naked for all the world to see, I have no doubt the votes will be there.

The Rethugs will try to spin the facts as they usually do and that was my point.

We have to be ready for the spin and speak as one voice. It is obvious that the process of Impeachment against Clinton was personal...the facts are there in the record. There is NO comparison and can never be any comparison. Thousands and thousands of people have died because of BushCo's ABUSE of POWER. Billions of dollars are missing. Victims of Katrina are still without homes and are still struggling with InsuranceCo. Our Veterans are being disenfranchised. BushCo stole the elections, and lied us into a bloody and costly war. BushCo has manipulated our Constitution, diluted our Bill of Rights and has co-opted the National Guard. I can go on and on and so can others who are more knowledgable and who have actual legal credentials. BushCo has broken Constitutional law. BushCo's lies have killed and maimed hundreds of thousands, brought at least one country to ruin and destroyed our nation's credibility around the world. And he is doing the SAME DAMN THING ALL OVER AGAIN WITH IRAN. We cannot allow this travesty to continue. Clinton's lie was....what? About a blow job? Give me air.

There is a HUGE difference and we need to keep pointing to those differences with conviction and consistancy. We cannot allow the Rethugs to mangle the truth.


BushCo WILL be convicted if we open the door.

[cooolandrew]

29. Not sure why you were against it initially, the world wants this, it's the right thing to do.

Actually I might of been a little againsst it but ultimately it's the only option.

[solara]

30. I wasn't "against" impeachment but rather, against a "rush to impeachment' - does that make

any sense? ? I was being cautious and wary of any action that might add to the perception that the Dems were somehow "lying in wait" to pounce on BushCo in revenge. I felt that such a perception could only weaken our case and maybe ruin our only chance to remove BushCo from office. It was a reasonable and logical position and I still think there was some validity to that concern especially since, at the time, Bush was making "bi-partisan" noises so it would have been very easy to cast the Dems in the role of "bully".

So, what has changed?

Not very much really, only that it didn’t take very long for BushCo's true colors to show once more as they continue to ignore the voice of the people, continue to undermine and ignore the Constitution, continue to lie without conscience while their "lurch towards Bethlehem" not only remains unchecked but is escalating. They are un-repentent and unrelentingly power hungry. More to the point, though…I believe that the time for caution and any worry about maintaining the perception of being a “politically correct” party is at an end and that we must act while we still can.