George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney belong in an insane asylum. Bush is comparable to Adolf Hitler. Bush is mentally ill. Bush suffers from narcissism and megalomania. Bush lied, and thousands of people died. Bush is psychotic. Bush is dangerous. The American people should pursue the involuntary psychiatric hospitalization of Bush and Cheney to safeguard against further atrocities. God will judge and punish Bush and Cheney.

Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA

I'm glad you know that, Colleen. I've met a few people who think Nixon was impeached and removed from office due to the impeachment. They believed Tricky Dick's lifelong crapola that he was not a quitter.

Believe me, I would have been happy to see the crooked old codpiece impeached and forced out of the White House by federal marshals -- but it was not to be.

RSJ

Nixon resigned because he knew he would be impeached and be convicted. He was removed from office by pressure from the investigations and the desertion of the Republican Party, which no longer would protect him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal

"With few exceptions, Nixon's remaining supporters deserted him. The ten congressmen who had voted against all three articles of impeachment in the committee announced that they would all support impeachment when the vote was taken in the full House. Impeachment by the House and subsequent removal from office by the Senate now appeared certain."

................

Nixon was a saint by comparison to this bunch and the Republicans are still protecting the Bush administration. In the future there are going to be many questions about why Bush remained in office.

Royce [July 17th, 2008 4:14 pm], I recall the Watergate hearings in the summer of 1973 as well. When they began, not one of the TV pundits or newspaper columnists at the time thought Richard Nixon nor any senior member of his staff was connected in any way to this 'third rate burglary' of the Watergate. I recall one saying, "Nixon wouldn't be that stupid." Polls at the time showed Nixon with high approval ratings and most of the public also didn't believe he was involved with Watergate. The Washington pundit class agreed that it was just some ambitious lower-level campaign flunkies -- remember the aptly-named CREEP? -- who planned and executed Watergate and the whole case would be over with when they were convicted. I also recall that most of America was glued to the TV that summer watching the hearings, and that's what changed minds as the evidence gradually emerged of Nixon's guilt. This is why we need to keep pressure on the Big Media, and here I'm thinking in particular of CNN and MSNBC, to carry all or part of Kucinich's impeachment hearings -- if they do, it would be more likely that the broadcast and print BM will also pay attention.

Unless the charges are heard by the public, this will be a largely useless gesture on Kucinich's part.

As Dave Lindorff [July 17th, 2008 5:28 pm] writes: "...you have to be willing to trust in the good sense of the American people." If the public hears and understands the charges against Bush, I have no doubt that a majority will agree he needs to be impeached. Already, mostly without the help of the Bush-friendly BM, over 60 percent have concluded that we need to leave Iraq and an unprecedented 80 percent think we're headed in the wrong direction.

claudius [July 17th, 2008 7:41 pm] exactly. We need to be rid of the spineless Nancy Pelosi, Jane Harman, Jay Rockefeller and Steney Hoyer. Cindy Sheehan is doing her part by running against Pelosi (send her money). If there isn't a progressive Dem who will challenge the others, then we need a strong and well-funded third party candidate who will oppose Harman, Rockefeller and Hoyer on the grounds that they violated their oath of office and failed to uphold the Constitution. Unfortunately, I can't think of a strong well-funded Dem or third party candidate who can do this by next November, but let's try to find some by the next off-year election. After all, Ned Lamont won the Dem nomination and came close to unseating Lieberman in CT and, if Ned runs again, I think he'll win this time.

zzz [July 18th, 2008 12:10 am], you're absolutely dead on. Pelosi and the others have taken an oath to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution, even without regard to their constituents' opinions -- their failure to do so by impeaching those who violate the law puts them in the same boat as Bush and Cheney. Technically, and I know it's not going to happen, Kucinich could prefer impeachment charges against the Democratic leadership in Congress for not upholding the Constitution.

matti [July 18th, 2008 5:33 am], I support Obama, but I also support impeachment. I don't think it will hurt his or the Democrats chances one bit to stand up for the Constitution -- even if they don't succeed in trying and convicting Bush and Cheney, it will at least show they strongly believe in something. Let the GOP try to explain why they didn't want to uphold the law of the land. Like you, I've met people from various walks of life who would like nothing better than to see Dubya and Dick impeached -- some of them are even recovering Republicans.

tetti_tatti [July 18th, 2008 9:00 am], every Dem in the House may not vote for impeachment, so that case is anything but closed. But Kucinich, et al, can continue to pursue impeachment all the way until next January. If nothing else, it might give the Bushites some pause before they commit their next crime. This isn't 2002 -- people are paying more attention now and even Republicans are less likely to go to the mat for the loathed Junior.

colleen [July 18th, 2008 1:17 pm], Nixon wasn't removed -- he quit in August 2004 because he knew he would be impeached.

Tesla [July 19th, 2008 4:15 am], I agree. The tide has turned and I think most Americans are quietly angry at what has happened to this country. Even some Republican on TV, in a rare moment of honesty, said that the voters are more anti-Republican this year than they were in 1932. Proof? Look at the special Congressional races in Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi -- all solidly conservative Republican areas -- IL-14 was Denny Hastert's district! -- and all won convincingly by Dems.

But there are also two other possible flies in this balm of impeachment:

1) I have heard that Karl Rove has something nasty on every senior Democrat, or a member of their family, in the House and Senate -- something that would ruin them. If they impeach, or try to send Karl to jail, he'll go to this 'nuclear option' and destroy the careers and reputations of all of them. (Notice several senior Bush aides, and Rove, have refused to answer subpoenas and still walk free.)

2) Congressional Dem leaders have struck a deal with Bush and Cheney -- don't impeach them and they'll quietly leave office in January 2009 and we can have our country back. Any serious attempt at impeachment and they'll cause a Constitutional crisis -- declare martial law, suspend elections, etc. -- that will bring down the government, and they just might end up making themselves leaders for life to protect themselves from prosecution. I hope this isn't the case, but we've all seen the way the BushCo Regime operates -- I would not put it past them for a minute.

If either of these two propositions are true, we are going to have to wait until next year to see justice done under President Obama -- if he's elected.

Phoning & Emailing Congress Won't Be Enough To Get The Job Done

"What else?"

"Daily mass vigils outside the offices of every Congressperson."

"With the call going out where?"

"Online."

"OK, say we do all this & Congress goes on to impeach President George W. Bush II, then what sort of world?"

"Empowered by our victory over the powers that be, it'll be up to us."

waterboard dumpsterdive u.s olympics waterboard watergate blackwater pentagon papers carlyle group halliburton ect. sheep or nader

MikeBinSC

Yes the right wing is afraid of the power of Move On and they like to label it as extremist. But its truly a grassroots American organization. That an organization like that could spring up and have the power it has in such a short time illustrates the strength of America.

Yes the posters here are often a bit purist..but they also have good information sometimes. It worries me when they chastise others because it has the effect of stopping others from posting. I like to read everyone's opinions.

My fear is that the reason the Dems are not confronting Bush/Cheney is because there are people in this group who will assassinate and have done killings in other nations. They would kill in America as well. We know how Bush/Cheney will use torture and will even purge other Republicans who are not in their group (firing of US attorneys) and they will use the courts to prosecute political opponents (Siegelman). What are their limits?!? I hope we never find that out.

(Incidentally Hitler had the Night of the Long Knives where Nazi party members, who would oppose Hitler's plans of mass murder, were killed. A less violent purge was the removal of Republican district attorneys who would oppose Bush/Cheney's future plans...)

So what are their limits? And which way would the military go if there were a serious confrontation between the executive and legislative branches? To me it looks like there are Bush/Cheney sympathizers in the military in the legislature and in the courts...

Americans as a group imo , at their core, believe that everything will turn out all right. They believe its just a question of time and eventually the goodness of America will take over and the US will go in the moral direction. I am not so sure that is true.

What I also think is a possibility is that Bush/Cheney will allow Israel to attack Iran and in over their heads the US will come in to protect Israel. Imo right wing Jews harbor great anger that so many Jews have been killed over thousands of years and they still feel hatred towards Europe for the holocaust. Their reaction to this anger and hatred is to want to protect fellow Jews from persecution and another holocaust with military action. Imo military action intensifies the conflicts and there are too few Jews in the world to use this alone as a means of protection. Israel must accept that they are in the middle of nations that have great hatred and try to resolve some of the conflicts in some ways that do not involve the military. Imo it is inevitable that there will be injustice but that is the situation now. A perfect solution does not exist.

--
"Wrapping themselves in the flag, repeating the mantra 'security' and attacking anyone who questioned this insanity as soft on terrorism, they succeeded in disgracing their country before the world, and now they deserve to be called what they are: traitors. In a just world they would be prosecuted and convicted."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=as7YVr4Wamak&refer=home

(I use the above quote as the signature of my emails.)

If Obama does get elected, and does not follow through with his message of change, I don't think the people will take it any longer. The critical mass is rising to our side. There is no where left for them to hide...

Think of the 100th monkey. Thoughts are things, and as long as there are people out there who care about the future, than there is hope.
Intention is a powerful thing, and the people's intention has the numbers!

Conyers has failed as a leader. With all of the other failures down through the years, on the Democratic side, should we be surprised.

As some others have stated here, it's more then just impeaching Bush/Cheney, it about exposing and challenging and changing the shadow side of American behavior. Even if impeachment was voted down in the Senate, the likes of Senator Stevens would have to stand in public by his vote and the fact that he believes the behavior like those of the massacre of el Moetz and the rape cultures of the world wide American military bases (positioned and carried out for the economic elite) are what American stands for and what We join in daily toil to work for.

Just listen to how easy it is now for the words "war on terror" and "petty dictator/tyrant" to flow off of Barack Obama's tongue. Impeachment hearings - regardless of procedural outcome - would help turn Obama's intelligence, and all of America's true intelligence, in the direction of sanity and human decency.

IMPEACH... TAR AND FEATHER... DO NOT RINSE.... SEND TO THE HAGUE.

This is what I'm talking about, A PLAN!
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/07/18/10439/

Colleen, I too would like to see the Republican Party dissappear, unfortunately the "lesser-evilist Nader-voters are nibbling away at the chances of that happening.

This blog has become overpopulated with a bunch of whining, self-righteous, holier-than-thou purists, as out of touch with reality as the Bush administration. Your arguments that only seem to revolve around lesserevilism reminds me of those really strange monks who won't walk around without closely inspecting the ground for each footstep, lest they might step on an ant or some other insect.

I'm not criticizing the monks, as they have chosen that as a way of life, it's just that none of you are really that deeply invested in your beliefs. You need to come up with some ideas and plans that will make things better or STFU!

SHOW ME A PLAN!

Nixon was removed very quickly without an impeachment. Now in retrospect its a shame there was no impeachment because there are Americans who are unaware of the crimes committed by the Nixon administration. And Nixon's crimes laid the foundation for the Bush administration

If the Republicans were smart they would pressure Bush to resign...

There is a rumor that McCain will not be the Republican nominee. At the Republican convention McCain will resign for health reasons as the nominee and be replaced by someone else. It will be back room politics by the Republicans.

A subtle form of censorship is to call another person names etc. Name calling can be used as a form of intimidation to silence another person.

I'd like to see the Republican party dissappear and the Democratic party split into two new parties. I hope the Republicans take a real trouncing in November.

drift July 18th, 2008 12:48 pm

"Cheney-Bush junta is the finest Adminitration our country has ever had"

You would indeed have a chronic and I might add terminal case of CRIS.

#2 It is correct. "It is possible to impeach someone even after the accused has vacated their office in order to disqualify the person from future office or from certain emoluments of their prior office (such as a pension)" "The defendant remains liable to criminal prosecution."

I looked it up to make sure.

As to #3....We are perfectly capable of bringing charges of war crimes here in the US, it would never be subject to and International tribunal.

I got the point, I just don't think anything will come of it.

But in any case, as you say drift..."Damn the torpedoes…" If they can get it done, so much the better. I certainly wouldn't object if Congress suddenly grew a spine, just surprised!

Pax

Thanks Thomas,

It's good to know that at least somebody else has a correct understanding of "mistimed" about this impeachment stuff.

It's not like we would just need one or two Republican Senators to be incensed about the Bush/Cheney crimes and vote to impeach them. We would need seventeen, and that is just not gonna happen. They would stand together as if patriotic on a sinking ship, rally the base, acquit the perpetrators, RATIFY all the crimes and most likely elect McCain.

I believe you are quite correct that there is plenty of time to scream the crimes from the rooftops and prosecute all kinds of people all kinds of ways AFTER Obama is president.

matti,

You can hope I'm a paid shill all you want. But I'm not.
I am, in fact, that "real person" you fear just expressing opinions here because I believe what I write. That's the only reason I write it. This election MATTERS to me and I don't want to see it frittered away. Not again. Not this time.

T More,

We are all entitled to our opinions, this much is indeed true. It could be my opinion that the Cheney-Bush junta is the finest Adminitration our country has ever had, but then if I really believed that, I would clearly be suffering from chronic CRIS (Cranial Rectal Insertion Syndrome), now wouldn't I?

So the same holds true for DD. He is tedious, boring, predictable, and cowardly, too, I might add. He was conspicuously absent from threads weeks ago when Obama voted to give cover to the Administration by capitulating on the FISA bill.

As to your "sane" suggestions, I admit that I don't know if assertion #2 is correct or not. My suspicion is that it isn't. How could you impeach someone not in office? You COULD criminally prosecute them... But if it is true, then it contradicts your first assertion.

As to #3, I would submit an Impeachment hearing would be a MUCH easier method of exposing war crimes as it is the constitutionally sancioned remedy for a criminal administration, whereas war crimes tribunals are bound by international law, and therefor much trickier to pursue.

And #4: The entire POINT of Lindorff's article is that this hearing won by Kucinich, Wexler, et al is a win BECAUSE it was attained by running an end-around the Congressional Democratic leadership, and that we as progressives need to keep the full court press on now more than ever.

And I couldn't agree more. Thanks so much for your work, Mr. Lindorff. Damn the torpedoes...

Maybe DD just holds a different opinion? Is that bad? If someone disagrees they are a schill or a troll or a plant?
Goodness gracious, lets get a bit of sanity here.

I would like to suggest the following. 1.Impeachment now would make no difference as it wouldn't get started good and they would be out of office anyway.
2. Don't forget you can still impeasch even when someone has left office.
3.Wouldn't it be better to press for the pursuit of war crimes now and follow it up the chain?
4. If anyone here thinks Pelosi or Reid have the guts to impeach, I've got some Texas desert land to sell them.

Let me qualify my opinions with the fact that I believe impeachment now would be mistimed and .

Daniel David is a such tool of corruption. Prosecutors issue indictments because a crime has been committed, not because there might or might not be enough jurors to convict.

The House impeaches, only a simple majority is necessary, and the Dems have the majority. Case closed.

Dems' single article accuses Bush of lying about the war, probably the single Bush crime that Dems are not involved in. Let's see how far this goes, I suspect it's just more political theater from corrupt Dems, the usual Dem sham.

Two things are important imo

1. Bush and Cheney are removed from power before more damage is done by them. (for example: war with Iran)

2. Its clear to all that what they did was criminal so that there is no repeat in the future of their policies.

Why not hold impeachment hearings in secret? (But maybe that also is a bad precedent)

Just get them out of power...before they kill more people and destroy more lives...and further weaken America.

I don't care about punishment...they can live their lives in luxury in Dubai and Paraguay for all I care...just get them out of the White House.

I think it is VERY, VERY, interesting that "Daniel David" has chosen to make "himself" such a strong presence HERE, on this thread about impeachment when "he" has been so absent of late on CD.

I would like to re-iterate my hope that "DD" IS some sort of paid shill or insider. The alternative, that "he" is a real person who feels the need to twist EVERYTHING into "that's why we should vote Obama" is just too damn sad for me.

I agree with Mr. Lindoff here.

What exactly is there to stop us from just TAKING this as a victory, whatever anyone else thinks?

I'm for Drawing and Quartering myself, but most everyone I know is for Impeachment -once they have it, and the offenses, defined for them- and I live in a No-Stop-Light-Three-Bars Mountain Town.

Don't underestimate people you've never met, and don't listen to what the "Media" tells you about them -go out and get to know them you shy bastards!

Have Fun,

-matti.

I try to ignore Daniel David's comments.

I am reminded of Kurt Vonnegut's Book, Mother Night, where during WW2, an America living in Germany is recruited by the US government as a spy. His cover, becoming a radio figure spewing anti-USA propaganda for the Germans, aka Tokyo Rose. Near the end of the war, a German Nazi reflects that he suspected the American was a spy. But in the end the German concluded that even if that was the case, he helped the German side even more with his anti-USA rants and propaganda.

Anyone claiming that there are reasons not to pursue impeachment have no understanding of justice or history. If Bush is not impeached, history will look back at this period as the dark ages, where there was no justice, reason, or law.

Ignorant people fail to pursue justice, and it will always bite them in the end.

Impeach.

Support third party candidates.

Something has to change.

Barn Burner : you are right:"but the American people will never forgive them ". Let's say 200 million Americans don't even know that MSM has aided and abetted the trashing of the Constitution by Congress , White House and US Supreme Court . That leaves 100 million who know but may or may not care and are too lazy or stupid to realize that mass boycott of MSM would silence the propoganda machine.

Dave Lindorff's heart is in the right place but he is dead wrong in his appreciation of the collective low pain-threshold of the American people.

Daniel David,

I won't insult you. You get enough of that here, plus you seem to enjoy it. So let me politely ask you a question. You say that Pelosi is right not to pursue a formal impeachment trial. But is this her choice to make? If crimes have been committed by Bush (which I'm sure even you would agree that they have) my understanding is that by her Congressional duty she is legally obligated to pursue impeachment. According to the law, she should have no choice in the matter. By avoiding this constitutional responsibility, it makes her an accessory to those high crimes committed by Bush.

In addition to her legal obligation, every available poll shows that her constituents in San Francisco want her to pursue impeachment. Being their only Representative to Congress, and despite her personal beliefs, what gives her the right to NOT represent those who elected her? Are you opposed to the fundamental aspect of democracy that voters be allowed representation?

DD,

You are SUCH an incredible tool. A twit. A nincompoop.

You just got bitch slapped by the author of the article your commenting... tiredly, tediously... upon.

Just give it up, already. You only dig your hole deeper. You've lost all credibility on this website.

Wake up and get A CLUE. Your act is tiresome. You've played yourself.

At least the hearings, if they are really held, will be entered into the public record. Whether anyone pays any attention or not (I'm predicting that very few will), posterity will have the chance to learn that not all of us stood by. Some of us, but certainly not enough, still cared about the Constitution. As for the rest of us, I still agree with Mr. Franklin-- they deserve neither safety nor liberty.

The hearings just might be covered BY C-SPAN. Anyone know?

Do any of you "lesserevilists" really think that we would even be discussing this under a Bush/Republican-Controlled congress? 'Nuf Said!

Bush & Cheney will just attack Iran to cause a distraction for the "sheeple" of the USA..FOX and CNN will cover the invasion 24/7, snd not a peep about impeachment.

Repeating the argument doesn't make it any more convincing (to me at least).

Brian Brademeyer,

You might look at the Democrats who were privvy to a briefing on torture and advocated it:

Jane Harman
Nancy Pelosi
Jay Rockefeller
Steny Hoyer

They won't impeach Bush because if Bush goes down, these people go down. The Dems also have given Bush the funds to continue his illegal occupation of Iraq. There are several other examples I can give.

This explanation that the Dem leadership is dragging its feet on impeachment because of "complicity" concerns seems unconvincing to me.

Much more likely that they are terrified of getting the "Wellstone" treatment.

Dave Lindorff,

You were a better author before you resorted to "chicken___" talk. That's what Republicans do, attempt to bully people with trash talk. You have your opinion, but it's cock-eyed, possibly even a plant from conservatives wishing to see Obama lose. It's otherwise a tad inexplicable from someone who ought to know better.

Republicans are going to hold the line that elects McCain, if they can. That is all they are going to do--in absolute lockstep. And you know it.

Let the games begin!!

PLEASE????

Referring back to DD's challenge, the point is that not one Senator was ready to vote to convict Nixon when impeachment hearings began in his case either. But as the hearings progressed, and his criminal behavior and abuses of power became evident to all and sundry, even Republicans began to see that he was a lost cost and they decided not to go down with him. With little Bush's popularity ratings in the toilet (lower now than Nixon ever got), it wouldn't take much in the way of disclosures at a public hearing--a few low level WH aides telling the truth about what was going on--for the same thing to happen with regard to Bush. Does anyone think that the Republicans in the Senate would go down with that ship? No way. They's throw Bush and Cheney overboard to the sharks in a split second if they thought he was going to drag them down.

And that's why we need hearings.

Anyone who says otherwise is the kind of person who can never cross the street for fear that there might be a car coming that would run the light. In defense of our Constitution, you have to be willing to trust in the good sense of the American people. I know they don't seem like they have any sometimes, but when it's put in front of them, as it would be with an impeachment hearing, they usually come around.

So no more chickens*** political cowardice. Let's do this thing!

We absolutely need to present the case for impeachment, even if this is not part of formal impeachment hearings. The point is to get this information before the public, who ideally will call for real impeachment procedures. We can't know now what the Republicans or the public in general will do, but we can't worry about this either. If we were always worrying about doing what we know is right, we'd never make any moves at all. This country is supposed to be a democracy and it won't be one unless we act as real patriots, to uphold the basic principle of rule by the people. Yes, the Constitution is imperfect, we don't have a real democracy, the Repubs and Timidocrats won't go with impeachment -- there are lots of such reasons. But let's act according to what we believe and try to get everyone else to see the point. If we don't act according to our principles, what kind of principles do we have?

"We're not doing impeachment, but he [Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who introduced 36 articles of impeachment] can talk about it."

This is a "win"? Are you fond of eating crumbs, Mr. Lindorff? This is obviously a way to kill the bill.

"the House just voted 251-166 to send Kucinich's 36 articles of impeachment to the Judiciary Committee"

- to kill the bill. Otherwise, they could have simply voted to impeach Bush.

Remember that bill to impeach Cheney that was sent to the Judiciary Committee back in Nov. 2007, how's that coming? Oh, that's right, it was DOA.

"but the American people will never forgive them or the rest of the Congress if it allows these two men to leave office next January without tar and feathers on their backs and a federal grand jury on their cases."

So how come after 8 years of this, people are still Democratic supporters? How come everyone has forgiven Obama for opposing impeachment? The answer: Americans are easily distracted, and Democrats don't need to be forgiven if people will still vote for them. Even if this wasn't the case, what can we do? "People power" doesn't exist without organization and representation. The Left has neither.

We still don't have a clear idea of what to expect during Conyers hearing for Kucinich (and the World) next Friday.

Friday is usually a day when Congress is not in session. If Congressmembers go home Thursday evening, who will be present with Conyers? Will there be 5-10 House members? 30? Will they do more than make an appearance at the hearing and then leave?

Will the corporate media turn their lights toward Kucinich and Conyers? Will the event last beyond the weekend?

After fighting with Congress over taking members' oath seriously for more than three years, I will make calls ONE MORE TIME next week. (Please don't hector me about doing my part...that dog was put down long ago.)

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34830

"Rep. Kucinich gets to make his case that the president is committing high crimes and misdemeanors and abuses of power and war crimes..." But only so the Congress is fully aware of how many more immunization bills they have to pass before January.

If progressives and liberals had a Rove team working hard, headlines around the world would be this: "Congress Begins Bush Impeachment."

Prosecute

If memory serves, impeachment is a political trial, not a criminal procedure. Therefore, the evidence presented is not so much to prove criminality than it is to test the political climate. Or even to establish clear political truth.

Yes, a number of senators will always see this as party war and ever stand by their party. On the other hand, impeachment procedings eventually make their way to barber shop chairs, doughnut shops, and laundromats. Those are places where the poliitcal tide may change and affect predictable Senate votes.

I vividly recall the Watergate hearings when many Republicans put their bravest faces on Nixon's abuses. Yet they knew, despite Nixon having won 49 states only two years prior, that the jig was up. The Watergate hearings effectively changed the climate: a bungled burglary had evolved into a tyrannical power play. The constitution, gentleman's agreement as it was and still remains, was being manhandled in a most ungentlemanly manner. Nixon's abuse did NOT reflect what voters and the elected understood to be the governing contract.

While I personally would have liked to see Bush thrown out of office in 2002 for his warmongering, at this juncture removing him and Cheney is less important than getting the Constitution and Bill of Rights back. Impeachment proceedings are the simplest way (well, sometimes the simple way IS the most miserable way!) to re-assert shared governmental power.

If not, then it is only a matter of time until we do exactly what the king tells us.

Daniel David wrote:

"I still say you wrote a good paragraph we should admire as a rallying cry for electing Obama—even if you didn't know for sure why you were writing."

Political expediency is not my game. Voting for a party instead of principle got us into this mess in the first place. By not holding politicians accountable for their actions, they continue to work in their own best interest, not the people or the country.

And since you asked, I will absolutely NOT be voting for Obama in November. I really had hoped that I could. But not anymore. He has proven that he cannot even uphold his current oath of office, let alone as POTUS. With his vote for the FISA "fix" he abandoned the 4th amendment and the rule of law. And he is currently working to support the bailout of the Wall Street banksters/gangsters at taxpayers' expense. So, NO, my statement was not a rallying cry for the status quo or for a party or candidate.

Rebel Farmer I would bet 100 pesos that if energy and food prices drop significantly before the election you will see an huge increase in Bush's popularity ratings. Most the people I talk to in the States are friends of my Son's in their late 30's and early 40's but I read yahoo and other Internet news and see no evidence of the 28% your are talking about. These poll numbers depend on the questions asked.
But hell, I hope your right!

On a side note, who the hell are these 28 percenters supporting Bush?

Dave Lindorff July 17th, 2008 2:09 pm
I disagree, I have not met any of the public that are pissed off at Bush for crapping on the Constitution and abuse of power-NONE. Americans on the whole do NOT take interest in politics and think that what ever Bush does must be legal as they have been brain washed to think there is some magic mega cop out there that would stop him-plus they don't want to think about it. There are some notable exceptions but most the people I have talked to in the States are pissed-off about high energy and food prices and Bush gets their anger about that but not much else.
Yes, I think these hearings are good and one can hope but from my experience with my fellow Americans-they will change the channel.

Barn Burner - Maybe people in your life don't know what's happening, but lots of Americans really do. Over 60% of Americans want to see impeachment hearings on Cheney according to a poll taken about 6 months ago. In the same poll, over 50% wanted to see the same for Bush.

So, don't give up hope. Even though the MSM has tried to keep the public in the dark, they really are starting to slowly wake up. And Bush is now polling at 28%. If the people got to actually hear some truth at an impeachment hearing, guess where that number would go?

What Democratic apologists seem to not understand is even if Bush Co. is not convicted by the Senate (of course, assuming that the House votes for impeachment), the symbolism of the Democrats trying to do what they should have been doing all along by doing what is right would win them greater appreciation among voters than being complicit in a scheme to bilk the country out of hundreds of billions and even trillions of dollars. Unfortunately, the latter has proven to be far truer than the former, since the Republicans and Democrats basically are two sides of the same evil coin.

Impeachment might at least keep them so busy that they won't have the time or the guts to start a war with Iran.

"but the American people will never forgive them or the rest of the Congress if it allows these two men to leave office next January without tar and feathers on their backs and a federal grand jury on their cases."
What are you smokin man, I don't know of any person in my daily life that even knows of an impeachment hearing. If I said "do you recognize the name Dennis Kucinich" I would get a blank look as they mentally go through the rosters of sports teams. The Administrations spin doctors have so successfully confused every issue that the U.S. Public doesn't want to be bothered much less "forgive".

Rebel,

So you're ticked off. So what? Me too. Not a single Republican in the Senate will vote to convict Bush of anything NO MATTER WHAT evidence is "presented". The whole thing would merely rally the Republican base again (more than guns, more than gays, more than abortion) and they would all be thanking Kucinich and Company for preserving their wars and tax cuts without them ever breaking an electoral sweat. This is the problem and I don't mind being called a fool for insistently pointing it out.

I still say you wrote a good paragraph we should admire as a rallying cry for electing Obama---even if you didn't know for sure why you were writing. It's so good, it's worth repeating, once again:

"This is our last stand folks. This is the only fight that counts right now. If we lose this one, we will have no tools left to fight all the other challenges that lay before us. If our government does not stand up for the people. the Constitution, and the Rule of Law at this point in history, the chance may never come again."

Just a sidebar question: Will the media be there that day or will they be covering a celebrity's woes?
Seriously, Mr. Lindorff,--if you're still here--what do you expect as far as media coverage?
Thanks.

Impeachment is good. Indictment is better. 'The Bush Indictment Project' is ongoing. Both Impeachment and Indictment have some drawbacks - for one thing they both give the impression that Bush/Cheyney are the big problem. THERE WOULD BE NO WAR IF THE CONGRESS DID NOT AUTHORIZE AND FINANCE IT. ONLY THE CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR.
Anyone who is serious about prosecuting the war criminals should vote for a State Attorney General and County Prosecutor who will bring forth Indictments. It CAN happen, but only if the voters all over the country are smart enough to vote for it.

adnan - I totally agree with you! You're right. What we have left of our country is not the democracy that it should be. That's because of all those "thousand cuts" that have been inflicted since its inception. But the fact of the matter is that democracy does not have a chance if we don't bind up the wounds that it has suffered.

It's like the old saying: If you kill the body, the head dies. Well, if the Constitution dies, the country goes with it. We certainly didn't fix it when it needed repair, and we certainly can't put it back together once it is destroyed.

So, our democracy may be terribly broken, but it ain't dead yet.

Daniel, you are a fool. Your argue that impeachment proceedings should not even be started because YOU have already counted the votes of the jury (the Senate) who have not even heard the evidence that would be produced at trial. So how does that work exactly?

Essentially we know that crimes have been committed. Kucinich has a list of charges against some of the folks that have committed crimes against our country. He has asked the Judiciary Committee (something like a grand jury) to review those charges to see if there is enough evidence to request a trial. If the Judiciary Committee gets to hear the evidence and votes to bring charges, then impeachment proceedings would move on to a trial in the Senate where evidence would be brought forward like any other trial.

According to your scenerio, the Senate and the American people do not even get to hear the evidence. Nobody gets to actually hear the truth. Because YOU have already decided how the jury will vote BEFORE they have heard the evidence. So YOU have decided that the Rule of Law does not matter. YOU have decided that a known murderer will not be charged and tried, because YOU think that the system can be rigged for a specific outcome. And YOU only care about any of this because it may affect an election outcome and how party members might benefit?

Personally, I want to have the opportunity to hear the evidence and the truth. I want to make up my own mind. I don't even care what the outcome is. I want the process to happen. I want the legal system set up in the Constitution to be enforced.

LET THE TRUTH BE HEARD BY ALL AMERICANS!!!

Open hearings, we, Veterans for Peace have priority. We hand delivered the petititions, we met twice with Conyers and Dennis and we WILL be there very, very early. I expect nothing. 9 repugs voted For Impeachment, 10 abstained. Yea: Brady[TX], Gilchrest[MD], Walter Jones[NC], Manzullo[IL], Tim Murphy[PA], Paul[TX], Reichert[WA], Shays[CT] and Mike Turner[OH]. Walter Jones Represents Camp LeJueune.
800-828-0498. call conyers, ask him to schedule IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS. pelosi, too. your reps.
We'll see....

@ Rebel,

How could you even claim that your country "exists as a democracy"? What is democratic in your electoral system where electoral college selects president, lack of choices, easily stolen elections, appointed not-elected executive branch, signing statements which nullify laws, pardons for well connected criminals ....

I would say that your country rather exists as moneocracy, where money rules, and nobody cares what demos ( people) wont.

Put the proceedings on prime time and vote Bush and Cheney off the island.

Rebel Farmer puts it well:

"This is our last stand folks. This is the only fight that counts right now. If we lose this one, we will have no tools left to fight all the other challenges that lay before us. If our government does not stand up for the people. the Constitution, and the Rule of Law at this point in history, the chance may never come again."

The only problem is, this is being said about the hopelessly impossible cause of an impeachment---when these stirring words should be applied to the election, where it counts.

Dave Lindorff,

As soon as you get off your high horse, tell us where the votes to convict in the Senate are going to come from, since they ARE NOT THERE. I like ideals as well as you do, but I don't buy bound-to-lose foolishness. You shouldn't either.

Our country exists as a democracy only because it is founded on the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Rule of Law. As those have been eroded, so has America. It's like dying from a thoudsand cuts. What does it take to understand that our country has received mortal wounds at the hands of this administrtion? At what point in time do we stand up and declare that we will defend our democracy? At what point do we stand up and staunch the bleeding and save our country?

This fight to save our country is not about party politics or who wins the political battle. It is about the life and death of our country. It is a total conceit to support any position that ultimately throws our country "under the bus" of political gamesmanship. There can be NO compromise given or offered that weakens the foundation upon which this country is based. Every compromise is just another wound that evenually will drain the lifeblood out of America. And the wounds are now so severe, that we can see the life of our country flowing out.

I have listened to DD for a long time on many different subjects. He sometimes has added contructively to various discussions, though I generally do not agree with his version of "realistic" reality. His comment above, however, is beyond belief. Our country is dying and he is advocating that we understand the politics involved? Are you nuts?

This is our last stand folks. This is the only fight that counts right now. If we lose this one, we will have no tools left to fight all the other challenges that lay before us. If our government does not stand up for the people. the Constitution, and the Rule of Law at this point in history, the chance may never come again.

So get on the dam* phone and call your congress critters. Toll free: 800-828-0498. And FAX messages are very effective as well. Go to the links Dave gave you and sign the petitions.

A lot can happen between now and November. Pick your battles wisely.

The hearings are open, but space will be limited.

As to the idea that impeachment hearings are a good idea, but that actual impeachment would be bad, I find Daniel David's thinking to be thoroughly undemocratic and a gutless reflection of the pathetic thinking of the Democratic Party leadership.

The majority of Americans know that this administration has abused its power and crapped on the Constitution, and they want something done about it. If the Democrats were to act and actually try to punish the Bush/Cheney administration, they would have the overwhelming gratitude--and the votes--of most sentient and patriotic Americans.

re 1:41pm

note how lesser-evilism and defeatism go hand in hand.

cave in now and avoid the rush, eh?

i don't think so, not this time. the rock has been turned over, and all the creepy crawly thingies are going to be exposed for everyone to see, including madame pelosi, her accomplices, and her lame apologists on CD.

"sunlight is the best disinfectant." (forgot the source)

There is much to be gained by the hearings to expose and dwell upon the crimes. There is nothing to be gained by a formal Senate trial where the perpetrators are found "not guilty" on all charges by a Senate that, far from being an "impartial" jury, is stacked with enough Republicans to make any conviction numerically impossible. There is even much to be lost if hardheads go through with the trial anyway, lose it (inevitably), and then lose the election too from the backlash of Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity and crowd creating the great American flag-draped sympathy movement for "Righteous Republicans". Nancy Pelosi "gets" this and always has.

Will the hearings be open to the public? What about a significant showing at the hearings themselves? I am nowhere near DC but if I were, I'd go.

http://www.healingmagic.org/articles/Narcissism.pdf

Please note that while no public announcement of impeachment hearings has been issued by the Judiciary Committee, Chairman Conyers has notified Veterans for Peace that they will begin at 10 am on July 25 in the Rayburn Office Building. The National Impeachment Network is organizing a rally a the Rayburn Office Building on the Independence Av. side, to begin at 9 am on July 25. Anyone who can make it should be there. The hearing, of course, will be open to the public.

Dave Lindorff

damn!

if this actually comes to pass, some of us are going to have to come down off our studied cynicism and get busy.

no more excuses for inaction! not all congresscritters are asbestos-footed freaks impervious to fire! public outrage has a measurable effect!

that funny feeling in my gut might just be optimism---it's been so long, i didn't recognize it at first.