Congressman Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Dick Cheney

Source: Fox News

Congressman Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles Against Dick Cheney

Tuesday , April 24, 2007

WASHINGTON —
Rep. Dennis Kucinich introduced three articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney on Tuesday, saying the vice president lied to America to get into a war in Iraq.

Kucinich, a 2008 presidential candidate, said Cheney misled the nation about Iraq's having weapons of mass destruction; he had been deceitful about a nexus between Iraq and Al Qaeda and was being aggressive toward Iran "absent any real threat" from the Islamic Republic.

Cheney "purposely altered intelligence gathering to justify the use of the Armed Forces in Iraq in a manner damaging to national security," the first article reads. The vice president also is accused of using the "intelligence process to deceive citizens and Congress about the tie between Iraq and Al Qaeda in a manner damaging to the United States."

The Ohio Democrat said he hadn't discussed his articles of impeachment with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi or other Democratic leaders but "has the support of millions of Americans."

* * *

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268201,00.html

that is a lot of supporting stuff

Good stuff there.

and the lederhosen:


KIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICK-OLA!!!!


Guys, CALL! PLEASE!!! The TOLL FREE numbers are there! CALL YOUR REPS, AND, if you feel up to it, SOMEBODY ELSE'S!!!

CALL PELOSI and urge her to STAND WITH THIS!

he does, including this former Ohioan.

Rec'd.

Thank you, Dennis.

Don't forget to call and thank Dennis, too!

He already has what he was looking for, and that's long before any impeachment plays out.

I ain't getting taken for a ride.

someone posted that earlier today that he was postponing it due to Cheney going to the hospital?

turns out Cheney's medical appointment was routine

http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&tab=wn&q=Kucinich&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d

:popcorn:

The Ohio Democrat rejected suggestions he introduced the articles of impeachment to give his campaign a boost.

"These articles are about the conduct of the vice president," Kucinich said. "That's what this is about."

But House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio said, "It's nothing but pure politics."

According to the House historical office, no vice president has ever been impeached.

he hadn't been forced to resign before he was arrested and sent to jail for corruption.

Hell, I'd settle for that.

A Reuters pickup

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-usa-politics-cheney.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. Democratic lawmaker opposed to the Iraq war initiated a bid on Tuesday to remove Vice President Dick Cheney from office that even his own party leaders dismissed as futile.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio introduced three articles of impeachment in the Democratic-led House of Representatives against Cheney, accusing him of having misled the country into its 2003 invasion of Iraq and, more recently, threatening Iran without cause.

``I believe the vice president's conduct of office has been destructive to the founding purposes of our nation,'' said Kucinich, who is making a long-shot bid for the White House.

Shortly after Democrats took control of Congress in January from Bush's Republicans, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would not consider impeachment, a highly divisive issue that could tie Capitol Hill into knots.

``Nothing has changed. It's off the table,'' said Nadeam Elshami, a Pelosi spokesman. ``We're focusing on tough issues like bringing the war in Iraq to a responsible end.''

(more at link)

I could understand NPR, but the BBC??? :shrug:

The resolution has already been referred to the Judiciary Committee where it will die. Kucinich couldn't even get one single cosponsor for this publicty stunt.

You really think he did this because he thought it would HELP his campaign?

Bwahahahaha!!!!!

He is stuck within the margin of error in almost every poll and he has raised less money than some Congressional campaigns.

help him?

He is doing what he thinks is right. And he will be castigated by the leadership of his own party for doing so. How does that do anything but hurt his candidacy? That doesn't exactly sound like a cynical publicity stunt. It sounds more like, uh, what's it called? Integrity?

does not trust Pelosi.

And support the job hes done?

the business at hand.

Quixotic crusades and publicity stunts that distract from the fact that they are rerouting the entire government starting with the constitution?

I wish more had the spine that Kucinich has to get the votes necessary to make it a probability.

You're right. These punks are not going to impeach anybody.

I guess the argument could also be made that congress doesn't do much in getting "business" done anyway, so this isn't detracting from much of anything. If they aren't doing anything then they can't be doing anything bad.

If this were to gain traction, at least it'd take away the time they have to abolish the estate tax, pass another round of tax cuts for the rich, appropriate the (seemingly) trillion dollars a day they put toward the military, or enact any more trade agreements, or screw the majority of the public any more than they've already done.

Of course, though, this isn't going to gain a bit of traction.

yet she hasn't chosen to join forces with him on either the Iraq funding vote or this impeachment motion.

You would like to believe that Kucinich is the only one with guts to stand up, but many other progressives in the house do so everyday. They just don't do it with Dennis.

Has it occurred to you that maybe HE is the problem if he cannot even convince Barbara Lee on such an issue?

Please stop making Kucinich into more than he is. Meanwhile, Kucinich will be appearing on Fox shortly. Check your local listings.

Taken for a ride I will not be.

Praising Kucinich isn't really the point. I admire SOMEBODY for pushing this, even though it's symbolic. I just wish there were more people to make a serious effort when it comes to this. In the Senate, there are probably only two (Sanders and Feingold). Kerry is pretty good.

Point is, that isn't enough to bring the criminals to justice. I think we all agree they need to be removed from office, right...through any means necessary? Most rational people would agree.

There aren't enough people with spine, though, to get the necessary votes to really do it.

250 Democratic members of the house and there are 10 or 15 with "guts". What kind of losers are the remainder?

They need to go, don't re-elect them.

Fortunately Speaker Pelosi and the House Democrats have learned a lesson from what happened with impeachment in 1998-1999.

"bandwagon". Frankly, this threat of impeachment, coupled with the investigations now ongoing (hopefully reviving those shut down by the Attorney firings -- obstruction of justice) will ultimately provide the 'switch in time' for the GOP if you are a GOPer. But I don't think this is going to happen. GOP and Rove have lived by the sword for far too long.

My, my, everyone who disagrees with Kucinich on this is accused of being a Dick Cheney supporter.

How many people does that accusation win over? Maybe you should support another candidate, because you surely aren't helping Kucinich, no, not one bit.

Is it only what you term the "far left" that believes that Cheney deliberately lied in order to convince Congress and the public to support the invasion and occupation of Iraq, and that this action justifies his impeachment?

I am not asking if you believe that Rep. Kucinich's actions are going to be effective, or if you believe that he has political motivations for his actions.

I'm simply asking that, considering everything that Cheney has done during his tenure as VP of the US, do you personally believe that some of his actions justify his impeachment by Congress?

As there are not enough Democrats in the Senate to convict and removed him. Impeachment without conviction and removal will not be punative to him.

and add:

Dennis Kucinich :yourock:

This is really cool.

How the MSM didn't braodcast the announcement itself.

Washington Office

2445 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Phone (202)225-5871
Fax (202)225-5745

:yourock: DENNIS KUCINICH :yourock:

And Obama & Hillary get most of the republican owned mainstream medias coverage & exposure.

Do you know what a great progressive FDR platform Kucinich has & stands for?...At the very least everyone sucked into voting for Obama or Hillary should check it out.

http://kucinich.us/

Forget it.

If I want to watch our initiatives lose, I'm certainly not going to pay for that.

I'd rather help the people who are actually doing the legwork to get stuff passed, like ending the war, upping the minimum wage and investigating the attorney scandal. And he has not been front and center in advancing those causes.

He just goes on tv, says what he wants to happen, then moves on to another topic, which he will also move on from. Meanwhile nothing changes, except Kucinich has said something about it.

:kick: & rec

INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT IMPRECATE INCARCERATE :patriot:

"Is this just a political stunt by a Presidential candidate?"

Did the Situation Room ask this about Clinton????

wiccan pentacles on memorial plaques

nt

according to wolf

Meanwhile, making us wait thru another long set of ads.

They know this will keep people from changing channels!

Well, that's a better sign than the stupid questions.

Dennis did good

:thumbsup:

And I say "it is about damn time".

Thank you Dennis, thank you for doing what is right.

I apologize for the language but there just isn't a better way to say it.

Every syllable was precious. Say the truth from the moutaintops!

:patriot:

Call Pelosi, Call Reid, call your own Rep. Ask that they do their job, as warranted by the Constitution. Ask that they support the Articles of Impeachment. If this fails we can blame ourselves.

is under investigation with the FBI for accepting money from Abramoff & his people... among other misdeeds that SOB has committed... (Feeney, or "the fiend" as I call him)

www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable <<-- check it out, top '08 stuff

is needed - to simply do the right thing! Let's not stop with impeaching Cheney, the entire corrupt, immoral Bush Administration must resign and their supporters in the Congress. And, while we are at it their appointments to the Supreme Court who are not men of honor for accepting their position by being promoted by a rogue administration that used illegal and immoral means to take office in 2000 and did every slimming tactic to suppress and deny the vote in 2004.

A POX on all of their houses!

Thanks that we still have a society that produces a brave sole such as Dennis Kuchinich!

I'm sure there are scumbags just as big in Congress (most with an "R" after their names), but not likely there are any bigger ones. Feeney's about as bad as it gets.

Good Idea!
:thumbsup:

:kick:

The show is taped too early for 5pm EST news conference to make it.

Unless there's some damning evidence, I don't see this going far at all. We all know there are too many reThugs who usually would never vote against Chimpy no matter what, so this has all the potential to end very, very badly for us.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

. . . that is a valid observation.

Do those seem like the words of a troll, or an experienced progressive.

Especially when one makes that stand among a theater of crooks and scoundrels - on both sides of the aisle. When someone makes a stand that is true and right, he/she may be beaten down by the corrupt, but every time a stand is made, the next one is a little easier to make. The Republicans hate us and our country, it doesn't matter what we do, so we might as well do what is right.

It is to get it on the permanent record in the house, start a debate about it and get publicity about it. It is a first step that must be taken, even if it doesn't go anywhere.

As we have seen, impeachment does not mean conviction. When the Clinton impeachment went ahead, everybody saw how thin their arguments were, so he was not convicted.

If this goes ahead, we will all see how thin the arguments against it are, and if they fail to convict in the Senate then the result will be the painting of all those who vote against it with the same brush. The lies and corruption will be exposed, and every one who does not vote to convict will be revealed to be voting on political partisanship, not on the issues raised - and they will be coming up for election tainted by their vote.

Either he is impeached and convicted, and removed from office, or he is impeached and not convicted, indicting his entire party.

The only way this would not be a positive for us is if the Dem leadership lets it die in committee.

You are completely right. This is a win/win for Democrats if the House votes these articles through. The only loss will be if the Democrats in the House drop the ball...

For president there can be no other person!

...there are more important things to address, like winning in 2008.

I'm glad they don't have more important things to address.

But welcome to DU! :hi:

I think it was long overdue. I hope that they are brought to account for their transgressions. The whole cabal. It would be the one thing that would restore my hope for America.

PS. had a really bad day and occasionally I am more optimistic.

FULL TEXT: Articles of Impeachment of Dick Cheney
By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor and National Correspondent, Atlanta Progressive News (April 23, 2007)

(APN) ATLANTA -- Today, US Rep. Dennis Kucinich introduced Articles of Impeachment against Vice President of the United States Dick Cheney. Kucinich did not limit the Articles to the issue of Iran; they also include defrauding the public and Congress over the need to invade Iraq. Prisoner torture, outing CIA agents, and illegal domestic warrartless wiretapping were not included as reasons.

The main sections of the FULL TEXT of the bill as obtained by Atlanta Progressive News are reprinted below. We redacted the individual exhibits supporting various claims, as well as the "line numbers" for flow. However, the files are available here as well: http://kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/int3.pdf

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and mis demeanors.

Article I

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction...

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.

(3) The Vice President’s actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002 and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002 vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President’s actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq. In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

Article II

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:

(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda...

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including...

Article III

In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:

(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:

(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:

(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following...

(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S Constitution’s adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force...

Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

About the author:

Matthew Cardinale is the News Editor and National Correspondent for Atlanta Progressive News and may be reached at matthew@atlantaprogressivenews.com.

Syndication policy:

This article may be reprinted in full at no cost where Atlanta Progressive News is credited.
http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0148.html

"(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction...

(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.

(3) The Vice President’s actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002 and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002 vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President’s actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.

The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq. In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office."


WOW! Great stuff... there the HARD evidence people are writing about wanting to see... to me #1 is clear - he was told there was nothing and reordered it to get what he wanted to hear so they could go to war.

Can always bring another set articles later I suppose.

the details of the Plame case to be presented as argument before the senate - those details being self-evident because there has already been the successful prosecution of Libby based on the same evidence.

but the actual illegal act of outing a NOC in and of itself should be enough to impeach. But that's just me. :)

:patriot:

Bless him!

... what are the chances this will actually pick up any serious support among Dems or left-leaning Repubs?

What crime is he being impeached for? This is starting to look like a cheap publicity stunt. Cheney can be impeached but only if the effort is well thought out.

...3,330 American deaths and over 24,000 wounded is not a crime. I suppose that is why the entire Bush administration uses lies about everything they do, it isn't a crime so they lie about everything. If the administration was forced to tell the truth about their activities it would become readily apparent what crimes and misdemeanors have been committed

Why do you think they're all so god-damned afraid of swearing an oath? Because it is at that point that lying becomes criminal.

There was an army surgeon on NPR the other day saying that unlike in vietnam, where casualties ran 2.4 wounded for each fatality, in Iraq it is 16 wounded per death - that makes it 52,000 wounded.

The 'lying to people' is only a small part of his violation of his oath of office. THAT is what he is being impeached for.

and they kept repeating his lies to the American public, which sadly, is not a crime.

he lied to congress to get approval for their war. That prevented congress from having a full and honest debate about the necessity for war, which is their duty. That may not be criminal, but it is certainly impeachable.

Or, can congress just take a vote on it and impeach someone? I'm asking because I honestly don't know.

It's the opposite of the Bill Clinton situation...he wasn't under oath.

Wouldn't they have to prove that President Cheney violated a criminal statute that applies to everybody?

Wasn't that the whole thing with the Clinton situation: everyone agreed that the sexual affair was no big deal, but the fact that he lied about it under oath made him subject impeachment (but not removed)?

Then they have to be able to prove intent, and that's an incredibly murky task.

And what are the chances of a majority in the House if zero other members are cosponsoring this?

What is wrong with Kucinich that he can't muster ONE consponsor for his bill among any of the people who vocally support impeachment?

Kucinich cannot get one progressive to stand with him on this, people with longer progressive history than Kucinich. Why, why, why?

They work with him, they know him, they agree with his stands, but they won't stand with him.

A little more skepticism of DK is in order here, but don't let that stand in the way of your fantasies about the great white knight of progressivism.

Article II section 4 - The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States,shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

As we have seen innumerable times, people can be jailed for 'contempt of congress', by refusing to give information, or by giving false information to congress. That is a misdemeanor. I reckon that applies. It may not have an exact equivalent to any civil code, but there it is.

ON EDIT:

Besides, from the articles,

"in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed"

If it is granted that such is his constitutional duty, he blatantly violated a law in starting an aggressive war, which is a violation of the Geneva Accords, an international treaty which has the full weight of law.

Argue him out of that one.

You must commit a crime to be impeached. So if it isn't criminal then it isn't impeachable either.

They've made serious efforts to stay within the letter of the law while breaking the hell out of the spirit.

They do NOT NOT NOT have to "commit a crime" to be impeached (and removed from office)!!! Please pass the word so we don't have to keep answering this same question over and over again.

Thanks;

High Crimes and Misdemeanors are primarily political and Constitutional offenses.

http://www.constitution.org/cmt/high_crimes.htm

"the origin of the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" and its meaning to the Framers, and found that the key to understanding it is the word "high". It does not mean "more serious". It refers to those punishable offenses that only apply to high persons, that is, to public officials, those who, because of their official status, are under special obligations that ordinary persons are not under, and which could not be meaningfully applied or justly punished if committed by ordinary persons.

Under the English common law tradition, crimes were defined through a legacy of court proceedings and decisions that punished offenses not because they were prohibited by statutes, but because they offended the sense of justice of the people and the court. Whether an offense could qualify as punishable depended largely on the obligations of the offender, and the obligations of a person holding a high position meant that some actions, or inactions, could be punishable if he did them, even though they would not be if done by an ordinary person.

Offenses of this kind survive today in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It recognizes as punishable offenses such things as refusal to obey orders, abuse of authority, dereliction of duty, moral turpitude, and conduct unbecoming. These would not be offenses if committed by a civilian with no official position, but they are offenses which bear on the subject's fitness for the duties he holds, which he is bound by oath or affirmation to perform."

Will Kucinich need others to sign on? What decides when and if it is debated on the House floor?

It gets referred to Judiciary, where its up to John Conyers to decide whether to hold hearings or otherwise give it a moment's consideration. It seems unlikely at this point that Conyers will do anything with it.

way overdue - about 5 years at least...

...the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And perhaps she will get a chance to see what the American people really want her to do with "this President," and "this Vice President."

Impeachment is the only ethical thing to do. Enabling criminals in the White House makes those in the Congress who do it complicit in their crimes.

He needs support from Democratic leaders for the impeachment measure to pass through the Judiciary Committee to a House vote, then to the Senate for a trial. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told The Plain Dealer that Democratic leaders don't back impeachment "because we are here to go in a positive direction for the American people," and are focusing instead on stopping the Iraq war.

She suggested that impeachment backers around the country "use their energy in the next election to make sure that we have a Democratic president and vice-president."

more: http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2007/04/kucinich_cheney_deceived_ameri.html

and refuse to use the process written into the constitution for these foreseen occasions, then perhaps you can see adequate legislation is written, passed, and signed into law or resubmitted into law, protecting the sanctity of the vote.

Countering the wisdom of our founding fathers in form and process, and extending your arrogance as exhibited when you " suggested that impeachment backers around the country 'use their energy in the next election to make sure that we have a Democratic president and vice-president'"; Then in your infinite wisdom you should damn well find sponsors and pass legislation requiring paper ballots, publicly owned and inspected software and hardware for all electronic tally machines from the beginning to the end of the voting process. Even if you do not think you have the votes for this, it is imperative it is recorded in history, just who are the traitors against the collection of 220 years of wisdom, expounding verifiable elections.

If you want your tenure as Madam Speaker to survive the judgment of history, you should spare no effort to give the citizens the verifiable tools to defend their most sacred right, that of the vote. Failing that Madam Speaker, you are nothing better at bottom, than a madam of a house of ill repute, flaunting established rules governing political morality while securing the fraudulent agenda of present political practice.

kind of weird considering the circumstances.
He violated the law of the land and has been on a steady campaign to rewrite the constitution.
He is a fascist at best.
Political stunt or not he needs to go and we should all be on that boat, that will force our reps to do our bidding.

the Speaker's reaction. Would creating a false quote by the Speaker have been more supportive of the cause?

Because they don't think Kucinich's move is well considered or well executed?

You are low.

You have a future with the Administration since they also say that anyone who disagrees with them is "on the other side".

Low, low, low.

Get everybody on record about Dirty Dick.

Although the cynic in me says the Dems (that is DLC-sucking, GOP-table-feading, pork-chewing Dems) will work hardest to kill it before it goes to the floor.

Come on Nancy, prove me wrong!

He's the only one who has the balls to speak the truth to power

Should Americans vote for impeachment by sending just $3.33 to Kucinich?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x746432

...why I decided to vote for him in the primaries. Out of all our current candidates (and I love the others too), he's the one most willing to stand up and take a risk and make a bold move. There's an advantage to not being seen as a "frontrunner" - because he doesn't have to worry about losing support over every controversial word. All he can do is gain. Go Dennis!

kucinich--way ahead of the curve, again.

it's the right thing to do AND it's a good political move for him.

Next payday I'm sending Dennis my hard-earned $$ for his prez campaign. I don't care what the media talking heads say - he IS the only viable candidate in my opinion!

although I already donated $$$ to him in March, I'm going to donate again.

pure awesomeness.

The he went ahead with it.

evidence, connect the dots, type it up.

It aint that hard.

Having the public interest and not corporate interests at heart is the hard part.

who is not afraid to represent progressive people and promote their/our values. He has been marginalized for years because he is consistantly honest, telling the truth especially when it contradicts the "conventional wisdom". In America this is rare enough in politicians that he is easy for the "MSM" to propagandize against.

Kucinich is one of only a few (Democratic) politicians on the national scene that I respect and would choose to vote for instead of voting for a progressive 3rd party candidate like Nader. Too many are actually performing like Republicans while wearing Democratic clothing, including, of course, all of those currently complicit in the ongoing war crimes in Iraq, and also refusing to impeach Shrub, Slimy, etc.

These politicians are not leaders but either opportunists, too stupid to deserve respect, or perhaps they are all victims of vicious blackmail plots of some sort. (I hope!)

You tell me?

We need this. Go Kooch!

mentioned but Dennis. :rofl: Guess he has them sorely threatened.

...with a statement by the minority leader like this:

<snip>
“There are two things that happen in Washington, D.C. — public policy and politics. And for some Democrats to call for the vice president to be impeached, I think is nothing but pure politics. We’ve got serious work to do on behalf of the American people and we ought to get about it,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Pure bullshit! The republicans have serious work to do, but it isn't for the American people. They have to work to save their sorry asses and impeaching Dick Cheney and George W. Bush is the business of the American people right now.

Show this man some L O V E!!

no decision that has to be made. Impeaching Cheney is a no-choice deal given what he's done to our country!

The Dems who don't support it are the ones who are playing politics.

Bravo, Dennis Kucinich!

and, shockingly, no corresponding Republic sound bite! It was something like, "And, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced articles of impeachment for Vice President Dick Cheney... (cue Kucinich sound bite) " and ended the segment that way.

This was WTIC AM 1080 in Hartford, CT, a station that runs Rush Limbaugh, Jim "Buddy" Vicevich (a local guy that may be right of Rush, but isn't over the top like Rush) and Sean Hannity at night. So, pretty surprising.

and let it begin with me.

If you are giving Kucinich props for introducing impeachment of the VP, then you should also give him blame for making it less successful than the overall level of support for it.

In other words, at least a handful would support impeachment, but Kucinich can't even get them to cosponsor. That means he's mucking something up.

Typical Kucinich, make our side look less popular than it is. Dennis, please don't touch health care or Iraq or anything else, then our initiatives really will be sunk.

interesting

I don't think DK can manage this effort to success and worse not manage it to humiliating defeat and that's what I said.

You said a bunch of crap about dennis making your side look less popular than it is, So im curious as to what side would that be?
cause there would be the VP side, and then I guess my side cause your with the VP right?

Yes, that's why I don't like Dennis.

When he takes on one of our issues, he garners less support than he should for it and that makes the issue less likely to have success, and yes, it also makes it look like (in this case for instance) there is less support for impeachment than there really is.

To me, it's tantamount to political malpractice. Now, you can search my postings, and you will see that I am committed here, but that I dislike when DK goes on his quixotic campaigns while doing little of the footwork to actually accomplish his ventures and that does us no good.

I have defended Edwards again and again, Pelosi again and again, Reid, again and again, Lantos (my congressman), Boxer, you'll see that I hate Lieberman's undermining of the party and occasionally I get on Feinstein for bouts of the same thing.

Please don't suggest that I am on the "other" side, meaning the Republican side. My postings suggest nothing of the sort.

If Kucinich did the footwork and garnered support to actually make his soundbites have actual effect on the political process, I would be fully supportive, and in fact, would reconsider my support of him. But it bugs the heck out of me how he gets "Progressive Cred" by simply saying words, but following them up with little action that can actually see them implemented. And by the way, if this weren't true, he would be garnering much more support for the nomination because many of his stands are so good, but he is simply not doing anything more than speaking and introducing paper-tiger legislation (because he won't round up support for it) and that helps us little.

LOL like you and your side own these or something!
Man take a look at the greatest, the population wants this, we support Dennis.
I dont know about you but I have two sides, and a back and front of course, and well like i said before there is the VP side then I guess my side...and I dont know where that leaves you, possible in the back.

If everyone who isn't on DK's side in this is on the VP's side, then every member of the Democratic House including Barbara Lee, Pete Stark, Maxine Waters, Diane Watson, all those progressives are on the VP's side by your logic.

You have got it 100% wrong.

GOD DAMMIT JIM YOU HAVE GOT IT 100% WRONG!!!

Its the WILL OFF THE PEOPLE, we want him impeached! hell most of the repubs I know want him gone. The Neos mislead all the christians..thats right, thats what happened and you know it. They rigged the elections they did the opposite of what they promised and to their own base even.

Now look at our country everyone knows it we are screwed.

It has to start somewhere, our voice must be heard.

I'm telling you, giving him this issue is like letting a drunk guy fly our shiny, new 747. It's a great vehicle, but it doesn't stand a chance with the wrong guy at the helm.

And spell "of" correctly, instead of "OFF"

Man you are way to much!

Well, at least I never called you a Republican/supporter of the VP. Which is what you called me and what you have not either apologized for nor corrected.

At least your atrocious spelling is indisputable. My being a Republican is wrong and not substantiated.

Later man, hope your not to mad or anything its all just opinions :)

this 'WILL OF THE PEOPLE.'

But you definetely weren't.

I think the mods should remove the Mrspeeker's posts where he accuses you and I of supporting or sticking up for the VP without basis.

And Mrspeeker is long gone off to work, conveniently leaving before proving any of his/her accusations against us.

Another potentially good impression of the Dennis Kucinich supporters yet wasted. Perhaps I should help every other candidate instead of DK since none of the others and their supporters accuse me of helping the Republicans

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

He makes progressive ideas look less popular than they are, which ultimately hurts the movement.

The 11th commandment:

Thou shalt criticize every Democrat that does not wholeheartedly support Dennis Kucinich in all that he does.

AND

Thou shalt never criticize Dennis Kucinich. (if Kucinich is wrong, please re-read this sentence).

"Thou shalt kiss ass to the republicans, and belittle progressives wherever thou shalt find them."

Instead of blaming Dennis when something does not work. Have you called Speaker Pelosi? Have you called Majority Leader Reid? Have you called your own Rep.? If not, then your blame is misdirected.

If we are not willing to do our part then we cannot assign blame to anyone but ourselves.

...simply because I didn't think DK was the best flag bearer on this issue. Regardless of whatever else I should do, I'm not going to let this one go without complaint.

I'm not going to be smeared by a DK supporter who is accusing me of something without evidence.

And besides, he is doing DK no favors.

On the other hand, I asked a valid question...have you called anyone on this issue? It seems you are quick to dismiss Dennis as not effective...his effectiveness can be correlated to OUR effectiveness. It is the same for any elected offical.

No I haven't contacted my officials lately. The most recent thing I've done is contribute money.

My point was that Kucinich is not giving this issue the proper attention it needs. Normally, you propose leglislation and gather cosponsors and in the process you gain for it, attention, you make sure that it is acceptable to people that should agree with it and you work on momentum for the leglislation.

Kucinich isn't doing any of this. As it stands, probably the way the motion is written is making it unsupportable by even some progressives. That's the point of getting support.

But I've been troubled that Kucinich is making statements and getting press, but actually accomplishing little else for the causes he cares about.

We can do better than him on this issue. And he certainly can do better than he has been doing on this issue.

I was really hoping Dennis would bring up something that no one expected and left impeachment the only option but these items won't hold up. Article 1 and 2 accuse him of deliberate deceit. They can prove that Cheney is a jerk and refused to believe what he didn't want to, but it would take a miracle to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was deliberate deceit.

Article 3 is meaningless. The executive branch does not need legislative concurrance to be pricks to the world. They just need concurrance to shoot at them.

Furthermore...

Someone mentioned the Geneva Conventions against aggressive war and how the executive violated supreme law of the land. However, congress passed the authorization of force which also makes that the law of the land. If that is not true then we should campaign to impeach every member of congress who voted for it because they are the most important branch of government.

I emailed DK to commend him for HR 333 and thanked him for taking positions that may not be most popular, including the vote against the war.

I believe people (especially us Americans) have a hard time admitting that they were wrong to state it simply, and that explains many of the ones continuing to support the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Maybe Cheney's impeachment would give the US public an out, so to speak, by putting the * Adminstration's false assertions on display. Notice I said false assertions, not lies. Proving that Cheney willfully and intentionally deceived us as the article of impeachment alleges would be pretty difficult. Proving that Cheney communicated false information would be a cakewalk. By spotlighting the whole 6 or 7 years worth of misinformation, the public outrage that has been conspicuously missing in this country could be ignited. In this scenario Cheney's impeachment would not be important. The real victory would be vilifying the entire admin.

I don't know what DK's strategy is, but I believe it is a bit more complex than what it appears. I do know I have provided alot of speculation, but this is a very possible sequence of events. If we could just get the ball rolling, then we could gain some serious momentum. But it IS one heavy ass ball.

Now to make it stick with the rest of Congress....

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.