Regarding impeachment of shrub...we all know it most likely

will never happen, but the fact that I am starting to see the "I" word being used by others offers me a very small sliver of hope.

Maybe if we all think real hard, and imagine the shrub being impeached...it will happen. Believe me, I can see it in my head and it makes me happy.

I would love to watch that crooked, ignorant, lazy ass, war monger squirm. I would also love to watch him take Cheney and co. with him.

Never Give Up.

VISUALIZE IMPEACHMENT

I like it.

of the House? That's what we're up against--roughly those same odds. But the Democrats need a coherent marketing strategy--something equivalent to Gingrich's "contract with America." We need to start talking about restoring honor and decency to the Congress.

::patriot:

I know most of the people on here think it's a pipe dream. But didn't so many other amazing and unbelievable accomplishments in the past seem like pipe dreams? I can't think of them all right now, but some outstanding things nobody would've ever thought of have happened.

We don't need impeachment. We just need to try W and Co in the Court of Public Opinion and demand that they resign from office as soon as possible.

It's a possibility. He might just resign to avoid impeachment like Nixon did.

And if you think about succession, You can see the problems it raises. Cheney, Hastert, Frist, Rice... who gets the job?

I think the only chance is a turnover of the congress in '06, and that is a long way off, but such an outcome could be seen as an entree to impeachment.

The best we can do, I think, is to keep it alive as a talking point, to let everyone know he should be impeached. That may keep pressure on enough to minimize some damage, but I doubt it. Because after all he is a fall guy, not a decider.

--IMM

As you said, we should still be shouting it from the mountaintops.

NGU.

vision to come to pass...It makes for a great motivator...having the photoshop photo of B* in his white fruit of the looms in jail is great wallpaper :evilgrin:

waving goodbye like nixon did................ORGASMIC

That should have happened a long time ago, like immediately after the first missiles flew over Baghdad. However, it's never too late.

The invasion of Iraq was completely unjustified, certainly not justified by the presence of banned weapons or ties to al Qaida. Bush knew or should have known that these rationales were false. Other people around him must have. Meanwhile, the international community saw through neoconservatives' scheme, forcing the withdrawal of a resolution before the Security Council that would have authorized force before the Council could vote on it; it would have been voted down, possibly by a margin of 12-3. The invasion, which could not be justified on defense from an imminent attack or by a UN resolution authorizing force, was a war crime on its face.

In addition to war crimes, Bush should also be charged with crimes against humanity arising out of torture at his offshore network of gulags.

In addition to Mr. Bush, at a minimum Mr. Cheney, Mr. Powell, Mr. Rumsfeld, Dr. Rice, Mr. Gonzales, Mr. Wolfowitz, Mr. Feith, Mr. Libby and General Sanchez should be charged with either war crimes for planning the Iraq invasion, crimes against humanity arising out of torture at Guantanamo, Bagram, Abu Ghraib and other facilities, or both.

Once the tribunal is convened and charges made, any individuals who travel outside the United States should apprehended and detained until they are tried.

Let's do something about it. Let's start the ball rolling.

NGU.

First of all, the very best way to clear the matter up is to impeach all of those just named and bring them to trial in federal court for violating the War Crimes Act of 1996. However, that seems very unlikely. Therefore, let's examine the international route.

A special tribunal, like the ones for war crimes in the Balkans and Rwanda, would usually to be convened through the Security Council. In this case, since the US and British governments are involved, they may have to make an end run around the Security Council and go through the General Assembly, where nobody has veto power. That would be similar to the way the UN approved its involvement in Korea in 1950.

Although the Bush regime does not recognize the International Criminal Court, the ICC could become involved. The designers of the Rome Statute were not so foolish or naive as to ask tyrants who would never sign on to the Rome Statute for their permission to make them subject to international law. The Rome Statute has several ways to bring suspects from non-member states like the US to The Hague for crimes committed in other non-member states like Iraq. A member state (and there are almost a hundred of them) could refer the matter to the ICC (see Article 14) or a prosecutor may of his own accord bring a case before the court of his own accord (Article 15). Such provisions, along with a referral from the Security Council, were put into the Rome Statute as a way to allow for the prosecution of somebody like Saddam; no one in the 1990s probably dreamed that these articles of the Statute would need to be used against a sitting American President.

One might also seek the council of international jurists such as Ramsay Clark, who has long advocated Bush's impeachment for war crimes in Iraq. He may have a better idea of how to bring a case before an international tribunal.

Contact Ramsay Clark? He runs an impeachment web site, doesn't he?

NGU.

Vote to Impeach

Also, Francis Boyle's website:

Impeach Bush Now

Alright people, let's talk to Mr. Clark:

http://www.votetoimpeach.org/

NGU. :patriot:

.

The Impeachment of george w bush and trial for war crimes for the cabel and long life sentences.

America coming out of the dark sleep.

I want him executed for treason.