For those who have dissed me for not advocating Impeachment.

I am not alone.

Thank you and have a nice day.

.

, to lie, steal, defraud and pillage the constitution.

if crimes were done, Justice must prevail above class status. we need to end the immoral illegal plutocracy

chimp to be impeached, I have to say I hate Dick more then I hate Bush.

While we expose 12 years of Republican Crimes.

Anyway, Cheney will resign within six months.

He got us into this mess. Why should he be able to wiggle out of it now? After putting another Repub on the throne who could absolve himself from responsibility? (And pardon Bush.)

going after the real problems.
After bu$h is found guilty, too much of the public would think everything is again all hunky-dory and forget about the real criminals. Very little would get fixed.

I really wonder if those pushing for impeachment see the full picture. Is it just ignorance or is it because they understand bu$h would be a sacrificial lamb, taking the pressure off going after the real criminals?

an impeachment. That would really send a message.

Depending on what the investigations turn up, I think almost anything's possible.

Plame, Destroying the Constitution, illegal war, Spying, Habeas corpus...

Illegal? Yeah. Treason? No.

Spying on you own government is Treason, Attacking the Constitution is treason...

So far you haven't given any legal basis. I don't think any of those things could be described as treason. Historically, I don't see any treason prosecutions for similar actions.

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

Any of those would be quite a legal stretch...

Under Bush the Elder China obtained those nuclear secrets.

Under Bush the Dumber China got their hands on advanced reconnaisance technology.

Bush the Uncle is president of the America China Business Chamber of Commerce.

All the while we send more and more jobs to China. At what point do you ask yourself if all this is just coincidence?

effect of impeaching. In reality America would be depressed and unhappy (the majority) watching a divisive event like impeachment. If Bush cannot be throttled back with us in control of congress then we would have no choice. Otherwise forget impeachment, concentrate on making things better, use our power to change policies.

Good for you for standing your ground. I don't advocate it either; I want congress to straighten out the 12 years of bullshit the repugs did to America

I am against impeachment but would like to see thorough investigations regarding Bush going to war on lies.

... we disagree on HRC but I'm right there on impeachment. :) Politically, it would be stupid at this time.

I'm sorry you feel you were 'dissed'. But that's what happens around here when people disagree on matters as minor as the exact time of low tide, so when its impeachment, no wonder shit gets hurled.

I am pro-impeachment for what I think are very good reasons. But that's not to say there aren't good resons for not impeaching.

In my mind, it is finding the sweet spot between politics (and the very future of our dominance) and moral standing in the world (and the very future of our citizenship therein). Both are important and it isn't an easy issue with which to come to grips.

I am for investigations to see where they lead. See the difference? Coming out of the starting gate advocating Impeachment is a very bad idea. See where I'm coming from?

...to see where they lead." So no, I don't see ANY difference. It'd be ridiculous to IMPEACH without first investigating.

What IMPEACHMENT supporters here are doing is helping to build a groundswell for IMPEACHMENT - putting IMPEACHMENT on the table, so to speak - because our elected Dems CAN'T.

THEY can't rush into IMPEACHMENT. But WE, their surrogates, have to prepare the ground for the possibility/inevitability of it.

See where WE'RE coming from?

P.S. I'm sorry to learn you feel you were "dissed." Most discussions I've seen here have been impassioned but civil.

NGU.

Doesn't leave much room for investigations. Thats sending the wrong message, so I will still stand by my original post.

On edit: here is one example.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2611282

...than actually bothering to listen what people have to say? Not my idea of a good policy. And my fellow DUers deserve better than that.

NGU.

It's right there for you to see and contradicts what you said.

It seems fellow DUers only deserve better than that when they agree with you.

.... to follow. I was amazed when i started seeing some people immediately assume every impeachment hawk was calling for articles to sworn out in the first hundred hours (<--- hyperbolic exaggeration). I had originally just assumed our level of understanding would recognize that without the need to explcitly say it. Sadly, that wasn't the case.

Its amazing how, on some issues, one needs to spend more time framing and stating caveats than framing and stating the actual case.

some of us have is the method by which we push for investigations, it might be best to avoid the calls for impeachment at this point. The public is pretty well aware of the wire tapping issue, the torture issue, the habeas corpus issue, the derelict of duty issue, all this stuff has been aired already. In order to make the jump to impeachment there really needs to be new material to justify it. And I still have my doubts that there would ever be a chance to get Republican Congressman behind such an effort. There is a political cost, it needs to be weighed against any perceived benefit. If Bush were to fight investigations like Nixon for instance in order to protect himself that could lead to a call for impeachment as it did in that case. But the investigations should not be about impeachment, that undercuts their credibility from the get go.

That's the whole point. They should be about the issues, but impeachment should not be avoided. I'm okay with leaving it unstated. I'm not okay with with steadfastly avoiding it.

They feel they know the facts all on their own and don't need to prove them to anyone anywhere, let alone Congress. It's not everyone advocating impeachment, but they are a loud and vociferous group.

Perhaps they've misspoken. Perhaps those who say "we must impeach now" mean "we must start investigations now." But that's certainly not what they are saying, so they should certainly be more clear about what they mean. And when I've pointed out (as have others) that a case needs to be made before you can impeach, many have no time to listen to that nonsense.

Give it up! Haven't you learned by now??

:banghead:

There are plenty of others wrong too.

Impeachment is a slap on the wrist. We need our representatives to launch rigorous simultaneous investigations and prosecutions all up and down the bureaucracy if we ever expect to neutralize and eliminate the neocon/bushco leviathan. Chopping off the head at this point won't accomplish the fundamental change we need in the way our government conducts business and carries out policy. Hey, you've seen the monster movies. Those "heads" always seem to have a propensity for growing back...

So, I'm going to give Conyers, Pelosi, et al some latitude here. These are not stupid people and I expect they have a strategy. I'm going to take a wait and see position on this. If they fail to deliver aggressive prosecution of justice and revelation of facts after a reasonable amount of time (I'd say 3 to 6 months) then we start calling for heads.

Of course it's just an opinion but...
You are not alone.
And thank YOU. I'm having a splendid day.
:toast:
J