Impeaching Bush: Good or bad idea?

It seems we need to discuss this some more.

It Would have been a good idea if Democrats were pushing for it from the minute many of his crimes came to light. To talk about it now, is cowardly and comes across as political payback. If its a crime now it was a crime then. Yes he should be impeached but its shameful that people didn't immediately call for it.

Well just the guy impeach himself!

Seriously, you need the support of the Amerciacn people to do this. Nixon wasn't impeached because he had a Democratic Congress with the votes. He was hung because even his own party (Howard Baker from Tennessee) wanted to see him strung up.

And there really isn't much that bush can do to improve himself over the next two years.

So let history just take it's course. The dam has cracked, let TIME flood the valley...

If Pelosi feels that impeachment hearings will work then we should support her. if she thinks it's a waste? Well it probably is.

The man has acted, proudly and unapologetically, directly against the Constitution he swore to uphold when taking office as the leader of our nation. You can't be more lawless than that. And, while I appreciate the iconoclasm of it, tens of thousands of innocents are dead because of it, and the repurcussions will likely be felt for generations, and not in a good way. It is our fucking duty to impeach him. There is no question.

Ben Ferencz has called for one for Bush. Any real patriot would call for no less.

Then we take advantage of his being the leader of their party in 2008. He's a perfect target.

That way, we actually get power back in 2008 and we can do something to *fix* our country. Impeaching him will not solve the problems we're dealing with.

I'm beginning to get pretty frustrated with the mentality of the Democrats on this board re impeachment. They're not thinking clearly. They want so badly to get off on seeing Bush being humiliated that they're willing to sacrifice the health of the nation.

it is about the damage that has already been done, and how much more damage can be done.
How many people will suffer from his policies, and how soon we can start correcting it.

Certainly Cheney will have to be impeached, too.

Hastert and Co are imploding on their own.

After getting the House back.

Then who is President? Pelosi. For two years, going into 2008. Think she'd get re-elected? No. Now, the Republicans have shaken off the Bush Administration, we have an unpopular Dem in the White House, and after all the hubbub over the impeachment we lose the Presidency once again. Another 8 years of Repuke rule. That, for lack of a better term, would be "bad."

That's even assuming we're able to impeach both of them. It's just short-sighted thinking.

We have to keep building momentum into 2008 to take it all back and reverse what has happened. We can't let this one guy get in our head and make us destroy everything we've got going for us. We can't cash in the chips yet. I'd actually describe this impeachment idea as immature-

On edit: Call it "premature ejaculation."

Disregarding the law and the Constitution is what he's done while holding the highest position in our government, and you would have us do the same because you're not comfortable with who might replace him? What the fuck, man? I think you need to brush up on your civics. It would help you feel better if you understood it more.

The idea is that the *long-term* health of our country is better served by taking the government back in 2008.

If you thought past your dinner, you might realize that impeaching Bush could lead to ten more years of Repuke presidency. That's "bad" for the Constitution.

When has the party who's president was impeached retained the presidency the next election?

It wasn't me. The more you keep guessing incorrectly about my motivations and level of understanding of the topic, however, the less credible anything you have to say is becoming.

I can't stand people like you. You had nothing to say, so you picked out some obvious technical point and harped on it to try to confound the issue and make yourself feel better when you encountered someone who was just smarter than you.

Then, to top it all off, you tried to lie about it later. So you have no integrity, either.

Notice my level of civility with everyone else on the thread. Yes, you tried to shit in my Wheaties. Well, I don't tolerate that shit.

The impeachment process will take many months - many facts will be uncovered and revealed for public scrutiny during the entire process.

If the truth behind this administration is not enough to open the eyes of the citizenry of this country - this country is beyond salvage

Perhaps, I have more confidence in the people. I don't see a presidential election as a cure all, the outcome will be decided upon the result of adhering to the principles of the constitution and by the performance of those we elect and vest our rights to.

Impeachment doesn't preclude our return to power, nor does it necessarily mean bush will leave office. Clinton was impeached and finished his term, remember? Impeachment is simply the presentation of formal charges against a public official by the lower house, trial to be before the upper house. What does impeachment mean to you, and why do you think you are thinking clearly while those who don't agree with you are not?

meaning to remove him from office.

Or is that not what everyone else is pushing for?

"Everyone else on the board" would include me and the other considerable number of people who know what the definition of impeachment is, so you're wrong. I'm sure you aren't the only one who mistook the meaning, but don't assume everyone made the same mistake, either.

Now that that's cleared up, you should now understand that impeachment and removal from office are two separate issues, though they are related. However, you are again wrongly making a sweeping generalization in claiming "everyone else" is pushing for bush's removal from office. I think most of us here would like to see him gone, presumably even you, but we aren't necessarily in agreement as to how and when, which I suppose is what you're on about. I'm guessing you're probably continuing some argument from another thread here as well, not that it really matters.

So, now that we're on the same page as to the definition of impeachment, do you understand what I said and how we absolutely must impeach the bastard?

of "impeachment?" 8th Grade civics- like everyone else did? Pity if you're resting your ego on this...

Everyone knows what it means, my friend. People are just using it loosely on this board- and they ARE- because it's easier to maintain the context of the topic from thread to thread through the term "impeachment" rather than "conviction."

Now, are you going to attempt to address the rather important points I'm raising, or continue your elusive, pathetic attempts at condescension? If you do continue, I'm going to have to assume that you have nothing of value to contribute to the discussion and take corresponding measures.

Get the fucking chip off your shoulder already, pal. I'm not condescending to you, and the only pathetic thing here is your refusal to be rational. Get some therapy and clear up the issues you obviously have and we'll talk again some time.

impeach and remove all of the vile thugs; or we are not and we need to lie down and die.

I would make it "Impeach Bush and Cheney"
One without the other just wouldn't work for me.

I think everybody know what I mean when I suggest this...

We don't want them to be able to shake him off their backs.

Use the Buchanan idea. After the next President is sworn in the new President's first duty will be to read Shrub his Miranda rights...or better yet, declare Shrub an unlawful combatant and have him tried by military tribunal

:evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin:

...with the penalty being that he is parachuted into the middle of Baghdad or maybe Fallujah.

needs to be arrested and brought to justice.

But he does need to be removed from office. It's absolutely critical that he be censured and/or impeached - his actions to seize absolute power, and the corresponding action (or utter inaction) by the Congress is HISTORICAL STUFF - future courts may well look to this as Congress's consent to give the President quasi-dictatorial powers.

The need to censure and/or impeach Bush cannot be emphasized enough. Ladies and gentlemen, this is PRECISELY how Hitler became Germany's dictator: his predecessor started issuing "emergency decrees" that bypassed the legislature - and the legislature was silent. Hitler came to power and started issuing his own emergency decrees - people tried to fight them, but there was now a bad precedent, since the Legislature refused to fight them before, the courts ruled they had given up that right - Hitler won, everyone else lost.

I want him to be an object lesson - a visible reminder of what Republicans are about. Healing will occur via a democratic congress, a democratic president and a bunch of democrat court appointees.

Early retirement is altogether too charitable.

Impeachment talk will get them out to vote

It would set a very bad precedent to let him get away with his many crimes. He should be impeached by the House, thrown out of office by the Senate, then arrested and put on trial.

Cheney too.

as long as dick goes with him to Nuremberg.

People act like impeachment is the be-all and end-all to everything. Hell, Clinton was impeached and he served out his term. If you consider impeachment to be a moral victory, then the Republican's impeachment of Clinton must have been a moral victory also. O.J. was charged, indicted, and tried and since he was not convicted he remains a free man and living a good life. It will be the same with Bush.

It's not like either side is going to be able to pass any meaningful legislation (even if the Democrats manage to sweep the election). I say let the festivities commence!

instill a sense in the American public that law still means something. I'm not being idealistic here, but cynical.

The myth that we have some sort of democracy in this country has taken a heavy beating in recent years, and if they want to keep that myth in place, they would do well to impeach the Bush Administration.

Democrats just took over everything in 2008, because the Repukes ruined everything? Wouldn't that, in fact, be more of a rebuke to the Republicans- from the American *people*?

And, isn't it also better to do it that way, since we could actually fix things?

Laws he continues to break. Everything from NSA domestic spying without a warrant to secret prisons to torture to illegal propaganda, like GOP political ads dressed up as news spots? They've been all over the place. There are almost too many crimes to count.

Until there's some direct action taken in response, the impression remains that law means nothing in this country.

Don't get me wrong- I don't seriously think that law *does* mean anything in this country, unless it's being applied to people with no power whatsoever. It's the illusion I'm talking about- if these people want to maintain their precious illusion they'd do well to impeach the Bush Administration.

arrested after we take everything back. The laws he is breaking are extremely important- but, if we just throw him out now, things will just get worse. The machine will still be in place.

There are too many things to correct ala Pelosi's "list" to get to it soon.

However, accountability hearings most certainly be held to account for profiteering, corruption etc.

And then, and only then, should it be approached if we have a lock solid majority in both houses as well as a huge upswell of the public clamoring for it. If none of those factors are in place, it only pegs the Dems as "divisive" to our detriment in '08.

History will impeach him and judge him to be the worst president ever. May he rot.

There's about a hundred things we need to look into and publicize.

He's like the poster boy for bad Republican governance. For the next two years he needs to be John McCain's albatross. Making him a political martyr won't make him any more ineffective than just letting him stew in his mess. The more time HE spends slamming Democrats as soft on terror, the lamer that accusation is going to sound in the mouth of any neocon candidate.

Too many spineless people want to let him off the hook.
He should at least be treated worse than Clinton though to be fair.
:dem:

of the oath that all of Congress takes it is actually their legal obligation to initiate an enquiry if they believe the President has violated the Constitution. Whether it is wise political strategy or not is beside the point it is their sworn duty. If they do not uphold their sworn duty then they too can be held up for charges. Of course none of this will happen as it seems the DC snakepit just wants to play politics with our once-Constitution.

I'm saying that we owe it to our country to wait until we can actually change things to "blow our load."

pre-2004 election. He's my favorite Dem but I not only disagreed with his point but saw it as beyond anything I or He would have contention about it was simply and clearly written as part of his, and all others, obligation under the Constitution to begin the enquiry process. In fact he admitted that Bush committed what he saw as impeachable offenses but it would be bad political tactics. There's a real disconnect there. Well anyway it's irrelevant as it seems not even Conyers is willing to tread this path.

Damn I miss Paul Wellstone.

They are the party of greed, corruption and hypocrisy. In this day and age we do not need a party that takes hush money from child predators to have any role in U.S. government. They do not commit to any idea they pretend to espouse.

Yes, the damage done will take decades to repair ... but I believe, in order for us to learn, move forward, and protect against future incursions we, the American people, have to know the whole sorry truth. Unless what has taken place these last 6 years is thoroughly examined, documented, and made public ... there will always be a part of the population that will be able to cling to the lies, and deny the facts.


We have learned just how vulnerable our country and Constitution truly are if not jealously guarded ... and how easily the population can be manipulated and lulled into a semi-conscious stupor by powers that can shape events and wield the MSM. These powers might be vanquished, but they will not be dead. They will lie in the shadows licking their wounds, feasting on their festering resentments and flesh-eating hatreds, plotting, planning and preparing for that day when they can return costumned as something attractive and benevolent.

...for dtaking care of some other business first. Impeachment hearings soak up huge amounts of time, so if there are important things to get through in Pelosi's "first 100 days" even though I would really really really like to see our national disgrace removed from office, I can wait.

It isn't like he's going to get anymore popular over time.

us sink to their level.

that Chimpy's behavior is unacceptable. After the 2000 selection, the world view was that Americans had screwed up and would rectify it in '04. When that didn't happen, what else could they believe except that Americans were idiots? If he is able to serve his term under impeachment, that's even better. It makes the implosion even more enjoyable.

and necessary to restore faith in our judicial system.

make the bastard pay for his crimes against humanity, and not just him Cheney, Rumsfeld & Rice, too- the country will recover sooner with them in prison.

but I seem to recall that the law withdrawing from the International Court of Justice authorizes the use of military force to recover US officials who might be jailed in the Hague. This means the US would invade Belgium.

about President Cheney, who could then "elect" himself 2 more times.

Look who's next in line!!

That's the most important thing. A conviction in the senate is least important. We have to get the information out to the people.

--IMM

Cheney would be next in line. He's worse.

Pelosi is dead wrong. Impeachment isn't a political choice (regardless of its abuse by the Repugs), nor is it a matter of "finding time" to do it. If serious crimes are suspected then Congress is COMPELLED to investigate, under the articles of impeachment.

If the people representing us in government would grow the fuck up we wouldn't have the sham of a democracy we do now.

n/t

Are you talking about the Repugs using the threat of impeachment to rally their base? Yeah right, that'll work. The 33% who still support Bush** aren't going to win the Repugs any elections that aren't in the bag already. And that shouldn't stop the Dems from doing the right thing when they get the chance in any case.

I'll say it again: impeachment is not a political choice; it's a duty. I've had it with the Dems never ever standing on principle, and the excuse that it would hurt them politically if they did. Not washing with me anymore. They've hurt themselves worse by NOT standing up and opposing BushCo over the last five years.

The worst thing about impeaching Bush is that it gives the Repukes a clean slate. They get to blame everything on Bush or his administration, and then leave it all behind once he's gone. Further, if Cheney takes over, he could be re-elected for two more terms, or appoint a VP and then resign, who could be re-elected for two more terms.

Even if we impeach both Bush and Cheney, and (assuming our Speaker will be Pelosi) Pelosi gets the White House, she'll never get re-elected. So we lose the WH for another 4 to 8 years, probably 8. We'll never be able to actually fix what's wrong with the country.

Keep in mind that, in 2009, once Al Gore gets the WH back, we could still bring BushCo to justice.

In essence, the idea is sacrificing the long-term health of our country for short-term satisfaction.

My view is that putting political strategy before ethics and the Rule of Law is exactly what's got us into this horrific situation in the first place. Over and over the Dems have taken the politically expedient path of standing on the sidelines instead of going on the offensive, and in so doing have sacrificed not only their credibility as an opposition party but this country in the bargain.

What you're telling me is to expect two more years of the same from the Dems because they aren't willing to risk '08 by standing for what's right. Never mind that the strategy of silence and inaction hasn't helped the Dems' popularity a jot over the last several years. They've gained in appeal largely by default, only because the Repugs have screwed up so badly.

There are ways and ways around the line of succession problem that would put Pelosi in the unsatisfactory position of having to run in '08 if Bush**/Cheney were impeached. For example, in deference to the idea that a Democrat wouldn't have the public mandate to assume power from a Republican presidency, she could stand down after Congress appointed a Repug to replace her as acting president. Or impeach Cheney first and let Dimson appoint a new VP.

Finally, I wouldn't call waiting four years to bring known criminals to trial "short-term satisfaction". I'd call it long overdue justice.

If there is no impeachment if majority is achieved = my last election cycle as a democrat.

screw the founding fathers.

Take actions that WILL ACTUALLY save our country AND its Constitution. FOCUS.

he stays in office despite crimes against the constitution. Explain it where it can make sense.

all the politicians we will not stand for the kind of BS this admin. has pulled! I understand all the feelings of get the Country together, but the signing statements, ignoring the FISA law, and all but rewriting the Geneva Treaty is beyond the pale!

I was a happy person 10 years ago, whenmost of the World Countriesloved the USA...NOW they all hate us!

There are CONSEQUENCES, Mr. Shrub!!!!!!!!!

Whether or not it would accomplish much is another question, particularly with Cheney waiting in the wings.

It's just that simple.

We choose complicity or defiance.

These things have been done in OUR names. We bear the responsibility to adress them with honesty and impose full accountability.

The Redemption of Our National Soul is at stake. In the face of the world, our forefathers, and our children.

Who is really willing to say they would do less than they could have?

I'm not.

---

thousands of Americans in the WTC and in Iraq... and negligent homicide of New Orleanians, some of whom were my friends... and all the animals that died in the aquarium, zoo, and region! :mad:

:grr:

George Bush is the reason impeachment exists.