Will Libby's Pardon Be Enough For You To Demand Impeachment

Will Libby's Pardon be the straw that broke the camel's back for you? Will it be enough for you get go into the streets and demand impeachment, will it make you call your Congress person and your Senators to demand impeachment of the head of this lawless Administration?

If its not what will it take for you, does the son of a bitch have to eat a live baby on TV?

so I guess you aren't asking me. ;-)

We're an outlaw nation unless and until we rightfully prosecute and imprison those who've committed war crimes and crimes against our Constitution. Our nation has no honor nor courage as long as "impeachment is off the table."

I say we put all the evidence on the table for all to see and if we can't get a conviction then so be it. to me that would go a long way toward closure for us all. I really believe that there are many more of us wanting impeachment as there are who don't, whether we get a conviction or not at least make an effort to stop these treasonous bastards.

It's the height of cowardice and dishonor to not even take the first steps. Even Aesop's fox had more integrity before complaining about "sour grapes"! It's despicable.

for years. I have sent several emails to Whitehouse.gov and letters to the White House asking the stupid son of a bitch to resign because he is incompetent and endangering Americans with his actions. :dem:

Bush and Cheney have each done a bizzillion things worthy of impeachment. A pardon, however, would not be one of them. The Constitution that I like to pretend still exists gives exclusive power to the "president" for pardons. I cannot be a "high crime or misdemeanor."

What we need to remember is that impeachment does not equal justice. It is only a process for removal from office. It takes a long time and is irrelevant to any eventual prosecution.

Dems have not done enough to where anybody cares. It's another slam-dunk issue which has been ignored by the politicos.

Bush's presidency is over anyway, he's not up for re-election. Wouldn't the time and energy be better spent elsewhere?

I still fail to see the point. I do not think there is enough time between now and Jan 20th, 2009 to adequately and successfully conduct Impeachment hearings for Both the President and Vice President and even if there was, Pelosi is polling low and would not be an acceptable replacement, among the public or the house. Besides, Successful impeachment would require a LOT of time and energy of Senate and Representatives up for reelection.

Lets not forget the fact, that, as mentioned earlier, for it to be successful, both Bush and Cheney would have to be booted, so Pelosi could step in. Riddle me this, Batman, How do you think Hillary will take it if it looks like Pelosi will become the first Female President in the US history?

The difference is that there is no Washington Post or CIA anymore to do the final takedown. There's a lot of quiet pushback, but the Establishment is either so neutered or compromised by the events of the past six years that no institution has the power or will to take on the President directly.

If Congress finally does take the risk of an all-out confrontation with the Administration, it will be because they judge that Bush and Cheney can be brought down. It has nothing to do with Nancy or Hillary's poll numbers.

A pardon of Scooter would make some very powerful people very angry at Shrub, however, so I wouldn't entirely rule out Impeachment.

Re-election is paramount for everyone in the house. That is what will drive their actions, not standards. Sorry But I believe that no member of the house or senate will risk reelection for this issue. Sadly, it seemms no one is up to the task of doing what is right, over what benefits them or their constituents (read: votes) directly.

The GOP didn't pay a price for going after Clinton in the 2000, 2002, or 2004 elections and that was far more of a pure political vendetta. The cost of NOT Impeaching now, it seems, would be greater -- particularly in terms of demobilizing the Democratic base -- than any supposed lashback among swing-voters.

democracy is dead. Nothing is more important than impeachment.

Pelosi and Clinton have nothing to do with anything.

Bushco loves to recycle their criminals.

haven't you?

You know the one we pretend still is working in this country

(The Constitution is dead, the Republic is dead and a pardon is the least of the reasons to wish to remand this guy to the World Court, but that is a matter for a whole different discussion)

A pardon of Libby would be a finger jabbed in the eye of a complacent, "please don't beat me into hitting back" Congress. Bush won't pardon him until after the '08 elections - a presidential pardon in this case would get a lot of very powerful people pissed off, because it will prove that Law and Order is just a television show in America.

Scooter's going to jail, for a while. Bush will let cool his heels in stir for a while.

Assuming there is no judicial intervention, Libby likely would have to begin serving his sometime in early August. My prediction is that if the courts don't delay things, that he ends up serving 3 months or so --- from early august to early november, at which point chimpy commutes the sentence in the spirit of the thanksgiving/holiday season. Congress will be in recess, the public's attention will be elsewhere and the fact that he served time at all will deaden the outrage that would occur otherwise.

The problems of getting out of Iraq have prevented that issue -- the mandate the 110th had coming in -- from being acted upon effectively.

Impeachment is first and foremost a political process in the House, the legal issues have be tussled out during the Senate trial. Even if 17 GOP Senators don't vote to convict, it puts them in the unciomfortable position of having to justify the crimes committed by BushCo.

nor does it change the reasons to not impeach: not enough votes to remove from office.

You hit the nail on the head. The real question is, why aren't there enough votes? will every single Dem representative vote in favor of it or will there be hold outs. If there will be hold outs, you have to ask why. I bet anything it boils down to the hold-outs thinking of their careers over what is right or wrong.

Every GOP Congressman has to justify why he or she excused Bush and Cheney's many crimes. That will be a very odious process for them.

in your support for attempted impeachment.

My answer: It makes no change.

It strengthens the chance that Congress and American people will actually go ahead and pull the trigger and Impeach this mob.

Most of us don't need any further incentive, but others do. I think a Libby pardon would be a tipping point.

reasons that I do not support an attempted impeachment.

Surely, you are convinced that Bush and Cheney have committed high crimes and misdemeanors? Or, maybe you aren't?

more than it helps.

I too prefer removal, but doing nothing is worst. Besides, there's zero chance of removal if House doesn't impeach first.

debating that one more time. I'm simply answering the question that was put forth, and my answer is that a Libby pardon makes no difference to my reasons for my position.

and even as cover for being able to STEAL the election in 2000.

They made it PLAUSIBLE for Bush to be seen as the winner even as they cooked the votecount.

They knew they wouldn't have the votes in the senate to remove Clinton, but they went ahead anyway.

Democrats have been following Clinton's lead and letting the Bushes get away with their crimes of office for so long, they have FORGOTTEN that it was investigations of Poppy Bush that allowed Clinton to win in 1992 in the first place.

Now, Democrats undermine and attack their own truthseekers in an effort to play go-along, get-along with the BFEE.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

Regardless of everything else Bush has done, pardoning of Libby isn't a high crime or misdemeanor.

There are plenty of crimes to charge that mob with.

Why. A pardon can make a good election issue. But it doesn't really change the equation in Congress when it comes to impeachment unless you think that repubs are going to start jumping ship and asking for an impeachment inquiry, which seems unlikely since most repubs seem to be urging pardon.

Think about it. It gives the Dems a chance to lay out the whole case. The public hates Bush and Cheney now. They'll become radioactive. Those GOP Congresscritters who try to defend the Administration would die of radiation poisoning.

It's no where close to an impeachable offense. If Congress truly wants to impeach, they should be able to find many other reasons, not just the pardon.

the process of Impeachment going and to frame issues of Administration lawlessness.

Treason, high crimes and misdemeanors - as laid out by the Constitution. Before Clinton could be impeached they had to prove the lying under oath falls under high crimes and misdemeanors. Pardoning, which is a right to all Presidents, wouldn't fall under it.

Congress has much to investigate, but no matter how you spin it a basic pardoning of Libby wouldn't fall under impeachable offenses.

Edited: grammer

As I've said, there are many criminal grounds for Congress to formally Indict Cheney and Bush, as the Libby trial provided a number of them. Particularly for Cheney. who should be impeached first.

In your head, try to encompass that there are two aspects to impeachment: the political will to impeach, and the legal grounds to convict. Both are necessary. Neither, alone, is sufficient.

The disincentive to starting impeachment now is that the process would be totally partisan -- repubs would stand behind chimpy, notwithstanding his abysmal approval ratings. I don't think granting a pardon to libby is going to appreciably change those numbers. Those who have supported chimpy through thick and thin want him to pardon libby and, in fact, he will lose more support not pardoning him. So where is the incentive?

forces GOP to defend crimes; 4) further brands GOP as party of corruption.

How many more reasons do you need?

That's why Shrub will likely wait until after the Nov '08 elections to do it. If, he's still President.

but it could make a difference in the elections. But in order to appease his base, while minimizing the electoral damage to repubs, I'm guessing that he lets Libby serve 3 months or so and then commutes the sentence right before the holidays this winter.

They have enough problems without having to defend Bush, Scooter, and Bush pardoning Scooter.

I don't think so.

... and expresses support for it.

Senate eventually votes to convict.

Would you want to be a Republican Congressmen defending the lies told by Bush and Cheney to get us into the Iraq War? Of course not.

an impeachment process that has is begun as a partisan effort will inevitably draw the repubs together, not drive a wedge. THey will do their best -- and experience tells us that they are very good at this -- at using the issue to rally their base and to demonize the Democrats for starting a partisan impeachment process. THere are statements by folks such as Wellstone and Feingold made during the Clinton impeachment process that they will use with great success, i fear, to bludgeon us. Do not underestimate their ability to change the subject.

Look at the most recent historical example. The GOP came back with bigger majorities until '06.

The failure to convict Clinton did not wound them. It succeeded at further crippling Bill as a lame duck in his second term.

Sorry that the facts are inconvenient for your argument, but the reality is that in 1998 (after the impeachment effort against Clinton began, but before the articles were voted), the repubs lost 6 seats in the House and failed to pick up anything in the Senate -- the first time in over 150 years that the non-presidential party had failed to pick up ground in the sixth year of an opposition presidency.

In 2000, after the impeachment process was over and done, the repubs lost 4 seats in the Senate and two more in the House (and they lost the popular vote for the presidency and, but for the scotus, would've lost the electoral college vote as well).

In 2002 and 2004, the repubs picked back up Senate seats and house seats getting that "bigger majority" you refer to -- but those gains were attributable to the public's reaction to 9/11 not to the clinton impeachment effort.

Put another way, the "historical" record shows that the GOP did not come back with bigger majorities as a result of the clinton impeachment effort. To the contrary, they lost ground which they only made up after 9/11.

approval rating was thirty points higher than Shrub's at the time. Also, the grounds for Impeachment were of the personal variety that didn't play well outside of the "values voters" that are Bush's hardcore 30 percent.

I'd say an effort to Impeach Bush in the coming months, even one that doesn't result in removal, won't cost the Dems net votes, given the very different circumstances. A pardon remains an ideal trigger, if it doesn't come too late in Bush's term.

This subject needs to be thoroughly thrashed out. Thanks.

There are other reasons. I can't imagine pardoning being impeachable - like it or not the constitution gives the President the unlimited right to pardon.

It's not the underlying charge. Impeachment is a political AND legal process.

A president exercising a power given him by the constitution would cause a few outraged editorials, a lot of bitching and moaning here, but would do nothing to engender impeachment.

But, Congress needs convincing that we feel that way.

Libby's pardon is going to be a joke when it happens.

They need to know that there's support for impeachment regardless of whether 16 GOP Senators do the right thing.

We need to do the right thing. Our Democratic representatives need to do the right thing.

Impeach!

Like I said, I'm done "encouraging" them. They do not listen to common-folk like us. We don't own any multi-national corporations.

indicted, that they wouldn't pardon Libby.

Where did I get this from? A hunch.

and no one can stop them...Alberto, Cheney & Rove will make sure of that....Surely not some lowly pinhead prosecutor who wants out and wants it all over with.

on through till Jan 20, 2009 and if he chooses longer as your dictator (documents have already been signed in case Bush sees anything he chooses as a national emergency) and for as long as he wants, or until Jeb takes over as head (i.e., President of the US) of the fascist corporate family crime business.

You give way too much significance to "calling" ones congressperson...Shit people have been demanding impeachment on worst issues than Libby being pardoned...How about the NSA spying, torture, lies about WMD, treason of Valerie Plame...none of that is enough to get congress to impeach...so what make you think Libby gonna do it? Get real dude the Dems have no power...Bush has it all, gets everything he wants and just cruises and laughs at the silly powerless Democrats!!!

And when Congress continues to refuse to impeach for torture, criminal spying, abusing signing statements to nullify our laws, blatant corruption of the justice department to steal elections, terrorizing us into war with threats of "mushroom clouds," on and on, it's hard to imagine ANYTHING that would be "the last straw."

When they are tolerating about 50 intolerable things, what could possibly "do it"?

What do the people who keep telling us "the investigations will lead to impeachment" imagine an investigation could uncover that would be worse then the crimes bush and cheney are committing in plain sight?

Inquiring minds want to know.