Thump Thump Thump...the drums of impeachment are beating

Email Print posted by Andrew Koenig 07/14/2008 02:03:40 PM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
If you like this story, digg it!

This is an email I receieved from ImpeachBush.org

 

 

http://www.impeachbush.org/ site/R?i=BSJCj8libb1Pwbkaej vhLA..

Congress to Vote on New Impeachment Resolution -- Take Action

Congratulations to the tens of thousands of people who have been forcing Congress to take up the impeachment issue. The situation is rapidly changing mainly because of pressure from this nation-wide grassroots movement. There is not a second to lose.

Please continue to show your support with an urgently needed donation. This movement is taking off because of the self-sacrifice of individuals. Please donate today by clicking here.

Breaking News. This from the desk of Florida Congressman Robert Wexler, one of the co-sponsors of the 35 articles of impeachment introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich:

“Capitol Hill is buzzing today with major developments regarding our campaign for impeachment hearings for President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Just today, in what could be described as a perfect impeachment storm:

"After stating unequivocally that impeachment "is off the table," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated to CBS News today that the House Judiciary Committee should address the issues that Rep. Kucinich's has raised in his impeachment resolution.... This issue now reaches far beyond the substance of the Judiciary Committee's original inquiry regarding the firing of US Attorneys for political purposes. The crisis at hand relates to our most fundamental laws and of our Constitution. It is, in many ways, more serious than the Constitutional crisis surrounding Watergate."

Nancy Pelosi’s comments reflect the growing pressure of impeachment supporters on all elected officials and the heat from Cindy Sheehan’s courageous campaign to unseat her in the coming November elections. Cindy has made the impeachment of Bush, and Pelosi’s previous refusal to allow impeachment to proceed, a centerpiece of her campaign.

Send an email today to support new impeachment resolution

Congress may vote by Tuesday, July 15, on another impeachment resolution offered by Rep. Dennis Kucinich on July 10, 2008. This is a separate resolution from the 35-Articles of Impeachment that was introduced on June 9, 2008.

The new resolution is a single article of impeachment that accuses Bush of lying to Congress about Iraq’s so-called Weapons of Mass Destruction in order to obtain Congressional Authorization for the use of military force against Iraq. Congress passed the authorization in October 2002 and Bush then used it to launch an unprovoked war of aggression and subsequent occupation of Iraq.

You can read the new impeachment resolution by clicking this link.

Take a moment today to let your member of Congress know that you want them to support this impeachment resolution. It is easy and only takes a few seconds of your time by using the mechanism that ImpeachBush.org has created. Click here to send a letter.

Again, we can’t carry out all this work without your generous donation. Please click here to make a contribution.

< Miss USA falls AGAIN | THE YOUNG TURKS ANNOUNCE NEW HOME ON XM SATELLITE RADIO >

Poll

Once they are impeached, how should Cheney and Bush be treated
Life in prison 50%
Death by hanging 6%
Death by firing squad 6%
Death by waterboarding 12%
Drop them into the middle of Sadr City without any weapons 18%
Slow roasted over an open fire (barbeque!) 6%
Tarred and Feather and sent walking down Pennsylvania Avenue 12%
Have all their money taken away and forced to live in the 9th ward of New Orleans 37%
Forced to marry in California and then dropped into Tehran 18%
New Reality show where every night for 12 weeks, crowds gather to point and laugh at them. 18%

Votes: 16
Results | Other Polls
 Display:
Thump Thump Thump...the drums of impeachment are beating | 33 comments (33 topical, 0 hidden)
love the quiz (none / 0)
but I'm having trouble voting. Its like a box of chocolates.

by hazmat on 07/14/2008 03:09:40 PM EST

This isnt going anywhere... (none / 0)
You guys can get your panties wet all you want with the idea of Bush and Cheney getting impeached and imprisoned, but this should have happened 2 years ago when the Dems took over, not 6 months before he leaves... Are we to set a precident here that every outgoing President should be subject to last minute impeachment just because we don't happen to like them? What happens when Obama leaves office in 2012? Repubs gonna start hearings then? This is a dangerous (and stupid) road you're following... We are not in Latin America you know!!!

by bobo1 on 07/14/2008 03:14:33 PM EST

Hi there straw man. (none / 0)

"Are we to set a precident here that every outgoing President should be subject to last minute impeachment just because we don't happen to like them?" [sic]

Wait, so you're saying that's not a good reason to impeach?  Interesting...

by Spencer on 07/14/2008 03:25:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Im saying.. (none / 0)
That Pelosi should have done this in January 2007. Now it is useless (very much like Clintons impeachment, even though their timing was a Hell of a lot better!)

by bobo1 on 07/14/2008 06:52:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Wrong again (none / 0)
Newflash for you Bobo, a resolution to send the articles of impeachment to the House Judicary Comittee has just passed in the House. With Conyers in charge, those articles will be up for a FULL house vote within 2 weeks.

by mijoh on 07/15/2008 07:14:39 PM EST

[ Parent ]
To what avail?... (none / 0)
Do you think the blue dogs from the south are gonna want to explain to their pissed constituents why they are screwing with this now, bringing it into question when Obama should be having his spotlight? Tisk Tisk, Mijoh - you know this doesn't go ANYWHERE!!! The dems are chicken shits.... :)

by bobo1 on 07/15/2008 07:17:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Setting a dangerous precedent (none / 0)
would be allowing a president to flout the constitution and never hold him/her accountable. Don't assume that impeachment = removal from office. Impeachment and conviction can happen after a public official has left office. It doesn't necessary have to be a political tool that hacks use to bring down their opponents, although I understand your confusion in the wake of the 90s. If Bush is convicted of the various crimes of which he has been accused, let's look at what they are and decide what punishment is appropriate. You are for upholding the law, aren't you?

by hazmat on 07/14/2008 03:30:03 PM EST

this was intended as reply to bobo (none / 0)

by hazmat on 07/14/2008 03:32:43 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Yes Hazmat... (none / 0)
I believe he should be held accountable, but it should have been done when they knew 3 years ago, not 6 months before he's gone - They are not going to punish this administration even after they leave - that precident has already been set, hazmat, and it is sickening. Cheney is too powerful to be held accountable - that's why he's scary! :)

by bobo1 on 07/14/2008 06:57:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Liberal dreamers (none / 0)
There are a little over 100 days until the election. And you guys think there will be an impeachment?

Says who? Dennis Kucinich?

Here's a news flash for you:
DEMOCRATS JUST VOTED TO SUCK GEORGE BUSH'S DICK ON FISA!!!

Give me a fucking break.

by KenTX on 07/14/2008 07:02:58 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Amen Brother... (none / 0)
:)

by bobo1 on 07/14/2008 07:24:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]
is it better to suck (none / 0)

figurative dick, or actual dick? Ken would rather suck actual dick. Ask his dick-sucking friends.

 

 

 

notice how I used the word "dick" instead of "cock" in the interest of keeping the discussion civil.

by hazmat on 07/14/2008 08:35:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
precedent has been set? (none / 0)
Really? I didn't know the statute of limitations was up. Can you source it?

by hazmat on 07/15/2008 08:11:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Dont be stupid, hazmat... (none / 0)
When Pelosi took over as speaker, she had the votes and political opportunity to nail Bush/Cheney - the precedent was set when the Democrats let them walk scott free in January 2007 - at that point, they lost all credibility and support for impeachment... Going after them after they leave office is just stupid and beyond the point of setting a good precendent for future presidents actions... :)

by bobo1 on 07/15/2008 08:29:39 PM EST

[ Parent ]
can someone (none / 0)
who understands my question answer it please?

by hazmat on 07/15/2008 09:04:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
let me help you (none / 0)
the senate and house of representatives is full of lawyers. If the statute of limitations was passed on the laws that the Bush administration is alleged to have broken, then we wouldn't be having the conversation. I ask once again. Are you for upholding the law and the constitution, or against?

by hazmat on 07/15/2008 09:10:28 PM EST

[ Parent ]
hazmat... (none / 0)
Nobody gives a shit about the rule of law in this congress - nobody is going to go after Bush whether or not we think they should or not - precedent and statute of limitations be damned! What don't YOU understand about THAT?

by bobo1 on 07/15/2008 10:04:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
nothing that i've said here (none / 0)

suggests that I don't understand that. This isn't what we're discussing though. Someone in congress, namely the speaker, has maybe grown a pair. You believe that she should drop it, because in your view, it would create a bad perception, and that it would set a bad "precedent".

A) the precedent was already set (see Gingrich Newt, under political hackery) as others have pointed out in this thread including me. The perception that Clinton was being persecuted was very strong in the public mind, but that didn't stop anybody, and it didn't prevent republicans from winning elections again just 2 short years afterward.

B) If serious crimes have been committed they *should* be prosecuted regardless of whether somebody in congress--or you--gives a shit. Read that sentence carefully. Go on, tell me why this isn't true. I'm waiting.

by hazmat on 07/15/2008 10:15:43 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I hate explaining things to children... (none / 0)
Maybe I'm in the wrong profession? Anyway - here it is ONE MORE TIME - Pelosi is not going to pursue this impeachment actively - it will derail the entire election and at 9 percent, they don't have the backing (or balls) to do it! The difference in the Clinton Impeachment of 1998 is that the Republicans HAD BALLS and control, so they ran with it 2 years before the election... And then they won in 2000! Now as to the debate on whether they SHOULD prosecute the Bush Crime Family (thanks Malloy) is a horse of an entirely different color. Can they? YES. Will they? NO Should they? - probably, but it continues a dangerous precedent (as it did with Clinton in 1998) that if the opposition doenst like you and believes you're a crook (whether they are or not) they will use the threat of late term impeachment to destroy them - That's 3rd world shit (but in the 3rd world they don't fuck around, they just shoot who they don't like) and I don't want to see America stoop to that level. Hasn't Bush brought us down enough? Thanks...

by bobo1 on 07/15/2008 11:33:58 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Lame (none / 0)

I don't see how you got into an argument with me over whether Pelosi will hold impeachement hearings. I am on record countless times on these boards for my pessimism regarding democratic leadership. In fact its fair to say most listener's of TYT probably fall in that category. So why do you keep patting yourself on the head for stating the obvious?

And your last point is simply obnoxious. You think we shouldn't prosecute Bush because... (drum roll) "Hasn't he already brought us down enough?"

WTF??

Upholding the constitution is not equivalent to base partisanship. Notice how I have avoided calling you stupid or a child anywhere in this thread. Instead I used unassailable logic and hard facts to deliver your beating.

by hazmat on 07/15/2008 11:53:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Peace be onto you my child... (none / 0)
"Notice how I have avoided calling you stupid or a child anywhere in this thread. Instead I used unassailable logic and hard facts to deliver your beating."

 As I told someone else in an earlier thread this week...

"Pride cometh before the fall..."

Its gonna be so fun to watch you guys cry.... Even if Obama wins, its gonna be fun when you realize what you have done...

:)

by bobo1 on 07/16/2008 12:50:15 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Sick idea of fun (none / 0)

Listen to yourself.  None of those here that you predict will "cry" are going to say, "Damn, we should have voted for McCain."  There can't be any regret when there was no other alternative...so why would any of us have anything to cry about?  You'll still be waiting for your stupid predictions to come true when you're 80 years old and by then, everyone will brush you off as senile.

Oh, unless you mean that we'll all be saying, "Damn, we should have joined Bobo's imaginary revolution."

by OneHitKill on 07/16/2008 02:11:59 AM EST

[ Parent ]
OK Andrew (none / 0)

For what it's worth, I just sent an email to my Rep - Henry Waxman (same as Cenk)... and I'm guessing it's worth "zero".  But there you go.  Don't say I'm so cynical that I don't back up my beliefs with action.

 

 

It's another day in paradise...

by happyhominid on 07/14/2008 04:33:46 PM EST

NO NEWS IS BAD NEWS (none / 0)

I just googled "impeachment hearings", looking in "news" and limited it to the past 24 hours.

Andrew's post here was the 2nd story.  I'm guessing this isn't so big. 

It's another day in paradise...

by happyhominid on 07/14/2008 09:20:27 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Vote (none / 0)
Good on you Happy! Now you have the right to complain if it doesn't happen!

by Andrew Koenig on 07/16/2008 12:15:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Congratulations Andrew! (none / 1)
This thread has been forwarded to the Secret Service.

You might expect a knock at your door at any moment.

Thanks for using your real name.

I'm going to start a new poll, so we can vote on what your punishment should be.

by KenTX on 07/14/2008 05:29:12 PM EST

Now then (none / 0)
Don't be a little cunt.

by bfaul on 07/14/2008 08:28:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Honorary Secret Service Agent and Lollipop Taster (none / 0)

I can explain:

Did you ever see that episode of The Office where Toby tells Dwight that there's a "special file" at the corporate office for all his complaints about Jim?

A couple years ago a real Secret Sevice agent, annoyed with Ken's constant attempts to help them with "tips" about internet message board users who could be considered threats to national security, fed Ken a dummy email address and told him that it was a super-secret internet security information hotline.  He told Ken, "This is SO secret, you can never talk to the Secret Service again, unless it's through this email address."  Then he gave Ken a gold plastic badge and sent him skipping merrily away, completely unaware that he had had just been brushed off like an exasperating child.

by OneHitKill on 07/14/2008 09:42:35 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Exactly! (none / 0)

Ohhh Ke-ennnnnn,

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

by BENS MISSING GOATEE on 07/16/2008 10:01:30 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Jesus Christ KenTX! (none / 0)

You're funny!
(and a little cunt)

Ha ha

by BENS MISSING GOATEE on 07/16/2008 10:06:23 AM EST

[ Parent ]
110 Days Until The Election! (none / 0)
How's that impeachment thing working out for you?

Fools.

by KenTX on 07/17/2008 01:55:01 AM EST

American History (none / 0)
Impeached
impeached

Not Impeached
still champ

Any questions?

by KenTX on 07/17/2008 02:01:59 AM EST

Any questions? (none / 0)
No.
But here's an order -

SUCK MY DICK!

ha ha

by BENS MISSING GOATEE on 07/17/2008 08:59:14 AM EST

Thump Thump Thump...the drums of impeachment are beating | 33 comments (33 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: