Should our criminal in chief be impeached?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

The poster that had assumed Cheney would become President if Bush got impeached clearly had a misunderstanding of how the system works.

so what exactly is the misunderstanding? Baring any changes in facts, Chaney would in fact take the realm. There's no reason to presume that he would resign.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

The poster that had assumed Cheney would become President if Bush got impeached clearly had a misunderstanding of how the system works.

so what exactly is the misunderstanding? Baring any changes in facts, Chaney would in fact take the realm. There's no reason to presume that he would resign.

The misunderstanding is that you and the first person I was responding to do not appear to understand what the term impeachment means.

Specifially, it does not mean that the person impeached is automatically removed from office. So, in this case, President Bush could be impeached, remain in office and therefore Cheney would never sit behind the desk of the Oval Office.

Maybe reading this will help;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment

In fact, even with the current Democrat controlled Congress, I seriously doubt there are the votes required to actually remove President Bush. Impeachment then becomes an offical renunciation of his position but with no actual significance other than a footnote in history books.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,089]

>Specifially, it does not mean that the person impeached is automatically removed from office.

Well, a person who is _successfully_ impeached is indeed removed from office. The impeachment itself is the beginning of the process, equivalent to an indictment in criminal law.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Some House Reps are considering it, should he be impeached? A recent AOL poll just showed that 62% said yes he sould if he keeps the Iraq idiocy going.

That is not an impeachable offense.

Find some evidence that shows he committed a CRIME, not "I don't like what he did". Then sure, try to impeach him.

[quade 4]

I often sit at home, late at night and ponder, why we have a five pointed star on our flag, but only require 60%.

Why not 62?

I'll let you ponder that while you count how many Democrat and how many Republican Senators there are.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

The misunderstanding is that you and the first person I was responding to do not appear to understand what the term impeachment means.

Specifially, it does not mean that the person impeached is automatically removed from office. So, in this case, President Bush could be impeached, remain in office and therefore Cheney would never sit behind the desk of the Oval Office.

There was no confusion with me. Nor did I miss your point. However, seeing how I offered a strategical reason why Bush should not be impeached, and that impeachment proceedings are not typically brought forth with intent to fail, your response was not really applicable.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[miked10270 0]

Quote

On what charge?...

Exactly. Being a self-centered incompetent is not in itself an impeachable offence. If it were, then personal survival rather than impeaching the President would the first thing on the mind of the average American politician!

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[tbrown 26]

It's a waste of time to talk about it because the votes at a Senate trial will be along party lines and the Dems don't have the votes to convict - a 2/3 majority is required. Both Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were saved by the 2/3 rule, as the majority voted against both presidents.

Besides saying that 'til I'm blue in the face, I'm also of the opinion that impeachment SHOULD BE a dire step to take against a President who's clearly out of control. Which could arguably be our Boy George.... Nevertheless, the only two times a Pres has been impeached, were both abuses of the process in my opnion (and both the work of radical Republican Congresses against Demo Presidents who they hated, historic fact). Johnson was impeached for firing his Sec'y of War Edwin Stanton, and Bubba Bill of course for lying under oath about a couple blowjobs that were really nobody's damn business.

So instead of fanning the flames of impeachment every time some President or another pisses us off, maybe we should just THINK a lot more carefully about the ones we elect. As well as our reasons for running off to war, which is always easier to start than to finish.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[Royd 0]

This thread is just proof that liberals aren't about peace, love and tolerance. I sense nothing but hate.

We see the same childishness in Congress.

[billvon 3,089]

> This thread is just proof that liberals aren't about peace, love
>and tolerance. I sense nothing but hate.

Read more carefully. Most of the liberals in this thread do NOT want Bush impeached. Compare that to the number of conservatives who were 100% behind Clinton's impeachment, and you'll get a good sense of where the hate is coming from.

[TrophyHusband 0]

sure, lets impeach him. that will be great for our country. i just love how for the last few years, the dems have been doing everything they can to embarrass the administration and make our pesident look bad. if bush is as bad as the dems say, they wouldn't need to waste so much energy pointing it out, it would be obvious and they could spend their time doing something constructive. also, if there were the slightest shed of evidence that bush lied, it would be on the front page of the new york times daily. in the interest of fairness, they same thing may have been going on during the clinton administration, i don't know, all i remember is that he lied about something he never should have been asked about and our pesident was embarrassed in front of the world. this trend is not good for us.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[Lucky... 0]

I'll answer these posts later, as I'm slammed tonight, even tho some don't deserve answering. And yes, to assume I don't know what a political impeachment is, is, well, condescending.

As for what we can impeach the Republiscum for: Usurpation of power, just as the first scumbag Repug. If he thumbs his nose at Congress enough and overrides their vote, they can impeach. Do I know that they will never get removal? Of course they won't with a supermajority required. Will they get the impeachment (political indictment)? Easily, even with some Repub crossover.

Someone said that Clinton was saved by the supermajority rule to remove, yet Clinton had a 55/45 vote against removal on one charge and a 50/50 vote on the other, and we know the VP plays tie breaker, so no, the SM rule didn't save Clinton.

As for Johnson, I don; know the structure of Congress back then so I can't attest.

[willard 0]

Quote

And yes, to assume I don't know what a political impeachment is, is, well, condescending.

Constant use of degrading terms in reference to a certain political party and President most likely is what leads to people assuming someone doesn't understand the political process.

Quote

If he thumbs his nose at Congress enough and overrides their vote, they can impeach.

Wrong. To veto any or all bills put before him is well within the powers of the President. If congress wants and has the votes they can then override a veto.

[Lucky... 0]

Perhaps some have forgotten this recent thread:

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2723032;page=3;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

I made this assertion:

Clinton was impeached for 2 of the 4 counts that were POLITICALLY charged, the charges were perjury and obstruction of justice,as decided by the House.

The Senate failed to POLITICALLY convict him with the supermajority they needed, 67 votes.

The vote beakdown went as follows:

PERJURY: 55 no / 45 yes

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE: 50 / 50

So yes, I do well know what the deal is, do you know the diff is between a political and a criminal case/proceding?


How quickly some forget.....

[mnskydiver688 0]

Impeachment will not solve anything because it isn't the president who is doing anything criminal. Either he is incredibly smart or incredibly stupid. His administration are the ones who are committing criminal acts. While the president sits there and looks like an idiot his administration is doing all the dirty work. Look at how many criminal situations have surrounded the president but never directly involved him. His most recent attempt to call on executive privilege while shady still doesn't connect him to anything criminal. All I see is a president who lets his administration run free. Personally I am disgusted with the entire government. Everyone is tripping over their own desire to do what will make themselves look better instead of doing what needs to be done. Oh well I voted, what else is there.

Sky Canyon Wingsuiters

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

As for what we can impeach the Republiscum for: Usurpation of power, just as the first scumbag Repug. If he thumbs his nose at Congress enough and overrides their vote, they can impeach.

Not a valid reason. "I don't like him!!!!" is not an impeachable offense no matter how much you don't like him. For a person who claims to know about the impeachment process and law, you seem to forget, or just choose to ignore, that he has not done anything illegal that you or anyone else can produce any evidence.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

Would you rather Cheney hold the top office, allowing him the opportunity to campaign as an incumbent up to two times?

Sure! Cheney's a sick man; he's going to die soon. He's not going to run anyway, no matter what. He's already the power behind the throne, so maybe the added pressure of being the actual President might make him code sooner. And you know who's next in line.

Wrong answer. Can you say Karl Rove?

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Misternatural 0]

>This thread is just proof that liberals aren't about peace, love and tolerance. I sense nothing but hate.

Whoa! stop the bus for a sec.
Ok Royd, you've accused me of being hateful in my critique of the bush administration too but its really not about that.

Here's why; Since the time of Jefferson, Adams, and G Washington. there has been a fundamental rift In the U.S constitutional govt. It started out with bitterness between the Federalists and the Jeffersonians and led to the 12"th amendment which recognized the need for a partisan Govt.

This was a good move because it was recognized that people like to be somewhat tribal in their beliefs and tend to band together under certain shared ideology.

Well thats fine until one side decides that they have a moral and righteous domination over the other side and everything they believe in is the undisputed truth and no one can argue with them or prove them wrong in any way.

The Republicans seem to have taken up a sort of teflon shield with which no scrutiny can penetrate.

It is the shield of Patriotism and Christianity and for years they have successfully used this shield to govern the U.S and create policy both foreign and domestic which the Democrats have no effective counter strategy against. The balance of power is gone!

It's not that we're hateful- it's that we're a little frustrated that we ( the Democratic Voters) are constantly being accused of trying to lead the country down some path of a drunken, pot smoking, butt fucking, lesbian,(not that there's anything wrong with that) wife cheating, conspiracy theorizing, gunless, cowardly, socialist welfare state.

While Republicans are always painted as the corner stone of Truth Justice and the American way

Granted, as Lawrocket once pointed out to me All presidents try to push the boundaries of the Constitution. Well thats fine but NO ONE has the right to Squelch dissent from behind a teflon shield of hypocrisy.

It's not that the guy's a criminal, he just got carried away with his costly Ideological crusades and needs to be reined in.

I liked him better when he was a Jeezusless coke snorting drunken skirt chaser.

Beware of the collateralizing and monetization of your desires.
D S #3.1415

[rushmc 23]

Quote

> This thread is just proof that liberals aren't about peace, love
>and tolerance. I sense nothing but hate.

Read more carefully. Most of the liberals in this thread do NOT want Bush impeached. Compare that to the number of conservatives who were 100% behind Clinton's impeachment, and you'll get a good sense of where the hate is coming from.

CLINTON BROKE THE LAW BASED ON A SEXIUAL HARRASMENT SUIT BROUGHT AGAINST HIM FOR HIS ACIONS BEFORE HE WAS PRESIDENT!!! He purgered himself and conspired to have others lie for him under oath. Did not have a fucking thing to do with a GD BJ.

Big dam difference

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Misternatural 0]

Ok, so I guess you're not against the dems of the congress breaking out the ol' judicial microscope and scrutinizing the political lives and doings of Chaney, Libby, Rove, Bush and Gonzales.

Beware of the collateralizing and monetization of your desires.
D S #3.1415

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

"I don't like him!!!!" is not an impeachable offense

I think it is now.

I think each president should be impeached every year of their term regardless of whatever party they are in (but especially if they are in the 'other' party, and especially if they are ugly, or have bad hair, or if their hair is better than mine).

Congress should also be allowed to 'censure' (whatever effect that has - it's like a UN action, pointless gesture that doesn't do a damn thing but tie up time and money) anyone, any time.

It'll make everyone "feel" good on a regular basis. And isn't that what's really important?

I think every single action available to our political process should just be completely diluted from any 'real' effectivity and turned into pointless/teethless public relations biscuits for childish disgruntled partisan nutjobs.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Misternatural 0]

now you're being delusional and thats my job so step off.

Beware of the collateralizing and monetization of your desires.
D S #3.1415

[billvon 3,089]

>CLINTON BROKE THE LAW BASED ON A SEXIUAL HARRASMENT SUIT
>BROUGHT AGAINST HIM FOR HIS ACIONS BEFORE HE WAS PRESIDENT!!! He
>purgered himself and conspired to have others lie for him under oath. Did
>not have a fucking thing to do with a GD BJ.

Why, That post is just proof that conservatives aren't about peace, love and tolerance. I sense nothing but hate!

[SkyDekker 1,465]

priceless

[Darius11 12]

I voted No.
Do I want him to be impeached yes. But has he broke the law unfortunately he has not. So we can not impeach him. It sucks to want.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain