Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Impeach Bolton & Bush in ONE SWEEP [let Bush recess appoint him]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:24 PM
Original message
Impeach Bolton & Bush in ONE SWEEP [let Bush recess appoint him]
If Bolton is Recess Appointed by Bush, he becomes an official member of the administration.

According to the articles of impeachment by the U.S. Constitution, anyone in the administration can be impeached for high-crimes and misdemeanors, treason and/or bribery.

Given the evidence regarding the Plame case and the DSM, we must investigate if Bolton is guilty of these crims. The administration refuses to release the FBI documents regarding this in order for the Senate to make it's confirmation.

So let Bush recess appoint him.

Then Congress immediately opens up an impeachment investigation and the Bush admin is FORCED to release the documents.

Then we find enough evidence to Impeach Bolton, guilty of Treason (i.e. Plame).

AND because Bush knew this, he's guilty of Treason too (by recess appointing someone he knows is a traitor).

Bush, "BRING IT ON!"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. WE can't impeach anyone , and they won't.
You do understand that the Democratic minority cannot impeach anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wildewolfe Donating Member (470 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Actually...
That kind of depends on the MSM. If bush's allies start to bail because the water gets too hot, and it all gets reported in the MSM properly, you could see a republican congress impeach them all in order to save their own skins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fryguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #2
14. far fetched
since that relies on the MSM actually reporting.....which it won't considering the fat-cat owners will still be making profits thanks to their WH friends irrespective of what repubs in congress do.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wildewolfe Donating Member (470 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Not as far fetched as it might seem...
The DSMs are a wonderful example of the power of the blog and the internet to get the message out for a start. It took time and they are still trying to downplay it, but the message did get out and the MSM was forced to start coverage of it.

The power to force it starts here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fryguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. we should be doing more to win back congress in 06
than fantasize about convincing the number of GOPers necessary impeachment (see my post #13 below).

and re: the DSMs, while they are getting some press now it seems to me highly unlikely that the MSM will stick with the story anymore than they did with the PDB, and will instead let the WH continue to spin and whitewash the story as they wish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wildewolfe Donating Member (470 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. the two concepts are not mutually exclusive
I agree we need to focus efforts on regaining control of house, senate and the WH in electoral efforts.

However, the fallout from a well run campaign, whether successful or not at impeachment, will open a great deal of congressional real estate for us.

The MSM could not avoid covering it, and the scandals that by all rights "should" come out of all of it again "should" ruin more than one repub's career.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fryguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. no argument there - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. If CuckooBananas goes,
and Cheney goes that will leave Pelosi as President.

She will forthwith appoint a new UN Ambassador.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Internut Donating Member (436 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I don't think you have the succession sequence quite right. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LifeDuringWartime Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. i thought it was tom delay
although if this ethics thing ever gets him out of his position, who would take his place?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yodermon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. Only after 2006 elections...
and ONLY if the Dems regain a majority in the house,
and ONLY if Pelosi is elected Speaker.

a scenario I like, of course :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Um.... methinks you need to re-read the 25th amendment
Succession goes thusly:
* Vice President
* Speaker of the House (Dennis Hastert (R-Il))
* President Pro Tempore of the Senate (Ted Stevens (R-Ak))
* Secretary of State (Condoleeza Rice)
* Secretary of the Treasury (John Snow)
* Secretary of Defense (Nosferatu...er Donald Rumsfeld)
* Attorney General (Alberto Gonzales)
* Secretary of the Interior (Gale Norton)
* Secretary of Agriculture (Mike Johanns)
* Secretary of Commerce (Carlos Gutierrez)
* Secretary of Labor (Elaine Chao)
* Secretary of Health and Human Services (Mike Leavitt)
* Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (Alphonso Jackson)
* Secretary of Transportation (Norm Mineta)
* Secretary of Energy (Samuel Bodman)
* Secretary of Education (Rod Paige)
* Secretary of Veterans Affairs (Anthony Principi)
* Secretary of Homeland Security (Michael Chertoff)

As you can see, Pelosi's name is nowhere to be seen among this rogue's gallery of Republican pestilence.

The only "warm cuddly" one gets from reading this list is that hopefully the top seven or eight would be in the dock with Little Georgie.


--MAB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Internut Donating Member (436 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Alright! Takes only 3 simultaneous impeachments for
this country to have both its first woman president and its first black president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fryguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. 3 U.S.C. sec. 19
Not to be pedantic, but the XXV Amendment only sets forth that the Vice President will succeed the President.

3 U.S.C. 19 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+3USC19) contains the complete list of succession as decided by statute and which you cited.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
23. This is the scenerio
First, there's no impeachment until Dems achieve a majority in the House of Representatives, in which case Nancy Pelosi would be the likely Speaker of the House.

Second, impeaching Bush would just put a worse person in as Pres namely, Dick "Are the lambs still crying, Clarisse" Cheney. Impeaching him, too, becomes imperative.

That put Pelosi in as President, just as I said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fryguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. Dennis Hastert (speaker of the house) is third in line
Pelosi is the minority leader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. ummm....we don't yet know all of the evidence in the Plame case
but I agree that there is a high suspicion Bolten was involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Enough connection to justify further investigation
At least the Senate Democrats (and some Senate Republicans) believe so...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laura PourMeADrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
8. Man - The creep Bolton is everywhere - at the fraudulent Florida
recount in 2000, to spying on people, to stong-arming intelligence analysts, to Plame ?

Shit, no wonder they are pushing so hard to get him in -- he paid his dues big time to the BFEE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DinahMoeHum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:10 PM
Response to Original message
12. Let Bush recess-appoint the mofo, OK? All the more reason
for Howard Dean/DNC to hammer the 'Pukes on this issue like a tent peg for the next 17 months until the 2006 elections.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fryguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
13. check the make-up of congress.....no way an impeachment for either happens
To pass articles of impeachment in the House a simple majority is needed. As it stands now, the split is 231 (R) 200 (D) 1 (I) which means 16 GOPers would have to cross their party and vote in favor of any article of impeachment - and that's assuming all 200 Dems and lone the Ind hold their ranks.

Then, once in the Senate the vote to convict someone on an article of impeachment requires a two-thirds majority. Again, the GOP holds sway there by a 5 vote margin (assuming the independent votes with the dems), meaning 18 GOP senators would have to vote in our favor.

Basically, given the current make-up of Congress, notwithstanding the ire we all have with Bush&Co., the falling poll numbers, and the apparent cracks within the GOP facade, there is realistically no chance that we will be seeing any of these criminals impeached......but it's sure nice to dream.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
17. whoa, I missed something
He's connected to Plame too???? Sheesh, Bolton is one slimy being. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-05 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. Bolton stuff
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC