Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Impeachment Time: Grab the Torches and Pitchforks!

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
 
Marleyb Donating Member (736 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 06:47 PM
Original message
Impeachment Time: Grab the Torches and Pitchforks!
Self-styled "progressives" in Congress should stop being afraid to demand Bush's head. The Fitzgerald indictment is now about one man lying; it's about a cover-up of the president's and vice president's mad scheme to trick the country into a war in Iraq, and that calls for impeachment. A bill of impeachment should be introduced right away.

There is little doubt that the even if the Bush administration doesn't go down in flames, it will go down in history as one of, if not the most incompetent, corrupt and dangerous presidencies in the history of the republic.

The question is, with crimes so colossal, why isn't there a public demand for his impeachment?

In fact, there is a powerful and growing popular sentiment for impeachment--we just don't hear about it. The Zogby organization, the only polling outfit to have posed the question to date, found last June that 42 percent of Americans felt Bush should be impeached if he lied about the war (a much larger percentage believe he lied). That, of course, was before the mainstream media began finally reporting, as a result of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation of Plamegate, on the disinformation campaign for war against Iraq directed by Vice President Dick Cheney and the White House Iraq Group. It was also before Bush himself was found to have been in on the cover-up of the outing of Valerie Plame by Cheney chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and presidential advisor Karl Rove. It was also before the US death toll in Iraq topped 2000.

Significantly, it was also before Bush's callous and inept performance following the Hurricane Katrina disaster in New Orleans, which has driven his approval rating down to the size of his hard-core conservative base.

It's a safe bet that the percentage in favor of impeachment of this liar and joke of a president today would be a lot higher than Zogby found it to be in June--a figure, incidentally, which is higher than it ever was during the entire impeachment saga of President Bill Clinton in 1998/9, when the issue was, not an illegal war but an adulterous blow job.

The question now is why Congressional Democrats aren't calling for Cheney's and Bush's impeachment. So far, not one member of the minority party in Senate or House has made that call. Not one Democratic member of the House has tried to introduce a bill of impeachment in the House.

The argument being made by even more progressive members of Congress like Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan) and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) is that there is no way, with a Republican majority in both houses, that impeachment could happen, and that pursuing that goal would simply make them look like "radicals."

Being radical, however, is exactly what is called for today, and fear of that appellation is why the Democratic Party is on such a sustained loosing streak.

I remember back in the late 1960s, when I used to have hair (long), hitchhiking and sometimes driving cross-country through the vast Midwest, West and Southeast, and seeing big billboards calling for the impeachment of Chief Justice Earl Warren. Those signs, funded by right-wing Republican groups, seemed Quixotic at the time. With Democrats firmly in control of both houses of Congress, there wasn't a chance in hell of Justice Warren's getting put in the dock. But that seemingly pointless campaign had a tremendous impact on rallying conservatives to the Republican cause, and contributed mightily to the election of Richard Nixon in 1968 and 1972, and to the election of Ronald Reagan a decade later.

An impeachment campaign aimed at Bush could have the same impact, only much faster. With the interminable war in Iraq getting worse and worse and less and less popular, with the economy wobbly, and with state and local governments struggling because of federal cutbacks in all kinds of programs from education to Medicaid, impeachment could become a campaign rallying cry in the 2006 off-year Congressional elections, when every member of the House and every third member of the Senate must face the voters.

It is time for progressives in the House to forget about propriety, to forget about calculation, and to remember what being a progressive is supposed to mean. The spirit of Paul Wellstone, the late and sorely missed senator from Minnesota, who would surely be calling for Bush's head today, needs to be resurrected in the House Progressive Caucus, if it is to continue using that name.

I for one will be pushing this argument in a book on impeaching Bush which I am currently working on, with Barbara Olshansky of the Center for Constitutional Rights, for St. Martin's Press, (due out this spring).

Fitzgerald's investigation is a welcome blow against the creeping fascism of this most deceitful, manipulative and corrupt regime, but a special prosecutor can only go so far. Progressive forces need to focus now on wresting back the initiative and drumming Republicans out of House and Senate in 2006--no easy task.

A good start would be a concerted impeachment campaign, aimed at tying down the Bush administration with hearings and investigations so it can do no more damage to nation and globe.

For other stories by Lindorff, please go (at no charge) to This Can't Be Happening... http://www.thiscantbehappening.net

related action-Support Kucinich Resolution of Inquiry on WHIG
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2202128
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. YES!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silverhair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. Bush will NOT be removed by impeachment. It is just a fantasy.
My thanks to DUer elperromagico for this post, which I am reposting.

1. The House Judiciary Committee deliberates over whether to initiate an impeachment inquiry.

2. The Judiciary Committee adopts a resolution seeking authority from the entire House of Representatives to conduct an inquiry. Before voting, the House debates and considers the resolution. Approval requires a majority vote.


At present, the political composition of the House is 232 Republicans, 202 Democrats, and 1 independent.
In order for the House Judiciary Committee to begin an impeachment inquiry, at least 218 aye votes must be cast. If every Democrat and Bernie Sanders voted "aye," 15 Republican votes would still be needed.

3. The Judiciary Committee conducts an impeachment inquiry, possibly through public hearings. At the conclusion of the inquiry, articles of impeachment are prepared. They must be approved by a majority of the Committee.

At present, the political composition of the House Judiciary Committee is 21 Republicans and 16 Democrats.

In order for articles of impeachment to be approved by the Committee, at least 19 "aye" votes must be cast. If every Democrat voted "aye," 3 Republican votes would still be needed.

4. The House of Representatives considers and debates the articles of impeachment. A majority vote of the entire House is required to pass each article. Once an article is approved, the President is, technically speaking, "impeached" -- that is subject to trial in the Senate.

In order for those articles of impeachment to be passed, at least 218 aye votes must be cast. If every Democrat and Bernie Sanders voted "aye," 15 Republican votes would still be needed.

5. The Senate holds trial on the articles of impeachment approved by the House. The Senate sits as a jury while the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial.

6. At the conclusion of the trial, the Senate votes on whether to remove the President from office. A two-thirds vote by the Members present in the Senate is required for removal.


The present composition of the US Senate is 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats, and 1 independent.

In order to remove a President from office, 67 votes are necessary in the Senate. If every Democrat and Jim Jeffords voted "aye," 22 Republican votes would still be needed.

7. If the President is removed, the Vice-President assumes the Presidency under the chain of succession established by Amendment XXV.


All who have posted the impeachment fantasy have had a roadmap that ALWAYS includes MAJOR REPUBLICAN HELP. Not just one or two, but MAJOR help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Actual impeachment is not the point..but to create a state of mind.
Those signs, funded by right-wing Republican groups, seemed Quixotic at the time. With Democrats firmly in control of both houses of Congress, there wasn't a chance in hell of Justice Warren's getting put in the dock. But that seemingly pointless campaign had a tremendous impact on rallying conservatives to the Republican cause, and contributed mightily to the election of Richard Nixon in 1968 and 1972, and to the election of Ronald Reagan a decade later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silverhair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Vietnam elected Nixon in 68.
And McGovern elected him in 72.
Carter elected Reagan in 80.

I well remember all of the elections. Humphrey was viewed as being a continuation of LBJ. Both the left and the right hated LBJ. I even voted for Nixon in 68 because LBJ/HHH was the one that sent me to Vietnam.

McGovern ran the worst campaign one can imagine. The campaign of the double 1,000s. Any Repub could have beaten him.

Carter had extreme problems. Anybody could have beaten him too.

A special "state of mind" wasn't needed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Why Syzygy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. And as I've posted before (being one of the day dreamers)
Even repukes are ELECTED to GOVERN according to the WILL of the People.

If the public wants impeachment and their SWORN REPRESENTATIVES won't take care of it, what do you think they will do?

He's toast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silverhair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. What will you say, when on Jan 19, 09, he is still POTUS?
I'm not a dreamer. I am a realist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShockediSay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Anyway, wait until '06 election returns
for your head count.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silverhair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Conviction REQUIRES 2/3 majority in the Senate.
Where are those votes going to come from?

Brutal Fact: Congresscritters have a 98% reelection rate. People gripe about congress but still send their same one back up. And the Repub congress HAS been delivering to their base, bills that their base wants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marleyb Donating Member (736 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-31-05 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
9. We need to go on the offense
This part is really important...

"tying down the Bush administration with hearings and investigations so it can do no more damage to nation and globe"

It is every member of congress duty and obligation to uphold the constitution. It doesn't matter whether they are Republican or Democrat, they must proceed with impeachment or they should be removed from office. When did we come to assume that everyone votes party line? The country, the truth must come first. And if these congressmen choose to serve Bush not the American people, we need to know this, and we need to do everything possible to restore an honest government(and voting system) by 2006.
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 Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:51 PM
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