Assume the impeachment nay-sayers are right . . .

[DeadElephant_ORG]

Even if impeachment will never happen, it is an essential national service to demand that Bush be impeached - right up to his last day in office. Our unwavering demand lets the world see the moral distinction between America's people, and the powers that govern us. The impeachment movement gives those nations who used to be our allies reason to hope and to wait, and it gives the moderates of Islam reason not to become terrorists. Simply to demand that this president be held accountable - no matter the odds - is an act of moral courage and moral cleansing.

Support impeachment.

[BlackHawk706867]

1. Good post and I agree 100%... This needs to begin now! eom. ww

[Warren Stupidity]

2. We demand justice for the people of this nation and this planet.

I agree. This is not about the score at the end of the game, it is about doing what is right.

[NancyBreen]

3. But will the media report it?

[MADem]

4. Keep in mind the purpose of impeachment. It's not a punishment.

The purpose of impeachment is to remove someone from office--to get them out of the job. Not to slap their wrist, or make them do the walk of shame. It's just to get the person GONE from whatever their job is--be it judging, or "Presidentin'" as Li'l Bush likes to call it.

If you can render the incumbent completely impotent in his job, knowing he's out of there promptly with the passage of time anyway, there is clearly an argument for keeping the boob boxed in and constrained, as opposed to impeaching him.

Again, you aren't PUNISHING with impeachment, you're just REMOVING. On his last day of office, why, he's removed anyway, so the effort at that stage would be symbolic in the extreme--and would be regarded as an attempt to use it punitively.

[DeadElephant_ORG]

6. Well... actually, no.

As with any legal or political action, impeachment may serve any of a number of purposes, including and beyond removal AND punishment. You will grant that Clinton was punished - humiliated - even though he was not removed. Clinton was also severely distracted by impeachment. And distressed. And boxed in. All of which, if applied to Bush, would serve our nation. But the impeachment movement also affects all of us - the nation's people. It galvanizes our opposition. And most important, it demonstrates our commitment to the rule of law - both domestic and international - and to common norms of human decency. Even while impeachment remains "off the table", the impeachment movement is already having ALL of the impacts I've listed.

[MADem]

7. Well, I am going to disagree.

The purpose, the intended RESULT of impeachment is to remove someone from office.

Not imprison them, not fine them, not flog them in the public square, not humiliate them--but simply to get a substandard performer out of the job they are in. That is all conviction accomplishes.

And Clinton came out pretty well, because yes, he was impeached, but NO, he was NOT CONVICTED. His impeachment made him a martyr to the rampaging, Christofacist, rightwing, fundie GOP--and was the very beginning of what you see happening in political life in America now. An out of control Newt-run House was at it's apogee when those articles of impeachment were sent over from the House to the Senate...and it was all downhill from there.

I don't see Clinton running from public life these days.

When you POLITICIZE impeachment, you FUCK UP, see? Now, people may hate Bush, and they may KNOW full well that he has done wrong--but where's THE EVIDENCE? You need to HOLD HEARINGS to GET evidence. You don't start out saying "We're impeaching!!! And now, let's hold hearings to get the evidence we need to impeach!!!!!" That's called a KANGAROO COURT. It's what REPUBLICANS do.

Bush is a bastard, but he isn't stupid. That illegal war? Why, an entire Congress gave him the up-check for that, so take that off the old Impeachment Table. What he didn't take care of by having someone else get their hands dirty doing (Gonzalez, Scooter, e.g.), he covered with a SIGNING STATEMENT. Illegal to torture? Well, let me put a little signing statement on that baby, there! Voila--the "illegal" is now "legal"--because Li'l Bush said so! What? You don't agree with that "Signing Statement" bullshit? Let's take it to the SUPREME COURT, then--and let THEM decide!!! How do you think that will work out? Isn't it best, taking the LONG view, of course, to keep those fascist bastards out of the process to the extent possible?

I take the long view. You can't bellow for impeachment without evidence, and like it or not, there AIN'T none yet. Investigations may produce some, but until they do, impeachment SHOULD be "off the table." We don't shoot first and ask questions later--that's what the Republicans do.

But hey, whatever. I know I am pissing in the wind with some around here, who simply want a pound of flesh without doing any hard work to get it, and don't care how they'll look down the road.

If we handle ourselves properly, we can have all three branches of government, undo some of the crap we've seen happen since the BushCo coup, and maybe get the country back on track. If we handle ourselves poorly, we'll turn off a nation that's already weary of the infighting and bullshit. We've got to make people believe in the best of America again, and getting all shitty and petty--without EVIDENCE (and like it or not, there still isn't any)--is not the way to do it.

[DeadElephant_ORG]

8. hey, I appreciate your response and...

I hope you won't be too surprised that I largely agree with you. We DO need more evidence. The calls for impeachment will, I hope, drive the Dems to aggressively go after that evidence, as well as to embolden them, in the meantime, to resist further neoConservative initiatives. Congress's willingness to fight to get those emails regarding the firings of the US Attorneys is brought about in part by growing public calls for impeachment, as well as by Bush's rock-bottom poll numbers, and other factors.

It follows from your points that simply calling for impeachment is far less risky than actually impeaching. Here also I agree with you, that we do not want to screw up an impeachment.

[MADem]

9. Well, I guess our primary difference is in the order of attack

My concern also is that calling for impeachment without evidence--or ahead of the evidence--politicizes the entire process. You can see what the GOP will say: "Fishing expedition" (red face, shaking fist) will be a well-worn phrase by the time they are done.

The challenge is to connect BUSH to any of the sins of the administration. He's been careful to stay at arm's length and mitigate like hell through the use of stooges and proxies. If we can get a hold of source documents, emails, memos that kind of thing, or credible testimony, that show his staff saying they spoke with the Monkey, and the Monkey said this, that or the other thing that is implicating, then we've got somewhere to hang our impeachment hat on.

I oppose the politicization of the process, because if the GOP can wag their finger and say "Politics--just like CLINTON!!!" (and they'll do that, blaming that whole Clinton shit-and-kaboodle on Newt, if they're desperate enough) it dilutes any discussion of the actual crimes. And those crimes are BIG CRIMES that shouldn't be called "politics of personal destruction" or any of those other famous phrases in mitigation.

But of course, the unfortunate fact is that we have no "crimes" (even though we think we do--and we are probably right) until we have that pesky evidence. So we have to put investigations FIRST, and keep impeachment under the table until the evidence blossoms. Than and only then can we haul it out and put it on the table.

I just don't want to put any carts before any horses. It doesn't help us if our horses stumble over those carts in the run-up to 08.

See, I really want to win all the marbles in 08, and I think we can do it...and hopefully, turn back from the mess the GOP have made of this country...!

[Heath Hatcher]

5. "Support impeachment"

Not until the votes are there in Congress and until support for impeachment are in the 60-70 percentile. It doen't matter if it's "the right thing to do" that means nothing if you can't convict. I won't have Congress take six months to investigate and draft articles of impeachment, have the house vote to impeach only to see it die in the Senate on aquittal. Look I support impeachment but on the other hand I understand that in order see this all the way it has to have the unwavering support of Congress not to mention the american people and I just don't see that. If I wanted to impeach the President and the VP I want this to go all the way, nothing half ass, I don't want to see all this hard work get destroyed by an aquittal in the Senate, that happens were the ones that come out like the bad ones just what what happened to the Republicans when they went after Clinton.