Will enough Republican Senators vote to convict if Bush is impeached?

[baby_mouse]

[Infomaniac]

1. Nope, if it comes to it...

Jim Baker will write Sonny's resignation letter himself. If there is damning evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors - and I don't doubt for a second that Bush has stopped outside the law - the 'pugs will give Bush the Nixon sendoff.

[GreenTea]

2. They're all thieves...code of honor..slime...they've made a killing

and must stick together...they believe they'll be back in power in 2009.

[JI7]

3. if their keeping their job depends on it

[Swamp Rat]

4. I am looking forward to the investigations.

:)

[AndyTiedye]

5. When The Dems Can REALLY INVESTIGATE 9/11, Impeachment Will be the Least of **'s Problems

[HCE SuiGeneris]

6. What we got here...

is a failure to communicate.

The Repuke -- and possibly more -- arm of Congress, is owned by the Corporations. The Diebold's, Haliburton's, Enron's, Pfizer's etc., that pencil-whip their lower echelon (90-95%) into subservience, in order to maximize profits... own our politicians. Why did Hilary pounce on Kerry for his faux pas? Why are whistle-blowers so scarce? Not all politicians on each side are complicit. But they all are aware of the stakes. We have a lot of work to do.

[Oak2004]

7. Yes they will, with a cherry on top

There are a lot of very angry Republicans who are blaming Bush, in private, for the defeat. Even before the defeat they were angry with him for his arm-twisting Congress into compliance and for stomping all over what they see as core conservative values. Party discipline (much stronger in the GOP than with the Dems) and (even more so) control of committees and party funds kept them in line.

But with the defeat, the lid is off. Plenty of them are itching for revenge.

[magellan]

8. Yes. It's not like it will come to a vote in the Senate immediately

There will be House investigations to get through first. By the time Rep Conyers and the committee have brought everything to light, a majority of Americans will be clamoring to impeach Bush** AND Cheney. If the Repug senators want to keep their jobs, they'll listen to their constituencies.

This is, by the way, how things happened with Nixon. Few among the American public, or on the Right in Congress, thought impeachment was warranted when investigations began in 1973. Nearly a year later, Nixon resigned because his impeachment was looming.

[Guaranteed]

9. Folks- cognitive dissonance ain't exclusive to the Freepers.

Lemme tell ya.

If you think we're going to get 16 or 17 Repukes to vote to convict Bush, you're bat-shit crazy.

[Oak2004]

15. I'm a former Republican. I've known some of the Republicans still in Congress

and no, I'm not bat-shit crazy.

Neither are most Republican elected representatives, for that matter (though they are bat-shit wrong), and given overwhelming evidence (and the collapse of the party machine that gagged and shackled most of them, and the opportunity to get revenge on the man they see as ruining their party), they'd do it.

[Guaranteed]

18. They already know. What he has done is patently obvious. Those who still support him put loyalty

to him above country. They don't care.

[Oak2004]

20. It was not politically possible prior to the Dem victory

They'd have been staked out in the sun and left to die by their own party. And they'd never have been able to enter or vote on a motion before they'd be shoved off the scene because their party leaders would have stopped any such effort cold. Keep in mind the persuadable and pressurable ones are not among the recent party leadership, and nobody in Washington is going to commit political suicide for no net gain.

We need to give them cover (see here for an explanation) and we need to make the crimes of their president/vice president widely known and understood by their electorate in all their gory detail, so that their votes become justifiable to their constituencies.

[Bluebear]

10. SHOW AMERICA THE EVIDENCE. 100 will vote to impeach!

Are you kidding? You think they will save Chimpolini if in formal impeachment hearings America sees evidence on the table?

No, of course now they wouldn't but remember there are hearings. Let them play out and see what happens.

[lvx35]

11. Its all about the frank investigations

its time the light come into Bush's secretive shadow world. Lets not make assumptions of what's there, lets just use the same logic he used to say that homeland security could come into our homes without a warrant; if there's nothing to hide, what are you afraid of? We'll see what's there.

[Bluebear]

12. Frank investigations....yes, Barney Frank

Perfect chairman for the proceedings :)

[lvx35]

13. hey, good as anybody...

anybody who gets called a fag by a man named Dick Armey is okay in my book... :)

[Bluebear]

14. He would be devastating!

I like it the more I think about it. His being gay would just be a bonus thorn in the side.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

16. But BUT !!! What would the boss say?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[MGD]

17. If the evidence is overwhelming, they'll vote for it. They will have too.

[Blackhatjack]

22. If evid is overwhelming, They won't have to... Bush will resign first

It is the threat of impeachment and removal that is the check and balance on Presidential wrongdoing. Actual impeachment and removal will not be necessary if the evidence is overwhelming. A group of prominent Repubs will make their way to the White House and deliver the word that it is time for the President to resign, and that will be that. Just like it played out in the Nixon saga.

You have to remember these folks are mighty good at counting votes in advance of a matter hitting the floor for a vote. THey will know the outcome before it gets that far.

When Clinton's impeachment came before the Senate, the Repubs knew in advance the vote total would not result in Clinton's removal. They forced a vote for political reasons.

Here, It will all turn on the investigations and evidence uncovered as whether Bush/Cheney serve out their terms.

[OneBlueSky]

19. impeachment ain't gonna happen . . . no how, now way . . .

by the time it ran its course, their terms of office would be over anyhow . . . so it would be nothing more than symbolic -- and the Senate would never convict . . .

[Laelth]

21. Not relevant.

So long as we attempt to effect justice, we will have done our moral and ethical duty. If the senate fails to convict, we'll hang that fact around their necks in the next election. You might be surprised at how easy conviction might be, though. The Repukes are trying to distance themselves from *.

-Laelth

[porphyrian]

23. It depends on a number of factors yet to be determined.

If enough damning evidence emerges, though, (and it's going to emerge like a motherfucker) they may have no choice.

[txaslftist]

24. No. Which is why we shouldn't do it.

[ecstatic]

25. possibly, he really threw a lot of them under the bus and they are furious

with him. Of course the most angry ones are no longer in office :rofl:

[Ganja Ninja]

26. Given time yes.

Wait awhile until this election sinks in. As the Dem's investigate Bush and the people become more and more outraged Republican Senators and Congressmen will be lining up with the Democrats to go after him. Only an idiot would try to defend Bush over the next two years and I wouldn't give them a snowball's chance in hell of getting re-elected again if they did. Bush is going to find the sledding getting tougher and tougher the closer we get to November 2008.

[MoonRiver]

27. Where's the "Don't Know" choice?

I say this because it really depends...on what comes out in (hopefully) open, public congressional investigations. If what comes out is the truth, then there may be a lot of Repubs who will have NO choice but to vote aye for impeachment. I'll wait and see how aggressive Dems are in uncovering and revealing all the dirt behind these criminals. I think they will be extremely thorough, but until it happens I can't vote in this DU poll.

[baby_mouse]

30. 'kidoki

very reasonable :toast:

[in_cog_ni_to]

28. AFTER the corruption is exposed? YES! They won't be able to vote fast enough. n/t

[dysfunctional press]

29. wouldn't that depend on the evidence?

aren't specific charges, supported by facts a necessary FIRST STEP....BEFORE considering impeachment?