IMPEACHMENT IS NOT A CHOICE

[Iwasthere]

Speaker Pelosi and John Conyers cannot decide not to pursue this. They have to follow those articles (they can hold off a bit, and I think that is what they are actually doing here). It is the law of our land, "For Gods sake!!!"

[lwesty]

1. first Cheney, Then Bush,

Then Hello President Pelosi

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. That's Not How It Works...

Even if there were simultaneous impeachments which is a fantasy either Bush or Cheney would resign. If Bush resigned first Cheney would become president and choose a vice president. If Cheney resigned first Bush would pick the vice president.

[niceypoo]

2. I agree

For them to come right out without specific charges would be too partisan. As far as, "reaching across the aisle," and playing nicey nice SCREW THAT! Democrats couldn't even introduce legislation or hold a hearing for the last five years. The repukes deserve absolutely nothing from us.

[Critters2]

16. There have to be specific charges, and will be

Articles of Impeachment are indictments. The articles will need to make specific charges. That shouldn't be hard to do.

[deaniac21]

3. I will be extremely disapointed if they don't.

[novalib]

4. HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS!!!!!

If we can't agree that what Bush and Cheney and others have dones are HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS (the standard for impeachment), THEN ALL IS LOST!!!

WHAT IS THE POINT OF HAVING POWER IF YOU DON'T DO THE RIGHT THING WITH IT????!!!!!

[Marrah_G]

6. The point

The point of having the power is to fix all the god damn problems before our country completely disintegrates. Retribution can come later.

Someone how everyone thinks just impeaching Bush right this minute is going to save us. It is not.

Impeachment will take a great deal of time away from some things we need to handle right now.

Impeachment will not give us the whitehouse. The White house will still belong to whoever Bush/Cheney want to be there.

Yes they are criminals and yes they should pay, but right now I would rather avoid a complete meltdown of our planet.

[novalib]

8. "Retribution"??!!! WTF???!!!

"Retribution can come later"???!!!!!

WTF IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN???!!!

Do you think that those of us calling for IMPEACHMENT OF THE WORST CRIMINAL IN HUMAN HISTORY are all about "retribution"??!!!!

Some of us are TRULY OUTRAGED by the CRIMES -- HIGH CRIMES -- that have been committed in our names!

It is about JUSTICE -- Not "retribution"!!!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

13. Worst criminal in human history?

Ever heard of Stalin?
Hitler?
King Leopold?
Caligula?
Ghengis Khan?

Sheesh.

[Critters2]

17. I agree. Much as I hate Bush

Stalin and Hitler have him beat, in the criminality department.

[VeggieTart]

19. And maybe retribution can be stopping the damage

And maybe undoing some and trying to enact legislation that makes the BFEE grind their teeth. Retribution can be, you guys royally screwed it up, and only we can fix it. Retribution is most of the world happy about a Democratic Congress, although with a few reservations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/08/AR2006110801726.html

Okay, so it's not perfect, and I would love to see Bushie, Cheney, Rummy, Rice, and a few others tried, convicted, and tossed in prison for a long time, but I don't know that we can do that in two years. The best we can hope for is the Dems firmly reminding them that they have to stop crapping on the Constitution.

[cali]

7. You must be an authority on Constitutional Law.

If you're not, you have no credibility making such an absolute assertion.
Gee, why would I put more faith in Speaker Pelosi and Rep Conyers than some screechy poster on a web site?

[Laelth]

9. We'd like to believe that Speaker-elect Pelosi and ...

... Judiciary Chair-elect Conyers will listen to us. This is one vehicle we use to talk to them.

You might listen, of course, simply because you're curious to hear what we have to say and because you'd like to know what we think. Or, you might just spew venom. Your choice.

:patriot:

-Laelth

[cali]

10. And you might try

distinguishing between criticism and what you so snarkily call spewing venom. My post isn't even remotely venomous. I don't call the poster names. It's not laced with obscenity. I simply took the OP to task for making a statement that he or she is not qualified to make unless said poster is an expert. Frankly, your post to me, with it's false accusation, is a lot more venomous than mine. As for listening, you haven't the vaguest idea of who I am or what I've listened to.

[Laelth]

15. Oh, boy.

See below.

And I'm alluding to your comments in other threads this morning in my post above, though I don't say so explicitly. You seem to be in a very bad mood to me.

Peace.

-Laelth

[Laelth]

12. I should also add ...

... that I think you're right. I don't think there's any legal duty to impeach. To my knowledge, no one has ever been criminally convicted for failure to impeach. I think the OP is suggesting that the Democrats now have a moral and ethical obligation to impeach. With that, I agree. They took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and we have watched the Repukes shred the Constitution for five years. It seems to me that we're morally and ethically obligated to do something about that.

Congressional Democrats may not get convicted in a criminal court for failure to impeach, but the court of public opinion may turn against the party if we fail to hold * and his cronies responsible for their crimes against America and humanity.

-Laelth

[porphyrian]

11. Impeachment is a Constitutional imperative.

If we are a nation of laws, we cannot allow the highest ranking officials in our government to break those laws. Impeachment isn't an option, it's an imperative. And it's coming.

[Critters2]

18. Exactly! nt

[earth mom]

14. Recommended-I Agree 100%! However it's up to The People to tell them to do their job!

Impeach Bush: Do it Yourself:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2662784