LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:15 PM
Original message |
so if 17+ Repuke Senators vote no confidence against Gonzo |
|
Would the House try to impeach Gonzo???
|
endarkenment
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:20 PM
Response to Original message |
1. no. but they should impeach regardless of the vote. |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-11-07 04:20 PM by endarkenment
Impeachment should be initiated based on reasonable suspicion that high crimes and misdemeanors have been committed. An impeachment proceeding is an investigation. The political consideration that the republican creeps would not vote against one of their own if he were caught having sex with an underage baboon really should not matter.
|
LSK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. and when it fails, you will be happy about that? |
depakid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
6. Absolutely- stand up and put it on the record.... |
|
Fighting hypocritical Republicans is much better than looking cowardly- even if it's not successful.
|
EVDebs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
endarkenment
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-12-07 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
13. Yes I will be happy that we tried to do the right thing. |
|
So far our opposition party's return to power has committed itself to nothing. It has not once attempted to take a risk. This last exercise in futility: the non binding lack of confidence vote being a perfect example. We risked defeat for nothing! Good show. Had we somehow won, absolutely nothing would have been achieved. Like the non-binding Iraq war bills, we managed to destroy our credibility without even a chance at actually winning anything of value. One has to ask whose side exactly are our leaders on, and I think the answer is obvious.
|
Bake
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:25 PM
Response to Original message |
3. I suspect that while they MIGHT vote "no confidence" |
|
They would not vote to impeach.
Bake
|
Rex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:26 PM
Response to Original message |
IChing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:27 PM
Response to Original message |
5. The house then votes on no confidence tomorrow? |
|
it is a joint no confidence vote as I understand the debate.
|
NewYorkerfromMass
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:32 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Just remember- a 'No Confidence Vote' |
|
is historically unprecedented. It will be a huge slap of the admin. if we pull it off. Bush will go to below 20% approval or something embarrassing like that.
|
EVDebs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 04:42 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Censure, sure, anything that gives the appearance of oversight by GOP |
|
but all the while had their heads in their asses.
|
Bitwit1234
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 05:43 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Since he wasn't elected- and was appointed by bush |
|
I didn't think he could be impeached, fired maybe.
|
MonkeyFunk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. No, he can be impeached |
|
all executive officers subject to senate approval can be impeached, as well as judges.
|
endarkenment
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-12-07 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
14. wrong. see the constitution. |
|
Cabinet officers are impeachable.
|
EVDebs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-11-07 06:34 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Vote on 'no confidence' failed 53-38 this just in |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-11-07 06:34 PM by EVDebs
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:56 AM
Response to Original message |