The reason to take impeachment off the table is no longer valid.

[The Backlash Cometh]

Pelosi made her now infamous statement at the beginning of the Congressional term because she wanted to make it clear to Independents, Centrist Democrats and Republicans, and even conservatives, that a Democratically controlled congress would not be distracted by a vendetta impeachment and would, instead, focus on more important matters at hand.

However, EVERYONE is distracted because of what this Administration has done in the past and it requires congressional oversight and that is probably the most important job that this Congress has to tackle. And, yet, the Administration stalling tactics and general lack of cooperation becomes a growing obstacle. In essence, it's Pelosi who's the lame duck because she can't go forward to do her job, UNLESS she moves to impeach. Lord knows that Bush-Cheney have given her ample reason.

At this point, what more pressing job does Congress have than to go back to the White House to get their cojones back? They handed them to Bush on a silver platter when they gave him the "okay" on Iraq, and now it's time that they go and take them back if they want to be taken seriously again, because, until they do, every bill that comes in front of Pelosi is going to be one where the power of the executive veto will trump any Democratic success. Why does he need to compromise with them? It's like Pelosi already told them, don't worry about the past, you can finish out your term.

And that's a problem because neither Bush nor Cheney took office to win a popularity contest. If you think that the stories of Clinton's staff pilfering Air Force One on their exit flight was bad, hold onto whatever you can because that's ALL you're going to have after the Bush-Cheney team are done raiding our government. Pelosi has already given them a two year lead.

[babylonsister]

1. I can't fault your logic there. It's past time to do something. nt

[EFerrari]

2. Error. You've already recommended that thread.

:kick:

[Nikki Stone1]

3. Maybe Pelosi has been biding her time--let the public push impeachment, not Congress

That way, it's not seen as a political vendetta but as the will of the people. (Which it really is, but you know what the right wing echo chamber would make of it.)

[MedleyMisty]

4. Fuck the right wing echo chamber

Don't let the other side frame the debate.

[Ghost in the Machine]

19. AMEN! We have to MAKE the pugs understand...

THEY ARE THE MINORITY NOW! Sit down, STFU, and do as you're told! It's time to play "Smashmouth Politics" now. No holds barred.

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. Alright: Democrats to Pelosi: Consider yourself pushed.

[EFerrari]

7. Consider yourself pushed in your own district.

Ignore us at your own risk.

[rucky]

52. And it polls well, too!

Just trying to put it in terms she understands.

[AmericanAlways]

6. two sides of the same coin.

This picture says it all, we are just now seeing the signs that have been put into place. Please everyone join together to stop talk of immigration until a fence is built and the border is secure. Congress Republican and Democrat voted for a war without securing the country, they both are at fault. I feel their smiles and laughter are at the American Public.

[EFerrari]

8. Yes, we have to protect ourselves from gardeners and nannies

immediately. :sarcasm:

[fazoolius_2006]

28. Agree.

If you would want to impeach bush, do it on immigration. I think lots of republicans would support an impeachment of the president on this matter.

[kenfrequed]

41. What?

Uhm, percisely how and in what way would Bush be impeachable on 'immigration.'

This is about law, and Bush has broken enough of them to warrent impeachment proceedings without this canard to the xenophobes.

[RoccoR5955]

53. Yeah, Clinton was one of the best Republican Presidents...

We ever had.

Now it's time to IMPEACH Bushco, Inc.

And by BUSHCO, Inc., I mean ALL OF THEM... INCLUDING THE SUPREMES COURT!!! (Yes, the Supremes Court... They might as well be a singing group)

Run Bushco, Inc. out of business, NOW.

Hear me Democrats?!?!?!

[Captain Hilts]

9. We don't have nearly enough votes. And you don't need "cojones" to be tough. nt

[EFerrari]

12. That's future tripping. The Republics are stampeding away from Junior.

Geezus, we need to beg or borrow some cojones here.

[spanone]

10. Couldn't agree more.

[Meeker Morgan]

11. Impeachment was never ON he table in the first place. n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

13. Yeah, I think it's time now, especially after last week

The problem has been that Bush has come out and said specifically that he had the right to make signing agreements, wiretapping, etc. But, this past week both Bush and Cheney have said they are not bound by law. That is by definition unconstitutional. It's time to start the proceedings.

[originalpckelly]

14. Representative Barbara Jordan:

"If the impeachment provision in the Constitution of the United States will not reach the offenses charged here, then perhaps that 18th-century Constitution should be abandoned to a 20th-century paper shredder."

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barbarajordanjudiciarystatement.htm

[babylonsister]

15. Whoa. Nice Quote! nt

[bigtree]

16. remember, those charges against Nixon came after a trial of the Watergate burglars . . .

1973

* January 8
The trial of the Watergate Seven (Barker, Gonzalez, Hunt, Liddy, Martinez, McCord and Sturgis) begins in Washington. It is presided over by Judge John Sirica.

* January 11
Hunt pleads guilty.

* January 15
Barker, Gonzalez, Martinez and Sturgis plead guilty.

* January 30
Former Nixon aides G. Gordon Liddy and James W. McCord Jr. are convicted of conspiracy, burglary and wiretapping in the Watergate incident. Both had pleaded not guilty.

* February 7
The Senate votes (77-0) to create the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities.

# March 19/23
James W. McCord WRITES A LETTER to Judge John Sirica in which he claims that the defendants had pleaded guilty under duress. He says they committed perjury and that others are involved in the Watergate break-in. He claims that the burglars lied at the urging of John Dean, Counsel to the President, and John Mitchell, the Attorney-General.

# April 6
John Dean, the White House Counsel, begins co-operating with the Watergate prosecutors.

# April 17
Nixon announces that White House staff will appear before the Senate Committee. He promises "major new developments" in the investigation and says there has been real progress towards finding the truth.

# April 17
An official statement from the White House claims Nixon had no prior knowledge of the Watergate affair.

# Easter Sunday
Nixon asks John Dean to prepare a report about the Watergate affair. He sends Dean to Camp David to write the report.

# April 30
Nixon appears on national television and announces the dismissal of Dean and the resignations of Haldeman and Erlichman, describing them as two of his "closest advisers". The Attorney-General, Richard Kleindienst, also resigns and is replaced by Elliot Richardson.

# May 17
The Senate Watergate Committee begins public hearings.

[TahitiNut]

38. There weren't enough votes in the Senate to convict and remove Nixon

... until there were. Let that be a lesson.

[The Backlash Cometh]

40. kick

[TwilightGardener]

17. Nancy's constituents need to make it clear to her--

if she takes no action toward impeaching the Dick, then she is siding with him and protecting him. That's the framing to use--she's either for him, and is one of his enablers, or she's for our country. It's well past time for Nancy to show which side she's on. I've been patient on the war maneuvering, but I've lost patience with the lack of will to impeach. I simply don't know what it's going to take anymore. I will be sick to my stomach to watch Shooter and the Chimp walk away into the rest of their lives with nothing but a failing grade and a tsk-tsk.

[dkofos]

18. And don't forget the Billions they stole from the taxpayers!!

[emald]

27. nothing but a failing grade and a tsk-tsk.....

and don't forget the great health care, and great retirement, and who knows what other perks. God, if these criminals walk away from this our country is toast. black toast. scrapable black toast. crisspy constitution. what a wreck these two have made of our country...

[Ghost in the Machine]

20. Pelosi made her now infamous statement at the beginning of the Congressional term

because she KNEW if she made the statement BEFORE the elections that she'd never get elected. Pelosi doesn't want to lead anyone, she just wants to be the figurehead at the top that goes with the flow.

[Kablooie]

21. The reason was never valid in the first place.

Their duty and responsibility to this country has been to impeach all along.
The Democrats are performing treasonable actions by NOT impeaching. They are accomplices to the crimes and should be tried for treason as well.

But no one is listening. No one cares.
America is fat on McDonalds and as long as that's the case, who cares if all our freedoms are taken away.
Won't change MY life. I'm doing OK.

--- and then they came for me ----

[The Backlash Cometh]

22. I think the Democrats are delegitimizing our Constitution.

They're setting a terrible, terrible precedent. They're giving Republicans a green light, saying that if they declare a war during their presidency, the Constitution is suspended and there will be no recriminations.

You want to know why all the good ole boys keep acting like Sopranos all over this nation? Because they know there are no recriminations when they abuse public office.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

24. what a terrible situation.

there has never been a day in the past 100 yrs that we have not had troops in harm's way someplace in the world. Never.

the logical conclusion is that since we are always "at war" the constitution never applies.

[The Backlash Cometh]

30. You're absolutely right. I have two words for you: Jack Bauer.

That kind of mentality has been around for a while. Proof: those 1970's family jewels- CIA papers indicate that we have had at least one rogue agency suspending our Constitution and the Geneva Convention for at least the last thirty to forty years. Cheney just got greedy and decided to bring it all out of the closet.

[tomp]

31. nor does it seem to matter which party is in power. nt

[WillyT]

23. Hey BC ??? - Have You Seen This ???

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1176205&mesg_id=1176205

Here's the quote that pissed me off so much:

"...a senior Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee recently argued to me, "we are holding what otherwise would be impeachment hearings under the heading of oversight" and publicly "embarrassing" the Bush-Cheney White House.

We won't be the party of Impeachment, yet we will be the party of Embarrassment.

How fucking embarrassing is that?

:banghead:

[The Backlash Cometh]

36. Wow, I don't know why that one didn't make the greatest page.

I want to believe that Pelosi is trying to outfox Fox. You see, she'll stick to her word and not commence impeachment hearings, but if they keep divulging information that usually is covered in those hearings, aren't they basically doing the same thing, since a successful impeachment requires public support?

[mmonk]

25. Never was valid. Simply announcing it was off the table right before

the election was a dead give away. Otherwise, why mention it?

[Major Hogwash]

26. It's been 6 months, how long do we have to wait for justice in this country?

If torturing prisoners at GITMO wasn't illegal enough, if the Abu Ghraib scandal wasn't illegal enough, if Bush starting the Iraq War by telling the UN WMD inspectors to get out so Bush could start bombing Iraq wasn't illegal enough, if Gonzales firing competent US attorneys isn't illegal enough, if breaking the Hatch Act by politicizing the civil service workers at federal buildings isn't illegal enough, if stealing the 2004 election isn't illegal enough, then what in Christ's name do they think impeachment is for?

[Wednesdays]

51. It's reserved for prosecuting sex involving Democrats. nt

[LSK]

29. we found 17 GOP Senators who would vote yes??

:shrug:

[Individualist]

48. You think the Senate impeaches?

:eyes:

The OP was about impeachment; conviction wasn't mentioned.

[yellerpup]

32. Cheney is begging for impeachment.

He's daring Congress to try to impeach him. So, call his bluff! Throw them out of office and turn them over to The Hague.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

34. cheney never begs. Not even from his little Lynn.

Now, about those two sweet young things he went hunting with when he tried to lower the lifespan of US lawyers, that might have involved some form of restraint, begging or other activity.

[yellerpup]

35. My opinion is that he would like for us to focus on his impeachment

while the rest of the administration raids the treasury and starts a war with Iran. Kind of a James Cagney moment for dirty dick: "Come and get me coppers!" Not that it won't get done without his impeachment.

[The Backlash Cometh]

37. Would you be surprised to learn five years from now that the shotgun incident

was not an accident? Impulsive maybe and not well thought out, but not a real accident?

I mean, what are the chances that the one man that Dick Cheney shots in the face happens to be a liberal lawyer from Texas? How many of those manage to get an invite from Mr. Wild West Libertarian?

[onenote]

33. If enough HOuse Democrats supported the effort, it would be "on the table" tomorrow. But they don't

Its convenient to blame Pelosi, but the fact is that a resolution to impeach Cheney has been introduced and it has attracted only eight co-sponsors. Eight. If that resolution had 150 co-sponsors, there would be action. The fact that over 95 percent of the Democrats in Congress aren't moved to co-sponsor the Cheney impeachment resolution can't be laid solely on Pelosi.

[The Backlash Cometh]

39. Why isn't someone analyzing and pinpointing the Congressmen who

would respond to a grassroots movement to impeach?

[focusfan]

42. i wouldn't hold my breath on impeachment

you may smoother to death lol.I don't know why Nancy Pelosi
won't impeach the crooks.unless Bush and his administration
has something on her.

[The Backlash Cometh]

45. Sometime ago, I gave an explanation as to why the parties settled

on their signature colors: The Republicans are red, because they're always looking for occasions to draw blood; The Democrats are blue from holding their breath, waiting for the Republicans to do the right thing. I guess Nancy Pelosi is fond of blue.

[SoCalDem]

43. It's historically relevant too . Dems have traditionally been in favor

of "burying the hatchet..moving on..going forward..letting bygones be bygones.."

They controlled everything for decades, and yet allowed the upstart, whiney republican party tp sneak up on them and snatch the government away..BECAUSE they usually looked the other way.

Iran-Contra was a wake up call for ME. The fact that they never followed through, is what allowed those scoundrels to go away for a while and lick their wounds...and return to us in 2k...with a vengeance.

The nastiest of the republicans do not respect their adversaries (the dems) because they KNOW that when push comes to shove, the dems take a nap, and awaken with kiss & make up attitudes.

republicnas KNEW it was "safe" to steal the election because they knew the democrats would back down..

[The Backlash Cometh]

47. The Democrats respond the way they do because they still believe

that we are a country based on one rule of law: The U.S. Constitution. The Republicans, the party of business ventures, knows that there's money to be had in chaos, so they try to change the rules to profit in that chaos. The U.S. Constitution has given minorities a seat at the table, that they never anticipated, so they're going to dispense with the niceties at all cost.

The Democrats would go far to describe their party as the party that protects the U.S. Constitution; the party of unity among individuals. And then paint the Republican party as the party of individualistic greed, at the expense of the many: The rich and the rich wannabes, that want to sellout our country.

I think Dick Cheney and George Bush knows that we are heading towards disjoining of the states. That's what was being suggested on talk radio in the late 90s because white America felt so disenfranchised. So they're supervising a fire sale of our resources, and making sure that those resources are given to "good Americans," by their definition.

[Flatulo]

44. Principle should still matter. Conviction is irrevelant. n/t

[Demeter]

46. It Was NEVER A Valid Decision

Impeachment is used to check abuse of power--that's why it exists. And the abuses were always there. The abuses are now getting public attention and press, and they are getting more pervasive and abusive, if possible.

So, is Impeachment Officially Back on the Menu?

[L. Coyote]

49. Keep Impeachment right under the table, the top is too crowded, make them bring it up

as the 36 investigation move forward, more subpoenas are issued, more witnesses are sworn in, testimony is collected. All is going fine and the only hindrance is the stonewall at 1600 Penn. Ave.

I say, it was and remains a brilliant strategy. Keep impeachment under the table. Make the Rs call it impeachment, hee hee, like they are going to bring up that subject. Besides the table is too crowded already.

And who wants to listen to all the Rs whine as a chorus? :rofl:

[The Backlash Cometh]

50. "Impeachment is under the table."

Love it. Because I suspect that's what's happening. Do you mind if I add it to my signature?

[L. Coyote]

55. Make it, "Ssssshhhh. Impeachment is under the table."

:rofl: "Ssssshhhh. Impeachment is under the table." :rofl:

[The Backlash Cometh]

56. Done and Thanks!

[WillyT]

57. I'm Stealin It, LOL !!! Thanks Guys !!!

:bounce::yourock::bounce:

[L. Coyote]

58. Somebody do the bumper sticker. Permission granted!

:bounce: :rofl: :bounce:

[Kurovski]

54. K&R. (nt)