Those opposing impeachment favor having criminals in the White House.

[lonestarnot]

It's easy.

[woodsprite]

1. Now THAT would make a nice bumpersticker! n/t

[oldtime dfl_er]

2. You're either with us or against us?

It's a little black and white. But what the hell I'll make the bumper sticker anyway.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/658059

[lonestarnot]

11. With us or against us is nowhere to be found in that line.

[jgraz]

Actually, I'd put that on my car

IMPEACHMENT

You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists.

[MrModerate]

3. They don't "favor" it so much as believe . . .

As I reluctantly do, that impeachment is 1) impracticable and 2) politically risky.

Although I'm beginning to think that 2) isn't operative any more and 1) is looking a little shaky too.

[madokie]

7. I'm glad to hear that

cause people are dying over there by the boat loads daily. Not all by our hands but because of our hands they are

[AntiFascist]

61. The alternative of leaving the criminals in office....

is starting to look incredibly risky as to what's left of our democracy.

[Danascot]

89. Did you watch Bill Moyers with Fein and Nichols?

If not, please watch and then come back and tell us what you think. I've favored impeachment for a long time, but I'm interested in knowing how persuasive the program is for people who aren't conviced yet.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1332753

[madokie]

4. how more plainer can it be put

traitors as well but I guess traitors do come under criminals

this is what these traitors/war criminals needs to be looking at

[A wise Man]

55. I prefer a trial for treason

Go in with a warrant for everyone in there from the maintenance person to the cooks and throw all of their asses in jail

[goodgd_yall]

86. Well, if we want to talk about what we prefer...

I prefer he be tried for war crimes at The Hague.

[bryant69]

5. Yes it is easy

And those who favor pissing away political capital tilting at windmills want our troops to stay in Iraq. It's easy.

Everything is easy when you simplify the arguments you disagree with down to a caricature. It's like debating a cardboard cutout (which some people seem to find very satisfying).

[lonestarnot]

10. Cardboard cut outs get more done. Quibbling and endless discussion were

not on Don Quixote's to do list. Your suggestion of endless discussion = endless war.

[bryant69]

14. Hmmmm. ok

But I suppose we've done this topic to death. A difference in preferred tactic does not necessarily indicate a difference in preferred outcome.

Bryant

[lonestarnot]

15. Talking without action will really get you places.

[bryant69]

16. Nobody believes that immediate impeachment will actually lead

to removal in office - not even here at DU.

You know you can attempt to bully and intimidate people into agreeing with you; that is a tactic that works on some. But it won't work on me.

Bryant

[lonestarnot]

18. So you don't like facing facts. Too much for you?

Well here's another. When he's tied up with impeachment proceedings, he can't do more harm to the country. And while we're at it add in gonzo and dicko fucko too, add them in the mix.

[bryant69]

22. I'm fine with facing facts

Just not keen on simple minded propaganda - whether it is President Bush or a fellow DUer spewing it.

Bryant

[lonestarnot]

34. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, well almost everyone.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bryant69]

47. And yet somehow I'm rejecting your simple minded arguments

Bryant

[lonestarnot]

48. Must be a personal problem.

[madokie]

25. I'm on your side lsn

:hug: this should not have to be a discussion, whats right needs to be done and now and whats right is stopping this madman now.

[bryant69]

32. This should not have to be a discussion?

Now that's an interesting statement. Almost religious in nature.

Bryant

[King Coal]

26. He doesn't understand the reason for impeachment.

Removal isn't the only reason for impeachment.

[lonestarnot]

35. LOL

It isn't that fucking difficult.

[King Coal]

21. The mormons seem to intimidate you.

[bryant69]

23. I am actaully a Mormon

So that's not really an accurate statement.

Bryant

[King Coal]

28. Oh, I think it is. No offense, but I think it is accurate.

:hi:

[bryant69]

No offense?

Why say that? What value does that add, when you are purposefully implying something offensive?

Bryant

[Name removed]

33. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lonestarnot]

37. Splains everything!

:rofl:

[bryant69]

40. Nice.

I disagree with you on Impeachment and I agree with Harry Reid, John Conyers, Nancy Pelosi and others.

[Ghost in the Machine]

65. You have one too many "M"s in there....

[lonestarnot]

74. LOL

:toast:

[Ghost in the Machine]

87. Tell me how, exactly, are we going to get our troops out of Iraq with that warmonger

still in office?? Please, PLEASE tell me how?? He will veto, or render moot by signing statement, any legislation that actually passes both the House and Senate aimed at ending this war. He's already fucking said it! Didn't you get the message? What does it take to get this through the skulls of the people who push this meme???

Hollow victories like the one yesterday don't mean SQUAT! It WILL be vetoed or rendered moot by signing statement. I know I just repeated myself, but dammit man, what does it take to get you to see this?? Yes, let's waste time and political clout passing useless legislation so the Dem leaders in Congress can pat themselves on the back and say "look! we did something!"

IMPEACH. INDICT. IMPRISON.

[ThomWV]

6. Exactly! K&R

[KharmaTrain]

8. Projection Rating = 3.5

And how are criminals convicted and brought to trial with an impeachment...especially those who aren't elected? Also, how does a political trial replace a criminal one?

One final question that I have yet to see anyone answer and that is how does Impeachment bring this invasion to an end? Or does it prolong it? Instead of focusing on cutting funding and finding ways to defang this regime step by step. Instead of using resources to investigate real criminals and real crimes that fall outside the politics of impeachment, crooks like Sara Taylor or Monica Goodling or numerous other liars and enablers will go free from having to face their crimes and then rise again in several years as part of a "new" Repugnican party.

Now my easy...it's math. Without 67 votes to convict, with an acquital, the criminals not only remain in charge, they get vindicated. It's that simple.

[lonestarnot]

12. The criminal trial can wait until after impeachment as is always the case.

[KharmaTrain]

20. Then Let's Go Get Gonzo

Right now I'm all for dragging Gonzo up on contempt charges, taking those criminal charges to the House Judiciary and let's get that bastard Impeached NOW. Here's someone directly linked to obstruction and the destruction of the Justice system. He must be removed. I see the votes in the House and then its on to the Senate. And what can we expect there? This will give you a good idea of how the process works or doesn't...as we call agree this criminal needs to be removed immediately and this is our only recourse.

Now what if that impeachment leads to an acquital? Then what happens to the criminal trials? The history books will write this regime's criminal legacy...our job is to bring it all forward and prosecute it...as a criminal matter. Through that route, we also rectify the political wrongs and do so in a strong and lasting way. We must prevent the politicization of our government and root out all the corrupt enablers...preventing them from creeping back in the future to infect the country again.

With a Democratic House, a Senate with at least 55 Democrats and a Democratic Executive, we can still get an impeachment...correct the wrongs, send the political message and get some vindication...but right now these options aren't ones that will effect positive change.

Trust me, I'm as frustrated with the criminality as anyone on DU. I applaud all who want to hold this regime accountable, but I'm also a pragmatist that sees this right now as an act that will distract and prolong problems rather than solve them.

[lonestarnot]

49. All three of them suits me.

[KharmaTrain]

52. The Corporate Media Would Love That One

"Democrats attempt coup de etat"...and they wouldn't be too far from being wrong.

I'm playing pragmastist here. While the thought of all three in the well of the Senate facing conviction is a wet dream beyond dreams, let's stick to what is do-able...what can make something happen sooner rather than later...actions that have substance that will end this war for profit.

You know the government can barely function as it is...so if you're going to force change you have to cut the tenacles off this beast...Gonzo is one major artery. The inquiry into his crimes will expose even more crimes, making a case against booosh even stronger. It removes an enabler who holds a motherlode of smoking guns and puts him in legal crosshairs that will build a case for the World Court and the real trials that all in this regime deserve.

I won't be satisfied until I see boooosh, cheney, rummy, feith, rove, wolfowitz, pearle and others sitting in judgement in the Hague.

[ClassWarrior]

9. The next pack of criminals will be far worse...

...unless we draw a line in the sand NOW. Toll-free numbers below.

NGU.

[in_cog_ni_to]

13. BINGO!!! Succinct and to the point.

And just happens to be TRUE. It really is THAT SIMPLE.

:thumbsup: and recommended!

[porphyrian]

17. Arguing about whether or not we should impeach is like arguing about whether or not to exhale.

It's the stupidest thing I've heard from the otherwise above-average intelligence pool of opinion that is DU. The argument's been framed, and I have to wonder what's being slipped by us as we waste our time with it.

[lonestarnot]

19. Like we can't think about more than one item at a time. Please.

[porphyrian]

24. Oh, change your diaper. I didn't say that.

I'm saying that we might as well be discussing abortion for all the good it's doing. And while we're yelling at each other, we aren't yelling at the people we should be yelling at.

[madokie]

27. due to the fact Iraqi's are dying each and every day, innocent Iraqi's mind you

is the reason we have to stop this madman, no matter what it takes, impeachment arrest it don't matter to me just stop the killing

[porphyrian]

29. I agree with that completely. When is someone going to do something about it?

Our elected representatives can't seem to be bothered with it at this time.

[lonestarnot]

31. Well keep at them like a badger! Never surrender!

[porphyrian]

36. I keep wondering if that isn't a waste of our time.

They are telling us that they are unable and/or unwilling to do the job that should've already been done. How many more dead should we endure before they do anything effective?

[lonestarnot]

39. Your question is circular.

[porphyrian]

42. Not really. - n/t

[lonestarnot]

30. I am.

[jgraz]

56. "Oh, change your diaper"..."I am"

:spray:

[lonestarnot]

75. heh heh heh

:toast:

[Atman]

38. I don't think it's fair to say they FAVOR a criminal in the White House

They just don't feel we should do anything about it.

.

[lonestarnot]

51. Complicity = Favor.

[Atman]

54. No, complicity = complicity. FAVOR means to prefer.

I sincerely don't believe anyone here on DU, except for the freeper moles, FAVORS (as in PREFERS) having criminals in the WH. I think they just feel powerless or otherwise hopeless to change anything. It doesn't mean they FAVOR criminality.

That doesn't make their spinelessness any more palatable, but I don't think it does any good to falsely characterize their position.

.

[lonestarnot]

68. Silence kills. Remaining silent on the issue is the same as favoring as in prefers.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

41. This Ideal's As Idiotic And Simple Minded As "If Ya Don't Support The War You're For The Terrorists"

Same limited and flawed mentatlity inherent within each.

Impeachment is far more complex of an equation.

[lonestarnot]

69. Tell me how allowing criminals to stay on in the White House is not complicity with regard

the criminality we all know exists there. Quibbling about how complex the truth is, is fucking simple minded. Simple minded is as simple fucking minded does!

[tomp]

80. omc wouldn't understand logic if it bit him/her in the ass.

and it regularly does. really, of all people to be complaining about false dichotomies...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

43. Apparently, some people think they're not really criminals.

They keep making excuses.

[lonestarnot]

50. They like talking to hear themselves talk.

[LeftCoast]

44. Dear lonestarnot

There is at least one other way to look at the situation. I for one, feel it would actually be far worse if Bush & Cheney were impeached but not convicted. Unfortunately, at this point I simply can't see a conviction coming out of the Senate. I can't picture this crop of hyper-partisan republicans voting for that. No way.

Believe me. I would like nothing better than to see Bush do time in prison. I don't want to see him 'exonerated' either though, and you know that the republicans would trumpet an impeachment w/out conviction as a 'partisan attack by Democrats (sorry, the Democrat Congress) from which Bush had been totally exonerated'. You know it would happen.

I will add though, that as these investigations continue to play out (Meiers not testifying, etc) we may get to the point where even the republicans in Congress will be forced to get on board w/ impeachment. We're not quite there yet.

[lonestarnot]

46. They will be convicted, but first they must be impeached.

I thank you for your concern. :hug:

[mzmolly]

60. My thoughts as well.

:hi:

[tomp]

81. i'm also afraid of that, but we have to impeach anyway.

it is impossible to convict UNLESS you impeach.

[snappyturtle]

82. Listen to the Bill Moyers Journal program that aired tonight on PBS>

Fein and Nichols both said that impeachment doesn't have to lead to conviction to be very productive.

[mmonk]

53. That's correct.

People can spin it anyway they want to in order to try and deny it.

[democratdoug]

57. We should stage a HUGE protest at the doorsteps of OUR Whitehouse...

let me know....I'll be there.

[madokie]

58. I agree, I'm back to say the same thing again,

[mzmolly]

59. Are you saying impeachment NOW will lead to Bush's removal?

Also, I'm not sure anyone here is "opposed" to Impeachment per se.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

62. Thank you! nt

[wiggs]

63. Like it. But would expand/modify to " Those opposing impeachment tolerate having

criminals in the White House and are satisfied that the current WH can solve some of the toughest, complex, and critical issues our country has faced in nearly every policy area."

Doesn't sing like yours but I think if the criminals in the WH were actually doing great, it's another story. These criminals are doing very, very badly by anyone's measure.

[mmonk]

64. Same thing. They favor them staying.

[lonestarnot]

71. Good wiggs. Tolerating is softer.

I'm not the soft kind. :shrug:

[Xenotime]

66. Agreed 100%

[Vidar]

67. K&R.

[Alexander]

70. Well the impeachment polls at DU show only about 2-3% opposed to impeachment...

So maybe you're preaching to the choir?

[lonestarnot]

72. Have you read the thread? All the 2% flock to oppose? Or what?

[kurth]

73. Impeach the precipitous asshole and his puppetmaster

[wildbilln864]

76. Couldn't have said it better myself!

Impeach, indict, and imprison the Bush/PNAC cabal! :grr:

[lovuian]

77. I agree they are supporting criminals

if you do that then you are aiding and abetting criminals

[lonestarnot]

78. If I let a bank robber come and stay in my house with knowledge that he had

just robbed a bank, that is exactly what I would be fucking charged with! :toast:

[suziedemocrat]

79. I used to oppose it - but now it's like Bush is almost daring congress to do it

He doesn't even make an effort any more to appear to want to uphold the constitution.

[Kablooie]

83. Not only that, they are in favor of a permanent Republican dictatorship instead of a democracy.

That, I'm afraid will be the result if these assholes are allowed to remain through next year.

The elections won't happen.

[Senator]

84. K&R

[Usrename]

85. Yep.

That's how I see it. I think that if someone opposes impeaching Cheney at this point, then they are supporting him.

How simple is that to understand? The guy actually claimed that he was not part of the government that he was elected to.

Throw the bastard out and be done with it. Why are the Dems in Congress the only ones protecting him?

[Enrique]

88. you've summed up what's wrong with most of the pro-impeachment talk

it's only easy if you ignore the non-easy parts.