My theory on why our Democratic leaders are against impeachment

[Poiuyt]

They are all saying that impeachment would take too much time from accomplishing the people's business in Congress, we need to concentrate on getting our of Iraq, etc., etc. Pelosi's against impeachment, Reid's against it, Feingold's against it. Everybody (OK, Dennis Kucinich is for impeachment,but just Cheney). My own Democratic Congressman is saying the same line as the leaders.

Is there a concerted effort by the Democrats in Congress to avoid impeaching Bush? I think so. There has to have been some kind of back room bargain made or they wouldn't be so unified (wouldn't it be nice if the Democrats were unified for us instead of against us? I would expect some members of Congress to be against impeachment for the reasons they state, but not all of them.

My guess is that they are not going to impeach Bush 43 to avoid embarrassing Bush 41. That's the only thing that makes sense to me. Bush 41 had been one of "them" and I'm guessing that they have at least a little respect for the man. Impeaching his son would be a terrible blow to the Bush family, so I think Congress is putting up a unified front against impeaching 43 so that 41 can save face.

[liberal N proud]

1. The problem is it does not make sense

Something or someone has them afraid to take up any actions against bu$h or cheney. We need to find out what that is, then we can expose it and free our congress from the grips of the regime.

[in_cog_ni_to]

4. My guess is NSA wiretaps. BLACKMAIL. They're all being Blackmailed. n/t

[liberal N proud]

6. That is a lot of email and tape, I think it is bigger than that

Terrorist attack?
Attack on Iran?
Martial Law?
I don't know but I first noticed it when Carter changed his story, very uncharacteristic.

[zonmoy]

15. question is what are they being blackmailed with.

I suspect that it is that the cabal has told them that if they vote to impeach he will set off a false flag terror attack and end the pretense of democracy forever.

[madokie]

22. thats my guess also

[AndyTiedye]

28. And if Blackmail Doesn't Work, They've Got this Anthrax and…

[in_cog_ni_to]

2. If that's the reason, it's the most idiotic excuse EVER! Poppy is responsible for that psycho

being in office. Poppy procreated with that windbag wife of his and created SATAN. THEN Poppy sent James Baker to Florida in 2000 to help steal the fucking election. IF that's the reason the Dems aren't Impeaching, THEY should all resign.

[Poiuyt]

7. I didn't say it WASN'T an idiotic excuse

But the Democrats have never been in lockstep on anything. I find it odd that they'd pick this issue.

BTW, mass blackmail would explain it too. I actually did think of that, but I couldn't come up with anything where they could ALL be blackmailed.

[CreekDog]

10. Please apply Occam's razor to this problem

You know, when you are faced with many explanations, the simplest is often the most correct.

Tin foil hat theories are way down the list when you have plain old political explanations that make a hell of a lot more sense.

Sheesh.

[nebenaube]

13. Occam's Razor says that they are comprimised. n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. Well, even if only 10-20, or fewer, are being blackmailed they'd all stick together

to save their Majority. Not all of them need to be blackmailed for them to be united. If they were to lose ANY seats, they'd lose the Majority.

[CreekDog]

9. It's not the reason, man alive, that was stupid

...and unsubstantiated in any way.

[NNN0LHI]

3. I am guessing here but I think they are worried about the rally 'round the president factor

It happened with Clinton. Pretty sure his approval ratings hovered in the 60 to 70 percent range throughout the entire impeachment ordeal. Bush is a lame duck president at best right now with his approval numbers in the 20's. Don't want any constitutional crisis's right now. I think the Dems are just trying to humor the crazy bastard until we can replace him.

Don

[CreekDog]

11. Is this thread flypaper for stupids?

I haven't seen one explanation that makes any sense.

Rally around the president? At 26%? No, he won't get removed, but he won't become popular either. Remember, Clinton was highly approved when he was impeached and that's why folks rallied around him.

Dems want a majority to last beyond 2008 and they want to recapture the presidency in 2008 also. Their political calculations (flawed though they may be) are telling them that pursuing impeachment is ON BALANCE a negative when compared to the alternatives.

You can disagree with them, but the conspiracy theories are a bit much when simple politics will explain it all.

The thing you can unite all politicians on is their own reelection and then the reelection of their party. Nothing beats that for explaining how a group of politicians act, nothing at all.

[NNN0LHI]

20. Is this thread flypaper for stupids?

The first four words in the subject line you were responding to were, "I am guessing here", in my original post to this thread.

I wasn't giving an explanation of anything as you suggested. I was making a guess. And I pointed that out.

What part of "I am guessing here", didn't you understand friend?

And in answer to your question I think the jury is still out.

Don

[CreekDog]

23. It's a silly guess

That's my point.

That you aren't sure of it is not much of a defense of the point.

Hell, I can say that they are doing it because the men from Mars have told the government that Bush is their representative and if they get rid of him, the Martians will come down here and zap everyone, Democrats first.

But I'm just guessing here.

Now, I'm not being serious and I am mocking anyone here who puts forward such silly explanations without substantiation and then expects us to think they are serious explanations.

They aren't.

A serious explanation is plausible.

[NRaleighLiberal]

5. So - remind me - who does the congress serve?

I think it is simpler - they are concerned, first and foremost, for their own hides.

[CreekDog]

8. Your reasoning is the silliest explanation I have ever read

Play out impeachment in your head.

1) Bush gets impeached
Cheney gets to be president
The administration essentially finishes out its term except that the Democrats in 2008 have trouble getting any attention for their campaign or their issues because impeachment is the topic getting all the attention

or

2) Bush and Cheney get impeached
If Bush gets impeached first, Cheney picks his new VP
If Cheney gets impeached first, Bush picks a new VP
This forces a terrible choice on Democrats...If the Republicans choose their very best candidate for VP, that candidate will give the Republicans an advantage that they didn't have pre impeachment...the other choice Democrats have is to vote down all but the worst Republican choice for VP to avoid losing

3) Dems try to impeach Bush and Cheney but fail to get the votes in the Senate to remove from office
This try will get some favorable attention
However, the Democrats will not have any accomplishments to run on in 2008
Democrats will also not be able to run on the concept that Republicans have vetoed or blocked all the good the Dems tried to do because once impeachment heats up, nothing else will move forward on their agenda (this happened in 1998 when Republicans tried to impeach Clinton)

So instead of that asinine explanation about not wanting to embarass Bush I, it comes down to congressional Dems view that impeachment is bad politics.

The Dems see:

1) unlikely to be able to remove Bush or Cheney
2) even if they do, the outcome of that will not change things (not enough time to do much good) and actually may backfire as Republicans will get a chance to nominate a new VP who will then become president
3) the Democrats want to run on a record of trying to accomplish things or accomplishing them, however, impeachment proceedings (which very likely will fail) will consume all the time and effort, leaving Democrats weary in 2008, looking impotent and possibly foolish
4) add to that the spectacle will direct attention away from Democrats running to recapture the presidency
5) impeaching the president or vp will spark some life into combative and activist republicans probably amounting to greater contributions to republican candidates.

So there's lots of reasons for Democratic reticence regarding impeachment.

[Amonester]

16. And what if Bu$che and Cheneyouself stage a new Nine Elev'n

1. Stage a new Nine Elev'n (somewhere "symbolic"...)
2. Then unilateraly declare Bu$che = the new dictatortot
(They've set up and signed all the papers such a coup would require, to not USE them in the end... Oh, come on...)
3. Impose Martial Law (arrest all dissenters they've monitored by opening their mail, tracked their computers' IPs, listened to their calls, etc., for years, and in the middle of the night, if need be... to not USE it in the end because they want that PNAC's oil the Iranians have the bad luck of walking over) in order to fill those empty "re-education" camps Helliburton got bidless contracts to build (for who, us?).
4. Cancel ALL elections.
5. Attempt to dominate the world like the real fascists they R (and fail).


I. Am. Affraid. It. Can. Happen. Here.


On edit: forgot #4. (How could I?)

[PSPS]

17. That's all well and good, but...

I'm not disagreeing with your generally good overview of the scenarios. And I can tolerate the political realities of the situation.

However, it just won't be america anymore if these criminal goons simply skate after what they've done. If a criminal cabal like this can act with impunity, our country stands for ... nothing. Well, at least nothing good.

[CreekDog]

19. I'm not arguing against the rightness of impeachment

But I was answering the question of why Democrats are not universally getting behind it.

There are downsides and they are significant.

[HughMoran]

12. I just think they like having a really, really lame duck in there

It's like getting a free Democratic ad every time that idiot moron fool opens his mouth.

[CreekDog]

18. I go with that too

Republicans are going to have to criticize Bush to have any chance in 2008.

That could get messy for them, especially since so many are in congress and so many have defended the same policies they will be forced to run against to have any shot.

[EFerrari]

21. They're not going to do it to avoid embarrassing Senator Clinton.

And that is wrong.

[CreekDog]

24. Which Democrat is doing it to avoid embarassing Sen Clinton?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[EFerrari]

26. Hillary Clinton doesn't want any comparison between Bill's impeachment

and Junior's floating around just at the moment she's trying to look presidential.

[CreekDog]

30. You only named Hillary as not wanting impeachment

But you referred to presumably all Democrats as not wanting impeachment.

Can you name any others that don't want it to avoid embarassing Hillary?

[EFerrari]

31. What about all the Democrats who are invested in her candidacy?

I don't blame them, in a way. That's their job -- they're politicians.

[CreekDog]

32. Don't change the subject, you said Democrats aren't impeaching

because they don't want to embarass Senator Clinton.

I asked who these Democrats are. You named Hillary Clinton, only.

Who else? And how do you know this?

[EFerrari]

33. All of them.

Don't make me go there. When the party can get Mr. Conyers to say we can impeach Bush at the polls, knowing full well what bullshit that is, it's a done deal.

[CK_John]

25. IMO, * told Nancy, the minute you vote impeach, I push the red button on Iran. n/t

[MrMickeysMom]

27. Here's my belief why everyone's having such a hard time

From the fibers of every member of congresses' BONES, they know what this group in the WH is capable of--

marshall law after another 911
911 (the sequel) as an inside job (nod, wink, turning of heads)
not wanting any more blood on their hands or loss of their own families in the process

Fuck the tin foil hat, good people of DU... These people are not planning on leaving. The administratipn is already a real crime mafia family

At least that's what I think...:tinfoilhat:

[bbgrunt]

29. Whatever the real reason they are united in this folly, the only

justifiable reason for them to be acting this way is if they have made a deal to prevent another false flag terror operation here in exchange for avoiding impeachment. Even that, however, would be like paying ransoms to kidnappers.

[BeHereNow]

34. OR...perhaps they don't want to relinquish the profits they have been assured of...

by the multi national corporates who own their asses on both sides of the aisle?
Perhaps a little of both, given that Poppy Bush and his circle ARE the multi national corporates.
BHN