Would you be willing to impeach a Democratic President to validate the concept of impeachment?

[wuushew]

Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached over bullshit reasons.

Nixon would have been impeached but resigned before he could be officially defrocked.



If we impeach the next President for waging preemptive war the VP will take over, so what are the downsides to the necessary and desirable weakening of the Executive Branch?


Will this plan work or is the Republican love and approval of war greater than their partisan hatred of Democrats?

[dkf]

1. I don't care if a President is a Democrat or Republican

What matters is what they do in office. If they break the law or commit war crimes, then yes they should be impeached.

[wuushew]

6. Bill Clinton was apparently willing to attack North Korea in 1994

I never heard of any Congressional authority that authorized him to do that.

[laylah]

11. But he didn't so...

your point?

[wuushew]

16. Just that NK would have been a better example than Kosovo

Which was also illegal.

[morningglory]

17. Hang 'em high! I want all the crooked bastards out of our government,

no matter what ilk or persuasion.

[More Than A Feeling]

2. Here's one that will really burn your noodle.

If Bill Clinton had resigned, Al Gore would have ascended to the presidency, but would he have been the Saint Al Gore of today?

[wuushew]

4. On environmental issues absolutely

"Earth in the Balance" was written a long time ago.

He probably would have been quite a bit less impressive in other areas.

[demnan]

3. No, of course not

I would only be willing to impeach on the grounds of something done by that President, Vice President, etc. Nor would I impeach a Republican just to validate impeachment.

Impeachment doesn't need to be validated. It is part of the Constitution. It should be used only in the case where laws are violated.

In the case of Bush and Cheney it is warranted and demanded by many in this country.

[JerseygirlCT]

19. Precisely nt

[aquart]

We may have to.

Because we didn't have the brains to impeach Bush.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The next president will inherit Bush's usurped powers unchallenged, but now with a backup of precedent. Our next president will never have to answer a subpoena, or reveal the process of a single decision unless he/she feels like it. Or enforce a single law unless he/she feels like it.

Our only hope, in fact, is a sudden Republican panic that rescinds the powers. But I think they are much more likely to sit back and wait for the Democrats to get drunk on power and then return as the reform party.

Oh, won't it be fun.

[Iktomiwicasa]

10. All those ....

....usurped powers have virtually all politicians , regardless of party, rubbing their hands in glee. They will not voluntarily give them up.

[Lint Head]

5. A Democrat was impeached.

:dem:

[LWolf]

7. Yes, if the reasons to impeach were valid. n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

8. If a Dem president were to violate the Constitution as badly as this one has

I'd be all for impeachment.

I'm all for impeachment of the current bozo, but apparently the Congressional Dems are "keeping their powder dry." I'd love to figure out a way to get him, Cheney, Rice, Eliot Abrams, John Negroponte, the heads of Blackwater and Halliburton, and a host of others shipped over to The Hague for war crimes trials.

[BeatleBoot]

9. Remembering the Senate Acquittal of Clinton on all House Charges...

I can't help but remember the House vote....

[frogcycle]

12. nuttiest OP of the week

[WillowTree]

13. It's not going to happen.

Better to focus your energy and attention to things you can actually do something about.

[old guy]

14. It's not up to us anyway.

However if it were I would stand for impeachment of any president who did something to warrant it. The question now is will any impeachment be possible if this president isn't. What would the criteria have to be?

[Stinky The Clown]

15. No. I want Fuckwad impeached to validate the concept

Impeachment is what we need to do NOW .... not when one of our guys is in.

[redbaum21]

18. I would be for it!

I would be for it! All the way!

[FlyingSquirrel]

20. It says something about DU that a question of this nature is allowed

(apparently) and not roundly condemned by all. Bet if someone had posted this on Free Republic they'd be instantly gone. So in the sense of defending the Constitution regardless of party, this is a good thing.

On the other hand, it just once again points out the fatal flaw of being a Democrat (also apparently) which is that the party doesn't band together to form a solid bloc in the same way the Republicans do, and so even if they have a majority they can't get their agenda passed.

[Wizard777]

21. Clinton was not impeached. Any officer of the United States must be removed from office

upon Impeachment. Clinton was not removed from office. So he was not impeached. Clinton was censored and the republicans just lied about it being an impeachment.

[wuushew]

23. Actually he WAS impeached

he was not convicted. Both Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were impeached and both remained in office by virtue of not being convicted by the Senate.

[Wizard777]

22. No but if the dems don't go after Bush. I would have no problems with Impeaching the entire Congress

In fact we now need a Constitutional amendment that would allow We The People to Impeach all three houses simultaneously. The White House is impeached. Prepare to stand trial for your crimes. The Senate is Impeached. Prepare to stand trial for dereliction of duty. The House is impeached. Prepare to stand trial for dereliction of duty. We can nolonger trust Congress with this duty. So we must be able to do it ourselves.