Send 500,000 impeachment letters to Pelosi by her first day as speaker Jan. 3

[yurbud]

While arguing about whether we should demand impeachment in another thread, someone said there had to be a "groundswell of support" like there was for the impeachment of Nixon and cited this article:

More than 50,000 telegrams poured in on Capitol Hill today, so many, Western Union was swamped. Most of them demanded impeaching Mr. Nixon.

John Chancellor, NBC News on a Special Report on October 20, 1973

We already have more support than that. When John Conyers took Bush his petition demanding he answer questions about the DSM, it had 540,000 singnatures, over ten times as many as wrote about Nixon. I would bet most of those people would write to demand impeachment of Bush, probably more.

The great thing is, now we have someone to focus this demand on who can and possibly will act (in spite of her protests to the contrary): Nancy Pelosi.

She should have a half million signatures waiting for her her first day as Speaker of the House.

I think she and the many of the Democrats want to do this, but to overcome the reluctance of the DC etablishment and big money interests who are afraid their ox will be gored along with Bush & Cheney, she needs constant overwhelming evidence of public DEMAND not just support for impeachment.

Fax or snail mail the letter below or your own variation to:

FAX: [phone]

Nancy Pelosi
2371 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515

District Office:

450 Golden Gate Ave.
14th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102

emails are nice, but letters and faxes make a physical pile that form a powerful visual, and that should be Pelosi opening her door and being buried by letters.

CC a copy to your congressman too. You can find their address here: http://www.house.gov /

Post this around to other boards and send it to you friends, and let's see if we can get something going.

Speaker Pelosi,

The American people elected a Democratic majority to restore checks and balances, the rule of law, and our reputation as a law-abiding country in the world community. These cannot be accomplished unless President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are impeached. Their impeachable offenses dwarf those that led to proceedings against President Clinton and President Andrew Jonson, and the threatened proceeding against President Richard Nixon combined. The offenses below are already supported with evidence in the public record, including admissions of guilt. It is likely that investigations prior to impeachment would turn up even more.

IMPEACH BUSH & CHENEY FOR:

• Lying to the American people, Congress, and the world about the threat from Iraq & need for war.
  
  
• War of aggression against Iraq, which posed no threat to US.
  
  
• Death of over 600,000 Iraqis and nearly 3,000 S troops in unnecessary war.
  
  
• Exploiting 9/11 for political gain and for war to benefit oil companies and other cronies.
  
  
• Canceling Iraq’s oil contracts with foreign companies and giving them to American corporations and restructuring Iraq’s oil industry to their specification in violation of the Hague and Geneva Conventions.
  
  
• Awarding no-bid contracts to cronies for rebuilding and oil exploitation in Iraq.
  
  
• Inciting animosity toward the US by attacking Iraq and falsely claiming it was part of “War on Terror.”
  
  
• Authorizing the use of torture in violation of the Geneva Convention and US law and against the advice of the uniformed military.
  
  
• Participating in the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Haiti and attempting to do so in Venezuela.
  
  
• Failure to fully cooperate with 9/11 Commission and joint congressional inquiry, and refusal to comply with Freedom of Information Act in other areas as well.
  
  
• Warrantless wiretapping of American citizens.
  
  
• Issuing signing statements that contradict the plain meaning of legislation, including on issues of torture.
  
  
• Denying Americans and others habeas corpus rights even after Supreme Court ruled against it.
  
  
• Coercing government employees to lie to Congress and the American people about the cost of Medicare drug benefit, global warning, and toxic hazard of NYC after 9/11.
  
  
• Failure to provide timely aid to Hurricane Katrina victims and appointing someone with no experience to run FEMA.
  
  
• Barring Americans who disagree with the president from public events paid for with taxpayer money, and forcibly removing some with private security posing as Secret Service agents.

Listen to the American people so we can be confident we have a democracy again.

Sincerely,

yurbud

Most of my list is paraphrased from the one found at ImpeachBush

[Bernardo de La Paz]

1. Don't.

Don't waste her time or her staff's time.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. I wonder if they thought it was a waste of time in 1974?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

Read the history. Nixon wasn't impeached he was investigated.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. I know the history

I lived it. He resigned before impeachment proceedings began. Or did you forget that part?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

40. You made my point: Nixon resigned before impeachment began.

He resigned before impeachment proceedings began. Or did you forget that part?

That's my point.

[proud2BlibKansan]

58. And why did he resign?

You don't think the threat of impeachment had something to do with his resignation?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

60. He resigned because Republican Senators told him to after investigations.

The point is that don't talk about impeachment until it is obvious even to a Republican Senator. Otherwise you end up with a debacle like the impeachment of Clinton.

[puebloknot]

77. The "debacle" part...

...of Clinton's impeachment is that he was being impeached for unimpeachable "offenses." He screwed up (pardon the pun), but he didn't hold his middle finger up to the whole nation and dare us to react.

Impeachment for actual crimes against the Constitution, the country, and the world are a horse of a different color!


Judy Barrett, Citizen
United States of America

[nam78_two]

94. Yeah I don't get the constant comparisons between the Clinton impeachment

and this.
No one died because the guy got a blow job. I think its insulting to the intelligence of the American people to assume that they will see the two scenarios as identical.

I think people have also matured over these past 6 nightmarish years. They can differentiate between a blow job and the kind of disaster this presidency has been-9/11, Katrina, Global warming negligence, IRAQ, Halliburton, CIA leak....Good Gad-Nixon was impeached for far less....

[puebloknot]

100. Actually, Nixon...

...resigned before impeachment could take place. He knew it was coming, and he resigned.

We need to hold this same very legal "sword" over the heads of Bush *and* Cheney. Then maybe they could fall on their *own* swords, metaphorically speaking, of course!

[rodeodance]

121. I agree.

[caledesi]

81. I lived it too. Articles of Impeachment were drawn up. See link.

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/impeachments/n...

[Webster Green]

25. He would have been impeached.

I remember it well. He was fucking toast!

You are wrong on this issue! It won't be a waste of time either.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

39. First steps first and then impeachment won't even be necessary.

Bush is going down in history as the worst president ever. Uncover the facts now to seal that fate.

[Webster Green]

51. I agree......

Investigations will reveal the extent of the criminal and treasonous activities to the American People.

but...
Those of us rabid political/news junkies who already know the extent of the crimes, and are demanding accountability, will eventually be seen as having been ahead of the curve. (kind of like our anti-war-in-Iraq position)

There is no compelling reason to just shut up till everyone else catches up.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

95. I think writing Pelosi is a great idea

Next week is Thanksgiving, hopefully most of us will be in the company of friends and family. What if we all printed up enough letters for every adult we'll see; pre-address the envelope, and if you have the means, stamp them.

Your letter could be short and sweet:

Investigate, Impeach, Imprison

President George W. Bush
Vice President Richard B. Cheney,
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice,
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales

[dailykoff]

5. Right -- let's make it 1.000.000!

p.s. you're out of your gourd if you'll pardon the expression.

[Laelth]

72. Love your sig!

n/t



-Laelth

[puebloknot]

99. Second the motion!

I also love that sig.

Somewhere I read recently that Germany has a "nip it in the bud" policy. Georgie wouldn't even have gotten to first base in modern Germany. How ironic, and how humiliating, that charges are being filed against Rumsfeld by the *Germans.* How heartening, also!

We'll have egg on our face forever if we don't have the deceny to clean up our own government through *legal means*, as we did at Nuremburg after WWII.


Judy Barrett, Citizen
United States of America

[dailykoff]

110. Thank you!

I hope she hears them!

[yurbud]

88. Dailykoff sig: 59% of Nancy Pelosi's constituents voted to put impeachement ON the table.

[dailykoff]

111. hey thanks

hadn't noticed the typo!

[MindPilot]

10. So holding the bush administration to account for their

crimes and incompetence is a "waste of time"?!

I'll have to remember that next time I'm pulled over for speeding. "officer, there are potholes to be repaired, busting me is a waste of time."

[Bernardo de La Paz]

12. Investigating and public exposure is the first step of accountability. Impeach way down the line.

[yurbud]

20. Pelosi and those in Congress know procedure, we tell them how serious the offenses are

[MindPilot]

21. You would be cool with half a million or so letters demanding "investigation"?

just as long as we don't use the word "impeachment"?

So we ask for impeachment and get investigation. Again I don't see where it's a waste.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

41. You're already getting investigation and impeachment is off the table.

[MindPilot]

44. Just becase we want impeachment doesn't mean we'll get it. From a downthread post...

As I mentioned upthread, this now looks like an argument over semantics
We, some of the people, want impeachment so we send a bunch of letters demanding it. That doesn't mean we will get it, but what it does do is gives political cover for no-holds barred investigations. I don't see a downside at all.

[tavalon]

32. Don't waste her time?

Um, we are her constituents. We can damn well bother her with any thing related to running this country. And that is most assuredly related to running this country. The fact that you disagree doesn't make this request frivolous.

Feel free to "not waste her time" with this request if it isn't something you think you should request. The rest of us who believe that impeachment needs to be back on the table will do this and we won't be wasting her time.

[mmonk]

34. Yeah, we don' t need that constitution stuff and rule of law stuff.

Waste of time.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

43. You won't get constitution stuff and rule of law stuff without public hearings first.

Don't put the cart before the horse or you waste everyone's time and give the Republicans an easy target.

[civildisoBDence]

97. If Pelosi had called for impeachment, it would have looked like she was angling

for the presidency via her position as Speaker. Major ammo for Republicans!

If she jumps the gun on impeachment, same problem, same ammo.

If she resists hundreds of thousands of letters and emails, waits for that smoking gun that would demand impeachment, then reluctantly allows the process to go forward...checkmate.

Writing her now is giving her the cover she'll need when impeachment becomes a realistic, reasonable option in the eyes of the public.

Newsprism

[puebloknot]

101. I've had this same thought...

...that Pelosi could look like she's doing an under-the-radar grab for the presidency.

Know what? That's just too damned bad if people think that. She needs to stay in integrity, and she should have kept her mouth shut about impeachment, instead of coming out with the "off the table" comment.

I'd like to think it was a well-thought-out stealth strategy on her part, but I don't think so. I think she just put her foot in her mouth, and I hope this isn't a sign of things to come.

Actually, I don't like the idea that Nancy, et al. are using clever strategies to get us where we need to go. Maybe I'm naive, but I think the public wants to just hear some plain truth-telling for a change!


Judy Barrett, Citizen
United States of America

[Zhade]

105. How about we ignore you, follow our conscience...

...and throw it in the face of those like you who advocate letting criminals get away with their crimes?

Seems a better suggestion to me!

(See, it's not like you're going to be able to stop us from demanding accountability.)

[Bernardo de La Paz]

109. You can try putting words in my mouth but that is a cheap tactic.

I do not "advocate letting criminals get away with their crimes".

Quite the opposite, as my postings show.

So stop your underhanded tactics. They only reflect badly on you.

[Zhade]

112. Yeah, that was kinda out of line.

Sorry for that. This issue raises my ire.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

122. You are forgiven. My policy is "investigate and expose". Make resignation inevitable

I forgive you. My policy is "investigate and expose". If it is done skillfully, then resignation or impeachment with conviction will be inevitable. It would be ideal if Bush resigns in disgrace about July 2008. Even if he resigns a little earlier, some months of Cheney snarling on TV sets should be enough to sink any Repugnant nominee.

[dailykoff]

2. Fantastic idea!

They need to hear it NOW before they set the "agenda."

[Zhade]

108. How about this - send a letter EVERY WEEK!

Lets them know that it's not just a passing fancy, and builds that pile of faxes/letters.

[dailykoff]

113. YOU GOT IT!

Homework time!

[Zhade]

114. Kick against the stupid copycat discouragement thread.

Again, all you "don't impeach" folks - NOT GOING TO STOP US.

[Thickasabrick]

3. I wish I could get behind this...but I just can't. What candidate ran

on promises of impeachment? I can't think of any. Almost all ran and won on fixing Iraq. That should be the focus. After our men and women are safe, there will be time for impeachment. Shrub's not going anywhere.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. Anyone who ran on promises of impeachment

would never have won the election.

[Thickasabrick]

8. That my friend....is the point.

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. Doesn't mean it shouldn't happen

Bring on the investigations! Then we can impeach the bastard. I believe that the majority of voters are uninformed and don't yet see the crimes committed by this administration. So impeachment would not have been a good campaign strategy. Once the investigations disclose what many DUers already know, then impeachment should be a popular choice.

[yurbud]

50. not by voters but by GOP PR machine

[Zhade]

106. With all due respect, you have absolutely no way to know that's true.

You can't read the-never-happened-to-test-the-theory future (or past, I guess).

You can suspect it, but you don't in fact know this to be true.

[yurbud]

16. we can do both. and impeachment weakens Bush ability to block change

[Thickasabrick]

28. You may be right, but after Bush we have to get Cheney. This

will be all the country hears about. Iraq will become 2nd page news and we will be voted out of office in two years for forgetting about the promises that we made.

[yurbud]

73. this will directly weaken war-mongers hand especially investigating Cheney's energy task force

that set all this in motion.

If people know exactly why we are at war, they will be more likely to back ending it.

[caledesi]

82. Agree. Iraq, then let the American people know that they care

about them, not power. Start with minimum wage.

Later, get these thugs under oath. Let them sweat it out.

BTW, I read that Conyers ALREADY has AOI drawn up for *. Believe me impeachment can be back on the table in a flash.

[rinsd]

90. 1 candidate won out of 21 endorsed by ImpeachPac (nt)

[Bitwit1234]

7. I would love it.

BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE VOTES. The constitution says we need 2/3's of the senate to vote...that's 67 - do you think we could get 17 republicans...forget Liberman ...so 50 democrats and we need 17 more. And if they didn't pass the impeachment, what would that say.Bush won again.

I think they should go thru with all the investigations...show what crooks and liars bush and cheney are. Then remember, according to the constitution, again, we can impeach them after the leave office. Which would ruin them and they might even get jail time. If we win the 2008 election and bring enough democrats on board, we could do that.

[dailykoff]

9. They need to hear that we want justice.

Otherwise they'll spend the next 2 years raising money for '08.

[yurbud]

19. even getting to point of a vote would stain Bush and some repubs might be forced by constituents to

vote for it.

[keepCAblue]

24. A lot of repubs are seething mad at chimpy...

...for waiting until AFTER the election to dump Rummy. Many rethugs felt that dumping Rummy BEFORE the election might have helped them in their respective races. And it should also be noted that ALL those Rethug candidates that Chimpy stumped for during the campaign...LOST! So maybe it's not so fantastical that you might get the 17 Rethugs turncoats to vote for impeachment--afterall, the Chimp is now perceived as a LIABILITY to the Rethuglican party--pretty much everything Chimpy touches turns to shit right now for them.

[Jcrowley]

11. 5th Rec

and make phone calls and for those who can go to your various reps offices. Let's not just consider one action but keep it going and build momentum. ultimately we must make our Reps responsive to our calls and if they are not then let that be revealed.

[yurbud]

26. Yep--like Bush said, gotta repeat things to catterpult the propaganda

[Liberty Belle]

13. anthrax screening delays all mail. E-mail and calls are best.

Or call Western Union and have a telegram delivered.

[DODI]

29. Alas, there are no more telegrams -- not from Western Union

at least -- I think they stopped last year.

[xultar]

14. We really cannot do this. It would kill us for 2k8.

[yurbud]

23. how do you figure that? Did it hurt GOP when they did it to Clinton on BS charges?

Also, how exactly do you win votes through cowardice?

[xultar]

27. It isn't cowardice. It is smart. Even Dean knows this is the wrong move.

[yurbud]

63. dean et al are being circumspect so that it will look like we are forcing their hand.

[bliss_eternal]

38. I will never understand...

how a progressive board has so many people that absolutely MUST discourage others from following their convictions.

In any given day, I can't even begin to count how many posts are made to this board. Yet, somehow the same people somehow always show up to dump cold water on others desires to DO something, anything.

They were there when women and pro-choicers wanted to act regarding the Roberts nomination. They showed up again to tell us to do nothing over Alito. They shouted people down over the Disney boycott and so many other things I've frankly lost count.

Would it be at all possible for those that DON'T want to participate to just NOT, and allow those that DO WANT TO, to do so? Is it possible?

How about using energy on issues that you personally believe in--as opposed to discouraging those motivated to try?

yurbud!

I don't know that my saying this will make any difference at all. I'm just tired of seeing this sort of thing, and wanted to say so.

The republicans don't sit around arguing about this sort of thing, they just get busy and act. Because they started small, somewhere--they now have a friggin' news network and the power that goes with that. If we just start--who knows what we could accomplish?! Could/would some of you just allow some to try what's in their hearts to do? If you don't agree, don't support them.

[yurbud]

64. thanks for noticing. If they don't like it, THEY can do something else or as seems to be

their preference, do nothing.

[yurbud]

66. I remember these kind of noises about Kerry & vote rigging in 2004: "be quiet! It's taken care of!"

"You'll ruin EVERYTHING if you make noise."

And of course the establishment fucked it up just fine in spite of what we did or didn't do.

[Zhade]

107. It's probably because those same posters are a lot more conservative...

...than they are progressive.

They tend to turn out to be behind-the-curve and less informed than more progressive members of DU. Sorry, just what I've noticed over the years. I'm not saying they're bad; ignorance is something to be educated against, not applied as a "this person is bad" label.

They were the same way with the war, when we were right all along.

Anyway, let them bitch and moan about us demanding criminals be held accountable. It's not like they're going to stop us.

They can't.

[rg302200]

62. Yea it did...don't you remember what it did for Clinton's popularity?

The last thing we need is a popular Bush!

[MindPilot]

30. You are saying that getting political power is more important than using it?

That's exactly what's made the Democrats so effective over the past couple decades. Are you afraid that Rush might stop saying all those nice things about us or that the media wouldn't be on our side anymore?

[xultar]

31. OMFG! Don't be daft! You don't need impeachment to fucking investigate.

We are holding investigations and oversight. The truth will come out.

[MindPilot]

42. As I mentioned upthread, this now looks like an argument over semantics

We, some of the people, want impeachment so we send a bunch of letters demanding it. That doesn't mean we will get it, but what it does do is gives political cover for no-holds barred investigations. I don't see a downside at all.

[tavalon]

35. Of all the reasons not to

this is the most politically motivated machiavellian reason I've ever heard.

[AntiFascist]

17. Yes!!!!!

[greenman3610]

22. The voters have already consigned him to Hell

The Hell of having to face himself as his
hated father comes to his rescue and takes
over for the last 2 years of his admin.

Meanwhile, we investigate till the Repubs are
screaming to impeach the bastard, just
to stop the bleeding. Then we investigate some
more.

[Fridays Child]

33. I wonder if my rep-to-be, Gabrielle Giffords, has a DC address, yet.

Anyway, here's my letter:

Nancy Pelosi
2371 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
November 12, 2006

Dear Rep. Pelosi:

We wish to add our voices to the voices of those who are calling for the impeachment of George Bush and Dick Cheney. Their crimes are obvious and myriad, and this country needs to know that you will do the brave and the right thing in putting into motion the wheels necessary to effect their punishment.

Below our signatures is a list of what we believe are impeachable offenses committed by Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney. There are, undoubtedly, other offenses, too, which a thorough investigation of the last six years should bring to light.

Sincerely,
(names redacted)

cc: Gabrielle Giffords

(The list I added is, basically yours, yurbud, with some changes and additions. I think it's good, if our letters don't all come out of the exact same can.)

[yurbud]

47. Put her name & house of representatives on it, and she'll eventually get it.

[Fridays Child]

56. I emailed her for a current address.

I'll see if she responds.

[AntiFascist]

79. Excellent letter! So you see...

calling for impeachment can lead to investigations, unlike the strange arguments those who would rather compromise are trying to shove down our throats.

[Botany]

36. Not now!

It will come but now is not the time.

By screaming about it now we ruin any chances in the future. Let Rockefeller, Conyers,
Levin, Dingel, and Boxer work for a while and then the truth will come out.

[yurbud]

48. they can stockpile the evidence that we are behind them for when shit hits the fan

[MikeE]

37. No one would like to see him impeached more than me, but,

she already said it was off the table, so let her stick to her word, (that is, afterall, a big difference between Democrats and repugs) . Also, I agree, with the investigations and the storm of war crimes charges coming, I think this will be even better than impeachment. Let his own party take him out themselves. That would be even sweeter than us having to do it.

[yurbud]

46. she represents us--you're making the DLC argument: vote for us then go back to sleep

don't pay attention to the details, just trust us (so we can do most of the same things as the GOP unimpeded).

[Laelth]

75. What's off the table can come back on the table.

She did not say that she would never, under any circumstances, pursue impeachment. I believe that, in political parlance, saying something is "off the table" is only saying that you're not thinking about it at the moment (and I am sure, in fact, that she is thinking about it).

for what that's worth ...

-Laelth

[rodeodance]

119. His party will not do it.

[rodeodance]

120. recall Blairs problems recently and the theat of impeachment. He will

resign instead.

[DemPower]

45. Excellent Work yurbud! Thank you!!

[MindPilot]

49. A huge call for impeachment would set Pelosi up to say something like

"I hear your calls for impeachment; you know I've said many times it's off the table. And that stands because WE are not a party which treats impeachment--especially of a president--lightly or does so for political reasons. Our goal is not revenge or payback; our goal is to get the facts. If the facts reveal that crimes have been committed we will follow the law."

[yurbud]

52. and when the investigation leads there, she will know she has the mandate to go forward

[bliss_eternal]

54. When did she say it was off the table...?

My question is sincere. I wasn't aware that the issue was brought up and that she addressed it. Though even if she did, I don't think that means that people here can't move forward with this action.

Govt. is there for "us." How can they carry out our will if we don't tell them what we want? Whether it is ever acted on, seems beside the point to me. None of us has a crystal ball and the power to say what will happen under what set of circumstances. Attempts to predict seem more futile than action, to me at least.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

61. Immediately after the 2006 elections, like Wednesday.

[laugle]

53. I think demanding investigations might be a better idea!

Since we know there will be investigations, why not show our huge support for them!

We need investigations into 911 and the rest of the commission's report on what they knew prior and did about it!

Also, investigations into what led up to the Iraq war!

Also, the NSA spying without warrants, which must be stopped immediately, oversight is imperative!

Once the truth comes out--the public will decide, not just DUers,(with all due respect) what the penalty should be.

There must be a mandate for impeachment or it will just look like revenge.

We all know what happened to the repubs that were strongly in favor of impeaching Clinton, we don't need a repeat, especially since we must win in 2008!

Frankly, I would love to see them all jailed.....but we must play it smart and look at the long term ramifications.

Let the investigations begin......

[yurbud]

67. then do so. just put "Dear Nancy" on top of your post and mail it to address provided

[laugle]

76. I'm not sure if that is sarcasm or if you found my

POV valid and reasonable? Can you clarify???

[yurbud]

68. Part of the "mandate" comes from who is shouting loudest with most voices

If we don't say from the start the end result should AT LEAST be impeachment, the PR machine can drown us out and massage opinion in a different direction.

The biggest mistakes democrats have made is in communication, and the principles are so fucking simple it's painful:

• say what you ultimately want in the simplest possible terms (not a gradual step by step message even if that will be the process to get there.
  
  
• repeat it until it becomes the conventional wisdom.
  
  

The GOP did this with social security. They repeated that it wouldn't be there by the time the boomers retire so often that kids now believe that is true. If they had waited a few more years to privatize social security, like until everyone who lived through the Depression had died, they likely would have succedded.

Democrats often figure out some half-measure that they think won't be too objectionable to the GOP and Chamber of Commerce then can't figure out why the public doesn't get excited about something that was diluted to begin with and will be watered down to nothing by the time they are done.

[laugle]

74. Like I said before, ultimately this will be decided

after investigations and by the consensus of the people of this country.

As far as dems communicating, remember, we now have power, and that's the difference between yesterday and today.

Cooler heads will prevail......

I completely understand your feelings, but you must be patient as the dems are about to do a hell of alot of communicating and I don't think you will be disappointed!

"POWER TO THE PEOPLE"

[yurbud]

85. I hope you are right, but it would be dangerous to remain silent given dems recent track record

of capitulation.

[yurbud]

55. some seem to be ignoring crucial difference with Nixon case

the extent of Nixon's cover up may not have been clear until the investigation. By contrast, many of Bush's crimes are admitted. It is simply a matter of Congress matching deeds to particular laws and treaties broken. While more will certainly come out, there is no reason for us to hold back from saying what we think what is already in the public record deserves.

Those of you opposing this are acting likey Bush MAY have done something wrong, like he has some overdue books but we aren't sure yet.

To bring up the idea of settling political scores is dishonest and frankly insincere. The evidence we already have is greater than for any past impeachment or threatened impeachment. You know that.

Frankly, I'm not sure what your real agenda is.

[yurbud]

57. consider alternative scenario: we sit by quietly, they investigate, get up to impeachment...

then the GOP PR machine kicks into high gear, phone calls go out from lobbyists and CEOs and the pressure mounts to drop the whole thing or make some symbolic gesture.

Without knowing they have the overwhelming support of the American people, they will cave in to that pressure, just as they did with the Iraq War Resolution, the Patriot Act, and confirming known war criminals to Bush's cabinet in his second term.

[madrchsod]

59. simple- the dems investigate bush and bring charges

then set in motion the impeachment or spend the next year restoring as many programs as possible that bush has cancelled or under funded. the reality is we can not do both.

which do you think the american people want?

[Swamp Rat]

65. IMPEACH BUSH!

[yurbud]

70. Swampy, cross post this anywhere you visit.

[yurbud]

69. Another advantage to calling for impeachment: makes investigations look moderate and restrained

by comparison.

If PR machine starts to give Pelosi, Waxman, and Conyers crap for investigating, they can say "Look, I got half a million letters demanding Bush's head on a plate. I owe it to my constituents to at least investigate and document what they are concerned about."

[Laelth]

71. This is the way it must happen.

Legislators become friends with one another inside the beltway. Our representatives do not want to impeach anyone. We have to make them do it.

I fully support this proposal. Nicely done, yurbud.



-Laelth

[puebloknot]

78. Postcards!

I support this idea, but think that postcards might be better than letters in envelopes because no one has to open them, and a single word -- Impeach -- would get the message across.

[yurbud]

87. I was thinking of that, but haven't taken time to condense message down to postcard length

Maybe:

• Iraq War lies
  
• 3,000 dead US troops & 650,000 dead Iraqis
  
• Blowing cover of CIA agent and endangering her colleagues lives to punish her husband for proving Bush lied
  
• torture
  
• warrantless wiretapping
  
• secret detention of citizens without habeas corpus rights
  
• Failure to fully cooperate with 9/11 investigations
  
• Inaction during Hurricane Katrina
  
• Cronyism in awarding no bid contracts and appointments
  
• pressuring government workers to falsify information
  
• signing statements that contradict plain intent of legislation
  
  

I'll put something like that on a postcard at cafepress tomorrow.

[puebloknot]

98. This is great!

And yes, it's better to have a concise laundry list, rather than just writing "impeachment" on a postcard.

I've posted elsewhere that that legendary activist, Jane Fonda, says writing personal letters/postcards and showing up in the streets are more powerful than all the faxes and e-mails in the world.

We could even get our own rubber stamp made of the list, to ink onto postcards and send out to our "rubber stamp Congress"!

Cheers,

Judy

[Clarkie1]

80. No thanks. Pelosi has an excellent agenda already. nt

[noiretextatique]

83. we must do this...the democrats have told us

this is the way it has to be done: the people must demand it. they can't do it without seemingly seeking revenge, hence the statements about backing off. this is our opportunity to do our duty as americans, while providing some cover for those who will be on the front lines, and still vulnerable to a hostile media.
count me in.

[yurbud]

86. Great! Pass it on too

[GreenTea]

84. Over 500K - Keep them coming!

[Senator]

89. Can we say Tsunami ?? n/t

[porphyrian]

91. I can't believe people are still resisting this. - n/t

[nam78_two]

92. The letter is good but

I think " Serious Negligence and deception on Environmental issues" should be its own bullet point-It will be in my letter !

Great idea-k&r. For one rare time I am for using more paper !

[Workers To Power]

93. nah

Impeachment will never happen, and even if it did; what would it accomplish?

So instead of Bush as president you'd have Cheney? Or maybe even Hasert? What would that change?

More than anything (as was the case with Nixon), impeachment is used by the ruling class in a pinch to restore "legitimacy" to its "democratic" system.

The truth is the system is no more legitimate than it is democratic.. no matter which of the two parties of the bosses is in power.

[earth mom]

96. Impeachment is up TO THE PEOPLE.

Simple as that.

Thanks for posting this. I and others have posted similar threads and we must keep hammering this home. Especially since the naysayers aka opposition-can you say DINO?-are really hitting this issue hard and instead want to continue playing politics instead of doing the right thing. They are wrong because kissing a$$ will get the dems NOWHERE. Not only that but Dems need to also figure out why they were voted into office by the vast majority of people: to kick the criminals to the curb! Leaving the criminals in office to do more damage is crazy and will only serve to tick voters off. Where's the common sense?!

As another DUer put it, You are either FOR THE CONSTITUTION OR AGAINST IT!

_______________________
Impeach Bush: Do it Yourself:

Do-It-Yourself Impeachment...
Impeach for Peace, a Minnesota-based impeachment group, has researched a method for impeaching the president using a little known and rarely used part of the Rules of the House of Representatives ("Jefferson’s Manual"). This document actually empowers individual citizens to initiate the impeachment process themselves.

more:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[yurbud]

102. you'll notice on my impeachment poll thread that the "shut up" position is a decided minority

which you would never guess from the number of threads they start.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[yurbud]

103. POLL: let fellow DUers know "shut up about impeachment" is a minority opinion LINK

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[yurbud]

104. IMPEACHMENT POSTCARDS now available (LINK)

See this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[Zhade]

115. Kick again!

NT!

[earth mom]

116. Kickety Kick Kick!

[rodeodance]

117. John Nichols, today said he was VERY disappointed in Pesoli

Wisconsin public Radio had a segment on today with John Nickols. He said he was very disappointed in Pelosi saying that impeachment was off the table. One of the things he said that many think ----promoted by RW talk radio---was that impeachment never should be considered during a time of war, yet, as his new book points out--most impeachment proceedings took place in a 'time of war" (see his new book below---with is a history of impeachment).

After listening to him i am of the mind that she should step aside and let someone else take over the speakership of the House--and put this issue back on the table.

He has a new book out--
http://www.wpr.org/hereonearth/archive_061113k.cfm

The Genius of Impeachment
November 13, 2006 Monday 3PM CT ( listen)
This hour on Here on Earth: Radio Without Borders, Jean Feraca and her guest, John Nichols, discuss his new book, The Genius of Impeachment.

Guest

* John Nichols, associate editor of the Capital Times and Washington DC writer for the Nation Magazine.


Related Links

* The Genius of Impeachment
* Nichols' bio and articles on The Nation
* Nichols' column on Capital Times

[yurbud]

123. the best thing the Democrats could do is stop taking ANY of the free advice right wing pundits give

If Rush Limbaugh squeals like a stuck pig, you are probably doing something RIGHT.

Taking their advice is like getting marksmanship advice from someone you are in the middle of a duel with--they might have a reason to give you bad advice.

[rodeodance]

118. you better believe I will send her a hand written letter --! thanks for the post