Successful impeachment would be a disaster.

[Perky]

Cmon people. Think through this before you call for impeachment.

A dem controlled house would never impeach Bush...NEVER

If successfully impeached by the House. And successfully convicted by the Senate. It would mean we get Cheney for president. Mum no thanks.

Scheming for a twofer? It would be viewed as a democratic vendetta. and there would be backlash. considerable backlash. But lets say the stars are aligned and kismet happens. Nancy Pelosi would become president. Is that what we want? Really?

Nancy Pelosi leading the charge to indict Bush and Cheney in order to ascend to the Presidency herself? She would be the least popular president in all of history and completely ineffective.

Principled impeachment or not. I want to win in 2008 in a landslide as a national repudiation of the NeoCon agenda. We win the house back and Bush is completely emasculated anyway.

If Pelosi were the heir apparent we would likely lose in the Fall of 2008. SHe would be swift-boated to a far greater degree than HRC.

No thanks.

[Walt Starr]

1. I disagree completely

In order to convict in the Senate, you'd need more than a dozen Repukes to get on board.

That simply won't happen, but impeachment would tarnish this fucker forever.

[tsuki]

8. And stop his agenda dead in its tracks. Impeach!

[Seabiscuit]

20. Ditto. All of the OP's "therefore"'s are based on erroneous assumptions.

That do not either necessarily or even logically flow from the premises.

IMPEACH NOW! (Both Bush AND Cheney!). Anything less is a sellout.

[Perky]

37. umm how about an example.

of my purported lack of logic

[Seabiscuit]

65. Are you sure you want to hear it?

Example one: "Scheming for a twofer? It would be viewed as a democratic vendetta. and there would be backlash. considerable backlash."

Who would view it as a "democratic vendetta?" And who would provide your "considerable backlash"? KKKarl Rove? If not already imprisoned by then for his Plame leaks, he'd be gone once Bush and Cheney were gone. So who's going to be the spinmeister for the no longer existent administration??? If Bush and Cheney were impeached it would be because at least two-thirds of the Senate convicted them of high crimes and misdemeanors under the articles of impeachment. You think the mainstream media's going to provide some "considerable backlash" to two-thirds of a Republican controlled Senate? That just doesn't compute. And who in their right mind would "view (it) as a democratic vendetta"??? Not the media - Impeachment would have been entirely bipartisan, by the numbers. I don't know where you get those notions, but it certainly does not flow logically from the premise - if Cheney and Bush are both impeached... then... no, your conclusions are illogical.

Example two: "Nancy Pelosi leading the charge to indict Bush and Cheney in order to ascend to the Presidency herself? She would be the least popular president in all of history and completely ineffective"

First logical fallacy: Your initial premise is a false assumption - Nancy Pelosi would not be the one to "lead the charge to indict Bush and Cheney". It would be the entire House Judiciary Committee. And before that possibly a Conyers-style investigation of the type Sam Ervin chaired during the Watergate hearings.

Second logical fallacy: "Nancy Pelosi... in order to ascend to the Presidency herself"??? You appear to be alone in the world accusing her of bad motives simply because she would be one among a majority in the House voting to Impeach. And she does not stand in line to ascend to the Presidency - she is not the Speaker of the House. And even if she were, the fact that both Bush and Cheney were impeached does not put her in charge of "leading the charge", and does not impugn her motive or character if she joins with the majority to impeach. There's nothing logical about your assumptions or conclusions.

Hence your final conclusion that "Nancy Pelosis... would be the least popular president in all of history and completely ineffective" is merely reckless crystal-ball gazing based in part on the previous two fallacious assumptions, and adds more fallacious assumptions, (1) that she would be viewed as tarnished simply because she agreed with the majority of Congress, and (2) that even if tarnished, as you wrongly assume, she would not be capable of doing anything during her term to rehabilitate her tarnished image.

I think everyone here wants to see the Democrats control Congress after the 2006 elections, and control the White House after the 2008 election. But that wish avoids, by its nature, the need to uphold the principle that ours is a nation of laws, not of men. And when a President and Vice President violate so many of our laws at will, the Constitution provides a remedy: we MUST impeach!

I could go on and address the rest of your post, but I think you must get the idea by now.

[Perky]

83. ANd you accuse me of Crystal Ball gazing?

1, Conyers recentcall for an impeachment inquiry has gotten nearly no press as all.

2. Do you realy think the GOP led by the RTNC would not attempt to Demonize Pelosi for having gained the SPeakership proceeded with, no doubt endorsing a vonyers lef move on an impeachment inquiry of Both Bush and CHeny when she is next in line. for the Oval? Are you really that naive, It will be spun as the worst abuse of power in History.

3. DOn't think for a second that any impeachment hearing could ever be initiated without the SPeaker authorization. Its completely naiive to think that COnyeres could fo it on his own in Judiciary. She would have to use draconian tactics to whip her side of the aisle in place to create a bipartisan Watergate-type process. ANd if you recall the Ervin committee was a senate committee investigating watergate criminality.. and Pete Rodino led the HJC committee investigating whether impeachment should occur. In a house that is sure to be closely divided it would be a complete DOnnybrook from start to finish. SHe would completely alienate virtually helf the House by strong arming the process through.

4. SHould se succeed to the presidency... SHe would still have to contend with a practivally evenly divided house for a year meaning that she would have no success on the domestic front and on Iraq with an equally divided house it is dobful she could build the center-left coalition necessasry to bring the troops home.. How many of her nominees for Cabinet Secrearies do you think she would get through with a Senate that has has 46 or 47 republicans? SHe would never gain the respect of the JCS

[Seabiscuit]

89. Sorry, but I can't make much sense of your reply.

It all just gets murkier and murkier.

You asked me for my analysis of your original post. I gave it to you. You obviously didn't like it, but there are too many convolutions in your reply for me to want to take the time to wade through it.

You seem to be thoroughly entrenched in the conclusions you jumped to in your OP which make no logical sense to me in the first place, and your follow-up is even more tortured, so...

I'll just leave it alone - to agree to disagree.

[Perky]

27. But that is the prima facia problem.

Impeachment should never be about tarnishing a president. That is what the Republicans did with CLinton/


Impeachment is about protecting the constitution agains the tyranny of the executive.

If you are going to impeach you need to do so on legitimate constitutional grounds.

The wiretapping issue is that grounds to be sure but it can't be based on image-tarnishing as the underlying rationale.

[Kingshakabobo]

34. I think we can take our chances in the realm of public opinion.

Blow-job vs. illegal spying and lying to congress to start a war

With impeachment comes investigation and uncovering of the truth. Besides, it's the right thing to do.

[Walt Starr]

43. Impeachment is the right thing to do

even if you know for a fact that politics would keep the conviction from happening.

My argument was why impeachment would not be a disaster.

[zippy890]

49. every effort to totally humilate him is worth it

our role is to try and do everything we possibly can to "tarnish that fucker" in any conceivable way.

Bush & Cheney to the Hague! War criminals the lot of them

[mattomjoe]

2. Since I believe Cheney's the one who is truly in charge anyway,

why not put him out there and expose him for what he is?

[stepnw1f]

3. Whatever

They broke the f*n law... THIS is beyond politics. If we do not seek impeachment, others will just do the same, and maybe even more. Whose side are you on.

Cheney would be politically neutered, since we'd have the majority in either the House or Senate.

We have to make the Bush Administration the poster child of Corruption itself. Without impeachment the right will claim we were making scandals up because if they had done something wqrong, why didn't the dems hold them accountable. This strategy you asking for is worse than if they don't hold to principals.

[carolinalady]

4. not Pelosi, Hastert and as far as Cheney is concerned-he is as

guilty if not more guilty than Bush and BOTH need to be taken out. F*** politics. I am not so sure Bush won't trun on him when the hammer comes down.

[mattclearing]

11. The OP assumes a Democratic takeover in '06.

Hence, Pelosi.

[carolinalady]

21. Doesn't she have to be chosen first? They might pick someone

else if they have a larger plan.

[mattclearing]

24. She has proven to be effective.

No reason for change. Do you have a problem with Pelosi?

[carolinalady]

33. No, but if the House members feel the same way the OP does

they may choose someone else if they pursue a double impeachment. I just don't think we should be worrying this far ahead when the true danger is right in front of our faces right now!

[Perky]

31. Wrong. if Dems take the House. Pelosi is Speaker (n/t)

[liberal N proud]

5. If Cheney would become president, it would only last a few hours

He would either resign for health reasons or drop dead in the oval office.
These people must be punished and just voting them out of office will not suffice.

[mwb970]

81. And just how would we "vote them out of office" anyway?

They own the voting machines and control the election "results". As long as one (corrupt, dishonest) party controls the vote counting, with no checks or balances, that party will be ascendant. There's no way around this.

[El Supremo]

6. But how many more are going to die at the hands of these maniacs?

Pelosi would make a good interim president.

[aka-chmeee]

7. Pelosi is Speaker of the House?????????!!!!! n/t

[mattclearing]

14. It assumes Dems retake the House in '06. n/t

[mattclearing]

Not buying it.

President Pelosi for a year instead of Bush? How could any real Democrat pass that up?

This self-defeating attitude by Dems is out of control. It's always, "wait until next time," isn't it?

And even so, Conyers is spearheading the impeachment movement, so your facts are off on Pelosi running for the job.

Pelosi didn't break the law. And once in power, she would earn the public trust.

[carolinalady]

13. Pelosi is not in line for Presidency. It is Hastert. n/t

[mattclearing]

19. It assumes Dems retake the House in '06...hence the "for a year."

I'm not an idiot.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. It doesn't matter whether we wind up with Cheney as the actual president

since he's been the de facto president all along. Impeachment is important if for no other reason than to show the rest of the world that the United States has not completely lost its way.

[lonestarnot]

15. If we impeach both the chimpshitler and d-dick would Pelosi

be Prez?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

35. No, not unless she becomes Speaker of the House. As of now, it's this:

After the Vice President, we get:

Speaker of the House - Dennis Hastert
President pro tem of the Senate - Ted Stevens
Secretary of State - Condoleezza Rice
Secretary of the Treasury - John Snow
Secretary of Defense - Donald Rumsfeld
Attorney General - Alberto Gonzales
Secretary of the Interior - Gale A. Norton
Secretary of Agriculture - Mike Johanns
Secretary of Commerce - Carlos Gutierrez
Secretary of Labor - Elaine Chao
Secretary of Health and Human Services - Mike Leavitt
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development - Alphonso Jackson
Secretary of Transportation - Norman Mineta
Secretary of Energy - Samuel Bodman
Secretary of Education - Margaret Spellings
Secretary of Veterans Affairs- Jim Nicholson
Secretary of Homeland Security - Michael Chertoff

They all suck until you get to Mineta. So impeachment and conviction wouldn't get us any better people. It would, however, teach the rest of them an extremely important lesson having to do with not fucking with the Constitution.

[lonestarnot]

46. oh but come Nov.....

[ticapnews]

47. Some of those people are ineligible

because of the requirement that only people born in the United States can be president.

Not that it matters. Neither the Chimperor nor Lord Vader are going to be impeached.

[lonestarnot]

60. We shall see if he is above the law. Wait until after the 1st of the year

:*

[Seabiscuit]

67. Hastert and Stevens have GOT to be better than Bush and Cheney.

Simply by virtue of the fact that NO ONE could be as bad as Bush and Cheney.

[lonestarnot]

10. WTF?

[gristy]

12. disaster or no, he must be impeached

Read and think about this article in The Nation (last 3 paragraphs below), and see if you change your mind.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060109/schell

The Hidden State Steps Forward
.
.
.
With Bush's defense of his wiretapping, the hidden state has stepped into the open. The deeper challenge Bush has thrown down, therefore, is whether the country wants to embrace the new form of government he is creating by executive fiat or to continue with the old constitutional form. He is now in effect saying, "Yes, I am above the law--I am the law, which is nothing more than what I and my hired lawyers say it is--and if you don't like it, I dare you to do something about it."

Members of Congress have no choice but to accept the challenge. They did so once before, when Richard Nixon, who said, "When the President does it, that means it's not illegal," posed a similar threat to the Constitution. The only possible answer is to inform Bush forthwith that if he continues in his defiance, he will be impeached.

If Congress accepts his usurpation of its legislative power, they will be no Congress and might as well stop meeting. Either the President must uphold the laws of the United States, which are Congress's laws, or he must leave office.

[htuttle]

16. It would be a hobbled Cheney presidency, however

If we never hold criminals responsible for their crimes, they will keep committing them.

The American people have let a LOT of criminals go over the years, and I fear that this time, if we let the crooks get away the rest of the world will never forgive us. I think the ONLY way we can gain our respect back on the world stage is if we actually hold them legally accountable this time.

Unfortunately, at this rate it's likely that we will NEVER regain the respect we once had -- especially if we intend to act according to political calculus instead of doing the right and just things.

[Joe Turner]

41. Indeed, enough of the strategery. Impeach the Traitorous F*ck! n/t

[More Than A Feeling]

17. If this party also won't uphold the law as set down in the constitution

what's the point? Bush is defying the congress and the constitution. Failing to stand up to that using all the tools set down by the founders to deal with this situation would mean that the Democratic party is likewise defying the constitution. Why should I be motivated and excited about a party like that? We have become so beaten down by the fear of "backlash", that we fail to see the possibilities of "frontlash". I believe that taking bold action to impeach the president would excite the American people. They will respect the courage and the principles of the Democratic Party.

IMPEACH.

[marylanddem]

18. You're kidding, right? n/t

[dorktv]

22. Are you okay with President Bush being left in office then?

Even after all he has done?


Sometimes, life only gives you two hard choices and this is one of them. I know it would not be great to have a double impeachment but frankly, we have little other choice given what George W. Bush has done as president. In 1967 the Supreme Court in Berger vs. United States and Katz Vs. United States said that our civil liberties come before National Security. Are you willing to let someone who would violate the law, and the Constitution stay in office simply out of interest for the Democratic Party's future or is America more important then any one party?

[Perky]

55. If the grounds for impeachment are the wiretaps alone.

I would faveor censure and then impeachment for willful diregard for the law if he continues.

[dorktv]

68. Congress can impeach or deny funds. The Constitution does not

allow for anything less.

And willful disregard for the law of the land is a crime, depending on the law it is a high crime.

[unblock]

23. i disagree completely

i do think a successful impeachment is extremely remote, and certainly not possible without democratic control of congress both houses of congress, which itself is unlikely at best.

however, assuming we DID have a successful impeachment, then that means that a whole lot of BAD stuff gets aired along with it; shrub is tarred forever; cheney is temporarily president but can't do much, what with being tied to that legacy AND with a presumably democratic congress blocking everything and investigating the rest.

then the democrats win the white house in 2008 promising to clean up the mess as the public is fed up with banana republican corruption. whatever gave the democrats control of congress in 2006 would still hold for the white house in 2008. impeachment wouldn't hurt us, not with the goods we got on them.

[IdaBriggs]

25. Pelosi as President -- YEAH! As for the fear of backlash,

it didn't seem to matter that much for the Republicans. Clinton's impeachment was OPPOSED by most people in this country, and we still ended up with Bush as President.

Either way, the sooner the Bush cabal are out of power and in jail, the better off the country will be. I won't give money to any politician who doesn't support impeachment, and I certainly won't support the Dems if they don't.

[bigtree]

26. I'll take anything that throws Bush's assault on us off balance

[w13rd0]

28. Impeach...

...because it's the CONSTITUTIONAL thing to do when a President abuses his power and acts as if he is above the law.

[porphyrian]

29. Cheney wouldn't last long, and couldn't do more damage...

...than he does anyway. Do you think any of his agenda hasn't been pushed through just because bush is President? And who cares if impeaching both of them is viewed as a vendetta? They're both implicated in criminal wrongdoing, and deserve impeachment. This is bigger than any politician's career, this is about the integrity of the highest posts in the White House and our nation. What more damage can Pelosi do than is going to be done with bush and cheney in office, especially when we take back Congress?

Bush is out of office in 2008 whether he's impeached or not. If we do not officially recognize his illegal actions during his Presidency, we degrade ourselves, our government and our nation. Fuck that. Impeach them all. Now.

[WI_DEM]

30. Bottom line is Bush deserves to be impeached for

his crimes while in office. It didn't stop the Republicans from impeaching Clinton for his cheating on Hillary--of course he wasn't convicted. Maybe it does mean getting Cheney, but we already have Cheney calling the shots already and instead of hiding behind the curtain he would then be front and center--unless he, himself is impeached. I'd take Pelosi any day and she would be president and be able to actually lead as president before '08 and people then would be much more comfortable with her.

[unblock]

32. on the REMOTE chance that impeachment appears likely

IF democrats regain the house in the 2006 elections AND if there's any serious threat of actual impeachment and removal, then the banana republicans would short-circuit the entire process by having shrub step aside.

one way or another they would make the problem go away rather than face a successful impeachment. note that a bunch of republicans would have to go along with successful removal and those republicans would quietly warn the powers-that-be what's in store so that they can manage it on their own terms.

shrub would get thrown megabucks to retire, and they could fake a stroke or something, whatever.

[Kazak]

36. The Cheney-president strawman, eh?

We can't let fear of a Cheney presidency prevent us from doing what is the right thing to do. We do what we must, and then deal with the resulting situation next. Just MHO.

[The Stranger]

38. Karl Rove -- is that you?

Of course, polls show impeachment to be completely out of the question. :sarcasm:

Thanks for the kind words, Karl!

[emald]

You really think your gonna get a vote in 2008?

really? You believe the election in 2004 was straight up? You won't win in 2008, nobody will. It will all be made up numbers and so too will be 2006.
So what your saying is it is expedient to allow the frothing idiot another three years of destruction because the follow on's are more disgusting? Surely we must get rid of this most ugly administration, ASAP.
Waiting for fair elections is, well, just a laugh.
guess it really doesn't matter anymore, no one can stop this monkey faced idiot from utterly destroying our once beloved country. We have become a fascist state; it has already happened.

[Tarc]

85. bit too much tinfoil there for me

[marylanddem]

39. Your message inspired me to write Rep. Steny Hoyer,

my Congressman, and urge him to support Congressman Conyers' initiatives to get the ball rolling on impeachment. Thanks for the inspiration.

[EST]

40. I respect your penchant for analysis.

Back to the drawing board. I've tried being an advocate for both views and there is no substitute for an all out, full speed ahead at flank attack, caution to the winds. We must not care whom the brooms of ethics gather up-if you're dirty, you're gone.
If you place your personal ambition above service, and still choose to play in the public arena-you're gone. The only cure for what ails us is thorough housecleaning, with an eye toward justice, not mercy or retribution.
We claim to be a nation of laws; now we need to act like it.
At this point in the slide toward fascism, it's the bitter pill, now, or armed insurgency and homeland terrorism, later. Action must come swiftly and incisively, with all attention to the legal niceties as well as a complete follow through.

[Perky]

45. Myopia runs Amok

Folks He will never be impeached over Iraq and it should not be seen as vendetta. It isnot about punsihing or tarnishing Bush... It is about the Consitution, This has to be about arrogance of power

The focus has to be on the illegal wiretaps.

Honestly a Cheney presidency scares me more... He would get to choose his own heir apparent as VEEP, A NEO-CON for sure.

[marylanddem]

48. O.K., Karl, time to stop DUing & get back to work! n/t

[giant_robot]

42. There's no need to fear a Cheney presidency.

If Bush is removed from office, Cheney would instantly become the lamest of lame ducks. He has a 19% approval rating right now, and that will go nowhere but down in the wake of Bush's impeachment proceedings. The republicans will be falling all over themselves to distance themselves from Cheney and the taint of scandal. Cheney himself said he has no designs on an '08 run for the White House, but it won't really matter, since there's no way in hell he'll be nominated.

[Perky]

51. But he would get to choose his VP.

ANd the VP would be the heir apparent.

[me b zola]

72. And who would they choose as their heir apparent?

Seriously. You are shadow boxing.

[meganmonkey]

44. Criminals deserved to be punished.

That's all there is to it.

We are a society that is supposed to be based on laws. Maybe we need to start acting like it?

:shrug:

[Marleyb]

50. WTF? We are already living in a disaster!

Cheney is already running the country.

How is it going to get worse if we expose the bastards and hold them accountable!?

Impeachment March on State of the Union Jan 31
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5701703

[beingthere]

52. Disagree totally.

[baldguy]

53. "We can't impeach Hitler, because then we'd have Goering as Chancellor."

This isn't about politics. It's about upholding the principals on which America was founded. If that means removing every elected or appointed official who stands in the way, then so be it.

We all should stop acting like good Germans and start being ornery Americans again!

[ClassWarrior]

54. Successful IMPEACHMENT will be a victory...

...for truth, justice, and the American way.

And will blaze a trail for restoring our democracy.

Never Give Up.

[Orsino]

56. Impeach away.

A President Dick Cheney would be the lamest of ducks.

[flyarm]

57. wrong wrong wrong!! there has never been anyone more deserving of

impeachment ..this guy makes nixon look like a dove!!

or and angel!

its bullshit to say we should not demand impeachment..cheney would be cut off at the knees...

or nuts!!

and the repubs would all be toast!

they will be anyway when abramoff sings like a bird...and hearings are held on spying on us!

impeachment would neuter the entire rethug party ...and thats what needs to be done..
then we clean all their clocks ..and also clean out our own house ...

its like a do over..we need a thorough house cleaning on both sides...
but we must start with the most evil and work our way through taking our nation back!!

thats the only way this nation will survive ...with any of our moral compasses still in order..or the very values we have known as the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA...

fly

[proud2BlibKansan]

58. We do it for the distraction factor.

dubya already has had to scrap his SS plans. Some Senators are insisting that Alito's approval hearings be delayed until after they hold hearings looking into the spying issue. We add impeachment hearings into this mix and he won't be able to accomplish a damn thing.

[longship]

59. Do you honestly believe that?

Do you you honestly think that a Congressional investigation leading up to the impeachment of the Chimp would not also find sufficient grounds for impeachment of Crashcart? Many of us, and John Dean as well, think that Crashcart is the source for many of the impeachable policies in this administration. It's simple here. Once they start picking at the scab, all is going to come to light. If Chimp is impeached and removed, it is very likely that Crashcart will go as well.

More importantly, probably no presidency in our history has committed so many clearly impeachable offenses. As others have said on these forums it is no longer a question of whether Chimp should be impeached. The only question is when impeachment will be possible. Indeed, Chimp must go, no matter who is Veep. If President Crashcart worries you, than it becomes all the more important for the process to go forward in a meaningful way so that Veep Crashcart's role can be exposed.

[MoonRiver]

61. I can hardly believe this OP.

Sorry, but it sounds like either a Carl Rove or DLC argument, designed to protect the fascists. Please, get a grip.

[eShirl]

62. WE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO IMPEACH.

and I would say the same if a Democratic president was trying to grab dictatorial power. If Cheney's next, then get the case for his impeachment ready.

[applegrove]

63. Yes - it would allow the Repukes & Neocons to "rebrand".

[Raydawg1234]

64. If we get a Dem. controlled congress, we could remove Bush from office,

and investigate Cheney as well. There are plenty of crimes here.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

66. Bush doesn't have much power now & we'd still have a Repub Congress

and Dick Cheney would be calling the shots even more then than he does now.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

69. Good grief. Did you actually think before you posted this?

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

70. If he's still in office in '08, this country is finished.

It's just way too much time for him to do far too much damage- and he has the mindset to go the scorched earth route if he thinks he's in trouble. We need him out NOW.

[KyuzoGator]

71. If Bush is impeached, Cheney would resign.

Cheney has succeeded by operating behind the scenes. Vampires hate the sunlight, you know?

[Raine]

73. YES!!! Finally

a post on impeachment that I can agree with! :thumbsup: YES, chimp deserves it but impeachment would be a disaster in the long run for the Democratic Party. Let the idiot serve out his full term, no excuses from the repukes that they were 'screwed' out of him finishing and that's why things are a mess. Let history show he had eight years and he botched them horribly.

[donheld]

74. We can't, we'll lose, we're cooked, give up. Resistance is futile

:cry: Let's just give up, what's the use of trying to better things. :scared: We can't, :cry:We can't, :cry:We can't! :cry: Resistance is futile :nuke: I can't believe this thread was even started. :banghead::grr:

[B Calm]

75. What kind of crap is this!! IMPEACH the BASTARD

[LincolnMcGrath]

76. "SHe would be swift-boated to a far greater degree than HRC"

:rofl:

The ONLY person more hated (on the right) than HRC, is WJC.

[WilliamPitt]

77. Cheney would be an emasculated President

Utterly powerless, a placeholder until '08.

Can you imagine a more fitting fate for the man who wanted to recreate the imperial presidency?

I can't.

Get over your fears. There is far, far more good than bad behind the 'I' word. The total political paralysis of the administration is only one aspect.

Pssst...if they can't govern, they can't fuck up. Pass it on.

[MessiahRp]

79. The other thing I would worry about is this...

If Bush can order NSA to break the law at will and can order attacks when he feels like it (which I believe he would have done without Congress' approval of the Iraq invasion), then wouldn't Cheney be even more dangerous to order agencies to break law by his executive order or order military attacks on Iran or worse?

This is a severely demented man we are speaking of here. He not only backs Bush's illegal tactics but he probably ordered them.

The only thing I wonder is if there is a way to tie both of them to illegal activity so they could both be impeached in one fell swoop.

Rp

[NYC Liberal]

80. "but he probably ordered them."

And that's the thing: he's most likely behind all of this anyway. Right now he has a 19 percent approval rating because he works behind the scenes and doesn't really care; if he became president, the spotlight would be shined on him...except he wouldn't have the "nice guy" image to fall back on. He'd be utterly powerless...his 19 percent approval would only go DOWN in the wake of Bush's removal from office. There's no way in hell any Republicans would even be seen with him, unless they WANTED to lose.

[MrSlayer]

78. Is every President from Clinton on going to be impeached?

Not that Chimp doesn't actually deserve it but is this going to become a pattern? I don't remember impeachment calls on Poppy but I do remember them vaguely on Reagan. Were there people calling for Carter's impeachment way back when?

[B Calm]

84. Face it, republicans have sucessfully turned the USA into a

BANANA REPUBLIC

[Caretha]

82. I can't believe I'm reading this thread on DU!

I'm truly amazed. This hand wringing and "Oh Dear what if" attitude sounds purely contrived. Why? You got to be f*cking kidding or have some kind of sick agenda.

This is not a game! I repeat - This is not a game! This administration has broken the LAW and defied the Congress and Judicial branches of our government. They have spit in the face of Americans and said they damn well are going to do what they please irregardless. They have done it clandestinely and now openly.

We're literally in the "fight of our lives" and the future of our country. If you don't see that, then get out of the way and quit being an obstructionist for those of us who realize it. In other words - if you can't be a part of the solution, quit being part of the problem.

[rman]

86. You better believe it. It's exactly because DU is DU,

that it's such an attractive target for individuals with a certain agenda.

After all, a "DU-er" is just someone who posts on DU - and anyone can do so.

[kenny blankenship]

87. YEAH! Yeah that's right, and if we had forced Nixon to resign or

impeached him, Gerald Ford would have won in 1976.
Oh wait. Nixon was forced to resign because he was going to be impeached. And Ford lost in 1976 to Carter.

Sorry Perky, we got President Cheney already. Strip Cheney of that "plain spoken" pork rind eatin' mask they call George W. and he'll become even less popular than he is now, which is about as well-liked and popular as Pol Pot. Net result, mild positive for whomever we nominate in '08.

[info being]

88. Pelosi would be the best President ever.

We could stand proud in support of her.