|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
![]() |
WilliamPitt
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:48 PM Original message |
Let's say Pelosi and the House actually do impeach Bush... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LynneSin
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:50 PM Response to Original message |
1. STOP IT STOP IT STOP IT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Blue_Roses
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:40 PM Response to Reply #1 |
167. lol |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
orleans
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:52 PM Response to Original message |
2. first maybe congress should poll this and check the temperature |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NYCGirl
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:00 PM Response to Reply #2 |
12. Online polls are highly unscientific. NT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zywiec
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:02 PM Response to Reply #2 |
16. Not to mention the poll is from 2005. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:06 PM Response to Reply #16 |
26. Exactly. And pro-impeachment sentiment has certainly waned in the past 18 months |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:26 PM Response to Reply #26 |
157. How do you know it hasn't? Here is a poll from this month |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
orleans
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 01:08 AM Response to Reply #16 |
127. if it's an "old" poll how are people still voting in it? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zywiec
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 06:55 AM Response to Reply #127 |
138. New York Times Endorses Ned Lamont |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
orleans
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 04:41 PM Response to Reply #138 |
175. what do you mean constantly clicking? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wryter2000
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:33 PM Response to Reply #2 |
42. That would work if the people got to vote on removal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coalition_unwilling
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:53 PM Response to Original message |
3. You ignore a preparatory step - the Resolution of Inquiry in |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zodiak
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:36 PM Response to Reply #3 |
44. Yes....I agree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wryter2000
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:38 PM Response to Reply #3 |
47. That's a good point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eridani
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 03:44 AM Response to Reply #47 |
133. How in fucking HELL are the Dems supposed to be conducting investigations? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wryter2000
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 09:49 AM Response to Reply #133 |
140. And they'd magically tell the truth if it were an impeachment investigation? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:30 PM Response to Reply #140 |
160. Well, impeachment seems to have magical powers to hear people around here invoke it.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eridani
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 07:12 PM Response to Reply #140 |
177. What do you suggest as an appropriate response? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kenny blankenship
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:26 PM Response to Reply #133 |
156. "Gonzo and Monica flip them the bird, Condi and the Psychopath in Chief have ignored every subpoena" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blm
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:33 PM Response to Reply #3 |
65. Exactly - Who will tell the people? Who will chronicle the actual historic record |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:54 PM Response to Original message |
4. It would show that our legislators are willing to uphold the Constitution |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lyonn
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:20 PM Response to Reply #4 |
41. That is the other consideration with an impeachment hearing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:32 PM Response to Reply #4 |
161. Why do we need to "Show" anything? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:54 PM Response to Original message |
5. Good point. We should only fight for things we're guaranteed of winning |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
helderheid
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:00 PM Response to Reply #5 |
13. Agreed. Fuck it all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftCoast
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:04 PM Response to Reply #13 |
20. So impeach because you can't think of anything better to do? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftCoast
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:07 PM Response to Reply #20 |
27. Mispost |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
helderheid
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:07 PM Original message |
Yea, that is exactly what I'm saying. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftCoast
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:12 PM Response to Original message |
34. Investigations will slow them down |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
helderheid
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:14 PM Response to Reply #34 |
37. And no impeachment will also let them get away with it all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftCoast
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:37 PM Response to Reply #37 |
45. Investigate. Build case. Impeach. Win conviction. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
helderheid
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:25 PM Response to Reply #45 |
60. We're on the same page. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rosesaylavee
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:31 PM Response to Reply #45 |
86. I thought this was a special two-part episode of Matlock |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:37 PM Response to Reply #37 |
164. False choice - and a silly one at that n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
snappyturtle
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:25 PM Response to Reply #34 |
112. Number one: I don't think impeachment would fail. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:39 PM Response to Reply #112 |
165. Because we've been so successful passing less devisive issues like war funding? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:13 PM Response to Original message |
35. Impeachment might be the best thing Congress could do |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:36 PM Response to Original message |
163. They need not cooperate with the hearings and so how will it slow them down?... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Individualist
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:40 PM Response to Reply #5 |
49. The can't win, won't fight excuse is disgusting |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:39 PM Response to Reply #49 |
166. I agree. That's probably why no one is making that excuse. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Forkboy
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:45 PM Response to Reply #5 |
95. And there you go. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:34 PM Response to Reply #5 |
162. Close. We should avoid doing things guaranteed to fail. See the difference? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rosemary2205
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:55 PM Response to Original message |
6. DU and the press will slaughter the Dems |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hekate
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:07 PM Response to Reply #6 |
28. I must glumly agree. I'd need to take a long vacation from DU until the hysteria died down. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hekate
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:08 PM Response to Reply #6 |
29. I must glumly agree. I'd need to take a long vacation from DU until the hysteria died down. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
oregonjen
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:58 PM Response to Original message |
7. Will, it's not only impeachment that we want |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:40 PM Response to Reply #7 |
67. Timetables? What would that accomplish? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
oregonjen
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:49 PM Response to Reply #67 |
72. Exactly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Telly Savalas
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:07 PM Response to Reply #7 |
109. It's not only timetables that we want. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tularetom
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:58 PM Response to Original message |
8. It's not just the failure to impeach |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:58 PM Response to Original message |
9. Justice is not like riding a bike. Use it or lose it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Joe Fields
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:59 PM Response to Original message |
10. Will, I do hope you are playing "devil's advocate" here. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DancingBear
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 02:59 PM Response to Original message |
11. Ah, the "conventional wisdom status quo" argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlooInBloo
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:01 PM Response to Original message |
14. You fight the fights that are worth fighting, not just the fights you think you can win. Cowards. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TahitiNut
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:01 PM Response to Reply #14 |
82. For once, we agree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlooInBloo
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 11:20 AM Response to Reply #82 |
146. Aight - now I *know* you're making shit up! :) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
calimary
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 10:26 AM Response to Reply #14 |
141. Here, here. AND Hear, hear. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:42 PM Response to Reply #14 |
169. Fights worth fighting are ones you have a hope of winning. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlooInBloo
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:50 PM Response to Reply #169 |
170. Only to a certain sort of person. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:55 PM Response to Reply #170 |
172. A person who is not a fool with dreams of martyrdom... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:01 PM Response to Original message |
15. Oops, forgot this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSK
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:02 PM Response to Original message |
17. no fucking way you can get 67 votes out of the Senate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nadinbrzezinski
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:03 PM Response to Original message |
18. I know the conventional view |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HiFructosePronSyrup
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:03 PM Response to Original message |
19. What will it accomplish? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ccpup
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:04 PM Response to Original message |
21. WilliamPitt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:12 PM Response to Reply #21 |
32. Gee, Will, looks like you've got a fan |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:14 PM Response to Reply #32 |
38. Not again! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:26 PM Response to Reply #21 |
113. Is that more or less what happened to Clinton? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AndyA
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:04 PM Response to Original message |
22. The real issue here is not if they try to impeach and lose, or impeach but don't convict. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
k8conant
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:05 PM Response to Original message |
23. Impeach 1st. Then in the Senate keep away 50 of the Senators and then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuyingThyme
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:05 PM Response to Original message |
24. I wonder why they even bothered to require a trial. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Junkdrawer
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:06 PM Response to Original message |
25. Before the Sam Ervin hearings, NO ONE would have guessed... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lyonn
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:30 PM Response to Reply #25 |
63. That is what some of us think will happen if impeachment occurs |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 11:02 PM Response to Reply #25 |
122. Sam Ervin's hearings weren't impeachment hearings |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LynneSin
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:09 PM Response to Original message |
30. Personally, I think there is a reason Pelosi & Reid aren't quite pushing impeachment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Buck Rabbit
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:38 PM Response to Reply #30 |
48. What makes you think there is anywhere near enough votes in the House? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
G_Leo_Criley
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:46 PM Response to Reply #30 |
53. well said ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftCoast
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:11 PM Response to Original message |
31. No conviction would equal exoneration for Bush |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
liberalnurse
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:12 PM Response to Original message |
33. Thanks for the realistic post.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DinahMoeHum
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:16 PM Response to Reply #33 |
39. ". . .they're looking at '08. . .". Well, the longer Bush and Cheney are around, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:41 PM Response to Reply #39 |
51. How many lives is that election victory worth? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DinahMoeHum
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 10:28 AM Response to Reply #51 |
142. Well, you know the saying about the wheels grinding exceedingly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 12:50 PM Response to Reply #142 |
148. Before I respond, I want to make sure I understand you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DinahMoeHum
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 01:42 PM Response to Reply #148 |
150. Jgraz, I'm sorry, we can't do anything about losing another |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:04 PM Response to Reply #150 |
152. Wow...ask the future 500-1000 dead troops if they agree with you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DinahMoeHum
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:41 PM Response to Reply #152 |
168. Did I say I like this scenario? No, I did not. So don't put words in my mouth. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:50 PM Response to Reply #168 |
171. Like it? No. You're just pointing out the up-side |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
G_Leo_Criley
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:14 PM Response to Original message |
36. k and 5th r |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
terip64
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:18 PM Response to Original message |
40. There are so many issues more worthy of our attention it is hard to know where to begin...n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:34 PM Response to Reply #40 |
43. But it's just stupid not to hold this threat over Junior's head. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Annces
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:37 PM Response to Original message |
46. We need to sting their asses |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nightjock
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:41 PM Response to Original message |
50. Yeah?.....So?.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Phredicles
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 03:43 PM Response to Original message |
52. What would impeachment accomplish? Rather let's ask, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lyonn
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:45 PM Response to Reply #52 |
70. Clearly spoken, Thanks. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:02 PM Response to Original message |
54. nothing that we "accomplish" under these criminals |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maven
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:05 PM Response to Original message |
55. Politics is also about consensus-building and perception |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kelly Rupert
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:11 PM Response to Original message |
56. See, WP, you need to realize that DU is only a form of entertainment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maven
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:20 PM Response to Reply #56 |
57. "truth to powerlessness" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kelly Rupert
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:40 PM Response to Reply #57 |
91. If we had the votes in the Senate, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maven
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:42 PM Response to Reply #91 |
92. Oh, OK. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kelly Rupert
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:49 PM Response to Reply #92 |
97. Which would then be signed into law by |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maven
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:57 PM Response to Reply #97 |
103. Right, because |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:29 PM Response to Reply #56 |
62. What crap. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:52 PM Response to Reply #56 |
75. If it's ok with you, I'll skip the condescension and go right to pissed off |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kelly Rupert
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:39 PM Response to Reply #75 |
89. And explain what difference posting on DU makes? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:47 PM Response to Reply #89 |
96. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kelly Rupert
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:53 PM Response to Reply #96 |
101. Apparently discussing politics on a politics discussion board |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jgraz
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:02 PM Response to Reply #101 |
105. I honestly don't understand what the hell you're talking about at this point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:56 PM Response to Reply #56 |
79. so, why are you here? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kelly Rupert
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:34 PM Response to Reply #79 |
87. Same reason you are. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Forkboy
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:49 PM Response to Reply #87 |
98. A lot of people are actively involved. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kelly Rupert
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:54 PM Response to Reply #98 |
102. Networking and finding meetup times/places is great. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Forkboy
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:03 PM Response to Reply #102 |
106. I can see the difference. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:58 PM Response to Reply #87 |
104. not why i am here. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Forkboy
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:51 PM Response to Reply #56 |
100. "I assume I'll get a condescending reply or two" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nam78_two
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:13 PM Response to Reply #100 |
153. I know |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:21 PM Response to Original message |
58. I believe it does many things. The alternative does more harm than none. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Usrename
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:24 PM Response to Original message |
59. Yeah, right, it was also WRONG to try and convict OJ Simpson. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:28 PM Response to Original message |
61. Besides Giving The Other Side Every Bit Of Ammo They Need To Win; Not Much. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Disturbed
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:41 PM Response to Reply #61 |
68. Would Rethugs in the Senate ignore the evidence of Crimes? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 11:03 PM Response to Reply #68 |
123. the same folks that voted to sustain chimpy's veto even though the public supports a timetable? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:31 PM Response to Original message |
64. Better yet, what is getting accomplished by the ignoring |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
StefanX
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:34 PM Response to Original message |
66. What would this "actually" accomplish? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KansDem
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:52 PM Response to Reply #66 |
77. Good points! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
StefanX
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:59 PM Response to Reply #77 |
80. Exactly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HCE SuiGeneris
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 01:59 AM Response to Reply #77 |
129. delete -- wrong thread area |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NuttyFluffers
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 11:08 PM Response to Reply #66 |
124. this is the correct answer. thank you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlackVelvet04
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:43 PM Response to Original message |
69. I keep seeing all these posts about impeachment..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:51 PM Response to Reply #69 |
74. And as an American I find that unacceptable. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
earth mom
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:47 PM Response to Original message |
71. Yeah, why even try to abide by the Constitution? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
derby378
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:51 PM Response to Original message |
73. History will not look kindly on the Democrats if they do nothing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ComerPerro
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:52 PM Response to Original message |
76. exactly. So many people here seem to think we have anything close to a 2/3 vote. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KansDem
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:06 PM Response to Reply #76 |
85. No, but many of us here think the evidence is so strong that there'll be a 2/3 vote... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ComerPerro
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:45 PM Response to Reply #85 |
94. Repigs are so ethical and honest that they will vote based on evidence, not party line? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dogday
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:54 PM Response to Original message |
78. And what is it they can accomplish? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TahitiNut
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 04:59 PM Response to Original message |
81. What does this add to what's been "discussed" so many times already? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vinca
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:02 PM Response to Original message |
83. It would offer a line in a history book 100 years from now and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Swamp Rat
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:05 PM Response to Original message |
84. I'd rather concentrate on the 'articles of impeachment now', and sort out your questions afterward. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
IChing
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:35 PM Response to Reply #84 |
88. "What do we have to lose by doing this?" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Swamp Rat
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:40 PM Response to Reply #88 |
90. "if we don't we will lose our democracy" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OxQQme
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:16 PM Response to Reply #90 |
110. Here's a 'series' question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wiggs
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:45 PM Response to Original message |
93. Might start to convince me that there is a true opposition party interested |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Morgana LaFey
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 05:50 PM Response to Original message |
99. Do you have any idea how many Americans want impeachment? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jack Rabbit
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:04 PM Response to Original message |
107. That is a chance I am willing to take to remove Bush and Cheney |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EndElectoral
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:07 PM Response to Original message |
108. Forget impeachment...they don't have the guts to keep timelines.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:17 PM Response to Original message |
111. I'll speak frankly. It still boggles my mind that we are discussing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nosmokes
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:45 PM Response to Original message |
114. If we don't impeach bush, then no one should ever be impeached. just |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Toots
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 06:52 PM Response to Original message |
115. In order to convict a person of a crime you need unanimous consent from a jury |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 08:00 PM Response to Original message |
116. It would slow Bush down. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mopinko
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 08:02 PM Response to Original message |
117. A FAILED IMPEACHMENT OPENS DOOR TO HAGUE |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 09:05 PM Response to Original message |
118. And just what if we do have 2/3's of Senate votes in 2009? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tavalon
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 10:19 PM Response to Original message |
119. I guess this is a fair question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hailtothechimp
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 10:56 PM Response to Original message |
120. So what is actually being accomplished right now??? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 10:57 PM Response to Original message |
121. Logic on the impeachment issue. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Voltaire
![]() |
Tue May-22-07 11:40 PM Response to Original message |
125. If I am not mistaken |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
earth mom
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 12:46 AM Response to Reply #125 |
126. The BEST post on this thread by far! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Amonester
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:27 AM Response to Reply #126 |
131. And the truth is, if Congress know these treasonous thieves did... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WA98296
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:36 AM Response to Reply #125 |
132. Voltaire, your response is so totally, exactly, and perfectly RIGHT ON! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
chknltl
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 04:18 AM Response to Reply #125 |
135. Thank You |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wiggs
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 11:27 AM Response to Reply #125 |
147. Thank you. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raine
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 01:50 AM Response to Original message |
128. A voice of reason |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HCE SuiGeneris
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:01 AM Response to Original message |
130. When will everything be just right for me? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eridani
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 03:46 AM Response to Original message |
134. Other issues? Like what? Using the Justice Department to spy on Americans and suppress votes? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
radfringe
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 04:57 AM Response to Original message |
136. so what will it take? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nunyabiz
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 06:25 AM Response to Original message |
137. What Impeachment would show is that the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sheerjoy
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 10:32 AM Response to Reply #137 |
144. Ooo that all sounds so great |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GeorgeGist
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 08:43 AM Response to Original message |
139. Another OJ ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sheerjoy
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 10:29 AM Response to Original message |
143. The whole procedure |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cleita
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 10:41 AM Response to Original message |
145. Forget impeachment. There are so many crimes under RICO |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spanone
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 12:53 PM Response to Original message |
149. I, for one, would love to say that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
underpants
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 01:49 PM Response to Original message |
151. Take a Friday afternoon and impeach him ..er them |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GOTV
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:19 PM Response to Original message |
154. Impeachment without conviction does accomplish something - but it's not something we want.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ganja Ninja
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:25 PM Response to Original message |
155. Let me ask you a question Will. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:28 PM Response to Reply #155 |
158. Their base doesn't have the votes to elect them. Which is why |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuyingThyme
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:28 PM Response to Original message |
159. Now that Iraq is off the table, there's plenty of room for impeachment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
chaska
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 02:56 PM Response to Original message |
173. In case someone else hasn't already said it, Republicans would be relieved to be rid... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zhade
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 03:24 PM Response to Original message |
174. Why do you predicate this question on a BULLSHIT false dichotomy? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Proud2BAmurkin
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 04:46 PM Response to Original message |
176. Showing the world at least half of the US is HONORABLE? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
porphyrian
![]() |
Wed May-23-07 07:19 PM Response to Original message |
178. What makes you think impeachment proceedings would prevent other worthy issues from being heard? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thu Jun 20th 2024, 04:51 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC