You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #152: This was covered right after the election... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-05 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #139
152. This was covered right after the election...
and I believe some qualified (attys?) were involved.

In summary, this was the gist of the thread:

Once Bush was sworn in (1/20), the only way to remove him from office is to impeach him.

But there must be legal grounds to impeach him for this to happen.

The ONLY legal grounds would be if you could prove he personally knew about the election fraud (they used terms like willful, foreknowledge, etc., as I remember). This would be much harder to prove than election fraud. In reality, He may never have been told. Rove is probably smart enough NOT to have told him. The "man behind the curtain" doesn't need to tell "the great OZ" which levers he pulls.

Would he (be forced to) resign in this case? We can only speculate on this point. Going by the Bushco history, I doubt it. Look at the current Delay situation, etc. They have NO sense if integrity anymore, and a repub congress is unlikely to force it. And the American public seem to be so desensitized to the shame of Bushco, I doubt enough would call loudly enough for it.

If he did step down for some reason, the rules of succession would apply.

Our best strategy is to expose the fraud still. It greatly increases our chance of getting meaningful election reform. It would probably seriously damage the effectiveness of the Bush admin (and repub congress; and would likely hurt them badly in the 2006 and '08 elections.

No doubt, it would certainly ruin his legacy. History would NOT wait to judge him until after he was dead (as he told Bob Woodward). He would live the rest of his life in a shame that would certainly be much greater than anything Nixon ever experienced - if that's any consolation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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