Regarding Impeachment. DNC Howard Dean on CNN this AM.

[chill_wind]

Just now, on Dem agenda. "Impeachment is not something Democrats are particularly interested in. I don't think you're going to see that come up at all."

[jarnocan]

1. wimpy and stupid answer IMHO WORLDCANTWAIT!!!!

He could discuss the importance of accountability, and just leave it open. I just don't get it sometimes, this pandering to the "undecided" who must be the most ignorant folks, and timid around.
All the more reason www.worldcantwait.net Don't count on the elections. VOTE but don't count on it to save the day.
I also hate seeing Bush talking about the wonderful economy and no one interviewing him even mentions the cost of the war, and how much it is going to cost US to help our vets recover.

[Cassandra]

2. Let the investigations begin...

and the country will see what was done and be calling for impeachment. When investigations began against Nixon, the point was to find out what the hell was going on. Once people saw the truth, impeachment or resignation naturally followed.

[jarnocan]

7. excactly- some good responses nt

[SouthernBelle82]

23. Exactly

With John Conyers head of the investigation the public will know. I think the public already knows though but this is playing it smart and not following into the republicans trap.

[Ganja Ninja]

27. Yup! Investigate them and expose them for what they are.

Impeach him and the whole GOP in the court of public opinion. Make it so the nation becomes ill at the very mention of the words republican, conservative and neo-con so they'll never vote GOP again. We can pursue criminal charges once the whole bunch is out of power.

[onenote]

30. a bit of history

You are right that Congressional hearings played a role in uncovering the evidence that led to impeachment proceedings against nixon and, ultimately, to his resignation. However, the impeachment effort came relatively late in the game. The factors that built to the demand for impeachment were several. First, you had members of the nixon administration indicted by a federal grand jury for obstruction of justice in the investigation of the watergate break-in; second, you had the revelation that there white house tapes; third, you had nixon's refusal to turn over those tapes and, critically, the Saturday Night Massacre; it was only after the Saturday Night Massacre that calls for impeachment became serious, and even then it was another six months before the formal impeachment inquiry was initiated; fourth, the impeachment effort gained momentum when it was revealed that some of the tapes were missing and one had an inexplicable "18 minute gap"; fifth, the effort got a further push in the Spring of 1974 when nixon released transcripts of some of the tapes which showed him to be a petty, profane man, thus further alienating the public; sixth, the final nails in the coffin, without which impeachment might not have moved forward, was the Supreme Court decision in July 1975 requiring Nixon to turn over the tapes; whehter the impeachment inquiry would've resulted in the Judiciary Committee recommending impeachment if the SCOTUS had ruled in favor on Nixon is something we will never know; moreover, whether the entire House would've impeached (probably) and the Senate convicted (unclear) was mooted by the subsequent disclosure of the smoking gun tape and Nixon's resignation three days later.

The reason for giving this background is to point out that in the Nixon situation it wasn't simply a case of investigations producing information that resulted in impeachment. It was a sequence of events within a particular context. One critical differnece that cannot be overlooked is that chimpy will resist subpoenas and document demands citing executive privilege and national security. While Nixon's efforts were thoroughly rebutted by the Supreme Court in US v. Nixon, I am sadly confident that the current SCOTUS is likely to side with chimpy if he asserts executive privilege based on national security with respect to information relating to the run up and conduct of the war in iraq (or the "war on terror"). If the SCOTUS sides with chimpy, I don't see the parallels with the Nixon situation holding.

[w13rd0]

3. He's right...

...as much as I might like to see it happen, it would be a misappropriation of resources. Investigtions, sure. Obstruction of the Bush agenda, definately. But our goal should be to take over Congress and cripple the Bush agenda while preparing to take the White House back in 2008. We can use investigations and subpeona power to establish our case as to why they must be turned out, but Impeachment would be a monumental effort requiring more coordination, and frankly, more power, than we presently have, or even that we might have in taking both houses back...

[Cha]

14. Yeah, we'll be freakin' fortunate

to take over congress if the maniac rove's plans fall through and the Dems actually win. I'm amazed that it's(IMPEACHMENT) even being bantered about!

[gully]

4. I don't really care about impeachment. Bush will leave office in disgrace

regardless and we'll be in a position to take the OO in 08.

[SouthernBelle82]

25. I personally

want to see the bastard up for war crimes at the Hague just like the Nazi's had to go through. I saw a History channel special (of course) about the Nazi's and their trials at Numermberg and at the end the person telling the story (a col) said that they had the investigation's so a country can never invade another country again. We have to impeach and put Bush up to the world court. Not just us with people who can be corrupted like the 9/11 Commission but with outsiders who know more. Bush can't go to Paraguay.

[gully]

29. I can't argue with the fact that it would be just to see * co.

pay the ultimate price.

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. As much as it's going to disappoint some, these comments don't bother me

Wish I would have seen it. :(

In the political arena, this is the SMART thing to be saying, IMO. The RNC is trying its best to make Nancy Pelosi-Howard Dean-Ted Kennedy the big boogeyman right up there on par with OBL. One peep out of any of their mouths that Impeachment is goal #1 would be a non-stop commercial with every type of conceivable media.

Personally, I would rather hear them say something along the lines of "Democrats are going to make Congress WORK and perform their Constitutional responsibilities as a branch of Government." But, I'll take the no-Impeachment for now. Once oversight hearings are commencing, it's going to become clear what should happen. And the public has to be behind them in order for it to take place.

Oddly, I'm glad they're 'keeping their powder dry.' LOL!

[chill_wind]

6. Inflection and word emphasis his. nt

[in_cog_ni_to]

8. *snicker*

Nope. We won't impeach.

I think we should play along.

The Democrats are NOT going to show their hand until the election is over. Investigations WILL warrant an Impeachment.

[Rosemary2205]

9. So CNN ""IS'' working for Karl Rove after all.....

The whole point of the question is an attempt to get Dem leaders to go on the record that they'll impeach so just enough independents will get spooked off from voting Dem.

[Bandit]

16. You may very well be surprised at how many Independents

actually favor Impeachment. Independents usually see things a little clearer than partisans. It is obvious to all that look. Impeachment is warranted.

[SouthernBelle82]

26. Exactly

Who isn't working for them?

[Nite Owl]

10. The Blue Dress vs The Constitution

I think they are afraid that since Clinton's #'s went up and the gop bore the retribution for Clinton the same will happen to them but they don't see the differences. This isn't frivolous it's about the fabric of our country. People have to demand it.

[madfloridian]

11. I agree.

You don't talk about it now. Not if you want to win.

Everyone knows there will be investigations, but the right wing is just waiting in the wings for a Democrat to say the word impeachment too loudly.

Actually I did not see CNN, but I saw him on MSNBC just before that. I was proud he was representing our party.

[mmonk]

12. Dang it.

This piece of plastic I'm trying to put across my keyboard to keep from typing in these threads won't fit.

[chill_wind]

13. He wasn't asked specifically about impeachment. He volunteered.

He was asked about "Iraq, the questions Americans have, the billions spent and whether there would be any investigations."

Dean: I'm sure there will probably be a little of that. Then hastened on to the quote above. Paraphrasing: We've just got get back on track, got to repair our relations abroad and our image in the world, no immediate withdrawel of troops, can't leave, everyone agrees, that would be a disaster, a plan of phased redeployment over a reasonable period of time with troops still handy somewhere in the region yada yada.

[madfloridian]

15. He was right.

I agree with that approach.

[shance]

28. Everyone in Washington establishment circles may agree that soldiers

should remain in harms way.

BUT AMERICANS DON'T.

TROOPS MUST COME HOME NOW.

Every single second they remain, more evil and more wrongdoing will have to be undone.

We are already on OVERTIME and overdrive.

Wake up Governor. You're above believing such rhetoric.

[flyarm]

17. No responsible dem congress critter could possibly say impeachment ..

no one can say impeachment until you prove there was wrong doing that stands up to the high bar for impeachment..

no different than a court of law..innocent until proven guilty...

but do not think that the dems won't have hearings..they will and two congress people have the goods on the crimes committed..John Conyers, and Henry Waxman

it would be more than foolish for dems to say they are going to impeach...without hearings..but no one has asked them..are you going to hold hearings on accountability??

Accountability:of the intelligence to start this war
...............of the failures of 9/11
...............of spying on Americans
...............of spying on congresspeople
...............of no bid contracts to * buddies
...............of torture and rendition
...............of propaganda paid for with tax dollars to USA media
...............of gitmo
...............of the new terror bill and canceling habeas corpus
...............of the medicare bill and pharmacy pay offs
...............of the national debt
...............of outsourcing jobs
...............of private militia in Iraq
...............of fema
...............of homeland security
...............of failures of Katrina and the gulf states
...............of insurace companies
...............of so many rethug congress critters and payoffs
...............of think tanks like pnac
...............of medical for vets and vets benefits
...............of the private suppliers of the troops in Iraq & Afganistan
...............of the sale of our ports to Carlyle i.e. dubai
ohh the list can go on and on..
care to add??

the dems won't need to impeach...they will neuter the rethugs..with hearings to expose them for who and what they really are!!

* will be taken to his knees!

just my 2 cents...but i do not believe it would be responsible for dems to say they will impeach..hearings come before charges!!

fly

[madfloridian]

18. Whoa there.....here is what he said. Great statement.

A lot of drama and upset over a very sensible statement.

"HARRIS: Would a Democratically controlled House, for example, launch investigations? A lot of folks, perhaps, would like to see what $2 billion a week in Iraq is going towards.

DEAN: Look, I'm sure people are going to look into all that stuff. But the major priority is to change the direction of the country, both at home and abroad. We need to regain our moral footing as the leader of the world. We've lost that. That's the first time since World War I that America hasn't been the moral leader of the world. We can be the moral leader of the world again. It's just a matter of respecting other countries and listening to them and working with them in a constructive way.

We need to deal with the economic problems that 80 percent of Americans have suffered under the Republican economy. So there's a lot that has to be done. And, you know, the Republicans are claiming they were going to do this and we're going to that. We're not particularly interested in raising taxes, except getting rid of some of the oil company and insurance company tax breaks. We're not particularly interested in impeaching the president. I don't think you're going to see that come up at all.

We -- if we win this, it's because Americans hire us to set a new direction for the country. And that is not bogging us down in undoing everything the president has done. It's setting a new direction with real leadership for the country. We haven't had that kind of leadership in the country for a long time."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0610/24/cnr.01.html

[shance]

19. Iran/Contra - if there is no accountability, the murderers continue to kill.

Look at history.

[npincus]

20. talk about getting away with murder.... literally

[garybeck]

21. Conyers would file for impeachment.

[SouthernBelle82]

22. So much

for caring about the Constitution and Bush breaking the fourth and sixth amendments.

[WI_DEM]

24. it's a smart political strategy

you have to have investigations before impeachment. Besides if we say our goal is to impeach you'll have independent voters deserting us the way they did the GOP in '98 when republicans impeached Clinton and the GOP lost ten house seats.