Impeachment is a classic "red herring".

[Raven]

"Red herring is a metaphor for a diversion or distraction from an original objective. An example can be found in academic examinations, particularly in mathematics and physical sciences. In some questions, information may be provided which is not necessary to solve the given problem. The presence of extraneous data often causes those taking the exam to spend too much time on the question, reducing the time given to other problems and potentially lowering the resulting score. Red herrings are frequently used in literature and cinema mysteries, where a character is presented to make the reader/viewer believe he/she is the perpetrator, when in reality it is someone far less suspect." Wikipedia

A red herring was used in England to throw the hounds off the trail of a fox, or so it is said.

Now we've got one of our own, Cindy S., sitting in in Conyers' office and enormous amounts of energy being devoted to the Impeachment movement and in the meantime, Bush lackies refuse to come befor Congress, Executive Orders eviserating our rights and freedoms being issued almost on a weekly basis and a war that rages on.

The House and the Senate have the foxes on the run, let's stay with the chase, corner them and by doing that we'll trap the President and his gang.

I elected these Dems to bring us out of this morass. It is too early for me to make a judgment as to whether they will be successful but I voted for them because I trust their judgment. It's been just a little over 6 months. I'm willing to give them some more time and if they say that, in their judgment Impeachment is not the wise way to go now, I will accept that...for now.

[eleny]

1. I view impeachment as smacking D & W in their heads with a giant tuna

It'll get their attention and slow them down. Right now, we desperately need that.

[bobbolink]

15. A salt-water clue-stick?

:rofl:

[eleny]

48. Yeah!

So round, so firm, so fully packed!

[iconoclastic cat]

2. The discussion and clamor for impeachment may be more valuable

and effective than the actual impeachment.

[spanone]

13. that may be very true!

[Phredicles]

3. "Bush lackies refuse to come befor Congress, Executive Orders eviserating our rights"

So I'd say on that basis alone impeachment is not a red herring but imperative and urgent.

I've been voting straight Democratic since 1984. However, in that time I've seen them show some exasperatingly poor judgment on occasion. Often they need our help to see what they should do. Now appears to be one of those times.

[JDPriestly]

4. The Bushies' refusal to appear in Congress

and impeachment are not just linked. They are one and the same thing. Bush's unitary government by one person concept is the reason to impeach him. The refusals to appear are illegal acts that necessitate impeachment. It is quite likely that the only means that Congress has to force appearances by Bush's aids is to invoke the constitutional framework of an impeachment. There can be no question that Bush's aids would have to appear before Congress if Bush faced possible impeachment.

Congress is under the illusion that the impeachment process will prevent it from getting things done. But, the problem is that Republican stonewalling and obstructionism is what is preventing Congress from getting things done. The only way to stop Republican obstructionism is to impeach the president.

Personally, I hate the thought of impeachment. But there is no way around it knowing President Bush. I suspect that the contempt actions will just be treated with contempt by the Justice Department and the courts unless the subpoenas are issued in the context of impeachment proceedings. That's just my opinion.

[GOTV]

18. How does impeachment force appearances?

As far as I know, the administrative branch is not compelled to cooperate with impeachment hearings. Congress can then impeach due to the non-cooperation, since they can impeach over anything they want, but if the Senate is viewed as reluctant, Bush will certainly not allow anyone to testify and provide info that could convince the Senate.

[JDPriestly]

50. Impeachment is the constitutional process through which

the Congress may investigate the high crimes and misdemeanors of officials. Ms. Meiers was Bush's attorney in the White House. The privilege she claims to be invoking, I assume, is similar to the attorney-client privilege. That privilege places a mighty shield around attorney-client communications. It does not apply however, in a case in which an attorney is aiding and abetting a client's fraud or crimes. Let's say that an attorney is accused of knowingly assisting a client to obtain an illegal loan. The communications regarding the illegal act would arguably not be entitled to the protection of the attorney-client privilege.

A court might rule that Bush may claim the executive privilege to protect his communications with Harriet Meiers from disclosure in the context of the routine non-criminal investigations brought by Congress, but would be less likely to do so if the privilege were asserted in the context of an impeachment which is for criminal conduct. Caveat: I am not an expert on executive privilege. Someone more knowledgeable about it than I might have a different take on this.

[GOTV]

52. That's an interesting theory - and I'm also no expert but....

... If the distinction is that the impeachment is over a criminal act, I'm not sure then why impeachment needs to be involved. It would seem like it's only the nature of the act being investigated whether it's being investigated in the context on and impeachment or any other investigation.

There is no exclusion in the constitution of any of the presidential powers for self protection under the description of impeachment. Isn't that right? So I don't know why Bush would behave any more compliantly under an impeachment than he does with regards to anything else.

[JDPriestly]

53. If a lawyer such as Harriet Meyers is involved or aids in certain

criminal acts by the client, then the attorney client privilege does not apply. Of course in that case, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination would apply, however, that is limited to some extent. The Democrats are probably correct in stating that there is not enough time to impeach, but the Bush administration's overreaching by refusing to allow Congressional oversight has to be challenged even if it cannot be stopped -- in my view. If nothing else, the public needs to know that this administration is refusing to be held accountable by the Congress that the people elected in 2006 for the purpose of holding the administration accountable.

[EFerrari]

5. No, the impeachment efforts, in addition to being just, divert

BushCo resources away from their business as usual criminal activity.

And, I didn't elect Democrats to think for me but to represent me. In particular, I elected Nancy Pelosi to represent me in Congress as did the rest of this district. We have passed resolutions to end the war and to impeach. If she ignores that, she's not doing her job. It's really pretty simple.

/ack

[PDJane]

6. No. It's the cure for a constitutional crisis

That has been ongoing so long that it's becoming background noise.

[Swamp Rat]

7. I no longer just accept "their judgment."

Maybe if you lived behind broken levees, were unemployed, had no medical insurance, and faced with becoming homeless like half of us already in New Orleans, you might feel otherwise.













Btw, impeachment is not a Red Herring. It is a Constitutional remedy for what is happening right now.

[applegrove]

11. Those are powerful pictures. Brings me right back to that terrible terrible time.

[Swamp Rat]

21. I live it right now,

at this very moment.

That is why my patience has run out.

MANY of us are on the verge of being homeless here. Imagine if half of the middle-class in your city had just joined the impoverished, and were soon to be homless.

Just imagine.

The gentrification of New Orleans is in full swing.

[applegrove]

49. I'm so sorry. You are not forgotten.

[EFerrari]

22. Of all the crimes this cabal has committed, that was IT for me.

:hug:

:cry:

[Swamp Rat]

28. WHY ARE WE DEBATING IMPEACHMENT NOW????? ....... FUCK!!!!!!!

What do I have to do or say to CONVINCE OTHER DEMOCRATS?!??

The photos of us BEING MURDERED BY BUSHLER are NOT ENOUGH???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[EFerrari]

32. It's GOBSMACKING! I'd like to think people care IF THEY KILL US.

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[walldude]

34. Apparently not... I think they are waiting for the official

announcement of our loss of rights. I guess as long as nobody talks about the dictatorship then it isn't really a dictatorship. We wait much longer and it won't be impeachment, it'll have to be an overthrow or a coup...

[Lerkfish]

37. as I stated in another thread: they're saying "I"ll defend myself AFTER they kill me"

Then, I'll know they done something wrong...oh, oops, I'll be dead then.

I really, really don't get the anti-impeachers, honestly.

[aquart]

39. May those monsters never sleep.

I will never forgive Katrina. New Orleans. What they did. What they did not do.

[Lerkfish]

8. um...ok. Why are the anti-impeachers sounding so...desperate...today?

:shrug:

[Raven]

19. Not desperate, just thinking it through. n/t

[Lerkfish]

40. so, you don't feel this administration has committed impeachable offenses?

you don't consider the intentional dereliction of duty in New Orleans bad enough?
Lying us into war? violating the Hatch act? Torture? Renditions of detainees? suspension of habeas corpus?

I could go on, but you get the point.


you really, really, and honestly and truly do not consider those impeachabe offenses?

[eleny]

45. It could be....

.... that yet another letdown would be too much. We've had so many and * enjoys seeing people suffer. This is like nothing we've experienced in our lifetimes.

[bryant69]

9. Good post

But you see this is Sheehan Underground. If only the Democratic party had a website where you could go express support for them; but around here we just hate Elected Democrats.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[EFerrari]

14. It's absurd to reduce this effort to one person. Go back and

read all the national activists that are there and how much support they have.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1408785

Conyers mailbox is full, btw.

[bryant69]

31. Well America is full of morons of all political persuasions I guess

Bryant

[EFerrari]

36. When in doubt, insult.

:shrug:

[bryant69]

38. I guess that was uncalled for

On the other hand I've certainly had my motives questioned enough for not jumping on the impeachment train, so I'll probably be able to live with myself.

Bryant

[EFerrari]

42. And that would be a good thing, Bryant.

Let's try to end this conversation on an upbeat, okay? :)

[walldude]

43. Yeah you are right about that, it's really moronic to watch this country

turn into a dictatorship and sit around with our thumbs up our asses saying things like "it takes time" or "there's more important things to do" or "we don't have the votes". No wonder the Repukes think Dems are a bunch of wimps. We apparently are. Achieving the impossible used to be a challenge to Americans, now is an excuse to whimper into the night...

[mmonk]

10. So the founders gave us a red herring. I've heard it all now.

[EFerrari]

16. I would have prefered some salmon myself.

[mmonk]

24. I love Salmon.

[Raven]

23. Never said that. It's how and when you use it.

[Lerkfish]

30. so, in your opinion, this administration does rise to the bar of impeachable offense?

if not, where is your bar?

[mmonk]

41. Excuse me. "Classic" red herring.

;)

[TahitiNut]

12. So, the Constitution is nothing but a fish wrapper?

:eyes: Methinks someone's hoarding their chips.

[bobbolink]

17. Hey, that's better than bird cage liner.

:silly:

[Raven]

25. Hah, yeah, I guess I mentioned a fish but I wasn't using it as

a packing device.

[H2O Man]

20. Respectfully disagree.

People can have a variety of sincere opinions on if congress should move towards impeaching Bush, Cheney, and/or others. But no serious case can be made that those advocating impeachment are tossing out a red herring.

[Democrats_win]

26. Impeachment is good. But it won't fix everything. i.e. Corporate run government.

Corporations have been writing the laws in this country for some time now. After the impeachment, will we get a constitutional ammendment declaring corporations are not people? (It should ban them from participating in elections: democracies are for people.)

The time for strong action against the corporations is needed. They are like a friend that we helped when we were both young and then when they became rich, they stole our spouses. The betrayal is that big.

Think Enron, the insurance companies who insure you when you are healthy, big oil with it's fake oil refinery crisis and Haliburton moving to Dubai.

[glitch]

35. Impeachment is just the beginning of the horrific clean up we have to do.

Gotta start somewhere.

[KoKo]

27. I look on Sheehan as similar to early Suffragettes. People told them to go away

that they shouldn't push for their vote. Why did these women want to face going to jail and being force fed when other women were very happy not having the right to vote. What was wrong that they degraded themselves with these emotional pleas to be able to have a say in their government.

I look on Cindy that way. A person who has gone out an done something that most of us couldn't do. Even when we protested in the hundreds of thousands...no one listened to us. But Cindy and her small band plus her supporters all over can hope to be that One Voice that makes the change that's needed. She will be ridiculed and belittled and told she's a "red herring" or an "attention getter" and that she's mucking up things with her challenge to Pelosi. But for those of us who watched ineffectual Democrats give up the 2000 Election and cave time and time again under Tom Daschle when he had a slim margin in Senate to deny Bush some of his top appointments...what Cindy is doing is Important and worthy of all the support she can be given.

[rucky]

29. Stay the course, instead of pulling them out? n/t

[GeorgeGist]

33. Freidman ...

units love you.

[Raven]

46. So lets have a sit in in John Conyers' office, disrupt his work

for a while, get a few people arrested...John Conyers, the great hope, we won't give him much more than 6 months to satisfy our "I want everything now" agenda. Makes no sense to me.

[EFerrari]

51. John Conyers has nothing more important to do than to listen

to the people. And how do you know his work was "disrupted", Raven? I doubt anyone would even be admitted to his office without his consent. lol

[Individualist]

44. "willing to give them some more time"

Time is NOT on our side. The cabal is desperate with approval ratings in the crapper. War drums for Iran are beating more loudly every day, they're hyping the terror, and they've established laws for martial law, blocking bank accounts, etc. It would be extremely foolish to ignore the warning signs that these criminals have a plan to establish a full fledged dictatorship, and IMO it won't be long until they implement that plan.

[cgrindley]

47. I agree

blathering on about an impeachment that ISN'T going to happen is a pointless waste of time. A distraction from the real issues.