(OT) Impeachment articles introduced against Cheney

Discuss music production with Ableton Live.

Yes or No

Yes, I support Impeachment against Vice President Cheney
33
89%
No, I do not support Impeachment against Vice President Cheney
4
11%
 
Total votes: 37

luv2spin31
Posts: 105
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 6:10 am
Location: texas
Contact:

Post by luv2spin31 » Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:10 pm

nowtime wrote:
luv2spin31 wrote:now what about Bush?

ooooooh! luv2spin; I like your signature. where's that from?

it came from me after reading about the late great john coltrane. coltrane has said, paraphrasing of course, "a thought is like a million vibration"
"music is like photography. it's all in the rhythm of expression."

dango
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:38 pm

Post by dango » Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:31 pm

i am curious why the four people that chose not to impeach him in this poll made this decision?

it is obvious why the other 87% did choose to. but those 4 people are a mystery to me. i know it is an anonymous poll, but if you feel like sharing inquiring minds want to know. not an attack, i am just curious as to what reasons.

forge
Posts: 17422
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:47 am
Location: Queensland, AU
Contact:

Post by forge » Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:37 pm

dango wrote:i am curious why the four people that chose not to impeach him in this poll made this decision?

it is obvious why the other 87% did choose to. but those 4 people are a mystery to me. i know it is an anonymous poll, but if you feel like sharing inquiring minds want to know. not an attack, i am just curious as to what reasons.
you sure you want to go there?

Tone Deft
Posts: 24152
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:19 pm

Post by Tone Deft » Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:54 pm

dango wrote:i am curious why the four people that chose not to impeach him in this poll made this decision?

it is obvious why the other 87% did choose to. but those 4 people are a mystery to me. i know it is an anonymous poll, but if you feel like sharing inquiring minds want to know. not an attack, i am just curious as to what reasons.
it doesn't matter what the vote tally is, the results are in and Cheney wins!!

the reason is that even mouth breathing knuckle dragging republicans use Live. (did he just say that??!)
In my life
Why do I smile
At people who I'd much rather kick in the eye?
-Moz

dango
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:38 pm

Post by dango » Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:29 am

i do want to go there.

why?

is it because they think Iranian ManBearPigs are coming to get them but Cheney will keep them safe?

did a friend or loved one die overseas and they want to believe it was not in vein and that Cheney has done and is doing the right thing by bringing democracy to the Iraqi people?

are you just plaint dumb?

were you not paying attention to the last 6 years...maybe just got out of a coma?

do you support the destruction of an entire race of people for geopolitical gain?

i am just curious as to why. there's only four of them, so it can't take to long.

popslut
Posts: 1056
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 4:58 pm

Post by popslut » Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:45 am

dango wrote:i do want to go there.
You want to know how these mouth-breathing fuckwits think?

Click on "Search" and type in "MBreqs".

There you'll find more misguided, right-wing, tub-thumping fuckwittery than you'll ever need - in just two mouse clicks.

smutek
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:30 pm
Location: Baltimore,United States

Post by smutek » Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:51 am

Believe it or not it looks like there might actually be a little bit of hope here. The person to call at this point is John Conyers. Check out this op ed by Dave Lindorff of Counter Punch, it was posted yesterday, 11/9 on ICH

___________________

Suddenly, Impeachment Hearings Are Looking Like a Strong Possibility

By Dave Lindorff

You wouldn’t know it if you just watch TV news or read the corporate press, but this past Tuesday, something remarkable happened. Despite the pig-headed opposition of the Democratic Party’s top congressional leadership, a majority of the House, including three Republicans, voted to send Dennis Kucinich’s long sidelined Cheney impeachment bill (H Res 333) to the Judiciary Committee for hearings.

The vote was 218 to 194.

Now the behind-the-scenes partisan maneuvering that preceded that vote was arcane indeed, with Kucinich first exercising a member’s privilege motion to present his stymied impeachment bill to the full House, only to have Speaker Nancy Pelosi arrange for a colleague (Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-MD) offer a motion to table it. The Republicans, anxious to embarrass the Speaker, threw a wrench into that plan, though, by voting as a bloc to oppose tabling. Since Kucinich already has 22 co-sponsors for his bill, it was clear that the tabling gambit would fail. As soon as that became apparent, rank-and-file Democrats, unwilling to be seen by their constituents as defending Cheney, rushed to change their votes to opposing the tabling motion. In the end, tabling failed by 242 to 170 with 77 Democrats supporting a pleasantly surprised Kucinich.

In order to avoid a floor debate on the merits of impeaching the eminently impeachable Vice President Cheney, Pelosi and her allies then moved to send Kucinich’s bill directly to the Judiciary Committee. They were joined by three Republicans, including maverick Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX).

Now the hope of the Democratic leadership is that this means Kucinich’s impeachment bill will continue to be safely bottled up in a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. But it may not work out that way for them.

Whatever the explanation, this impeachment bill has been endorsed by a floor vote of the full House, with bipartisan support.

For the Judiciary Committee to sit on it now and not schedule a hearing would be a gross travesty of parliamentary procedure and custom.

Indeed, some House members not associated with Kucinich’s resolution are now openly calling for immediate hearings into Cheney’s impeachable actions—specifically lying the country into a war in Iraq, and threatening war with Iran.

One indication of the change in the political climate in the House is the announcement by Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL), a six-term congressman and a member of the House Judiciary Committee, that he will call for the Judiciary Committee to take up Kucinich’s impeachment bill. This is significant because Wexler, no left-wing hothead, is not a co-signer of the Kucinich bill.

In an email message to constituents, Wexler said:

“I share your belief that Vice President Cheney must answer for his deceptive actions in office, particularly with regard to the preparations for the Iraq war and the revelation of the identity of covert agent Valerie Plame Wilson as part of political retribution against her husband.”

“…Cheney and the bush Administration have demonstrated a consistent pattern of abusing the law and misleading Congress and the American people. We see the consequences of these actions abroad in Iraq and at home through the violations of our civil liberties. The American people are served well with a legitimate and thorough impeachment inquiry. I will urge the Judiciary Committee to schedule impeachment hearings immediately and not let this issue languish as it has over the last six months. Only through hearings can we begin to correct the abuses of Dick Cheney and the bush administration; and if it is determined in these hearings that Vice President Cheney has committed High Crimes and Misdemeanors, he should be impeached and removed from office. It is time for Congress to expose the multitude of misdeeds of the Administration and I am hopeful that the Judiciary Committee will expeditiously begin an investigation of this matter.”

Also calling for prompt action by the Judiciary Committee in the wake of the Tuesday House vote was Carol Shea-Porter, a first-term Democrat from New Hampshire, who also is not a sponsor of the Kucinich measure. In explaining her vote to send the Kucinich bill to the Judiciary Committee, she said:

“It is the duty of the Vice President to faithfully execute the laws of the United States of America and to defend the Constitution. There is growing evidence that the Executive Branch has ignored some of our laws and has attempted to bend the Constitution to its will. Members of both parties decided that this issue is too important to ignore. I voted with my Republican and Democratic colleagues to investigate the Vice President’s actions in office.”

She characterized the resolution sending the bill to the Judiciary Committee as a “strongly bi-partisan vote.”

With these kinds of endorsements and calls for action, it is clear both that Speaker Pelosi is looking increasingly pathetic and out of touch with her “impeachment is off the table” mantra, and also that Judiciary Chair John Conyers (D-MI), who seems to have been intimidated by the Speaker for the past year, but who earlier had been a leader in exposing the crimes of the Bush/Cheney administration, is getting strong support for taking a bolder stand.

Stephen Cohen (D-TN), a member of the Judiciary Committee who is a co-sponsor of the Kucinich resolution, says he thinks that there will be an impeachment hearing in the committee.

The 22 House members who have already signed on as co-sponsors of Kucinich’s Cheney impeachment resolution are: Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Maxine Waters D-CA), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Lynn Woolsey D-CA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Albert Wynn (D-MD), William Lacy Clay (D-MO, Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Jim Moran (D-VA), Bob Filner (D-CA), Sam Farr (D-CA), Robert Brady (D-PA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Donald Payne (D-NJ), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Ed Towns (D-NY, Diane Watson (D-CA, and Danny Davis (D-IL).

The change in attitude toward impeachment among the rank and file, and the evident increasing willingness to buck the Speaker, reflects growing awareness of the groundswell of popular anger with the Bush administration and the Democratic Congress over continued funding of the Iraq War, and over continued erosion of Constitutional government and civil liberties by an administration that wants unfettered executive power and by a Congress that is afraid to act.

The latest polls show three in four Democrats in favor of impeaching the vice president and president, while a majority of all Americans favor impeaching the vice president and roughly half of all Americans favor impeaching the president.

This is before hearings and presentation of evidence have even begun!

The Democratic strategy for the 2008 election has been to do nothing overly confrontational, to pass no significant legislation, to collect lots of money from corporate interests, and to hope that the Republican Party, saddled with an unpopular administration and an unpopular war, will implode.

The strategy, however, is proving to be a disaster, as public support for the Democratic do-nothing Congress has fallen even below the president’s record low numbers. Just running against Republicans, Bush/Cheney, and the continuing war risks seeing Democrats go down to defeat in ’08.

It is awareness of this looming electoral disaster that underlies the growing restiveness among rank-and-file Democrats in the House, all of whom have to face the voters in less than a year’s time.

As recently as a month ago, it didn’t look like impeachment was in the cards,

Now it’s starting to look like we Cheney’s going to be put in the dock.

It may not be long before we start to see bills of impeachment filed against President Bush too.

The corporate media enjoy making fun of Rep. Kucinich, a height-challenged but dedicated progressive who has made a career of standing tall for his views. If his bill ends up leading to impeachment hearings against Cheney, Kucinich will end up having the last laugh.

forge
Posts: 17422
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:47 am
Location: Queensland, AU
Contact:

Post by forge » Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:00 am

smutek wrote: It may not be long before we start to see bills of impeachment filed against President Bush too.
.
this is what I've been wondering - why has it been just cheney they're after?

I know Bush is mostly a puppet, but surely he should go down with him??

nowtime
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:24 pm
Location: Homefree

Post by nowtime » Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:09 am

forge wrote:
smutek wrote: It may not be long before we start to see bills of impeachment filed against President Bush too.
.
this is what I've been wondering - why has it been just cheney they're after?

I know Bush is mostly a puppet, but surely he should go down with him??
For the simple reason that if Bush gets impeached, then we have that monster Dick as our new Prez. And I suppose throwing them both out at once is unlikely.

smutek
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:30 pm
Location: Baltimore,United States

Post by smutek » Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:17 am

My thoughts as well.


Assuming that an impeachment against George Bush were successful, Cheney would then become president.

Why not file articles against both of them at the same time? I honestly don't know. Lots of people, myself included, have thought for quite some time that Cheney has been the one calling the shots. I think they both need to be in prison, but out of the two I think Cheney is the one who is the most dangerous. They guy reminds me of darth Vader or something.

At best we can hope the lot of them, Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Tenet, Abrams, Wolfowitz, etc. etc. will be brought up on charges of war crimes and thrown into prison, preferably all of their assets would be seized and divided up amongst everyone, Americans as well as everyone else in the world who has suffered, as a first step in paying reparations.

At worst we can hope that impeachment proceedings would prevent Cheney from ever becoming president or serving in government again himself.

Like Sqook said earlier in this thread, the problems we have run much deep than these guys though. These are just the players we hear about. We have serious problems here in America.

Anyway, I will be calling the office of John Conyers this Monday to express my support.

glu
Posts: 2769
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 12:27 am

Post by glu » Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:30 am

and then Nancy Pelosi is pres?
no prevailing genre of music:
http://alonetone.com/glu

smutek
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:30 pm
Location: Baltimore,United States

Post by smutek » Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:32 am

Not much better eh?

nowtime
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:24 pm
Location: Homefree

Post by nowtime » Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:32 am

glu wrote:and then Nancy Pelosi is pres?
What? That traitor? You gotta be kidding.

smutek
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:30 pm
Location: Baltimore,United States

Post by smutek » Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:38 am

Well, hypothetically speaking if the President and Vice President were removed from office the next in line would be the Speaker of the House, right?

dango
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:38 pm

Post by dango » Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:51 am

that is great news to hear. and yes that is correct; Pelosi would be president. i have called her office once every two week for the past 6 months asking if anybody works there anymore and why doesn't she listen to the American people. good to see this article though. everyone wants it done, but i think some members of congress are actually scared of these people, or are in the same corporate pocket. they know the reach they have and i think are truly scared for their careers and maybe in some cases their well being. maybe Cheney sends them all never before seen footage of Kennedy getting shot with a note that says"impeachment? don't even think about it" :twisted:

Post Reply