Now that the Democrats won, it is time to straighten up some things, such as the gov't rountinely violating our Constitutional rights. They violate the 1st Amendment by caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon. They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina. They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps. They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus. They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing. They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't. Fix up that, impeach ALL involved and while you are at it, investigate 9/11 a bit more thoroughly. Support indy media. Last link (unless Google Books caves to the gov't and drops the title): America Deceived (book)

by Lorring II (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 87 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 6:51:22 AM

  (0+)

This article is disturbing. Not from the standpoint of debating whether impeachment has merit or not but rather given the absolute mess this country is in courtesy of the GOP, where the author's priorities are. The article's apparent focus on opportunistic ax grinding rather than constructively addressing the issues that mean something to every other American - Iraq, global terrorism, illegal immigration, jobs, tax reform, energy, etc - is unfortunate and disappointing – at best. As a DMR (Disenchanted Moderate Republican), I solidly endorsed the recent change in congressional leadership. But I did that with the absolute understanding that the next two years the Democrats would commit and demonstrate their new leadership to fixing problems, not opportunistically going for jugulars. Bottom line, we're in a mess. Let's fix it and worry about personal vendettas on someone else's time – not the American people's. If the Democrats use their new found power focused on retribution as opposed to moving this country constructively forward, I'm afraid they may seriously jeopardize any chance at moving into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue come January 21, 2009. The next two years have been given to the Democrats to demonstrate the lead by example principle and show how a party should behave and constructively use its power. So as a starter, rather than hearing her comprehensive plan for impeachment proceedings, I would prefer to see the author offer a constructive solution on Iraq. I for one and I believe many (ALL) in my peer group, sincerely would like to see new (party) residents in the White House in 2009 - but ONLY if this country is substantively better off in two years than it is now. Respectfully, CitizenMV

by Matt Vrabel (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 1:01:54 PM

  (0+)

if you think that starting an illegal war isn't grounds for impeachment. There is nothing that the Democrats can do in Congress as long as Bush holds the veto, and nothing that they will want to do as long as they keep getting big fat corporate donations. You can use a bit more disenchantment, in my opinion. Start by researching 9/11 and watching some of the videos online. Then do some research on how our economy is doing. Read up on the Nuremberg trials. Find out about depleted uranium. And as for what you and your peers might want in 2009, so long as two brothers own the machines that count most of the votes in this country, you and your peers have no more say in the matter than anyone else. A little research on election integrity wouldn't hurt either. Some other topics for research that I'd recommend are globalization, multi-national corporations, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s book, "Crimes Against Nature," about how this administration has been polluting our air, soil, and water. Anyone who calls themself a conservative should know at least a little about conservation. As some wise person put it, "The economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment." When you've caught up and developed a basic understanding of the issues facing this country today, then come back and talk about going for the jugular -- if you're not too busy ripping throats yourself.

by Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 30 quicklinks, 100 diaries, 1325 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 7:36:59 PM

  (0+)

I offer same comment as I noted below to another. Respectfully, CitizenMV

by Matt Vrabel (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 7:42:12 PM

  (0+)

And there's horse sh*t all over the place. I would suggest that the first thing you do is take the horse out of the house, so it doesn't keep sh*tting all over the place. I apologize to horses for the Bush analogy.

by Rob Kall (954 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2089 comments [49 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 10:18:18 PM

  (0+)

Rob, If I can please take a moment to clarify. My comments are not aimed at the issue of impeachment or challenging its merit, and I think or at least I tried to make that very clear. I even re-read what I wrote to make sure. Rather, my point was simply where should the near term dedicated Congressional focus be, which I think, at least in my opinion is to immediately resolve Iraq and save as many American lives as possible. I could be wrong but my gut suggests to quickly resolve it will require close collaboration between both parties. I just don't think impeachment proceedings "at this juncture" are conducive to that which I view requiring necessary 2 party collaboration. For the first time in 6 years, I think the American people and the Democrats have the Administrations's ear, following its stunning mid term election losses, and I finally have some element of optimism we can end the Iraq debacle sooner rather than later if everyone really tries to work together. Maybe that's beyond optimism and borders on being unrealistic but its how I feel at the moment. I would only personally like to see the GOP weakness seized upon and leveraged for some immediate benefit to the families of servicemen and fathers like me with sons in or entering draft age, who wake up in the middle of the night with a nightmare of a new draft, and my sons patrolling hostile back alleys in Baghdad - for no purpose. I think you can see from all my writings I'm no fan of the Bush Administration, and unlike others with my background, willing to say so. I am a fan of the new Democrat Congressional leadership position as I see it as leadership to take this country in a new and positive direction, beginning with Iraq. Again, just my humble opinion where the immediate focus should be. I realize its the minority view on this matter, and don't profess I have the magic answer. Respectfully, CitizenMV

by Matt Vrabel (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 11:23:54 PM

  (0+)

When we investigate, prosecute, and punish criminals, it's not about revenge, it's about law. A law is not a feeling, according to The Winston Dictionary, it's "a binding rule of action established by authority with the intent of enforcing justice." When a rule of law has been broken, a crime has been committed. The rules of our nation are laid out in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Anyone who breaks them has committed crimes against America, a nation of laws, not men (feeling). If we as Americans can't stand together on upholding, protecting, preserving, and, in this case, restoring our Constitution and Bill of Rights, the very heart of our nation, then we don't know what it means to be American. I'm not into putting a band-aid on a dirty, infected wound and saying it will be okay. Glossing over (refusing to acknowledge, condemn, and do something about) the Bush administration's crimes against America, Iraq, and the world, will never benefit us or teach new generations of Americans (or the entire world) anything about our principles, our U.S. Constitution, except that "it's just a goddamned piece of paper". And guess what? Just a goddamned piece of paper doesn't mean anything. Don't be a "just a goddamned piece of paper" American, impeach Bush/Cheney, et. al., for the crimes they have committed against our nation, Iraq, and the citizens of the world. America is broken and in disgrace as a result of their greed and ignorance and/or defiance of OUR law. If we love America and want her to ever rise up and shine again in this world, perhaps even brighter than before, we have got to be clear and unified on reestablishing our law, truth, and justice. We've got to clean house! "Take courage, People. Truth is its own Power. We need only hold fast to it and pronounce it, and we will prevail!"

by Lilydove (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 4:06:14 PM

  (0+)

And your solution to Iraq? I did not note anything of significance in your response about measures/focus/ideas to immediately save American lives. My priority and most others I believe to be their's too, is the expectation this country's leadership will immediately now focus on the major and most important task at hand - resolving Iraq and saving American lives (not months and months of gut wrenching, tear the country apart impeachment proceedings, regardless of the merit or not, and all while MANY more die) - so I and my kids (and the heroes families) don't have to be absolutely heartbroken watching the 6PM news anymore to hear of more fine, young, teriffic, wonderful Americans being killed - unnecessarily. I lived through the 6PM news daily body count during Vietnam. I don't want my kids to experience that same memorable horror with Iraq. I hope you don't want yours to either. So let's keep the priorities right, and where we desparately need Congresional leadership immediately focused. Respectfully, CitizenMV PS I'd be interested in hearing the names of all candidates who pitched/based their recent election campaign (and won) on an impeachment platform. I supported the ones (Democrats) who pitched saving lives. I believe they were most, if not all.

by Matt Vrabel (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 5:35:41 PM

  (0+)

Iraq is the crime to which impeachment pertains. Cleaning up the crime scene and apprehending and prosecuting the criminals often do take place at the same time. From the recent news articles I have read, there are many fine ideas up and coming to clean up the Iraq crime scene and bring the troops home safely. Not from me, but from those who are educated, experienced, and now in a position to advise and implement such measures. If Bush, et. al., are not apprehended regarding their crimes, the murder of our troops (and innocent Iraqi civilians--over half a million, now) will continue unabated, because the criminals are still at large and still "the decider" for our nation. Do you really think we can bring the troops home when the president and vice president (who lied and deceived us into a war against an innocent soverign nation) don't want to bring them home? They have been trying to start WWIII, and the people in their "think tanks" have even called their war of aggression against Iraq the beginning of WWIII and WWIV, depending on which stations you watch. Why do you want to keep these criminal warmongers in control of our nation? How is that going to save lives? You simply want congress to tell the criminals to stop trying to steal Iraq's oil (a.k.a. importing democracy) and spilling the blood of our military personnel in the process? When have Bush/Cheney ever obeyed congress? They will just issue signing statements and continue along their bloody criminal way for two more years, killing our troops and Iraqi citizens, and further shreding the shreds of our U.S. Constitution. We need to address the heart of the crime of Iraq, where Bush/Cheney (and neoconservative think tanks) reside, their criminal intent, and standing firmly on law, publicly condemn it for all to see. That will help to bring the troops home with honor, and keep them home because our law will have been reaffirmed and upheld. Either way, yours or mine, the bloodshed is likely to continue for two more years, or longer. Let's do this right, once and for all. When we brought the troops home from Veitnam, the war was over, but we didn't thoroughly address the causes of it, the laws that were broken, the criminal intent, and so our current leadership has caused this to happen to us again. I haven't seen or heard of any Veitnamese terrorists exacting retribution against America for our heinous crimes there. Perhaps Iraq will be the same, just utterly relieved to have us and our WMDs leave their country. Getting our troops home is the easy part, enforcing law and cleaning house to prevent similar criminal wars from taking place in the future is the harder part. It will require painfully thorough impeachments for all of us (and the world) to see and learn from. In the long run, it will be worth it in terms of truth, justice, and our security as a nation. It won't hurt our international standing to demonstrate the power of truth and justice on the homefront, reaching to corruption in the highest levels of our government and cleaning it out. We the People are the power behind this cleansing action. I am 100% for it.

by Lilydove (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 7:14:52 PM

  (0+)

Impeachment is Imperative! When a crime, or in this case, plural CRIMES have been committed, the path to restitution and to correct those wrongs... we must begin by holding the perpetrators responsible for their actions. Ours has oft been called "a nation of LAWS" for a reason. We track down errant fathers and hold them responsible for paying child support. We prosecute drunk drivers. We arrest college kids for smoking flowers. We even fine jay walkers fer christ sake! Why should we NOT hold Bush, Cheney, Rice and the rest of their cabal responsible for the crimes they so arrogantly committed in FULL public view!? They have violated international law and numerous treaties. They have descimated the US Constitution and soaked the flag of this nation in the blood of their victims. Just before Bush took this nation to war against Iraq, the LARGEST demonstrations in WORLD HISTORY took place in cities all around the planet trying to get the message thru to those criminals in the White House that their war plans were: ill-advised, unneccessary, illegal and unwanted by the peoples of this Earth... How did Bush respond to the largest "NO" ever heard in history? He said: "Aw, we don't make no policy by focus groups or polls." What arrogance! What ignorance! He then proceeded to CAUSE the deaths of hundreds of thousands of INNOCENT people and PERMANENT life-changing injuries to hundreds of thousands more... Impeachment would be just a start - we have a lot of serious house cleaning to do! To "Citizen MV" -- YOU have some catching up to do boy! Just because you've been 'out of the loop' with your head up there inspecting your republican colon, does not mean the rest of us weren't paying attention over the past 6-7 years! Wake the 'f' up!

by mrk * (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 312 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 7:24:35 PM

  (0+)

I enjoy and delight in constructive debates, and will engage at length with those that conduct themselves accordingly. To others who don't and cross lines, I've made it a practice to simply note it as I am doing here and move on to others that will engage constructively. Your comments are charming. Respectfully, CitizenMV

by Matt Vrabel (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 7:38:44 PM

  (0+)

Impeachment can be brought about for criminal activity, or merely for being a continuous threat to the security of the population. The tens of thousands of nuclear weapons sitting about waiting only for the optimum moment to be "Triggered," should give us all pause to reflect upon what our nuclear war fighting elite have pulled on us. "They" have pulled the nuclear "Trigger" on us; not once or twice, but repeatedly over the last half of a century. This is why old blood suck, sh*t spout, can't tell us about the "ET." He and all of the other high level corporate and government Fiends, know all about the "ET." "They" can't come clean now about the "ET" because it would reveal that the "ET" have for decades, been shooting software blocks into the missiles poised to exterminate us all. The decision to immolate the mass of the human race was made in April of 1947, and until today, that same plan is still in place. The plan is to "accidentally" launch a nuclear missile, and let loose with a volley that will end the life of humanity on the surface of this planet. Many nuclear armed missiles have installed into their communications systems what is known as an "Emergency rocket communications system." This system will, once launched, broadcast an alert via the "Universal attack order satellites" to other nuclear ballistic launch facilities, in particular, "Ballistic missile submarines." The cover story is that it will prevent our forces from being "decapitated." It of course is all nonsense. Once a missile is up in the air and signaling that it is in flight, the message itself will act as a stimulus for other nuclear missile launch facilities to let loose with all that they have. At the moment that our nuclear war fighting elite are either removed from positions of power, or in the alternative, that they select a new strategy that does not include engaging in a nuclear war, we will be able to address many issues of importance. If we are destroyed in an all out nuclear war, nothing else will matter. For those who understand what this is all about; a dangerous group of nuclear armed human genocidal cannibals have made a "Mortal Error," and have been hobbled in their attempts to immolate us all. This intervention may allow us time for a new choice to be made. To select a different strategy; a cooperator strategy rather than the current human predator one, a new strategy, the strategy of Peace. .

by Patrick (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 522 comments [23 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 9:11:44 PM

  (0+)

I KNEW IT! Mister 'Citizen MV' is a GoMoFo - read the bio. Sleeping for 20 years with your head next to a nuclear reactor is enough to fry a few brains cells. That, and working FOR the MIC...! We know on which side your bread is buttered! Enough said! I rest my case.

by mrk * (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 312 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 9:13:32 PM

  (0+)

Fact is, former republicans enabled the sea change in Washington. As a lifelong democrat, who is the son of a lifelong dem, I've changed my attitude to former republicans. People wake up or recover from their upbringings and family politics on their own time schedules. It's harder to change from Repubolican to dem or even to independent than to have been born into a dem family and vote Dem. your snarky, smart-ass remarks are not welcome here Intelligent commentary and friendly humor are. Rob Kall, publisher, OpEdNews

by Rob Kall (954 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2089 comments [49 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 10:41:06 PM

  (0+)

Rob, after your "Imagine you Have to clean a house" post, with the sh** word in it and the horse/Bush analogy, isn't it a little hypocritical to flag the MRK post about "inspecting republican colons" and waking the "f" up? I appreciated MRKs post, even though I am not inclined to be quite as snarky or a smart-assed at the very end of my otherwise fine comments. Maybe you're trying to be funny? Regardless, I'm leaving for the night--maybe days or weeks, or months--without finding out what a "gomofo" is.

by Lilydove (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments) on Sunday, Nov 12, 2006 at 11:18:22 PM

  (0+)

"GoMoFo" is based on the way the military and the Pentagon love to create acronyms... 'Go' = Government, 'Mo' = Mother, 'Fo' = Fokker. (but not the WW I fighter plane) Yeah, you flagged me twice for 'personal' attack on a 'recovering Republican'... Listen up: Republicans have called me (us) everything under the sun over the past 6 years. Republicans have called us traitors. Republicans have called us cowards, Republicans have called us chickens. Republicans have called us liberals!!! Imagine THAT! Republicans have even called us terrorists, and worse because, why? Because we had the nerve to point out that their leader, a fascist dictator wannabe, named Bush, is in fact a liar and a war criminal. So excuse me if I am not charitable enough to engage in 'polite discourse' and play footsie with the same people who called me a traitor and who believe US Constitution is "just a piece of paper" -- Do you recall that infamous Bush quote? The time for playing nice is over. Playing nice is what got Democrats stuck neck deep in the poo in the first place. We should play hard ball like they ain't no rules no more! And that includes calling out those who started the ruckus to stand up and take what's coming! Ya dig?

by mrk * (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 312 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 5:21:40 PM

  (0+)

flagged you. Your post is a classic case of argumentum ad-hominem. There is nothing about the posters arguments or positions in your post. You only attack the poster.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 7:56:23 AM

  (0+)

First "logic" and argument: Yo - back in my university daze, I enrolled in the course, I took notes @ every lecture and read all the assignments. As I recall there were 144 students on day one and by the final exam, 11 people showed up: one of them was me. I got a B. To say it was a tough course is an understatement, check the attrition rate. That was 39 years ago and I still I have a stack of logic books right here on the shelf. I know an ad hominem. I also know tit fer tat and freakin' chickens coming home to roost. So called 'Republicans' have been playing an underhanded game in this country for years. When the opposition takes "Roberts Rules of Order' and starts beating me over the head with it - I believe it's time to start biting and scratching... not to mention grabbing 'em by the genitals if necesary! As I recall the banner for this site used to say something about "TOUGH LIBERAL VIEWS." Now you say I ONLY posed an ad hominem attack: I don't think that's correct. Only in the closing paragraph did I address that republican government shill... HOWEVER - what about the other three paragraphs in that posting? Here they are again for your review: Impeachment is Imperative! When a crime, or in this case, plural CRIMES have been committed, the path to restitution and to correct those wrongs... we must begin by holding the perpetrators responsible for their actions. Ours has oft been called "a nation of LAWS" for a reason. We track down errant fathers and hold them responsible for paying child support. We prosecute drunk drivers. We arrest college kids for smoking flowers. We even fine jay walkers fer christ sake! Why should we NOT hold Bush, Cheney, Rice and the rest of their cabal responsible for the crimes they so arrogantly committed in FULL public view!? They have violated international law and numerous treaties. They have descimated the US Constitution and soaked the flag of this nation in the blood of their victims. Just before Bush took this nation to war against Iraq, the LARGEST demonstrations in WORLD HISTORY took place in cities all around the planet trying to get the message thru to those criminals in the White House that their war plans were: ill-advised, unneccessary, illegal and unwanted by the peoples of this Earth... How did Bush respond to the largest "NO" ever heard in history? He said: "Aw, we don't make no policy by focus groups or polls." What arrogance! What ignorance! He then proceeded to CAUSE the deaths of hundreds of thousands of INNOCENT people and PERMANENT life-changing injuries to hundreds of thousands more... Impeachment would be just a start - we have a lot of serious house cleaning to do! Thank you. I yield the floor.

by mrk * (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 312 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 9:20:24 PM

  (0+)

your missive against that person. Murtha was a GOMOFO, both JFKs were GOMOFOs, the various veterans groups that opposed and protested against the Iraq war were GOMOFOs, I served in the USAF, so I guess you could call me a GOMOFO, yet I was against this war and fought hard against it from the very beginning. Various people who now sit anywhere on the political spectrum in the US from farthest of far left to farthest of far right were GOMOFOs. The fact of their/our service does not in and of itself yield any substantive conclusions about their/our views and beliefs. Sad that you seem to think that it does.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 9:49:05 PM

  (0+)

That IS what I said in the first place - you must have joined the conversation in the middle of the thread. The gentleman I was berating for being a GOP shill says he spent 20 years on a nuke sub -- I suspect his POV may be colored by two decades of indentured serviture to the Military Industrial Complex. It happens. But... enough already.

by mrk * (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 312 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 2:30:04 AM

  (0+)

Bush and Cheney WILL be impeached, OK? There are no two ways about it. You can start out without having impeachment as your goal, but if you investigate only one or two of the many key areas that need investigating, you are going to end up there. This President is already at 31% approval. When the public finds out more information about some of the things he has done the public will demand that he be put on the fast boat back to Crawford if he is lucky, or Leavenworth or some other federal facility if he isn't. Whether Pelosi and others who are voicing anti-impeachment themes or positions understand this or not is irrelevant. Might I suggest that any effort spent arguing about this be tabled until after investigations start? Pelosi has already mentioned several times that hearings and investigations will be held into several areas. Folks, if you have any confidence at all as I do that there has been widespread lawbreaking and malfeasance then give it a rest, sit back, get some buttered popcorn, and watch the show.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 7:29:55 AM

  (0+)

You say (like Dave Lindorff) that impeachment will happen. Interesting that you are so partsian to pursue impeachment against Bush yet not press charges against Clinton for the same acts. At least from what I see here, MOST of the charges for impeachment could also be used against Clinton for his own executive actions in Eastern Europe, Africa, SE Asia and the Middle East. And Clinton did not even get Congress to ok it first. /Thus the question, what do you do when it does not go before the Senate? //Personally I'm laughing having predicted this scenario, it's humourous to see all the masturbatory fantasies of impeachment. All without a legal/historical precedent. ///But since you like the ad hominem attacks go ahead and respond like you used to.

by Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 8:29:21 AM

  (0+)

CAn I hold you to this Leser? - Yes You say (like Dave Lindorff) that impeachment will happen. - Yes Interesting that you are so partsian to pursue impeachment against Bush yet not press charges against Clinton for the same acts. At least from what I see here, MOST of the charges for impeachment could also be used against Clinton for his own executive actions in Eastern Europe, Africa, SE Asia and the Middle East. And Clinton did not even get Congress to ok it first. - If you provide specifics as to how these actions are all the same, I will respond. /Thus the question, what do you do when it does not go before the Senate? - I am trying to figure out what you mean. The way you have constructed this sentence, are you saying the house will never vote to impeach? Are you saying if the house does that the senate will not vote to approve? //Personally I'm laughing having predicted this scenario, it's humourous to see all the masturbatory fantasies of impeachment. All without a legal/historical precedent. - Actually, if we look at the two prior instances of impeachment, the unfortunate precedent is that congress can impeach the president for whatever they feel they want to impeach him. I think in attempting to come up with these poor excuse for reasons why impeachment will not happen, it is you who is engaging in onanistic fantasies. ///But since you like the ad hominem attacks go ahead and respond like you used to. Do you mean as in the past, or as I am accustomed to do? If I am going to respond, I would at least like to know how you mean some of the things you write.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 10:57:46 AM

  (0+)

You have comunication issues and use it as a screen for your words and previous slurs. Hope that works for you when you are shown to be wrong on impeachment. Clinton: Kosovo -Lied about the genocidal attacks occuring in order to promote armed intervention Sudan- Lied about an aspirin factory and bombed it. Somalia - Illegal intervention in a foreign country HAiti - Illegal intervention in a foreign country Clinton's use of Echelon to listen in on US citizen's conversations. NOTE: my use of the illegal is the same used by those here to define a "illegal war". I rank the above as counters for any GWB impeachment. If the DEMs charge Clinton and GWB ; only then will they be seen as non partisan. And by the way you are still in fantasy land if you think that a true bipartisan effort will impeach Bush/Cheney. Mainly because of because of FDR and LBJs actions negate the charges in the first place.. But if you mention Nixon as a bipartisan attempt; remember they went after him for his domestic illegalities. /As for me being delusional or orgasmic; stop projecting. I called this election and laugh at those who overrate the amount of change that will occur from it. Such as yours.

by Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 12:30:06 PM

  (0+)

or is it giving the bird? oh I see - Oh I doubt that You have comunication issues and use it as a screen for your words and previous slurs. Hope that works for you when you are shown to be wrong on impeachment. - Nope, the issues aren't mine. I know how to construct sentences so that their meaning is clear. I'm no English professor when it comes to grammar or syntax, but people understand what I write. Clinton: Kosovo -Lied about the genocidal attacks occuring in order to promote armed intervention - So you say. There is much disagreement on the topic. The original UN ruling in 2001 said that it was not genocide because of a technicality. All the murders and rapes and tortures did take place but because they could not prove that these actions were undertaken in order to wipe out the ethnic Albanians, it could not be termed genocide. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1530781.stm click here There is still an ongoing UN investigation taking place. As you can see from the full text, UN officials were not pleased that what happened in Kosovo was not termed genocide. By most people's interpretations, it certainly was. Sudan- Lied about an aspirin factory and bombed it. - Friendly or mistaken fire incidents abound in virtually every war or attack ever undertaken. This does not warrant any work on my end to disprove. Somalia - Illegal intervention in a foreign country - The US Mission to Somalia was part of a joint and approved UN Operation. See click here HAiti - Illegal intervention in a foreign country - The US operation in Haiti was actually agreed to by the government of Haiti prior to the operation taking place. Former President Carter obtained agreement with the current leader of the time General Cedras. Clinton's use of Echelon to listen in on US citizen's conversations. - Interesting point. I was not aware of Echelon until I researched it just now. Amazing, you actually got something right among the half a dozen to a dozen items you completely mischaracterized. Perhaps it is such a bigger deal in this administration because it came along with a general disregard for civil liberties and laws passed by congress and the patriot act. NOTE: my use of the illegal is the same used by those here to define a "illegal war". - No, it isnt as my above doclinks and comments prove /As for me being delusional or orgasmic; stop projecting. I called this election and laugh at those who overrate the amount of change that will occur from it. Such as yours. - I believe you intend to say "overinflate" or "overestimate" instead of "overrate" and "As you do" instead of "Such as yours". My response is as it has been throughout this discussion and not just to you. Arguing about it is pointless. We shall soon see. Furthermore, I am the furthest from having any sort of emotion about this topic among anyone in this thread. I am simply convinced in a very level headed way about what will come to pass. But dont let that get your tidy-whities in a bunch.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 4:33:20 PM

  (0+)

" Sudan- Lied about an aspirin factory and bombed it. - Friendly or mistaken fire incidents abound in virtually every war or attack ever undertaken. This does not warrant any work on my end to disprove. " What war were we again. What is the LEwinsky war? Clinton took offensive military action without a congressional mandate.

by Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:40:24 AM

  (0+)

Re: Sudan- Lied about an aspirin factory and bombed it. - Friendly or mistaken fire incidents abound in virtually every war or attack ever undertaken. This does not warrant any work on my end to disprove. " What war were we again. What is the LEwinsky war? Clinton took offensive military action without a congressional mandate. - I dont know, I've never been a war. I am also not familiar with any war called the Lewinsky war. Sorry, cannot help you here.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 1:31:40 PM

  (0+)

- The US Mission to Somalia was part of a joint and approved UN Operation. See click here sO mR. lESER, you think that it is okay for a POTUS tocommit acts of war against a foregin non agressor nation without authorization by Congress? HINT That is why IS said is was using the "ILLEGAL WAR" definition that is batered around here.

by Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:48:46 AM

  (0+)

and that charter includes US military assistance to UN operations. Any US involvement in UN operations has an implicit prior approval by congress dating back to the approval of the charter. As I said, it is totally different than what happened with Iraq.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 1:27:34 PM

  (0+)

... as I have been telling people on both sides of the aisle, it matters not what anyone's preference is regarding impeachment. You can cry partisanship all you want. It is a useless argument. The investigations and hearings on various issues are going to happen, we already know that. Either things will be uncovered that makes the public scream for impeachment, or they won't. If the public screams for impeachment, you can bet the additional 16 votes in the senate will materialize. If not, you know what, that is fine too. If that happens, the GOP will have protected yet another corrupt individual from getting what is coming to them, and you will see another GOP congressional bloodbath in 2008, this time accompanied by a loss of the white house. But, again, the arguments, name calling, all of that is meaningless. We are on a course whose outcome, based on a few variables, is easily predictable one way or the other.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 11:07:57 AM

  (0+)

Once the dirty truth comes out-- that shows that there is absolutely no comparison between Bush and Clinton-- that Bush was a criminal and constitutional violator in SO many ways, the Republicans will be forced to take a walk to the white House-- at least 15 or 16 of them-- and they will tell him, and Cheney, that they have to go, because the Republican party will be obliterated (oh that sounds sweet) if they don't clean up their own mess. And Bush and Cheney are their mess.

It will be oh so delicious to see the day that Bush and Cheney resign because the Republicans told them to. Either that, or the Dems will take an additional 50 house seats and 15-20 MORE senate seats in 2008. At that point, the two party system could be replaced by new parties.

by Rob Kall (954 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2089 comments [49 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 12:13:39 PM

  (0+)

you said they would be impeached. You said GWB would serve jail time. Now you are saying that Bush /Cheney will be forced to resign. I don't suppose you actually have a firm stance on this considering your own words. /You must be changing the scenarios to keep your mastabatory fantasies(as previously posted) fresh. Well at least that's healthy on a personal level for you and yours. //I said no impeachment and I meant it. I also said the DEMs would hold lots of hearings get a few sacrificial minor GOP staffers for all their 18 months of efforts. Why because historical preocedence is a great baseline and POLs are so predictable. /// Now if GWB did have to appoint a replacement VIP, I hope he goes for Condi.

by Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 4:34:32 PM

  (0+)

... would someone please page Mrs. VultureTX, poor creature as she probably is, to get self pleasuring off VultureTX's mind. Pretty please! I'll even spring for a hotel room.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 4:42:27 PM

  (0+)

the word means "self indulgent" in a literary sense.

by Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:35:40 AM

  (0+)

... Rob, you and a couple of others see it. There really is a very limited solution set concerning what will happen given what facts and variables are in play. The wants and desires of politicos like those of us here on the site, or elected officials are really besides the point once investigations and hearings start. Frothing at the mouth for immediate impeachment hearings like some on this site are wont to do, and frothing at the mouth against it like VultureTX and the Freepers do are both about the biggest wastes of effort I have ever seen.

by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2148 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 4:38:00 PM

  (0+)

She is a toxic troll, was warned repeatedly and will not be allowed back.

by Rob Kall (954 articles, 4178 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2089 comments [49 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 12:32:50 PM

  (0+)

Impeachment should have nothing to do with whether it's good or bad for the country; nothing to do with whether or not Congress wants to pursue it; nothing to do with whether it's payback or the right/wrong thing to do. I wrote a diary article on this a while back if'n any of you want to look it up. It has everything to do with what the majority of Bush's employers, we the people, want Congress to do in our name. Impeachment? Hell yeah, why not, but I'd rather see the big one, trial for International War Crimes.

by Mark Petersen (9 articles, 73 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 50 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 8:10:32 AM

  (0+)

First why did you reply to me yet address nothing I said? Second Only the US govt. can give someone up to the ICC or other various courts for War Crimes. If a person(acting in his US govt position ) is taken into custody by a foreign govt for "war crimes" ; US Military force is AUTOMATICALLY authorized for his extraction back to the US. Yep that's one of the accomplishments of the last session. So please tell me how this would occur in our Unites States? 'Cause in case you have not noticed there is a gentleman's agreement to protect the power of the POTUS. And that means not allowing Foreign Powers to make a mockery of the office.

by Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 9:25:58 AM

  (0+)

It wasn't a reply to your comment, but a personal feeling that the most important aspect of this subject is the will of the people. It wasn't intended to be a direct reply to your comment; don't think it showed up that way as it's divided as a seperate comment. How would it happen? Once again, the will of the people would have to be honored by all involved, a majority, if it is indeed their will. Could it ever happen? I'm not holding my breath.

by Mark Petersen (9 articles, 73 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 50 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 10:36:36 AM

  (0+)

I was always promoting not political but criminal probes against Bush and Co on 9/11 and Katrina. I would like to state that the primary goals here are not the individuals but the machine they had erected. Thus we need to brake and then stop the machine. Investigations, perpetual perseverance will not allow the machine to function, comproment people and set the backlash in motion. The impeachment can happen only if there is a direct proof for the people that president was lying to them. By that proof to the people I do not mean facts ( there are plenty) but the mood of the people to accept those. Criminal probes are justified and they also serve political purposes. And I also agree that we spend too much time attacking each other. Don't we have enough adversaries anyway? Peace on Site?

by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4103 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 8:13:48 AM

  (0+)