As I have indicated in a previous article -- There is a TON of "atrocities" and "theft" yet to be un-earthed about this war. When all is said and done, Nixon will look like a saint!

by JOpiko (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 1:25:43 PM

  (0+)

His weekend report excerpted: "According to Washington insiders, there are moves afoot to dump Vice President Dick Cheney and replace him with either John McCain or Rudolph Giuliani prior to the 2008 presidential election. "Since the increasingly-besieged Cheney has signaled he has no intention of voluntarily stepping down, the strategy by the Bush camp may be to force him out by presenting evidence before Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald that it was Cheney who was responsible for the compromise of CIA non-proliferation covert officer Valerie Plame Wilson and her Brewster Jennings & Associates cover firm."

by Russ Wellen (58 articles, 1029 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 335 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 2:46:32 PM

  (0+)

Bush dump Cheney? Seems really unlikely to me . . . maybe the other way around. It's been clear to me, for a long time, who takes orders from whom.

by Irvthom (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 91 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 10:03:37 PM

  (0+)

Understand -- they ALL take orders from George H.W. Bush. Gates is nothing but a George H.W. retread. They ALL are. Make no mistake about it -- George H.W. Bush has, for all intents and purposes, been running the White House since the 80's or before -- straight on through the Clinton years -- right up to the present.

by Lilith's Spirit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 11:25:42 PM

  (0+)

Head of the CIA for how many years? What do these people actually do, anyway? Everything I read about them, it's stirring up trouble somewhere. Yes, the more I've read about Bush Sr. and the CIA, the more plausible this seems. It has always seemed like he's been the pupeteer for little george. He certainly "dropped out of sight" rather quickly after the little one got in.

by Daniel Geery (26 articles, 95 quicklinks, 126 diaries, 912 comments [26 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 8:46:58 AM

  (0+)

When you say GHWBush 'dropped' out of sight, it was the public view, presenting his views to influence the public politic. We did not see GHW then for the same reason that after 911, when 'Bush the Lesser' was asked if he had taken advice from his father, the former president with prior war experience in the Middle East, his answer was, " no, I turn to a more powerful Father". The reason this answer was necessary was that his 'Daddy' was working full time as a weapons salesman for the Carlyle Group, and the conflict of interest would be blatantly obvious. -- If that seems odd to you, you will be interested to know that John Majors, Ex-British PM and James Baker III, Ex- US Sec/State were also employed selling weapons for Carlyle at the time. Do not be mistaken by accepting the view of that the Bush men have been anything other than public front men. They have a history of being used willingly by the truly powerful that prefer the shadows. our pres. GW Bush his crimes are current and many. his scholastic records are sealed. he demonstrates attributes of a moron. Someone with enough power got him into office twice. in 2000, Afghanistan had ZERO poppy cultivation. today, Afghanistan is producing 130% of WORLD consumption. his father was; GHW Bush married the grand-daughter of US pres. Franklin Pierce. his crimes are historic and current. his scholastic records were also sealed. his function in the war, bay of pigs, Kennedy assassination, Franklin gay porn, Iran Contra, Gulf war I, on and on, was a bungling inept covering true facts. Reagan hated him, and yet Someone with the power got him on Reagan's ticket. As VP he took total control of the US drug interdiction. Cocaine imports to the US rose 2600% in his tenor. his father was; Prescott Sheldon Bush married the daughter of Herbert Walker, partner of EH Harriman. founding member American Eugenics Soc. (Hitler's Super-race start) full partner of Brown Brothers Harriman, saviors of Barings Bank/opium traders. convicted of trading with the enemy in WWII, held 1% of stock, covered Harriman's 99% stake from prosecution. ( Alex brown covered the 'PUT' options on 911.) elected US Senator/Conn. Someone used a lot of power to get a convicted traitor elected. funded GHW Bush's' oil start in Texas. his father was; Samuel Bush vice-pres. Remington Arms before WWI 2ND in charge of small arms procurement of US during WWI. (Remington sold arms worldwide, 75% of all small arms expended in WWI were sold by Remington. 1/2 of all munitions fired at allied troops were provided by Remington. This is a NASTY gene pool.

by cliff567 (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 165 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 21, 2006 at 12:07:44 AM

  (0+)

It seems the former ruling party has found themselves in a bit of a pickle. Knowing that the President and Vice-president have lied, cheated and abused constitutional rights, removing them before 2008 might be best for the Republicans. But whether through resignation or impeachment, doesn't the law provide that if the president resigns, the VP is in charge. Following the VP, it's the House Speaker. Now perhaps the VP could resign first, but doesn't that still move Pelosi up the chain? Quite the pickle...

by Jim Prues (15 articles, 33 quicklinks, 10 diaries, 81 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 3:20:28 PM

  (0+)

simultaneous resignation!! also, I believe that a replacement VP has to be authorized by the congress. Someone tell me if I'm wrong on that. If the Dems sandbag and delay, then a President Pelosi sitation would be possible. They would be insane to allow Giuliani or McCain to take it, since it would give them an incredible lead. of course, that's one way that Lieberman could screw the Dems and buy incredible power. The more I think about it the worse Lieberman looks. We need to turn another senator to the Dems so he loses his power.

by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 3:39:17 PM

  (0+)

The vice president would be appointed by the president with a majority necessary in both legislative branches.

by sbaker (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 147 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 5:20:46 PM

  (0+)

Please point me to the link, please, because my ConLaw is quite rusty. I remember Agnew's resignation and the appointment of one of the Rockefellers (was it John D. or Nelson, I was only a pre-teen). I vaguely thought just the Senate had to approve the nomination. Either way, Cheney out -- replacement stalled. Impeach Bush with no sitting V.P. and third in line (Speaker of the House) becomes President. If she's too bashfull (or they have good pictures of her with a mule) she could decline and then Majority Leader of the Senate (#4) could take the job. CharlieL

by Charlie L (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 747 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:27:01 AM

  (0+)

Nope Jim! The election of last week proved that the people of America are now wide awake! Karl Rove's "complicated tricks" are now known even to the "lowliest peasant," so to speak. No more cooked up "Red Alerts" -- It just won't work. Of course, I assuming that the Democrats play their cards strategically. The Republicans have lost the Hispanic vote forever, and for that matter any immigrant vote -- The effects of the racist demonizing of immigrants (illegal and by extension legal) may not be seen immediately, but will definitely be a factor in the near future ...if not already. Appointing Mel Martinez as RNC chairman -- an act of "Tokenism" will not pacify the many millions of "scared" immigrants in this country -- Citizens or Citizens to be. The Democrats need to push comprehensive immigration reform and take full advantage of this constituency -- Immigrants, for we saw last week that it takes just a couple thousand votes to turn things upside down.

by JOpiko (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 5:08:24 PM

  (0+)

I dont agree. if the democrats pass what most people veiw as amnesty they will do it at the pleasure of George Bush. And the angry swing voters of 2006 will go back to voting republican in 2008.

by Gary Denson (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 283 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 5:29:06 PM

  (0+)

I meant -- Nope Russ!

by JOpiko (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 5:11:46 PM

  (0+)

For several years I have dreamt of the day we would have the opportunity to impeach the President and Vice President. I truly do believe they both need to be held accountable for the damage they have done to this country and to Iraq. Last Tuesday I avoided turning on the TV because I wanted so badly to see a Republican loss and feared it would not be so. I finally did give in and could not stop grinning until I fell asleep. I wish, oh, how I wish, the wisest step right now would be to impeach them, but I don't think it is. Impeachment would seem an act of revenge that could further exacerbate the current American political/cultural rift. I thought about the International Court and a country like Germany stepping in and doing the job for us. That might work. Rob, your article caught me off-guard. I had never considered the possibility of either of these two arrogant men resigning - willingly or otherwise. You've definitely given me something to think about. In the meantime, I do agree with the need to investigate everything that is investigatable. It is absolutely imperative, from my point of view, that we, the American people, thoroughly understand how we allowed ourselves to be so easily manipulated and why we turned on each other so easily.

by Diane Cadonau (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 5:19:00 PM

  (0+)

Rob, What a perfect ending to a hellish nightmare that we've all had to endure over these past six years. Karmic justice indeed!

by Mike Browne (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 17 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 5:21:47 PM

  (0+)

From your keyboard to G*d's ear!

by Laur (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 22 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 10:19:00 PM

  (0+)

The precedent of inducing the VP to resign 1st, selecting & seating a harmless nonentity as the new VP, then inducing the Prez to resign & moving the new VP to the office a failed Prez vacates was established in the 1970's. It will be interesting to see if & how the designated wingnut/Prez can be induced not to pull a Jerry Ford & pardon W & go on to add RBC to the pardon list. There is much to be said for trying W, RBC, et al for treason since treason may be punished by death in the USA. That would allow the defendents's lawyers to plea bargain. Life in solitary, in a super-max prison on a diet of bread, water & ExLax would be a more humane alternative to execution. There is no way the nation will tolerate the slap's on the wrists Mr Kall mentions. This bunch must do hard time, very hard time for life. To sentence W & co to time in a minimum security prison is unacceptable. The other prisoners would make life intolerable for W & co by constantly abusing W & co with violent attempts to murder them. The fate of W & co in the general population of a prison which houses violent offenders would be to be murdered by skilled & hardened inmates. The house arrest deal wouldn't fly. Martha Stewart did time in a Federal Pen in W VA, then house arrest. Mr Skilling is set to serve hard time & Mr Fastow is doing time for a shorter period contingent upon Andy singing on others. All they did was bankrupt a firm, its investors & employees. W & co has(have) bankrupted the USA, killed 100's of troops & Iriqi civilians, subverted the Constitution. Mere investigations & impeachments won't do. This isn't a matter of oral sex between consenting adults. W & co have tortured people & repeatedly committed grand theft on a monumental scale. The culprits merit solitary, hard time for life. No house arrests are to be given to these criminals & traitors. Senator Specter isn't the only former prosecutor in either body of the U S Congress. There are a number of ambitious former prosecutors who want to preserve & add to their reputations for demanding that culprits feel the wrath of the law, the full wrath demanded by the law in Washington DC.

by larry278 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 5:44:08 PM

  (0+)

== Please Restore Impeachment to Its Rightful Place on the Table == An Open Letter By Larry W. Bryant TO: Mr. John Conyers, Jr. U. S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 FROM: Larry W. Bryant DATE: November 13, 2006 On August 25, 2006, you sent me a letter thanking me for my $60 contribution to your reelection campaign. I had chosen that specific amount because your campaign literature said that any contributor sending you at least $60 would receive an autographed copy of your book-length pre-impeachment report. I'm still awaiting receipt of that copy. Meanwhile, I have another, more urgent reason for writing to you at this time. Word has come to me that you recently have echoed Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi's announcement that "impeachment is off the table." This action on your part, coming as it does from a professed champion of seeking an impeachment resolution against Pres. Bush and Vice Pres. Cheney, betrays and insults such contributors as myself. You readily must have perceived that your original, proactive stance on impeachment would appeal to those U. S. citizens directly victimized by the Bush-Cheney record of deception/dishonesty/retaliation -- and that some of these citizens (and their supporters) were quite willing to send you campaign money in furtherance of your stance. For whatever reason, Mr. Conyers, you and Rep. Pelosi have let us down at a critical moment in the history of what's left of our republic. Instead of boldly and unequivocally helping us make a difference in the politics of fear-and-loathing, you've opted for maintaining the status quo. That option reflects, of course, just how broken our system of governance has become. Contempt for the will of the people in this matter should not be an option in the halls of Congress. Accordingly, I ask that you immediately return to your principled view that impeachment remain on the table so long as Bush and Cheney remain in office. Otherwise, I -- along with thousands of other pro-impeachment activists -- will have little difficulty in concluding that your "off the table" decision will stand as a monument to Congress's capitulation to corruption and deceit within the Executive Branch. LARRY W. BRYANT P. S.: Since I consider your abandonment of the impeachment movement to be a bait-and-switch ploy for garnering monetary favors from the masses, I hereby request that you immediately refund to me my $60 contribution to your reelection campaign. I intend to apply that money toward such grassroots activism as exemplified by the volunteers at the web site of http://www.bushbusiness.com/impeachment%20news.htm . Copy furnished to: Chairman, U. S. Federal Election Commission _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gjprobe/petition.html

by LarryWBryant (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 58 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 6:04:38 PM

  (0+)

Thanks for posting the letter, Larry. I add my support, and hope others will as well -- both here, and to Mr. Conyers directly. He needs to get a good dose of the outrage over his 180. Unless he intends to join the ranks of the former Congressman/consultant in 2008, he better do another 180 and get back on track. If he thinks he's going to run and hide on this one, he's sadly mistaken.

by Lilith's Spirit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 11:37:28 PM

  (0+)

Thank you for providing the link to sign your petition. I have added my name. Let's hope it get the desired results. Blessed be! Pappy

by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 2:21:29 AM

  (0+)

Hmmm, I thought I said that? Bush would do a Tricky. Everyone said no..........hmmmmmm. OK...everyone...don't get your dandruff in your coffee...because of a constitutional flaw that prevents impeachment, and more than likely those boys will wait it out. My email to Dave Lindorff dlindorff@yahoo.com Dave I have read your reasons for seeking impeachment of GW Bush and Dick Cheney, and think the real issue is this. The issue is about Iran, and the so called the tail wagging the dog syndrome. Democrats start the supporting process for impeachment, Bush declares war. Now what? The impeachment hearings are thrown out, and the war is dragged on until Bush has finished his term. We have a fundamental flaw with the governing branches, in which impeachment is always fought off by waging war. Is this not obvious to why Nancy Pelosi has taken it off the table? We might as well vote for impeachment is also voting yes for the bombing of Iran. The only way it could work is if Democrats get countries like Russia, and China, to say they will support Iran if attacked by Israel or the United States. This means Russia would be waging war against the United States. Such a stance might stop Bush dead in his tracks, and impeachment would be solidified to go forward. Or to have Congress override the Presidents powers against his veto in starting the impeachment process, and stripping his powers by preventing him from launching a war against Iran. In so doing the impeachment is about his power to wage war illegally, and thereby preventing him to exercise more. I think if such an override would be legislated it would be the end to this President, and the impeachment a foregone conclusion. This is a major flaw of governance in the United States. If we do nothing about this, the same cycle of repetion will occur. Congress needs to have the right to take the executive powers away, in lieu of stopping false wars, and criminal presidents. This is the fight! Not so much the impeachment proceedings; but the actions that will occur once it is tabled. We should not be trying to sell the impeachment process, but telling it like it is, to the people, about getting impeachment on the table verses the President declaring War on Iran. Democrats have to get support from the people to strip him from those war powers he has been illegally exercising. We can go on and on about the reasons to impeach, but if we do nothing to solidify the backlash from waging another illegal War on another target country....Iran, we might as well shoot ourselves in the head. Impeachment on the table tells Bush to attack Iran, meaning we have another or a 3rd so called war on; for the War on terror. In fact he will consider impeachment a terrorist plot, and attack Iran to make the Democrats impotent imbeciles. I wish your book would address these facts and the political maneuvering that it will take to defang this monster in the Whitehouse. What can I do? I am in China...trying to prevent another war here. Good Luck... Also a point you failed to mention in reasons to impeach is the stealing of the 2000 election, the denial of recounts, and sending the issue to the Supreme Court. That was not an election..it was a selection process, and you might as well say; that is the day they enacted Marshall Law on the Untied States, by preventing all Americans their due right to vote for President of The United States. Hope to hear from you, Mr. Jermano --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 930 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 6:06:59 PM

  (0+)

I don't know about this whole premise, but it sure sounds good to me. The important thing is to get rid of them together. Who the hell wants Dick Cheney as an alternative to George W. Bush? The fact is that Cheney and Bush's old man have probably been running the country the entire time anyway. Junior's got no brains, so he's perfectly believable as a figure head. But still, I'd love this to happen. And soon!

by Deb Della Piana (31 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 46 comments [2 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 6:27:48 PM

  (0+)

All former and current Bu$h & Co. must not be allowed to resign, but face impeachment and then have trials of Treason against these fascist thugs; before being turned over to the Hague to face War Crimes Charges. They should then spend their life sentences at Gitmo. Their illegally amassed fortunes would be turned over to U.N. humanitarian projects in Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon. Then the world will know that the U.S. is serious about prosecuting its war against terrorists.

by Stanimal (2 articles, 226 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 1253 comments [232 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 6:42:06 PM

  (0+)

Don't jump so fast! Wait until the Dems are sworn in to make a final decision about their intentions. Rigth now the Repubs can authorize funding for a war against Iran, NOT after the swearing in ceremony. Also, by not coming right out about Impeachment the Dems can say hearings have brought out definitive proof that the current Administration has committed impeachible offences. Once out of office, CRIMINAL CHARGES!

by nymta3 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 7:38:55 PM

  (0+)

I wish to respond as regards impeachment. The simple truth I fear is that Democrats are getting ready to install Rep. Nancy Pelosi as the Speaker of the House. Very 'PC' and very unwise. I have not seen one thing that Pelosi has ever done that even seemed like leadership. One of Rep. Pelosi's first public statements was that there would be no impeachments on her watch. Since November 6th swept aside the Republicans, thanks be to God, she has broken her back bending over backwards to be the "Speaker of the House...not the Speaker of her Party". Being the Speaker of the whole House does not mean she needs to tie the hands of those who want to investigate and appropriately deal with those who tried to turn our representative democracy into a fascist oligarchy. We have had no advise, consent and oversight of the Bush Excecutive branch since the Republicans have had control. I feel so strongly about Pelosi that I wrote to my own Congress person begging that he work to see that someone with the strength necessary be sought for Speaker. I knew this was a waste of time. My fellow Democrats love to be politically correct to a fault. The President, the Vice President and several others should be impeached for sins of commission and ommission in the execution of their jobs. Additionally, it is entirely likely that Bush and Cheney are in danger of being branded as war criminals by the rest of the world even though the Republicans have tried to wrap them in 'magic shields' of legislative trickery. The actions of the Congress just prior to the November elections were due to the terror that had seized Bush and Cheney when it finally occurred to them that they had not been able to pull the wool over all the eyes in the world. Both of these men have made a mockery of the Geneva Accords and they need to be made to stand and answer for this. It is my concerted belief that the Democrats under Pelosi will fail to even seek to administer the justice that those of the Bush/Cheney cadre that so richly deserve justice. The only hope is for a ground swell of public opinion demanding that those who are responsible be held accountable and to let the chips fall where they will. The Democrats need to remember an angry and fed-up electorate put them in control. That same electorate can take them back out again.

by Michael Weaver-Robbins (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 30 comments) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 10:41:35 PM

  (0+)

So after that looney toons mental midget Democrat Speaker of the US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and her Shadow & Yes Nancy Man,Gutless Harebrain Harry Reid openly and publically sold us out on Impeachment of both War Criminals,The Power Mad Blood Thirsty Psychotic Liar in Chief George W Bush and Vice War Criminal Dick Cheney, therefore isn't it time that we launch a dump Nancy Pelosi and Dump Harebrain Harry Reid Movement on the Democrats so that even the Gutless,Yellow Coward,Lying Two Faced Sell Out Democrats Finally Get It Into Their Dimwit Heads That We Want Bush & Cheney Removed From Power And We Want A Congressional Democratic Leadership that we can trust to not sell us out like Sell Outs Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid did,and to forcefully remind the Democratic Party and the Republican Party as well,that The President and Vice President, and The US Congress work for us not a Political Party,and that we threw the Republicans out in 2006 over their failure to force Bush & Cheney to end the war in Iraq and to do the will of the people! Please contact your own US Senators And US Congress Member as well as the Chairman of both the Republican and Democratic National Committees on this,so that these political hacks know we mean business!

by Ralph (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 74 comments) on Saturday, Dec 23, 2006 at 11:13:34 PM

  (0+)

just, as there was no formal justice during all these years. They decided to take the law into their own hands, and it will end with/by their own hands, or in reaction to. My intuition is blinking like a Fire-truck.

by Katrin R. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 657 comments [15 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 13, 2006 at 11:13:42 PM

  (0+)

to me whether DUBYA and Dick(LESS) find their way out of office because of resignation or impeachment, as long as they are out. It is a given that much like Dumbsfeld, both DUBYA and Dick(LESS) will be charged as war criminals under international law. They cannot escape prosecution, even if Pelosi and the rest of the new House Democrats decide to wimp out and lick at DUBYA's heels. Frankly, I think congress will be unable to hold off impeachment. We already know there are going to be lots of icky worm cans opened when the subpoenas start flying. There is no doubt in my mind as the investigations into the criminal enterprise that is the DUBYA administration moves forward, congress will be forced into the impeachment of at least DUBYA and Dick(LESS). Many others may also fall under the juggernaut, and rightly so. It would be a mistake and set a very dangerous precident not to impeach. This time around, we may be able to escape with the constitution still somewhat in tact. Next time, we might not be so lucky. Blessed be! Pappy

by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 2:39:39 AM

  (0+)

If the Repubs or an impeachment vote were to force Dubya to go, he would use troops to surround the Whitehouse to keep him in power. Remember, Bush thinks God put him in there. The country would survive or fail at this point. Remember, at the end of the day, Bush is a whackjob first, last, and always...

by Aodhan51 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 8 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 6:03:25 AM

  (0+)

Even if your far-fetched scenario were to come to pass, which is highly unlikely, I doubt very much that the military would be so willing to protect DUBYA. Let us not forget the military has been just as fucked over by DUBYA and his freak squad as the rest of us, if not more so. Not since the end of the Vietnam War has the military been so upset by the actions of a sitting president. The number of generals and other higher-ups that are less than impressed by DUBYA is staggering. Why else would the newspapers for almost all the branches of the military have called for Dumbsfeld's resignation? They know what's up more than we civilians do. If the highly unlikely scenario you propose were to get some start, I have a feeling it would backfire severely. Of course, that might end in the death of DUBYA, and the goddess knows, I wouldn't shed a tear over that one, unless it be a tear of joy in his much overdue passing. Blessed be! Pappy

by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:15:57 AM

  (0+)

Nancy Pelosi has already said no to impeachment. If Bush does go under investigation, the first thing that will happen is that Cheney will resign for "health" reasons and a Bush clone will be appointed VP with an understanding that Bush and Cheney will be pardoned. It will probably be McCain who will eventually be president and be hard to beat in 2008. Irregardless, Pelosi stating that impeachment is being taken "off the table" was a very dictatorial thing to say.Is she the Washington D.A.? What about all the crimes committed by Bush? What a mess. Doesn't this chain of events scream for a third party? When are you people going to realize that politics is very different from 10 years ago? Millionaire Pelosi has her OWN interests at heart, not ours. Whoever wins out in the end will not put humpty dumpty back together again. They will fart around Washington while American military get shot in Iraq with no more backing than they have now. People will get more and more disillusioned until there are riots in the street.

by Timothy V. Gatto (348 articles, 177 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 574 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 8:18:22 AM

  (0+)

When Spiro Agnew resigned, no VP replacement occurred, and then, when Nixon resigned, the Speaker of the House, Gerald Ford, became president. It would take Joe Lieberman to elect a repug.

by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:16:59 AM

  (0+)

Pardon me for asking an obvious question, but how on earth is a third party going to change anything? While I readily agree that there needs to be an alternative to the Democrats and Republicans, especially since I consider myself to be a Libertarian, I can't see how having a third party would change the outcome of any possible actions against DUBYA and Dick(LESS). Perhaps I am missing something in your argument. Politics has a way of corrupting the easily corrupted. Just because a politician claims to be outside the "duopoly" of the Reps and Dems doesn't guarantee they will be honest, forthright, or even marginally trustworthy. How many other world governments exist where there are multiple parties? Doesn't the rot of governmental corruption afflict even these multi-party systems? Can you honestly think that if there were a third, or even a fourth party to rise against the prevalent "duopoly" said parties would be any less given to the ills that afflict all governmental bodies? If our government is actually controlled by "corporocrats", their money would be just as green to an Independent or Libertarian candidate as it is to the present crop of Republicans and Democrats. Ergo, adding more political parties to the mix only clouds an already merky body of water. Frankly, I don't really know that anything will ever fix our government. Blessed be! Pappy

by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:35:19 AM

  (0+)

I believe something legal needs to be done to Poppa Bush to get his input out of the Presidency and CIA. The Bush family has been profiting off these wars as has the Bin Laden family through at least the Carlyle Group. The Christic Institute many years ago tried to bring racketering charges against Poppa Bush and his corrupt CIA bunch. The corrupt courts in Florida would not allow any evidence against Poppa Bush and his corrupt bunch and then the case was thrown out as frivelous as there was not evidence. All this would not be going on right now had Poppa Bush and crew been legally restrained at that time. Poppa Bush needs to not get Presidential Daily Briefings and be taken out of the loop for any US Government and CIA information and activities. Bring forth the evidence. His handprint is on it. His guns for drugs crew are in Bush Jr's administration. They are criminals and need to be put in prison. How about those solitary confinement prisons that the Bush family makes money off of? Regarding Pelosi and Conyers saying that Impeachment is off the table, I heard that legally they need to take an impartial stance before an official investigation brings forth the evidence and then they can take a stance for Impeachment. I am not a lawyer and was not even interested in politics until the day before Poppa Bush came into office and have been horrified at my government's behavior and history of corruption ever since. We need to protect our Constitution and the financial stability of the US and the stability of our middle class which maintains our democracy. I am not hearing talk about the immediate reversal of the Constitutional destruction brought under the name of Homeland Security, i.e. Habeus Corpus and Posse Commitatus (spelling?) I have been comforted that the right to bear arms was not reversed with all these fascist seeming changes to our Constitution. Take back our Constitution and put the whole crime family in prison and let them face war crimes/crimes against humanity in the Hague.

by spakitty (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 12:03:07 PM

  (0+)

does anyone know if laws in other countries, such as Afghanistan or Iraq, allow them to arrest politicians in other countries for crimes they believe have been committed against them. Do things like that only happen via diplomatic channels (extradition, deportation, etc.) if they happen at all, or do other sovereign nations have the capacity to arrest and take people from other countries they feel have committed crimes (i.e. terrorist acts) against their country? And isn't that what the U.S. has been doing under the new Bush/Cheney's "anti-terror" laws? Wouldn't it be fitting to see the same types of laws applied against Bush and Cheney by other governments?

by Lilith's Spirit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 3:41:11 PM

  (0+)

does anyone know if laws in other countries, such as Afghanistan or Iraq, allow them to arrest politicians in other countries for crimes they believe have been committed against them. Do things like that only happen via diplomatic channels (extradition, deportation, etc.) if they happen at all, or do other sovereign nations have the capacity to arrest and take people from other countries they feel have committed crimes (i.e. terrorist acts) against their country? And isn't that what the U.S. has been doing under the new Bush/Cheney's "anti-terror" laws? Wouldn't it be fitting to see the same types of laws applied against Bush and Cheney by other governments? First, let me post the reason why Germany has been chosen for the prosecution of Dumbsfeld: "Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law provides 'universal jurisdiction' allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world." Source article: click here While it would stand to reason that Afghanistan would have a right to press for prosecution of the various American war criminals, I doubt that would happen given the existence of Hamid Karzai, our dictatorial puppet. He is not about to bite the hands that feed him, and keep the opium poppies growing tall. As far as Iraq, firstly, before they could even consider engaging in prosectution of foreign war criminals, they have to set up a government that works. Once again, we have a puppet at the helm there. Right now, our puppet there, prime minister Jawad al-Maliki can't keep a government in operation. About the only good thing I can say about him is he has pissed off DUBYA. I doubt he has enough power or Iraq has enough government to concern itself with things like prosecution of foreign war criminals. They can't even keep the lights on twenty-four hours a day yet. It is my understanding, and I hope someone will correct me if I am wrong, that usually, such things are dealt with via diplomatic channels. Of course, we have circumvented them a bit, so that might no longer be true. As far as sovereign countries having the right to arrest and detain by going on foreign soil, I believe that the country in question needs to request extradition in order to arrest and detain foreign criminals, even war criminals. Once again, the US has sort of pissed all over that one, so it's anyone's guess as to what the proper channels are. As far as your last statement, it would be a stellar thing indeed to see DUBYA and Dick(LESS) punished under laws like they have made. I would garner a huge amount of satisfaction watching them facing a bit of their own kind of hell. Ultimately, the whole Hee Haw gang of DUBYA and his henchmen will fall under some sort of prosecution. While it will most likely be done on foreign soil, and they will most likely be found guilty in absensia, that will be more than enough for me. They will effectively become fugitives at that point, and if they cross into international airspace, they might just wind up in a foreign prison. Poetic justice indeed if you ask me. Blessed be! Pappy

by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 15, 2006 at 2:12:52 AM

  (0+)

Thanks for your response, Pappy. I hope things are going better for you all around.

by Lilith's Spirit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Thursday, Nov 16, 2006 at 12:53:00 PM

  (0+)

Does it feel natural to you, to be reading your text, and words, while at the same time these bright, red lips are opening and closing...back and forth...competing for the attention? or rather, competing for the distraction? I realize that I am 'over-sensitive', and this is not a value judgement originating from thought, or otherwise opinions of mine. I just cannot do them both. I find myself having to cover up those imposing red lips, in order to hear what you are saying, and to listen. People often tell me that I say what everyone is thinking, but nobody dare says. I just felt a need to tell you how I feel, because I find myself struggling with a dilemma. When I read a comment, or article, I form my own visualizations. Nothing you have said goes with the flashing lips; they take away from your words. Would you consider giving this a thought? (It is not meant to be mean, at all) Just frustrating!

by Katrin R. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 657 comments [15 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Nov 17, 2006 at 6:38:34 AM

  (0+)

Well, Katrin...yes, I will give it consideration.

by Lilith's Spirit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Monday, Nov 20, 2006 at 10:26:16 PM

  (0+)

much better! xxx Katrin PS: You must have been a very bright toddler, even then.

by Katrin R. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 657 comments [15 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 21, 2006 at 4:46:33 AM

  (0+)

PRECOCIOUS. ;-) (And yes, I was/am. LOL)

by Lilith's Spirit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Tuesday, Nov 21, 2006 at 10:46:18 AM

  (0+)

things are about the same as they ever were. I still find it hard to believe that jobs in my chosen field are so damned hard to come by, but the fact that I am without money yet again more or less speaks volumes about it. Perhaps the new iteration of congress will realize that free trade agreements are failed experiments, and America will be put back to work yet again. Hey, I can dream, can't I? Oh, by the way, I love your lip graphic. Their moving doesn't bother me in the least. You should see my standard cursor if you want to talk about something that's distracting. It does keep people from messing with my machine, though...hehehe Blessed be! Pappy

by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Nov 20, 2006 at 1:01:01 AM

  (0+)

Well my friend...I caved in to Katrin's pure, simple request. I guess one person's humor is another person's distraction. And since life is short, why not go for the change every now and then, eh? (Hey, it's a lot easier than tryin to change this political system. LOL)

by Lilith's Spirit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Monday, Nov 20, 2006 at 10:47:41 PM

  (0+)

In response to ikster, didn't Clinton continue with his ("wag the dog") "war" in Kosovo WHILE he was being impeached? One does not preclude the other.

by Lynn Hirshman (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 41 comments [6 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Nov 14, 2006 at 5:38:42 PM

  (0+)

Yes...and that's the point. He went forward with war in Kosovo when impeachment was tabled. As we know impeachment went forward, and he was not impeached..And the War crimes committed in Kosovo never came to be part of that impeachment. Remember they bombed a Chinese Embassy. This is the same repetition I am am talking about. Given the resources of the Republicans, to bring impeachment over sex did not make them hesitate to impeach if he took the country to War. Afterall it was only an air assault, unlike the committed soldiers we have in Iraq, Afghanistan, and more than likely later in Iran, and Syria. Plus Clintons War was not a protracted War as this one will be if we attack Iran. We never did get a verdict when Milosovich died. Some say he was killed on the inside. A very likely repeat of Saddam despite his verdict in hanging. I think we should give Pelosi credit...in not tabling it just now, until things are in place to prevent and take his War powers away. I think if the majority of Republicans would agree to first stop his power to wage war, so impeachment could proceed, then it should be tabled. In all respects I think if Bush is impeached Iran will halt uranium enrichment. Bush is the problem...not the so called terrorists.

by Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 930 comments) on Wednesday, Nov 15, 2006 at 4:01:51 AM

  (0+)

You can't get the bulk of the US citizenry to pay enough attention to what's being done to the constitution to realize that they're being sold down the river. Those of us old enough remember when the evening news not only gave you the facts (remember facts? all they do now is this "one side said this and then the other side said this other thing", without even any damn fact checking any more, much less investigative reporting), but also informed you of the history and how it was important to the big picture. The general public's understanding of the functioning of government is now so poor that you couldn't get them lit up against these monsters if you poured gas on the public and lit the match yourself. If Bush pulled off that fake face and showed them the Frankenstein's Monster's mask that is his real face underneath it, they wouldn't wake up. It's a nice dream, but you're just dreaming. The old Republican Party and the corporations had a deal and it basically was this. "We (the Republican Party) will keep favoring business as much as we reasonably can without the general public catching on, you will give us enough money to keep us doing this, we won't begrudge you giving some to the Democrats (as long as it's less) to hedge your bets." The new Republican Party made this deal "You will give us as much money as we can extort out of you, we will punish you for giving money to the Democrats, and if you do give us as much money as we think is appropriate, we will screw the US citizenry over as badly as we can get away with to give you whatever you want." Fortunately, just enough of the free and unbent media still existed for enough people to get an idea of their incompetance that it ended this. The perfect storm of the Iraq occupation, Hurricane Katrina, and Republican Senators running around Washington with their pants around their ankles chasing pages helped, too. And realize, all of that was just barely enough. People still aren't paying attention, they're just pissed off. It took a massive amount of flagrant, flaming incompetance to get them to say, "Well, maybe some of these guys do suck, let's vote them out of office" when ALL of them sucked, because the marched in LOCK-STEP off any available cliff, just like lemmings. You grossly underestimate the shallow understanding of the US citizenry.

by brantl (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 23 comments) on Wednesday, Nov 15, 2006 at 9:18:46 PM

  (0+)

This is why OPEDNEWS online to give the facts. The Republicans are in for a reawakening. They have been wacked. I think the Democrats will have a real force to make positive change. Now you know.

by Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 930 comments) on Thursday, Nov 16, 2006 at 12:31:09 AM

  (0+)