Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

So You Think You Want to Impeach?

By Tim Dickinson, Mother Jones. Posted November 15, 2006.


There's little doubt that, both legally and morally, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have earned an early retirement. But impeachment isn't a practical option.
111506story

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also in Top Stories

Sleeping Around Craigslist
Anna Reed, Lily Penza, East Bay Express

Bush's Secret Army of Snoops and Snitches
Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive

Michael Pollan on What's Wrong with Environmentalism
Kate Cheney Davidson, Yale Environment 360

A Peak Oil Prophet Imagines Life in America After Wal-Mart
Michelle Nijhuis, Grist.org

Sci-Fi Heroes Take on the System
Roya Rastegar, ColorLines

Billionaires Are Gouging Your Grandparents
Brave New Films, Brave New Films

Online Activists Keep the Pressure on Obama
Ari Melber, TheNation.com

More stories by Tim Dickinson

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Book Review:

The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism and Why It Must Be Applied to George W. Bush
By John Nichols
The New Press. 217 pages. $15.95.

Pretensions to Empire: Notes on the Criminal Folly of the Bush Administration
By Lewis Lapham
The New Press. 277 pages. $24.95.

The Case For Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush From Office
By David Lindorff and Barbara Olshansky
St. Martin's Press. 275 pages. $23.95.

Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush
By the Center For Constitutional Rights
Melville House Publishing. 141 pages. $9.95.

The Impeachment of George W. Bush: A Handbook for Concerned Citizens
By Elizabeth Holtzman and Cindy Cooper
Nation Books. 256 pages. $14.95.

On October 7, 2003, citizens of the world's fifth-largest economy swarmed to the ballot box to oust their feckless chief executive in a special recall election. The wellspring of their discontent? A fiscal emergency, linked to a bungled electricity crisis, which had left constituents sweltering in the dark. Vying for votes against a motley crew better suited for a season of hijinks on VH1's The Surreal Life -- a midget, a porn star, a Greek millionairess, an ex-Mr. Universe -- Governor Gray Davis was thus rudely ushered out of power and Arnold Schwarzenegger installed as commander in chief of a state reborn, in a guttural instant, as "Galifornia."

With the benefit of hindsight, it's now clear that the wrong politician got the boot for the Golden State's woes. The energy crisis had nothing to do with Davis, the tone-deaf technocrat. Instead, it was a criminal conspiracy by Enron to plunder state coffers with schemes so malevolent that company traders code-named their effort "The Death Star."

If dead men could tell tales, Ken Lay might now regale us with the secret back story of those infamous energy meetings in the White House -- the ones whose opacity Vice President Dick Cheney defended all the way to the Supreme Court -- and expose the role of the Bush administration in suborning that faux "crisis." At the time, our president laughed off calls to investigate market manipulation by his chief corporate benefactor, even as he used California's blackouts as cover for abandoning his most important campaign promise. "We're now in an energy crisis," Bush declared in the spring of 2001. "And that's why I decided to not have mandatory caps on CO2."

And perhaps, then, we as Americans would demand ultimate accountability. For if lying under oath about a sexual dalliance with a Botero-esque intern is an impeachable offense, so certainly would be administration complicity in the effort to (as one Enron trader put it so coarsely) "jam Grandma Millie...right up her asshole for fucking $250 a megawatt hour."

But why limit ourselves to speculation about misdemeanors when the administration's high crimes are hiding in plain sight:

  • Whereas the administration "fixed" intelligence to embark on a war of choice, unsanctioned by international law.
  • Whereas a criminally incompetent lack of planning has caused that conflict to drag on longer than U.S. involvement in World War II, while spurring the nuclear ambitions of the mullahs in Tehran.
  • Whereas the president authorized the National Security Administration to engage in warrantless wiretaps of American citizens in violation of the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the doctrine of separation of powers, and the express will of Congress in establishing the fisa courts.
  • Whereas the president has authorized the use of torture in contravention of military law and Article Three of the Geneva Convention, violations of which, as Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy pointedly observed in the Hamdan decision, "are considered 'war crimes,' punishable as federal offenses."

  • Digg!

    See more stories tagged with: cheney, pelosi, impeachment, bush

    Tim Dickinson is a contributing editor for Rolling Stone and also writes its political blog.

    Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


    Advertisement

     

    Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
    Comments closed.
    The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
    View:
    IMPEACH X 1000
    Posted by: rsaxto on Nov 15, 2006 12:36 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    While Dickinson wrote an interesting and readable piece, he came to a wrong conclusion. He didn't even mention the fact that the Bushies criminally stole both of their elections which means he is a false president unworthy of he office without signing a single law. Since becoming "president" he/Cheney have committed numerous crimes against the people of the USA and against the peoples of the world including the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of people in an illegal war. Impeach? Yes, yes: a thousand times YES!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: Intraspecto
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: Conservasaurus
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: rsaxto
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: Floradora
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: tiellis
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000..Not only would..sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: sheena2u
    Use impeachment as a threat to get past the predictable Bush vetoes.
    Posted by: Sojourner on Nov 15, 2006 1:22 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Speak softly but carry a big stick? Bush has nothing to lose by vetoing Demo legislation coming to his desk. So keep impeachment at the ready. Maybe it will get his attention.

    And then again, maybe not. That wouldn't surprise me at all.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    No alternative to Impeachment
    Posted by: bob357 on Nov 15, 2006 1:26 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Well argued article. However after listing the crimes of this administration in the article, the unmistaken conclusion must be to impeach the President and to do it as soon as possible. Before he has a chance to cause the Country any more harm by his feckless behaviour.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    A Reasonable Alternative to Impeachment
    Posted by: LeftWright on Nov 15, 2006 1:29 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    1) Cheney resigns due to health reasons,

    2) Bush appoints someone acceptable in his place (McCain?),

    3) Bush then resigns and moves to his ranch in Paraguay.

    Obviously, Bush will not do this without encouragement, so real investigations into 9/11, the pre-war intelligence book cooking, warrantless wiretapping, torture, Katrina failures, etc. will be needed.

    Bush gone and no "Pelosi problem."

    And this can all be done by July 2007 or sooner!

    The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

    Be well.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » Excuse me... Posted by: WhuThe?!?
    » RE: Ignoramus? :) Posted by: Scientz
    » RE: I know Tarpley's work. Posted by: Scientz
    » Not so sure I like that... Posted by: WhuThe?!?
    It's too late to screw around.
    Posted by: RYancey on Nov 15, 2006 1:41 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    People are dying because of Bush and Cheney. They need to be impeached and imprisoned. To do anything thing else makes our country a joke. Pelosi can pledge to not run for reelection and the world will be a better place.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: It's too late to screw around. Posted by: Intraspecto
    Teaching Justice and its opposite
    Posted by: JoeCraine on Nov 15, 2006 2:32 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Horrible crimes should be punished. It is a continuing assault against the victims and it send the worng message to those who would emulate to do otherwise.

    The investigation should begin. Let the people demand what the people will demand.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Well, this piece is not what passes for intelligent thought on the Left.
    Posted by: doinaheckuvajob on Nov 15, 2006 3:03 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    In fact it's dumb. Coming from the same magazine that mostly ignored vote fraud for 6 years too.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Riddle me this...
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 15, 2006 3:07 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    "Impeaching Bush alone, of course, would be of no use -- for Cheney, equally if not more culpable, is but another head of the same abominable Hydra. And there's the rub. Take away Bush, take away Cheney,..."

    *gasp*
    *sigh*

    People, help me here...

    Since when is being held accountable to the laws of our nation (not to mention international human rights conventions) merely a relatively high priority subservient still to the twisted trade-off thinking of modern politicking?

    How did we loose our collective anchoring upon the bedrock of clear, and clearly essential, constitutional principals to the tragic extent that each of us can, far too easily I'll admit, entertain the "logic" of Mr. Dickinson's point here? I hear him saying that impeachment, while no doubt a fate well due this mummery of an administration, is less strategically precipitous (given whatever he perceives to be the Democrats own ulterior motives to be now) than all of us animals being happy that our stall doors are now open, wandering mannerly and grateful from the barn up to the farm (White?) house and joining in a feast of humble-pie, even with our old tormentor still at the head of the table.

    Join me in shaking-off enrollment in this Orwellian endgame mindset; this browbeaten herd mentality that settles for selling-out. The key here is to realize exercising our rights to keep REALITY front and center in US democracy is not an "either/or" matter at all. Our rights guarantee us ALL our rights, not Kafkaesque trade-offs, pay-offs and dirty-pool jockeying to get the most of the least that "business as usual" has taught us to either hope for or give up on.

    Who's buying this BS?

    If the state of human affairs here on planet earth today was any less tragic, phantasmagoric and melodramatic, I'd expect to deserve having the novelty of my so-called "idealistic" questions here dismissed with a paternal snigger. But when the "parents" (or any form of higher, worthy or effective realism) are absent, nuts or pathological who are we simple people to fear for asking the right questions, no matter how apparently basic?

    Is the limit on our ability to multi-task here (carry out investigation and justice even while forwarding a redesigned set of national and international policy) a resources issue? Could someone here with stronger math skills (or better stomach for such a shameful tally) please tell us all: for what small percentage of what is being spent on Iraq (DAILY) could we, The People, fund, staff and see carried out both a thorough clean-up agenda on "accusations" of this administration's wrong-doings even while moving on with authoring an agenda of renewed purpose, service and change? (Hell, a proxy board of Kindergarden teachers, social workers and union janitors would be just fine by most of us for an unbiased examination of possible wrong-doing, no?).

    People, this is about the power of "AND"-thinking. We need not being cornered into integrity trade-offs that are tantamount to signing up for mutual culpability in nothing short of mass murder, billions in wrongful profiteering, purgery, and what all else.

    While redesigning and realigning our congressional legislative agenda to what is really fair and sustainable for a balanced and democratic American (not to mention healthier planet and happier humanity), we will ALSO exercise our rights in the service of truth, liberty and accountability to call for wholly independent investigations into all aspects of:
    1. 2004 presidential elections
    "AND"
    2. 911 attacks
    "AND"
    3. Invasion of Iraq
    "AND"
    4. War-time profiteering
    "AND"
    5. War spending accounting/misappropriations
    "AND"
    6. Civil liberties violations
    "AND"

    (tb cont'd)

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: iddle me this... Posted by: atom6277
    » 7. Mass Murder Posted by: eyeman
    » Who's buying this BS? Posted by: WhatNow?
    Riddle me (pt 2)
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 15, 2006 3:07 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    ...

    7. National disaster responsiveness
    "AND"
    8. (you add, reorder, upgrade wording here please)

    Why the hell not? What do the American people have to hide from? Are the actual mathematical majority of American voters privileged rich right-wing 'christians" who have "benefited" (as if that word had any real meaning in this context when the true costs of such greedy shortsightedness are finally accounted for) from and therefore have vested interest in NOT having all this looked into?

    We, the american people, don' t have to pre-trade away our rights to have the truth be known and accountability to core principals and laws be upheld when the only cost is our tax money to fund such exercises of democratic maintenance and the only "troubling of others" to make it their priority are to those others we supposedly elected to go to Washington to serve just such interests of our common good.

    What does adulthood, stewardship, patriotism, or even simple personal integrity mean in America today when even our children, in any local court and for even any minor offense of local town ordinance, would be held 100% accountable to the letter (of even often silly local) law, do we let those in Washington, our SERVANTS, dictate to us (whether directly through propaganda or indirectly through disempowering education that has us thinking that "logic" such as this article demonstrates as "realistic") what ercentage of our constitution and personal rights we can reasonably hope to see maintained?!


    Well???
    (!!!)

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: Joyleaf
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) thanks Posted by: dovelight
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: marianne
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: inanaturallight
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: symphonylee
    » Best comment so far... Posted by: BillC
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: Basenjis
    You must be joking ...
    Posted by: paul_revere on Nov 15, 2006 3:32 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Gee willikers! Let's see. Biggest mass murderer in our history. All those offenses against our nation and humanity laid out nicely. Let's forget about it? Not a chance.

    Clinton gets some blow jobs and inquiring minds want to know, but he lies when questioned because it's nobody's damned business. Nobody dies because of his impropriety. Millions spent to investigate and impeach.

    Then, some eco-enthusiast burns up three SUVs in Oregon. Nobody killed. 22 years in jail.

    I say -- GFY!

    The only moral and judicial thing to do is to investigate and impeach. It also bodes well for our credibility as a nation based on law if we hold people like Bush and Cheney accountable for their actions.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: You must be joking ... Posted by: Intraspecto
    » RE: Just interested Posted by: livopete
    » RE: You must be joking ... Posted by: outsidea
    » I am not joking either Posted by: jwg
    » RE: You must be joking ... Posted by: aonghus36
    » RE: You must be joking ... Posted by: outsidea
    Are we ready to go yet?
    Posted by: Joyleaf on Nov 15, 2006 3:39 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I mean, from the sound of it some of us are. I think some action is in order, and I have this little feeling that weight's shifting in that kind of way that can signal changing tides. A little push from a lot of us could get the show on the road.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeachment IS an option!
    Posted by: keefus55 on Nov 15, 2006 3:51 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    If impeachment is not an option, then why did our founding fathers put that procedure in our Constitution in the first place? Clearly, this crowd has committed MORE than their fair share of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

    It seems to me that the unprovoked invasion of another sovereign state in a trumped up war which has resulted in the needless killing thousands of our own sons and daughters (not to mention hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians) would CERTAINLY beat white stains on a blue dress hands down

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Impeachment IS an option! Posted by: markusmark
    Revolution
    Posted by: oneyedjack on Nov 15, 2006 4:06 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Number one, ain't nothing credible about Mother Jones (the magazine); number two, it needs to be a people impeachment. If we want to impeach Bush and Company we the people need to do it ourselves. Kinda like the Italians and Mussolini during WWII. It is the people (all humanity) that have been harmed and murdered during the Bush regime, it is the people (all people's) who should mete out the punishment; not a bunch of wimpy Democrats who couldn't hit their asses with a board. And I count Mother Jones (the magazine) among them. If MJ wanted to live up to its namesake they would take to the streets and raise some hell, but that ain't gonna happen.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: evolution Posted by: BillC
    » Viva La Revolucion! Posted by: crisman
    You want two more years of death and destruction?
    Posted by: NonnyO on Nov 15, 2006 4:06 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot...?

    At every turn I encounter naysayers who STILL refuse to deal with reality. Hundreds of thousands of people have died for the sake of LIES and oil (not to mention record profits for oil corporations). They have all died in vain, not for "our freedoms," that's for sure! We do not have any "freedoms" left!

    The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (aka 'detainee bill' to Lamestream Media, aka 'torture bill' to most bloggers) obliterated the US Constitution, The Bill of Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and US laws. It also gave Dumbya dictatorial powers (which I don't think he wants passed on to the next president). Dumbya and his administration are retroactively exempt from being charged with war crimes uncer MCA '06. TECHNICALLY, we do not have the republic the Founding Fathers gave us. TECHNICALLY, we are right now living in a dictatorship!

    First our Congress Critters need to deal with that bit of toilet paper legislation and repeal it immediately! Other crappy legislation like the so-called Patriot Act and its amendments need to be repealed, as well as the other legislation that has taken away our rights and privileges and privacy. The other legislation the Dems want to pass can be written right now, if it hasn't been already, and it can be read, understood, and voted on in the first month after they're sworn in on Jan. 3 - IF they want to do the will of the people who elected them, that is, and not keep flapping their jaws while more people die. They also need to get the guard and reserve troops home immediately, and redeploy the regular military elsewhere. There's no "victory" to be had in Iraq for the simple reason the invasion was unconstitutional, and a war crime under the Geneva Conventions - just as torture and concentration camps at Gitmo and elsewhere are war crimes.

    With investigations into what we already know are war crimes and so many lies we've lost count, impeachment proceedings could start as early as March, more charges could be added as more crimes are revealed. After they're impeached, they can be turned over to the World Court at The Hague and be tried for war crimes.

    Put Congress in gridlock until the criminals are out of office? I'd be only too happy if that happened. Ecstatic, even.

    It won't. But that's my daydream..... I don't think Congress has a set of stones between all of them. They're all still afraid Georgie might call them unpatriotic, when the only patriotic thing they could do is impeach, stop this bloody awful war based on LIES. The dead who died for those lies are crying out for JUSTICE!

    IMPEACH! Then send the criminals to The Hague to be tried for war crimes...!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    A Ridiculous Arguement!
    Posted by: theskywolf on Nov 15, 2006 4:12 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The idea of not impeaching is beyond reasonable.

    It does not matter who the President is if they are from either Democrat or Republican Party. Both suck at the teat of corporate America. Bush/Cheney have repeatedly violated the Constitution and the moral principles of right and wrong that guide this world.

    Impeachment sends a message: Do what's right by the people or pay the price!

    We've had enough of this namby-pamby bullshit. Bush and Cheney and the rest of their cabal have violated the trust of the American people as well as the people of the world. They must pay.

    And if Pelosi becomes President, something I don't particularly relish, and she steps out of line, IMPEACH HER TOO! And continue right down the line until they understand:
    IT'S OUR COUNTRY AND BY GOD YOU'LL DO THE JOB WE SEND YOU TO DO!

    Skywolf.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: Scientz
    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: livopete
    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: Scientz
    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: aonghus36
    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: Scientz
    No time for impeachment
    Posted by: robchapman on Nov 15, 2006 4:14 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The Democrats and the progressive movement have just erased Reaganism as a political force in America. There is no time in the political agenda now for retroactive score settling.
    Bush is clearly irrelevant. His dispatch to Vietnam without a signed trade agreement is demonstrative of his lack of clout.
    Now is the time for the 110th Congress to establish a legislative blueprint of progressivism.
    Whether the legislation is signed into law or vetoed is less important than that the Democrats craft a tenable vision for progressive governance.
    Impeachment is a waste of time and effort.

    Robert Chapman
    Lansing, NY

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: Scientz
    » Yes, time for impeachment Posted by: Earthie
    » RE: Yes, time for impeachment Posted by: markusmark
    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: Zarquan
    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: Basenjis
    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: Zarquan
    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: mdruss42
    Impeachment is an option
    Posted by: Tom Degan on Nov 15, 2006 4:27 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The important thing to remember, I believe, is that a precedant needds to be established. Bush and Cheney need not only to be forcably removed from office by means of a constitutionally viable option, but they also need to be punished, severely, for what they must have known were high crimes. Why do you think they have gone to such lengths to cover their tracks? Why do you think the VEEP went all the way to the Suprmem Court to keep his so-called energy task force secret from the American public?

    No president in the history of this once great nation has ever removed from office by the legislative branch of our government - in spite of overwhelming evidence that more than one of them should have been. Please, let's make an example of not only George W. Bush, but his entire admiministration. Not only is the evidence there, it's overwhelming and undeniable!

    Pray for peace.

    Tom Degan
    Goshen, NY
    "The Rant" by Tom Degan

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Impeachment is an option Posted by: mdruss42
    impeachment isn't good enough
    Posted by: schnoggi on Nov 15, 2006 4:29 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Bush and Cheney are guilty of high treason on so very many counts, the punishment needs to be fit the crimes. They really do need to be hung at high noon. No, it won't happen, but it would most certainly be appropriate. Hey secret service guy who's going to drop this in my file, stop being such an idiot and do something useful with your life.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: impeachment isn't good enough Posted by: Intraspecto
    Brass Tacks
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 15, 2006 4:36 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    What organization (grass roots or institutional) is the most organized, capable and already leading in impeachment centered ACTION?

    Let's get this forum practical with an assessment of optimal, viable "next steps".

    *is Googling now, but would like this community's inside advice/opinion*

    Standing by (to end all standing by),
    -dm

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Brass Tacks start Posted by: dovelight
    It Must Come From Us
    Posted by: Earthie on Nov 15, 2006 4:46 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    It bothers me not at all that many in positions of leadership now speak of impeachment as "off the table". This is, after all, government of, for and by "the people", which is us. Many seem to want to forget the "by" part of this reality.

    We have a few months before the 110th Congress (which will be under a Democratic majority) is sworn in. This means that men of integrity such as Conyers and Waxman will chair key committees charged with oversight of the crimes that we have seen openly committed by Bush and Cheney. We (those of us who believe firmly that impeachment is both warranted and necessary) have those few months to muster and show support for this cause.

    Remember that Senator Rus Feingold (my Junior Senator from Wisconsin, thank you) stood up and called for censure of Bush just a couple of months ago. He was met with resounding silence. The silence of cowardice and complicity rather than reasoned judgement, if you want my opinion, but silence nonetheless. Not very encouraging to those in Congress who might now consider the more severe measure of impeachment.

    In short, impeachment is a remote likelihood without strong support from "we the people". And that support must be shown by means other than well reasoned books by a few authors and unscientific polls by "news" media. Certainly those have their place in the grand scheme of things, but they are mere prelude to the real work that must be done by US.

    Join a group, form a group, write letters, march, demonstrate and maintain the public dialog at a high level, it's the only way this will happen. And I'm convinced that for the sake of our country and the world, it must. We're doing it in my community, if you've not begun doing it in yours, please do so.

    One technique we will be utilizing, in addition to those mentioned above, is to place an ad in the local paper with a "clip and send" ballot for impeachment by which people can vote for the process to begin by mailing it to Conyers and others. Perhaps you have more and better ideas on how to get the word to Washington that we're behind this. Share them.

    I look forward to working with you on this.
    Peace

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: It Must Come From Us Posted by: symcokid
    What About The Low-Foreheads?
    Posted by: Narco-NYC on Nov 15, 2006 4:49 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I dig it. Since Articles of Impeachment there seems to be even more reason to impeach. And once more, when the supoenas are finally issured. Wow! America is going to get the true story of a mind-blowingly-corrupt administration. Impeachment? Yes, way! But again, as I have asked for six years. Where is the populous outrage? What about the working folks, like the ones I work with? There were no mass demonstrations against the illegal wiretaps, bungled Katrina response, use of cheap hype to go to war and incredible dementing of consitution to imprison sans trial.
    Does it matter that none of the outrages of the bushies actually effect a family and their car payments? I don't know what I'm trying to say, only that there seems to be two Americas. My low-forhead cohorts don't want to impeach the president, but they couldn't say why. And pol. sci. grads like me, that do. Don't we have to be united for impeachment?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: What About The Low-Foreheads? Posted by: inanaturallight
    trust the people
    Posted by: jeanbee on Nov 15, 2006 4:51 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The pragmatic clincher for the anti-impeachment crowd seems to be the impossibility of getting 67 Senators - which would have to include at least 16 Republicans - to vote for conviction.

    What these people ignore is the role of public opinion in the success or failure of impeachment proceedings. Low public approval for Nixon caused him to see the writing on the wall, and he resigned; high public approval for Clinton insulated him from the purely ideological drive against him by Republicans in Congress, and protected him from conviction in the Senate.

    IMO as Congressional investigations, fully reported in a press kept even minimally honest by bloggers, reveal the colossal crimes, bungling and plundering of the treasury committed by this administration, public disapproval of Bush/Cheney will plummet further and faster than anyone can imagine. As they approach 20% & 10% respectively in public approval, you can bet that plenty of Republican Senators will be only too happy to vote to convict.

    The key, though, is to impeach both - not just Bush. The American people already despise Cheney; Bush they just see as feckless, not the dangerous, self-serving tyrant he really is.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    To impeach or not to impeach
    Posted by: Pau on Nov 15, 2006 5:05 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Terrible article by Dickinson.
    "to replace a president who was popularly elected". Where did he get that from? Cheating is how he got to be president. Therefore he can hardly be considered a legal president.
    To condone all the crimes the Bushies have perpetrated, for the sake of practicality, is completely amoral, contrary to what I thought should be the american values and permit politicians to ignore the constitution.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    This article is really bad
    Posted by: brad on Nov 15, 2006 5:06 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    It basically makes a case for impeachment and then says, nah, it would look bad. The only thing that would look bad is the republican (and some dems) corruption and collution with corporations. If we don't impeach the next time they take power, and there will be a next time, they will only start from where this admin ended and go further. The only way to save democracy is to have rule of law and that means impeaching those who deserve it.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    The right message?
    Posted by: jseas on Nov 15, 2006 5:19 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Sometimes humor can cut through people's defenses.

    The phrase, "Just One BJ Needed to Impeach" could serve that purpose. It's short enough for a bumper sticker--or a signature line on e-mails.

    It also lays bare the hypocrisy.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: The right message? Posted by: disgustedandamused
    » RE: The right message? Posted by: disgustedandamused
    www.onthetable.us : AVAILABLE! (chick REGISTER NOW $7.99)
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 15, 2006 5:28 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Someone hop on it!

    :))

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    No, I don't want Bush for two more years!
    Posted by: kgs1947 on Nov 15, 2006 5:33 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    No, I do NOT prefer Bush to any other alternatives. We do have an obligation to stand up for the Constitution and for all those who have been tortured or died in defending it. That is the obligation of our elected officials. So, let's go for President Pelosi.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 -