[RenegadeRick]

I heard rumors of this last week. Looks like it is real.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/24/AR2007042401542.html
http://kucinich.house.gov/SpotlightIssues/documents.htm

That preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the vice president was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The vice president pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and the Congress of the United States.

That in this the vice president subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,300 United States service members and the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs, which has increased our federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States armed services, through an overextension and lack of training and lack of equipment; and the loss of United States credibility in the world affairs and decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

It seems smart to me to take out Cheney first. Otherwise, he would have just taken over for Bush, and he scares me even more than Bush does.

Now, with respect to the president. I think that it's very important that we start with Mr. Cheney. Because if we were to start with the president and pursue articles of impeachment, Mr. Cheney would then become president.

 

[stinkyboy]

 

[rockwool]

Why did this take soo long?

 

[N8 v2.0]

 

[DRB]

and how far do you think that this is going to go?

 

[RenegadeRick]

Why did this take soo long?

and how far do you think that this is going to go?

Both very good questions that I don't know the answers to. But this is the internet and I am free to eSpeculate.

First, this really happened and the mass media isn't really covering the story.
This google news link doesn't bring up anything from major sources. This MSNBC article suggests that even the dems don't support it.

I suspect that our corporate controlled media is owned by the same folks who own our government and the exact same folks that are making big money off of oil and outsourcing and perpetual war. I eSpeculate that this is the answer to all of these questions.

 

[blue]

I suspect that our corporate controlled media is owned by the same folks who own our government and the exact same folks that are making big money off of oil and outsourcing and perpetual war. I eSpeculate that this is the answer to all of these questions.

OMG, RLLY?!

If this isn't clear to anyone by now they need to be beaten with my trusty rubber mallet until it is crystal...

 

[$tinkle]

here, let me help:


http://www.crimesofwar.org/print/onnews/CIA.html
http://www.thelawparty.org/CIATimeLinePage2.htm
http://www.thememoryhole.org/ciacrimes.htm
http://www.betterworldlinks.org/book73e.htm
http://www.serendipity.li/cia.html
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA
http://downingstreetmemo.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo
http://www.apfn.org/enron/pawns.pdf
http://archive.webactive.com/pacifica/demnow/dn20020322.html
http://sheeple.net/Cheney.htm
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/enron.html
http://www.earthrights.org/
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=23898
http://www.pogo.org/p/contracts/co-040301-iraq.html
http://georgewalkerbush.net/bush-nazilinkconfirmed.htm
http://www.bushcommission.org./
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/180306bushsigns.htm
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8252175042329977626
http://sheeple.net/Cheney.htm
http://www.citizenworks.org/corp/warcontracts/warcontracts.php
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporate_Welfare/CarlyleGroup_HMOWD?.html
http://www.discourse.net/archives/2004/06/olcs_aug_1_2002_torture_memo_the_bybee_memo.html
http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/treaties.html
http://www.buchanan04.blogspot.com/
http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse update/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/12/AR2006021200732.html
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/enrn25.shtml
http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/wawjune2005.html
http://farsite.hill.af.mil/forums/area1/dispatch.cgi/sitehelp/docProfile/100340
http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/grounds.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/08/politics/main628320.shtml
http://www.alternet.org/story/13582/
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/bushco/bush_crime_family.htm
http://citizenworks.org/enrondonations/results.php
http://www.impeachbush.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr012=8cl6zc23i1.app1b&page=NewsArticle&id=5171&security=1&news_iv_ctrl=1041
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_to_impeach_George_W._Bush
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/jan02/2002-01-12-enron-politicians.htm
http://coanews.org/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=1595
http://downingstreetmemo.com/

 

[MMike]

Listening to the Vermont NPR station this morning. Apparently the Vemont senate....or house....or whatever group of politicians do these things are actually going ahead with some sort of impeachment talk.....
http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070421/NEWS04/704210384/1004/NEWS03

Vt. Senate urges Bush impeachment

April 21, 2007
MONTPELIER – In a stunning reversal, the Vermont Senate approved a resolution early Friday morning calling for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

The vote makes the Senate the first state legislative body in the country to call for Bush's impeachment. At least nine other states have similar resolutions pending.

The 16-9 vote urging the U.S. Congress to begin impeachment hearings came without debate. The vote fell mostly along party lines, although three Democrats joined six Republicans in opposing it.

...and so forth....

 

[MMike]

another one

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=51&ItemID=12662

 

[H8R]

Let's hope this snowballs out of control.


I doubt if it will go anywhere at all, but one can hope.


Kucinich will probably get shot in the face for this either way.

 

[$tinkle]

when this is all said & done, here's what's going to happen:

right there.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

when this is all said & done, here's what's going to happen:

right there.

wtf.... Barb Boxer gettin' her O on from this?

 

[rockwool]

Over the past two years Bush staffers and advisors like John Yoo and Alberto Gonzales and Senators like Pat Roberts have declared in their own memos that Bush is above the law and therefore above the very US Constitution that he swore to protect and defend.



Warrantless secret wiretaps of American citizens were claimed to be within the boundaries of the Constitution yet clearly violate the 4th Amendment.

The controlled mainstream media collaborated with the government in parroting the use of the "terrorist surveillance" term, despite the fact that thousands of the wiretaps were used in domestic to domestic calls and the Pentagon regularly spies on peaceful American citizens involved in anti-war organizations.

Bush's repeated trashing of the Constitution, a document he reportedly referred to as a "Goddamn piece of paper," is indicative of a nation hurtling into a dictatorial abyss.

I don't know what to say..

 

[ohio]

and how far do you think that this is going to go?

not far, which is unfortunate. the republican party (and supporting think tanks) has done a fantastic job of bullying the media, the democrats, and much of the public into the idea that impeachment would be a petty partisan trick only the most extreme and spiteful liberals would consider.

I swear I'm a moderate, but I absolutely think that impeachment is not only justified but an intelligent and pragmatic move for two reasons. First, is that the Bush admin has set an extremely dangerous precedent for executive power. Failure to address that, and specifically draw the lines of executive power leave the doors open (or even encourage) future abuse. Second, our diplomatic capital has suffered horribly and such a move would have a trememndous effect in gaining some of that capital back, and giving the next administration a cleaner slate with which to withdraw from Iraq, and credibly handle other foreign policy issues (Iran, NK, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, etc.).

 

[Changleen]

Standing ourside the US, I think impeachment would go a LONG way to help get your international credibility back. It'd be a kind of group "OK, We acknowledge he's a lying, murdering fvcker who we are ashamed of.."

 

[ohio]

Standing ourside the US, I think impeachment would go a LONG way to help get your international credibility back. It'd be a kind of group "OK, We acknowledge he's a lying, murdering fvcker who we are ashamed of.."

I don't care about credibility. I care about reducing the terrorist threat against Western targets, about having productive talks with Iran that will cause a resurgence of their moderate population, about gaining a military helping hand during withdrawal efforts.

 

[MMike]

I don't care about credibility. I care about reducing the terrorist threat against Western targets, about having productive talks with Iran that will cause a resurgence of their moderate population, about gaining a military helping hand during withdrawal efforts.

well I guess that would be good too....

 

[Silver]

First, is that the Bush admin has set an extremely dangerous precedent for executive power. Failure to address that, and specifically draw the lines of executive power leave the doors open (or even encourage) future abuse.

The only problem with that idea is the fact that there's got to be a large majority of Democratic politicians who are salivating at the idea of having power come 2009.

I expect the Republicans to grow a spine December 2008...of course, by then it will be too late because they will all be on the trains to the camps...

 

[MMike]

Well isn't it a foregone conclusion that the democrats will win the next presidency?

"President Giuliani"...too foreign sounding....

 

[jimmydean]

Sad but true, I think if we are still in Iraq (and I know we will be), the Rep's will win in '08 because people fear change.

I also fear who the Dems will have to vote for. Not for myself, but for the populous.

 

[H8R]

Well isn't it a foregone conclusion that the democrats will win the next presidency?

Why not? Worked out great in the last couple elections.

 

[$tinkle]

Sad but true, I think if we are still in Iraq (and I know we will be), the Rep's will win in '08 because people fear change.

then people are rutardid.
as a conservative, i see the current field as a bunch of fudge ports.
none has my vote.