US Democrats pledge to investigate Bush

[sabra]

http://seven.com.au/news/worldnews/169182

US Democrats pledge to investigate Bush

US Democrats will launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration if they take control of Congress in November, but are not out to impeach President George W Bush, a top Democrat says.

House of Representatives Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said Democrats will hold hearings on the use of intelligence in the lead-up to the Iraq war and investigate the high price of energy and prescription drugs if they win the extra 15 seats they need for a House majority in the mid-term elections.

But Pelosi denied Republican claims that her party would move quickly to impeach Bush.

"I said we'd be having hearings on the war, we'd have hearings. But I don't see us going to a place of impeachment," Pelosi said in an interview on NBC's Meet the Press.

"Investigation does not equate to impeachment.

[More Than A Feeling]

1. Heh, that's what she thinks.

It's not her decision to make, its the decision of the American people. If we say impeach, she should say,"on how many counts?"

Speaking of which, that ought to be explicitly in the constitution, that if a certain number of Americans sign a petition for impeachment, proceedings automatically begin in the House.

[Ecumenist]

5. Heaven and Earth..?

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[OKIsItJustMe]

32. Not so fast!

http://seven.com.au/news/worldnews/169182

...
While she declined to rule out impeachment, Pelosi focused on investigations of the White House's energy task force and the prescription drug bill.

"You never know where the facts take you ... but that is not what we are about," Pelosi said.
...

First you investigate.
Then (if there's evidence of criminal behavior) you impeach.

Section. 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Think of it like any other criminal investigation. You don't go straight to court and then do your investigation. First, you investigate and build your case. Then you take it to the grand jury to see if they agree that you have a case. Then, you take the case to court.

Similarly, you don't declare a suspect guilty before the trial has begun.

The Republicans looked like fools because they rushed to impeach Clinton, when the American people really didn't want him impeached. At this point, the majority of the American people really don't want to impeach Bush either.

If the Democrats investigate (all the while preserving the presumption of innocence) and demonstrate that there clearly are grounds to impeach, they should be able to get the people behind them.

If they rush to judgement, it will come off as purely a tit-for-tat, politically motivated impeachment. If they campaign saying, "Elect us, and we'll impeach the President," I'm afraid the point will be moot, as they will lose the election.

[Rex]

2. Why investigate him if impeachment is already off the table?

FOR GODS SAKE, KEEP EVERYTHING ON THE TABLE DEMS, STOP GIVING IT ALL AWAY! Man...

[HysteryDiagnosis]

3. It would be just as necessary to investigate if water

is wet, fire is hot, the sky blue, etc.

[unblock]

4. interesting how the banana republicans keep talking about impeachment

that's a fairly clear sign of guilt, imho.

[cyclezealot]

6. Listening to Pelosi now.

The way she condemns Conyers is making me want to puke. COnyers has grounds for his convictions which need be heard. He reflects the will of his party. and for GOod cause. Guess, she did say , you never know where investigations will lead. But, I bet she does not have the will to complete the process, should that investigation reveal what shanigans have incured.
also, need condeming how the people blame all in Congress for being partisan when they also believe , Bush lied. A disconnect with reality there. It is just they don't know what is going on and don't care. Just don't rock the boat...

[anoraksia53]

8. yeah it's as if

they don't really want to know what's going on. If they investigate I sure hope it's for real and not just a political tactic like a PR gimmick. If the focus groups tell them they need to sound concerned about something then they make concerned noises.

Well action speaks lots louder than concerned mumbled noises....we need real investigations with Consequences.

[Just Me]

7. OHWWWHATTTAA!!!!!!!!

Tell me she is just adopting the "fibbing" game the BushCO/neocons have played!!!

Otherwise,...

:yoiks:

[proud2BlibKansan]

20. I don't want them talking about impeachment

That will get the repuke voters out en masse in November. They are pissed at * now. Let them stay pissed. Then they will stay home on election day.

[Malva Zebrina]

9. Oh good--Bush is not going to be impeached!

if the Dems take the house. That ought to get the Republicans to vote Democratic. eh?

Wow--I am so relieved. Bush should be set free from all the crimes he has committed . We must protect our president under all circumstances.

This is mere political talk. You can bet that Conyers, if we do get back the house, will see to it that charges are brought.

[jaysunb]

10. you're right, but...

we don't need to broadcast it.

[Malva Zebrina]

13. umm--well you may be right

However, there is nothing wrong with throwing a few hints out there. Take a look at Bush's poll numbers and the leaks coming out every single day .
People are fed up with Bush. What is needed is some honesty and honorability--people are dying for a leader who is willing to tell the truth -- and they do not perceive that Bush is anywhere near being a leader.

I do not believe those who say that impeachment is a serious charge when it comes to Bush. There are so many things pending that show he is indeed, an incompetant and I will add, stupid, man who deserves to punished for what he has done.

I assume you have heard the latest that what he considers the highlight of his more than five years as president is that he caught a 7.5lb perch on his OWN lake. How much more does anyone need to understand that he is a total embarrassment--I know we do here though

Yeah, we should be sneaky about impeaching Bush, provided we get the house back.

More to come from Fitzgerald, Abramoff and the like. Hopefully the media will give up their boot licking and realize that the man they are supporting is a totally stupid and ignorant doofus. I would not hold my breath though.

[Harper_is_Bush]

11. Smart move. The pukes are making impeachment their rallying cry

for '06. Better to make them look like fear-mongers.

[noel adamson]

12. Forget Impeachment, a military tribunal is appropriate

When they went after Mr. Clinton with impeachment they not only used the process to smear him to the max under color of official sanction but almost totally cheapened and discredited the process of impeachment as a viable option. Considering that many of his worst transgressions have been perpetrated with mis-use of our military I think a military tribunal would be totally appropriate for the "Commander in Chief". Many, many lives have been lost outright due to the invasion of Iraq for the purpose of acquiring the second largest oil reserve on earth and squashing a socialist dictator who was the most progressive leader in that region of theocratic dictatorships, while failing to defend us from a handful of fundamentalists with box cutters or the current influx of Afghani heroin among other things. Gigantic amounts of money have disappeared into the black hole of the Iraqi excursion, or into the pockets of the Bush circle of criminals. The list goes on. Here is just one article in the Uniform Code of Military Justice that certainly seems to apply in both spirit and every letter of the law;

Uniform Code of Military Justice
899. ART. 99. MISBEHAVIOR BEFORE THE ENEMY

(6) quits his place of duty to plunder or pillage;

(7) causes false alarms in any command, unit, or place under control of the armed forces;

(8) willfully fails to do his utmost to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy any enemy troops, combatants, vessels, aircraft, or any other thing, which it is his duty so to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy;...

...shall be punished by death or such punishment as a court-martial may direct

In addition to seeming to me to being totally appropriate it might restore a little of the respect the world once had for us as a nation and as a people.

[hyphenate]

14. She's right

We don't want to impeach the idiot. The goal is to render him AND Cheney completely useless, until they BOTH either resign or are brought up on criminal charges.

Fact is, as we've pointed out so often, we don't want Cheney as President. We would need to be rid of Cheney before we ever considered impeaching the chimp.

[iconoclastic cat]

15. Except that Melissa Bean thought that "investigate" meant "suck up to"

nt

[SalmonChantedEvening]

16. Hmm, an invesigation where the President might actually be...

Under oath, as opposed to just having a visit? My, what a novel approach. ;)

[951-Riverside]

17. "Investigation does not equate to impeachment."

They will investigate my ass HAHAHAAH! these dopes don't have to lie to get my vote, I'm voting dem anyway.

Jeez what a joke.

[No New War]

18. I don't get it

Bushco's approval rating is 30%, why do we need to step lightly? There is a reason his ratings are so low, why say that "we're going to investigate, but we don't plan on impeaching." If investigation uncovers impeachable behavior, we Americans EXPECT impeachment.

Bah.

[0007]

19. I wish Pelosi would get nasty so we'd be able to call her

Nasty Nacey the smoking repuke queen.

[VegasWolf]

21. Way to go Nancy, show off that Democratic spine. NOT. Future leader???

[patsimae]

22. I'm all for impeachment

but my fear is a Republican president in power pardoning these guys. It has to be timed just right. These people need to be in JAIL!!!!

[mac56]

23. She is very smart.

She knows if she dangles the word "impeachment" out there, that the Repubs on the fence will circle the wagons around their man.

This is very skillful.

[leesa]

24. Will they finally investigate 9-11?

[w4rma]

25. Bush will be going away two years after the elections anyway.

Besides, it's the profiteers and the non-term limited underlings I want kept out of politics at this point.

[Demeter]

28. Are You So Sure of That? Willing to Put Money On It?

I'm not. I'm thinking seriously of exercising 2nd Amendment rights in anticipation of Revolution in the French manner.

[The_Casual_Observer]

26. War crimes trials instead.

By the fall impeachment will be a very welcome idea.

[ima_sinnic]

27. oh blah blah blah--how many "investigations" do we need, anyway?

this "treading lightly" bullshit does NOT impress.
Articles of Impeachment have actually been drafted for YEARS, by Ramsey Clark. Signers at impeachbush.org now number more than 716,000. Even the Republicans are talking about having to impeach Bush themselves ( http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20060505/cm_rcp/should_republicans_impeach_bus ), since the Democrats are too goddam COWARDLY to do anything.
For me, impeachment is a litmus-test issue. If a candidate is not clearly, firmly, courageously, unwaveringly, and outspokenly in favor of impeachment, I am NOT voting. I would rather just abstain than vote for another spineless coward who is just concerned about "playing it safe."
Who the fuck CARES if the repukes are "scared" that Democrats "might" impeach--the mofo's approval is at 30% and still falling. You TRULY believe a MAJORITY of people would "react negatively" by voting repuke if they thought *gasp* the Dems will impeach Bush??? sheesh. You think "investigating *" is somehow palatable to the *-cultists? You really think they're going away wiping their brows saying, oh phew, they're only going to investigate him?

If you will recall, Gore WON THE POPULAR VOTE and we KNOW that Kerry won 2004 also. The country KNOWS it is screwed and that the mofo "in charge" is a cowardly sissy-boy ignoramous loser who couldn't take a shit without somebody holding his hand and thinks catching a fish in his private pond is his most glorious moment as head of (what used to be) the richest nation on earth. Not a day goes by without some new scandal, how much more is needed.

And btw, all this BS about how Cheney would become president if * were impeached is just that--BS. It's a package deal and everybody knows it, so stop with the crap already.

I used to love Dean--I still do, but I lost respect for him after his remarks yesterday.
You can blather on all day about how "playing it safe" is the "best," but you are just kidding yourself. If they don't have a spine today, you think they'll suddenly mysteriously grow one tomorrow? After these "playing it safe" candidates are elected on the basis of the fact that they are spineless, I don't think so. Either come out against the #(%*& piece of scheist or go back to sleep.

[Evergreen Emerald]

29. I want the courts to find my neighbor guilty of theft

But, there has been no investigation, only allegations. Should the police by-pass the investigation? Should the system by-pass a jury trial? Let's just deem my neighbor guilty and punish him.

[fshrink]

30. When I think that Clinton had this

guy glued to his pants for years so that we could acquire the priceless knowledge of whether or not he had sex with that woman... It's almost funny, in a Shakepearian kind of way.

[jazzjunkysue]

31. This is political talk, so, it's moderate. Once the investigation

starts and people start confessing, we can impeach whoever we want.

We can't throw stones without proof.

I think this is appropriate. She can't go on national TV and say that each party intends just to unseat each other for ever.

Let's let the Repubs get the reputation for making everything and every agency dysfunctional.