Why not impeachment? Maybe it is better to force confrontation

[alfredo]

to expose the cult of personality in the White House and by extension, the Republican Party. Impeachment will fail. McConnell will enforce discipline if removal makes it to the Senate before 2009.

So instead of going after the big man, cut away at his true believers like Meirs, Gonzales, and Rove. It will put before the public the image of a Manson like cult around bush and cheney.

Impeachment could remove bush, but I doubt it will be done before Nov 2008. bush will run out the clock. Better allow the junta to show their contempt for our constitution, one invoked 5th, one refused subpoena, one claim of executive privilege at at time. Let the news show empty seats at hearings. Let the news show bush's followers smirking for the cameras as they refuse to answer for their actions.

Let's use the rapier of investigations to cut them to shreds instead of using the impeachment to bludgeon them. We can, through exposure, impeach the whole administration instead of one little man. I think it will pay off at the ballot box.

[acmavm]

1. Why not? Some people love endless 'hearings' that the subject

in question doesn't show up for, even when 'invited'. Or when they've been lied to over and over and over again. Or when they're told that bush** will instruct the DOJ not to investigate. You know, those yakity yak things that really don't do much good but apparently are so endlessly entertaining to some folks.

[alfredo]

2. But it paints a picture of the Republicans as being contemptuous of our

constitution. It paints them as loyal to bush, but not the law.

Expose the party, not just one or two corrupt men.

[JHB]

3. Force the Republicans to Either Marry Bush of Refute Him

As long as impeachment is "off the table", Republicans can stay in lockstep with no consequences. Heck, it's safer for them, because they don't make any powerful enemies by turning "traitor".

But if they have to stand up and vote -- a vote which will be an issue in '08 -- then they'll have to choose: wed themselves to His Squandership and associated baggage, or bail and try to look clean(er).

[alfredo]

4. their unlawful behavior opens a lot of avenues to us, politically and

legally. Let's play with our prey a bit before dispatching it. It may slip away, but it will be so damaged it will not survive.

[dfgrbac]

5. Congress must use its power - or it has none.

When power is being abused by the White House, it is the job of Congress to confront them.

See Mike Gravel's recommendation for Congress.

[alfredo]

12. If impeachment is tried and fails to vote for removal, what would the

consequences be?

[dfgrbac]

13. If Congress truly used its power ...

It would win - eventually. Check Mike Gravel's strategy in my previous post.

This would not be a waste of time for Congress. Beating a veto would just take a half-hour out of each day until success - which would come in a few weeks due to public pressure and the sensational media coverage.

[alfredo]

14. Can we do that for a removal vote?

[dfgrbac]

16. Yes!

Public pressure is strong. And it would get stronger if Congress acted responsibly to the public's wishes.

Mike Gravel's strategy is a little different though. He says Congress should make a law to end the war and bring the troops home. Since this would obviously be vetoed, Congress can use the daily cloture vote to override the veto and pass the law. Then if Bush does not end the war, he is breaking the new law - an immediate impeachable offense!

[alfredo]

17. Of course a removal vote would be held if the minority sees there

are not enough votes for removal.

[Poiuyt]

15. Historically speaking, impeachment has been a political winner

But is impeachment really a political loser? Not if history is a guide. There have been nine attempts since the founding of the republic to move articles of impeachment against a sitting president. In the cases in which impeachment was proposed by members of an opposition party, that party either maintained or improved its position in Congress at the next general election. In seven instances the party that proposed impeachment secured the presidency in the next election.

snip -

The benefit of an impeachment fight to an opposition party comes not in the removal of an individual who happens to wear the label of another party. Rather, it comes in the elevation of the discourse to a higher ground where politicians and voters can ponder the deeper meaning of democracy.

When the whole of a political party finally concludes that it must take up the weighty responsibility of impeaching a president, as Democrats did in 1974 but Republicans never fully did in 1998, its language is clarified and transfigured. What Walt Whitman referred to as "long dumb voices" are suddenly transformed into clarion calls as a dialogue of governmental marginalia gives way to discussion of the intent of the founders, the duty of the people's representatives, and the renewal of the republic.

When a political party speaks well and wisely of impeachment, frustrated voters come to see it in a new way. It is no longer merely the tribune of its own ambition. It becomes a champion of the American experiment. To be sure, such a leap entails risk. But it is the risk-averse political party that is most likely to remain the permanent opposition.

more -

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1109-27.htm

[Joe Fields]

6. It is best to enforce the constitution and for Congress to do their

sworn duty, and that means impeachment, which shouldn't be treated as some kind of option.

[alfredo]

7. Impeachment is the desirable course, but removal will be next to impossible.

McConnell holds the power of the purse over the senate republicans. If they don't obey him, they will not get one red cent for their reelection bid. They could also face a well financed opponent in the primaries. We will not get the votes it takes for removal. Their fear of McConnell is greater than their love of our constitution.

[warren pease]

8. Just get Cheney...

...and excise the cancerous tumor. The rest won't know what the hell to do, especially our strutting little fuhrer.


wp

[alfredo]

11. Impeaching bush would be cutting off the tail. Impeaching cheney, the head.

Impeaching is not the punishment they deserve. They have committed crimes against humanity and need to face the Hague if not held accountable here. they can't hide behind executive privilege there.

[mmonk]

9. Keep thinking. Maybe you'll come up with something.

All our rights will magically reappear without question. The operative word is trust those in charge. They know what's best for us all.

[alfredo]

10. I agree we need to fight for our rights, but we'd stand a much better

chance of a restoration of rights with the Dems in power.

I remember how long it took to bring Nixon down? They had the time to gather the evidence, and build support in congress for his impeachment. It was partisan back then, but not to the degree it is now. There were member of the Republican congress who put the law above the person. Men of that caliber are far and few between in the ranks of the Republican party. Like it or not, we need them.

We have in power in the white house, people like Cheney who learned from the Nixon years how to stonewall, delay, and fight dirty. They will run out the clock and we will have nothing to show for it. They are ready to fight the impeachment fight. Let's go around that Majinot line. Let's not fight their fight.

We will not get the votes in the Senate. Let's fight a fight we can win. Going after the foot soldiers, the drones who carry out the orders is working. It also reinforces the perception that the GOP is corrupt to the core. It reminds the public that it was good to remove the GOP from power.

If we do not win in 2008 there will be no hope of constitutional restoration. If we win, we have leverage to force reforms and restoration. We should shift our push, once in power, for restoration of the balance of power between the branches. The impeachment is not a silver bullet that will fix what bush has broken. It's going to take you and me forcing our Democratic leaders to restore America.