IS THERE STILL ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND ABOUT THE NEED TO IMPEACH GEORGE W. BUSH?

[kpete]

Bush's Illegal Use of Signing Statements is Impeachment Reason No. 1


In a Pulitzer Prize-winning article in the Boston Globe, Charlie Savage courageously published details of Bush's outrageous "signing statements" added to new legislation. As you can see from the examples quoted from Savage's story(Boston Globe, April 30, 2007) link below, the intention of each statement is to allow an "executive loophole" whereby "the W" can essentially ignore the effect of the legislation. In other words, Bush has been assuming the powers of a dictator, ruling by decree, under our noses.


"Since taking office in 2001, President Bush has issued signing statements on more than 750 new laws, declaring that he has the power to set aside the laws when they conflict with his legal interpretation of the Constitution. The federal government is instructed to follow the statements when it enforces the laws. Here are 10 examples and the dates Bush signed them:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_david_ch_070502_bush_s_illegal_use_o.htm


IS THERE STILL ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND ABOUT THE NEED TO IMPEACH GEORGE W. BUSH?

[Jcrowley]

1. No

K&R

[Richard D]

2. Never was the slightest doubt in my mind.

[calimary]

43. Nor in mind. Not for a nanosecond.

It's always been pretty damned obvious to me. It's our ONLY recourse at this time. Everything else is just dicking around. No pun intended. And oh, yeah, him too!

[AndyA]

3. No doubt whatsoever.

I've wanted impeachment for years, actually since his secret Energy Policy, which I felt should have been a matter of public record. Transparency to keep everyone honest. That was the first real issue I had, other than the fact that the SCOTUS should have butted out of the election issue in 2000.

[BOSSHOG]

4. My only hesitation

is that a war crimes trial would result in real honest to goodness punishment. bush doesn't give a fuck if he gets impeached. He'll just fly off to Paraguay and while away his worthless fuck life. I'd rather see him and his fellow criminals swinging in the breeze on a sunny Spring Afternoon.

[Richard Steele]

5. Not even a little.

B*sh is the frontman for the most recklessly criminal
Administration in our nation's history.

It's a fact.

[Marnieworld]

6. Nope

Not a doubt. Not for a long time. It is the only way to establish America as a Constitutional Gov't of Laws again.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. Republicans Need To Get Off Their Asses And Do It

Certainly the 'Democrats' won't.

[Rydz777]

28. You're on to something

Not only will the Democrats not do it, but it might be the only thing the Republicans could do that would bring them any popularity. It might even help save their sorry hides in the next election.

[NRaleighLiberal]

8. Not as long as it is followed by life time prison terms for B* and Darth Cheney.

[porphyrian]

9. I've known it since he lied us into Iraq in the first place...

...but I'm crazy enough that people can dismiss my rantings.

[earth mom]

10. NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER!

I am so frustrated and furious with the lack of leadership by the Dems that I find myself wanting to throw stuff at the wall. Instead, I come here to vent and rant. :rant:

But it changes nothing.

How in the hell are we going to get the Dems to do the right thing and Impeach * and the rest of the goddamn criminals?!!!!

[bigtree]

11. never was any doubt about the need

the question is whether that act (of impeaching Bush) will achieve any of the priorities we expected the legislators we elected to address; like the withdrawal from Iraq.

Also, whether that act will be a symbolic one, or an effort that actually has a chance of succeeding. Too many folks want our Democratic majority to just press forward, now, without the necessary amount and quality of evidence amassed in this Congress which would compel the obstructive minority to join in the effort. Our Democratic majority cannot pull off an impeachment with Democrats alone. Just prosecuting Bush on his actions with regard to Iraq, for instance, without some new and sensational evidence would likely just generate the same division and polarization which has characterized the resistance in this Congress to the Democratic efforts to address the Iraq occupation so far.

[blm]

12. Top question for ALL Democratic candidates: Will you promise to open the books on BushInc?

The candidate who refuses to promise to uphold accountability of BushInc and their crimes of office needs to be hounded until the swear to do so PUBLICALLY.

[tomp]

38. agreed!

we cannot do another nixon and let this most vile administration off the hook in any way. that would be THE WORST THING for this country.

[madokie]

13. nope never will there be a chance of that

Theres one thing I'm totally with with so many here and that is I knew long before * was installed what a mistake this was going to be. I knew and to the ones who didn't they were not paying attention :shrug:

[stray cat]

14. No doubt the repubs won't vote to impeach and so it won't happen

[mwb970]

15. It's been obvious for quite a while that he and the Dick are criminals.

The Constitution requires impeachment under these conditions, so I do hope the new Congress finds the time for it.

[democrat2thecore]

16. If there was EVER a president worthy of impeachment - it's Bush

But, unfortunately, it won't happen. The man has fully disgraced the office of president.

[calimary]

44. Welcome to DU! Now try to focus mainly on the first of your three

statements.

No negativity allowed here! Not in this case, at least.

We CANNOT give in and stop fighting. We just can't.

IMPEACHMENT is an absolute ESSENTIAL at this point.

I realize it's discouraging sometimes. VERY discouraging. Like maybe we'll never get out of this morass. But I can't let myself sit with those thoughts. We HAVE TO keep pushing this.

[TahitiNut]

17. I've never worn a pink tutu in my life and I won't start now. I only support impeachment because

... the more appropriate options are immoral, no matter how seductive. :evilgrin:

[On the Road]

18. If Congress Can Make the Right Case

in which Bush has broken a law (or series of laws) using the ridiculous singing statement defense, and those breaches are serious enough, then yes. The issue is very important but has been presented in a nebulous way so far in most of the media.

Prosecution and impeachment are all about specifics. We can survive another year and eight months under Bush, but blatant violations of the constitution need to be stopped and not become common practice.

[CTD]

19. If our Congress doesn't have the spine to send the same Iraq bill back to W

...with timetables in place, they certainly won't have the spine to impeach.

I am utterly disgusted with the lack of spine our Dem leaders are showing.

The American people want this Congress to stop this war and impeach the bastards. But all they're doing is bending over and enabling Bush to keep drag the war out until at least 1-20-09, at which point the war becomes something the Reps can blame on the Dems. They must stop this war BEFORE the 2008 elections or we will pay a price for it.


Edited for typos

[ananda]

20. No.. and never was any doubt at all.

What has happened over the last few years is in the nature of a constitutional crisis,
resulting in a corporofascist dictatorship not subject to the rule of law.

Since no one in the government or the courts is subject to the law or the constitution,
impeachment will never happen.

Almost all politicians are owned.

[mikelgb]

21. No. But Cheney first.

333

[EstimatedProphet]

22. Nope, just want it done right, that's all

[babylonsister]

23. Not one iota of doubt here. nt

[Solly Mack]

24. Not a bit. Also removed from office and imprisoned ....

after a fair trial, of course

[Ganja Ninja]

25. I only wish it were possible.

Sadly we just don't have the votes to get it done at the moment. That's why they aren't even considering it.

[WiseButAngrySara]

26. I have no doubts about the imperative to impeach the

Fascist Imperialistic B* cabal, including Cheney. When did DU first talk about the signing statements? Wasn't it about a year ago? I can't believe that Americans are kept so blind, except that it is intentional. We are living in perilous times, and most don't even know that we have a tyrant posing as a lover of freedom and democracy in the WH.

[WiseButAngrySara]

27. k(pete)nr! Bless you kpete! ....n/t

[philly_bob]

29. Don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes. Not yet, but soon... /nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

dupe

[proud2BlibKansan]

30. No, never was any doubt

[kenny blankenship]

31. If you have an infestation of vampires, you have to put a stake in the heart of the Master

Half measures will do you no good.

[robinlynne]

32. no. And I was one of the people saying to wait and let the investigations take their course.

[lies and propaganda]

33. Never was. Jail their sorry fucking asses as well.

For the countless Iraqis and Americans he has killed both there and NOLA.

[mvd]

34. Nope

It should have been done when no WMD were discovered and the Downing Street Memo came out. If there was any justice, both Bush and Cheney would be out, and the Repuke Speaker of the House that was elevated to the Presidency would be following the will of the public.

[Jack Rabbit]

35. Any doubts I had dissipated when the first missiles flew over Baghdad

It was clear to me that the Bush regime had not made their case for war. Any one who thinks they had should grab an entrenching tool, hop the next plane for Baghdad and start digging for Saddam's WMD.

[adamuu]

36. that makes it pretty black and white, doesn't it?

also its a personal insult to all Senators, isn't it? basically telling them all "f*** you i won't do what you tell me." If i were a Senator, rage alone would be enough to see the impeachment through.

[mmonk]

37. None whatsoever. In fact, I think its dangerous if we don't.

If the American people live in the dark about so much and none of things are taken care of to where the propaganda that runs through our corporate media is removed, we'll stay in danger.

[Lugnut]

39. I've never doubted

Not for a minute. There's not much that this president has done that is constitutional or legal, for that matter.

[frogcycle]

40. I think the dems have been doing some serious strategerizing

I don't believe for one second that the leaders' public statements come anywhere close to the depth and breadth of their plans.

I think they know that this cabal is going to be very tough to take down and they don't want to blow it. They could move too hard on b or c or even both and just end up lopping a couple of heads off the hydra, getting a new heir apparent in the WH and basically screw the country for good. I suspect that some of the non-candidates, like Kerry and Feingold, maybe Kennedy, are planning the thing very, very carefully. I suspect Hillary's move was not just her campaigning; it was part of an orchestrated after-veto performance. I am just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

[Kurovski]

41. Kick. (nt)

[Harper_is_Bush]

42. Yes, there is. Why not keep the idiot around for his last 1.5 years?

Don't let anything detract from the stark reality that these new age Republican Presidents are the worst thing that can happen to our world?

I mean seriously, can he do any more damage than he already has?

Keep him there and in '08 any (R) candidate will be tied to him by association, and the contrast created by the almost guaranteed Dem Prez election will solidify Dems as the ruling party.

[question everything]

45. I agree. I also wonder how much of a drag

impeachment proceedings will take on Congress, preventing it from doing things to better us, the people.

And, yes, come November, the voters will realize what the last 8 years have done to us. Not only about Iraq but about so many other issues, with a rubber stamp Congress.

[Harper_is_Bush]

46. Good points. Impeachment is a pointless exercise at this juncture.

It feels like the drive for it here is based more on revenge/payback rather than sober consideration.

[StarryNite]

47. Absolutely no doubt.

Nancy set the table!