Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Articles of Impeachment To Be Filed On Cheney

Looks like he's reached his boiling point.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), the most liberal of the Democratic presidential candidates in the primary field, declared in a letter sent to his Democratic House colleagues this morning that he plans to file articles of impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney.

Kucinich has made ending the war in Iraq the central theme of his campaign. He has even taken aim at the leading Democratic presidential candidates in the field for their votes on authorizing the war.


Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution
gives Congress the authority to impeach the president, vice president and "all civil Officers of the United States" for "treason, bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Sources tell the Sleuth that in light of the mass killings at Virginia Tech Monday, Kucinich's impeachment plans have been put on hold. There will be no action this week, they say.

Kucinich's office had no comment on the Congressman's "Dear Colleague" letter -- which apparently was drafted over the weekend, before the school massacre -- or on what the focus of articles of impeachment against Cheney would be.

But Kucinich shouldn't hold his breath on getting anywhere with his impeachment plan. "We'll see a Kucinich Administration before we'll see a Cheney impeachment," quipped one Democratic aide.


Here is the text of his letter, a copy of which was forwarded to the Sleuth:


April 17, 2007

Dear Colleague:

This week I intend to introduce Articles of Impeachment with respect to the conduct of Vice President Cheney. Please have your staff contact my office . . . if you would like to receive a confidential copy of the document prior to its introduction in the House.

Sincerely,

/s/

Dennis J. Kucinich

Member of Congress

By Mary Ann Akers  |  April 17, 2007; 10:09 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bush Administration: Breakdown
Next: Romney: In the Bunker on Shooting Incident

Comments

It may never happen, but Kucinich is right to propose it. The lies, deception, and seemingly endless corruption require more than a Congressional scolding. Bush too must be held accountable, yet the great irony is Bush can't be impeached because if it were successful, then Cheney would become president.

Posted by: Arcadian | April 17, 2007 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Ah, yes, but the question is whether or not it'll stick, or if this is the last we ever hear from Kucinich after the WH finds out?

I'm off to find a tub of popcorn -- if it does stick, this could be an interesting ride.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 10:39 AM | Report abuse

You know...oddly enough, this sounds like a stroke of genius! The media waters have been thoroughly poisoned with the idea that impeachment proceedings against Bush as a no-go because of the Clinton impeachment. By the same logic, the failure to convict even ONE person - even if they were innocent - somehow makes it impossible to even try to convict the most depraved mass-murderer.

But going after the Vice-President is different. He's even more unpopular than Bush, for one thing. And I don't believe that a Vice-President has ever been impeached in the history of the US, so this is actually something quite new.

I understand why the perpetually-cowed Democrats in Congress are too terrified to dream of impeaching Bush, no matter how thoroughly he deserves it. But for some reason, it seems just barely possible that they might feel better about supporting a Cheney impeachment bid.

Maybe.

Posted by: Quasit | April 17, 2007 10:47 AM | Report abuse

At first, I thought this was brilliant--finally someone has the courage to hold the engine driving the train accountable. However, on second thought, this (if it were to succeed and Cheney were to leave office) would get the next Republican president into office. Appointing a new vice president would be a dream for the GOP. Good intentions Kucinich, but bad idea overall.

Posted by: DreA | April 17, 2007 10:51 AM | Report abuse

The proposed action by Kucinich may well explain why he is near last place among even Democratic presidential candidates: political zeal not balanced by political smarts.
The Constitution allows impeachment for high crimes-normally interpreted as felonies- or misdemeanors that warrant removal from office despite being elected by the people. It doesn't call for impeachment for bad judgment or political ineptitude. This makes about as much sense as impeaching Clinton did. The most probable results will be to a) suggest Kucinich is desperate to revive a sinking campaign, b) ensure that the Republicans rally around Bush whether they believe in him or not.
We need to hope the leadership of the Democratic Party is smarter than Kucinich and will defeat the move in committee. If Bush is indeed wrong, then he and his party should be defeated at the polls.

Posted by: John G. | April 17, 2007 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Who's dick cheney?

Posted by: donviti@yahoo.com | April 17, 2007 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Maybe Kucinich knows something the rest of us don't. Maybe he evidence that links Cheney's office to that infamous Italian letter. Or maybe, based on Cheney's statements in the media regarding our success in Iraq, he's going to try to impeach Cheney based on the assertion that the guy is effing crazy. Or maybe, he's going to go after him for obstructing an investigation when he refused to see the authorities for 14 hours after he shot a man (surely he wasn't drunk when that happened).

Posted by: caneiac01 | April 17, 2007 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Of course cheney should be impeached and Bush simultaneously. With investigations, the evidence would be overwhelming that they did indeed manipulate intelligence and lie to america about iraq's wmds, ties to 911 and imminent threat. Additionally, they committed crimes of authorizing torture, illegal spying and illegal detentions. Democrats need some balls like Kucinich. Does america stand for criminal leaders? The rest of the world is viewing america as a torturing arrogant beast that invades other countries and is guantanomo. We have lost our moral authority and the way to regain it is impeachment!

Posted by: Abel tomlinson | April 17, 2007 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Also, 51% of americans support impeachment, so we are the majority, including 20% of republicans, so it is bipartisan. If they support Bush as the head of their party, then they are represented by a criminal and their party will die.

Posted by: Abel Tomlinson | April 17, 2007 11:29 AM | Report abuse

START AT THE TOP WITH BUSH AND THEN DO CHENEY. THERE BOTH NO GOOD,THEY LIED TO CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE !!!!!!

Posted by: R.E.LENZ | April 17, 2007 11:46 AM | Report abuse

The lack of leadership by the Democratic Party makes really solidifies my Green Party affiliation.
Criminals should not be allowed to run our country.

Posted by: Robert | April 17, 2007 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Go Dennis!
Dick is a great start in holding this administration accountable, screw the polls and political talking points, Dennis has the truth on his side!
-Mike

Posted by: Michael | April 17, 2007 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Why won't the Democrats pursue this? I don't understand. There is plenty of already documented, sworn evidence from Fitzgerald. In fact, at his last press conference Patrick Fitzgerald stated that he would be happy to send Congress any evidence they want. An invitation? Cheney's approval rating is only about 18%. Moreover, he is at the root of all the war mongering that comes out of this administration because people are afraid to cross him. Let's all stand up for Cheney's impeachment and make this happen from the grass roots. One person can make a difference.

Posted by: D. Wakefield | April 17, 2007 12:06 PM | Report abuse

i say definitely start with cheney... he would be more dangerous if bush got axed, bush is just a dumb puppethead for the real evil doers behind the scenes in their governmental undisclosed locations

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 12:07 PM | Report abuse

According to Sue Lindsey's article (of the Associated Press), the first statement the White House made after the VT shooting was the following:

"A White House spokesman said

President Bush was horrified by the rampage and offered his prayers to the victims and the people of Virginia. "The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed," spokeswoman Dana Perino said "

Why aren't journalists jumping on this? Doesn't this show how special interest oriented he is and how he is out of touch with the main stream and reality?

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich should introduce a single article over Geneva Convention violations. Cheney has publicly dismissed the horror that is waterboarding as "dunking."

The Hamdan ruling has already established the reality of Geneva violations. These acts are also federal crimes under US Code: Title 18,2441.

This would put the DC Dem "leadership" (and that craven quipping Dem aide) on the spot to defend or oppose war crimes. The GOP Senators would be put on the same spot in a Senate trial.

It is the charge that would stick.

In fact, it is a "slam dunk."

--

Posted by: thedeanpeople | April 17, 2007 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Well, Kucinichs lame grandstand play got him his 15 minutes of fame, but it wont save his candidacy. Somehow I suspect in the world he walks in Kucinich sees this as a way to firm up his base in preparation for his run to the White House. My only question is if that is the case just what world is Kucinich in?

Posted by: Dave Anthony | April 17, 2007 12:58 PM | Report abuse

I am sick and tired of hearing all these damn excuses why Bush and Cheney should not be impeached. Politicians are not above the law, dammit! Kucinich speaks for the majority of the Americans. Democrats, hear this, Don't let those bastards blame you for losing a non-winnable war. This is on their shoulders and is theirs to keep. Win or lose!

Posted by: forest sprague | April 17, 2007 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Impeach them both. it'll be a good thing.

President Pelosi would severely piss Hillary off.

Posted by: Mike | April 17, 2007 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Both Cheney and Bush have misled and betrayed our country, our democracy and our TRUST. They have commited high crimes and misdemeanors, which can be read HERE: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/downloads/mckinneyarticles.pdf

The momentum for impeachment is growing every day. This online petition has already gathered nearly 90,000 signatures of THE PEOPLE: http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/88?ad=d0

We are in the midst of a Constitutional crises, and guess what? Our government isn't going to fix things unless WE THE PEOPLE stand up and make a big stink about it. This is a non-partisan issue. Bush and Cheney have betrayed their own party as well. They are not true to democracy; they are traitors and enemies of democracy and if they are not stopped, we are going to lose our country, and our world, to corporate power.

The demand for impeachment is a cry from the American People for the protection of DEMOCRACY as we have known it! Whether they are impeached, or not, at least we the people are starting to make noise about the injustice happening RIGHT NOW to America the Beautiful!!!

A true patriot of democracy and the USA

Posted by: gracefounddog | April 17, 2007 1:16 PM | Report abuse

hats off to Kucinich! Cheney, then Bush. Impeachment proceedings are likely to blow the lid off a lot of things we've been getting inklings of for years... such as, but not limited to:

How are Duke Cunningham, corrupt Lobbyists like Jack Abramoff and Cheney connected?

Why did Cheney really target Valerie Plame Wilson, taking down her counter-WMD-proliferation network?

Why did we listen to phoney bunk from drunks and liars about Iraqi wmd?

Was Cheney behind the Niger yellowcake scam in the first place?

What was Cheney doing on 9/11/01? The Secretary of Transportation's witness testimony of Cheney's actions were strange!

Is Cheney profiting from the war in Iraq and its aftermaths?

Posted by: enzo titolo | April 17, 2007 1:20 PM | Report abuse

it is brillant because cheney will pass the blame to bush, both will go down and we will have Pres. Pelosi!

Posted by: bks | April 17, 2007 1:22 PM | Report abuse

This will be a brilliant move. It will insure. upon impeachment (and conviction), that this criminal will not have a chance to be the head of the government. One thing at a time, in it's own time, when the time is right. The chimp will get his due...

Posted by: Jack Alexander | April 17, 2007 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is one of the best vote-getting tools the Democrats have in their arsenal and every time he opens his scowly mouth out pops more reason for an Independent or moderate Republican to think seriously about defecting from the GOP. This is the nasty RealPolitik reason Cheney will never be impeached. . . he is too valuable a motivator for the Dem base!

Posted by: Christian in NYC | April 17, 2007 1:24 PM | Report abuse

At least someone has the guts to do something. To whatever it might lead. But the American people need to wake up and get rid off the corrupt administration and its cronies. Finally some real news!

Posted by: Democrate in NOVA | April 17, 2007 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich likely has an accurate picture of his lightweight status in the pecking order.

But he surely isn't dumb. Just MAYBE,he's moving on some brand new impeachable dirt on Five Deferment Dick.

I advise the congressman not to board any small planes that are scheduled to land on icey runways.

Posted by: muzza | April 17, 2007 1:30 PM | Report abuse

This is the only thing a congress person can do in the face of the abuse of power exhibited by the administration. Any representative that does not go along with these investigations is defying their oath of office to protect the constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic. Go Kucinich!

Posted by: Matthew G | April 17, 2007 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Democrats are still learning something that the GOP learned long ago: don't run from your party's most extreme elements.

The GOP has relied for years on the "repeating it makes it so" phenomenon. Even if Kucinich's request goes nowhere, he's the first representative to mention it. If the Democrats wanted to, they could make use of it.

Posted by: Sammy | April 17, 2007 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Impeach! Yes democrats, go right ahead and spend the next two years focusing on that, assuring another win for the Republicans.

Posted by: Peachy | April 17, 2007 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Dennis I knew if anyone would come through it would be you. At least one politician still believes that the constitution is a useful safeguard of the rights of the people of the United States against the dangers of unbalanced executive power. For this president, vice president and the future of the democracy we need more brave and constitutionally mandated action like this. You have my support for this action.

Posted by: John L. | April 17, 2007 1:57 PM | Report abuse

If Bush and Cheney are not impeached then the idea of impeachment should never again be brought up. For the future of OUR democracy and the whole idea of "We the People" impeachment is the ONLY way to restore the ideals of our Founding Fathers.

Posted by: Ravenwood | April 17, 2007 1:57 PM | Report abuse

IMPEACH !!

Posted by: suexian | April 17, 2007 1:58 PM | Report abuse

YESSSSSS!!! Is America finally demanding our people to be responsible? YEAHHH!

Posted by: ddezignz | April 17, 2007 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Coo Coo Kucinich is running toward his base and away from reason and intellect. So whats new?

Posted by: TheHatMan | April 17, 2007 2:25 PM | Report abuse

I wish Kucinich would stop dreaming he has any shot at the presidency in this world. If he set his sights just a little lower, like a major cabinet position, he would be so much more effective. He is a brilliant and principled man, but he has so little charisma, how can he not see that?

that aside, I hope he has the cojones to follow through with this, and I hope he isn't hung out to dry for it. if these bastards don't deserve impeachment, then I can't imagine how far the next maniac mob will feel they have a mandate to go unopposed. spineless dems, I wish they'd just disband if they aren't going to even throw the ball back, so pathetic.

and if this country elects another monster to replace that robot if he's impeached, well to hell with us all.

Posted by: verdinckt | April 17, 2007 2:35 PM | Report abuse

What charges, specifically would be filed against Cheney--what crime or misdemeanor would be charged?

Cheney is a vile, stupid, cowardly man. He deserves to be put through every ringer we can think of, and I love that Kucinich is willing to squeeze the bastard. It may even work, if specific legal charges can be found.

I may even kick a few bucks Kucinich's way if he can pull this off...

Posted by: windserf | April 17, 2007 2:38 PM | Report abuse

YES--IMPEACH CHENEY. NOW, WHO WILL INTRODUCE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST BUSH?
CHEERS FOR KUCINICH!

Posted by: Sarah R-M | April 17, 2007 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Contact your Rep.! Tell them to support Kucinich's Articles of Impeachment! I called and emailed Rep. DeFazio, my rep. Please do the same, email and call yours!

You can find your rep here: http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Thanks Mary Ann for breaking the story.

---
http://regionalchaos.net

Posted by: Jim | April 17, 2007 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Go for it Kucinich.

He has no chance of winning because he's as far to the left as Bush is to the right, and I think people are done with the extremes for now. Plus, impeachment has no chance of success due to the fact that Democrats do not carry the perception of having strength, so nobody is going to stand beside them in any endeavor of this magnitude.

So at the very least it could provide some entertainment as we head into the campaign season. I give him points for being creative though. Going after the VP is original. Maybe next he'll try to get Bush with a Court Marshall.

Posted by: crid | April 17, 2007 2:51 PM | Report abuse

I dearly hope this turns out to be true and not merely a rumor. Cheney is so vulnerable and there is no doubt he's the right place to start. Kucinich is truly taking a powerful leadership role here and I admire the man.
For those discounting his presidential aspirations, how about Kucinich/Obama in 08. Who would the GOP put against that ticket on the heels of an impeachment that inevitably reveals the depths of the GOPs bloodthirsty militarism? McCain?

Posted by: Thank the Lord | April 17, 2007 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I love it when Democratic leftist fringe types talk about impeaching Bush or Cheney since it really makes them seem like loons to the majority of people. Why cant the Dems just get a president elected rather than try to impeach? Also, exactly what crimes have been committed? I would like specifics on that last one, not vague canards like "lying to the people" or "mass murder".

Posted by: flyoverman | April 17, 2007 2:57 PM | Report abuse

It will happen if we want it to! That's all it takes. So do you want it? Another great representative to check out- http://RonPaulReport.squarespace.com

Posted by: Trevor Lyman | April 17, 2007 2:58 PM | Report abuse

If Kucinich follows through with this, he will instantly become the first and only candidate running for President in 2008.

Everyone else is simply running for Unitary Executive - hoping to assume the grossly expanded powers of this most corrupt, inept and morally bankrupt President.

Yet Cheney is by far the more sinister character of the two.

If you are not yet convinced of the impeachable offenses of both Bush and Cheney, please view them here:

http://www.impeachforpeace.org/evidence/

And please contact Kucinich through the Congressional Switchboard at: (202) 224-3121 to encourage him to do the right thing and follow through with this.

Then call your Representative and Senator and tell them to sign on with Kucinich. The Senate may not be in play at first, but the more members committed to honoring their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against these DOMESTIC ENEMIES TO THE CONSTITUTION who have occupied our White House.

Mikael Rudolph
www.ImpeachforPeace.org
minneapolis@impeachforpeace.org

Posted by: Mikael Rudolph | April 17, 2007 3:04 PM | Report abuse

How long will it take you propaganda disseminating genocidal apologists to figure out that Bush and Cheney and their gang are mass murderers, thieves, liars, and traitors. Anyone who had a basic civics class in high school that required reading (and understanding) the US Constitution and Bill of Rights should clearly see reason to impeach. Oh, wait. I keep forgetting most Americans haven't actually had the privilege of a proper civics class; so much for Democracy!

Posted by: King George | April 17, 2007 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Based on the Mineta 9.11 Commission Report testimony alone, Cheney MUST be impeached.

Posted by: Right on... | April 17, 2007 3:23 PM | Report abuse

I find this all hard to believe. On 9/11/01 the entire United States wanted Bush to do something and he did, the United States wanted to be rid of Hussein and we are. Now comes the calls for PRESIDENT PELOSI give me a break, she's conspiring with Syria who sponsors terrorism and she's wanting to go to Iran, and anyone with a pea brain knows about Iran. WHAT HAS THE PELOSI CROWD ACCOMPLISHED in their 1st 100 days of power?? absolutly NADDA, NOTHING, ZILCH, oh and by the way, she saw everyone but never had time to stop to see the troops, maybe she realized that wouldn't be a real good idea.

Well ya'll are probably have your dreams come true next year and when you get the likes of Hillary or some other block head I'll set back and say "TOLD YA SO"

Posted by: Danny | April 17, 2007 3:27 PM | Report abuse

It's about time a Democrat actually had some spine. What could have possibly come over America, to think that such a historically spineless party would actually rise to the occasion this time? Fortunately for us, there are still some mavericks like Kucinich who have not yet been silenced by their ultra-right wing masters (i.e. Hillary Clinton).

If the Republicans were like the Democrats, we'd have never gotten into any of this -- not because of wisdom, but simply because the Republicans would have pre-emptively psyched themselves out of every victory with the same defeatist attitude shown by the "liberals" commenting here.

Posted by: David Hennessy | April 17, 2007 3:28 PM | Report abuse

I can't prove this, but I don't have to because this is comment post and not a court of law.

I believe that Dick Cheney was involved with the Anthrax attacks on Patrick Lehey among others and that he ordered the downing of Paul Wellstone's plane.

Remember, this guy likes torture. He might even like it in a kinky way. Maybe he gets off to people suffering.

They call these people sadists. They do exist. They do tend to seek powerful positions.

Posted by: Alexjonesfan | April 17, 2007 3:44 PM | Report abuse

The US of A wasn't born from people incapable of taking risk, and more importantly, action in the face of wrongdoing. Assume what you want about the outcome; but is there ever a time that it's not worth it to do what is right? Justice needs to be done. Our country needs to be restored. This will only be done through action and holding those accountable that have had a hand in destroying what was once a great nation!

Posted by: Stefan | April 17, 2007 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Typical of a scummy DLC dem operative to skewer the only real liberal in the crummy party.

"We'll see a Kucinich Administration before we'll see a Cheney impeachment," quipped one Democratic aide.

Why are the febrile effing dems so hot to dismiss impeachment for what Are high crimes and misdemeanors, from lying us into war to massive and blatant cronyism and corruption? This is not an imaginary or politically motivated impeachment, like the repugs tried to do. They had the guts to do a bogus impeachment but the dems don't have the balls to go for a real one.

What a rotten party. I quit. I'll never vote Democrat again. What a scummy, nonrepresentatie party. The Majority of Americans would now go along with impeachment, and as disaster unfolds that majority will grow.

The DEADocrats suck. And all they'll give us as a choice for the next election is procorporate globalist warmonger Hillary, or prettyboy, emptyhead Obama (I heard him speak the usual jingoism against Chavez, which showed he has No idea of what we have done in Latin America for ages, or what the real situation is.)

Posted by: Jim Mooney | April 17, 2007 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Funny how everyone wants to hang him high without evidence. I read everything here and found no foundation for impeachment. What are the charges? Sorry, he "Mislead" or "Lied" isn't impeachable unless the lie is under oath. You people are fun to listen to but once again no truthful reason other than you suspect him or just don't like him. It takes a lot more than that kids.

Posted by: Rick | April 17, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

See above. I'm with Jim.

Posted by: Herbert Hoover | April 17, 2007 4:03 PM | Report abuse

It would be awesome to see this war criminal impeached. The problem is that Cheney has already made billions from his Haliburton deals so he probably wouldn't even care if he was impeached. He's so rich he can go buy 100,000 acres in any country he wishes, like Bush has already bought land to plot his escape destination.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 4:03 PM | Report abuse

How many kinds of treason must this one man commit, until SOMEONE calls him out on it? Why, if "liberals" are such whimps, is it a liberal standing up, taking the old man to task?

Posted by: Prissy | April 17, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

The guy who wrote this blog response below is truly an a-h0le. No wonder the whacky left gets ZERO respect beyond its own echo-chamber in the blog-o-sphere.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"It is too bad the shooter at VT spent all of his mojo on students and faculty.

Posted by: mmather | April 17, 2007 11:20 AM"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Posted by: Dave From Alexandria | April 17, 2007 4:13 PM | Report abuse

what kind of moronic Democratic aide would "quip" that "We'll see a Kucinich Administration before we'll see a Cheney impeachment."

Don't these people understand the crimes that Cheney has committed? How despised he is by the American people? (protests at BYU!)

Cheney certainly should be impeached, and Democrats should be rallying behind his impeachment, not cowering behind their lobbyist's losing advice.

Posted by: mike g | April 17, 2007 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Rick, STOP..."without evidence" tells me you are either loyal to the point of watching your constitution go up in smoke or you aren't educated enough. I'll go with the latter. Now go to this website http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/- read all the court certified evidence and then try to tell us he's innocent. It's all there in his own handwriting...

Posted by: Uncle Sammy | April 17, 2007 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Rick - your stupidity is stunning.

Posted by: Dave | April 17, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Just another "non-binding" proposal

Posted by: yellowdog | April 17, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

I hope this pans out. I'd like to see that evil SOB squirm.

Posted by: John Paul | April 17, 2007 4:22 PM | Report abuse

The fact that WaPo posts this without censor is impressive-especially considering the Editor performance of the last 6 years. Did they finally realize they better tell the truth or watch the country perish until the rule of one man?

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Go Dennis Go!!!

Posted by: Jeff in Ohio | April 17, 2007 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Kucinich was right FROM THE BEGINNING when he voted against the Iraq War and he is right about this also. One of the few in Congress with the insight, integrity and guts to support the laws of the Constitution. You show a lot of love for America Rep. Kucinich!! Actions like yours may restore some sense of morality to the American Govt. and begin to regain some respect overseas to America. It's simply outrageous what this admin is doing to our beloved America and to it's citizens.

Posted by: FreedomRider | April 17, 2007 4:26 PM | Report abuse

They deserve not only impeachment, but a full public trial in the system they have undermined or ignored for six years. And if/when found guilty, they should be placed in prison for hard time. Let them try to spend their ill-gotten gains then!

BTW, if they run, they open themselves to being arrested and charged under international law, under which it would be much harder for them to evade serious punishment. Why do you think Bush wouldn't sign on to the war crimes act?

Posted by: cosmogenium | April 17, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Seems the nation is waking up and finally rising up to the real terrorists.....

Good luck from Amsterdam

Posted by: J. Portland | April 17, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Impeach both Bush and Cheney simultaneously. That way if it works, Pelosi becomes president.

It won't work, but it will be fun trying. After all, if Specter can rail against the Patriot Act Reauthorization because it revokes the right of habeus corpus, claiming that we would be doing away with one of the rights passed on down from the magna carta, and then goes and votes for the blasted thing, well, he will never vote to convict. What a tool.

Posted by: coltergeist | April 17, 2007 4:31 PM | Report abuse

It is astounding to read some of the comments above, so many of them have nothing to do with the subject of why impeachment makes sense for Cheney and Dumbya. The obvious criminal activity of this administration should have any American upset to say the least, but no it has to be dragged down to a partisan issue.

Not only are the crimes of Cheney and Dumbya impeachablr offenses but some of their dirty deeds are clearly in violation of international law. I an not a Democrat and surly not a Neocon Republican but how anyone could support some of these Dems that have taken impeachment "off the table" is beyond me. What Clinton did was just so minor compared to what is going on, these people are tyrants and need a jail cell. I say give Cheney and Dumbya one more term - Life in prison.

Posted by: Dmitri | April 17, 2007 4:32 PM | Report abuse

maybe an article of impeachment should be about those missing e-mails which will soon turn into entire missing computers no doubt. rumour has it that one has been found in a field in wyoming. sources tell me it appears to have been destroyed with several blast fired from of all things, a shotgun! well, thats just a real crude way to attempt to hide the facts. kucinich should worry about his voting record on iraq as well. voting for an immediate withdrawal and therefore helping to diminish support for the democrats lacks any sense of pragmatism whtsoever dennis baby! so lets get real and get on to some reality, o.k.? this is why even though you got my vote last time around you won"t get it this time. we all want to get cheney and get out of iraq but we need to go after the money and deadlines and not just cut and run.cheney will hang himself and leave behind the legacy of a snarling weasel and that's o.k. with me. patience, patience, dennis.

Posted by: logan | April 17, 2007 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Very smart to go after Cheney rather than Bush. Cheney control's the show and it's his willful ignorance and incompetence that is primarily responsible for the worst military fiasco in American history, as well as the pervasive corruption of the Bush administration. It won't stick, but you have to start somewhere.

Posted by: Craig | April 17, 2007 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Well there is quite a body of work out there spelling out the grounds for impeachment. United States v. George W. Bush et al. by Elizabeth de la Vega, a former federal prosecutor is quite compelling. Also there is The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office by Dave Lindorff. AND there is Impeach the President: The Case Against Bush and Cheney by Dennis Loo. Sooo before you Fox News viewers go off deriding the loony left for advocating impeachment you should educate yourselves. Here's a hint, you are not going to find the facts on Fox News.

Posted by: Scotter | April 17, 2007 4:37 PM | Report abuse

"The lack of leadership by the Democratic Party makes really solidifies my Green Party affiliation.
Criminals should not be allowed to run our country.

Posted by: Robert | April 17, 2007 11:51 AM"

Well Robert, while it's nice to have ideals and convictions that draw you to the likes of the Green party, your inability to foresee the effects of a wasted vote contributed to that moron Bush getting installed as president in 2000. Thanks a lot.

Posted by: John Paul | April 17, 2007 4:39 PM | Report abuse

I'm all for it. Kucinich is currently getting my vote.

You cant impeach bush and put cheney in charge. BUT you can impeach cheney and THEN impeach bush. cheney's arrogance will be his downfall, the information that comes out in his trial would be enough to impeach bush.

In a perfect world they would then be tried for warcrimes.

Posted by: KenF | April 17, 2007 4:39 PM | Report abuse

"The proposed action by Kucinich may well explain why he is near last place among even Democratic presidential candidates: political zeal not balanced by political smarts."

Dear John G:

I tend to think that your comment is somewhat ironic, considering that Kucinich bases his "zeal" on solid evidence and not feelings and rhetoric, which you classify as "political smarts," unlike his Democratic counterparts that are doing far better in the polls. It goes to show what a nice haircut, Armani suit and perfectly placed photo ops can do. Quit pandering to mainstream media and wake up to reality.

Posted by: Newman | April 17, 2007 4:40 PM | Report abuse

I think the one thing that everyone here has overlooked is that if both Bush and Cheney are impeached, then Pelosi takes over. I think that would be worse then letting those SOBs stay where they are until the term is over.

Posted by: sane1inthecrowd | April 17, 2007 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"....quipped one Democratic aide?" Impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors is not a subject matter of "quips." It is deadly serious business and this aide's boss better take the pulse of his/her constituents ...I'm betting there is a lot of support for such an action. We need to get the military and intelligence and treasury out of Cheney's grimy, greedy little fingers.

Thank you, Dennis...your integrity is showing.

Posted by: Sandy D. | April 17, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Finally some good news out of this Congress. I wonder how long it will be before the Congressional 'leadership' tries to pull the rug out from under DK for fear of being called nasty names.

GO DENNIS!

Posted by: Joe Hill | April 17, 2007 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Excellent move, one that I hope will be fruitful. Impeachment says a lot about the character of the American people not tolerating a wrong path administration deterined to ruin our country.

Don't worry about the Republicans, 22 of them switched sides and won seats int eh House as Democrats. Hagel was the first in all Congress to suggest Bush be impeached and he is a Republican.

Go Dennis go - if this is true it will make Mr. K popular with the people and unpopular with all those guilty of ruining our counrty. On the topic of impeachment, you are either with Bush and Cheney or you are against them. I think most Americans are against them and for their removal from office.

Tivana
WashingtonFORimpeachment.org

Posted by: Tivana | April 17, 2007 4:51 PM | Report abuse

What a dem love fest!!!
Take a pil and get over it Bush is our president and the majority put him there.
Also congress rubber stamped the war in Iraq including the dems.

Posted by: BillyB | April 17, 2007 4:52 PM | Report abuse

And all those who support this corrupt administration should go sign up to fight this war instead of offering up other peoples' children. They have even upped the age limit so get off your lazy butts and go fight since Bush has you so scared of the terrorists. Cowards.

Posted by: jaynine | April 17, 2007 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Kucinich will find he has more support than he could have imagined.

But why wait? Awful news of any kind should make action more immediate instead of less so. After all, more people die everyday for Cheney's and Bush's war.
To say enough death is not disrespectful; quite the contrary...Start by going after Dr. Death.

Posted by: judy | April 17, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse

"What a dem love fest!!!
Take a pil and get over it Bush is our president and the majority put him there.
Also congress rubber stamped the war in Iraq including the dems.

Posted by: BillyB | April 17, 2007 04:52 PM "

BillyB - Go back to your beer.

Posted by: John Paul | April 17, 2007 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Newman...Thanks for saying one of the things I wanted to go into. BRAVO!

ANYONE who puts down D.K. for this courageous and much-needed and, apparently, well thought out move needs to go to www.kucinich.us and learn a few things about this man. He is a dream come true for WE THE PEOPLE! As someone else above said, stop being a pawn to mainstream media. This man is the real deal for us REAL Americans...not the top 1% of tax-avoiding, ludicrously wealthy.

Dennis, Get the ball rolling on the bastards, and we'll sit back and see the wussies in Dem party who squirm and the ones who stand beside you.

Posted by: Robert A. Brown | April 17, 2007 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Definitely start with Cheney, because if we impeach Bush first, then Cheney gets to be president. Even FIVE MINUTES with Dick Cheney is 10 minutes TOO LONG

Posted by: Jimmy G | April 17, 2007 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Well praise the Lord and pass the peace pipe. If we now apply Darth Cheney's One Percent Doctrine to him, it'll be a cinch.

Dick Cheney believes if one percent of the details look fishy, there's probably a whale in the picture. I agree when it comes to him.

Posted by: Kax | April 17, 2007 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Can't come soon enough.

Posted by: Send Him to Gitmo | April 17, 2007 5:14 PM | Report abuse

"Take a pil and get over it Bush is our president and the majority put him there."
Posted by: BillyB | April 17, 2007 04:52 PM

... a majority that has since dwindled to roughly 30 percent. The pill to help "get over" this nightmare of an administration starts with an 'i' and ends with an "mpeachment". What a perfect way for the country to tell Darth Cheney exactly what he told Sen. Leahy a few years ago on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

Posted by: xii | April 17, 2007 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Dennis is awesome! It's about time someone in DC told the truth.

Posted by: BT | April 17, 2007 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Why should Kucinich wait on taking action - even though his articles of impeachment don't have a chance in hell of being acted upon - because of the Virginia Tech massacre? It sounds like he's just looking for some much needed media attention.

Posted by: Eric blair | April 17, 2007 5:20 PM | Report abuse

xii: you mean Cheney used the F word? I'm horrified. Yeah, nail the SOB.

Posted by: John Paul | April 17, 2007 5:20 PM | Report abuse

What will Bush, Cheney's hand puppet, do without Cheney? While Kucinich may not be the most astute politician or the most popular, sometimes even a child can see the right of an action. We need to remove the puppet master before he comes up something even bigger for Bush to do.

Posted by: Bob | April 17, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Finally! Go Denis!!!

Posted by: SB | April 17, 2007 5:23 PM | Report abuse

There is surely much more cause (and evidence) to impeach Bush and/or Cheney than there was to impeach Clinton.
However, impeachment is really not the proper mechanism for mitigating against the damage of the Bush Administration. THere was an election in 2006 where the voters had a chance to speak and there will be another in 2008.
I suspect thre will be very few candidates asking either the outgoing VP or POTUS to campaign for them.

Posted by: GR Sloan | April 17, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Dennis.

Posted by: Peter | April 17, 2007 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Impeachment of chaney,would be about the most stupid idea i have heard. Bush is the supposed to be president,even though we know he doe;s not run anything. cut off the head, and the tail will die.Impeach bush ,problem solved. chaney will automatically go.one impeachment is enough, if it is G.Bush. signed tip.

Posted by: charles hendrix | April 17, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Jesse Jones | April 17, 2007 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Bravo, Kucinich! Now, maybe the MSM and the pollsters will start asking the impeachment question every week!

Posted by: sally | April 17, 2007 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Forget the political ramifications of this. This country needs, for a brief moment at least, to step way back beyond politics and see what has happened in the last six years. Perhaps we need a serious course-correction and perhaps, if Cheney is indeed guilty of the things most posters have written about, then this is the event that needs to happen next. No one knows the effect truth will have on the future. But I would be willing to bet that the airing out of all that has festered in the minds on both sides would be a good thing for this country. Lets do it and move on.
We've got big issues to tackle in the near future and I don't think the current administration is up to the task. If nothing else, we can show the world that we can ask the tough questions of our leaders. No red, no blue just the white truth please.

Posted by: Jim | April 17, 2007 5:34 PM | Report abuse

IMPEACH CHENEY FIRST, as the bumper sticker says.
The ball is already rolling all over the United States:
http://www.impeach07.org Yes, other Dems wouldn't initiate it -
they're too chicken. But if WE push for it and the media at least
get out of the way, Congress will follow (mooo!)

I saw All the President's Men again last night. We need just
a little luck and Woodward & Bernstein circa 1973 (bring back
THAT Washington Post) and the hearings, prosecutions and
resignations can be completed in a few short months.
No kidding.

Violence is cowardly. Peace takes courage.
Kucinich is a visionary with guts to spare.

Posted by: Nina | April 17, 2007 5:35 PM | Report abuse

You conspiracy spinners need to get back on your meds.

Posted by: Fel8Moi | April 17, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

You folks need to stop beating the dead horse and get on with business that impacts us all. Impeachment (Cheney or Bush) is of no value to the American people. Quit trying to run up the score. It is time to quit looking back and move forward. Work for your candidate in 08 and quit living in the past. To be truthful, the biggest crime during this administration was Sandy "Burglar" stealing and destroying classified documents from the National Archive.
Bird (Las Cruces, NM)

Posted by: BIRD | April 17, 2007 5:38 PM | Report abuse

First Rosie on 9/11, now Dennis on impeachment... it seems our "enemies" are becoming our friends.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward | April 17, 2007 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Impeachment is neccessary or we are endorsing everything that this administration has done. Irregardless of consequences, crimes must be punished. The guilty must be prosecuted, or justice dies. Accountability has to be the word we live by. No one is above the law. The Constitution spells out the relationship of the justice department to the executive branch and warns that it must be diligent and on gaurd against corruption by the executive branch. Justice must prevail. The Vice President and the President should no longer represent the people of the United States if they are criminals.

Posted by: Clarion | April 17, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Not enough votes in the senate.
UNLESS THIS GETS MASSIVE PUBLIC SUPPORT!
Get busy everybody.
Get the word out.
Call, email, etc.

Posted by: V | April 17, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse

"It is too bad the shooter at VT spent all of his mojo on students and faculty." Posted by: mmather | April 17, 2007 11:20 AM

Yeah, he should have saved some for the leftist traitors, like mmather and the rest of you morons who are ENCOURAGING THE JIHADISTS TO FIGHT HARDER.

Posted by: Joe Sixpack | April 17, 2007 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I sympathize with the passion I read in the comments, and also believe that both should be removed from office.

Unfortunately I can't ignore that which no one has mentioned: if the goal is removal, then at the moment impeachment simply won't work.

Even with a bare majority of Americans agreeing (& thus lessening whatever backlash would come from a Senate trial in which they were acquitted, as they would be), it requires a super majority of Senate votes to remove an impeached office holder.

Go ahead, count the votes for removal in the Senate and tell me how many Republicans will vote to remove these two (or either one seperately) from office?


(Crickets chirping in the long, long, long silence.........)

Posted by: oddjob | April 17, 2007 5:40 PM | Report abuse

G_ddammit this is funny! I can only hope that Mrs. Pelosi is stupid enough to help Lil' Dennis out and bring this to the floor! It would be the death knell for the defeatocrat party, IMHO.

Posted by: Alan | April 17, 2007 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Bravo, Bravo!!! Dennis! Now we must ask ourselves how we can get the rest of these gutless democrats to see what must be done now. I'm quickly becoming as angry at the dems than I ever was against the reps. How dare they not to have started holding these full-blown criminals accountable for their hideous crimes against the American people and millions of other people around the world; the Earth itself.

Posted by: James Benton | April 17, 2007 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Liberal Scum.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 5:43 PM | Report abuse

I've felt for several years that the reason why democratic congressmen are only a few percentage points more popular than republicans is because the people think they should be doing more to rid our nation of cheney and bush. If Kucinich's popularity raises after he files to impeach cheney it might finally send this message to the rest of the bunch.

Posted by: Orville Gunther | April 17, 2007 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Here is the best basis for impeachment.

Posted by: Attorney And Former Law School Professor | April 17, 2007 5:45 PM | Report abuse

jaynine: Many who support the War on Terror and the administration ALREADY SERVED in the military, or didn't you realize that? Look at the Gathering of Eagles last month, who protected the Vietnam Memorial from leftist crazies:
http://WWW.NaturalFamilyBLOG.com

Posted by: Frank | April 17, 2007 5:46 PM | Report abuse

If presidential candidates were chosen for their intellect and commitment to the people of this country, Dennis Kucinich would have gotten the nomination instead of the wealthy and well-connected Kerry.

But it could turn out ok in the end if Kucinich can pull this off.

Kucinich has courage, brains, and heart to spare - he deserves our unfailing support because he's doing this for every citizen of this country.

Posted by: Leonard | April 17, 2007 5:48 PM | Report abuse

As this US Attorney scandal is investigated more thoroughly, it will become apparent that the reason why this scandal is so scary, is the election laws and voting irregularities are at the heart of the scandal. One of the reasons the firings happened right after the Nov election was that the GOP doesn't want to lose another eletction. My analysis leads me to believe that both the 2000 and the 2004 election were rigged to give Bush et al the win. They didn't rig the last election enough. The rethuglicans never understood just how much they were going to lose by. they estimated 7 to 10%. Never dreamed they were goimg to lose by such big margins and the rigging couldn't make up for that much of a difference. Just check the exit polls and the actual numbers. As usual, they don't match up like they always did before the Bush people and their corrupt voting machines were in place.
We have this one window of opportunity to get rid of these crooks. We may never have another as these crooks are in the process of consolidating power and stacking the courts and the US Attorneys and the media and the Army and the Blackwell mercinary army. Impeach Cheney and Bush and indict Rove and the others.

Posted by: Ali B | April 17, 2007 5:48 PM | Report abuse

I'll bet some of you hippies will go crazy next year when a conservative GOP ex-senator named Fred Thompson is elected president. Eight years of a real conservative like Reagan might be enough to bring this country back to where it was when I was growing up.

Posted by: Harry Lime | April 17, 2007 5:50 PM | Report abuse

....."But Kucinich shouldn't hold his breath on getting anywhere with his impeachment plan. "We'll see a Kucinich Administration before we'll see a Cheney impeachment," quipped one Democratic aide."....

The new dynamics of NH politics are not well known outside of local activist circles, but I can assure you that we are laughing at the uninformed media coronations of the "Big Three" Dems. Watch & learn, grasshopper.

Posted by: IrregardlessNH | April 17, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

I'm all for giving the VP a fair trail, and then hanging the ***.

Posted by: g Anton | April 17, 2007 5:54 PM | Report abuse

This may not have the backing of the House and Senate. It may not even have the backing of the many spineless Democrats, but it's the right thing to do.

Posted by: bill | April 17, 2007 5:58 PM | Report abuse

About time.

Posted by: LeepII | April 17, 2007 6:00 PM | Report abuse

"Peachy" writes: "Impeach! Yes democrats, go right ahead and spend the next two years focusing on that, assuring another win for the Republicans."

You mean, like removing Nixon insured a win for the RepugniCONs in '76?

Exposing the lies and criminality of the Bush/Cheney Gang is going to ensure the election of a RepugniCON in '08? Sorry, not buying it.

Impeachment proceedings -- even if unsuccessful -- would drag the full depravity of this maladministration into the light of the day. It's the RepugniCONs' worst nightmare. So save your "helpful" advice, okay?

Posted by: hbm | April 17, 2007 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Impeachment trial first, war crimes trial second, treason trial third.

Posted by: Mike | April 17, 2007 6:01 PM | Report abuse

It is quite amazing to read the vitriol and hatred from the wacky leftist that dominate this site. You people need to get a life or maybe read the Constitution, maybe Article 2.

By your standards Franklin Delano Roosevelt would not be considered the greatest President of this century, but a disgraced man that was impeached and driven from office. What Roosevelt did to civil liberties in the name of national security makes George Bush look like a Girl Scout. If any historical precedent was considered at all in judging Bush's actions versus the actions of other President's, particularly Lincoln and Roosevelt, this President would walk away completely unscathed.

Secondly, you little whining morons have claimed for years Bush "lied" about Weapons of Mass Destruction. When Bob Woodward's book came out and described George Tenet telling the President the WMD's in Iraq were a "slam dunk" you simply ignored it. When you read a transcript or heard an audio clip of almost every Democrat leader in the House and Senate saying the exact same things about Hussein and Iraq as Bush did you ignored that too. Since you people really know the truth there is only one conclusion; It is you people that are liars and scoundrels and if you can hide the truth or distort the facts to get your way you are quite willing to do so.

You people are truly pathetic.

Posted by: Charles McFarling | April 17, 2007 6:04 PM | Report abuse

By pardoning Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford lost the support of American voters and greatly increased general apathy and cynicism regarding accountability in government. Now, having reached the point where Americans see glaring evidence of the most corrupt administration since the age of robber barons, citizens simply will not take it any more. Now, even as a retired, life-long Republican, I am one of them. I have absolutely had it.

It is painfully evident that the highest levels of my party and American democracy itself are being hijacked by corrupt ideologues funded by corrupt corporations and religious groups. At long last "We The People" are uniting to face this real and present danger, arming ourselves with facts, and acting decisively to take back American democracy. We will impeach Bush and Cheney and prosecute to the full extent of the law those who have defrauded, deceived and stolen from us. Once again we citizens have learned, at enormous cost to coming generations, to keep personally involved in the responsibilities of American democracy.

Recently, in a Middlebury VT town meeting led by Gov. Douglas himself, citizens passed a resolution to impeach George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. A Putney VT, vote to impeach was unanimous. More than 36 towns passed similar resolutions and it's happening all over America. These are inspiring examples of citizens uniting to take back their government and to re-affirm Constitutional accountability, equal justice and equal protection under the law. What a great time to be an American!

Posted by: sslyon | April 17, 2007 6:05 PM | Report abuse

"BIRD" writes: "It is time to quit looking back and move forward."

Yes, no doubt all you RepugniCONs would like us to overlook the crimes of the Bush/Cheney Gang and act as if the past six years never happened. "Move along, folks -- nothing to see here."

But guess what -- we're not in a mood to oblige you. We will "move forward" when and how we damn well please, thank you.

Posted by: hbm | April 17, 2007 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Dennis Kucinich - a true patriot!! Thank you , Dennis!!

Posted by: Sean McKernan | April 17, 2007 6:09 PM | Report abuse

"Rick" writes: "Funny how everyone wants to hang him high without evidence."

By no means -- have a thorough investigation first. That's what holding hearings and a debate over an impeachment resolution will accomplish.

Evidence first, THEN hang him.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Might as well do Bush AND Cheney at the same time. They are both criminals.

Posted by: wdb | April 17, 2007 6:10 PM | Report abuse

While this is long overdue, and is on target, our Congress does not have the integrity to back it up.

The best that could be hoped for is that nations all over the world will take out warrants for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and many others as war criminals, and if and when they should enter any of those countries, they be arrested and charged and tried in the World Court.

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

Posted by: Dennis | April 17, 2007 6:12 PM | Report abuse

McFarling: It is statements like yours that will consign the RepugniCON Party to the dustbin of history -- deservedly so.

There is absolutely no comparison between the REAL wars FDR and Lincoln had to fight and the trumped-up, phony war manufactured by the Bush/Cheney Gang for their own aggrandizement.

BTW it's amusing to hear you call us "whackos" when your great president enjoys the support of only 30 percent of the country. Sure must be a lotta "whackos" out there.

Posted by: hbm | April 17, 2007 6:14 PM | Report abuse

It's clear from reading the comments here that the Bush/Cheney dead-enders have learned absolutely nothing from the 2006 elections or what has followed.

You have been MARGINALIZED, ladies and gentlemen.

Posted by: hbm | April 17, 2007 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney will be impeached in one for or another. Rep. (D) Dennis Kucinich is on the right track with an open letter and invitation of impeachment. America, along with the world, is truly fed up with the present installed regime in America today. The killings at Virginia Tech are just the tip of the iceburg, as to how this administration of illegally installed individuals have destroyed the very fibre of a once free society. Money and greed are not the answer.....

Posted by: Stavo | April 17, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Reagan should have been impeached for the Iran contra scandal. The failure to remove him from office set a precedent which has enabled the Bush/Cheney cabal to literally "get away with murder". We can thank Reagan for the disatrous foreign policy generations to follow will be paying the price for in every conceivable way. The rest of us pay the price for American stupidity.

Kucinich is on the right track. Impeachment resolutions and investigations were drafted long ago documenting the crimes and felonies of both men. To date Congress is complicit in the holocaust they have created in Iraq which makes how Hitler managed his genocide in Nazi Germany more understandable.

That Nancy Pelosi has glibly dismissed impeachment for having better things to do with her time is a direct assault on her constituents as well as failure to uphold the oath under which she assumed her office. She has a moral duty to uphold the Constitution which she is miserably failing to do. Her counterparts follow suit.

Today Kucinich is the only Democratic candidate worth spending time on. If we fail to impeach, however, 2008 will be another coup and our democracy will then be as good as dead.

What is most amazing is that so many Americans insist upon remaining in a state of absolute denial to the truth of what is happening around them. Is there any wonder that atrocities like Virginia Tech happen on our soil when Americans are reared on Star Wars, nintendo games, and "shock and awe"?

We have razed the country of Iraq and created a holocaust equally as evil as Hitler's for all of ten years worth of oil. Hundreds of thousands of people murdered so Americans can hit the highway in behemouth SUVs? This isn't the American Dream -- it's the American Nightmare.

Meanwhile, as Bush has indebted us to China for trillions upon trillions of dollars, that country develops the most sophisticated technology in the world to assure their own sustainability while in the bat of an eyelash they could bankrupt the USA. All for oil and corporate greed.

The USA has been sold down the river, lock, stock and barrel.

Oh, yes, another 8 years of a Conservative like Reagan is just what America needs right now. Another actor for president. And another chimp.

Posted by: SFisher | April 17, 2007 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Much as it might briefly feel good, we can't impeach Cheney first. Then Bush could appoint a VP who might actually be an attractive candidate in 2008 and then wouldn't we all feel foolish. No, either impeach both or neither.

Posted by: Fritz | April 17, 2007 6:21 PM | Report abuse

there is no way he or any lib will get anywhere with that crap all you libs are just sore losers

Posted by: mike byrd | April 17, 2007 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Help Kucinich to Impeach Bush

Kucinich says he's ALSO pursuing impeachment of Bush. Well let's help him out. Sacks and sacks of mail are about to arrive in Dennis Kucinich's office initiating impeachment via the House of Representative's own rules. This legal document is as binding as if a State or if the House itself passed the impeachment resolution (H.R. 635).

Kucinich says he is building his case for impeachment, and is working to build the support of his peers in Congress. He says he intends to impeach. He said he needs us to keep building the groundswell of support for impeachment all over the country. He asks that we send him copies of all the resolutions passed in various States, local Legislative Districts, County Districts and of any petitions with signatures, so that he can present them to the floor of the House. He said he felt that our framing the issue of impeachment in terms of the Constitution is a principled choice, and ultimately more effective than just acting on anger. Here's video of Kucinich addressing the impeachment issue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAIJyKhJhiM

Let's answer Kucinich's call with a petition that has it's precedent in history, and it's legitimacy in the Rules of the House of Representatives.

There's a little known and rarely used clause of the "Jefferson Manual" in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.

That's where we come in. In addition to a House Resolution (635), or the State-by-State method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.

You can initiate the impeachment process and simultaneously help Kucinich to follow through with the process. Do-It-Yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in. We're not only having you send them to Dennis now, but also to Impeach for Peace. That way, we can collect them all in one place, and deliver them all simultaneously (with cameras rolling) in July. Be a part of history.

http://ImpeachForPeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

Posted by: Jodin Morey | April 17, 2007 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Begin the impeachment hearings with Cheney first ... and leave time for the trial for treason

Business before pleasure ... first Cheney, then Bush

Posted by: Lance R B | April 17, 2007 6:27 PM | Report abuse

You people are truly pathetic.

Posted by: Charles McFarling | April 17, 2007 06:04 PM
`
Charles, The majority of Americans support the impeachment of both Bush and Cheney. Why do you hate America? Why aren't you defending the Constitution as vigorously as you're defending Bush/Cheney. Stop putting party loyalty ahead of the country.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 17, 2007 6:27 PM | Report abuse

I am so sick and tired of hearing , " oh ," we can't do that " or " its a non starter " or other such crap . If this crowd hasn't reached the level of impeachment then they might as well strike the articles from the constitution because apparently no crime can reach the level required .

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Virginia Patriot, Patrick Henry once stated:"For my part, whatever anquish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and provide for it." There is compelling and conclusive evidence that the tragedy of 9-11-01 was a false-flag, "inside-job"operation (engineered and covered-up by the Bush/Cheney administration). This heinous crime has been used by this law-breaking and sadistic regime to "justify" all their other illegal, immoral, callous, and depraved atrocities. This "treason" on 9-11 must be placed at the top of the list of impeachable offenses of Bush and Cheney. Only by addressing this most grave and important issue can we truly restore decency, integrity, and goodness to what was once a Constitutional Republic.

Posted by: Frances Scarcille | April 17, 2007 6:31 PM | Report abuse

REPUBLICAN VOCABULARY
***********************
Impeachment = The House believes Bush is peachy.
Conviction = The Senate believes Bush is a man of convictions
Being Hanged for treason = Suspension of disbelief

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 17, 2007 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Dennis is the only one that has the guts to tell the truth. No, his chances of becoming Preisdent are slim, but his is a very important voice in the Congress...Anyone who goes after Cheney is ok in my book!

Posted by: JD | April 17, 2007 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Reading the stupidity posted here never fails to bring a laugh and brighten my day.

((((MUHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahaha!))))

Posted by: Dick Cheney | April 17, 2007 6:40 PM | Report abuse

What world do you guys live in? THIS ISN'T A DEMOCRACY!!! (and to you other whiners out there, no it's not a republic either).

More than half of the thirteen colonies were FOUNDED by Corporations! Unelected rich, property owning, slave 'owning' white males came up with a business model that would work for THEM. And it has.

If this were a democracy, Congress would have had some spine in 2003, when EVERY Congressmember had calls in a landslide AGAINST the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.

So to think that "Congress" might actually represent us NOW (why, because of Pelosi and the "Demcorats"?) flies in the face of all evidence and common sense, and means that you are in DENIAL!

The 2006 "election" was no more legitimate than the ones in 2000 and 2004. Oh yeah, and all the ones before that! Remember ballot box stuffing, dead people voting, poll taxes and literacy tests, LBJ almost challenging Kennedy in '60? Oops, sorry, that's no longer valid because it's "old news"!

And as for Kucinich?! I almost fell for his scam in 2004, with all his talk about ending the wars, unions, withdrawing from NAFTA, and blah blah blah. But he is in the position he's in for a reason - in order to succeed in politics, it's often neccessary to rise above your principles. When push came to shove, he could've gone independent and had a real platform for serious topics in the campaign, but he bent over for the "Democratic" party so he could play nice in DC and have another go round in 2008.

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE FASCISM!

This is not a democracy, so start acting accordingly!

Posted by: SLKirish | April 17, 2007 6:40 PM | Report abuse

With Dick's approval rating hovering around 18 % , I think there is going to be WAY more support out there for impeachment than this article suggests. Cheney is borderline delusional and I don't think it is good for the country to just "wait out" Bush's time in office. A lot of nasty stuff can happen in the next 18 months.

It would be really interesting if WaPo and the other big polls started asking the public if they are for it.

Posted by: Maria | April 17, 2007 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Unfortunately - this a a big PIE in the SKY. NEVER happen!!!!!

Posted by: Tom | April 17, 2007 6:44 PM | Report abuse

You people are a bunch of hard core socialists. The nation needs to be sundered because I hate you as much as you hate Repblicans. Either that, or get ready to rumble.

Posted by: Rick | April 17, 2007 6:44 PM | Report abuse

I think I'll send Kucinich another $50.00. At least he is doing something. If the 51% that hate Bush's guts did that, we would have a kucinich administration and a better world.

Unfortunately, money equals votes in America and the Zionist are giving our money to the republicans to get us to fight Israels wars.

Fight back!

Posted by: Ray | April 17, 2007 6:50 PM | Report abuse

You guys are so funny...Impeaching the Veep...Hoooo HooooHahaha...How about citing a specific example of a law that was broken and back it up with PROOF?

Oh, I forgot facts don't mean a thing to left wing extremists...

Posted by: Harry | April 17, 2007 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Some of these comments by the left wing marxists are funny. Conspiracy everywhere. Dennis the Menence put Cleveland into Bankruptcy in the '70s and given a chance he would do it to the USA also.

Posted by: JG | April 17, 2007 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Let's see - Democrats in Congress want what?

Oh, Pelosi as POTUS and who? Murtha for VP -

Then we could have a major battle on where we should move the Capitol - Pelosi will want to follow the yellow brick road to peace all the way to Tehran, and Murtha will want the Capitol to be re-deployed to Okinawa.

This ranks right along with - Al Gore is the one who plotted 9/11 - to get back at Bush.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 17, 2007 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Would this make Nancy Pelosi VP?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l11sB4cLHM

Posted by: LonewackoDotCom | April 17, 2007 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Impeachment should not be a political tool. Impeachment should not even be a choice. If someone is percieved as doing something impeachable, then they should be investigated and should be impeached if the investigations warrants it. It is our representatives' duty to impeach if the evidence is there.

Posted by: DNA | April 17, 2007 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Whatever happened to diplomacy and negotiation?

Posted by: Red River | April 17, 2007 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Republicans are either evil or stupid. You can tell which one by how much money they make.

Posted by: Dan | April 17, 2007 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Hey Charles, I guess you missed that news about George Tenet saying that he NEVER said "slam dunk". Perhaps if Cheney wasn't over at the CIA brow-beating intelligence officers into buying his paranoid worldview they would have been better able to voice the dissent that existed within the agency concerning those "WMD" in Iraq. What will it take for you rabid Republicans to take a clear-eyed, honest look at this band of incompetent losers and killers that you still manage to support?

I'm proud to be a "crazy" liberal. We read newspapers, and books for that matter.

A steady diet of Fox News and OxyRush Limbaugh will make you fat, stupid and terrified. The perfect Republican audience.
People like you would rather target liberals as Public Enemy Number One than focus on your own corrupt leaders.

If Clinton had gotten us mired down in a War of Choice in Iraq with over 3300 coming home in body bags I dare say, Charles, that you would have been calling for him to be thrown out of office as well. Show a little intellectual honestly at the very least. If it is only "liberal scum" like me that are fed up with Bush then I am surprised because then it would be 66% of America that has suddenly morphed into a bunch of "pinko-hippie commies'. Give it up already.

Posted by: Maria | April 17, 2007 7:08 PM | Report abuse

I guess the Democrats/Socialists haven't authorized the issue of "smart pills" with the grape KoolAid to their mentally stunted minions....

Posted by: SFSGM | April 17, 2007 7:08 PM | Report abuse

IMPEACH CHANEY,,,IMPEACH Mr.CHANEY,,,IMPEACH VICE-PRESIDENT CHANEY,,,IMPEACH HIDDEN PRESIDENT CHANEY............................................................Charles Belenchia

Posted by: charles belenchia | April 17, 2007 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Say the word impeachment and the Air America crowd runs to the idea like starving wolves to a moose carcass. Go ahead, try it. Gutless if you don't. Oh I forgot, courage isn't your strong suit, is it?

Posted by: Fabersham | April 17, 2007 7:22 PM | Report abuse

As far as grounds for impeachment, consider this. Cheney caused information relating to the national defense (the identity of Valerie Plame and her company, Brewster Jennings, as an asset of the CIA) to be transmitted to a foreign power (published in the NY Times) to the advantage of the foreign power or the disadvantage of the United States (blowing our counter-proliferation intelligence gathering apparatus). This is conduct covered under the 1917 Espionage Act.
And Cheney is the one who received the information from the CIA, according to testimony in the Libby trial. It was incumbent on him to safeguard it. Libby and Armitage never had a "Need to Know" and should not have been able to leak it to the press.
Cheney is guilty of Espionage. Why is that so hard to accept?

Posted by: stratocruiser | April 17, 2007 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Cleveland was bankrupted during Kucinich's term as mayor because the banks and Cleveland City Council refused to act in the interests of the people of Cleveland. Kucinich was later vindicated for his tough, principled stance, which is why he's been Cleveland's Rep to the US House for the last dozen years. Read up on how Kucinich saved Cleveland MUNY from the corporations 30 years ago, and in the process saved Cleveland residents tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars on there electricity bills.

Kucinich may not be as smooth as The Fonz, but he is a true hero and deserves our support.

Posted by: Heath | April 17, 2007 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Well, it's obvious that the vast majority of washington post readers and not big Bush fan's. Before I get attacked for that comment let me assure you that there are still some out there. Anyway, everyone is pretending like it's a good idea, and that it even has a chance. Fortunately for Cheney it is neither.
It isn't a good idea because he isn't a mass murderer. Whether or not you like the war, a president has a constitutional ability to deploy troops, regardless of whether or not the opposing party believes the war is justified. He also can't be held responsible for said lives. It's absolutely ridiculous. Impeachment as stated in the article has to do with breaking the law, not how power hungry the opposing party is. Since the laws have not been broken, it won't get very far. The reason Clinton was impeached was not because he turned the republicans didn't like him, but because he lied under oath.
Second, because he has never committed a crime, it won't succeed even if they did decide to impeach him. By the way, it sounds like noone whose posted knows anything about impeachment. If you are impeached you are put on trial. So even if he was impeached he would walk away guiltless and it wouldn't affect him. Remember Clinton was impeached, but not kicked out of office.
I'm a little surprised at the ignorance of people who apparently read the politics section of the paper.

Posted by: doesntmatter | April 17, 2007 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Cheney is just plain evil.

Can him!

Posted by: John | April 17, 2007 7:41 PM | Report abuse

American realists know following legal procedures and impeaching criminals is a waste of time. Patriotic realists wage war and kill their opponents. Most Americans are too ignorant, inarticulate and brutal to employ subtlety or diplomacy. Violence and brutality is part of the American psyche, the American way of dealing with conflict. Don't bother feeble resort to law and democratic principles. Be real Americans. Give the world the dictatorship or civil war that is in your nature.

Posted by: Fabian Xenofontous | April 17, 2007 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Reading the bile-filled tripe that passes for intellectual liberalism on this page has been the highlight of my day. Kucinich's effort to impeach Cheney has a snow-ball's chance in hell of seeing any action, he is merely grandstanding to keep some money coming in for hisw floundering campaign. I do have to admire him for calling out the other candidates who refused to debate on FOX though.

Posted by: Burt | April 17, 2007 7:47 PM | Report abuse

If Clinton did 1/100th of what Cheney has done, he not only would have been impeached many times over but possibly have met the same fate as JFK.

Posted by: fossilhippie | April 17, 2007 7:51 PM | Report abuse

The gross majority of these comments indicate that there is more lunacy here on earth than on the Lunar surface. The calls for impeachment and the great repository of provable evidence for a guilty verdict in an empeachment have been the hew and cry of the losers since December 2000. Six years od idle threats. Six years of nothing. Six years of the epitomy of the Colonel Bogey March, except now it is the Democrats not the Germans.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Clinton got impeached for a lie in a deposition for a civil case. gee i wonder if cheney and bush telling lies to congress is as bad an offence. And as far as saying kacenich is the most lieral,,,,lol ,,,you gotta be kiddin me, i can name at least twenty that are way more liberal...funny how the tite of "most liberal" keeps changing

Posted by: demonslayar | April 17, 2007 8:05 PM | Report abuse

An explanation of Mr. Cheney's mysterious reaction to the 'young man': Per Norman Mineta's testimony to Lee Hamilton. Vice Chairman of the "National Commission on 911 Attacks", should be sought.
See the excerpt on U Tube; http://www.com/watch?V=bDfdOwty3y.
where Mr Mineta (Transportation Secretary) refers to overhearing the 'young man' coming into the meeting and reporting on several occasions to Mr. Cheney; incoming, at various distances from the Pentagon and Mr. Cheney's reaction thereto. Then something hit the Pentagon.
Best of luck Mr. Kucinich!.
MA.

Posted by: MA | April 17, 2007 8:07 PM | Report abuse


impeach the both of 'em.
cheney first.
that's right people, itmfa.
bring our kids home.
(yes, the mercenaries too)
leading through peace takes practice
but
is very worth it

Posted by: ericamary | April 17, 2007 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't there come a time when, regardless of the chance for success, that one must do the right thing simply because it is the right thing to do?

Posted by: angryspittle | April 17, 2007 8:09 PM | Report abuse

These corrupt people are never going to be removed from the executive, senate, house, judicial, cia, nsa, dhs, and all the other crony positions nor is the war in Iraq going to be stopped until the corporate mainstream media starts to publicize the FACTS about how electronic voting machine failures, and hacking and cracking, have essentially removed legal US Citizens Constitutional right to vote. If you can not count the vote, you can not validate the vote, and if you can not validate the vote then you have lost your right to vote.

Only then can the Constitution be restored?

But, instead, we shall be bombarded by the forth estate's noise garbage propaganda on Shawn Bonea Ramesy, Paris Hilton, Brittney Spears, Anna Nicole Smith.. the baby..the lawsuit..the money, and about a zillion other worthless stories that have nothing to do with national security.

Look people, this administration don't take security seriously, or they'd have the ports guarded, the shipping containers checked, The EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM should be used for things like the Virginia Tech emergency!!! Was it?!

It's time to take the airwaves back from the Bush Crony FCC appointee, put technicians in charge of choices about power and frequency. These people don't care about American's safety.

But no, instead, what you'll hear is more gun control again. It's already started again.

This war in Iraq ain't gonna stop. The American people can not stop it.

It's like Democrats and Republicans are both the same.

Our CIA and NSA and DOD need a security clearance overhaul. Background check all the people working for these agencies, enforced removal by our military (Who swore an oath to protect the constitution), somebody screwed the pooch on that one too eh?

It's time for the SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM to be turned within, and oust the corruption before this whole planet is unlivable!

But no, well just listen to the same old noise from the fourth estate, American Idol, 24, Bob Barker, Jeopardy, Wheel Of Fortune.

We should be working on TECHNOLOGY, SCIENCE, ART. A cure for West Nile Virus in humans, could resonant frequency work?

Instead we are making microwave pain inflict-ors for protesters. Not throwing corrupt Secretary Of States and EVM manufacturers in jail for life for all the felonies they committed against the USA!

Let's not forget the Military and the Veterans. It's high time for a DRAFT if we really want to have global security.

Na, well just have a photo op for the (unelected by the people) elected by the Judicial president of the United States OATH OF OFFICE BREAKER!

I hope some really nasty stuff happens to these people.
I hope they find theirselves in so much legal trouble like they never could imagine. I want BAD (tm) things to happen to them. They've made bad things happen to us.

And all you gun control people, go climb back under a rock. gun control ain't going to make the US any safer, putting more red tape on legal gun owners isn't going to stop sick individuals from obtaining weapons and doing bad stuff, but what it will do is help to further destroy the constitution, and make it so that the government can do anything it wants to us.

Oh wait. They're already doing that pretty much now.

It's the last hope.

You have a JURY BOX, a BALLOT BOX, and an AMMO BOX. The ballot box is rigged, the jury box is rigged. WHAT IS LEFT?

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 17, 2007 8:11 PM | Report abuse

"We will see a Kunicich Administration before we see an impeachment" that shows you what the rest of the Democrats are worth.

Cant we impeach Cheyney for lying to the public and congress? Or have we grown so blasse that we expect lying to part of our government? Cant we impeach him for starting a war under false pretenses? Outing a covert CIA agent and busting a cover company that cost the taxpayers plenty to set up?

Do we have to wait to catch him doing something really bad?

Posted by: Libertarian | April 17, 2007 8:13 PM | Report abuse

I think that Bush and Cheney should be impeached for many reasons but lying us into war and killing probably a million people before thaey leave office is reason enough. We wouldn't get the senate votes to remove them from office but the impeachment stain would live on in history as a stain on the Bush administration. I don't think that these criminals should get away scott free and the history just be rewritten to make them seem like good guys.

Posted by: John | April 17, 2007 8:19 PM | Report abuse

SLKirish,

it isn't VOTER FRAUD.

it's ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINE FRAUD!

please make a note of it.

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 17, 2007 8:24 PM | Report abuse

Cheney sweeps all the elegibilty qualifiers:
"treason, bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
Indictment and Incarceration should be the next steps.

Posted by: Joedawg | April 17, 2007 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Ok...that's it...all those who wrote about impeachment report to you local city square with a sign around your neck stating " I am an IGNORANT TWIT!)

Posted by: SFSGM | April 17, 2007 8:32 PM | Report abuse

It's heartning to realize just how many nut jobs there are out there. After reading these comments, I'm not sure there's any hope for this country at all. Most of you guys are in another orbit.

Posted by: Crazy | April 17, 2007 8:33 PM | Report abuse

As much as he deserves it, Cheney should not be impeached. It won't achieve any useful purpose, and will only solidify Republican support for the Bush administration

Posted by: pillowpants | April 17, 2007 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Why impeach? Because we owe it to history.

There hasn't been a MORE corrupt administration in our nation's history, and that's saying something. Nixon, feh, he was a PIKER compared to this crowd. As another poster said, criminals shouldn't be allowed to run our country.

Posted by: Citizen J | April 17, 2007 8:37 PM | Report abuse

You can impeach them but they don't have to resign.

Posted by: RAP | April 17, 2007 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Impeach - prosecute - incarcerate

What is so funny are all the apologists for Dumbya and Cheney. These most likely are the same people that drooled with their retarded enjoyment over the impeachment of Clinton for lying about blow jobs. What this administration has done is beyond anything Clinton did, that was all fantasies about some 20 year old real estate deal and lying about sex. The sophomoric investigations of Clinton in the nineties are still used to slander him by the same drooling wingnuts posting here but truly criminal actions by our President are just overlooked because the Dems are just chapped about elections being stolen in 2000 and 2004. I say only one thing to those that defend these criminals, GO CHENEY YOURSELVES!!

Posted by: Dmitri | April 17, 2007 8:39 PM | Report abuse

I would think mass murder to be reason for much more than impeachment.

Posted by: kurt mcnally | April 17, 2007 8:39 PM | Report abuse

'Political smarts' gets us crap -- 'political smarts' is far overrated.

Look around you: Is there any other reason than 'Political smarts' that a person of the sort of George W Bush is a two term president?

It should be a crime to occupy a foreign nation simply because it seemed possible due to not having nuclear weapons, having no allies, and having a great strategic military location and considerable oil and water natural resources.

America is well ready for a return to liberty, justice, and war for defensive reasons only.

A return to the Constitution via the Constitutional remedy of impeachment for crimes committed against the public for which it stands is the correct place to begin to get back on the track of principles and true liberty so carefully engineered at great personal risk by Washingon, Jefferson, Madison and the unremembered patriots of their time.

Posted by: Geoffrey A. | April 17, 2007 8:41 PM | Report abuse

wow, sour grapes still because you all could not win an election...

let it go people, let it go...

Posted by: pawfoots | April 17, 2007 8:44 PM | Report abuse

I don't support Kucinich for President but I do support his moves to impeach Cheney and wish him the best of luck in his endeavors.

Posted by: Alan L. Maki | April 17, 2007 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich is right to do this, and politically it will show Americans whether the leading Democratic candidates are willing to do the right thing or too morally weak to set aside their ambitions for the sake of their country.

This Bush/Cheney administration has put America in such a deep hole morally, militarily, financially and politically that the only solution is to act now to stop the hemorrhaging of all that is left of America's health and pride.

The magnitude of this problem dwarfs any single Democratic administration. Repairing the damage from this Republican criminal crusade will take generations of honest government, if recovery is even possible. Is Dennis Kucinich the only Democrat to see how bad the situation has gotten?

Kucinich has little chance to become president, but he is quite correct to challenge his fellow Democrats to show some moral courage. Richard Cheney needs to be impeached, and after him, Bush. If Clinton, Edwards and Obama think they won't be judged by their bases on this issue, they've got a big surprise coming.

Posted by: jimbo92107 | April 17, 2007 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Unless we impeach them or do away with them in some other way, we will be held accountable for their offenses at home and out in the world. All their condoned tortures, their kidnappings, their illegal imprisonments, their wars of aggression, their assult on human rights and human dignity, all war wounded, all the war dead will be laid on our doorstep. And just like history asked of the German people in 1945, it will be asked of us: why didn't someone do something to stop them?

Posted by: johncferris | April 17, 2007 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, Dennis Kucinich. Just this afternoon I was chanting to myself: Impeach, impeach, impeach! But in this instance, I was responding to recountings of the president's shenanigans. Who will file Articles of Impeachment on the President?

Posted by: Michele LuValle | April 17, 2007 8:58 PM | Report abuse

My guess is that most of you who are complaining about the V.P. have not ever ventured out of the the U.S. It is people like him and others that let you whine about being in the greatest country on the planet. Typical liberals...

Posted by: Dennis | April 17, 2007 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Most folks don't realize that the choice in vice president for a presidential candidate is assassination/impeachment insurance. This is the case with Cheney. Impeaching him in my mind would be wonderful - we would take a stab at the neo-cons and all their BS, send them a message, but without actually putting somebody up on the throne who would make matters worse (which would be the case if Bush were impeached).

Frankly, I'm excited about this, and I'm also excited to see how the war crimes trials will go for these two assuming there are no impeachments. Abu Gharib and Club Gitmo need to be addressed and justice needs to be served.

Posted by: David J | April 17, 2007 9:11 PM | Report abuse

Better late than never. I applaud this effort but I believe the Israel Lobby (AIPAC) will do all they can to squash it.
The whole Bush Adm. is like a full toilet, let the flushing begin, then start on AIPAC influence.

Posted by: Ray | April 17, 2007 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Dennis | April 17, 2007 09:01 PM
????????? What!!! Cheney and Dumbya let us speak out about their tyranny? If they could stop us they would, they've come close but it is just going to far and they know it. The whiners right now are the wingnuts not the patriots that make up the 70% to 75% that don't approve of the tyranny of these chumps. Just like the fantasy that the troops are fighting for our freedom you say Dumbya and Cheney are allowing us to have free speech, LOL, it sounds like you need a simple civics lesson.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 17, 2007 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Dennis, the neo-conservatives have nothing to do with free speech. In fact, if anything, they've been the strongest advocates against it. The Bill of Rights means nothing to the neo-cons. The Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 are the two prime examples of the Bush regime's removal of our constitutional liberties, and it doesn't stop there. Free speech? At least when a liberal touts it, you know he knows what he's talking about...

Posted by: David J | April 17, 2007 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Ray | April 17, 2007 09:13 PM

Unfortunately AIPAC has major influence with the Dems and that is why impeachment is "off the table" as Pelosi says.

Posted by: Dmitri | April 17, 2007 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Dennis, haven't you noticed Bush wiping his ass with the Bill of Rights for many years now?? WTF are you drooling about?

Posted by: Dmitri | April 17, 2007 9:18 PM | Report abuse

THERE IS NO FREE SPEECH UNLESS YOU HAVE ANONYMITY.

And with the patriot act, we all know where that went.

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 17, 2007 9:23 PM | Report abuse

Without anonymity there is no free speech.

Since the patriot act we all know where the
1,2,3,4,5,6,7 amendments went.

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 17, 2007 9:24 PM | Report abuse

Do not be tricked into believing that a simple willingness for war is the measure of patriotism in America.

Every official and military member of the United States of American has sworn an oath.

What was it exactly, that the person swore to protect in this oath?

Each person swore to protect one thing:

The Constitution of the United States.

What is the Constitution?

It is the law of the land. It is every Amendment. It is the Bill of Rights.

The measure of American patriotism is the degree to which the American who has sworn an oath lives up to it by demonstrating unwavering defense of the Constitution by all the means afforded by his office, whether pen, or rifle.

How long must a list of violations and damages to the Constitution become, at the hands of a man sworn to protect it, before we impeach such a man?

Why would impeachment not be due at the man's first damage to the Constitution he has sworn to protect?

Posted by: Geoffrey A. | April 17, 2007 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Actually I am a veteran, and I swore an oath to protect the constitution of the united states and the president against all enemies foreign and domestic.

There's the catch 22.

Getting rid of these electronic voting machines is the ONLY WAY WE CAN FIX THIS

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 17, 2007 9:30 PM | Report abuse

In recent history, a vice president was driven from office and into prison, but I don't think it was by impeachment. President Richard Nixon's vice president Spiro Agnew was driven out of office and into, I think, a Maryland state prison cell on income tax charges. Prior to Nixon's resignation, Nixon appointed and had confirmed by the Senate Gerald Ford to succeed Spiro Agnew as vice president. When Nixon resigned to avoid being impeached over Watergate, Gerald Ford become president and (here's some political trivia for you), Nelson Rockefeller was appointed and confirmed as vice president. Both Ford and Rockefeller served until the next election when Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale took over the administration. So, for a few years in recent history, both the president (Ford) and the vice president (Rockefeller) were appointed and not elected officals.

I'm originally from Cleveland and remember when Kucinich was elected mayor of Cleveland and his administration drove the City of Cleveland into financial default. The night Kucinich was elected mayor, I remember him showing up at the ABC affliate studios in Cleveland, WEWS Channel 5. There on the air, long-time Cleveland broadcaster and political commentator Dorothy Fuldhiem looked at him and said "This is a fairy tale!". I think in the next few years the fairy tale turned into a nightmare for the City of Cleveland.

Kucinich was succeeded by election by George Voinavich as mayor who later become both Govenor of Ohio and later a US Senator from Ohio. Voinavich brought Cleveland back on track and help spur a great revitalization of the city that was once called "The worst location in the nation" and "The mistake on the lake". I no longer live near Cleveland but the city is far different and improved compared to those dark old days with Kucinich as mayor.

Even though Kucinich is at times a far-left flake, he is colorful and somewhat likeable to some extent. However, he should have stayed in his job as an ethnic westside Cleveland city councilman and not try to move on to higher office, especially his current ambitions for the US presidency. I think I heard at one time everyone is eventually promoted to the level of their incompentancy. I think that explains the present administration in the White House.

Posted by: Carl Cherko | April 17, 2007 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Having read a number of the comments re the above issue, is there any wonder this country is going to hell in a hand basket? I do not understand the unbelievably stupid comments that have been made by people who claim to be educated, knowledgeable,loyal & patriotic Americans.They should thank God that they live in the U.S.,otherwise they would have been shot after having been given a "fair trial"!!!

Posted by: Andy Banyas | April 17, 2007 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Thank you to Dennis Kucinich for once again showing that he is the one Democratic leader who is willing to do what the people want. More than 3000 Americans have died for a lie, and the families of the servicemen and servicewomen deserve justice. They deserve to have Bush and Cheney impeached, removed, tried and locked away if convicted.

For years, the American people have called out for the impeachment of those responsible for this illegal war. Dennis Kucinich has the courage, integrity and honesty to do the right thing. In introducing articles against Dick Cheney, he is proving that he has the ability to make the tough decisions required of a real leader. He has my vote for President.

Posted by: Ruth | April 17, 2007 9:37 PM | Report abuse

Andy Banyas,
What would you have us do?
Just shut up and take it?
Have you served your country?

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 17, 2007 9:38 PM | Report abuse

If Cheney's not impeached, the DEMs against it go, too.

Posted by: Victor | April 17, 2007 9:42 PM | Report abuse

How will we ever know "...if it will stick" if no-one ever tries it. As an ex-Republican I applaud Congressman Kucinich's actions.

If the traditional Republican's had any sense and morals at all, they would trash Cheney/Bush now, less the party surrender all chances in 2008.

Posted by: Ex-Republican | April 17, 2007 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Finally, a democrat who stands up for something thar should have been done a long time ago. It would be good if cheny got booted. After all, these two knuckleheads are going to go down as one of the worst administrations in the History of the United States.

Posted by: Josh | April 17, 2007 9:52 PM | Report abuse

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

Source: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Oath_Office.htm

Check this part again:

"...without any ... purpose of evasion."

Remember the millions of WH emails that the press secretary admitted to?

Is the massive WH email destruction not a violation of the oath of office all on its own, now that you have seen the oath yourself?

Posted by: Geoffrey A. | April 17, 2007 9:54 PM | Report abuse

according to a recent media report,Sandy Berger destroyed documents from the US Archive and should be tried! he covered up the Clinton administrations "8 years of incompetance" that brought us to 9/11 and the loss of over 3,000 innocent Americans. now that's real treason!

Posted by: big tom | April 17, 2007 9:55 PM | Report abuse

What a bunch of whiney, ignorant, radical left wing idiot Democrats!!! Get a grip or better yet, get out of the country! Liberalism is a disease of the mind and all these rants prove it. You people need counseling baaaaad.

Posted by: Averett | April 17, 2007 9:59 PM | Report abuse

It's a damn smart move. I'd bet 98% of Kucinich supporters (or more) already favor impeachment; he has nowhere to go but up.

Posted by: Ultra Carbon | April 17, 2007 10:03 PM | Report abuse

What? Kucinich is out to lunch. Another tactic these politicians use to get us from focusing on things that might actually matter in our lives. Doesn't matter both parties are screwing us. Going along with this Kook and his kind is just another step down the road to the slippery slope pols set us up on!

Posted by: Kucinich is a Kook | April 17, 2007 10:09 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich isn't the only one who wants to introduce impeachment resolutions.

State legislatures in California, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, New Mexico, Washington, Wisconsin and Vermont have introduced and have pending impeachment resolutions against Bush.

Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island and West Virginia are considering introducing impeachment resolutions

Posted by: impeach | April 17, 2007 10:26 PM | Report abuse

I don't know if this was mentioned above, but if Cheney is impeached first, Bush's nomination for a replacement is subject to confirmation by both houses of Congress.

Posted by: PSzymeczek | April 17, 2007 10:28 PM | Report abuse

Go Dennis. Do what you have got to do. For those who think you can't win. ...Just remind them how many times you've been elected in Ohio. Short ,no charisma? Sorry to the people who can only elect an actor(Reagan,) or a cheerleader(Bush.) Can we elect a person who can form an intelligent sentence? It is high time to say no more to war criminals in the White House. We blew it when we let Reagan get away with the Iran Contra thing. Then we blew it again when we let George HW Bush get away with the invasion of Panama. Then we let Clinton get away with Kosovo. Now are we going to let little George get away with two wars???The only whackos today are the ones who still say that George didn't lie us into war. People who were informed before the Iraq invasion knew that it was a lie. I shouted at the tv when Powell brought up the aluminum tubes. It had already been debunked . But truth simply didn't matter to these warmongers It didn't get the press it deserved because the so-called liberal media had become the lap dog of the war profiteering corporate plutocracy, and only spouted the goverments propaganda. Curious minds sought information from other sources. We Knew. Really it is time not for impeachment but for a war crimes tribunal. Indict, Convict and Hang them all. Slap the cuffs on them now.

Posted by: WARped | April 17, 2007 10:29 PM | Report abuse

I am so glad that someone has the nerve to
possibly impeach the worst and most evil
vice president n the history of this country. This man has proven to be a liar, a crook, and someone who will do anything to help the rich and powerful take over this country,the world and its assets. He never has done anything for the poor or middle classes and needs to be stopped. Then he can be remembered in history with his buddies HITLER, OSAMA BIN LADEN, STALIN ETC.. This administrations policies have killed as many people as anyone in recent history.

Posted by: Michael | April 17, 2007 10:30 PM | Report abuse

it's certainly long past time to impeach these lying, thieving, torturing, mass murdering gangsters.

Posted by: laurie | April 17, 2007 10:41 PM | Report abuse

This is a brilliant move. No, getting rid of Cheney won't bring in a new VP who will win in 2008. Not possible. Please. Condi? But it will take out a deranged maniac and thus ties the hands of the boy king. And it will unearth the dirt that needs to be unearthed: the crimes of the Cheney-Bush presidency. Yes, crimes. They have taken aim at our constitution and democracy long enough. And they threaten the globe. Impeachment against Cheney is warranted, necessary, and brilliant strategically.

Posted by: Lilybelle | April 17, 2007 10:46 PM | Report abuse

big tom: you listen to Rush "Druggie" Limpballs too much...don't bother us with his dribble and drool. Sandy sneaked out copies of copies...arrest and try him but stop with your conspiracy theory of Clinton being the BLAME FOR EVERYTHING. Kool-aid anyone?

Averett: c'mon, wasn't that rant rather childish? You believe in a vain and cruel fairy-man in the sky who listens to all your thoughts and you call liberals mental?? Issues!!!

Dennis isn't "doing this for his '08 run"...the man is REAL. Pity too many years of Turd Blossom has f*cked over the notion of doing something GOOD just because it is the MORAL thing to do.

Turning a Red state BLUE!!!

Posted by: MGBYG | April 17, 2007 10:55 PM | Report abuse

"it's certainly long past time to impeach these lying, thieving, torturing, mass murdering gangsters."

How do you propose to impeach Taliban, Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Abu Nidal Organization,Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, Ansar al-Islam, Asbat al-Ansar, Gama'a al-Islamiyya, al-Jihad, Mujahedin et.al.

Or, do you consider them on 'your' side?

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 17, 2007 11:03 PM | Report abuse

In response to Andy Banyas comments: BushCo would like to shoot people after "fair trials". Look what's happening in the with the CIA renditions of "terrorists", indefinite detentions without charges, and military tribunals. They torture and kill while hiding behind the good name of the United States. They can't even define who the "enemy" is, yet they've been equating anyone who dissents from them as the "enemy".

They are turning our government into the very same element we are supposedly circling the world fighting, while wasting nearly a TRILLION dollars in the process. Do you think it's OK for BushCo to act as an organized crime family just because they are American??

Wake up. BushCo gets away with what they are doing because people like you would rather PRETEND that this country is still wholesome and that these "leaders" are not criminals. They have destroyed our good name and only their removal will restore it. If they are not removed, we are all pretending that we have any moral authority left at all.

Thank you Congressman Kucinich for having courage to take a real stand!

Posted by: nyaker | April 17, 2007 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Bush and Cheney both are in the hot seat with their yapping about winning. My question is what the hell will we win?

Posted by: Bobby | April 17, 2007 11:06 PM | Report abuse

What a bunch of whiney, ignorant, radical left wing idiot Democrats!!! Get a grip or better yet, get out of the country!

Posted by: Averett | April 17, 2007 09:59 PM
`
Nobody here is whining. We are the majority, and Cheney is going down. You can leave the country if you like. We are going to defend the Constitution. You are a traitor.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 17, 2007 11:06 PM | Report abuse

"Bush and Cheney both are in the hot seat with their yapping about winning. My question is what the hell will we win?"

You just might want to consider what losing would get you...

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 17, 2007 11:09 PM | Report abuse

sick.of.it. all.

It appears from your comments that you are a poster of one of the comments I referred to. And yes, I have served my country more than you will ever know or be able to serve yourself.

Posted by: Andy Banyas | April 17, 2007 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Bring it on. It is time for civilized Americans to bury the rotten stench of modern day republicans.

Posted by: sinderdj | April 17, 2007 11:16 PM | Report abuse

big (little) tom: Sandy Berger was found to have pilfered COPIES of several pages relating to Clinton. Hardly an 8-year cover up as you purport.

How do you feel about the estimated 5 MILLION emails covering several years of the GWBush administration that have gone "missing"?

But that's A-OK by you, isn't it? Typical Limpbaugh double standard.

Posted by: nyacker | April 17, 2007 11:16 PM | Report abuse

banyas, you never served in the military, did you? What a phoney post.

Posted by: delta | April 17, 2007 11:22 PM | Report abuse

They should thank God that they live in the U.S.,otherwise they would have been shot after having been given a "fair trial"!!!

Posted by: Andy Banyas | April 17, 2007 09:36 PM
`
WTF This commenter is a right wing nut job who thinks we need him to protect us from even nuttier right wingers. The vast majority of Americans want Bush/Cheney out of office. Impeachment is the Constitutional way to do it.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 17, 2007 11:23 PM | Report abuse

Anyone else notice that the Bush/Cheney lovers can't put a coherent, grammatically correct sentence together? It's not their fault, SOMEONE has to have 50% of the IQs under 100...

Cheney and Bush deserve the death penalty for what they've done. So does anyone who supports them, and that includes the vast majority of the Democratic Do Nothing Congress.

Go Dennis!

Posted by: signalfire | April 17, 2007 11:24 PM | Report abuse

I think we can all take this one to the bank. There is no doubt that Kucinich is doing this. If anyone was watching CNN this past Sunday night Dennis was being interviewed in the 10Pm time slot live. He mentioned early on that (paraphrasing) "Cheney will have to answer to the Constitution in regards to his activities while in office."

Me thinks that Kucinich may have been a general in his past life as well. This is because he is logding articles against Cheney and not Bush. Everyone knows that Cheney is responsible for "directing" much of the illicit behaviors in the White House. Cheney is the "lowest lying fruit on the tree." I cannot think of virtually any citizens of the U.S. that I have met that don't like Cheney for what he has done or (of less consequence) his demeanor. Congress, once impeachment is initially logged will have to answer to their individual constituents. And if members don't impeach Cheney well then I think this is going to cause a lot of problems for Congressman.

Of course assuming impeachment of Cheney is successful then the next obvious target is Bush and by then we will have momentum on our side!! And quite possibly an earlier exit in this war as well.

Posted by: joshua schulman from Kingston,N.Y. | April 17, 2007 11:25 PM | Report abuse

Earlier tonight, I posted that Cheney should be charged under the Espionage statute. There has been no answer or refutation by any of you right-leaning commenters.

At least, none of you are continuing with the "no basis for impeachment" nonsense.

I'm asking. Tell me where I'm wrong. Or hush your noisome ignorant drivel.

Posted by: stratocruiser | April 17, 2007 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm, let me see if I have all the points straight -

Close Guantanamo - Invite those poor souls into our privileged homes as our guests - that way they will be happy.

Bill of Rights / Constitution absolutely - to the letter - Oh, there is no 'separation of church and state' there, there is no abortion right there, eminent domain does not entail shopping centers or apartment complexes, free speech does not mean you spew nonstop hatred/slander/potty language - Oh, and we admit that there is a Creator... If you insist... guess we can do that.

Guess I question something - do we want the congress or should it be a parliament, with votes of confidence on a routine basis...

I forgot the liberals think european in all things...

Sounds more like anarchy than our good ol' USA

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 17, 2007 11:28 PM | Report abuse

banyas, you never served in the military, did you? What a phoney post.

Posted by: delta | April 17, 2007 11:22 PM
`
It's unlikely, but if he did he forgot about the oath he took to uphold the Constitution. These kinds of sniveling cowards fantasize about protecting America from villains. When society rejects them, the nuttiest of them go on a rampage. They're deranged.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 17, 2007 11:29 PM | Report abuse

I'm 100% behind impeachment of Cheney.

Posted by: Big Dan | April 17, 2007 11:30 PM | Report abuse

Bust Bush
Chain Cheney

Lead us back to quasi sanity,
Dennis Kucinich

Posted by: Slogan Populus | April 17, 2007 11:33 PM | Report abuse

I forgot the liberals think european in all things...

Sounds more like anarchy than our good ol' USA

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 17, 2007 11:28 PM
`
This lady obviously prefers South America to Europe.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 17, 2007 11:33 PM | Report abuse

You are right, Sonofabastard.

These chicken-hawk wannabes like Rush Limpballs, O'Really, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Kristal, and the whole rest of that sorry lot are big on tough talk when someone else's life is on the line.

Posted by: delta | April 17, 2007 11:35 PM | Report abuse

My goodness, what koolaid drinkers we have here. Do you have your tinfoil on?

It may even work, if specific legal charges can be found.

Gee, you think? And no, BECAUSE HE'S A MEANY doesn't count.

Posted by: mishu | April 17, 2007 11:38 PM | Report abuse

you liberal's make me laugh, and yet sad at the same time. you hate this country, yet won't admit it. You do not care about anything but what you hear from the liberal media. Of course you think these things because that is all your intelligence will allow you to hear, coming from the media. You have no ideas, or thought, just hate for this country. In a way i hope a Liberal wins the White House, because god knows we will be hit again on our land becuase of your hate of protecting our country, and hate of the military. So get ready for your long term defeat in history. You all have no basis for anything, just what Chris Matthews and the like have to report on the news. I pray for you all every night, and my family, for what MAY await us all if you guys win the white house.

Posted by: Woody123 | April 17, 2007 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Perchance you can wrap your feeble brains around this -

Of course you weren't born then, but I stood toe to toe with Russian missles in '62 beginning of 'Nam -

Son was activated by Oh - gosh Clinton... to spend a year in Saudi Arabia training their troops, and is now heading to Iraq.

It also appears you are gender challenged - at 6'3" 290# FATHER of 4 - shame you can't tell the difference.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 17, 2007 11:43 PM | Report abuse

BUSH, CHENEY AND PELOSI SHOULD ALL GO. THEY ARE IN IT TOGETHER. THE CLINTONS AND BUSHES ARE FRIENDS AND VACATION TOGETHER. WAKE UP THERE ARE BAD PEOPLE IN BOTH PARTIES TRYING FOR A NEW WORLD ORDER. THESE RICH ELITISTS DON'T CARE ABOUT US. WAKE UP!

Posted by: JTRIMRTRIM | April 17, 2007 11:47 PM | Report abuse

So Woody123, you'd like to see America attacked again if the Dems take over, eh? Just so they'll look bad.
You're a great American, woodhead.

Posted by: brisbane | April 17, 2007 11:48 PM | Report abuse

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!! I love it. The best political campaign for the republicans in 2008 is kokoo Kucinich with his impeachment rants, Nancy "drew" Pelosi (love the head wrap girl) and "Happy, cut the funds to our troops" Harry Reid. You couldn't create a better group of morons. Stand back folks and let the libs implode. I can't wait until the huge tax increase and socialized medicine comes to the front of the line. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! Go ahead impeach Cheney WHO CARES!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Posted by: ONESHOT2007 | April 17, 2007 11:48 PM | Report abuse

This is just another play to the wacky-weed nutroots on the left who only have one idea - to destroy Bush.

What a tool.

Posted by: jdawg | April 17, 2007 11:50 PM | Report abuse

Woody, your problem is you are mistaking Bush and Cheney for America.

Liberals love their country--we hate to see it abused.

Blind rightwingers like yourself, on the other hand, would rather pretend your guy is honest for fear of looking bad yourself. Bet you were all for the Clinton impeachment and the $70 million wasted on examining his zipper.

BTW, what "Liberal" media are you referring to? Fox?--Murdouch. NBC?--That's owned by GE. ABC--Nope for that either, it's Disney. MSNBC?--Nope on that either, GE/MicroSoft.

Get informed before spewing nonesense.

Posted by: nyacker | April 17, 2007 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Rght, Dennis. Good luck with that one.

What will the Bush-is-Hitler-Cheney-is-Evil crowd do when this administration leaves office?** Stripped of their targets, no telling how those who are safety-wired to the Hate Bush poition will be able to face the day.

** (In January, 2009)

Posted by: tw111 | April 17, 2007 11:52 PM | Report abuse

Of course i dont want us to be attacked again moron, cant you get the point? Your party does. They do not care about our nation, or security, only the power they seek. The Lib's will do anything to get power. ANYTHING! spin what i wrote, being it not what i meant, that's what your party is good for. Be AMERICAN, love your country, and realize what time on earth we live in. Crazy's want to kill us, yet you don't understand that, it's pretty simple. Defend our country. What does the Liberal agenda plan for this country besides bashing Bush and Cheney? Anything? what plans for America? Socialism? Great party you have there pal.

Posted by: Woody123 | April 17, 2007 11:55 PM | Report abuse

And maybe at the same time we can impeach those dems that think that they are now the Secretary of State, the Executive Branch, and probably the Judicial one as well. Impeach them all.

Posted by: DutchScott | April 17, 2007 11:58 PM | Report abuse

if you voted for bush, are an idiot, and you owe everyone an appology. wtf were you thinking? we told you so.

Posted by: annon | April 18, 2007 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Democrats/Liberals are narcissistic - If it feels good, looks good, tastes good - whine till you get it.

Hate to tell them that now that they are grown up, nobody needs to give it to them.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 12:02 AM | Report abuse

Nyacker, i wanst for Clintons impeachment, being it embarrasses out country. Tell me how Libs love this country? and dont say getting troops out of iraq. and i love how you libs hate Fox, now that there is competition to your lies being out there. Have you noticed viewers watch more of Fox because they dont have ALL liberal views. Thats how you are blind my friend. stand behind your media, will serve you well in the outcome point is you Libs would rather make this country go to shame than support it. you dont have the votes, so make fools of yourself, live out of the beltway and the scarce libs floating elsewhere. .

Posted by: Woody123 | April 18, 2007 12:04 AM | Report abuse

"If you voted for bush, are an idiot, and you owe everyone an appology. wtf were you thinking? we told you so."

Sorry for your blindness...

If you could see, ONE LOOK at horseface and his moneybags pal would have turned you off too.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 12:05 AM | Report abuse

DON'T YOU SEE THE "NEW WORLD ORDER" AND "NORTH AMERICAN UNION" CREEPS WANT US FIGHTING. STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS AND GOOD REPUBLICANS AND START BEING GREAT AMERICANS. WATCH "AMERICA FREEDOM TO FASCISM" FREE ON GOOGLE VIDEO. YOU WON'T BELIEVE WHAT YOU SEE. IF YOU CARE ABOUT THIS COUNTRY AND OUR FUTURE PLEASE WATCH IT.

Posted by: JTRIMRTRIM | April 18, 2007 12:07 AM | Report abuse

Hey, did someone forget to tel Al and Jessie that Imus was all the Dems had left on radio with Franken gone bust.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 12:08 AM | Report abuse

Delta & sonofabastard:

Having reviewed further comments since mine of 9:36 P.M., together with your recent comments, it is obvious that there is no sense trying to have a rational,logical,intelligent discussion with certain members of our society and one can only wonder why this country is still able to function as well as it has. The only rational conclusion is that there are more intelligent than unintelligent people in this country and so long as the intelligent keep their focus, this country will continue to prosper.

Posted by: Andy Banyas | April 18, 2007 12:09 AM | Report abuse

I am a lawyer and a dual citizen of Canada and the United States. As such, I am familiar with the constitutions of both countries and the way they are customarily interpreted.

In this case, I think the orthodox view of the impeachment power in the U.S. constitution as a special emergency power that should be used only in the case of exceptionally serious misbehaviour is wrong.

The function of the impeachment power is obviously to give the legislative branch supremacy, by permitting them to fire any member of either the executive or judicial branches who are not doing their jobs in a satisfactory manner (any conduct unacceptable to the legislative branch could be considered "misdemeanors"). Congress should be no more or less hesitant to fire the president than the board of directors of a major corporation should be about replacing their chief executive.

Posted by: Wade | April 18, 2007 12:09 AM | Report abuse

YES!!!!!

WE LOVE YOU, MR KUCINICH!

SHOW UP THE LIES!
SHOW UP THE LIES!
SHOW UP THE LIES!

We demand a world of justice, honesty, sharing, peace, and cooperation....not corrupt leaders who invade countries and get super rich, while continuing to pollute our skies with fossil fuels emissions.

IMPEACH!

Posted by: Chuck L. | April 18, 2007 12:14 AM | Report abuse

OK, time to separate the sheep from the goats....

Are you a Democrat, Republican or a Redneck ?

Here is a little test that will help you decide. The answer can be found by posing the following situation and question:

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children.

Suddenly, an Islamic Terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you.

You are carrying a Glock 40 cal, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.

What do you do?

Democrat's Answer:

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor or oppressed?

Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?

Could we run away?

What does my wife think?

What about the kids?

Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?

What does the law say about this situation?

Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it?

Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?

Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?

Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?

If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me?

Should I call 9-1-1?

Why is this street so deserted?

We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.

This is all so confusing!

I need to discuss this with some friends over a latte and try to come to a consensus.

Republican's Answer:

BANG!

Redneck's Answer:

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click.....

(sounds of reloading).

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!BANG! click ...

Daughter: "Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?"

Son: "You got him Pop! Can I shoot the next one?"

Wife: "You are not taking that to the Taxidermist!"

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 12:14 AM | Report abuse

No woody123, you said you hoped the Dems would get power in '08, and then when America was attacked, it would serve them right. You love America so much you'd like to see it destroyed to score some cheap political points.
Nice thinking, jughead.

Posted by: brisbane | April 18, 2007 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Wow, you missed that one...

Brisbane - The armed Conservatives aren't nearly as afraid of them as the liberal chickens are.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 12:22 AM | Report abuse

* what a wild read! some of the better back and forth i've seen in a long while.
* for those posters defending bushco, you really, really need to get a grip on reality. by his own words, in public and on the record, bush has admitted breaking the law, several laws in fact. for example, fisa, presidential records, treaties (which according to the constitution ARE the law of the land) and close to 1000 signing statements which legislate laws already passed and signed. the president has NO authority to violate laws he doesn't like and NO authority to legislate, i.e. change the laws. his authority is to veto laws he doesn't like or to carry them out or to cause them to be a court case for resolution by the u.s. court system.
* as for cheney, it is a matter of fact, determined in a trial by a jury, that he outed valeria plame, thereby destroying the anti-wmd work she was doing. it is a FACT that he was court-ordered to reveal what his 'energy task force' did and who was part of it, which judicial order he ignored. the constitution created 3 EQUAL branches of government to watch over each other so that none could assume dictatrorial powers. Ms de la vega's case for fraud against the united states is most convincing and i would like to see it presented in court.
* as for the illegal war and the ensuing destruction, bushco is only 100% in the wrong. WE established the principle of aggressive ware at the nuremburg war crimes trials. a country is not allowed to attach another without justification and lies are NOT justification. in fact lies PROVE the underlying illegality of the war and therefore, charges of war crimes and mass murder are appropriate. the deaths in a war are only the by-producsts of war when the war itself is legal. that is not the case in iraq.
* i could go on and on, but others here have stated the case for impeachment much better and in more detail than i have. \\ free born

"those who would trade liberty for a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security." - b. franklin, 1759


Posted by: free born | April 18, 2007 12:25 AM | Report abuse

So banyas, you are saying that anyone that insists on ~accountablity~ in their leaders hates their country????

That is what this is about--accountability.

Pealple are DYING because we were LIED to.

Trillions are being spent--STOLEN in this insane "crusade" to rid the world of evil. It's insane. It's a trillion dollar boondoggle for Bush/Cheney associates--oil and defense contractors, mainly. Are you blind??

These military personnel are being exploited and scrificed so that American oil companies can confiscate Mideast oil. It makes a great partisan slush fund too. That's why smirker doen't want any oversight in his latest "emergency" war funding bill.

Instead of wasting a TRILLION dollars with NOTHING to show for it, we could have developed proper alternative fuel alternbatives and not ever have to worry about the Mideast again.

Never in the history of the world has there been fraud.

Not to impeach means it's just fine for them to bankrupt this country (that you supposedly love)on LIES.

Posted by: delta | April 18, 2007 12:30 AM | Report abuse

freeborn--GREAT post!

Posted by: nyacker | April 18, 2007 12:35 AM | Report abuse

I Am with Dennis 100% for impeaching Cheney!

Dennis works with and for You, Your Family and Your Friends!
All of the other Candidates work with and for the Corporations!

Posted by: Robert Fooulkrod | April 18, 2007 12:42 AM | Report abuse

This is the problem with the US political system. The Republicans are out of touch, directionless, flailing wildly, and are as corrupt by now as any other administration that's been in too long. But Kucinich represents what is, in many ways, the soul of the Democrats, and it's even more twisted and pathetic than the Republicans are. The Democrats howled when the Republicans tried to impeach Clinton, and rightfully so - it was a ludicrous overstep of their responsibilities, done soley for political gain. But at least they had the decency to wait until Clinton committed a crime before they did it(even if they hounded him into said crime, he still did it). Cheney hasn't committed a crime, and thus any impeachment against him is purely political, and has even less substance than the Clinton impeachment did. I hate 90% of what the Republicans are doing in office, but as long as Democrats keep acting like this, I'm forced to support them. The partisan structure is sick and dying, and people like Kucinich just make it worse.

And people look at me funny when I say my dream slate is Giuliani/Lieberman...

Posted by: Alsadius | April 18, 2007 12:53 AM | Report abuse

I can't believe the comments of these so called progressives just littering the place!!!

IF ANY PSYCOPATH, ***or*** politician of any sort deserves impeachment and incarceration, its Richard E. Cheney!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The case against Bush is an anomoly.

The case against Cheney and his neo-pederast spies, is a sealed shut case.

"This last question is not merely academic: vice President Cheney was apparently in charge of ALL 5 of the war games which occurred on 9/11 and coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks. See this CNN article; and this essay.

And Cheney is the one who monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon and -- when a military man asked "do the orders still stand?" -- Cheney responded affirmatively:

"The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?""

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/02/all-roads-lead-to-dick-cheney.html

The nine eleven attacks alone are enough to impeach and convict Cheney for high crimes, add that with outing a CIA operation and his verified treason as well as blackmail...

There is not a case that's more sealed.

As George Tenet would say its a 'slam dunk'

And everyone who isn't a neo-pederast, especially real republicans and democrats will say so.

Cheney betrayed the United States to a foreign government. This is openly about documented treason and conspiracy.

http://web.archive.org/web/20011109083529/www.copvcia.com/stories/previous/bush-cheney-drugs.html

Politics should not even be brought in or involved.

The time to convict is nigh.

Posted by: Restore the Government | April 18, 2007 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Bravo, LET EVERYONE WHO UNDERSTANDS WHY CHENEY AND BUSH NEED IMPEACHING, SIGN / PLEDGE AT:


www.PLEDGETOIMPEACH.ORG !


WeThePeople need to get behind Kucinich! Also, you can call Capitol Hill 24/7 (phone number below) to air your demand for impeachment!!

----------

Kucinich has again come out for the truth. Let's see what he does, what with a Congress and Dems who are "reluctant" to do the right and principled thing. Yes, I agree with some previous comments -- I sense that AIPAC has something to do with impeachment "being off the table":

However, Congressman John Conyers, head of the Judiciary Committee, has stated that "impeachment must come from the People". WHY it can't just come from Congress is beyond me (except for the AIPAC theory); but if he means well, then everyone CALL Rep. John Conyers -- plus

CALL your Reps and Senators -- either during business hours and give your comment...or, most Congresspersons have VoiceMail outside business hours....

CALL YOUR REPS & SENATORS AT:

1 866 - 220 - 0044 -- ask for the Rep or Senator's office you want.

-----------

I work with a grassroots organization, www.PledgeToImpeach.org -- and we have successfully had meetings with three Representatives -- either with them personaly or their Chief of Staff (and Kucinich's office was interested, but his schedule did not permit):

Rep. Danny Davis admits that if his district's constituents in Illinois show forth and back impeachment, he would be obligated to support a bill for impeaching.

Rep. Diane Watson (D-Ca)'s office's Chief of Staff said as much -- that if her district in the Los Angeles area showed forth at least 6500 or so signatures / pledges for impeachment, then the Congresswoman would feel obligated to re-look at impeaching...

Rep. Conyers, as stated above, said that it [impeachment] must come from the People -- again I don't know why it must come from the People and not directly from Congress -- when polls and comments and the MANY impeachment movements show forth for impeaching

(see www.Impeach07.org) --

why can't Congress just proceed....make sure, e.g., that Kucinich is 100% successful!

However, we at www.PledgeToImpeach.org are doing everything we can to consolidate signatures and our pledges -- and we will be going to D.C. to demand impeachment.

PLEASE SIGN AT www.PledgeToImpeach.org -- and volunteer to volunteer!!

Besides, it's fun, meeting new people and sharing this Justice vision with others -- this activism for impeachment gets a LOT of support!!

-------------

And impeachment movements Online, again here, www.Impeach07.org .

Also look at what above earlier comments are offering at wwww.ImpeachForPeace.org !

----------

We WILL have a lot to celebrate upon impeachment/JUSTICE being realized. DO something about it--not even entertaining the thought that it can't happen. The People must Rise Up peacefully -- in a kind of Renaissance-Rising mode!

Joy -- to realize Justice!

--------

The REASONS for impeachment can be found at many of the above-mentioned movements' websites and at ours


(www.PledgeToImpeach.org).


Also google "impeachment of bush - cheney", and you can find a lot... esp. the book by former Congresswoman and now Prosecutor, Elizabeth Holtzman (also in on the Nixon impeachment):

www.impeachbushbook.com


And the book by David Lindorff and Atty. Barbara Olshansky:

THE CASE FOR IMPEACHMENT --
info about that can be found at:
www.thiscantbehappening.net


And lastly a reminder: don't forget to pledge at WWW.PLEDGETOIMPEACH.ORG !


==============
===========


blessings to those victims and the survivors of VATech.
blessings to this country -- which will be freed via impeachment!

Thank you, Hon. Congressman Kucinich!


julie
www.PLEDGEtoIMPEACH.org

Posted by: juliaYoga | April 18, 2007 12:59 AM | Report abuse

juliaYoga - did you miss it -

"The nine eleven attacks alone are enough to impeach and convict Cheney for high crimes, add that with outing a CIA operation and his verified treason as well as blackmail..."

Blind logic is fascinating -

Didn't you get the memo that Al Gore planned and orchestrated 9/11 - He was pi$$ed off at Bush winning. Problem is, he is like the Preacher who called out sick on a beautiful Sunday to play golf - Of course he hit a hole-in-one and it kills him that he can't tell anyone! Al's in the same wicket - Masterminded it but can't tell anyone. He thought he had a foolproof plan - but since it didn't pan out politically the way he wanted, he took up the 'Global Warming' scam. You gotta buy into it - he already has the investment firm set up (he is Chairman of course) to take your reparations - I mean carbon offsets.

Are you sure you are reading the right talking sheet?

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 1:11 AM | Report abuse

hbm writes: We will "move forward" when and how we damn well please, thank you.

You will never move forward and you regress selectively. You have nothing to say about Sandy Burger. My words are intended for fair minded independent thinkers. B LC

Posted by: BIRD | April 18, 2007 1:17 AM | Report abuse

Brisbane - The armed Conservatives aren't nearly as afraid of them as the liberal chickens are.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 12:22 AM
`
This woman is scared out of her wits. Right wingers are such wussies. They're scared of their of their own shadows.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 1:28 AM | Report abuse

You have nothing to say about Sandy Burger.
Posted by: BIRD | April 18, 2007 01:17 AM
`
There are copies of everything Burger took. I actually would like to know what was in those documents. I don't care if they make Clinton look bad. I suspect, when the truth is revealed they make Bush look just as bad.
Impeach, convict, and jail Bush/Cheney, and what the hell throw Clinton in there as well, if that's what it takes to get justice for the American majority.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 1:34 AM | Report abuse

Bravo KUCINICH!


www.PLEDGEtoIMPEACH.org

Call Congress Members 24/7 at:

1 - 866 - 220 - 0044


---------


GO..................impeachment!


Posted by: JuliaYoga | April 18, 2007 1:35 AM | Report abuse

Please view the film "Loose Change 2nd Edition"' The film gives a good report of what REALLY HAPPENED on 9/11.

The web link to the film Loose Change 2nd Edition is:
http://www.loosechange911.com
On that page the actual link to the film is the 16th line in the body of the "Welcome" text.

Posted by: Robert Foulkrod | April 18, 2007 1:38 AM | Report abuse

Are you sure you are reading the right talking sheet?

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 01:11 AM
`
Dela, all we need to know is if you intend to obey the law in 2008, or are you going to attempt an armed insurrection against a Democratic president? Are you for or against the Constitution? You seem unhinged, we need to take your guns away.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 1:40 AM | Report abuse

How about that Patriot Act? Unconstitutional much?

Posted by: Square Ninja | April 18, 2007 1:43 AM | Report abuse

Yes Sonofabastard, and think...

If you or I intentionally took and destroyed classified documents, we would be in prison from moment one. This is my idea of "high crimes" - perhaps treason.

Posted by: BIRD | April 18, 2007 1:46 AM | Report abuse

Impeach the Dick! Go Dennis the Menace!!!

Posted by: Rex Hellion | April 18, 2007 1:46 AM | Report abuse

Sonofa- just follow me - Plenty of food and shelter here on the farm.

Qualified Expert on 4 weapons, resourceful as McGuiver -

Just best to do the main whoopin over there before they are here.

And believe me, they WILL come here.
Shoot, bunch are hear already - Minneapolis/St.Paul - your tax $ are going to build foot baths in the public college for them before prayer. Cab drivers not take you if you have a bottle or a dog. Demanding prayer room at airport.

Since they only got one of the three, they are pi$$ed. Yep they are coming here... Shira law too.

Guess you saw where they now are accepting Shira Law in England - applying it to Harem issues - they are illegal in UK but they are wussing out and have now said Shira law will be used... Hmmmm Wife beating..... One night marriages... Stoning rape victims - or giving them the option to become martyrs with bomb vests.

If you listen to some on here, that isn't important - danger is they may not get to slap around the Pres/VP - then they wonder why they get such sleezeballs running on their team. Kucinich bankrupted Cleveland - and next guy says - oh, but that was a good thing. they (we) needed to be bankrupted - we were keeping too much of our hard earned money when we should have been giving it to Dennis... Same scam Gore is trying to set up.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 1:47 AM | Report abuse

"Liberals love their country"

Only problem is thier country is Cuba, or Venezuela, or anyplace run by communist/islamist dictators. That's why Nancy (Damascus Diva) Pelosi will suck up to Assad and Achmeddinnerjacket, but flip the bird to Pres. Bush.

They sure hate America.

Liberals = the enemy within.

Posted by: jdawg | April 18, 2007 1:54 AM | Report abuse

Without any good facts or logic, the neo-nazi wingnuts spout off garbage about Al Gore or about how Israel should always be supported in its mass murder.

But yet, we can see by all clear indications this is because they have no argument.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hoax.html

Nine Eleven was an inside job.


http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/motherofallscandals.html


http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/palestinians.html

And Dick Cheney, not Al Gore, was at the center of it every time.

Posted by: DelaWhere is an example of fascism | April 18, 2007 1:54 AM | Report abuse

Sonofa- I will follow the Constitution - as it was intended - does that mean that I will accept perverted convoluted revisionist versions - NOPE.

Second Amendment sort of gives you the scenario of what it sometimes takes to keep the government honest.

When the Constitution says that anything not specifically called for the Federal government to have power on, belongs to the State or the People!

If you are asking if I will buy Federal control of a pothole in my driveway that fills with water when it rains, and a migratory duck chooses to land there, therefore it is a federally controlled migratory wildfoul habitat which cannot be altered. (In other words you are prohibited from filling in the pothole) NOPE not gonna go along with twisted perversion of it.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 1:57 AM | Report abuse

As a Republican i think this is a great idea! I have been waiting for the Democrooks to implode and open the door for Republicans to return to power..where we belong since we are far superior to the Democrooks in every area. I urge Dennis the Cook to move forward with this and to make as much noice as possible about it. Impeachment, failure to support the troops, and overall lack of ideas should get us back to a Republican majority in 2008. Good luck Dennis.

Oh and whoever the idiot was that said 51% of America supports impeachment is crazy. Idiot.

Posted by: Michael P | April 18, 2007 2:01 AM | Report abuse

Without any facts, knowledge, logic, or sense, the wacky-weed, tin-foil-hat brigades of the looney left blame everything on Bush, Cheney, or global warming. They prove thier utter hatred for America with every word they utter or write. They have proven themselves many, many times, to be the real enemies of freedom and democracy.

Liberals = the enemy within.

Posted by: jdawg | April 18, 2007 2:03 AM | Report abuse

DelaWhere is an example of fascism -

Yep anonymous cowards at it again. Afraid of their own shadow...

Hey - I talked to a nationally famous metalurgist - And Rosie said that... well, I won't repeat the garbage she said... but I concluded that it had to be Gore's hot air in combination with the increased CO2 and the September cold caused by global warming that brought the towers down. Gore Planned it and did it... Would you like me to set up a few links that back that up... I can... any jacka$$ can - Oh, and that is another reason Al did it - he invented the internet - see he is soooooooo smart and you have told us all that GWB was sooooooo dumb - there is NO WAY he could have done it.... You proved my point!

First thing in solving a crime is finding the motive..... Al sure had the motive.... so must be him.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 2:07 AM | Report abuse

Cheney is just one of a faction within and without our own government that carried out portions of the attacks of 9/11. Impeachment is just the beginning.

Posted by: JPD | April 18, 2007 2:09 AM | Report abuse

But can the neo-confederates dare dispute the FACTS?

http://www.911blogger.com/node/3128

These aren't some lame news article from some foreign land.

These are forensic photographs, analysis, HARD EVIDENCE of nine eleven being an inside job.

This is something every citizen should be concerned about, regardless of where they live. Nine eleven was an inside job and it was definitely a Cheney sponsored job....

Can anyone imagine terrorists taking over the government?

http://www.911blogger.com/node/3128

Posted by: They can do nothing but smear Al Gore | April 18, 2007 2:15 AM | Report abuse

I told you Cheney and Bush are no where near smart enough to pull that off and not have hundreds of leakers running around giving the NYT (all the news that's not even worth wrapping fish in) info.

I told you - if you investigate, you will see that only Gore's global warming could do it - because the metalurgist Rosie O' said that it was against nature for fire to melt steele - she guaranteed it. Gore is the only one smart enough to pull it off and he had the motive!

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 2:16 AM | Report abuse

I think Dennis must have found Cheney's smoking gun. Don't worry about the sock puppet (Bush) when you can disable the puppet master and his nefarious assistant Herr Rove.

The point of this seeming exercise in futility is to expose the whole fetid cabal slithering behind the Neo-Conservative curtain.

I don't have a lot of confidence in the dilettante Democrats who only pose as friends of justice and democracy who will probably roadblock his efforts.

I admire Congressman Kucinich for his fortitude and long career of public service distinguished by his courageous endurance of a ceaseless barrage of defamation from a melange of mean spirited detractors.

I hope this propels him to become our next President in 2008.

Posted by: Jay Hubbell | April 18, 2007 2:25 AM | Report abuse

Who gave the order to stand down NORAD's defenses on September eleventh?

"Although top officials at NORAD are certainly involved, Wolfowitz and Feith were number 2 and 3 at the Pentagon. Wolfowitz was Deputy Director, Feith was in charge of policy and "special plans." (The translated name of the Mossad is the Foundation for Intelligence and *Special Tasks*) They had to be aware of or responsible for the stand-down policy. In America, the military takes orders from the DoD.

Look at the new document from the MacDill AFB whistleblower showing how NORAD was taken out from under the command of the military on 9/11 and given to Cheney, long an Israeli partisan:

http://www.v911t.org/SergeantLauroChavez.php

I do not have any problem implicating American elites, but as the Israeli newspaper Haaretz said:

"The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history."

Regarding the surveillance of the patsies, the CIA/FBI and/or Able Danger teams were also under surveillance. Some of them complained of being constantly monitored by Israeli intelligence.

Atta and others were trained at US training facilities, it is clear that US covert operators were involved in that part of the operation as well.

I am half Russian Jewish by blood, although not a "believer," the other half Anglo Christian again not a "believer." I consider it particularly important to be vigilant about the criminal deeds of my people, especially because we are so sheltered in the mainstream media. If we all keep our own houses clean, there will be peace.

I'll start by discussing the Israeli and Zionist aspect, work around to describe what I believe to be the relationship between Zionism/Judaism and the Anglo-European establishment and then posit a transhuman agency without absolving its representatives. As my friend Greg Zeigler - one of the intel agents on the http://patriotsquestion911.com website - likes to say: "No one owns a scam."

I believe that when we start unraveling 9/11 we will find that 9/11 was conceived, designed and implemented largely by Israel partisans in and out of the US, just as the War in Iraq was. I say Israel partisans rather than Israeli because this includes the Christian Zionists and the Masonic British Israelists. Ostrovsky points out in his books that Iraq was an Israeli target for regime change since the eighties. Mossad's "warning" to CIA implicating Iraq strikes me as deeply suspicious."
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com

Posted by: INSIDEJOB | April 18, 2007 2:25 AM | Report abuse

I see Republicans (terrorists) running around like chicken with their heads cut off, saying, "Cheny and Bush could not have pulled it off, man." All the while swallowing as gospel the hilarious conspiracy theory that it was masterminded by some third-world, third-rate boogyman in a cavey cave cave.

LMFAO!

The enemy IS within.

Ironically, it's the terrorists who keep telling everyone that "the terrorists will show up, here, on our own soil...mark my words, you should live in FEAR!".

They know it to be a fact because they ARE the terrorists (Bush Worshiping Republican PseudoChriistian Fascists).

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 2:30 AM | Report abuse

Oh and whoever the idiot was that said 51% of America supports impeachment is crazy. Idiot.

Posted by: Michael P | April 18, 2007 02:01 AM
`


Newsweek: 51% of Americans want Bush impeached.
Remember all the pundits laughing at the notion of impeaching president Bush? Remember all the pollsters refusing to even ask that question in their polls? Well, a majority now approve of Democratic plans to impeach president George W. Bush. 28% think it should be a high priority, 23% think it should be a lower priority, while 44% disapprove.


Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 2:32 AM | Report abuse

The shootings 'happened' to distract us from Gonzales, Cheney, and impeachment. Do any of you doubt that mind-control is possible? It is another Hinkley/Catcher in the Rye in hand/Oswald set-up. MIND CONTROL- Make someone crazy enough to shoot lots of people, so we forget to think about the corruption at hand. AND to convince us that we should ban automatic weapons, which in turn will take away our ability to defend ourselves from a corrupt government.

Think about it.

Posted by: truthseeker | April 18, 2007 2:36 AM | Report abuse

NOPE not gonna go along with twisted perversion of it.

Posted by: DelaWhere | April 18, 2007 01:57 AM
`
Oh and whoever the idiot was that said 51% of America supports impeachment is crazy. Idiot.

Posted by: Michael P | April 18, 2007 02:01 AM
`
Liberals = the enemy within.

Posted by: jdawg | April 18, 2007 02:03 AM
`
DUMB, DUMBERER, DUMBEREST

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 2:40 AM | Report abuse

In a world with neither Cheney or Rove at his side, is a world in which George Bush could no longer operate.

Posted by: Dog Town | April 18, 2007 2:47 AM | Report abuse

Dennis is the best.

Dennis saved the people hundreds of millions of dollars through standing up to the bad guys and became a local hero for his work as mayor.

Now Dennis is saving the people of the United States from the neo-cons who have destroyed the integrity of our government.

In Congress Kucinich has always stood up for the people and backed their interests over those of big business. While other candidates, such as Obama and Edwards, take contributions from big corporations to support war and nuclear bills and then lie about their records, Kucinich can tell the truth because he doesn't take corporate donations and he has a perfect voting record.

I always knew that the one leader we could trust issue was Dennis. I'll be voting my first vote ever for Dennis for President. If others here have the integrity to vote for the best, they'll be voting for Dennis, too.

Posted by: Alex | April 18, 2007 2:49 AM | Report abuse

Oh how the impotent loonie lefties rage!!! There is not a chance in hell that this or any other impeachment attempt will suceed. In case none of you Bush-hating bozos noticed, a REAL law has to be broken for there to be grounds for impeachment. Made up BS about 911 conspiracies or impeachment on the grounds that "I don't like him and he deserves it" just won't do. What a bunch of clowns! I'm afraid you idiots are just going to have to deal with your hatred for a few more years. I suggest an anger management class or you could just leave the country as many of you promised when Bush was RE-ELECTED.

Posted by: Moe Hammered | April 18, 2007 2:50 AM | Report abuse

Mr./Mrs. Mathers,
You are a coward and a person of certainly little character. Your views contain the lucidity of the typical liberal, whose delusions of moral superiority are so gamely presented to all when you decide to abandon them in such pathetic statements as yours. Actual families have been devastated, but for you it's just an opportunity to boldly make political points. Bravo, bravo.

To the editors: Are these not the types of posts which are to be removed?

Posted by: Kirk Tutterrow | April 18, 2007 2:57 AM | Report abuse

The 51% number is a joke. I like how you nuts ignore the one number that matters in the Newsweek story where this myth originated.
"Other parts of a potential Democratic agenda receive less support, especially calls to impeach Bush: 47 percent of Democrats say that should be a "top priority," but only 28 percent of all Americans say it should be, 23 percent say it should be a lower priority and nearly half, 44 percent, say it should not be done."
Don't worry Democrooks..even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then...keep looking blind squirrels, you'll find something one day.

Posted by: Michel P | April 18, 2007 3:17 AM | Report abuse

The liberals started this country by liberating themselves from King George.
I guess its time for the liberals to take up arms again to liberate this country from another king George.
Liberate = Freedom
Republic = Control

Posted by: TreeTrunk | April 18, 2007 3:19 AM | Report abuse

Heroes happen.

Posted by: i-ono | April 18, 2007 3:33 AM | Report abuse

HOO-HOO-HOOOO!!

Keep it Lefties. You clowns will never win.
lmao!!

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 3:41 AM | Report abuse

Dennis Kucinich is a nut case.

However, he is also the most rational guy running for the Presidency. Biden, Obama, Hillary and all the others will simply try their version of winning - remember Vietnam or how about Cuba after the Spanish American War. Three administrations in Vietnam and 25 years in Cuba.

As Paul Simon wrote - there are 50 ways to leave your lover. It is time to get the troops on the bus, Gus and bring them home.

Impeaching Cheney is the critical juncture of the Bush Administration. The Dems have been taking out the key players one at a time. Go after Cheney and the number of deceptions and amount of corruption will wash over Bush and many others. Cheney is no Ollie North. He cannot go marching up the isle in his full dress uniform. Impeching Cheney will bring all the dirt out, because all the dirt starts with Cheney.

Go Kucinich!

Eric

Posted by: Eric Von Baranov | April 18, 2007 3:44 AM | Report abuse

It is too bad the shooter at VT spent all of his mojo on students and faculty.

Posted by: mmather | April 17, 2007 11:20 AM

Forwarded to the U.S. Treasury, Office of the Secret Service for Follow-up

Do not tamper with the server logs or IP of the sender. It may be considered destruction of evidence and Obstruction of Justice.

Posted by: intheUS/Since1642 | April 18, 2007 3:45 AM | Report abuse

kirk - your only retort is a bunch of personal and irrelevant criticism. So, in attempt to reach your mental plane - know that you are a stupid idiot who should never contaminate others with your primitive ramblings.

Posted by: smsara | April 18, 2007 3:49 AM | Report abuse

Thank you Denis Kucinich!!!

Posted by: Steve Chase 2008 | April 18, 2007 3:59 AM | Report abuse

seems you republicans are such cowards - luring poor young kids to take up guns under the guise of honor - only to benefit your wallet. your minds are mush - with no ability to think critically. You seem led by a bizarre ideal where money and righteousness guide and rationalize all of your behavior. You are walking sick contradications. you bring the rest of humanity way down.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 4:05 AM | Report abuse

The obvious advantage is that impeaching Cheney is like impeaching the President. Once Cheney is out, the rest is easy. We deliver Bush to an orphanage.

Posted by: armidalm | April 18, 2007 4:10 AM | Report abuse

The punchline is that there are still several conservatives who post on a note like this. Christians who think the current administration represents their interests. Failing middle-classers who have been led to believe that they have benefited from death-tax and rebate legislation. Bullies who think the war is "cool" and that we might some day "win." This is the same group who will condemn the liberals for the taxes imposed eventually to pay for the trillion dollar war. They recognize no social contract, and have not since RR lost his jellybeans. Even during a period where the GOP controlled the courts, the congress, and the presidency-- the number of court cases 80-20 against Dems... the GOP has not been able to stop the hemmoraging and convicting of Duke Cunningham, Jackoff Abrahm, Scooter (ride me in prison) Libby, etc.
Most true conservatives (Goldwater conservatives) wish this embarrassment of an administration were gone. We will be getting our wish soon.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 4:29 AM | Report abuse

Good Grief... We hold Cheney and Bush in Contempt! They`ve held our country together and We`re going to say they`re inept? Try getting one of those slimy Dems to pull that off.

Posted by: Kevin A. | April 18, 2007 4:53 AM | Report abuse

Smansra,
I feel you response is inaccurate and fearful. You think someone who is opposed to using the suffering and tragedy of others to make a coarse joke, requesting even that another person die, is as you so eloquently state a "stupid idiot" with "primitive ramblings". Please explain more, how my view would be stupid or primitive? It seems that you fear those who disagree with you. I made my case quite pointedly, Mr./Mrs. Mathers posted what any civilized person would see as a vile and opportunistic comment, joyfully and anonymously. Thus I propose he/ she is a coward and of little character. Your diatribe offers no such reasoning.

Posted by: Kirk Tutterrow | April 18, 2007 5:42 AM | Report abuse

Impeach the whole gang! They killed the "habeus corpus" principle that was born during Magna Carta! No other reason required. If Democrats fail to do so, vote them out!


Posted by: True American | April 18, 2007 5:57 AM | Report abuse

Dennis Kucinich said:
[As one studies the images of the Eagle Nebula brought back by the Hubble Telescope from that place in deep space where stars are born, one can imagine the interplay of cosmic forces across space and time, of matter and spirit dancing to the music of the spheres, atop an infinite sea of numbers.

Spirit merges with matter to sanctify the universe. Matter transcends to return to spirit. The interchangeability of matter and spirit means the starlit magic of the outermost life of our universe becomes the soul-light magic of the innermost life of our self. The energy of the stars becomes us. We become the energy of the stars. Stardust and spirit unite and we begin: One with the universe. Whole and holy. From one source, endless creative energy, bursting forth, kinetic, elemental. We, the earth, air, water and fire-source of nearly fifteen billion years of cosmic spiraling.

We begin as a perfect union of matter and spirit. We receive the blessings of the Eternal from sky and earth. In our outstretched hands we can feel the energy of the universe. We receive the blessings of the Eternal from water, which nourishes and sanctifies life. We receive the blessings of the Eternal from the primal fire, the pulsating heart of creation. We experience the wonder of life multidimensional and transcendent. We extend our hands upwards and we are showered with abundance. We ask and we receive. A universe of plenty flows to us, through us. It is in us. We become filled with endless possibilities.]...wearing his tinfoil hat, of course.

Posted by: juliannd | April 18, 2007 6:40 AM | Report abuse

Just do it, Dennis! Why is this article about a PROPOSAL to file instead of FILING itself? So far, as good as it sounds, just more hot air from a politician (one who folded to Kerry's pro-war platform, remember). Just hot air. Filing could have been done weeks ago, months ago, years ago. What has stopped you, Dennis? Now you PLAN on it? Well. Lalalalalalalalala. Well folks, don't count your chickens qutie yet.

Posted by: emkay | April 18, 2007 6:50 AM | Report abuse

Wow, There are almost as many anonymous cowards and loons here as Huffpo or Kos. It seems Mr. Kurtz lives in a glass house after all.

Posted by: Bill Maron | April 18, 2007 7:02 AM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney will not ride out his term as VP as he will resign for health reasons, leaving Bush the opportunity to name the next Republican candidate for the 2008 campaign. Therefore, the impeachment proceedings will be for naught as far as getting rid of Cheney. Further, I believe to hold hearings on impeaching Cheney will also form the basis for impeaching Bush and could put a stop to our being the world's leading terrorist threat.

Posted by: denek | April 18, 2007 7:08 AM | Report abuse

Andy Banyas,
sick.of.it. all.
It appears from your comments that you are a poster of one of the comments I referred to. And yes, I have served my country more than you will ever know or be able to serve yourself.

Posted by: Andy Banyas | April 17, 2007 11:15 PM

I was just asking a question. That's great, so have I, I am looking at my DD 214 right now.

(end reply to Andy)

None of these opinions in this thread are going to change anything. (But that doesn't mean you should be silent.)The war will go on and so will the corruption. The American people have lost the ability to change this situation, when they lost their right to have their vote counted. They lost that when electronic voting machines (which are impossible physically to validate) were introduced. Change that, and you can start changing all the rest of these problems everyone is mad about. Take away the money from the politics so that the Corporations are not running our government. (you can learn about voter rights and advocacy on bradblog.com I highly recommend it.)

I also notice a lot of troll-ish posts.

(I just have to wonder if this is not part of the WH cyber-warfare.)

I've personally had my websites (which I won't plug or name here) under DDoS attacks ever since I first started talking about electronic voting machines. It's be hard if not impossible to prove with my resources, but I know it's not just a coincidence.

Folks that just come in and say things like "liberalism is a mental disease."
(that's straight from the lips of Michael Savage, so when you say that, you look dumb, because your parroting him.)

Other troll-ish posts say something else which will refer to "the liberal media."

The fact is the media is corporate owned.,

Not liberal owned. Not conservative owned.
(Sorry if I just broke your preconceived notion)

You should think along the lines of Corporate Mainstream Media. Or for profit television.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_media

(which I don't agree 100% with, but most of it is spot on.)

You can technically break it down into the big five ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, FOX. They do not serve the public interest. They are For profit. And yes even PBS is not in the public interest. If you want that you'll need to turn to public access (which has been under attack for quite some time now by the telco's.)

On the radio side, I don't personally know how it breaks down, because I don't do radio.

But if you asked me about liberal media on the radio I would have to say, that you get very few choices, Air America / NOVA M.

Alternatively you have clearchannel owning way more than they should. -imo

The only radio that serves the public interest that I am familiar with is College Radio, Ham Radio, Cb Radio. (no the low power fm walkit-talkies don't count)

The washingtonpost strangely seems to get some of these issues, and I applaud them for that. But your still not going to hear about electronic voting machine problems and failures and fraud by bit flipping on CMSM (Corporate Mainstream Media)

Don't believe me? Pick a topic from Bradblog and send it into your local CMSM station and see if they report it. They won't do it. It isn't voter fraud, it's electronic voting machine fraud. And it's Corporate Mainstream Media Blackout.

So when you pull the liberal media vs. conservative media argument, you should re-think that. It's Corporate media. They are not going to report something that go's against their profit interests.

The neo-con/republican/facists and the liberal enablers should be the proper term, when you think this way.

I don't like either side at this point.

It's too bad that Washington Post (Who at least appears to get some of this) doesn't bring up electronic voting machines and pound it day after day.

I am sorry if this cracks many of your opinions and ideas, but it is the way it is, the Situation of America 2007.

You need look no farther to the results of these electronic voting machines than the shredding of our constitution, surveillance, an ongoing war that we can't afford, and the appointment of a lot of people (cronies arguably) that are unqualified to do their jobs in a myriad of government agencies. (I know I am skipping a ton of other problems, but if you really tried to wrap your head around how much corruption there is you will eventually go nuts) This happened incrementally over time, and it's going to take time to set it straight again. Part of that is going to have to be getting rid of these un-validatable electronic voting machines, and part of that is removing the money from politics.

CMSM reports that the democrats own the house and senate, well they may own the house, but not the senate, they do not have a majority in the senate to bring ANY practical change. The balance of power is currently that the folks with the (R) have Executive, Senate, Judicial, and a plethora of key offices and agencies. While the folks with the (D) have the house. (Meanwhile the actual elections are still questionable on both sides D, or R, since from a PHYSICS standpoint you can not see electricity, therefore you can not validate the signals, and therefore the vote.

You've lost your right to vote, because it can not be validated or counted. You've lost your representation because of large sums of money, you've lost parts of what really matter of your constitution because of these other two.

I listen to both conservative and liberal hosts, shows, books and programming. I also do public access tv. I think that puts me in a unique position to understand the situation. I don't know everything.

And I am just an opinion like everyone else here (cyber-warfare trolls included.)

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 18, 2007 7:10 AM | Report abuse

Impeaching Dickie Cheney would be a gift to Bushie and the Repooplicans. The NEW Veep would simply be poised to run for Prez with the Veepery (is that even a word?)as his/her springboard. Should that opening occur, farfetched as it may be, I'd bet the farm that Bushie would select Condi Rice for it. No, dear friends, just relax and let Dickie Cheney ride; he is the BEST advertisement for voting a Democratic slate into office in 2008.

Posted by: AnaHadWolves | April 18, 2007 7:15 AM | Report abuse

we have reached new heights of corruption-now plain for all the world to see - it needs to be addressed, kucinich has decided to be part of the solution-not part of the problem and he deserves to be heard above the bleating and foot dragging by his colleagues and the frightened press-at this point only the truth will set us free from republican stupidity and paranoia

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 7:18 AM | Report abuse

Isn't it time you liberals get over 2000?

Posted by: bill | April 18, 2007 7:22 AM | Report abuse

Definitely!! He certainly should be impeached for his 6 years of intentionally lying to the American people about many things, the list is endless. A manipulator and a liar, that sounds like a "high crime and misdemeanor" to me.

Posted by: Wallace Wolff | April 18, 2007 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Has Anyone Caught On To The Fact That Dick Cheney Is Buying An Aircraft Parts Supply Company aka Westco Aircraft For 2.2 Billion .. Now You Why They Want The War To Go On Longer ... They Always Said "War Is Big Business" ... Who Is Biger Than Bush Cheney

Posted by: Andy | April 18, 2007 7:30 AM | Report abuse

We don't even know what the charges are and here we are making judgement. Yes, there seems to be some probable offenses not based on judgement, character or other deceitful ways. And they could lead to the president as well. Rumsfeld, Cheney,Gonzales, this just the begining. And on what grounds? I think that making public the identity of a CIA covert agent is not only a dangerous act that jeopardices the life and well being of americans and friendly agents, but worse it is a treachrous act that could cost you your life if YOU WERE on the receiving end of these charges. We should be patient and wait to see what else could come out of this.

Posted by: joeL | April 18, 2007 7:31 AM | Report abuse

bill,

Hacked, Cracked, Failing, vote flipping Electronic Voting machines.

It's is not a partisan issue. It's an American Issue. It's a NATIONAL SECURITY issue.

I don't care what party your from.

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 18, 2007 7:32 AM | Report abuse

I see why Kucinich has almost no public support in his compaign for presidency. He is a far left ideiolog that operates on emotion and not on facts. Lets see now, if you dont agree with a government offical, just impeachment him. Read the constitution
Just like the motion that went before congress on ending the war, far left idea but NO voting support by congress. So shall be the result of impeachment proceedings.
How sad that one of the comments by one of the readers of this article states, "too bad the ammo of the killer at V.T. were wasted on the students and faculty". That is what the left is about, emotion and not rational thinking. That says it all!

Posted by: RS | April 18, 2007 7:35 AM | Report abuse

Hay guys, grow up. As stated by several of the respondents according to the US Constitution an official may be impeached for high crimes-normally interpreted as felonies- or serious misdemeanors, not for bad judgement or bad politics. There is no evidence that a crime has been committed by Chaney, at least not in the legal sense. As far as "manipulation of intelligence" is concerned, that despite extensive searches, the worst that the administration did was to ignore doubts by some intelligence analysts that Iraq actually had WMD, although the plurality of analysts thought they did, including those from other countries. I am not a supported of Bush or Chaney, and I am mad as hell that they got us into this no win situation, at great expense of human life and material resources, but I am a supporter of the US constitution and logic, facts, objectivity. Actually the Clinton Impeachment made a little more sense since there was evidence that he did commit perjury, which is a legal crime.
So guys, use your brains instead of emotions.
.

Posted by: Sam A. | April 18, 2007 7:38 AM | Report abuse

Love the hate speech on this liberal rag!

Posted by: anne marie hypocrite | April 18, 2007 7:43 AM | Report abuse

The blood thirsty democrats have already murdered 3 million Cambodians, Viet Namese, and Loasians when they pulled the funding in SE Asia in 1975.

I have served in Iraq with my National Guard Company. I am certain that if the democrats get their way and surrender Iraq to Osama, at least another million will be murdered. That will include every Iraqi that has helped us in any way. But I guess the democrats are very serious on surpassing Adolf Hilter as mass murderers!

SGT

Posted by: National Guard SGT | April 18, 2007 7:44 AM | Report abuse

DreA posed a counter-argument to a Cheney impeachment, saying the next Republican President would take over the VP role. I disagree. The impeachment proceedings could not begin until next fall (allowing for the snail's pace of Congress and summer break). The investigation, lead-up and actual hearings would probably begin in January. The decision would be reached in March/April at the earliest. By then, the Republican candidate will be identified by early primaries and polls. Why would someone tie their candidacy to the Bush legacy? Go Dennis, Go!

Posted by: DonS | April 18, 2007 7:44 AM | Report abuse

It is so sad! I guess all of you believe Bush/Cheney drew up the plans for the 911 attack and funded it also! You people yeah you people from the far left are so pathetic. You just cannot get over losing the White House and Congress for a decade out of the last 100 years. Well, you will not have it long especially with leaders like Pelosi and having speakers for your causes as M. Moore! America will wake up to the fact that all the Democrats do is whine and complain but NEVER offer a solution unless it raising taxes and having govenment take care of it. Maybe Bush should have just sat in the WH (like Clinton) and do nothing, except get his pleasure addiction fed! I mean Wee Willy had the opportunity to take out UBL and did not have the courage to do it! America Love it or Leave it, one tickets to anywhere are available! Hell we may even justify them under some govt. program and get a grant to get you out of your misery!

Posted by: GOIN | April 18, 2007 7:45 AM | Report abuse

Gee Whiz, I see you people are chock full of KoolAid on this. You folks leave out one thing, the lack of proof of any crime. Your delusional ramblings don't cut it. How many of you minimum wage service workers have a clue about the real world? Keep wearing your Che' shirts and flogging your dummies in some fantasy of impeachment. It won't happen.

Posted by: Oscar | April 18, 2007 7:54 AM | Report abuse


WOW, look at all the hate and venom being spewed in the comments.
mmather IS pathitic, as for the rest in here posting LIES..read this link below.

http://freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html

Posted by: Michelle Brooks | April 18, 2007 7:55 AM | Report abuse

The one thing that the left can impeach Bush on is his willingness to violate his oath of office by not enforcing immigration law. Unfortunately the left wants to ignore the laws of this land even more -until they can stack the court with leftists that can't read a simple constitution that is.

Posted by: DL | April 18, 2007 8:00 AM | Report abuse

How can anybody support CHICKENHAWK CHENEY?
The man is a global parasite as well as a war criminal and he's the "most inisidious of traitors".
Impeach and Incarcerate.

Posted by: Joedawg | April 18, 2007 8:03 AM | Report abuse

It is time for these thugs to be held accountable for their crimes, Criminals should be put in jail.

Posted by: A. Douglas | April 18, 2007 8:04 AM | Report abuse

It's been really interesting and somewhat amusing to read the incredible stupidity exhibited here. This is was the Democrats have fallen to??? What flavor Kool-Aid have y'all been drinking? When DK was mayor of Cleveland, we here in Ohio referred to him as Dennis the Menace - with good reason.

Posted by: Jen06 | April 18, 2007 8:05 AM | Report abuse

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Yes , but look at reality, the last president that opposed a war was assinated. As the war grows the stock market rises and you pay more for gas. We sheople get what we deserve, our comfort is the price we pay to live in a dictatorship. Dennis is tiling at windmills, he's right of course. But when was the last time anything "right" worked in this corporate controled, pawn popuplated polluted wasteland.

Posted by: Steven T. McCarty | April 18, 2007 8:10 AM | Report abuse

This will never happen, partly because the Democrats are not interested in blazing new procedural territory, but rather intent on restoring the status quo ante via the slow grind of traditional oversight. It's something I've been writing about.

Posted by: Mark Lazen | April 18, 2007 8:11 AM | Report abuse

Kucinich is a nutball

Posted by: walterroc | April 18, 2007 8:12 AM | Report abuse


"It is too bad the shooter at VT spent all of his mojo on students and faculty."

Posted by: mmather | April 17, 2007 11:20 AM


WOW....no one unhinged in here I see. Whackjob!

Posted by: Harry | April 18, 2007 8:12 AM | Report abuse

What's interesting about this story is how closely it parallels the opinions of the Copperheads during the Civil War. The Democrats were on the wrong side of history then, and now, along with the extremely wacko and vocal Left who make up their base, they're headed for the dustbin of history.

What drives the Left nuts is that President Bush's legacy will be that of a successful wartime President who ran a very clean administration, whereas their darling Clinton will always be known for "...meaning of 'is' is" and "...did not have sex with that woman," and "..did not inhale." And talk about running a dishonest presidency! Check out the list of Clinton administration controversies found on Wikipedia:

8.1 The Lewinsky scandal
8.2 Impeachment trial in the Senate
8.3 Disbarment
8.4 Administrative controversy
8.5 Campaign finance and the pardons
8.6 Sexual Assault and Rape allegations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_clinton

Now here's the list for President Bush:
....

Oops! None. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

Oh yeah, Clinton did manage to get himself impeached--only the second president to acheive that--so he'll have a nice writeup in the history books for that accomplishment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment#United_States

Posted by: Chris Christner | April 18, 2007 8:20 AM | Report abuse

All of the drowning-rat righties posting here who decry a "lack of evidence" of CHeney's crimes fail to note that any sort of congressional investigations have barely begun.

Go Dennis!

....just stay out of any small aircraft for a while.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 8:21 AM | Report abuse

What's very scary is that neither party, Republicans or Democrats, want to run this country. Nobody will step up to the plate and take control. If we wait long enough for a smart millionaire to show up, it might be China. I don't see that changing from one party to another is going to help. Neither party gets it.

Posted by: R. Pesicka | April 18, 2007 8:23 AM | Report abuse

One of the dumbest ideas yet.

Posted by: Herbert | April 18, 2007 8:28 AM | Report abuse

I think most of these comments are written by Kremlin's Goebbel propaganda division or by jihadists' media arm in Iraq - I just can't believe that Americans posting here can be so wacky.

Posted by: Leonidas | April 18, 2007 8:32 AM | Report abuse

Enough of this insanity, Kucinich and the far-left are driven by this absolute hatred of the administration. I think the war has been run horribly, but my reasons differ from their's. I believe that we should have put in a strong-man after our victory who would have kept Iraq under control with a pro peace and a America friendly foreign policy. We are now dealing with a bunch of tribalist, treacherous, superstitious yahoos who are not worth the life of 1 American. Yet the Congressman and the left wring their hands , blame America for all the ills of the world and rush from plan to plan trying to figure out to whom and where they can surrender with the greatest possible humiliation for the United States. Too bad they dont live in Iran, Russia, Nort Korea, Cuba etc. then see what their whining would get them.

Posted by: Joe | April 18, 2007 8:32 AM | Report abuse

I'll add my vote that both Bush and Cheney are a disgrace and should be kicked out of office. But, the big but, if we leave them in office it will help clear out the Congress of the rest of the Bush/Cheney supporters. For six years this country was pretty much run by a dictator or king whatever term you want to use. Bush's fellow republicans pretty much rubberstamped anything he wanted. We need to clear them out. I'm in a frame of mind to vote a lot of the Dems out as well.

Posted by: Lewijoh | April 18, 2007 8:36 AM | Report abuse

What is it? What kind of rabbit-hole mentality do we have?

We know we were lied to. Our fortune, honor and nearly a million people have died because of these lies. Yet when someone goes to stop this carnage and bring those to justice they are marginalized and ridiculed.

I don't understand this world. Unless it is that people just don not have the courage to do the right thing. Kucinich might be the only man in government with sense and courage and yet he is more often than not the one marginalized. Shows how far down this country has fallen.

Posted by: Com-n-sense | April 18, 2007 8:37 AM | Report abuse

Chris Christner:

Last-ditch delusions do not look good on you.

- Bush admitted explicitly to breaking the FISA laws

- Bush/Cheney have engaged in overt conflicts of interest re: "reconstruction" contracts in the war they invented.

- Bush/Cheney have denied habeas corpus rights to American citizens

- Bush/Cheney apparachiks have overtly lied to congress on numerous occasions (B & C have been too careful or cowardly to submit themselves to such contexts)

- Bush Cheney have overtly broken anti-propaganda legislation by paying WH funds to journalists to produce innaccurate news stories favorable to their policies

- Bush/Cheney have attempted to convert the Justice Department into a system of party-faithful gautlier/magistrates

- Cheney's office is materially connected to the bribery ring surrounding Duke Cunningham

-Bush/Cheney lied to the American people on countless occasions in order to take this country into a war-for-profit on behalf of their corporate backers

Hold your breath for a little while and wait for the Democratic Congress (a REAL congress, finally)to come up with charges firmly based on all of these crimes and more. Thay are coming; bank on it.

I bet you will lambaste Wikipedia when it posts a "worst Criminal Presidency" heading on its George W. Bush page

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 8:41 AM | Report abuse

An interesting historical treatise on what constitutes a high crime and misdemeanor:

http://www2.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/03/10/cq/high.crimes.html

Posted by: Charles Johnson | April 18, 2007 8:49 AM | Report abuse

Joe,

I think you and your fellow magically-thinking monarchists should get the hell out of my country and move to Uzbekistan, where torture is government policy and political leadership rests on an arbitrary cult of personality. You'll love it there.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 8:52 AM | Report abuse

Do it Dennis do it!
You blue staters need to encourage Dennis to bring charges against the administration and then see what happens. The rest of America hates to see bullies, nut cases and sore losers try to cause serious harm to the country for what can at the worst be called mistakes. Oh yea, I know Bush and Cheney caused 9/11, global warming, stolen elections, Valerie Plame outing, Katrina mayhem, Virginia Tech shootings, Mars warming, high tides, the sun setting and all other things in the world that has gone wrong. People use your brain cells, it takes treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. The best case may be "high crimes" because it is not clearly defined and like Ford said, high crimes is anything the majority of the house says it is. But know if the house takes this step, all it will do is make headlines, possible impeachment but never removal from office without a conviction in the senate which won't happen because of a super majority required. The long term effect of this won't be popular with the majority of the US voting block. So, go ahead and "Do it Dennis do it". It should guarantee liberal defeat for years to come.

Posted by: Rick | April 18, 2007 8:53 AM | Report abuse

It would be nice if liberals could come up with laws that the White House has actually violated. And I'm talking about black and white cases... something like.... giving pardons for money... something like that. Not... well this was a grey area that was done to make the country safer...

All liberals can due is Nifong the White House... no actual charges or laws violated but just pandering to their liberal hate.

Have you noticed that when talking about Bush, just about all liberals sound like they have Tourette's????

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 8:53 AM | Report abuse

To Juliannd: Read physics. Everything Kucinich said in that lyrical passage that you quoted is fully supported by quantum physics and astrophysics (the small and the large).

Thank you for posting it. I've been dithering about whether to support Edwards, who actually has a shot, or Kucinich, who represents my values and my heart more closely. I fretted about whether this would be "wasting" my vote. Well, I'm always clamouring about how politicians should just say what they think and let US decide, rather than pandering to the largest swath of voters possible by saying nothing substantive or specific. I guess it's time for me to vote for who I really believe in, rather than just who might be more likely to win by appealing to that broad mob.

What would happen if we all voted in the person we truly most believed in? Makes you wonder. Even if our candidates didn't win, perhaps we'd get more candid candidates.

Kucinich says what he thinks is right regardless of how it affects pandering polls. Wouldn't you like a president who did the same thing?


Posted by: JoanR | April 18, 2007 8:55 AM | Report abuse

There's NO WAY this will happen. Kucinich needs to read the very Constitution he has sworn to uphold and protect. It specifically says in 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."

Neither the President's nor the Vice President's actions fall under this. Kucinich is just grandstanding. Kucinich's the disgrace and should be kicked out of office, in MY opinion!

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 8:55 AM | Report abuse

B & C are scam artists and commit crimes on a weekly basis. The documentation is there for all to see. Whether its breaking the law, re-writing the Constitution, meddling in sovereign nations, lining pockets of corporate cronies, etc. they are at it full time and working very hard. A great philospher once said, "by their fruits you shall know them". Anyone who cannot see that they are top notch criminals is either deluded, ignorant or in profound denial.

Posted by: RJ | April 18, 2007 8:58 AM | Report abuse

ChiefPayne,

look a few posts up and note the list I posted of explicit infractions by this administration curently under investigation. Bribery? Yes. Treason? Hell yes. Other high crimes? Yes - we don't have the time to mess with their misdemeanors.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Why won't the liberal MSM cover this:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has abruptly walked away from her responsibilities with the Senate Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee after a report linked her votes to the financial well-being of her husband's companies, which received billions of dollars worth of military construction contracts she approved.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:02 AM | Report abuse

What looks best in the record of history? Doing the right thing, or doing what's expedient? Just waiting is easiest, but is sort of cowardly considering what they have done to undermine our principles and our language.

I'm for doing the right thing, but I'm not sure if the country is as convinced as they need to be in order for it to to be compelled through Congress. And that would be very sad indeed.

Posted by: Brendan McMahon | April 18, 2007 9:06 AM | Report abuse

it probably has something to do with the statements about Al-Queda and Sadam or Iraqi Official meetings whereby the intellegence was tampered with *whether that was before being presented to President or at the request of te President*... inter alia

Posted by: sd, washington | April 18, 2007 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Sir Loin of Beef,

That is it??? I'm not even a lawyer but I could easily fight those charges... and win. Sorry, you need something a lot better than that.

When going after criminals... you go with your strongest case... Is that why democrats keep digging over the D.A.'s??? They can't find anything else?

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Unfortunately, Kucinich isn't taken too seriously but what he was saying over 4 years ago is being espoused by some Congressional Democrats now. Is there anyone in Congress or the country *besides the loony 30 percent or 20 percent for Cheney* that thinks he isn*t a war crimial, a war profiteer and liar, to Congress and the people? He is an abomination as Vice President. He makes Agnew and his *bag money* seem like chump change compared to the pallet loads of $100.00 bills that was in the coalitions hands. There were only a couple of no-bid companies there and Cheney had his hands in two of them---Haliburton and KBR--that were capable of moving them pallets at a time. And that would be required to move $12,000,000.00. The President should be included too for lying us into war, NSA spying without warrants and against Americans who shouldn't have been spied on, rendition for torture, signing statements to continue torture, cherry picking and twisting intelligence to start a war and how many more reasons are needed?

Posted by: nellieh | April 18, 2007 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Leonidas,

It's easy to take folks out of context, with such a trollish blanket statement like that.

You want to talk more specific. Unless your part of the WH Cyber-Warfare brigade

Personally, I am all for a Cheney impeachment. If he broke the law then he should rot in a jail with his new boyfriends. The law is the law.

If I could change ONE LAW, it would be that oath breakers get LIFE IN PRISION.

Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 18, 2007 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Kucinich is a clown who wears a shirt and tie instead of floppy feet.

Posted by: Tom Peters | April 18, 2007 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Read this and then think about the Bush Administration and the past 6 years.

"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. There is also an inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and degeneracy of manners and of morals. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." --James Madison 1793

Posted by: Sunking | April 18, 2007 9:12 AM | Report abuse


Sir Loin of Beef,

What I would actually like to see investigated is Sandy Burglar. Why won't he take a lie detector test like he is supposed to??? What documents did he destroy??? What didn't he want us seeing???

If Conzi had done the same thing, would you have let her get away with a slap on the wrist??? Why the double standards????

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Why go half way, impeach both Bush and Cheney at the same time. You have to wonder why the democratic party,(the one that is supposed to be "for the people") is not behind Kucinich on this. If they were truely there to cqarry out OUR wishes, it would have been done and underway right now.

By the way, if the constitution states that they have to be convicted of these crimes before they can be impeached, then why haven't charges been filed and why haven't we got their sorry asses in court yet?

Posted by: Ann | April 18, 2007 9:15 AM | Report abuse

To show you how out of touch with reality liberals are, I had one tell me that if Kerry had been elected President, New Orleans wouldn't have flooded.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Please don't forget to file the same articles of impeachment against the bubble head puppet in the oval office. Bush and Cheney have lied to long to the Congress and the people that impeaching them seems like to nice of a thing to do to them. Charge them with treason for their lies have surely been high crimes that would constitutes treasonous acts. Dang fry them before they contaminate our country even more.

Posted by: Karl | April 18, 2007 9:18 AM | Report abuse

So Sad - some many ill (mentally) people read this trash.

Posted by: tired ofitall | April 18, 2007 9:19 AM | Report abuse


The former voting block of the Southern Baptists and Republican "Right" are desperate to atone for their "sin" of complicity with this war. They will actively support a rapid impeachment and purge of this administration, if there are some common-sense indications that SOMEBODY is serious about "homeland security;" abandonment of the bogus airport carry-on rules, rapid establishment of local civil preparedness, some discussion of the protection of our water and food supplies, eg.
Impeachment now is the very least our Congress owes us for their part in this mess.

Posted by: Foxtrot59 | April 18, 2007 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Ann,

Maybe because they know that no law was broken????

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Sir Loin,

Ok...let's LOOK at your list:

- Bush admitted explicitly to breaking the FISA laws

ANSWER: 2002 case dubbed: "In Re: Sealed Case," the FISA appeals court decision cited a previous FISA case [U.S. v. Truong], where a federal court "held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."


- Bush/Cheney have engaged in overt conflicts of interest re: "reconstruction" contracts in the war they invented.

ANSWER: Presidence set by the CLINTON administration says the contracts are valid

- Bush/Cheney have denied habeas corpus rights to American citizens

ANSWER: US citizens who are technically guilty of treason in a global war - sounds like we need to look at WWII treaties, doesn't it.
BUT this CAN be argued in court - WHY hasn't it?

- Bush/Cheney apparachiks have overtly lied to congress on numerous occasions (B & C have been too careful or cowardly to submit themselves to such contexts)

ANSWER: Apparachiks are NOT the VP nor the President - irrrelevant!

- Bush Cheney have overtly broken anti-propaganda legislation by paying WH funds to journalists to produce innaccurate news stories favorable to their policies

ANSWER: The anti-propaganda legislation (aka the Smith-Mundt Act) does indeed prevent propaganda from being distributed - now, which inaccurate stories were these AGAIN???

- Bush/Cheney have attempted to convert the Justice Department into a system of party-faithful gautlier/magistrates

ANSWER: Irrelevant! EVERY administration tries to put their own people everywhere.

- Cheney's office is materially connected to the bribery ring surrounding Duke Cunningham

ANSWER: And you have evidence Cheney was directly involved with this where exactly??

-Bush/Cheney lied to the American people on countless occasions in order to take this country into a war-for-profit on behalf of their corporate backers

ANSWER: Even if true (which I seriously doubt) this also is irrelevant! Neither were under oath (as opposed to Clinton) and so cannot be held under contempt.

I have seen NOTHING to equate to a high crime or misdemeanor. Want to try again?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 9:22 AM | Report abuse

The CYBER-WARFARE TROLLS ARE HERE NOW.

So I'll just go to sleep now.


Posted by: sick.of.it.all | April 18, 2007 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Chiefpayne,

Ouch, did you have to B*tch slap him so hard???

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Pepsiholic,

SOMEONE had to wake the guy up! Besides, it really irritates me when someone tries to screw around using the Constitution without know what the darn thing says!

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Chief,

Liberals don't really care about the truth, facts or logic.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:30 AM | Report abuse

THE HIDDEN CORRUPT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HALLIBURTON AND CHENEY WOULD CONSTITUTE A HIGH CRIME AND MISDEMEANOR!
I BELIEVE THAT THE IRAQ WAR WAS FOUGHT FOR THE ECONOMIC BENEFIT OF HALLIBURTON- CHENEY'S COMPANY, AND I BELIEVE THAT EVIDENCE OF A CONTINUING CORRUPT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HALLIBURTON AND CHENEY IS TO BE FOUND.
IT IS FOR THAT REASON THAT HALLIBURTON RECENTLY DECIDED TO MOVE ITS HEADQUARTERS TO DUBAI!

Posted by: NARO | April 18, 2007 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Naro,

Try investigating Diane Fienstein and the billions of dollars she has steered to her husbands company first.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Most all of you are such a joke. Deal with the real world for once. Cowards

Posted by: Brian Texas | April 18, 2007 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Naro,

The key word in your statement is HIDDEN. Is there ANY evidence you can give to support your beliefs in this matter? If not, then there is NO evidence to support an impeachment.

Look, an impeachment is like a Grand Jury...it looks to see if there is sufficient evidence to take a crime to trial. If you don't HAVE any evidence, WHY would you have a Grand Jury...OR an Impeachment? Make sense?

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 9:35 AM | Report abuse

I'll bet at least half of you barking, grassy-knoll moonbats are either under mental therapy, or have medicated for same at some time in the recent past. But I'd expect that from anyone that thinks Kucinich is lucid enough to have any say in the affairs of the common man.

Posted by: Viking | April 18, 2007 9:39 AM | Report abuse

Cheney vs Haliburton....

So, if Gore ran for President and won, are you saying that he couldn't do anything for the environment since he already had the movie and owns a company that does environmental business??? Would he be profiteering if he did???

See how stupid your liberal statements are???

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:40 AM | Report abuse

A good cross section of the lunatic fringe on display here. Even the Loose Change nuts are well represented, including those wishing for an attack on the vice-president.

Posted by: Mike K | April 18, 2007 9:41 AM | Report abuse

chiefpayne568, good post. But liberals don't deal with facts just the seriousness of the accusations is all that matters. No proof necesary because everone knows it is so. Do it dennis do it!

Posted by: Rick | April 18, 2007 9:43 AM | Report abuse

These comments show mental derangement at its worst. Kucinich, with this desperate ploy is pandering to the wackiest of you lefties for votes, and you're so blind, you actually think he believes in what he's doing. Heh. You've been punk'd.

Posted by: Anji | April 18, 2007 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Rick,

To so say there are no facts belies your profound ignorance.

Posted by: RJ | April 18, 2007 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Dems, If you don't listen to what the people said in November, you can forget 08. They want those Two, Bush and Cheney dealt with. There will be such a backlash against you by your own people. Dennis is doing what he was mandated to do in November. If your personal gain are put ahead of the people, just like the Republican, then you have also lied to the people. You claim to be for us then do what you're told.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Articles of Impeachment

of

President George W. Bush

and

Vice President Richard B. Cheney,
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice,
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales

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. - - ARTICLE II, SECTION 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales have committed violations and subversions of the Constitution of the United States of America in an attempt to carry out with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes and deprivations of the civil rights of the people of the United States and other nations, by assuming powers of an imperial executive unaccountable to law and usurping powers of the Congress, the Judiciary and those reserved to the people of the United States, by the following acts:

1) Seizing power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the rule of law; carrying out a massive assault on and occupation of Iraq, a country that was not threatening the United States, resulting in the death and maiming of over one hundred thousand Iraqis, and thousands of U.S. G.I.s.

2) Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war.

3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable.

4) Instituting a secret and illegal wiretapping and spying operation against the people of the United States through the National Security Agency.

5) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently changing its government by force and assaulting Iraq in a war of aggression.

6) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions of governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

7) Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda about the conduct of foreign governments and individuals and acts by U.S. government personnel; manipulating the media and foreign governments with false information; concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment concerning acts, intentions and possession, or efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction in order to falsely create a climate of fear and destroy opposition to U.S. wars of aggression and first strike attacks.

8) Violations and subversions of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, both a part of the "Supreme Law of the land" under Article VI, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in wars and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and others and usurping powers of the United Nations and the peoples of its nations by bribery, coercion and other corrupt acts and by rejecting treaties, committing treaty violations, and frustrating compliance with treaties in order to destroy any means by which international law and institutions can prevent, affect, or adjudicate the exercise of U.S. military and economic power against the international community.

9) Acting to strip United States citizens of their constitutional and human rights, ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to counsel, without charge, and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the Executive of a citizen as an "enemy combatant."

10) Ordering indefinite detention of non-citizens in the United States and elsewhere, and without charge, at the discretionary designation of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense.

11) Ordering and authorizing the Attorney General to override judicial orders of release of detainees under INS jurisdiction, even where the judicial officer after full hearing determines a detainee is wrongfully held by the government.

12) Authorizing secret military tribunals and summary execution of persons who are not citizens who are designated solely at the discretion of the Executive who acts as indicting official, prosecutor and as the only avenue of appellate relief.

13) Refusing to provide public disclosure of the identities and locations of persons who have been arrested, detained and imprisoned by the U.S. government in the United States, including in response to Congressional inquiry.

14) Use of secret arrests of persons within the United States and elsewhere and denial of the right to public trials.

15) Authorizing the monitoring of confidential attorney-client privileged communications by the government, even in the absence of a court order and even where an incarcerated person has not been charged with a crime.

16) Ordering and authorizing the seizure of assets of persons in the United States, prior to hearing or trial, for lawful or innocent association with any entity that at the discretionary designation of the Executive has been deemed "terrorist."

17) Engaging in criminal neglect in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, depriving thousands of people in Louisiana, Mississippi and other Gulf States of urgently needed support, causing mass suffering and unnecessary loss of life.

18) Institutionalization of racial and religious profiling and authorization of domestic spying by federal law enforcement on persons based on their engagement in noncriminal religious and political activity.

19) Refusal to provide information and records necessary and appropriate for the constitutional right of legislative oversight of executive functions.

20) Rejecting treaties protective of peace and human rights and abrogation of the obligations of the United States under, and withdrawal from, international treaties and obligations without consent of the legislative branch, and including termination of the ABM treaty between the United States and Russia, and rescission of the authorizing signature from the Treaty of Rome which served as the basis for the International Criminal Court.

Posted by: RJ | April 18, 2007 9:51 AM | Report abuse

YOU MAY BELIEVE IS SANTA CLAUSE AND THE TRUTH FAIRY, BUT I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT IT IS A COINCIDENCE THAT CHENEY LEAVES HALLIBURTON TO BECOME VICE PRESIDENT , AND STARTS A WAR IN IRAQ WHICH PROVIDES BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PROFITS TO HIS EX COMPANY, AND NOW THAT COMPANY IS MOVING TO DUBAI.

IS IT POSSIBLE THAT HALLIBURTON IS PLANNING ON REIMBURSING CHENEY FOR HIS EFFORTS, AND THAT IS WHY IT IS MOVING TO DUBAI- TO HIDE FROM AMERICAN PRYING EYES?
THE CONGRESS SHOULD APPOINT A SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM TO PROBE THE CHENEY HALLIBURTON CONNECTION.

Posted by: NARO | April 18, 2007 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Honestly, IMPEACHMENT FOR BOTH CHENEY AND BUSH HAS LONG BEEN OVERDUE!!!!!IF IT WERE A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT THAT HAS PUT THE COUNTRY IN THIS TYPE OF BLACK HOLE, HE WOULD HAVE LONG TIME BEEN IMPEACHED BY THE REPUBLICANS FOR LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE,MISLEADING THE COUNTRY, RUINING THE ECONOMY,AND SHEDDING INNOCENT AMERICAN BLOOD ON THE ALTER OF POLITICAL AGGRANDIZEMENT!

THESE TWO HYPOCRITES, BUSH AND HIS CLIQUE PARTNER, CHENEY, THE WAR HAWK, HAVE THE BLOOD OF INNOCENT AMERICAN MEN AND WOMEN WHO DIED UNJUSTLY IN A MAKE-BELIEF AND FABRICATED WAR ON IRAQ IN THEIR HANDS, AND
WOULD NOT ONLY BE IMPEACHED BY HUMANS BUT BY GOD ALSO!!!!

Posted by: Franco FRANK | April 18, 2007 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Why is it that liberals are stupid enough to think that if they write in caps that it makes it more important??? All it does is make them look stupider than they already do.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 9:57 AM | Report abuse

I am sick and tired of the Democrats over-analyzing every move they make and worrying more about what will help them politically in the next election than what will help the country. They should worry more about the state of our country than protecting their own jobs. This is why Democrats can't get elected as dog catcher. They were given a rare opportunity in the last election to come in and show bold, decisive leadership and do what the vast MAJORITY (Dems and Repubs alike) want: END the Iraq war, return to a diplomacy first strategy in foreign policy, roll back the assaults on the Constitution (Patriot Act, etc) and put a leash on Cheney and Bush to prevent them from further destroying the country and tanking our economy through rampant cronyism. Well, they blew it. If they lose next election, it won't be because they were too aggressive or ambitious, it will be because they will have once again proven that they are too wishy-washy, flip-floppy and spineless to be trusted with leading us. And really, there is a pretty good argument that they can't be.

The world Kucinich is living in is called REALITY. The DC establishment world is where the real fantasy is. In that world, people we bomb into submission will greet us as liberators and grovel at our feet for rescuing them from Saddam and replacing him with a civil war in which they have less money, saftey, personal freedoms, etc. than they did under Saddam. They will thank us that we stopped the brutal torture under Saddam, even though Abu Ghurayb still operates as usual, just under different management.

In the REAL world, when Bush told people about God directing him to bomb people -- he'd be deemed a danger to others and committed to a mental institution. When Cheney persisted in his delusions of grandeur which assert that the laws of the US don't apply to him because of the concept of the unitary executive -- he'd be committed, too, and treated for a psychopathic personality disorder. In the DC world -- mental illness is an asset, not a liability.

If the Democrats want to take the Republican's advice and back off of impeachment calls because it would "destroy" the country (yeah, like that stopped them from going after Clinton for an extramarital affair -- not real crimes, say like defying the Geneva conventions, nulling habeus corpus, etc), go ahead and wimp out. After all, that is pretty much what everyone is expecting them to do.

I say we all vote Republican in the next election. Why keep the US limping along with a timid Democrat in the White House? It will take strong leadership to undo the damage Bush has done. Why not just elect another Republican? That way we can speed up the inevitable demise of the US -- it'll be a lot more painful to drag it out. Plus, we'll only be getting what we deserve. The Repubs for voting and supporting such an evil, anti-American regime and the Dems for not having the balls to do anything about it.

Posted by: Scarlett | April 18, 2007 10:05 AM | Report abuse

I'm not wearing any pants.

Posted by: StumpBaby | April 18, 2007 10:06 AM | Report abuse


You have to ask yourself with all the crimes they have committed, how do they remain in power? It defies all reason.

Our last president Impeached for a personal indiscretion while this present group of usurpers continue to bleed our country of all its precious assets. How is it possible?

Who is really running this country. The boy king couldn't possibly be. Who is really behind the madness?

Posted by: Jim | April 18, 2007 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Hey RJ, typical liberal ploy. Can't deal with facts so deal with the messenger. Liberal implosion is pending, can't wait. Do it Dennis do it!

Posted by: Rick | April 18, 2007 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Everyone who lives, works or goes to school with Franco Frank better back away! I think his head is about to explode.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 10:08 AM | Report abuse

moonbats

Posted by: fly | April 18, 2007 10:10 AM | Report abuse

I keep on hearing about all these "crimes" being committed by Bush... I still find they provide no proof of crimes... just their beliefs that crimes have been committed.

Hey Scarlett, Didn't democrats co-author the Patriot act??? Jeez, don't you just hate when reality intrudes on your fantasies???

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 10:11 AM | Report abuse

I second the motion!

Posted by: Krashkopf | April 18, 2007 10:14 AM | Report abuse

I find it extremely ironic that the people we elected into government didn't hesitate to attempt to impeach Clinton for using his "tools" inappropriately, yet when Bush and Cheney are being deceptive, lying, and using an unproven blanket of "Weapons of mass destruction" as a quip to go into war to benefit their own stocks in oil companies that the government couldn't have acted on both Cheney and Bush to get them out of here before the Middle East kills us all!!! When Clinton was boinking Monica, that didn't pose any sort of security threat to this country. Now we're in the worst position we've been in in DECADES, thanks to people just turning their heads to the subject when we all knew it was WRONG right from the beginning. IMPEACH THEM BOTH!!!

Posted by: Concerned American Mommy | April 18, 2007 10:17 AM | Report abuse

It seems like a great idea to disenfranchise at least 51% of the voters in America! I think it's a great marketing idea Dennis, you gotta go for it! Oh yeah and don't forget, Clinton didn't get impeached because of his "indiscretions", he was impeached for lying under federal oath and attempting to try and have others lie under oath as well. Good luck Dennis and we enjoy it so very much when the real voice and soul of the left comes out to play! Keep up the good work Dems with trying to overwrite the CONSTITUTION!

Posted by: WiseOldOwl1136 | April 18, 2007 10:20 AM | Report abuse

JoanR

Here. Let me make your day.
http://www.peaceinspace.com/pb_speeches.shtml

Posted by: juliannd | April 18, 2007 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Dennis Kucinich is living proof that the jackass is the ideal symbol of the Democrat party! If members of Congress would spend their time addressing issues of violence, gun availability, safety standards in public institutions and things that are actually of interest to us voter / taxpayers - instead of harrassing the administration and playing childish "gotcha" games for political points, the incident at Virginia Tech might not have occurred.

Posted by: deacjeff | April 18, 2007 10:24 AM | Report abuse

I think it is high time someone start an impeachment process on this administration.

My concern is Carl Rove. If Cheney is impeached, could Bush appoint Rove as the VP?

Couldn't they both be impeached at the same time?

Please respond to MargaretMH1960@Aol.Com

Posted by: Margaret | April 18, 2007 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Actions like Rep. Kucinich's and all other sorts of intemperate and grandstanding voices that seem to dominate politics today will, if we are not careful, be the first shots in the coming American Civil War.

Its high time the 60's people who are now generally in control of most civil institutions (from both parties) do the growing up they so desperately need and start being the adults and statemen and women we so desperately need.

If they don't its quite possible that one day someone, wallowing in a sea of the childish name calling, bitter partisanship, and utter selfishness reflected in so many of our leaders and so many of the people commenting on this article, will do something terrible and a cycle of violence will begins which cannot be stopped.

We are all free to disagree and debate the issues but we all have as part and parcel of that right the responsibility to be civil and decent with each other. The screamers out there on all sides need to, frankly, grow up, get qa life, and if they can't do that at least shut thier mouths until they show they have the ability to deal with others as humans.

Posted by: John | April 18, 2007 10:28 AM | Report abuse

I can't fathom how crazy some of you people are. It's too bad that your hatred of the President and Vice-President is such that you would advocate these extreme measures based upon no evidence. Some of these posts are downright insane, and a good many reveal the hysterical nature of the Far Left in this country. It is laughable that you Ultra-Libs, Progressives, Socialists, or whatever you call yourselves are so willing to attack the Vice-President, yet you are unwilling to turn that same microscope upon Left-leaning Dems.

It's bad enough that you loons have all but convinced the world that 'global warming' is perpetuated by man, and not by changing magnetic fields and other such rational and scientific explanations. Worse yet, the same histrionics exhibited by today's eviro-wackos were used by the nuts in the late 60's to predict a population explosion, (which should have made the world uninhabitable by today--didn't happen), and by the junk scientists in the 70's to predict a new Ice Age. Ironically, some of those same scientists who predicted global cooling with such authority are now speaking with equal exhuberance about global warming. And that has environmentalists scrambling to link the two in order to have some coherence in thought, with the overriding theme of "Western consumerism is bad, America is bad, Vice-President Cheney is the Devil (without regard to any real religious significance), and we can save Mother Earth by all of us shopping at farmer's markets and smoking weed."

Please, Liberal Nuts, just admit it for once. Admit openly that you don't truly believe that President Bush and his ilk are causing problems for the world, and you have to rise in defense of us. Admit the truth, that you believe the world is flawed, Western ideals are flawed, and the you're going to hate anyone that disagrees with you. A bit of honesty from the Progressive Left would be a refeshing change...

Posted by: Christopher M. Spellman | April 18, 2007 10:36 AM | Report abuse

You know that this is something really important, good and very threatening to high-level criminal officials inside (and out) the Bush administration, when people post distractionary links to intel-owned disinformation 9/11 websites such as whatreallyhappened and loosechange, in a "people who are for Impeachment are into nonsense like the majority of the content found at these websites" discreditory effort. It is laughable. Go Kucinich! Knock down Cheney, then knock down Bush. The compromised and/or criminally complicit Democratic leadership such as Nancy Pelosi aren't going to like this, but Go Kucinich!

Posted by: - Ø®£Z - | April 18, 2007 10:36 AM | Report abuse

You can tell that liberals don't deal with reality when they won't admit even to themselves that they will never be able to get a super majority to support the impeachment.

But hey, they can always dream.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 10:41 AM | Report abuse

I cannot believe that no liberals are defending Cheney! He is a loving father of a same sex couple and he is even happy for them having a child!!!

Why do liberals and the far left hate Cheney again?

Posted by: True Liberal | April 18, 2007 10:44 AM | Report abuse

"It is too bad the shooter at VT spent all of his mojo on students and faculty." - mmather

That comment is going to get you watched.

Posted by: Agent 86 | April 18, 2007 10:45 AM | Report abuse

What a bunch of morons.

Advocating the death of anyone is serious. Maybe you should impeach yourselves from society.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Impeach Bush. When Cheney takes over the job as Prez his ticker won't be able to handle the strain and it will be a quick trip to Arlington Cemetary for that low-life sob.

Posted by: BC Bud | April 18, 2007 10:47 AM | Report abuse

You people who are always criticizing the President are nuts. Kucinich is an embarrassment to the State of Ohio. He can only get elected in Cleveland just like Hilary can only get elected in New York. If you don't like it in America,leave...

Posted by: Dan | April 18, 2007 10:51 AM | Report abuse

I want to say to the ultra-nationalist, neo-fascist bone headed Republicans that find GWB and DC to be their ultimate hero's in their life have a deficiencie or lack of cujoness, so, the way for you to make it up is to show your war machine brawn instead, kind of like growing beer muscles. Your mouths are filled with the same junk that your fascist leadership spews out, and, expectations are that when you speak and say the same garbage and repeat the same thing over and over from your budd buddies (i.e. "cut and run" ) that you can actually program people to beleive what your saying and to follow you into hell and back. Those times are over !! I want you to know something, when you start a new phrase and everyone repeats that same phrase, us democrats LAUGH, we know you have no individual thought patterns for yourselves and you think that if you can sound like a majority that all Americans will follow....WRONG. Your deceptions,lies and NON-Compassion for AMERICANS will NOT go unpunished. If I had it my way I would throw the likes of not only our political leadership but, the corporate leadership (which has bilked millions out of hard working people and to give nothing in return) to trial as well. My question is, "When you are rich and can afford anything you want, how much is enough... No really HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH?" The young, poor, needy, handicapped, single mothers, veterans and all of the rest who actually make the true moral fabric of the country have had enough of your smart mouthed, unthoughtful and uncaring words, but, most of all greed ! Republicans have stopped me from my pusuit of life(good paying job), liberty(illegal phone tapping) and my pusuit of happiness(a house,vacation,etc) as well as millions of Americans. To Impeach the Vice President and the President should only be a small part of the beginning,and, what should follow are the trials of all the corporate executives who have been gauging the needy and poor and middle class all for the sake of HUGE profits(spurred by this administration), not just a good profit which would be acceptable because as Americans we all wish for success ,but, HUGE and OUTRAGEOUS profits that make Americans sick (especially not paying your FAIR share of taxes). We have had enough of big oil, and still ask "why can't you build more refineries?" but, we do know.. it's because you need it for an excuse to gauge us. Those same executives are the only ones behind the denial of global warming, and, why is that? because they do not want any change from their companies of fossil fuels to save the earth. The oil executives should go to jail as a cell mate to Dick Cheney and his Boy George !!! So try to belittle us more Mr. Right Wing Republican and your days anywhere as an elected official in the DC area will become limited. Go and get them Dennis, and, America will be greatfull, throw the people who are selling out our country to others in jail (politicians and corporate executives) IMPEACH DICK CHENEY NOW!!

Posted by: The Fosk | April 18, 2007 10:51 AM | Report abuse

It is time the American people realized that they need to identify the individuals and institutions that are the source of their suffering and then ridding themselves of the cancer.

Posted by: Loren | April 18, 2007 10:51 AM | Report abuse

How the WaPo allow publication of the E-mails calling for the VP to be assassinated as this e-mail above propose.:

"It is too bad the shooter at VT spent all of his mojo on students and faculty.
Posted by: mmather | April 17, 2007 11:20 AM"

That is a crime
Are you sick people?

Posted by: EBurbano | April 18, 2007 10:53 AM | Report abuse

What mental institution did Fosk escape from???

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 10:56 AM | Report abuse

the stupidity of people here who think they have anything on this admin for impeachment just shows how dumb liberals really are - "they lied to us" is the same tired diatribe of the ignorant - proven again and again and again to be false - but when you're stupid, i guess thats all you got.

Posted by: Mark | April 18, 2007 10:57 AM | Report abuse

The Fosk,

How many times do we have to tell you:
Don't drink the bongwater!

Posted by: juliannd | April 18, 2007 10:59 AM | Report abuse

I live in an area that is surrounded by the Navy and I am very proud of the job they do. We should all make it a point of going up to military members, shake their hands and let them know "We thank you for what you do"!
With all this talk about impeachment, it shows our country is divided. This would be the perfect opportunity to fall under attack similar to 9/11. We need to stand together as a nation and show our enemies that we will not allow that to happen on our soil again! Let us all show our pride
as citizens of the United States of America!

Posted by: coronadokim | April 18, 2007 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Reading the majority of these comments makes me believe that most of the people responding here must be government employees. Having the time to listen to Kucinich and to support him is further evidence of inside the beltway mentality....it also serves as evidence to the lack of work productivity within government. Read The Federalist Papers and the Constitution. Stop looking for government to do everything for you. Stop .....WHINING!

Posted by: deToqueville | April 18, 2007 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Finally, a solution to all our problems! Do this, and Iraq will become a wonderful place to live. It will stop the erosion of the dollar. National Debt will be wiped out too! The idea will even remove carbon dioxide from the air and we will enjoy lovely weather forever. The best thing is, we will have a country where nobody blames their problems on other people

Posted by: Candy Jordan | April 18, 2007 11:11 AM | Report abuse

I WAS A LIFELONG REPUBLICAN WHOSE PARTY WAS HIJACKED BY HIGH SPENDING, THIEVING CONGRESSMEN AND PRESIDENT WHO SQUANDERED OUR NATIONAL WEALTH, DEVALUED OUR CURRENCY BY A THIRD WHICH IS WORSE THEN A HUGH TAX INCREASE, PUT OUR NATION IN DEEP DEBT, AND SENT OUR BOYS TO DEATH AND DISABILITY BY THE THOUSANDS IN A NONSENSICAL AND UNWARRANTED WAR IN IRAQ WHICH I BELIEVE WAS FOR THE BENEFIT OF HALLIBURTON.
MY FELLOW REPUBLICANS, IF YOU STILL BELIEVE IN YOUR REPUBLICAN LEADERS IN THE WHITE HOUSE YOU ARE DUMBER AND MORE STUBBORN THEN A DONKEY.
I WISH THAT THE PRESIDENT AND CHENEY COULD BE IMPEACHED FOR THEIR INCOMPETENCE ALONE, BUT CHENEY'S RELATIONSHIP WITH HALLIBURTON IS GROUND ENOUGH FOR ME!

Posted by: NARO | April 18, 2007 11:11 AM | Report abuse

RJ,

Ok...let's look at your evidence.

1) Seizing power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the rule of law; carrying out a massive assault on and occupation of Iraq, a country that was not threatening the United States, resulting in the death and maiming of over one hundred thousand Iraqis, and thousands of U.S. G.I.s.

ANSWER: WAR was declared by CONGRESS hence this statement is totally inaccurate. Congress approved the Iraqi War Resolution. Irrelevant statement.

2) Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war.

If the evidence was incorrect then so was every other countries intelligence reports, so if the President's rationales were incorrect, it was due to the information provided him by the Intelligence networks world-wide. This was proven and so is NOT an Impeachable offense.

3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable.

There are two rule in War - Rule one: People die (including innocents), Rule two: You cannot change Rule One. The inherent problem is the enemy HIDES behind civilians...there is NO other way to get to the enemy. Further, this is not an impeachable offense as the war was declared.

4) Instituting a secret and illegal wiretapping and spying operation against the people of the United States through the National Security Agency.

Instituted by Presidental Executive Order - presidence set by earlier Presidental Executive orders - currently awaiting court battle to determine legality of said wiretapping - AGAIN irrelevant as it has not been proven illegal and was done by Executive order which is in keeping with rights reserved for the Executive branch.

5) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently changing its government by force and assaulting Iraq in a war of aggression.

Precedence set for WWII (i.e. Japan)...further, a government was required and was setup by the MAJORITY in the country. Irrelevant and non-impeachable actions.

6) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions of governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

ANSWER: Totally false statement. ANY torture done was, once discovered, were prosecuted. Further, detainment of foreign nationals were NOT in violation with said Amendments as these are rights covered for US Citizens. Further, the Univerals Declaration of Human Right and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights do NOT cover POWs nor terrorists.


7) Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda about the conduct of foreign governments and individuals and acts by U.S. government personnel; manipulating the media and foreign governments with false information; concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment concerning acts, intentions and possession, or efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction in order to falsely create a climate of fear and destroy opposition to U.S. wars of aggression and first strike attacks.

ANSWER: Your evidence of the above IS...! As for the WMD everyone is so concerned about, it is documented there were missles with Sarin gas in them. Sarin gas IS listed as a chemical weapon and is deadly...and all WMD contain NBC (Nuclear, Biological, and CHEMICAL) weapons.

8) Violations and subversions of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, both a part of the "Supreme Law of the land" under Article VI, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in wars and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and others and usurping powers of the United Nations and the peoples of its nations by bribery, coercion and other corrupt acts and by rejecting treaties, committing treaty violations, and frustrating compliance with treaties in order to destroy any means by which international law and institutions can prevent, affect, or adjudicate the exercise of U.S. military and economic power against the international community.

ANSWER: Enforcement of said treaty with Saddam was NOT being done by the UN...hence the Iraqi Freedom war was done. This war WAS in compliance with the treaty setup between Saddam and the UN.

9) Acting to strip United States citizens of their constitutional and human rights, ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to counsel, without charge, and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the Executive of a citizen as an "enemy combatant."

ANSWER: War Powers entitle the President to suspend civilian rights with reguard to the above where appropriate.

10) Ordering indefinite detention of non-citizens in the United States and elsewhere, and without charge, at the discretionary designation of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense.

ANSWER: Said non-citizens were detained as prisoners of war in that they were enemies of said war. No status specifically of POW was available as said non-citizens would specify which government they were a part of.

11) Ordering and authorizing the Attorney General to override judicial orders of release of detainees under INS jurisdiction, even where the judicial officer after full hearing determines a detainee is wrongfully held by the government.

ANSWER: Presidential war powers - already answered.

12) Authorizing secret military tribunals and summary execution of persons who are not citizens who are designated solely at the discretion of the Executive who acts as indicting official, prosecutor and as the only avenue of appellate relief.

ANSWER: Your evidence of the above IS...!

13) Refusing to provide public disclosure of the identities and locations of persons who have been arrested, detained and imprisoned by the U.S. government in the United States, including in response to Congressional inquiry.

ANSWER: Presidental War Powers.

14) Use of secret arrests of persons within the United States and elsewhere and denial of the right to public trials.

ANSWER: Provide evidence.

15) Authorizing the monitoring of confidential attorney-client privileged communications by the government, even in the absence of a court order and even where an incarcerated person has not been charged with a crime.

ANSWER: And is incarcerated person a US citizen?

16) Ordering and authorizing the seizure of assets of persons in the United States, prior to hearing or trial, for lawful or innocent association with any entity that at the discretionary designation of the Executive has been deemed "terrorist."

ANSWER: Provided by Executive Order and precedence set from previous Presidental Administrations.

17) Engaging in criminal neglect in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, depriving thousands of people in Louisiana, Mississippi and other Gulf States of urgently needed support, causing mass suffering and unnecessary loss of life.

ANSWER: Irrelevant and incorrect. Neglect was on the Mayor of New Orleans and the Governor of Lousiana as they have primary responsibility for emergency managment teams on the ground.

18) Institutionalization of racial and religious profiling and authorization of domestic spying by federal law enforcement on persons based on their engagement in noncriminal religious and political activity.

ANSWER: A requirement as the enemy in this sanctioned war is of a specific ethnicity - further part of Presidental War Powers.

19) Refusal to provide information and records necessary and appropriate for the constitutional right of legislative oversight of executive functions.

ANSWER: Precedence set from previous Administrations to provide Congress information and records subject to Presidential discretion of affect on on-going war.

20) Rejecting treaties protective of peace and human rights and abrogation of the obligations of the United States under, and withdrawal from, international treaties and obligations without consent of the legislative branch, and including termination of the ABM treaty between the United States and Russia, and rescission of the authorizing signature from the Treaty of Rome which served as the basis for the International Criminal Court.

ANSWER: After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 the status of the treaty became unclear, debated by members of Congress and professors of law, Succession of the ABM Treaty,State Succession and the Legal Status of the ABM Treaty, and Miron-Feith Memorandum. In 1997, a memorandum of understanding[5] between the US and four of the former USSR states was signed and subject to ratification by each signatory, however it was not presented to the US Senate for advice and consent by Bill Clinton. President Bush decided to pull out of said treaty - Presidental authority. Same for Treaty of Rome which had been signed by Bill Clinton in 2000 but had NOT been presented to the Senate. Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a treaty can be accepted by a variety of means, including signature ad referendum. Most treaties, including the Treaty of Rome, require ratification before they are fully binding on the State Party concerned - and this is certainly the case for the Treaty of Rome.

All said, NOTHING provided here is sufficient cause for Impeachment - NOTHING.

Care to try again?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Who's to say Bush and Cheney should not be impeached?

Apparently a majority of Americans believe they have been lied to, deceived, and duped by this secretive group of clubby corporatists posing as the heads of American government. This group has distinguished itself by being the most secretive, authoritarian, and mendacious administration in recent history, perhaps in the entire history of America, overstepping their authority and claiming it is theirs to overstep.

We are not part of a proud history when we refuse to allow a process of inquiry and censure that was designed for the current situation we find ourselves in, to be carried out by numerous willing participants.

We cannot impeach now because Republicans made a mockery of the process in the 1990's? This is the most self-deceptive logic there is. Isn't this the same as saying, "we cannot put suspected criminals on trial anymore because there have been unjust trials where innocent people have been wrongfully punished?" I can assure you that this is not the case out here in America.

It's time to get a clue, DC Democrats. You're part of America. You know you are.

Posted by: demonstrator | April 18, 2007 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Hey RJ,
Nice list. Too bad the UN and ICC items don't apply to the US Constitution. The rest seems to be your opinion because Presidential findings cover most of it or you are incorrect on your constitutional law. No court has ruled his actions illegal. Unconstitutional maybe, which is hardly the same thing.
Like I said, this is more like Huffpo or Kos than a newspaper web page.

"Impeach Bush. When Cheney takes over the job as Prez his ticker won't be able to handle the strain and it will be a quick trip to Arlington Cemetary for that low-life sob." - BC Bud

Another anonymous moron wishing the VP dead.

Posted by: Bill Maron | April 18, 2007 11:15 AM | Report abuse

A case for impeachment is very strong. I quote Rep. John Conyers in his ongoing report of potential Bush Administration crimes:

"The misconduct found is not only serious, but widespread. The laws implicated by the Bush administration's actions include federal laws against making false statements to congress; federal laws and international treaties, such as the Geneva Convention, prohibiting torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment; federal laws concerning retaliating against witnesses and other government employees; Executive Orders concerning leaking and other misuse of intelligence; federal regulations and ethical requirements governing conflicts of interest; FISA laws; communications privacy laws; the National Security Act; and the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. All told, some 26 separate laws and regulations have been implicated by the actions of various individuals within the Bush administration. Significantly, none of the misconduct has been independently reviewed by the Executive Branch, Congress or the Courts."

Impeachment will never result in a conviction in the Senate, as the GOP representatives will not allow it, but it would at least allow the facts to be presented to the Nation and the world in hopes of preventing such abuses from happening again in the future.

This shouldn't be a partisan issue. It's about the good of the Nation now and in the future, no matter which party holds the White House.

At what point do we stop being Republicans and Democrats and start being Americans? Our Nation is crumbling while we bicker about nonsense.

Republican and Democratic supporters need to start holding their representatives accountable instead of merely making excuses for their inept "leadership."

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Jim,

"Our last president Impeached for a personal indiscretion while this present group of usurpers continue to bleed our country of all its precious assets. How is it possible?"

It's possible because our last President was impeached NOT for a personal indiscretion but because he LIED UNDER OATH AKA PERJURY. By the way, perjury is worse than burglery and assault under our laws and is punishable up to 5 years federal time. Frankly, Clinton was lucky he didn't get worse punishment and incredibly lucky he wasn't ousted from office by the Senate.

Oh, and President Bush has not committed any High Crimes or Misdemeanors to be impeached.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 11:19 AM | Report abuse

"Definitely!! He certainly should be impeached for his 6 years of intentionally lying to the American people about many things, the list is endless."

I would personally be interested in seeing this endless list you talk about.....

Posted by: Jen06 | April 18, 2007 11:23 AM | Report abuse

That's what I am talking about, Pepsiholic and juliannd who would have you beleive "mental institution and bongwater" all key words of misdirection. Just to let you two losers know, I am a disabled Veteran whom as Republicans you so adore (liars). I so willing to lay down my life for selfish monsters of the likes of you two. You must be either children of the rich or just rich by proxy. You the ones who now judge me and don't know me and who have probably NEVER served in the military are the same ones I spoke of above most likely. So NO I am neither Mental or on Drugs but thank-you for the nicety like the great republican people you claim to be.

Posted by: The Fosk | April 18, 2007 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Thomas,

If a case for impeachment is so strong, WHY haven't the Democrats MADE one to date? Answer, because the case hasn't even been MADE, much less strong.

I WELCOME the Democrats trying to make a case...LET them. And when it fails, as it surely must, they will look ridiculous.

BTW, look at my previous posts for an explaination why I believe it will never happen.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Whether true or not, the narrowly impeachable offense of perjury is discussed here and there on the web, as a bit of research reveals.

This regards the VP's sworn testimony to the 9/11 Commission.

Now why would a Vice President fail to tell the truth under such circumstances? Perhaps this was simply a lapse of memory.

Regards

http://www.realitytest.com/see.htm

Posted by: CPScott | April 18, 2007 11:30 AM | Report abuse

The Fosk,

I just got back from Afghanistan and am currently STILL in the National Guard. I served proudly there and would go again in a heartbeat if called.

I have NO problems with people giving their opinions but if they say they would like to have a sitting President impeached, I would like to know the charge given. "He lied to me" ISN'T sufficient UNLESS he was under oath (as Bill Clinton was). However, I am willing to listen if you have logical arguments to the contrary.

And thank you for your service to our country. I've known many a brave soul like you and am proud to count myself among your number.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Fosk

Although I disagree with absolutely everything you say, I would personally like to thank you for your service. I am a huge supporter of the US military and appreciate everything that the members have sacrificed for the welfare of all of us.

Posted by: Jen06 | April 18, 2007 11:33 AM | Report abuse

CPscott,

Remember who we are talking about and the timeframe in which the questions are being asked about. Can you remember every detail of everything that happened to you so long ago?

Frankly, I think it's AMAZING these people can remember as much as they do.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 11:33 AM | Report abuse

RICHARD B. CHENEY'S ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT:
Article I
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, has conspired to exceed his constitutional authority to wage war, in that:
Richard B. Cheney has violated the U.N. Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, by threatening the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Iran. Richard B. Cheney's threat of force against Iran has included the possibility of nuclear force. Article VI of the United States Constitution makes the U.N. Charter the law of the land.
These violations of the law pose a grave threat to the national security of the United States. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article II
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, has conspired to exceed his constitutional authority to wage war, in that:
Richard B. Cheney has subverted the Constitution, its guarantee of a republican form of government, and the constitutional separation of powers by undermining the rightful authority of Congress to declare war, oversee foreign affairs, and make appropriations. He did so by justifying a war with false and misleading statements and deceived the people of the United States as well as Congress. He denied the electorate the right to make an informed choice and thereby undermined democracy.
Richard B. Cheney also committed fraud against the United States by lying to and intentionally misleading Congress about the reasons for the Iraq war. Cheney pressured intelligence services to produce false and misleading reports, and Cheney used those reports to mislead the Congress and the people of the United States.
Richard B. Cheney acted contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subverted the constitutional government to the prejudice of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article III
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, has arrogated excessive power to the executive branch in violation of basic constitutional principles of the separation of powers.
Richard B. Cheney and his subordinates have advocated for a legal theory of the "unitary executive" aimed at placing the President above the rule of law. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article IV
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, has violated the rights of citizens and non-citizens by arbitrarily detaining them indefinitely inside and outside of the United States, without due process, without charges, and with limited, if any, access to counsel or courts.
Richard B. Cheney has condoned torture, failed to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for torture, and officially refused to accept the binding nature of a statutory ban on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
Richard B. Cheney has offended our system of government by attempting to expand executive power at the expense of the other two branches of government. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article V
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, has sought to mislead the people of the United States and the Congress by hiding information without justification, selectively releasing misleading pieces of information, threatening officials with retribution should they reveal information, and exacting retribution against whistle blowers.
Richard B. Cheney has abused his power by conspiring to reveal the identity of a covert agent of the Central Intelligence Agency and the front-group she worked for. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article VI
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, has maintained an improper and unethical relationship with his former employers at Halliburton and has promoted its agenda and interests over those of the American people.
Richard B. Cheney has allowed a small group of corporate executives to plan national policies in secret, and enacted policies that benefited a corporation from which the Vice President financially profited.
(1) In January 2001, the vice president did oversee a secret task force composed of corporate lobbyists and executives from the oil, gas, coal, and nuclear-energy sector, known collectively as the National Energy Policy Development Group, instructing them to meet regularly and develop the nation's energy policy.
(2) By conducting these meetings in secret, the vice president did endeavor to impart influence to corporate interests without public knowledge, eclipsing not only the oversight function of Congress generally but the specific role of the energy committees in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
(3) During the course of these secret meetings, the vice president allowed lobbyists representing the oil, coal, gas, and nuclear-energy industries to compose, word-for-word, the national energy policy adopted by the Department of Energy, in gross violation of the public trust and all ethical norms.
On March 25, 2002, and thereafter, the Vice President did willfully disobey court orders to identify the members of the National Energy Policy Development Group. In September 2002, and prior thereto, the Vice President did also refuse requests by Representatives Henry Waxman and John Dingell, as well as the Government Accountability Office, to release transcripts and papers produced by the aforementioned group. Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Who's Dennis Kucinich?

Posted by: Bill Harrison | April 18, 2007 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Abel, Kuchinich has balls? Peaceniks don't have balls.

Posted by: Jack | April 18, 2007 11:37 AM | Report abuse

chiefpayne

Thank you, also, for your service!

Posted by: Jen06 | April 18, 2007 11:37 AM | Report abuse

GEORGE W. BUSH'S ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT
Article I
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has conspired to exceed his constitutional authority to wage war, in that:
George W. Bush has violated the U.N. Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, by threatening the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Iran. Bush's threat of force against Iran has included the possibility of nuclear force. Bush has secretly supported preliminary acts of war within Iran with neither approval from nor funding by Congress.
Bush has initiated the development of new nuclear weapons, in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Article VI of the United States Constitution makes the U.N. Charter and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty the law of the land.
These violations of the law pose a grave threat to the national security of the United States. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article II
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has conspired to exceed his constitutional authority to wage war, in that:
George W. Bush has subverted the Constitution, its guarantee of a republican form of government, and the constitutional separation of powers by undermining the rightful authority of Congress to declare war, oversee foreign affairs, and make appropriations. He did so by justifying a war with false and misleading statements and deceived the people of the United States as well as Congress. He denied the electorate the right to make an informed choice and thereby undermined democracy.
George W. Bush also committed fraud against the United States by lying to and intentionally misleading Congress about the reasons for the Iraq war.
George W. Bush also misappropriated funds with which to conduct the preliminary stages of this war, prior to receiving any funding or any form of authorization from Congress.
George W. Bush, in violation of the United Nations Charter, which is the law of the land under the U.S. Constitution, Article VI, launched an aggressive war neither in self-defense nor under authorization of the UN Security Council.
George W. Bush acted contrary to his trust as president, and subverted the constitutional government to the prejudice of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article III
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has allowed the U.S. military to violate treaties to which the United States is party and has failed to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for these abuse.
These violations include the targeting of civilians, journalists, and medical personnel, and the illegal use of a variety of weapons, including:
-Land mines, used in Afghanistan and Iraq in violation of Geneva Conventions Protocol I, Article 85, and Protocol II of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons;
-Cluster bombs, used in Afghanistan and Iraq in violation of Geneva Conventions Protocol I, Article 85, and Protocol I of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons;
-Depleted uranium munitions, used in Afghanistan and Iraq in violation of Geneva Conventions Protocol 1, Articles 35.2, 35.3, 48 and 55.1;
-Napalm or Mark 77 Firebomb, used in Iraq in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, Article II.1.b;
-White phosphorous, which Defense Department spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Barry Venable confirmed on November 15, 2005 was deployed "as an incendiary weapon' in urban areas of Fallujah, Iraq, where there were high concentrations of civilians, during Operation Phantom Fury (November 2004-January 2005), making the said deployment of white phosphorous a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, Article II.1.b;
-BLU-82B/C-130 "daisy cutter' bombs, used in Afghanistan in violation of Geneva Conventions Protocol I, Articles 35, 48, 51 and 55.
Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article IV
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has directed or authorized the National Security Agency and various other agencies within the intelligence community to conduct electronic surveillance outside of the statutes Congress has prescribed as the exclusive means for such surveillance, and to use such information for purposes unknown but unrelated to any lawful function of his office; he has also concealed the existence of this unlawful program of electronic surveillance from Congress, the press, and the public. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article V
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has arrogated excessive power to the executive branch in violation of basic constitutional principles of the separation of powers.
George W. Bush has formally declared his intent to violate the laws enacted by Congress by appending a "signing statement" to legislation, asserting his right to carve out exceptions to legislation as he sees fit, thereby arrogating to himself powers reserved solely to Congress. George W. Bush has, in several instances, gone on to act on his self-declared right to violate these laws. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article VI
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has violated the rights of citizens and non-citizens by arbitrarily detaining them indefinitely inside and outside of the United States, without due process, without charges, and with limited, if any, access to counsel or courts.
George W. Bush has abused his power and failed to faithfully execute the laws of the United States by allowing his administration to condone torture, failing to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for torture, and officially refusing to accept the binding nature of a statutory ban on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
George W. Bush has offended our system of government by attempting to expand his power at the expense of the other two branches of government. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article VII
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has allowed his administration to fire United States Attorneys in retaliation for the proper performance of their jobs when that performance conflicted with the partisan interests of the President, and has failed to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for this abuse. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article VIII
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has sought to mislead the people of the United States and the Congress by hiding information without justification, selectively releasing misleading pieces of information, funding misleading journalism, producing misleading video reports falsely presented as independent journalism, using the U.S. military to target journalists in Iraq, threatening officials with retribution should they reveal information, and exacting retribution against whistle blowers.
George W. Bush has abused his power and failed to faithfully execute the laws of the United States by allowing his administration to reveal the identity of a covert agent of the Central Intelligence Agency and the front-group she worked for, and by failing to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for this security breach. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.
Article IX
In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed to take reasonable steps to protect the City of New Orleans from Hurricane Katrina, and intentionally misled the American people regarding this failure. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 11:39 AM | Report abuse

chiefpayne568:
The case is overwhelming but the gutless Democrats are more concerned with playing politics then performing their constitutional obligations.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Fosk, Once again, you are wrong. I served in the military for 8 years, USS Woodrow Wilson and Simon Bolivar. Now I'm out of the navy and making close to 6 figures thanks to the training I got in the Navy.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Thomas

Article I: Richard B. Cheney has violated the U.N. Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, by threatening the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Iran.

Answer: Irrelevant. Making threats of force against a foreign country is NOT an impeachable offense.

Article 2 - Richard B. Cheney has subverted the Constitution, its guarantee of a republican form of government, and the constitutional separation of powers by undermining the rightful authority of Congress to declare war, oversee foreign affairs, and make appropriations. He did so by justifying a war with false and misleading statements and deceived the people of the United States as well as Congress. He denied the electorate the right to make an informed choice and thereby undermined democracy.

Answer - Already said this but the world wide intelligence given at that time said SPECIFICALLY what was given to Congress, who by the way, had the SAME intelligence information and voted accordingly.

Article 3 - Richard B. Cheney and his subordinates have advocated for a legal theory of the "unitary executive" aimed at placing the President above the rule of law.

Answer - Advocacy is NOT an impeachable offense, even IF true.

Article 4 - Richard B. Cheney has condoned torture, failed to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for torture, and officially refused to accept the binding nature of a statutory ban on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
Richard B. Cheney has offended our system of government by attempting to expand executive power at the expense of the other two branches of government.

Answer: None of which has been supported by evidence NOR shown to support Impeachment. However, War Powers provide expanded power to the Executive during times of war.

Article 5 - Richard B. Cheney has abused his power by conspiring to reveal the identity of a covert agent of the Central Intelligence Agency and the front-group she worked for.

Answer: ALREADY proven to be UNTRUE in court.

Article 6 - Richard B. Cheney has allowed a small group of corporate executives to plan national policies in secret, and enacted policies that benefited a corporation from which the Vice President financially profited.
(1) In January 2001, the vice president did oversee a secret task force composed of corporate lobbyists and executives from the oil, gas, coal, and nuclear-energy sector, known collectively as the National Energy Policy Development Group, instructing them to meet regularly and develop the nation's energy policy.
(2) By conducting these meetings in secret, the vice president did endeavor to impart influence to corporate interests without public knowledge, eclipsing not only the oversight function of Congress generally but the specific role of the energy committees in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
(3) During the course of these secret meetings, the vice president allowed lobbyists representing the oil, coal, gas, and nuclear-energy industries to compose, word-for-word, the national energy policy adopted by the Department of Energy, in gross violation of the public trust and all ethical norms.
On March 25, 2002, and thereafter, the Vice President did willfully disobey court orders to identify the members of the National Energy Policy Development Group. In September 2002, and prior thereto, the Vice President did also refuse requests by Representatives Henry Waxman and John Dingell, as well as the Government Accountability Office, to release transcripts and papers produced by the aforementioned group.

Answer: Presidental authority allows the Executive to withhold sensitive meeting information from Congress if said information affects functionality of Executive duties or War time duties.

Still waiting on substantial evidence from ANYONE.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Sorry Thomas,

But all I see is subjective arguments at BEST. I'm looking for actual documented proof and have yet to see any at all.

As I said earlier, impeachment equates to a Grand Jury where the jury of your peers reviews the evidence to determine if sufficient evidence exists to forward the case to trial, or in the case of impeachment, to trial in the Senate.

So far, I haven't seen sufficient evident to even warrant an Impeachment.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Indeed, let's have impeachment hearings. Then when the evidence is provided the statement of the delusional left that Bush and Cheney lied will be debunked forever. Simply, because someone says he lied don't make it so and the evidence that he did is not there.

Posted by: jmadison | April 18, 2007 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Fosk,

"You the ones who now judge me and don't know me and who have probably NEVER served in the military are the same ones I spoke of above most likely."

Well, since I did serve in the military, grew up poor on a farm. I guess I will judge you and find you totally lacking in honesty, facts, logic and... just being a hateful person.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 11:50 AM | Report abuse

chiefpayne568:

I can't speak for our VP but I still remember the morning of 9/11 quite vividly, even now.

Of course Mr. Cheney is a very busy man, with all kinds of responsibilities; much has transpired since that morning, too.

I can't vouch for what was and was not sworn testimony to the 9/11 Commission, either; I wasn't there. I have yet to find full transcripts of the proceedings on the web but then I don't have the time to do so at the moment.

Regards

Posted by: CPScott | April 18, 2007 11:53 AM | Report abuse

President Pelosi ... now, that's a scary thought !!!

Posted by: Rooster211 | April 18, 2007 11:57 AM | Report abuse

chiefpayne568:
Your defensive arguments are just flat wrong. They blatantly violated domestic and international laws on numerous occasions. International laws are the "law of the land" and therefore violating them can be considered an impeachable offense.

As far as "showing you the evidence", that's what a trial is for. These are the charges. The evidence is presented at trial. That's how it works.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:00 PM | Report abuse

What a sad state of affairs we're seeing. It's incredible that so many people have been convinced by the Radical Far Left that President Bush and Vice President Cheney are somehow responsible for everything evil that has happened around the world. Thank God we have two men of strong faith and steadfast leadership in their positions. It is hard to imagine how out of control things would be if Al Gore or John Kerry had been elected. The Radical Far Left and their followers seem to resent the fact that we now have leaders who practice principled leadership instead of catering to every poll or naive demand.

If the Democrats were in the least interested in improving government, they would be busy carrying out their legitimate constitutional resposibility by proposing legislation to address the ills of our Country instead of spending an obscene amount of time and energy playing "gotcha" with the Administration.

My only hope is that the Dems continue to be as enept at being an effective majority party as they have been so far. That will insure that they continue to be their own worst enemy. I believe the Republican Party has learned it's lesson and will return to majority status in '08. At least I hope so.

Posted by: CASEY JONES | April 18, 2007 12:02 PM | Report abuse

I am from Ohio and Kucinich is a major embarrassment to our State.

As to most of the rest of you, just how much Kool-Aid do you drink a day?

Despite the advanced symptoms of Bush Derangement Syndrome that most of you are exhibiting, there have been NO crimes committed by either the President or the Vice President that would even remotely justify Articles of Impeachment. Do you honestly believe that if any existed there would be any hesitation on Nancy Pelosi's part to pursue that course of action? She has already proven herself to be reckless and seditious at the best of times and a flaming incompetent the rest of the time.

Get a grip people. This is NOT the time to be flaunting unreasoning hatred. THAT is what killed a lot of people in Blacksburg this week.

Posted by: Gilbert's Daughter | April 18, 2007 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Literally, ever one of your "defenses" is completely and utterly flawed. Across the board. Just flat wrong. Legally. Morally.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

There has to be sufficient evidence to support HAVING an Impeachment. So far, there's been NONE.

Further, while it may be the law of the land, there has been no obvious violation of laws to support an Impeachment.

Sorry but I don't agree with you. BTW, an Impeachment must have a High Crime or Misdemeanor - now which would you suggest is in operation here if they HAVE violated said international laws (which I assume you are saying I am wrong about)? After all, if one has broken the law, one MUST be brought up on charges - so what charges are they?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:05 PM | Report abuse

I can't fathom those who keep existing, in spite of the mountain of evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors, that there is "no evidence" of wrongdoing. It boggles the mind.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:06 PM | Report abuse

War crimes, for starters. Bush and Cheney should stand trial at the Hague, let alone face impeachment.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

I have made NO defenses...I am merely stating FACTS.

I have nothing to defend...the burdeon of proof is on the prosecution to provide evidence of crimes, not on the defense. Remember, innocent until PROVEN guilty.

You say my facts are flawed across the board, legally and morally. Care to elaborate?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Oddly, this will do very little good for the country because it's like switching seats on the Titanic at this point. Now if there was a way to impeach his entire administration- Then charge them for crimes against humanity, treason (for selling our country out in 2005 to form the American Union) Then Dennis would really be onto something! Naturally, the massacre at Virginia tech, yet another weapon of mass distraction- I doubt anything will come of it. Whatever happened to the three captured Israeli soldiers that started a war in Hezbola? See what I mean?

Posted by: Darrell Kern | April 18, 2007 12:08 PM | Report abuse

The President of the United States of America does not AND NEVER WILL answer to the most corrupt POLITICAL body in the world - the United Nations.

Anyone remember Oil-for-Food?

Dear Lord, what a bunch of troglodytes.

Posted by: Gilbert's Daughter | April 18, 2007 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

The Hague?! Now you really ARE stretching a bit. Just WHAT would you use to try to arrest, much less prosecute, these men in THAT venue?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Your "facts" are in fact not factual in the slightest.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Finally a Dem with back bone. Go Kucinich!
We really need to try Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, Gonzo and others for war crimes, but this is a small baby step.

Posted by: Tariq Butt | April 18, 2007 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

My facts are equivalent to yours. Thus if we are equal to each other, then in fact no evidence is shown.

My facts are based on what is known as are yours. But you insist that there is more there, yet cannot produce it.

Therefore we are both subject to speculation...NOT an impeachable offense.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Chief,

To a liberal, facts do not have to be factual. All that is required is a belief.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

I will, however, concede that I an impeachment would not be a bad idea. Since evidence WILL have to be provided, this will cause those who clamor for such to produce it or retract their comments.

I have no problems going ahead with one, provided the Democrats can produce at least SOMETHING of sufficient merit to go forward with the hearings.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Let's go through the "facts" one at a time, shall we?

"Answer: Irrelevant. Making threats of force against a foreign country is NOT an impeachable offense."

Completely and utterly incorrect. Making threats against a foreign country is a violation of U.N. Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, and therfore it is a violation of the laws of the United States of America. As such, it is certainly an impeachable offense. Unless breaking the law is not an impeachable offense?

Breaking the law is not a "high crime" or a "misdemeanor" in your opinion?

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Cheif the "I thank-you for your service to our country" is another of the Republican one liners. If you meant it you would have said the exact same line to veterans of vietnam. I said to them, "wished I was there to serve with you". As far as Democrats being gutless, I could have shown you how a few of us gutless democrats looked like in surgery, some of our guts were spilled on streets of a senseless war. As for Pepsiholic I am so glad you missed the action and are now making a 6 figure income, I guess maybe you can hire some of us gutless disabled people, put us in handicapped vans wheel us into your job and put us to work. Although some can't see others can't lift things and most can't walk. I guess I can tell you making a low 5 figure income for laying down my life just makes it worthwhile, I love the 7 different medications I take and the seizures I get 2 to 3 times a day and the feeling of having to have somebody wipe my behind. So of course all of you brave republicans who sent us to a war of deception I want to thank-you. Your hero's need to go to jail if they deceived me into going to a war with no wmd's. If you want to find out whether they lied or not, why do they block every investigation or inquirie launched? If you just leave it to me to have an answer I would automatically feel they have a need to hide something and I demand to know. I am a citizen of this country and my constitution allows me to question my political leaders in accordance to the law of this land, and to impeach or to criminally indite those who think they are above the law and the constitution.

Posted by: The Fosk | April 18, 2007 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Fosk,

My girlfriend works at a hospitals and sees that sort of thing from car wrecks. Should we outlaw cars?

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Fosk,

How about we start an investigation into what Sandy Burglar really stole... or how about Diane Feinstein's war profiteering?

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Pepsiholic:
We should investigate members of both parties who have potentially broken the law.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Still waiting on substantial evidence from ANYONE.


Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 11:46 AM
`
Chief, It's simple. Impeach Cheney because he's evil. Of course the Senate isn't going to convict him, but it will force Republican candidates in 2008 to defend evil, just as vigorously as you have done here.
You are a great Devil's advocate, but remember this. Satan never pays his bills yet always collects his due. Has it ever occurred to you that having a Commander in Chief that is loathed by the majority of Americans is not such a good idea? By dividing this country the way he has, puts us in grave danger.


Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Chief, All you have to do is look at the Plame "outing" to see where the liberal priorities are. remember, they wanted blood for the leaking of Plame's name... they wanted Rove frog marched to jail... they wanted justice!!!!!

Oh wait... it was Armitage who leaked her name... D*mn, he's not part of the Bush White house... honest mistake... what other non-issue can we now investigate???? Missing High Explosives... whoops, already did that... how about the D.A. story???

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

So per your view, if President threatens North Korea to stay away from South Korea or fact military consequences, that is an Impeachable offense? That makes no sense to me at all.

So, No I do not consider making threats against another country an impeachable offense. If this is a crime, then a great number of OTHER heads of countries will have to be charged as well.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:31 PM | Report abuse

"So of course all of you brave republicans who sent us to a war of deception I want to thank-you."

Ah Fosk... I believed that the democrats also voted for the war... at least a majority of them did.

Posted by: Pepsiholic | April 18, 2007 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

"Has it ever occurred to you that having a Commander in Chief that is loathed by the majority of Americans is not such a good idea? By dividing this country the way he has, puts us in grave danger."

Actually, I'd rather have a CIC who is willing to do what he thinks is right DESPITE what others may think of him. Frankly, I think that's a better leader.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Fosk,

I worked in the Casualty office and SAW a lot of what you are talking about. I ALSO grew up during the Vietnam War and saw a LOT of those guys come back and saw how they looked! I have lost friends in BOTH wars! I do NOT make a 6 figure income and work 2 jobs in ADDITION to being in the National Guard!

Now that I got THAT out of my system, I just wanted to let you know you're confusing me with someone else. I NEVER said Democrats were gutless. I will say I do not understand their logic.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Chief,
So breaking the law is not impeachable in that particular instance, right? Okay. Shall we move on down the line? How about the FISA defense? Let's hear the defense of Bush's authorization for the NSA to break the FISA laws?

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:40 PM | Report abuse

I believe that if Sandy Burglar did anything wrong and an investigation took place then by all means a criminal trial is in order. NOBODY IS ABOVE CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS, Democrats as well as Republicans. Just to let you know that I NEVER protested that Clinton should not have been impeached, he lied under oath. What I seek is the truth, and am ashamed that my brothers and sisters in arms who supposedly spoke the same oath as I did, interpret the constitution to fit their own agenda, (both democrats and republicans) instead of it's most pure form.

Posted by: The Fosk | April 18, 2007 12:41 PM | Report abuse


GOOD!


Posted by: JD | April 18, 2007 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

If you mean by threatening a country, yes - because it is NOT breaking the law. If it were so, then all heads of state who signed the treaty are breaking this "law". As such, there is nothing there.

As for the FISA ANSWER - already given:

Instituted by Presidental Executive Order - precedence set by earlier Presidental Executive orders - currently awaiting court battle to determine legality of said wiretapping - AGAIN irrelevant as it has not been proven illegal and was done by Executive order which is in keeping with rights reserved for the Executive branch. Even if proven illegal, is not impeachable as judgement was not set PRIOR to Executive Order.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Fosk,

I have no problem with getting to the truth...however, let's make sure we aren't on a witch-hunt. I have no problem with having evidence brought to bear, assuming there is evidence somewhere.

My problem is, I haven't seen any as yet.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Heck, if "treason, bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" could result in the impeachment of high ranking officials in the Government Congress would have nothing left to do but hold impeachment hearings.

I say a better place to clean house is the Securities and Exchange Commission. They have committed treason against the investors of this country as they allow our banks to launder money for criminals and allow the wealthy to manipulate our markets through offshore (tax free) funds. We don't even need Dennis Kucinich for this one, every American can vote for this action at www.investigatethesec.com.

Posted by: Patchie | April 18, 2007 12:48 PM | Report abuse

I suggest we impeach Dennis Kooksnitchass. When was the last time he went to a library? And what's he hiding underneath that hair? You know he's part of that super secret Rastafarian socity that wants to take over the world.

Posted by: Bud Munchlip | April 18, 2007 12:49 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe the puerile comments about impeachment that I'm seeing here. You people are complete fanatics. If this is the best "cause" to which you can attach your time, you might want to rethink your lives.

Brain-check: How many of you are secretly jumping on the bandwagon without critically analyzing anything you've heard about "Bush lied, people died". You really need to attach those brain stems to a pool of quick-grow.

Oh, and just because it's on the news (I know this may break your heart), doesn't mean it's true. Here's another stunning development: Just because a website says it, doesn't mean it's true. Just because multiple websites circularly link each other doesn't mean there is a mountain of evidence for impeachment.

Oh, and screw the U.N. That organization is more corrupt than the U.S. Congress without a doubt. Let's impeach them. Oh. Wait.

Posted by: Stunned | April 18, 2007 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I'm confused. How exactly is threatenting another country not breaking the law when it is in violation of U.N. Charter, Article 2, paragraph 4, which is inherently a law of the United States? It's a violation of the law. Period. There's no debate. Whether you think Bush's violation of that law warrants impeachment is another discussion, but it is without question a violation of International and therefore U.S. law.

Now, your "defense" of the blatant FISA violation sound like the kind of defense his lawyers would bring up in an impeachment trial, no? There's no debate as to whether Bush authorized violation of the FISA statute, is there? He admitted as much. Your "defense" is merely a defensive argument to a valid charge.

How exactly does your defense negate the right to offer an article of impeachment in this instance? I don't understand.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Stunned:
I've done enormous research on the subject and there is ample evidence to support impeachment. It's no fantasy. And I'm no democrat.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 12:54 PM | Report abuse

I am sure the terrorists are very pleased with our inability to unite during a time of war!

Posted by: John | April 18, 2007 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich is an idiot and the only thing harder to fathom than his continued presence in Congress is why the people of Massachusetts continue to elect the homicidal boozer, Chappaquiddick Ted, to the Senate. No, cancel that... there's Waters, Frank, Jefferson, Schumer, Kerry, Clinton, Byrd, and a whole host of idiots, crooks, philanderers and scofflaws that are reelected to Congress by millions of equally idiotic voters who take people like Kucinich seriously. Congress should impeach itself and give us back our money. Never mind--they'd most likely screw that up, too.

Posted by: TrickyDick | April 18, 2007 12:58 PM | Report abuse

I love it when liberals try to act like lawyers. Unless someone can point to a specific "high crime or misdemeanor" here, (like perjury, in Clinton's case) then this is nothing but a Stalinist show trial.

Simply disagreeing with the Vice President doesn't count.

Posted by: Jahpdq | April 18, 2007 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Jahpdq:
Can't you read? How many more specifics do you need? They have been listed over and over.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:01 PM | Report abuse

The "Center for Constitutional Rights" wrote articles of impeachment for Bush and they're very good. If they want to impeach...impeach them both.

http://zzpat.bravehost.com/april_2006/articles_of_impeachment.html

Posted by: zzpat | April 18, 2007 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Based on the ramblings I read on this page and the like, I seriously wonder if being a Left-wing, Liberal, Democrat is actually more of a mental illness rather than a political view point. The ability to distort truth and reality is most disturbing. The ability to take massive leaps of ridiculous and preposterous in the face of what is staring you in the face is truly disturbing. I've followed politics for many decades and, having different viewpoints on any given topic or issue used to be the norm. But what I see now from the left is a real neuro-psychosis when it comes to distorting reality. I think Liberal Democrats need to take a half dozen Paxils a day for a year before they should be allowed to discuss or vote on anything more important then what the next Smartie color should be!! You folks ( lefties) should take off the multi-colored glasses and look at the world the way it actually is for once.

Posted by: Meathead | April 18, 2007 1:03 PM | Report abuse

John,
You need a reality check. What "terrorists" are you referring to? The Iraqi citizens fighting our illegal occupation?

If only we were actually interested in bringing "liberty, security and stability to the people of Iraq". If you actually believe that, then you need a refresher course in U.S. foreign policy (and I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you).

A true "democracy" in Iraq is the very LAST thing the neo-liberals in Washington would ever want.

A sovereign Iraq, partially democratic, could well be a disaster for US planners. With a Shiite majority, it is likely to continue improving relations with Iran. There is a Shiite population right across the border in Saudi Arabia, bitterly oppressed by the US-backed tyranny. Any step towards sovereignty in Iraq encourages activism there for human rights and a degree of autonomy -- and that happens to be where most of Saudi oil is. Sovereignty in Iraq might well lead to a loose Shiite alliance controlling most of the world's hydrocarbon resources and independent of the US, undermining a primary goal of US foreign policy since it became the world-dominant power after World War II. Worse yet, though the US can intimidate Europe, it cannot intimidate China, which blithely goes its own way, even in Saudi Arabia, the jewel in the crown -- the primary reason why China is considered a leading threat. An independent energy bloc in the Gulf area is likely to link up with the China-based Asian Energy Security Grid and Shanghai Cooperation Council, with Russia (which has its own huge resources) as an integral part, along with the Central Asian states (already members), possibly India. Iran is already associated with them, and a Shiite dominated bloc in the Arab states might well go along. All of that would be a nightmare for US planners, and its Western allies.

What they really want is another puppet government who will cater to U.S. corporate interests at the expense of the native population.

This GUARANTEES terrorist-causing resentment that will be taken out on U.S. soldiers and civilians, which is merely a nuisance to those, like Dick Cheney and friends, who stand to make many more millions of dollars in "defense" and oil profits. After all, it's not their kids who are on the front lines.

Just look at the Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law, which privatizes 81% of Iraq's currently, nationalized petroleum resources, opening them to "investment" by Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco, and two British oil companies, BP/Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell. These companies expect to sign the rarely used and notoriously profitable contracts called "production sharing agreements" which guarantee them extraordinarily high profit margins: they might capture more than half of the oil revenues for the first 15-30 years of the contracts' lifespan, and deny Iraq any income at all until their infrastructure "investments" have been recovered.

So the Iraqi people will share among themselves all the revenue from 1/5th of their country's oil reserves. But they will get only a fraction from the remaining 4/5ths, where the American and British oil companies expect to generate immense profits.

American Foreign Policy is "rich" with similar stories. Add to that our enormous history of subverting democratically elected governments across the globe (including Iraq in the 50's and 60's and Iran in 1953). Add to that the system of economic strangulation forced upon most of the third world through imperialist institutions and concepts like the IMF, World Bank (Paul Wolfowitz, architect of the invasion of Iraq BACK IN 1997 was named head of the World bank by Bush - surprise, surprise) and ironically titled North American Free Trade Agreement.

Do you think the neo-liberal agenda stops at a "democratic" Iraq? No. They have made it clear that Iran is the next target.

Iran has the oil and is not under the thumb of Washington, making them a de facto "enemy" of the U.S. and the west in general. Israel, the United States militant ally in the region, has always longed to install their own puppet government in Lebanon to make the "refugee problem" much simpler to "solve". Iran has ties to Hezbollah, which has successfully defied Israels imperialist ambitions in Lebanon. Therefore, Iran is only our enemy and Israel's enemy in so much as they have proven to be a serious obstacle to imperial aggression, and not because they pose any serious threat to the United States or Israeli homelands.

Let's logically look at the Iranian "threat". What would happen to Iran if they attacked either Israel or the United States, either directly or through a secondary agent? The answer is simple; they would be wiped from the face of the earth in a few hours. Israel has the capability to do this all by themselves. The United States clearly could do it as well. So, an attack by Iran would essentially be a call for mass suicide by the Iranian government. That makes little sense. What makes a lot of sense, in fact it's as clear as day at a mere glance, is the concept that Iran is only our "enemy" because they refuse to cater to U.S. and Israeli hegemony in the region. It's obvious.

Let's look at the nuclear threat that has everyone up in arms. Iran has maintained the right to produce nuclear power, which is in fact their right under the existing Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaties. No independent monitor has found any proof that they have moved in the direction of nuclear weaponry, yet the U.N. still has been bullied into sanctioning them. Meanwhile, it is common knowledge that Israel has stockpiled an enormous nuclear arsenal at Iran's doorstep, thanks to the good old U.S.A, in violation of those same NPT's. When the U.N has repeatedly called for sanctions to be brought against Israel, the U.S. has vetoed those proposed sanctions in an egregious double standard that is never commented on in the United States corporate media.

By the way, the propaganda hit it's peak with the corporate media firestorm over Ahmadinejad allegedly saying, "Israel must be wiped off the map," which, it turns out was conveniently mistranslated in the U.S. and Israel. What he actually said, which was barely reported after the fact, was "The regime occupying Israel must vanish from the pages of history". Much different. It was clearly a shot at the current Israeli leadership, not the civilian population.

In any case, one needs to just look at the facts to see that WE are the threat to Iran, and not the other way around. If Iran's greatest resource were pistachios and coffee beans, would they be our enemy? Of course not.

It's all related. Bush and Cheney lied us into a war that has numerous goals. Disposing of Hussein was just one of these goals. The other major goal is regime change in Iran. We want to install a puppet government in Iran who will cater to our corporate interests at the expense of the native population. Sound familiar?

I contend that this policy helps very few, very wealthy Americans, while subjecting the rest of the American population to increased terrorist threats and reduced freedom and liberty here at home under the guise of "national security".

All of this talk of "defeat," "surrender," "support the troops," etc is straight out of the fascist propaganda playbook. Get the population scared and riled up and then they will allow you to do things against their own interest and the interest of the overwhelming majority of the world population.

So what does this mean?

We have a choice. Either we want the American Empire or the American Democracy.

The American Empire, like all empires throughout history has a foundation of massive violence, unilateral dismissal of international laws and treaties, reduced freedom liberty and justice at home and abroad, increased threats of resentment and retaliation, increased military spending, reduced social spending, ever-widening economic gaps between the have's and have-nots, enormous gains of wealth and treasure into the coffers of an elite few, and so on.

The American Democracy respects the rule of law at home and abroad, respects the will of the American people over the needs of corporate profit, reduced military spending leading to increased spending on much needed social programs like universal health care, school maintenance and education, infrastructure projects, poverty reduction, feeding the hungry, seeks to influence justice around the world instead of hegemony, and so on.

Does this mean we have to become the bullied instead of the bully? Of course not. We are currently the most powerful country in the history of the human race. We spend as much on our "defense" budget each year as the rest of the planet combined. We can easily provide a true defense for our Nation as the American Democracy. The enormous additional cost is due to our overreach, the hegemonic agenda that comes with Empire.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:04 PM | Report abuse

one clown investigating another clown!

Posted by: joe | April 18, 2007 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

He admitted as much but it's not a crime if it wasn't illegal in the first place, now is it? Your argument is specious at best. WHY impeach someone for doing something that wasn't against the law prior to his doing it? Ex Post Facto.

As per the other comment, Ok...if we are going to judge it by UN charter then yes the law was broken...but to impeach on something which has never been enforced on any other country leadership in the entire world is illogical.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Chief:
How exactly was it not illegal "in the first place?" There are FISA laws on the books. He authorized violation of those laws. I don't understand your position.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:08 PM | Report abuse

I am sure the terrorists are very pleased with our inability to unite during a time of war!

Posted by: John | April 18, 2007 12:57 PM
`
John, How can the country be united when more than half the country despises the President and V.P..
Also why wasn't it considered an act of war when Timothy McVeigh bombed the Federal building in Oklahoma City?
Why did right wingers support a criminal child molestor like David Koresh after he murdered government agents who were just doing their duty?
Jesus is a liberal, love him or leave him.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Thomas:

The point is whether or not the President has sufficient Executive Order privledges from War Powers in order to provide exceptions to the statute. This is what is to be determined in court. If he does NOT have this authority, his Executive Order will have to be recinded.

Now WHY would that be a crime?

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 1:15 PM | Report abuse

IT'S ABOUT TIME SOMEBODY DOES SOMETHING ABOUT THE WORST GANG OF CORRUPT, LYING, THIEVING, MURDERING, FILTHY SCUMBAGS TO EVER ENTER THE WHITE HOUSE.

Posted by: CHARLES K | April 18, 2007 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Chief:
Your "defense" is nothing more than a defensive postion to the charge of violating FISA.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Um. UN Article 2 Paragraph 4? Cheney violated that one... how? I think there were quite a few people who actually voted for the US to go to war. Let's impeach them all! Oh. Wait. We have brains. We should probably use them.

The U.N. is a joke! It is incapable of fulfilling its obligations and its "Charter" is a laundry list of ideals that, when in direct conflict with U.S. interests, MUST go flying out the window.

You're probably in favor of allowing the UN to impose a "carbon tax" on all of its members, aren't you? Admit it. Let's just go all out and jump on the one-world socialist bandwagon. That should ruin us quickly enough.

As for the mountains of evidence, I respectfully submit that your evidence is probably (and I say probably because I have no idea who you are) second-,third-, or even twelfth-hand information.

But, I'm actually a reasonable person. Give it your best shot, but please refrain from idiotic arguments. Just the facts please. Oh, and to prove someone "lied" (by definition) is going to be a very, very hard thing to do.

Posted by: Stunned again | April 18, 2007 1:20 PM | Report abuse

So many people (on all sides) love to use soundbites, take things out of context, or repeat things as fact when they really don't know the source. Occasionally I like to dig into one of these. Here's what I found...

A previous post said this:
[[[According to Sue Lindsey's article (of the Associated Press), the first statement the White House made after the VT shooting was the following:

"A White House spokesman said

President Bush was horrified by the rampage and offered his prayers to the victims and the people of Virginia. "The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed," spokeswoman Dana Perino said "

Why aren't journalists jumping on this? Doesn't this show how special interest oriented he is and how he is out of touch with the main stream and reality?]]]

I wondered if even our sometimes "PR-challenged" Whitehouse could really place these two comments so insensitively close together in a press release.

So, first I went to Sue Lindsay's article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070416/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech_shooting_65) to find that indeed somewhere in her article of a fairly extensive description of what happened, she included the two sentences quoted above. These were the only two sentences related to the Whitehouse and were presented one after the other, just as quoted above.

Next, I went to Whitehouse.gov to find the press briefing that was quoted. Find it at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/04/20070416-1.html

I learned that the first sentence, in which the condolences were presented, was contained in the second paragraph (after the opening "Good afternoon" paragraph) of a 7-paragraph prepared statement. Other statements talked about Iraq, Russia, Nigeria, and the Pope's birthday.

Then, the 9th question (of about 48 questions) from a reporter asked, "Dana, going back to Virginia Tech, what more does this White House think needs to be done as it relates to gun issues? The President says current laws need to be strengthened, anything beyond that -- you had a conference on school violence with guns -- what more needs to be done?

To this question, Ms Perino answered, "I would point you back to the fact that President, along with Secretary Spellings, hosted last October -- October 10, 2006 -- a conference on school gun violence after the Amish school shooting and the other shootings that had happened, because the tragedies are the ones that just collectively break America's heart and are ones that we deeply feel, because all of us can imagine what it would be like to have been at your own school, your own college, and to have something happen. And those of us who are parents, or brothers or sisters of people at the schools have to take that into consideration.

As far as policy, the President believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed. And certainly bringing a gun into a school dormitory and shooting -- I don't want to say numbers because I know that they're still trying to figure out many people were wounded and possibly killed, but obviously that would be against the law and something that someone should be held accountable for."

Shame on Sue Lindsay for presenting it as though the second sentence out of the President's mouth were to defend gun rights. Such out of context reporting only fuels the sound bite and repeat-what-they-heard mentality that so many people use.

When trying to find the sources of this, I inevitably ran across a bunch of people who simply repeated it in Blogs and forums without any care to its context and using it to substantiate whatever point they were trying to make regarding the President's insensitivity, special interests, or whatever.

No wonder it is so hard to have a healthy conversation or debate based on facts. And please remember - I said all sides have people who love to do this. Too bad.

Posted by: testposter | April 18, 2007 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Thomas, thanks for the good work. Keep it up. The Whashington Post blogs are way too important a battlefield to concede to the right wing creeps.
You are up against paid operatives like Chiefpayne. He's just doing his job, but he's countermanding the thrust of the United States Constitution with his every, well articulated word.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

Hardly. It was done by Executive order legally and then the legality of the order was challenged.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Let me see if I have some of this correct .
Grand daddy Bush-Deer Island, Skull & Crossbones-Yale-CIA
George Bush-head of CIA
George Bush Jr. planned an attack against his own people in his own nation in order to go to war-911
Jeb Bush fixed the election in Florida to get his brother elected
Marvin Bush (head of the security company for the World Trade Center buildings) let in the military, set the thermate charges and helped topple three buildings in about 30 seconds.
I know I'm leaving out most of the important stuff; but isn't this enough to warrent some action? Is anyone out there?

Posted by: DLO | April 18, 2007 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

HEY! If I'm getting PAID for this, where the heck is my paycheck! I've never seen one!

Seriously though, I'm sorry to burst your bubble, Son but I am NOT a paid operative to write here. Matter of fact, I'm really getting tired...but I won't stop as long as Thomas want to challenge my statements.

Now if you know where I could sign up to GET paid for doing this...!

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich is a NUT!

Posted by: Barney | April 18, 2007 1:25 PM | Report abuse

lol. Yeah, "stunned," you seem quite reasonable. I've listed a proposed articles of impeachment in this thread. Feel free to look it up.

Also, as I told "chief," articles of impeachment are the CHARGES, the EVIDENCE is what comes out in court. Those of you who keep insisiting on seeing all the evidence PRIOR to a trial have it backwards.

There is sufficient "smoke" to justify serious investigations into the alleged crimes of this administration.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:25 PM | Report abuse

These people are unbelievable! God bless President Bush and Vice President Cheney. May the Dems NEVER get cotrol of both houses of Congress and the White House at the same time. Kucinich needs to go back on his meds- the guy is hallucinating!

Posted by: Bob | April 18, 2007 1:26 PM | Report abuse

I just love the comments by the Bushies on here.

Apparently there's a whole lot of us "whackos" who "hate America" and "want to invite Al Qaeda into our homes" out there...

That's right. There are, and the best news is...are you ready for this?

YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW SMALL YOUR NEOCON MINORITY IS GOING TO GET. Learn to swim or go down with the ship.

Didn't you guys get that memo back in November? Nope? That's too bad.

I love this country, and if you truly did as well, you'd be calling for some answers.

The truth comes from the top, sirs and madams.

Posted by: T | April 18, 2007 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Chief:

That's absurd. By your logic, Bush can break any law "by executive order." Ridiculous. Talk about spin.....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:27 PM | Report abuse

so is Thomas

Posted by: Barney | April 18, 2007 1:27 PM | Report abuse

I'm "nutty" about seeking the truth.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

Granted the evidence will come out at an Impeachment hearing (BEFORE going to trial, by the way)...BUT, given the seriousness of an impeachment hearing, it would be incumbant upon us to ensure there is some kind of evidence to support impeaching the Commander in Chief, don't you agree?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Wow. Yes. And there is mountains of it. Seriously, are you paid to be here or just delusional?

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:32 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary gets elected President, will there be calls for her impeachment for the murder of Vince Foster? (See- we conservatives can spin "black helicopter" theories too!

Posted by: Bob | April 18, 2007 1:32 PM | Report abuse

"Also why wasn't it considered an act of war when Timothy McVeigh bombed the Federal building in Oklahoma City?"

sonfoabastard.

Are you for real man, if you can't distinguish between an American(with more than a few screws loose) and the concerted effort of the so-called "religion of peace" to bring down the bastion of freedom (USA) and to expand and become a global caliphate where islam(a cult more brutal and violent than any Christian group ever was) rules everything is beyond any sense of reality. If you really believe that America is the root of all things evil in this world, perhaps you should live in an islamic society for a while, I'm confident you'd appreciate the freedom to expression all the more than you apparently do now.

Posted by: Meathead | April 18, 2007 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

NO...I SAID that Presidental War Powers grant the President additional authority...I believe I also said he made an Executive Order to exempt said organization to allow them to do what was done.

Now are you saying that a President during a Wartime situation cannot do this? That's what the ACLU is saying and it's going to court to determine if he has this authority or not.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:33 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Dennis Kucinich and I support his efforts 100%. But I'm not voting for Dennis.

Dick, could also be impeached with his hand with the North American Union much like the entire Bush crowd.

I now favor a man of constitution history of impeccable voting history and who has always voted against his own congressional pay raise, anti war, national security who desires to actually protect the border, to repeal many of our far reaching laws which limit civil liberties. Who is he? Dr. Ron Paul.

I'm a voting republican who did vote for Bush regarding both terms. I'm like so many citizens who vote based on party. However, I shall never vote based on party with future votes. I have began to realize that the Democrat vs. Republican is simply a paradigm not worth being a part of. Over the last two years I have noticed many of our civil liberties have been compromised in the name of Safety and security.

However, make no mistake regardless who holds office if corruption abounds then we must remove anyone regardless of party who has not maintained their oath to office. Dick Cheney is guilty of so many wrongs and he must be removed. I think it makes good since to impeach Cheney first. We should also remove Rice and try other far right neocons.

Posted by: Darel | April 18, 2007 1:35 PM | Report abuse

The FISA crime alone is worthy of impeachment. And your defense is nothing more than what his lawyers could claim as a defensive position in an impeachment proceeding. On what planet does a President have the right to break any laws they choose by merely claiming "executive priviledge?"

And we have only scratched the surface....there are many more charges to go through.....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

Ah Thomas...I thought you were a serious individual until you started asking me if I was paid to be here. The answer is NO I am not paid to be here. Further, I could ask you the same question about being delusional if I weren't quite sure that you really believe your right and have SOME interesting viewpoints.

Be that as it may, I do NOT see sufficient evidence to impeach either President Bush or Dick Cheney. Sorry.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:36 PM | Report abuse

The "Presidential War Powers" defense is still merely a defense to the charges of violating FISA. No? How is it not? Did he violate FISA? Yes. What is his defense? "Presidential war powers."

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Finally, someone can hold to their convictions. He may have no proof, no lies were told and it has been shown in at least 6 seperate committes that Bush did not lie but finally we can have him bring it out in the open and show the proof a 7th time. For all those who say Bush lied to get us into a war, fair enough prove it. The intelligence agencies agreed with Bush initially, see the committe hearing minutes concerning pre-war intelligence. The nuclear question was answered by British Intelligence, of course Bush could have beleived they were lying to him. Finally, Al Qaeda was not in Iraq. Zarqawi feld to Iraq. The Iraqi intelligence meet with Al Qaida several times, maybe they were playing pinnocle. I hope they have the hearings.

Posted by: Shane | April 18, 2007 1:38 PM | Report abuse

You people are funny, LOL
I would really love to have some of the dope you're smokin'.

Posted by: d | April 18, 2007 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Great. And when you are all done with your lefty masturbation fantasy, we will impeach Pelosi for her recent Treason Trip. Morons.

Posted by: SurferDoc | April 18, 2007 1:40 PM | Report abuse

As far as betraying the country goes; What do you call a party that will gain from an American loss and lose if America wins?

Posted by: Shane | April 18, 2007 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

I guess we forgot about FDR and rounding up Japanese during WWII or a few other areas I could mention. But I digress. The FISA HASN'T been determined to be a crime as such...it hasn't been ruled on as yet.

So what will your point of view be if the judge says the President CAN do just what he did?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:40 PM | Report abuse

I won't disagree that Cheney is a bad seed; I'm certainly no fan of his. However, before I get too excited about this, I am interested to read what the actual Article of Impeachment says are Cheney's "high crimes and misdemeanors."

Posted by: Ryan | April 18, 2007 1:40 PM | Report abuse

10 out of 15 countriesbelieve that the United States cannot be trusted to "act responsibly in the world." The new PIPA poll also finds that majorities in 13 out of 15 publics polled say the United States is "playing the role of world policeman more than it should be," and majorities in all 15 of the countries polled reject the idea that "the US should continue to be the preeminent world leader in solving international problems."
`
`
The U.N. is a joke! It is incapable of fulfilling its obligations and its "Charter" is a laundry list of ideals that, when in direct conflict with U.S. interests, MUST go flying out the window.


Posted by: Stunned again | April 18, 2007
01:20 PM
`
`
Stunned Again, International law and world opinion of the United States are extremely important. When you consider the fact that the vast majority of Americans believe this President and V.P. are doing an atrocious job, don't you think it's time for them to go?
We shouldn't have to impeach Bush/Cheney. They should both do the honorable thing and resign.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

And yet that precedence has been set long ago...thus it is not a defense but a fact of law. Hence, this is not a defense but a disagreement on what is covered by Presidential War Powers.

I still do not understand your logic.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Thomas. Brilliant response - "Feel free to look it up". I'd already read your ramblings which, to begin with, quoted John Conyers. I suggest you go to a deeper well if you want to find something worthwhile.
This is the same guy who proposes National Health Care. Your case of "CHARGES" is oh-so-rock-solid.

In fact, your "CHARGES" are obviously fanatical rantings since they include phrases like:

"Cheney pressured intelligence services to produce false and misleading reports, and Cheney used those reports to mislead the Congress and the people of the United States."

Where is the "Cheney is accused of" or "Cheney will be charged with". Guilty until proven innocent? Is that the way it works now? Sounds like you've already reached your verdict, so don't go playing semantic games with getting "CHARGES" and "EVIDENCE" (yeah, I can use ALL-CAPS too!) backwards.

You've got the Move On (or some similar nuthouse) stench rising from your words.

I, on the other hand, am very willing to look at reasonable "CHARGES". If someone is guilty, then fine, they're guilty and should pay. Unfortunately, this is an obviously contrived political witch-hunt. It's painfully obvious. I'm almost hoping, for your sake, that you are on the payroll of some group like Move On. Otherwise, you're just a misguided pawn with nothing to show for it.

Posted by: Really Stunned Now | April 18, 2007 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Stunned,
Are you serious? You are going to ignore all of my points based on the fact that I didn't present them the way you would have preferred? How about responding to the charges and not the syntax?

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

So you believe we should remove the President and Vice President due to public and world opinion? Why? If that were the case, then why not add an vote of no confidence into the Constitution so we can vote out anyone we think is doing a lousy job? Seems more expedient to me.

Anyway, our Constitution says they are there for the full time and as such, they will be in office for another 1 1/2 years.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Chief:

Again, by your logic, the President can break any law on the planet by invoking "Presidential War Powers?"

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:49 PM | Report abuse

If there was any substance to the charges that GWB intentionally misled this country into war for for personal reasons or profit, the Democratic party would be sending everyone connected with the deception to prison already. But there is no proof, because there is no substance to the accusation, except in the deluded minds of petty, bitter people who can't accept that GWB legally won the presidency in 2000.

Posted by: Steven B | April 18, 2007 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Wow!! the world is full of idiots. Some of the bloggers on this site had to be the same blubbering idiots that elected "slick willie" twice. I would say "there's not a chance in hell" for them to impeach Cheney, but then I realize that the majority of this congress doesn't have any working brain cells. They are up there in the intelligence scale with your blogger Abel Tomlinson aka "his mother drops him too many times".

The truth is that he probaly likes Osama Bin Laden as his next choice for Prez.

Posted by: Ken-Texas | April 18, 2007 1:50 PM | Report abuse

What law has VP Cheney broken to get impeached? I don't think Kucinich has a case.

Posted by: Bill | April 18, 2007 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Scary to see how many nutburgers actually take Dennis the Menace seriously!

Disturbing to see how many of you patriots would rather have Saddam Hussein in power than President Bush.

Amusing to see the continual references to HALIBURTON!!!!

Interesting that some of you are more concerned with extending "Constitutional rights" to terrorists and unlawful combatants detained at Gitmo than with protecting reporters and civilian contrators from beheading by the terrorists that are still on the loose in Iraq.

Sad that so many of you have such intense hatred for President Bush that you would rather have the United States defeated in Iraq than have President Bush succeed there.

You impeach yourselves.

Posted by: Paul | April 18, 2007 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Vice-president Cheney responded best in his very eloquent statement to the disgusting senator from Vermont on the floor of the senate. For EVERYONE posting in favor of impeachment, Cheney's comment is appropriate for you as well.

Posted by: Glenn | April 18, 2007 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Are you for real man, if you can't distinguish between an American(with more than a few screws loose) and the concerted effort of the so-called "religion of peace" to bring down the bastion of freedom (USA) and to expand and become a global caliphate where islam(a cult more brutal and violent than any Christian group ever was) rules everything is beyond any sense of reality. If you really believe that America is the root of all things evil in this world.
Posted by: Meathead | April 18, 2007 01:33 PM
`
Meathead, Islamic extremists are right wing nut jobs, Timothy McVeigh and friends are right wing nut jobs. Right wing nut jobs are the root of all things evil in this world. American right wing nut jobs CAN do more harm to us than foreign nut jobs.
The holiest document known to mankind is the United States Constitution. It is the cornerstone for democracy and is based on the concept of liberalism. Authoritarians, here, and abroad are the enemies of democracy.


Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,
Of course Internationl Law and world opinion have an impact on our country. They aren't the be-all and end-all of our nation, though. The U.N. is impotent, and therefore any Internation Law that they presume to uphold is meaningless. Disregarding the UN Charter is a good first step in either getting rid of it, or changing it entirely. Someone has to take the lead, and frankly it's about time. World opinion is a watermark, but governing by "opinion" is an idiotic way to lead.

As for popular opinion in our country, I respectfully submit that our process doesn't work that way. When the next presidential elections roll around, the people will once again have their pseudo-voice. And I would again respectfully submit that people would NOT want to see Bush and Cheney step down and pave the way for Pelosi. That would be the most dishonorable thing a leader could do to this country.

Posted by: Stunned | April 18, 2007 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

Only those that are sanctioned by law...but given the mission of the National Security Agency he would granted authority to alter their mission designates and the perameters of their abilites. THIS is what is going to court.

The War Powers are limited to National security.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone questioned this guy's sanity lately? Are his constituents aware that this guy is going over the edge? I seriously think he needs a mental health confinement to St. Elizabeth's.

Posted by: lorddunsmore | April 18, 2007 1:56 PM | Report abuse

I pity folks like Paul, who have been indctrinated by zealots who haven't the slightest interest in fighting terror or protecting the american people.

Read my 1:04pm post on this thread for a lesson.

Posted by: Paul | April 18, 2007 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Chief:
Say what? Reads like some serious "spin" to me....are you sure you aren't Tony Snow? ;)

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Let's hope Dennis doesn't somehow meet poor ol' Paul Wellstone's tragic fate over this...........

Yeah, I said it.

Posted by: BJandtheBear | April 18, 2007 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

So you believe we should remove the President and Vice President due to public and world opinion? Why? If that were the case, then why not add an vote of no confidence into the Constitution so we can vote out anyone we think is doing a lousy job? Seems more expedient to me.
Anyway, our Constitution says they are there for the full time and as such, they will be in office for another 1 1/2 years.
Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 01:47 PM
`
No, what I said is considering the fact that the entire world and 70% of Americans would like to see Bush out of office, they should do the honorable thing and resign.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

LOL - thanks for the compliment!

No spin here (a nod of the head to Bill O'Reilly). War Powers covers national security which falls under the jurisdiction of the Executive Branch.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:00 PM | Report abuse

In response to Bush and Cheney lying and misleading our nation to war. Here is a nice source:

http://www.frankrich.com/rich_timeline_no_print_final.pdf

The evidence is pretty enormous when you look at the administrations statments in the timeline.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

Now WHY would they resign if they think they are doing the right thing regardless of what others think?

Isn't that the sign of good leadership?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich? WHO EFFING CARES WHAT KUCINICH THINKS ABOUT ANYTHING!!!? HE'S A LOSER!!!!

Posted by: prismsinc | April 18, 2007 2:02 PM | Report abuse

And I would again respectfully submit that people would NOT want to see Bush and Cheney step down and pave the way for Pelosi. That would be the most dishonorable thing a leader could do to this country.

Posted by: Stunned | April 18, 2007 01:54 PM
`
You are in the distinct minority on this. Most Americans would prefer that Pelosi assume the presidency today.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 2:03 PM | Report abuse

So Bush can read my emails, tap my phones, put cameras in my home, read my mail, check all of my personal financial and medical records, all without a warrant and claim executive priviledge based on his "War Powers," under the banner of National Security?

Seems like there are many in this country, citizens and memebers of Congress alike, who disagree with that assessment.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

No offense but some of the references for the timelines listed on the URL you gave are dubious, from my viewpoint.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:05 PM | Report abuse

I have to run....can't spend all day here....nice chatting with you, chief (you delusional nut)....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,
Don't be absurd. Your "phrasing" belies your intent. That's why I can't take you seriously. Your hatred rises off your words. You said that the charges should be brought first, and then the evidence. That's not "really" how it works, that's just the way it appears to work. No one is going to bring charges (well, a Democrat would) without having evidence that their charges are accurate, or at least believing that their charges are accurate based on some form of logic to which most people would adhere.

Why not add:
Cheney bit the heads off of baby kittens and sacrificed cows to the devil on your list?

If all we're after are charges, I can do a whole lot better than the contrivances you've listed above. Why would I bother answering any of them? Show me the money, dude. What do you have that would make any of those charges stick in a court of law? It's easy to ignore your "points" when you haven't made any.

Well, I've had my fun for the day. Thomas, thanks for the sparring. I mean that seriously. It's good for everyone to think through these issues. When we stop thinking, we're all doomed.

- back to work. I'll even let you have the last word ;-)

Posted by: Stunned | April 18, 2007 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

Now WHY would they resign if they think they are doing the right thing regardless of what others think?

Isn't that the sign of good leadership?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 02:02 PM
`
Absolutely not. They ignored the advice of all their military advisors. They made America weaker. How is that good leadership?

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

"You are in the distinct minority on this. Most Americans would prefer that Pelosi assume the presidency today."

You can defintely include me in that minority as well. While neither the President nor the VP are perfect and do some things to make me angry, I would NOT be happy to see the current Speaker as President...NOT at ALL!

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:08 PM | Report abuse

lol. Literally...how much smoke do you need before you feel there's enough to warrant serious investigation??? I mean, come on....you want to call "some" of those references "dubious," but there's many that you cannot discount.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 2:08 PM | Report abuse

All the commenters above who think this is going anywhere really need to get a life.

Posted by: Michael | April 18, 2007 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich? Kucinich is a COMMUNIST!

Posted by: prismsinc | April 18, 2007 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Stunned:
So you're not going to offer a rebuttal to the charges? Okay.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

Sorry but I disagree. America was weakened during the 1990s during the power-down of post-Desert Storm, at least militarily speaking.

As for other countries not liking what we are doing, I daresay they are highly incensed at us for interruptin their business-as-usual repart with Saddam.

Personally, I think things aren't too bad here in the US.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Poor Thomas, too many conspiracy theories, not enough time.

Posted by: Paul | April 18, 2007 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Thomas said:
"In response to Bush and Cheney lying and misleading our nation to war. Here is a nice source:

http://www.frankrich.com/rich_timeline_no_print_final.pdf

The evidence is pretty enormous when you look at the administrations statments in the timeline."

As I said before, if all this verbage you reference was significant, responsible Americans would be putting people in jail. But it's not significant, it's just the hopeful stringing together of voluminous facts that have no real impact on anything except people who want to believe the worst.

Posted by: Steven B | April 18, 2007 2:12 PM | Report abuse

If VP Cheney is impeached does that mean that George W. Bush will become President?

Posted by: CCM | April 18, 2007 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

Granted but there are many I can call dubious. The point is, we are talking about impeaching the person holding the highest office in the land. I prefer to err on the side of caution...if I can't see the evidence per se I cannot condone any impeachment.

Now during Bill Clinton's impeachment, I said the same thing until I was told the charges and specifically SAW the court transcripts which said he lied under oath...pretty hard evidence.

I want the same...I play by the same rules for all.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:13 PM | Report abuse

We need to hope the leadership of the Democratic Party is smarter than Kucinich and will defeat the move in committee. quote from John G

Funny how this "dumb" politician was smarter than most of the democrats and almost the entire GOP party regarding the Iraq war. Give Kucinich 5 gold stars!

Posted by: Dave C | April 18, 2007 2:14 PM | Report abuse

CCM,

Cute...but it DOES bring up an interesting question...if the VP does get impeached, WHO becomes VP?

I may have to go look that one up!

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Paul:
Or perhaps we had a lapdog GOP Congress in place that refused to oversee a criminal administration?

Now, I really have to go!

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Hello all? Why are any of you Dem goofballs giving this loser Kucinich any credibility? HE'S A LOSER!! He got a whole 5 votes in his last presidential primary. None of you Dem idiots would vote for him, but NOW he files "Articles of Impeachment", and suddenly, HE'S THE MOST COURAGEOUS DEMORAT ON THE PLANET! What an effing joke!

Posted by: prismsinc | April 18, 2007 2:16 PM | Report abuse

What good is an impeachment one idiot when the bigger idiot has the helm?

I'd like to see the whole administration replaced and washed clean - say the top 20 positions - clean slate!

I also don't want them 'appointed' by a President; they should all be elected positions.

Also, this isn't the 1700's! People are informed well enough and each vote should have equal weight - NO ELECTORAL COLLEGE! Sure, I'll agree there would need to be a change in our voting system - have voting take place at DMV(DOL etc, whatever it's called where you live) where they can verify your SSN and that you've only voted once.. No out of country/state/mail-in voting, if you want to vote, vote in person...if troops need to vote from outside America then fine but each vote would have to be verified by ssn after it's received to ensure each vote is counted once. 1 vote = 1 vote.

Impeach the whole Administration.

Posted by: Some guy named David | April 18, 2007 2:17 PM | Report abuse

I would NOT be happy to see the current Speaker as President...NOT at ALL!
Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 02:08 PM
`
We both agree then, you are in the minority. The majority of Americans are correct. Pelosi is much more able to lead the country until the 2008 elections.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 2:19 PM | Report abuse

HELLO DEMS! WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DENNIS KUCINICH HERE! This action might be more credible if it were filed by "masturbating mom" Jocelynn Elders!

Posted by: prismsinc | April 18, 2007 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Great film about the realities behind the powers that be:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&q=freedom+to+fascism

You could write it off as incredulous due to its poor production value, yet you can't deny the historical quotes and other facts in it....

Posted by: Joshua | April 18, 2007 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

"We both agree then, you are in the minority. The majority of Americans are correct. Pelosi is much more able to lead the country until the 2008 elections."

Oh I SERIOUSLY doubt I'm in the MINORITY when I say t hat I would not like to see Nancy Pelosi as President. While a good number of people are not happy with our current President, I do not see too many of them happy with Nancy Pelosi either.

Frankly, I would be VERY nervous if she were to take the position.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Where can I get the magic mushrooms these guys have been putting in their brownies? Talk about being divorced from reality. The lies and distortions by the left in this country do not represent the truth no matter how much they continue to repeat this nonsense.
Take the NSA program. The left pounding thier collective chests on how it was trampling our rights only to have a bi-partisan committee after the election affirm that adequate safeguards are in place.
Get real and get a life!!

Posted by: SK | April 18, 2007 2:24 PM | Report abuse

"America" ( the dems),wake up. Finally someone comes along to restore strength,courage and leadership in our world and you keep trying to tear him down.Grow up.GW will go into history as a great president who restored dignity to the white house and took on the responsibilities of the office like an adult not like the teenager before him.

Posted by: richard | April 18, 2007 2:26 PM | Report abuse

How amusing! You Dems can't respond to Kucinich's credibility! Any wacko can say "Bush and Cheney stink" and you would publicly support them!

Posted by: prismsinc | April 18, 2007 2:27 PM | Report abuse

The dummycrat netroots never fail to entertain us normal folks out here with their kookazoid zanyness. Keep it up Dennis!

Posted by: Zeb Quinn | April 18, 2007 2:29 PM | Report abuse

You're all a bunch of idiots. All this bs about misleading us into war. It's all a bunch of crap! The bottom line is we used Iraq to create a battlefield for a war that had already started, numbskulls! The question isn't whether we legally did it or not. Saddam broke the treaty he signed several times. The question is, was it moral to create a battlefield in Iraq or not? Anybody who has been paying attention to the Middle East for the last decade knows war was already declared. But was it right to create the battlefield where Iraqi civilians will be killed, as opposed to U.S. civilians being killed on our soil? I say YES! You reap what you sow. How long have the people of the Middle East been calling for America's death? You threaten my family, I'm coming to your place to kill you! Plain and simple. I'm not waiting for you to come to my home.

Posted by: Jeff Murphy | April 18, 2007 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Dream on, libs. Pursuing this will keep you from doing any real damage during this term.

Posted by: Jim Reyna | April 18, 2007 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Actually, some Democrats are quite well-spoken. Thomas had some well-written arguments for impeachment but unfortunately for him, they were insufficent to prove criminal intent and didn't hold up very well under scrutiny.

Still, he was polite and wrote well. And he didn't use hate-spew.

But as I said, to me he made NO CASE for impeachment.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:42 PM | Report abuse

It is lovely to see that our representatives in congress spend time bickering, complaining, and slashing each other instead of taking care of the country's business.

Oh, and anyone who thinks that the major media is telling them the truth without idealogical bias isn't paying very good attention.

Posted by: David | April 18, 2007 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Go Chief!

And Sonofabastard, 70% of Americans want the President and Vice President impeached?! Ha ha ha ha ha! (Pssst - your hysteria is showing.)

Posted by: skofla | April 18, 2007 2:45 PM | Report abuse

The real threat to your liberty and way of life is Islamic Jihad. Wake up!

Posted by: CD99 | April 18, 2007 2:46 PM | Report abuse

I would say this is a start. We all know that this administration has done great damage to our country and to the world. Impeachment would take a long time and may not happen, but the charges and discussions should begin. In two years this horrible man (bush/cheney) could destroy the world at the rate they are going. Kucinich is brave to start the discussion in public. Don't think it's possible to impeach? Stop thinking that way and write your representative to begin the process. You know crimes have been committed.

Posted by: dolly lanna | April 18, 2007 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Bush didn't lie. He simply repeated Clinton's lies.

Posted by: GB | April 18, 2007 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Dolly,

Care to tell me WHAT crimes have been committed?

Warning - I have just dealt with Thomas and he listed a great number of them which I refuted...so be prepared to backup your claims of the crimes you list.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 2:52 PM | Report abuse

This will go NOWHERE ! LiL Dennis needs attention as all losers do. You Hate America first crowd sure better wake up before you lose your heads. We are in dire straits and the dems. are cut and run, waving the white flag they love so.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 2:53 PM | Report abuse

I'm amused by the fact that the Bush haters seem to think they are in the majority....I guess it's the same bunch that continually whine about the election being "stolen."

There is rarely any *logical* evidence given except: he lies or he out for money. If he is out for money he is doing a lousy job of it since Clinton has more than he does...

Aliens are on earth = Elvis is alive = Impeach Bush = small minority of Americans!

Bush must be doing something right to have such hate spewed against him!

Posted by: c-man | April 18, 2007 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Wow! I have been reading these posts for over an hour. I cannot believe the hatred that the left and some Dems have for President Bush and Vice President Cheney. It is over the top psychosis. The more radical of them sound like kindergarten children on a playground, jumping up and down, demanding that people obey their commands. To the Dems: please get over the fact that Bush won the elections. If you want to get one of your own people in, find someone who is competent and has enough intelligence to make a good candidate, and vote for him/her in the next election. Don't choose someone from the extreme left of your party. Meanwhile, Bush is president and Cheney is VP. These are good people, and they are going their best. Why can't you quit your hate-mongering and live with it and be thankful for their leadership? As for the impeachment movement...good grief, people, there has to be some evidence of a crime. We have no evidence of crimes whatsoever...except for baseless accusations by hatemongering leftists who are scraping the bottom of the barrel for anything they can get. Bush and Cheney have actually done very well for our country. What were Bush/Cheney supposed to do after 9/11...sit there with their fingers up their noses, singing "Give Peace a Chance?" They responded in the best way they knew how, and they had the backing of Congress, both Dems and Republicans. Dennis Kucinich (sp?) is an idiot for trying to pull this stunt. No wonder no one takes him serious as a candidate.

Posted by: Doug | April 18, 2007 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Dolly, just saying "You know crimes have been committed" doesn't make it so, no matter how much you wish it would. There are rich and powerful, and respectable, people out there who, like you, wish GW was gone. If they thought they could prove any foul play on GW's or Cheney's part, they would be throwing everything they had at it.

But they know better - they don't waste their time and treasure on fantasies. Only frustrated people who have neither wealth nor reputation to risk throw these accusations around.

Posted by: Steven B | April 18, 2007 3:09 PM | Report abuse

THIS IS THE ABSOLUTEW BEST NEWS I'VE HEARD IN THE LAST 8 YEARS!

Posted by: P. Evans | April 18, 2007 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Spiro Agnew resigned rather than face the possibility that his crimes would be exposed and his resignation triggered a domino effect in the Nixon administration. We should be so lucky!

Posted by: Ellen | April 18, 2007 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Bush lovers keep using the term "Bush haters" like it's a bad thing.

Posted by: Brian Lupiani | April 18, 2007 3:14 PM | Report abuse

I am new here and have a question related to impeachment. If Bush was impeached because of starting a war for a false reason among other impeachable acts is there any constitutional basis for removing his appointments to the Supreme Court if it were determined that his impeachable acts occurred before the appointments. Probably not a possibility but what a scenario that would be if there was some legal leg to stand on to remove his appointments.

Posted by: tompap | April 18, 2007 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Brian,

Bush lovers, Bush haters - it's all the same to me. The problem is, those who want to impeach the President have NOT made a case to do it. You have to have EVIDENCE of a crime to impeach someone from office. So far, I have seen none.

BTW, I don't love or hate President Bush. I respect him and obey his orders as Commander in Chief, as a National Guardsman.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Tompap,

First of all, you cannot be impeached for "starting a war for a false reason".

Second, I have not seen ANY "other impeachable acts" but if you'd like to supply them, I would like to hear them.

Finally, no, you cannot "remove appointments to the Supreme Court if it were determined that his impeachable acts occurred before the appointments" because he was within his authority to appoint them, reguardless of whether or not you like his choices.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Aliens are on earth = Elvis is alive = Impeach Bush = small minority of Americans!

Bush must be doing something right to have such hate spewed against him!

Posted by: c-man | April 18, 2007 02:57 PM
`
Actually C-Man, 51% of Americans want to see Bush get impeached. How is that a small minority? And please explain why being hated by a majority of Americans means Bush must be doing something right.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Well done Thomas!

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

"Actually C-Man, 51% of Americans want to see Bush get impeached."

Son, can you tell me WHERE you are getting your percentage of Americans wanting President Bush impeached? That's actually pretty high.

Now keep in mind, to say they disagree with how he is running the country is ONE thing...but to want him impeached is another.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 3:23 PM | Report abuse

April,

Sorry but Thomas did not make his case...however, he did have to go so perhaps he can try again.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 3:24 PM | Report abuse

BTW, I don't love or hate President Bush. I respect him and obey his orders as Commander in Chief, as a National Guardsman.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 03:17 PM
`
As a National Guardsman how can you possibly respect Bush's service in the Guard. Even if you don't believe the overwhelming evidence he deserted his post, at the very least he was derelict in his duty to take that physical. That's the kind of guy you'd want leading you?

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Bush haters will see the sky green and the grass blue if it will help get rid on Bush.
DK is an idiot, there are no crimes and nothing will be done. Bill Clinton was DISBARRED for his actions. Must have been something there. If you guys are going to sell your soul for a cause I guess Hate is as good a reason as any.

Posted by: pfrg | April 18, 2007 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone need more evidence of this country's moral collapse than the fact that the Bush/Cheney Conspiracy to Destroy the Constitution and Oh By the Way Most of the World to Boot hasn't been tried, convicted and executed as the traitors they so obviously are? Kucinich's articles of impeachment are akin to putting a bandaid on a tumor that everyone seems satisfied with living with until it kills us.

Posted by: Hardy Campbell | April 18, 2007 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Newsweek: 51% of Americans want Bush impeached.
Son, can you tell me WHERE you are getting your percentage of Americans wanting President Bush impeached? That's actually pretty high.

Now keep in mind, to say they disagree with how he is running the country is ONE thing...but to want him impeached is another.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 03:23 PM
`
`

Remember all the pundits laughing at the notion of impeaching president Bush? Remember all the pollsters refusing to even ask that question in their polls? Well, a majority now approve of Democratic plans to impeach president George W. Bush. 28% think it should be a high priority, 23% think it should be a lower priority, while 44% disapprove.
`
`
You're right it is a surprisingly high figure. This president is a cancer.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

Ah me...THAT again. Ok, for those of you who have never been in the National Guard, a quick explaination.

President Bush apparently was supposed to report for a physical but never made it. His name was places on the DA Form 1379 which said he made drill...it was also claimed that he was present by some of his colleges there.

Now a lot of times, you are scheduled for a physical and don't get the word - so you don't show up. This does NOT mean he was derelict in his duty but that he was not INFORMED he was supposed to be there.

Now I am NOT saying this is what happened...but given that his name WAS on the 1379 as present and that his peers said he WAS there, I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt.

So Son, what else do you have problems with?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 3:35 PM | Report abuse

The crime of incompetence is an obvious start. We shall see if the country is in the mood to really investigate these lying greedy incompetent people. How about the lies to get us into this war. WMD? Forgeries? No plans for the aftermath of shock and AWE? No evidence that the people of Iraq wanted this and especially now, do not want us there? The
goal was to conquer the oil in the middle east.
That the crimes all mentioned above can't be proven is a fact that remains to be seen. The status of the US and the world will tell you that we are in a cultural crisis and this president does not know what to do. He has caused a crisis or neglected to address the crisis signs of everything he has touched. Check out his past business ventures. All talk, no work or great accomplishments. He is a frat brat failure.

Oh and I have to say Barbara Bush raised sons that are all conniving, mediocre, irresponsible spoiled, small men. Don't know much about the daughter, they keep her hidden. I am sad and scared for my country.

Posted by: dolly lanna | April 18, 2007 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton was DISBARRED for his actions. Must have been something there. If you guys are going to sell your soul for a cause I guess Hate is as good a reason as any.


Posted by: pfrg | April 18, 2007 03:30 PM
`
Loving Bush is the sincerest form of hatred.
Jesus is a liberal. The Constitution is our most sacred document.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 3:38 PM | Report abuse

where is imus

Posted by: yo yo yo | April 18, 2007 3:38 PM | Report abuse

i love you iman

Posted by: jessie jackson | April 18, 2007 3:40 PM | Report abuse

So Son, what else do you have problems with?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 03:35 PM

`
After he was grounded he got pissed and went A.W.O.L.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 3:42 PM | Report abuse

I guess in order to be a patriot one must lay down and surender to the enemy. The left in this country don't have any plan to deal with the terrorist other than love them.
I wonder how they will feel when their freedoms are all gone. The terrorist want to cut your throats and now they want to impeach one of the few men who want to fight back.

Posted by: Skeetnose | April 18, 2007 3:42 PM | Report abuse

iman iman iman iman

Posted by: jj | April 18, 2007 3:46 PM | Report abuse

i love bush

Posted by: woman lover | April 18, 2007 3:49 PM | Report abuse

nice to see the dems showing their true face. let them waste their time and further separate themselves from the good, intelligent, Christians that populate the real United States.

Posted by: ncred | April 18, 2007 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Dolly,

Incompetance (your opinion) is NOT a crime - if it were, most of Congress would have been impeached long ago.

As for the other parts you mentioned, THEY are not crimes either.

Basically, all I see is hate-spew and no facts presented. Come back when you have something of value to present.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Right on Dennis! Cheney first and then Bush, and investigate the truth about 9/11 in the process. Their jiggering of intelligence and acute tampering with evidence at the Pentagon and WTC should do it. Al Uhl, St. Paul, MN.

Posted by: Al Uhl | April 18, 2007 3:50 PM | Report abuse

But what will Bush do without his brain???

Posted by: bluestateblues | April 18, 2007 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

"After he was grounded he got pissed and went A.W.O.L."

Humm...I saw NOTHING which shows that. Did he have an Article 15 in his records? Did he have any permanent letters of reprimand? Did he have ANYTHING showing that he went AWOL? What evidence do we have that he did go AWOL?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 3:52 PM | Report abuse

The inaccuracies, the thought that some politician "lied", forever name calling, the hoodoos and the scarecrows, what have you democrats become? Enough was put in the stew that Ronald Reagan left you thirty years ago. I left you 20 years ago. We need to discuss ideas and not conspiracies. If it weren't for the media and their leftist template, no one would give you the time of day. And for that matter, you are still free to spew the vitriol that seems to be your lifeblood. You have everything but the presidency and you are galled that you don't have that. I see the same sentiments when I read PRAVDA. Flush your hate and start thinking about ideas. You are free to say or think anything you want. You should not abuse such freedom; it has been paid for with the lifes of seriously committed citizens (in the armed forces and others). Name calling is for kindergartners.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 3:53 PM | Report abuse

tree hugging socialists

Posted by: dd | April 18, 2007 3:54 PM | Report abuse

You liberals are total slaves to the left-wing media narrative and the overinflated "Bush lied" meme. You're living in a fantasy world, a house of cards of your own making.

The laughable conspiracy theories you engage in and your ability to put words in people's mouths would be laughed right out of a real court. Instead you erect your kangaroo courts of hate which itself is built on any number of lies told by Joe Wilson himself and the gutless Dem-wits in Congress who are too cowardly to take responsibility for the votes they casted based on the same intelligence (which wasn't "cherrypicked" as you liberal liars like to claim, see the SSCI Report) that had them coming to the same conclusions as President Bush under the Clinton Administration ... Saddam was a threat, he had WMD, we have plans for regime change ... etc.

When the history books are written you lying leftists will be shown for the frauds and lemmings that you really are. You wont' be content until you do turn Iraq into another Vietnam of betrayal and millions die in the aftermath of a unilateral withdrawal. And the liberal media with its own scandals won't fare much better in anything approaching an honest historical appraisal of this era of media disinformation.

Posted by: Hankmeister | April 18, 2007 3:54 PM | Report abuse

The impeachment wave is huge and unavoidable. I lost a nephew in Iraq and that is one of the small problems I have with Cheney and crew.
As I use to say to the only conservative I ever trusted and who didn't get to see the end of this idealogical disaster,'Dick Cheney is the worst president we've ever had'.

Posted by: james r bradach | April 18, 2007 3:55 PM | Report abuse

At least someone has the balls in the Democratic party to bring out what the majority wants to do. I'm sick of the games the Democrats have been playing in order to get to power. It is indeed a good idea to impeach Cheney although it won't be successful. Most Americas, Republicans, Dems alike, hate Cheney and would love to see him taken out of power!

Posted by: Spartanladkenny | April 18, 2007 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Bush lied, Bush lied, Bush lied, Bush lied,
Bush lied, Bush lied, Bush lied, Bush lied, Bush lied, ... I'm a millionaire, I'm a millionaire, I'm a miilionaire, I'm a millionaire, I'm a millioniare, I'm a millionaire, ... darn! How come some things become true when you repeat them over and over and other things don't.

Posted by: scarface | April 18, 2007 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Evidence of AWOL? Liberals don't need no steenkin' evidence of AWOL. They have their liberal blogs which are their veritable Oracles of Delphi don't ya know? The conspiracy crap and "news" stories on lefty blogs like KOS, demoncrapunderground.com.mie, and moron.org are so far left that not even the liberal media sees fit to publish such rubbish.

Of course this leads these moonbats to say the media is right wing ... based on the phenomenon that those saying this are morally and politically to the left of Stalin themselves so even liberals to their "right" look right-wing!

If there is any doubt that the national media is liberal, this UCLA study is just the latest to document the leftist leanings of American journalism: http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

Posted by: Hankmeister | April 18, 2007 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Now Hankmeister,

I prefer to give someone a chance to give and defend their position the same way I allowed Thomas to.

If they can't defend it, then it makes it more difficult for them to do it the next time.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Bush praying for the Students and their familys? I doubt that his prayers would go any farther than the ceiling.

Posted by: maryelizabeth_61 | April 18, 2007 4:07 PM | Report abuse

BTW, American liberals will make excellent dhimmies. As one Belgium elitist said a few weeks ago when seeing Muslim shari'a sprouting in his own country and the rising Islamic caliphate crouching at the door, "I've never learned to fight ... I don't know how to fight for the liberties I hold dear, I've only learned how to enjoy them."

Posted by: Hankmeister | April 18, 2007 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Before any of you Republicans get up in arms over what I'm about to write, let me tell you that I'm a Conservative Republican and always will be.

If anybody deserves to be impeached it's Pelosi for going over to Syria (our enemy) and Iran (another enemy) along with Kerry who went over to Vietnam (in a Naval uniform) during the Vietnamese War.

Plus there's the fact that during Clinton's 8 years in office there were (how many acts of terror committed against the US?) There were so many that I've lost count, culminating in 9/11.

During Bush's years in office there hasn't been one major attack against us because he took the war to them. But never fear once the dems take office in 2009 there will be and it will make 9/11 look like a ride in the park.

Wake up and smell the roses. There is more than one enemy out there and the list includes the illegals from all over the world crossing our borders, some of the people we elect and that includes RINO's as well as dems, and those that subscribe to the Islamic faith. Islam is not a religion of peace. Read the Koran if you don't believe me.

9/11 saw more than just the death of 3000 Americans, it also saw the death of innocence.

Pray for our country. She needs all the prayers she can get. But then when the end comes, America won't be a part of it because she'll already be gone.

Posted by: Ima Con Rep | April 18, 2007 4:08 PM | Report abuse

God Bless Dennis and the leftnutroots for bringing me this high quality delicious crazy ... more more

Posted by: LC | April 18, 2007 4:08 PM | Report abuse

What evidence do we have that he did go AWOL?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 03:52 PM
`
The evidence is that his commander said he never saw him during the time in question. Nobody has come forward to testify on his behalf. If you're privvy to documents showing he was present the day of his physical how come you don't have any for the period of time he went A.W.O.L.?
On another important manner of the Bush/Cheney evil cabal. Why wasn't the public informed of their D.U.I.s well before the election? Why did Bush then lie about it saying he was pulled over for driving too slowly, when in fact he drove off the road, and wrecked his car?
BTW You're doing a good job. Whatever CENTCOM is paying you is well worth it. Too bad you're getting your mates killed in Afghanistan and Iraq by doing so.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

To those wondering what the articles would charge or saying no basis for chargest exist: A really good series regarding articles of impeachment drafted by one of the authors of the articles against Nixon can be found in part at http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/022207N.shtml. She has actually prepared proposed articles of impeachment in the same form as would be used formally, citing specific conduct.

Posted by: Robert | April 18, 2007 4:11 PM | Report abuse

BDS has mutated into CDS...and spread!

Posted by: Robb Thomas | April 18, 2007 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Bad link. Try the original at http://men.style.com/gq/features/full?id=content_5402

also that is another effort by a different writer. I'll try to post the one I referred to if I can find it.

Posted by: Robert | April 18, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Hey Sonofabastard,
You deserve some credit for getting people killed in Afghanistan and Iraq yourself. The bad guys know useful fools like you make lots of bad press and that is the only way they can win, so just hang on guys.

Take a bow, Sonofabastard.

Posted by: Steven B | April 18, 2007 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Jeez- After reading this blog it is apparent that the Bush Derangement Syndrome folks have joined up with the Flat Earth Society and Kucinich is the leader-clearly recognizable by his tinfoil hat.

Posted by: John425 | April 18, 2007 4:18 PM | Report abuse

sonofa:
Bush wasn't drunk, he was busy in his time-machine automobile monitoring its global- warming-fairy-dust output. you see, he went back in time to start global warming so huricane Katrina would occur so he could "off" some of the people that knew he personally planted bombs (during another time travel excursion) in the twin towers. duh!

Posted by: egad | April 18, 2007 4:19 PM | Report abuse

... based on the phenomenon that those saying this are morally and politically to the left of Stalin themselves so even liberals to their "right" look right-wing!

Posted by: Hankmeister | April 18, 2007 04:02 PM
`
Hankmeister, Stalin was a RIGHT WING authoritarian evil nut job. Muslim terrorists are evil right wing nut jobs. You cannot defend liberty and the Constitution by becoming an evil right wing nut job.
Why is it that liberals in hostile countries are considered good, but not here? Liberty, Liberalism, Libertarianism, Libido. Get the connection? It's all good dude!

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,

True there IS no evidence he was there during that time. However, you CAN miss two drill weekends and still have a good year. Granted, going AWOL is still not a good thing to do but it does happen. Now, during that time, if you went AWOL, you were usually put on Active Duty...but George Bush was not...WHY not I have no idea. He was not disciplined for the AWOL so I don't really know what happened here and probably no one ever will.

W"hy wasn't the public informed of their D.U.I.s well before the election? Why did Bush then lie about it saying he was pulled over for driving too slowly, when in fact he drove off the road, and wrecked his car?" Hummm...probably because no one checked and he didn't want to tell anyone? I fail to see the point here...if I had DUIs I wouldn't want anyone to know about them either...and they wouldn't have any impact on my current state of affairs.

Son, if you can tell me who in CENTCOM I can contact to get paid for writing here, I sure would like to know. I am NOT writing for anyone but myself. But I thank you for the compliment to my writing.

However, I take exception to your comment that I would take ANY job that would get good soldiers killed in either Afghanistan or Iraq. You have no idea who I am so I fail to see how you are qualified to make a statement like that. Then again, you seem to be having problems making your case and name calling seems to be all you have left to work with...sign of a limited vocabulary and mentality.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Chief,

Thomas is so full of hateful hope that his synapses have all but jumped off the cleft. Ever heard of "blinded by hate" ? There is a reason for that old saying. Thomas will twist and turn your logic until he is blue, or you turn blue from too much patience. I have been in this forum much too long today for my own sanity. I am so saddened by the hate filled diatribes, the disjointed lists of percieved wrongs perpertrated by our President and Vice-President, not one making any legal sense whatsoever...but they still frantically type them out like they are real. And the sickest, a post about a tragedy implying that it should have been Cheney. Why are you libs consumed by hate? It has never ever been the answer for anything. You also speak of the election of 2006 being "the determinent and the comeback of Democrats in power". Uh.....this wasn't quite the smackdown of which you speak. It was a squeaker. And, if this thing goes through with Kucinich. Kiss your happy little majority bye bye. And another thing. I am not wealthy, never been wealthy, and I like Corporations. They provide jobs dummys. Ever try to have a job without an employer? I doubt if you have unless you are self employed. And that would be questionable for most of you lib posters because really.....your logic left home. Or maybe you would just as soon having your new Socialist Government Nationalising all business, and you can all be little babushska wearing federal employees. Yummy.

Posted by: cliffjumper | April 18, 2007 4:25 PM | Report abuse

This is the greatest idea since Al (Tree)Gore's "Lock Box." Goodness knows what might happen, maybe DC would resign.
That way Pres Bush could appoint Sec Rice as VP. Can't you just see ol Teddy (Chappaquiddic)Kennedy grilling a black woman who is probably one of the smartest people on the planet.

lyn
PS Thank goodness Kucinich is a Democrat

Posted by: Lyn | April 18, 2007 4:25 PM | Report abuse

With all the already available evidence of high treason and war profiteering, in any other country Bush and Cheney would long ago have been hanged from their manboobs in the town square.
It's about time americans grew some balls.
Good luck to you guys, you're gonna need it...

Posted by: telefonillo | April 18, 2007 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Well said, Ima_Con_Rep!! It's good to see somebody on this thing has some sense.

I think there is more body oil being used up in this lib love fest then is fueling most small countries!!

Posted by: CNTRLFRK | April 18, 2007 4:27 PM | Report abuse

I would love to see Bush out from under Cheney's skirt alone. He looks like a deer already been run over now, oh the things he might say! Who would Dicks temporary replacement be?

Posted by: james r bradach | April 18, 2007 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Hey Sonofabastard,
You deserve some credit for getting people killed in Afghanistan and Iraq yourself. The bad guys know useful fools like you make lots of bad press and that is the only way they can win, so just hang on guys.

Take a bow, Sonofabastard.

Posted by: Steven B | April 18, 2007 04:18 PM
`
That's absurd. I e-mailed my Congresswoman before the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq asking her not to vote for either. It's the reactionaries like you who get innocents killed. We didn't even invade the two countries most responsible for 9/11. That would be Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Chief:
lol....funny how you feel you "refuted" my list of impeachable offenses. I must have missed it. Meanwhile, your opinion that "starting a war for false reasons" is not an impeachable offense is absurd.

Misleading the Congress and the population into an illegal invasion, in violation of the Geneva Convention is certainly worthy of the title of a high crimes and misdemeanor.

Before you hide behind the "congress authorized the war" mantra, you need to acknowledge that Bush misrepresented the threat from Iraq in order to acquire that authorization. So what we have is multiple crimes. (1) Misleading Congress and the people into authorizing the use of force and then (2) using the ill-gotten authorization to commit an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation.

Once again, I will post the timeline here:

http://www.frankrich.com/rich_timeline_no_print_final.pdf

What we know from the timeline is George Bush, Dick Cheney and other members of his staff repeatedly cited information that allegedly linked Saddam Hussein to 9/11 and to weapons of mass destruction that had already been officially debunked by in-house intelligence memos, including but not limited to the Presidents Daily Briefing.

Among the debunked information that was repeatedly and knowingly sold to Congress and the American people were:

The alleged "yellow cake" purchase from Niger.
The alleged meeting between hijacker Atta and a member of Iraqi intelligence.
The alleged terrorist training on Iraqi soil.
The alleged mobile labs for chemical weapons production.

in addition, the Downing Street memo points to a conspiracy by the administration "to fix the facts and intelligence around the policy." Richard Clarke corraborates as much in his book, "Against all Enemies," where he claims the administration pressured the intelligence community to "find a connection to Iraq," in spite of repeated assurances from intelligence experts that there was no connection.

Need more proof?

Douglas Feith, it has been discovered, edited intelligence reports that were being submitted to Congress. His edits were all clearly intended to inflate Saddam Hussein's alleged threat to the U.S.

This is all the tip of the iceberg. Anyone who feels there isn't enough evidence to justify serous investigation is suffering from serious delusion.

We are closing in on a million innocent Iraqi civilian deaths and over 3000 U.S. military deaths caused by this immoral and illegal war of choice. George Bush should be tried for war crimes at the Hague, let alone face mere impeachment.

Meanwhile, it's hard to ignore the existence of the Project for a New American Century, the neo-con plan for U.S. world dominance that had, at it's core, an invasion of Iraq and Iran. Members of PNAC lamented in 2000 that "the process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event--like a new Pearl Harbor."

A new Pearl Harbor? Enter 9/11.....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

I also find it amusing that somehow finding Bush and Cheney guilty of crimes means you must be "filled with hate."

It's an empty rebuttal, at best.....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Jeez

Learn to spell, familiarize yourselves with the caps lock button, and take your lithium.

Are these the sort of statements you would make in public?

Posted by: Uncle Pinky | April 18, 2007 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Then again, you seem to be having problems making your case and name calling seems to be all you have left to work with...sign of a limited vocabulary and mentality.


Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 04:24 PM
`
I didn't call you a name. I said that by promoting the wars in the Middle East members of the National Guard you are getting killed as a result. By not trying to have an incompetent CIC removed from office you are getting National Guardsmen killed. By justifying or shrugging off every lie this administration tells, you are getting good people killed.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 4:37 PM | Report abuse

You all don't believe in the US Constitution, especially if you believe in Universal Healthcare and the Department of Labor, to name a few.

Show me in the US Constitution where these are the responsibiliy of the Federal Governmt.

Didn't think so.

Posted by: Saintknowitall | April 18, 2007 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Doubt it'll happen. The worst thing Cheney had one in office is shoot an attorney...and we have a surplus of them, anyway...

Posted by: mad monk | April 18, 2007 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Robert | April 18, 2007 4:43 PM | Report abuse

What exactly were Cheney's lies? What proof do you have that he ever lied? What if he did but was shielding you from the truth because you can't handle it? I am sick of anti-Bush forces dreaming up absolutes that do not exist. But then it is to be expected because that is what Liberalism is right? The absolutes can change to fit the circumstances.
Acutally I think an impeachment trial would be great because Americans would be allowed to see the bogus nature of all the anti-Bush rhetoric.

Posted by: Smokey | April 18, 2007 4:44 PM | Report abuse

The invasion of Iraq is part of PNAC's plan to control the energy supplies of most of the world, giving us "critical leverage" and what amounts to a "Strategic veto" over our enemies and allies alike.

Just look at the Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law, which privatizes 81% of Iraq's currently, nationalized petroleum resources, opening them to "investment" by Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco, and two British oil companies, BP/Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell. These companies expect to sign the rarely used and notoriously profitable contracts called "production sharing agreements" which guarantee them extraordinarily high profit margins: they might capture more than half of the oil revenues for the first 15-30 years of the contracts' lifespan, and deny Iraq any income at all until their infrastructure "investments" have been recovered.

So the Iraqi people will share among themselves all the revenue from 1/5th of their country's oil reserves. But they will get only a fraction from the remaining 4/5ths, where the American and British oil companies expect to generate immense profits.

This is a war for corporate profit and control. Period. It has become a beacon of anti-american resentment, leading to an enormous spike in terrorist recruitment. Close to a million innocent Iraqi's have died, many millions more have fled their homeland. Thousands of American soldiers have dies and tens of thousands have been injured.

We've spent hundreds of billions of tax dollars in what amounts to tax subsidized war profiteering for corporate "defense" contractors.


Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Sonofawhateveryouare......I know one thing....you are very confused. Right wing, left wing are in a circular continuum not, in on a continuum that is a straight line. The right wing and left wing meet in the middle at the bottom of the circular continuum. Both being the tyrannical ends of both. And each one is fascism....no one more than the other. So quit the useless comparisons.

Posted by: cliffjumper | April 18, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Thomas is so full of hateful hope that his synapses have all but jumped off the cleft. Ever heard of "blinded by hate" ? There is a reason for that old saying. I am so saddened by the hate filled diatribes,... And the sickest, a post about a tragedy implying that it should have been Cheney. Why are you libs consumed by hate?
Posted by: cliffjumper | April 18, 2007 04:25 PM
`
With the exception of that ill-advised comment about the VT shootings, all of the hate is coming from the right. Like I just said, loving Bush is the sincerest form of hatred. The right wing is going guano gonzo before our very eyes. Bush dons a lemming costume and right wing Americans follow him off the cliff.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Start with Nancy Pelosi, she's the traitor that broke federal by going to conspire with the terrorist. After reading Al - Sador's view on wanting a time line for the US surrender she must have met with him and Ben Laden as well. She sure did look good in a burka, very natural. I wonder if she's converted to Islam yet - wouldn't want to let that get out!

If she could just suspend the constitutional rights she doesn't like the way Hugo Chavez did, the socialist left could make this a perfect workers paradise - except for the elite class that would rule all of the hard working peasants and make sure their carbon credits were paid up so they wouldn't have to move out of their 20,000 sq. ft houses or ground their privet jets.

Posted by: Hard Workin' Middle Class | April 18, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

re Elizabeth De La Vega, one of the drafters of the Nixon articles: her book, United States v. George Bush, is at http://www.sevenstories.com/Book/?GCOI=58322100641520

and detailed excerpts showing how the indictment would read and how the case would be introduced to the grand jury - work she did for 20 years - is at Tom Dispatch.Com.

Posted by: Robert 2 | April 18, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Smokey,
I've provided the timeline link several times. Read it. You will see what Cheney knew and when he knew it. You will also see how often he lied publicly about the threats of Saddam which he knew to be false.

I'm not going to come over to your house to read it to you, so you need to put some effort into it.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Let's be clear about what is really going on in Iraq. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of the neo-liberals from the Project for a New American Century used 9/11 as the "pearl harbor-type event" Wolfowitz was hoping for, which created the opportunity to enact an imperialist plan for world domination. The plan, readily available online for those who wish to look for it, centered around removal of Hussein and replacing his regime with a pro-American (read: pro U.S. corporate) government that will allow us to exploit their natural resources. This control would serve as a "veto over the rest of the world". Once we controlled Iraqi oil, the next phase, currently in the beginning stages, was to attack Iran and replace the Iranian government with yet another puppet government to serve our corporate needs at the expense of the native Iranian population. Once we control all of the oil in the Middle East, we essentially can dictate our terms to the rest of the planet.

Meanwhile, this plan does nothing for the average American. It does nothing for the average citizens of the Middle East. It does nothing for the men and women risking their lives in our military. In fact, it creates anger and resentment of the U.S. and leads to more terrorism.

Those who believe the U.S. has any interest in democracy promotion need a serious refresher course on U.S. foreign policy.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Thomas, I understand Elvis is also a part owner.

Posted by: saintknowitall | April 18, 2007 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Thomas, Quoting Frank Rich doesn't really bolster your argument. You might want to expand your reading list.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 4:53 PM | Report abuse

What evidence do we have that he did go AWOL?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 03:52 PM

Well, there's the total absence of any official documentation or any eyewitnesses whatsoever that indicate that Bush ever showed up for any part of his final year of active commitment to the National Guard. From your own favored legal brief; Wikipedia:

"Bush's six-year obligation to serve required him to maintain his immediate readiness as an individual and a member of a unit to be called to active duty in the event of a national emergency. Bush's military records indicate that until May 1972 he fulfilled that obligation. But from that point on, Bush failed to meet the attendance requirements established by Federal law, Department of Defense regulations, and Air Force policies and procedures for "obligated" members of the Air National Guard, and the Air Force requirement for an annual physical examination for pilots."

After missing that required physical, which would have included peeing into a cup, a grounded Bush requested a transfer to a base in Montgomery, Alabama. Bush alone claims that this obligation was satisfied, but to date, noone has attempted to claim the widely publicized bounty of $10,000 offered by Gary Trudeau in one of his "Doonesbury" strips in 2004 to anyone wo could credibly claim to have seen Bush at his required post. Interestingly, despite Bush's claim that he showed up for service in Alabama, his error-ridden and irregularity-rich transfer request was rejected!

Once more, from "Wikipedia":

"On July 21, 1972, the Air Reserve Personnel Center in Denver, the final approval authority, rejected Bush's reassignment request to the 9921st, stating that as "an obligated Reservist" he could only be "assigned to a specific Ready Reserve Position. The ARPC wrote that Bush "is ineligible for assignment to an Air Reserve Squadron."[17] According to Bricken, in an interview with the Boston Globe, We met just one weeknight a month. We were only a postal unit. We had no airplanes. We had no pilots. We had no nothing..

Throughout this period, Bush remained obligated to train with his Texas unit, or perform substitute training each month. Bush service chronology[18] shows no indication that the 147th ever transferred Bush out of its control, nor do Bush's payroll records for the period in question[19] show any indication that any personnel action was officially taken by the 147th relieving him of his obligation to train with that unit. Nevertheless, Bush's records show that he is credited with no training during these months. Colonel Bricken is on record as stating that Bush made no effort to participate as a Guardsman with the 9921st."

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Nobody was quoting Frank Rich. Can you folks read? Frank Rich has put together a timeline of factual information that quotes numerous sources. It isn't his own quotes. Good lord. You guys need to put a little effort into this if you are going to debate me....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Ah Thomas,

Glad to see you're back. Now, misleading Congress - MAY be true if he DID mislead them...as I said almost ALL intelligence sources world wide said there was WMD there...and Congress COULD have said no way, but voted to pursue war anyway.

As to the other "proofs" you mention, all of that was explained away long ago. You are pulling up dusty info to make a case which cannot be made.

The alleged "yellow cake" purchase from Niger - originally came from Italian intelligence which the CIA verified as good intel.

The alleged meeting between hijacker Atta and a member of Iraqi intelligence. - last I saw this was not alleged per se.

The alleged terrorist training on Iraqi soil. - actually took place...I have friends who were over there and saw the training sites.

The alleged mobile labs for chemical weapons production. - not alleged - again I have friend who were in Desert Storm who saw them.

Richard Clarke corraborates as much in his book, "Against all Enemies," - not a credible source as far as I'm concerned...most in the Pentagon don't think much of him either.

Douglas Feith has been ALLEDGED to have edited intelligence reports that were being submitted to Congress. - I haven't seen full evidence showing it was actually done.

"We are closing in on a million innocent Iraqi civilian deaths and over 3000 U.S. military deaths" - There are two rules in war - Rule 1: people (sometimes innocents too) die - Rule 2: You can't change rule 1.

"Project for a New American Century" - Ah Thomas, I credited you for better than this. So you want to judge conservatives by one group? You really can't believe everyone who is a conservative is like this.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,
Most of the civilized world, the UN, and NATO, consider Afghanistan the nation most directly responsible for 9-11 since it hosted and provided refuge to the terrorist organization of Al-Qaeda. Not Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.

But I guess that is not a "nuanced" evaluation. Surely the ultimate responsiblity lies with the USA or Israel, right? At least you don't think Bush/Cheney personally orchestrated the whole thing, like the "Truthers". Do you?

Posted by: Steven B | April 18, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

actually, Cheney shot dennis in the head, too .. at close range .. blew his brains out .. happened several years ago but nobody ever noticed so it was never reported ..

Posted by: tejanodiablo | April 18, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse

"Thomas, I understand Elvis is also a part owner."

Another lazy, non-rebuttal....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse

"No Dick, no Bush", who said that?!

Anyway, Kucinich has moved to the head of the class and Ohio, you can now be proud.

Posted by: pre-Amerikkkan | April 18, 2007 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Sonofawhateveryouare......I know one thing....you are very confused. Right wing, left wing are in a circular continuum not, in on a continuum that is a straight line. The right wing and left wing meet in the middle at the bottom of the circular continuum. Both being the tyrannical ends of both. And each one is fascism....no one more than the other. So quit the useless comparisons.

Posted by: cliffjumper | April 18, 2007 04:45 PM
`
That's an oversimplification, and besides you're the one who said to the left of Stalin. Stalin was a right wing dictator, period.
If you want a more sophisticated way to measure it you make a graph, with the x axis going from anarchy, libertarianism , democracy, republicanism, to authoritarianism and totalitarianism. Then on the y axis you measure economic systems, going from completely free market capitalism, some government control, a lot of government control, to comminism.
Then you figure out where you are on the graph. You can get even more complex by making a three dimensional graph and factor in something like religion.


Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Both Stalin and Hitler were left-wing nuts.

Hitler headed Nazi Party, i.e., National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP).

Stalin was General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union's Central Committee.

As I said, left-wing nuts.

Posted by: Leonidas | April 18, 2007 5:00 PM | Report abuse

My God, its full of nuts!

Posted by: easy | April 18, 2007 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Steven B:
Most of the civilized world believe that Afganistan was harboring and supporting Al Qaeda. This is true. But what most Americans fail to do is ask themselves what caused the terrorists to form against us in the first place. Why do they hate us?

If you truly want to solve a problem doesn't it make sense to investigate the genesis of that problem?

So I ask you, why do they hate us?

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Sir Loin of Beef,

Ok...so can you tell me if he was CHARGED with AWOL? If not, then I would be asking Colonel Bricken WHY he wasn't doing HIS job. If an officer does not show up and is AWOL, he needs to be counseled and eventually it should affect his OER.

Further, if he had done no training then it should definitely affect his evaluation report. Also, if his transfer did not go thru, he should have not been carried on the DA Form 1379 and pay should not have been made.

This is all highly irregular...it sounds like the chain of command all the way UP didn't do their jobs. At any rate, this evidence is worthless as there is little in the way of documentation and no consistency at all.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Sonofabastard,
Most of the civilized world, the UN, and NATO, consider Afghanistan the nation most directly responsible for 9-11 since it hosted and provided refuge to the terrorist organization of Al-Qaeda. Not Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.
Posted by: Steven B | April 18, 2007 04:56 PM
`
Until proven otherwise I believe that Bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian double agent. Nothing else makes sense. Members of Pakistan intelligence gave Bin Laden logistical support. Saudi Arabia gave him financial support.
BTW Pakistan is the purveyor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 5:08 PM | Report abuse

The time has definitely come to Imeach both Draft Dodger Delusional Dick Cheney
and Liar in Chief George W Bush and Democrat President Wannabe Coward Speaker
Damscus Nancy Pelosi and have all them
tried for Treason and War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity NOW!

Posted by: Sherry Kay | April 18, 2007 5:08 PM | Report abuse

steven b. : why do they hate us ??? well, weren't they planning and practising the 9-11 attack during the clinton administration when he was doing all he could to kiss arafat's butt ??

Posted by: tejanodiablo | April 18, 2007 5:09 PM | Report abuse

"Project for a New American Century" - Ah Thomas, I credited you for better than this. So you want to judge conservatives by one group? You really can't believe everyone who is a conservative is like this.


Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 04:56 PM


Yeah, that's the response Kristol always gives too: "What? US? Shucks, we'er just a few guys in an a little old office on the third floor. What influence could we have?"


This is a group that includes as signatories the VP, the erstwhile Defense Secretary, the erstwhile Assistant Defense Secretary, essentially all of Bush's top advisors and most prolific speechwriters, and a covey of propagandist for the most well-funded neocon think-tanks around. Yeah, they don't mean anything to American conservatives.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

How long can you arbitrarily naysay? You should call Guinness.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 5:10 PM | Report abuse

mmather, what kind of sick dope smoker are you? do you work for the WPost? Perhaps, the NYT.

Posted by: Leatherneck | April 18, 2007 5:11 PM | Report abuse

You know the best thing about this thread?

Seeing the liberals here peeing themselves like hysterically excited, thoroughly incontinent terriers.

And knowing that Dennis's Articles of Impeachment will go absolutely nowhere.

LOL.
________________

Posted by: RJGatorEsq | April 18, 2007 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Chief:
You're tap-dancing again. The timeline proves, without a shadow of a doubt, that the administration sold threats that they KNEW had already been disproven. You keep throwing red herring rebuttals about other intelligence agencies etc which is meaningless to the facts. At the time they made statements about alleged threats, those threats had already been dubunked. End of story. Have you even bothered to read the timeline?

Richard Clarke is one of the most respected men in the intelligence community who worked in the White House under both Bush's and the Clinton administration in a 30+ year career in public service. Even after the book came out, the administration refused to say bad things about a member of their staff who busted his but for the good of the nation. Your assertion that he is not a "credible source" begs the question, if Richard Clarke, the counter terror czar during the 9/11 period, within the White House, in direct daily confereece with Bush and Cheney isn't credible enough for you, then who is?????

Feith admitted he edited the documents and the edits have been published. Read them. It's not "alleged," it is fact at this point.

The idea that you are erring on the side of caution is looking a bit silly the more you deny every bit of evidence, no matter how damning.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Both Stalin and Hitler were left-wing nuts.

Hitler headed Nazi Party, i.e., National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP).

Stalin was General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union's Central Committee.

As I said, left-wing nuts.

Posted by: Leonidas | April 18, 2007 05:00 PM

`
Go ahead and call them left wingers. It's irrelevant. That means F.D.R and liberals are right wingers. Authoritarians like Hitler and Stalin are together on the left-right continuum.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

Sorry but as I said, the timeline has references I cannot credit. It sounds like a good theory but I don't see the evidence.

Tell you what, show me hard evidence. I mean, do you have pictures, documents with their signature on them...SOMETHING?

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 5:18 PM | Report abuse

A True Story

The end of democracy started when the government, in
the midst of worldwide economic crisis, received
reports of an imminent terrorist attack. A foreign
idealogue had launched feeble attacks on a few famous
buildings, but the media largely ignored his efforts.
The intelligence services knew, however, that the odds
were he would eventually succeed.

But the warnings of investigators were ignored at the
highest levels, in part because the government was
distracted; the man who claimed to be the nations
leader had not been elected by a majority vote, and
many citizens claimed he had no right to the power he
coveted. He was a simpleton, some said, a cartoon
character of a man who saw things in black and white
terms and didn't have the intellect to understand the
subtleties of running a nation in a complex and
internationalist world. His course use of
language--reflecting his political roots in a
southernmost state-- and his simplistic and often
inflammatory nationalist rhetoric offended
aristocrats, foreign leaders and the well-educated
elite in the government and media.

Nonetheless, he knew the terrorist was going to strike
(although he didn't know where or when), and he had
already considered his response. When an aide brought
him word that the nation's most prestigious building
was ablaze, he verified that it was a terrorist who
had struck then rushed to the scene and called a press
conference.

"You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch
in history," he proclaimed, standing in front of the
burned out building, surrounded by national media.
"This fire," he said, his voice trembling with
emotion, "is the beginning." He used the occasion --
"A sign from God," he called it -- to declare a war
not on another Nation, but on a tactic: terrorism.
The terrorism his country suffered from, he said, had
to have originated with a group of people of middle
eastern origin who rationalized their acts using
religion.

Two weeks later, the first detention center for
terrorists was built to hold suspected allies of the
infamous terrorist. In a national eruption of
"patriotism", the leaders flag was everywhere, even
printed large in newspapers suitable for window
display.

Within four weeks of the terrorist attack, the nations
now-popular leader had pushed through legislation--in
the name of combating terrorism--that suspended
constitutional guarantees of free speech, privacy and
habeus corpus. Police could now intercept mail and
wiretap phones; suspected terrorists could be
inprisoned without charges and without access to their
lawyers; police could sneak into people's homes
without warrants if the cases involved terrorists.

His federal police agencies stepped up their programs
of arresting suspicious persons and holding them
without access to lawyers or courts. Those who
objected to these tactics were largely ignored by the
mainstream press, which was afraid to offend and thus
lose access to a leader with such a high popularity
rating.

In addition to playing up this new nationalism, his
propoganda minister orchestrated a campaign to ensure
that people knew that he was a deeply religious man
and that his motivations were deeply rooted in
Christianity. He proclaimed the need for a revival of
the Christian faith across his nation, which he called
a "New Christianity". Every man in his rapidly
growing army wore a belt buckle that declared "God is
With Us".

Within a year of the attack, the nations leader
determined that the various local police and federal
agencies were lacking in the communication and
coordinated administration necessary to deal with the
threat posed by the terrorists and troublesome
"intellectuals" and "liberals". He proposed a
national agency to protect the security of the
homeland, consolidating the previously independent
agencies under one self appointed leader.

To consolidate his power, he reached out to industry
and forged an alliance, bringing former executives of
the nations largest corporations into high government
positions. A flood of government money poured into
the coffers of private corporations hired to join the
fight against terrorism at home and prepare for war
abroad. Industry flourished in this new enterprise.

Once again, people started to question the leaders new
alliances to large corporations. He needed a
diversion-- something to direct people away from the
rampant cronyism bein g exposed within his government.

He began a campaign to convince the nation that a
small, limited war was necessary. Another nation was
harboring many "suspicious" middle eastern people, and
even though its connection with the terrorist who had
set afire the nation's most important building was
tenuous at best, it held resources their nation needed
if they were to have room to live and maintain their
prosperity. He called a press conference and
delivered an ultimatum to the leader of the other
nation, provoking an international uproar. He claimed
the right to stike pre-emptively in self-defense and
nations across Europe--at first-- denouced him for it,
pointing out that it was a doctrine claimed in the
past by nations seeking worldwide empire, ike Caesar's
Rome or Alexander's Greece.

It took a few months, and intense international debate
and lobbying with european nations, but finally a deal
was struck. Thus Adolph Hitler annexed Austria in a
lightning move, riding a wave of support as is often
found in times of war. The austrian government was
unseated and replaced with new leadership friendly to
Germany, and German industry began to take over
Austrian resources.

In a speech responding to critics of the invasion
Hitler said, "Certain foreign newspapers have said
that I fell on Austria with brutal methods. I can
say; even in death they cannot stop lying. I have in
the course of my political struggle won much love from
my people, but when I crossed the former frontier into
Austria there met me such a stream of love as I have
never experienced. Not as tyrants have we come, but
as liberators."

To deal with dissent, Hitlers advisors and his freinds
in the press began a campaign to equate his policies
with "patriotism" and the nation itself. In a time of
war, they said, there could be only "one people, one
nation and one commander-in-chief." And so began a
nationwide campaign charging that critics of his
policies were attacking the nation itself. Those
questioning him were labeled "unpatriotic",
"anti-german" or "not good germans," and it was
suggested they were aiding the enemies of the state by
failing in the "patriotic necessity" of "supporting
the valient men in uniform."

A year later, Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia, again
under a doctine of first-strike "preventitive" war.
The nation was now fully at war and all dissent was
stifled under the banner of national security.

It was the end of the Germans first experiment with
Democracy.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 5:19 PM | Report abuse

For those who think that in the next election to vote Green will help the United States they are describing the color of what their smoking.

Posted by: Ron | April 18, 2007 5:19 PM | Report abuse

"Ok...so can you tell me if he was CHARGED with AWOL? If not, then I would be asking Colonel Bricken WHY he wasn't doing HIS job. If an officer does not show up and is AWOL, he needs to be counseled and eventually it should affect his OER."

No argument here, chiefpayne. But how does the failure at that time of the Guard's standard proceedures required by the explicit and unchallenged chain of official documents detailing Bush's infractions in any way detract from those infractions themselves? I smell a straw-man.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Sir Loin of Beef,

And what is your point? I understand you have liberals who's mantra is actually communistic too, yet we don't judge all of you by that (at least I don't).

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 5:22 PM | Report abuse

You know the best thing about this thread?

Seeing the liberals here peeing themselves like hysterically excited, thoroughly incontinent terriers.

LOL.
________________

Posted by: RJGatorEsq | April 18, 2007 05:11 PM
`
You know what the worst thing about this thread is. There is only one right winger trying to make a coherent argument. The rest of you insouciant imbeciles think this disasterous administration is funny. Time will come when that smirk is going to get slapped right off your face. While you're laughing, good people are getting killed. I'm not LOL.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 5:22 PM | Report abuse

I thought that only Russ Feingold opposed the war before it started. Either way, it should be obvious that the polls at the time had most Americans wanting the government to "cowboy up" to their John Wayne understanding of what a war is. All of the politicians knew there was not grounds for a war, but wanted to look like they opposed a paper tiger, and that is what the idiots wanted to see in the media. This isn't a war by the way, it is a colonialization and an occupation, and guys like Chiefpayne do clerical work not dangerous heroic work, because it is a job. Hillary wants to look tough, because that is what politicians that resemble women think that they need to do to shirk that "too much of a weak feminine type" image they are strapped with. Pun intended. All Democrats try to shake the same image of weakness. The people that run this country are unable to lead, just like a bunch of decision makers in the military are as well, so what did you expect. They make errant decisions and lie about why things didn't work every day. Debriefing means cover yur ass.

You impeach Cheney because he "willfully misrepresented the facts" about Sadam's role with respect to 9-11, and WMD's, and other matters. Not accidently, but willfully.And was active in involving others to conspire to do the same(Colin Powell). I don't buy the I was duped and forced to obey portrayed by the Colin the rich dumb clown bit. That being said, any contractors and military personnel that are claiming how honorable they are, are obviously in violation of honor and truth. Military men are generally incapable of telling the truth, and being honorable, despite the clothing they wear and snap to salutes they practice.They always claim honor and truth by the way, especially the ones at the top, and are lieing in the officers club or NCO club, and ignorring the truth, by midnight of each day. The rest is about money, power, and land/natural resources acquisition(turf). That is what all wars are about. Hold Cheney and Bush accountable, like they claim all criminals should be, and give them a public defender, and an all black jury to help them come to grips with another dishonorable myth they have been fraudulently jousting about. Justice. No problem for them, the supreme court will find some obscure part of the constitution that implys that these two were protected by the constitution, unlike the rest of us for commiting fraud. All except Thomas, since he will just concur with Scalia because he was too busy blowing bubbles in his Coca Cola to listen.

Posted by: Robert Kunferman | April 18, 2007 5:23 PM | Report abuse

200 DEAD IN BAGHDAD TODAY. THE BUSH SURGE IS WORKING GREAT. THE BRILLIANT CHENEY STRATEGY IS WINNING THE WAR. THREE CHEERS FOR CHENEY!!! THE GREAT REPUBLICAN HOPE!!!

Posted by: NARO | April 18, 2007 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Sir Loin of Beef,

Sorry Sir Loin but if I can't see the smoke, it's hard to tell me there's a fire.

If they are THAT disorganized, then HOW do we know if President Bush was present or not? Answer is, we DON'T...so we really DON'T know if he was AWOL or not...not for a fact, now do we.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Not one (evident) response to Michelle Brooks' WMD quotes!?!

Are US lefties that dense, denying these historic realities?

(A bemused Canuck)

Posted by: b_C | April 18, 2007 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Rep Kuchinch---it is not going to pass and you are expending effort better spent on something more useful. Why not attack setasides, grants, bread and circuses? Or do you like setasides like the elephants do, grants like the mosquitos do, and bread and circuses like everyone who wants our attention diverted from foolishness?

Posted by: velvel in atlanta | April 18, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Thomas, they hate you because you are an infidel who doesn't follow the sharia law, not yet anyway.

They have obligation to hate you because their Holly Book orders them to hate you and attack you at every opportunity. It also orders them to lie to you whenever it is convenient. Just go to a library and borrow their Holly Book and read it. It is an eye opener.

They want you to submit to their dogma (which means SUBMISSION).

I quess, one of those days you will be ready to become a dhimmi (a slave) and the eternal peace will follow, or they say so until the next conquest.

Posted by: Leonidas | April 18, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Sir Loin of Beef,

Sorry Sir Loin but if I can't see the smoke, it's hard to tell me there's a fire.

If they are THAT disorganized, then HOW do we know if President Bush was present or not? Answer is, we DON'T...so we really DON'T know if he was AWOL or not...not for a fact, now do we.

Posted by: chiefpayne568 | April 18, 2007 05:24 PM

A $10,000 reward should roust somebody's memory.

...and what was that "communistic" post? Did you confuse me with someone else's post - or are you just verbally ejaculating?

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Chief:
I don't understand. You "can't" credit or "won't" credit those sources? I mean, we are talking about sources like Dick Cheney, George Bush, The Senete Intelligence Commitee, The Director General of Niger's French-led Consortium, Bob Woodward, The Defense Intelligence Agency, Richard Clarke, Joseph Wilson, Declassified internal White House Intelligence memos, The LA Times, the NY Times, Rolling Stone magazine, The Wall street Journal, Newsweek, Declassified CIA documents, The Downing Street Memo, British Intelligence, Colin Powell, Condeleeza Rice...

Stop me when I get to something worthy of your "credit"....

Are you serious? At some point you need to step out of the world of Orwell and come back to me....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Leonidas,
That's it? Strange, how come they aren't the sworn enemy of so many other nations that don't follow Sharia law?

It amazes me how ignorant Americans are to their own foreign policy history.

Former Lieutenant Colonel Robert Bowman (October 2, 1998) commented in the National Catholic Reporter:

"We are not hated because we practice democracy, value freedom, or uphold human rights. We are hated because our government denies these things to people in Third World countries whose resources are coveted by our multinational corporations. That hatred we have sown has come back to haunt us in the form of terrorism ... Instead of sending our sons and daughters around the world to kill Arabs so we can have the oil under their sand, we should send them to rebuild their infrastructure, supply clean water, and feed starving children...

In short, we should do good instead of evil. Who would try to stop us? Who would hate us? Who would want to bomb us? That is the truth ... the American people need to hear."

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 5:31 PM | Report abuse

I hope the demented soul under the name mmather who wishes Cheney dead gets help before he also goes postal.

To the Washington Post: Why in God's name have'nt you pulled that sick post?

Posted by: E Whitney | April 18, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Chief:
Serously, what would it take? If it is proven that Dick Cheney received a Daily intelligence Briefing that told him that the alleged sale of yellow cake from Nigeria never happened, then he went out the next day and told the world that Hussein was an imminent danger to America based on the fact that he attempted to buy yellow cake from Nigeria, does this mean nothing to you?

Because that is essentially what you are saying at this point.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 5:34 PM | Report abuse

That's what they're all saying, Thomas.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

I think that Stalin, Left Liberal, and Hitler, Right Conservative, represent opposite ends of the political spectrum. I think though that after reading a lot of historical articles of activities from both parties that the Democratic Party is more middle of the road than the Republican Party. They have so far racked up more fascist policies than all the other presidents combined since Washingtom.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

sorry, I forgot to post my name to the nameless post.

Posted by: ehorsman | April 18, 2007 5:39 PM | Report abuse

§ 2441. War crimes
(a) Offense.-- Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.
(b) Circumstances.-- The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the person committing such war crime or the victim of such war crime is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
(c) Definition.-- As used in this section the term "war crime" means any conduct--
(1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
(2) prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907;
(3) which constitutes a violation of common Article 3 of the international conventions signed at Geneva, 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party and which deals with non-international armed conflict; or
(4) of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.

Bush and Cheney on 911 interviewed behind closed doors, refused to take an oath, refused to allow tape recordings and ensured no transcript be kept but they tell us (citizens) they can spy on who ever they choose. Tell Congress to do their job as they pledged to the American people and God to do! Impeach and Indict this administration for TREASON! Remember any PEOPLE are responsible for the regime they are willing to put up with!

Posted by: Ed | April 18, 2007 5:41 PM | Report abuse

So Thomas,

President Bush deposes a brutal mass-murdering dictator, helps the people we freed start a democratic form of government, provides troops to kill the terrorists trying to disrupt the elected government and is re-building their infrastructure. All the items in your post. So why are you not singing his praises? Or are you a hypocrite?

Posted by: Bill Maron | April 18, 2007 5:43 PM | Report abuse

DEMENTED DENNIS OR AKA MR. LESS THAN ONE PERCENT, THIS LESS THAN, USED TO REFER TO HIS PREZ BID BUT NOW I BELIEVE IT'S HIS IQ. YOU KNOW I HAVE LISTENED TO THIS MENTAL MIDGET YELP AND TO THIS DAY I CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT KEEPS HIM IN OFFICE, HE OUGHT TO IMPEACH HIMSELF ALSO. THE KOOL AID DRINKERS MUST BE IN CONTROL WHERE HE LIVES.

GO FOR IT DENNY, JUST GO FOR IT AND LEAVE.

Posted by: ontime | April 18, 2007 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Roll Call reports, "The FBI has raided the Northern Virginia home of Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.), according to Congressional sources. No details are publicly available yet about the circumstances of the raid, but Doolittle and his wife, Julie, have been under federal investigation for their ties to the scandal surrounding imprisoned former lobbyist Jack Abramoff."
`
Here's another Republican who needs to go. How appropriate, a Republican Congressman named doolittle. Sheesh!

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

They do hate other non-sharia nations, just look what happens on Europe. Bombings, remember?

It is not a recent problem, and it has nothing to do with American policies. It is an ongoing battle since the seventh century.

Just remember the Polish king Jan III Sobieski and his battle at the gates of Vienna in the 17th century and many other battles over the centuries.

We, infidels, are attacked whenever we are considered being weak.

At this point America is considered a weak horse hence the attacks on her.

Posted by: Leonidas | April 18, 2007 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Bill,
I don't understand your question. He illegally invaded iraq for control of oil. It has led to comlplete destruction of the Iraqi society and the deaths of close to a million innocent civilians. Millions more had to flee for their lives. There is no interest in creating a true democracy, as I pointed out in my 1:04pm post and the re-building of the infrastructure (that we detroyed-ow kind of us!) hasn't happened.

I hardly think anyone should sing his praises for this monumental crime against humanity.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Go ahead and Impeach either one of them or both. Impeachment does nothing. The House impeaches someone, only the Senate can convict. Conviction wouldn't happen, not in the Senate.

Posted by: penn | April 18, 2007 5:49 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans look more and more like the Baathists every day. One-party rule; has it ever gone awry?


"An anonymous letter sent to the House and Senate Judiciary Chairmen, signed "A Group of Concerned Department of Justice Employees," thanked Democrats for exposing the "overtly political" firing of United States Attorneys, but warned that the Department was also politicizing the non-political ranks of Justice employees.

The letter claims that the traditional, objective process of hiring top students from law school was being superceded by top officials. After mid-level employees painstakingly pored over applications and resumes to select the best candidates as usual, senior Justice officials dramatically purged the final list in an unprecedented manner.

The letter charges that "Most of those struck from the list had interned for a Hill Democrat, clerked for a Democratic judge, worked for a 'liberal' cause, or otherwise appeared to have 'liberal' leanings. Summa cum laude graduates of both Yale and Harvard were rejected. . ."

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 5:50 PM | Report abuse

By the way, I hope that Kucinich does get the nomination. Talk about an easy GOP election in November, '08.

Posted by: penn | April 18, 2007 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Leonidas,
The attacks in Europe were against our allies because of our policies. Why aren't they attacking Buddhist nations? Why do they leave Catholic nations in south and central america alone? You need to take your head out of the sand.

We invade their lands, steal their resources, back ruthless dictators who deny them human rights...and you think it has "nothing to do with it?" Are you kidding?

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Hey liberals. I am sure dissapointed in your posts. Is this the best you have? Same old same old.

Posted by: smokehouse | April 18, 2007 5:52 PM | Report abuse

The ignorance put on display by the majority of the posters here is breathtaking.

Posted by: Veteran | April 18, 2007 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Man, the left-wingers on this site are so hate-obsessed, that if they can't find a legitimate reason to impeach Bush/Cheney, they will make something up. Anything is good enough for them. These people have gone totally insane. I concede that Bush and Cheney are not perfect, but they are not evil monsters, either, and the hatred of the leftists is seriously sick. Bush and Cheney are the democratically-elected leaders of this country. They are doing what they are supposed to do. They are trying to defend this nation from very real enemies. The liberals think that if we all just joined hands and sang "Give Peace a Chance" all of our problems would go away. These leftist fools smoked too much dope in the '60s and in the years since. As for all the lies that Cheney and Bush have supposedly told, where is the evidence? Clinton and his staff were saying the same things, and so was Congress. You liberals had better settle down. You are driving yourselves to insanity with all your hatred. Get some prozac or some haldol or something. This impeachment talk only gives encouragement to those who are conspriring to do harm to our nation and all other decent nations.

Posted by: Doug | April 18, 2007 5:58 PM | Report abuse

'Our own reactions to 9/11 attacks on relatives, associates, and our national institutions should help us see how millions of Vietnamese must have felt about our dropping countless tons of napalm and explosives on their villages and farms. How Iraqis must have felt about the bombing raids and economic blockade that we imposed for more than a decade, at a cost 5000 lives a month. How Nicaraguans must feel about the Contras' US-backed terror campaign that took the lives of over 30,000 civilians? How Indonesians must have felt about the US-backed coup that brought Suharto to power in 1967 and took perhaps as many as a million lives? How Chileans must have felt about the CIA-backed coup that put Pinochet in power and led to tens of thousands of desaparecidos. Or how Arabs must feel about our role in Palestine, in a conflict that has taken far too many lives on both sides, but over the years has claimed five times as many Palestinians as Israelis.

When our government supports the likes of Marcos in the Philippines, Chiang Kai-shek in China, Syngman Rhee in Korea, Diem, Ky, and Thieu in Vietnam, Batista in Cuba, Somoza in Nicaragua, Pinochet in Chile, Apartheid South Africa, Mugabe in Zimbabwe, Kasavubu and Mobutu in Zaire, the Shah in Iran, and ... yes ... even Saddam Hussein for decades in Iraq, how do we expect the world to feel about us?

We claim that our military interventions are to foster freedom and democracy. Yet our CIA and military have intervened to depose democratically elected governments in such places as Iran (in 1953) and the Dominican Republic (in 1966).

After Chileans elected Salvador Allende president in 1970, Henry Kissinger declared "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people." Three years later, General Pinochet, supported by the CIA, engineered a coup and, for two decades, led one of the bloodiest regimes in the history of South America.

When Daniel Ortega of the Sandinistas was elected president of Nicaragua in 1984 with 63% of the vote in an election that international observers found free and fair, President Reagan continued illegally to fund and arm the Contras until the Sandinistas were overthrown. And just last year, when Hamas won the Palestinian election, the US and its allies withdrew all support with the avowed intention of making it impossible for the victors to rule. Our government has a history of being all for democracy as long as its side wins, but gladly turning to repressive tyrants when it loses. Is it hard to understand why our lectures on freedom and democracy so often fall upon deaf ears? Why we're so widely dismissed as hypocrites? Why, when we complain that Muslims (or Latinos, Africans, or Asians) are incapable of embracing democratic governance, others say they would like to see us try democracy ourselves.

My point is not, as right-wing critics put it, to "blame America first." As I said earlier, reality is contradictory and complex. Our country and our people have many wonderful qualities that are widely admired. One can cite our wealth and power, democratic institutions, and many heroic acts of self-sacrifice intended solely to improve the lives of others. Think of the Peace Corps, or Habitat for Humanity, or Amigos de las Americas--an organization with which my family has been involved. But we also need to understand how people maimed and orphaned by our bombs and napalm, or those who have lost sisters, brothers, sons and daughters at our hands might well perceive our country as an arrogant bully and a leading source of mindless, heartless terrorism.

As long as we continue to cause suffering to people the world over, they'll rush to join bin Laden or Muqtada al-Sadr. Bush and his misbegotten war against Iraq have been the best conceivable recruiting tool for radical Islamists--as even the bipartisan Baker Commission recently acknowledged. If we hope to challenge them effectively, we have to claim the moral high ground--through our deeds as well as our intentions. Bush's war has done the very opposite.'

-Rick Feinberg, Professor of Anthropology Kent State University

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 6:00 PM | Report abuse

This country needs several more attacks before the mewling left and the castrated lemmings that support them are either obliterated or left shuddering in a corner while the real men and women in America are released to fight the enemies that the majority of the deluded commentors on this page are too cowardly to deal with.

Impeachment? If there is an impeachment it should be because the enemy wasn't dealt with the deathly blows that they deserve. An impeachment for weakening the Republican party to the point that now the cock roaches have majorities.

Impeachment for felonies? What a joke. You lefties love felons.

Those calling for impeachment are self-loathing ameriKKans, not real Americans. All of you will deserve the scorn and contempt that history will ultimately reward you. May your children spit on your graves.

Posted by: Zee | April 18, 2007 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Doug,
You're gonna have to actually go through the effort of reading the evidence and the links to the evidence that have been provided in abundance during this thread. We aren't going to come to your house and read it to you.

Backing this administration means you are either delusional, ignorant or one of the few, wealthy elites who they actually represent.

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 6:03 PM | Report abuse

"It is too bad the shooter at VT spent all of his mojo on students and faculty."

Reported to FBI.

Posted by: Love America | April 18, 2007 6:06 PM | Report abuse

On that note...time to make dinner.....

Posted by: Thomas | April 18, 2007 6:07 PM | Report abuse

You don't FILE articles of impeachment like charges are filed by a D.A. You INTRODUCE them onto the floor where there has be a vote or else it goes nowhere.

Your title is misleading and sensationalist. This is the Washington Post, not the Albuquerque Herald.

Posted by: FIX YOUR TITLE! | April 18, 2007 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Impeach Cheney and Bush and let Ms. Pelosi have a chance at running the country. She couldn't possibly do worse that Cheney and Bush.

Posted by: billywilder | April 18, 2007 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Those calling for impeachment are self-loathing ameriKKans, not real Americans. All of you will deserve the scorn and contempt that history will ultimately reward you. May your children spit on your graves.
Posted by: Zee | April 18, 2007 06:01 PM
`
Zee, last in war, last in peace, last in her class, last in the alphabet.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,

There was just another beheading of a Buddhist man in Thailand yesterday. Almost everyday Buddhists are losing their lives there, including school children, especially girls.

Here is a link for you to read: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/18/asia/AS-GEN-Thailand-Southern-Violence.php

It is not about American policies, it is about imposing Sharia law, about constant conquest.

Do you know that Syria, Iraq were originally Christian?

Do you know that Istambul was originally known as Constantinopole and was the Christian Byzantine capital for over 1000 years? Here is another link for you to read:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/18/europe/EU-GEN-Turkey-Bible-Attack.php

America is considered a weak horse, divided and shaky, full of people easily manipulated by jihadist propaganda that uses our main stream media.

Posted by: Leonidas | April 18, 2007 6:14 PM | Report abuse

"America is considered a weak horse, divided and shaky, full of people easily manipulated by jihadist propaganda that uses our main stream media."

An apt description of Bush's America.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Hard to believe most of the comments here.
I aqm an Independent because I can't see voting a party line for either the GOP or Dems. I have split my vote often for candidates of both parties. Getting harder to find worthwhile ones. the MSM slants everything making it difficult to get the REAL FACTS Which clearly most of these idiots have no idea exist). Saddens me to see Americans rave and rant with notihng.

Posted by: fred | April 18, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

HOW CONVENIENT THE VA TECH CIA SCHOOL SHOOTINGS SAVED CONVICTED DRUNK DICK CHENEY FROM IMPEACHMENT AND ARREST. NOT A PEEP FROM THE MEDIA MAFIA ON TV... READ PENTAGON'S OPERATION NORTHWOODS, WHERE CIA WOULD PERP SNIPER AND HANDGUN TERROR ATTACKS IN USA.

Posted by: PirateNews.org | April 18, 2007 6:19 PM | Report abuse

pardon if this has been mentioned before..

but it seems to me that the process of impeachment would give congress a reason to access records and subpoena testimony that they normally wouldn't have justification to do.

This, in and of itself, is reason enough to begin impeachment proceedings.

I'm sure I'm not alone in the desire to see the transcript of Cheney's meeting with energy industry leaders that took place within weeks of his taking office.

The subsequent rise in oil and gasoline, natural gas, and electric prices would lead any reasoned individual to at least ponder what was said at that meeting.

Posted by: lp009 | April 18, 2007 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,
Hey, thanks for the laugh. I actually burst out in laughter when you said I must be one of the wealthy elites. Ha. Ha. That is a good one. If you only knew...Let me say that you have jumped to the wrong conclusion again. As for having to come to my house and read the lies for me, it is not necessary. I have been reading the posts on this site, and those from the left, including yours, are baseless. Chief Payne has taken you apart all afternoon. Why don't you give it up? If you are a Democrat, I can understand that you are loyal to your party. Party loyalty is fine. But when you lose your ability to reason, you lose. Period. Your fanatical hatred of our current leadership, and that of your fellow leftist is nuts. Bush and Cheney are not bad leaders. But you will never realize this, because you are irrational. Keep working at it. I gotta go to work. Bye.

Posted by: Doug | April 18, 2007 6:24 PM | Report abuse

The new republican word of the week "surrender pullout bill" you guys make me sick with your manipulation of words. Don't you republicans think that when you start using the same word of the week, how stupid you actually look. I laugh my behind off. Maybe a dose of John Stewart will remind you idiots how stupid you are.

Posted by: The Fosk | April 18, 2007 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Sir Loin of Beef,

Actually the first WTC attack happened during Clinton administration. It was at that time that Osama BL invoked the weak horse description.

Posted by: Leonidas | April 18, 2007 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich defines the lunatic leftists and Democrat party and displays again their out of touch with reality mindset. The liberals wake up and look in the mirror and repeat whatever insane talking points Howard Dean passes on to them and they believe it regardless of facts. It's all about liberals keeping an open mind...so open that actual 'thought' never enters their minds.

Liberals or better yet anti-Americans, are truly lost in a fantasy world of their own making. Not only did President Bush NOT lie, but the decisions were made 'bipartisan' because of the information 'both parties' were privy to, but now the Dem's want it both ways like John Kerry; I voted for the war before I voted against the war...

Liberals; such hypocrites. Get over yourselves!

Posted by: Ed | April 18, 2007 7:06 PM | Report abuse

At first I even wrote my elected representatives not to waste time on impeachment proceedings, that there were more practical and important things to accomplish, such as getting out of the disaster in Iraq, but now I'm not so sure. Bush and Cheney simply make charades out of what leaders in a real democracy are supposed to be, namely accountable to the its citizens. In theri arrogant disregard toward what the vast majority of Americans want and need from their government, perhaps it's time to consider getting rid of them both. Maybe then politicians will understand and realize this is a government for, by and of the people. Not just a government for the rich and powerful, who seem to be the only people Bush and Cheney care about or listen to.

Posted by: Greg Van Hee | April 18, 2007 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Keep spewing, you lefty retards. Dennis Kucinich is a Mo-ron with a capital M. Blaming everything on a vast right wing conspiracy is just a way for you to cope with the fact that your sad, empty life as a barista has fallen quite a bit short of where you'd hoped you'd be. Perhaps if one had studied harder and laid off the nitrous oxide just a wee bit, one's life may have turned out much closer to their dream. You dopes are no more relevant than Lyndon LaRouche, or Pat Paulsen for that matter. Suck it.

Posted by: Jim Scrabbley | April 18, 2007 7:08 PM | Report abuse

The author describes Kucinich as:

"the most liberal of the .. Presidential candidates..".

I think this represents a mis-nomer, which 'liberals' ought to set straight.

It should, more correctly, read:

".. the most left wing .."

True Liberals should re-capture the center-left and resist the inexorable drive leftwards.

Posted by: DavidR | April 18, 2007 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Greg Van Hee,

You've come to your senses, then. The only way to redeem the relevance and integrity of the constitutionally prescribed impeachment process following its partisan debasement by the Republicans is to use it to the end for which it was actually designed; to protect our country from the leadership of scoundrels and pirates.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Doug, don't even talk about reason when you've been following the disasterously illogical leadership of this administration. Eisenhower could reason and showed it when he strictly warned Americans of the extreme dangers of nation building exactly like the absurd attempt being made and disasterously failing right now in Iraq. Goldwater could reason when he said government had no business going into deficit spending and this administration has tried to make fools out of us by saying it's just fine to owe billions and billions to countries such as Communist China. Kennedy could reason when he said we could and should not foist our beliefs on everyone else in the world and could not afford to cure all of the world's ills. This administration succeeded at alienating most of our best friends and allies by insults and arrogant rants when after 9-11 we had the sympathy of just about every important country in the world, but this administration had a private agenda that would cause us to have the worst relations with the rest of the world in our entire history as a nation. By the way, Doug, you seem to confuse name calling with reasonable argument, very illogical and unreasonable on your part.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 18, 2007 7:18 PM | Report abuse

True Liberals should re-capture the center-left and resist the inexorable drive leftwards.

Posted by: DavidR | April 18, 2007 07:12 PM

...forget the fact that historical conservatives like Barry Goldwater and Dwight Eisenhower would be considered to be to the left of Joe Biden today.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 18, 2007 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Bravo "testposter"!
Good work. I know what you mean. I also see a lot of quotations that are effectively misquotations. Juxtaposing quotations that were in fact stated minutes apart is a grave disservice to the truth. Then the misquotation gets repeated again and again, and all the angry webnuts get angrier and angrier and more confident that they're right. Good work - you have served the Truth.

Posted by: GB | April 18, 2007 7:30 PM | Report abuse

It's too bad the washingtonpost spends all their MOJO on LGF.

Posted by: seethingmuslim | April 18, 2007 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Bush "invaded Iraq for their oil" ???? Hmmm, why haven't we taken any, then? Can you all answer that simple question?

Oh, and here's some oldies but goodies for everyone. Looks like Bush isn't the only one who "lied":

Direct quotes can certainly come back to haunt you. Read on.....

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That
is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We
want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal
here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear,
chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest
security
threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983." S
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.
Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate,
air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to
the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John
Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he
has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has . chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of St ate, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam
continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a
licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten
the United
States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction
and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept.. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in
power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam H ussein is seeking and developing
weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority
to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
that a deadly arsenal o f weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real
and
grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively
to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the
next five y ears ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his
chemical and biologica l weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do" Rep.
- Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has
also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members
. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will
continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare,
and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam
Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for
the pr oduction and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
.. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
.."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES???
HMMMMMMMMMMMMM

Posted by: Right Wing Conspiracy and Proud of it | April 18, 2007 7:41 PM | Report abuse

I can't stand Cheney takes over Bush's seat, so impeach VP first. He controlled the robot over 6 years, he is the cancer of GOP. He is rich so doesn't need retirement paycheck from the government. Please impeach Cheney.

Posted by: Kyu Reisch | April 18, 2007 7:51 PM | Report abuse

To avoid another Republican creep as President, Bush and Cheney need to be impeached simultaneously.

Mind you, that would make Nancy Pelosi President.

How does that strike you?

How does that strike you?

Hello?

Posted by: Gerard Mulholland | April 18, 2007 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Having read most of the currently posted commentary, I note that no one has yet looked at the practical aspects of Congressman Kucinich's proposed impeachment.

Provided enough heat is kept on the relevant Democratic Committee members to hold hearings on the bill, it is likely that hearings can't really get going before June.

Those hearings, plus Summer breaks, plus meetings outside of Committee would likely push writing a Bill of Impeachment to about Labor Day. Reporting that Bill out might them be mid September.

After that things in the House move with some speed, and a final vote on the bill would come in perhaps early October.

Throughout this process the Vice President gets to take the heat without any real chance to respond directly to Congress, and his expected bombast aimed at Congress just makes him even more dislikable. It is highly unlikely that it will really help his popularity, although since even Ehud Olmert seems to actually be more popular with his country than our exiled Texan, it probably can't really cut his popularity down very much.

Any Democrat can score points at home during this process, either by directly attacking the VP, or by nobly demurring, on the grounds that that SOB just isn't worth delaying important work, like ending the war. The process as a WIN-win situation for the Dems, and a hale of buckshot to be dodged by the Republicans. It will be very hard for any republican to look good in this mess. Some Republicans will be able to look good siding with the Impeachment forces, the rest will look tongue tied or jack lighted. What ever real friends DC has will be notably absent in the debate.

The leveraged moment will come when the Dems get their Bill approved. At that point, the Republicans who have already been proposing that DC resign to give George a chance to anoint a supposedly electable successor may be able to give Cheney a final shove. If he won't go things get worse, but if he quits anywhere before this point, George gets to try to push his new guy past a Democratic Congress and Senate.

Here is an assignment for all of you Great White Hope Republicans: Whom should the Chief decider appointer name as DC's replacement? Remember he has to get Congressional Approval, no recess appointments.

If DC doesn't go before this the vastly entertaining trial phase takes up most of the rest of 2007. Then, just as the Republicans begin their polish firing squad exercise of a primary season, George has to try to name a VP.

Here is an exercise for old urbanity himself George Will: Will it be an Abbott and Costello routine, or Laural and Hardy, or the Three Stooges? (It ought to be the Marx brothers, but then these are Republicans)

From this point on anyone can try to imagine the making of the President, 2008, but if Congressmen Kucinich's three golden apples are half as destructive as the one's that brought down Troy, it will be a really fun year.

Crazy Cattail

Posted by: crazycattail | April 18, 2007 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Wow, scores of incoherent ramblings! I almost wore out my mouse scrolling to the bottom.

No look, guys, I'm a lifelong Democrat, but Kucinich, as well as the leadership of the Dems, know very well that *they* have been misleading the country since mid-2003.

When the going got a little rough in Iraq, all the Dems who voted for the AUMF in 2002, all those who indeed said all those fightin' words in the comment of "Right Wing Conspiracy and Proud of it" above, started to look for cover rather than stand their ground.

One might be forgiven in 2003 for swallowing this crap, but not now, not after:

+ David Kay interim ISG report and congressional testimony
+ Charles Duelfer final ISG report and congressional testimony
+ Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report of July 2004
+ Robb-Silberman Commission ("Iraq Intelligence Committe) report of 2005
+ Declassification of the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate

All of these documents and testimonies conclusively determined that (a) the Bush/Cheney administration acted on intelligence they were given by the Intelligence Community and (b) there was no effort by the administration to influence or distort the pre-war intelligence. End of story.

For some reason, other than a few brave souls like Joe Lieberman, almost all Democratic Senators and Congressmen continue to sell the "Bush lied" narrative. It's been very effective, as the majority of Americans believe them, not having taken time to look at the conclusive, contrary evidence above.

Posted by: SRosenbach | April 18, 2007 8:10 PM | Report abuse

SRosenbach:

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

If people would just do their homework, like you obviously have done, perhaps this blind hatred would not have bloomed so horrendously. The above people hear the anti-Bush chatter, and assume it's true without taking the time to verify it. It has now become chic to hate this administration.

You are a Democrat that I can truly respect for actually reading the facts!!!

Posted by: Right Wing Conspiracy and Proud of it | April 18, 2007 8:18 PM | Report abuse

It is too bad the shooter at VT spent all of his mojo on students and faculty.

Posted by: mmather | April 17, 2007 11:20 AM

Still there >24 hours later. Promoting (Vice) Presidential assassination are you? Unbelievable. It's one thing to disagree with or dislike a public figure and quite another thing to countenance this sort of vile utterance. Disgusting - you should be ashamed. I can't wait to read the next smarmy, self-righteous anti-gun, anti-violence garbage from this rag.

Posted by: CK | April 18, 2007 8:20 PM | Report abuse

I never realized how many brainwashed dumbed down fractured thinking demoncrats read WND. Too bad they learned nothing from this site. Sigh...

Posted by: KimC4444@aol.com | April 18, 2007 8:32 PM | Report abuse

I'M WITH YOU ON THIS ONE, DENNIS!!!

Your gutless Dem collegues won't support you, as they won't dare stand up to the insurance industry and try to pass a universal not-for-profit single-payer health care system, but YOU'RE RIGHT ON BOTH!

Posted by: Chuck | April 18, 2007 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Children: Tovarish Kusinish is a disillusioned Marxist leftover.
Just what do you think that Mr.Waxman is aiming for? Impeachment! After all it isn't whether the charges are true or not it is the seriousness of the charge! Most American's children would like to see the Nation's business done, not endless hearings which may or may not lead to charges. The most honest speaker of the house has appointed a member who is on tape accepting bribes, Not Duke Cunningham, over the comittee that has juristiction of funds for the F.B.I. and you call that honest? I have never heard such a bunch of pure bile and B.S. as has been presented here. Shame on you. That and get a Life!
The Democrat Party was elected on the corruption principle, not the war in Iraq, to the supprise of the Blowviating press in the interviews on the exit polls. Now we have a bill that purports to fund the Millitary in the war effort, which had to be packed with pork and of course TAX INCREASES. Seems that some Congressmen just had to be Bribed to get their votes. Seems that the Democrat party is backing into business as usual, TAX and SPEND!! That is not to say that the Republican party was not guilty of the same, but a lot of them are now gone! Perhaps we can get some people elected who are not Republicans in name only in 2008. Perhaps we can get some of the old Democrat party members to run not the Neo-Marxist's now in charge of the party! Perhaps we can get the Social Security funds put in a real lockbox and not into the General Funds as they are now, can you say a bridge to where, or spinich subsidies, or peanut protection?
You say that the Social Security funds are backed by Treasury Bonds? Wong Way children Congressional Bonds, which you can take all the way to the bathroom for obvious use! Socialized Medicine, that just means Medical Rationing and if you are over a certain age you might survive long enough to get some kind of treatment. There is no such place as FreeLunch Kids! Perhaps that is why so many Canadiens are coming to the U.S. for treatment. Perhaps that is why Mr. Castro had a physician imported, and did not use the homegrown variety? Hypocrite? Who the beloved leader?
Instead of Bile, use that thing between your ears which is called a BRAIN and lets get this country moving again please!! Sorry about the length of this, you girls caught me on the wrong side of the bed today!!

Posted by: h1m912009 | April 18, 2007 8:46 PM | Report abuse

He'd impeach Bush but Bush is his Socialist buddy.

There is plenty of cause to impeach Bush though, treason, bribery, allowing a hostile criminal invasion, delegating our sovereignty to the NAU, obliterarting our right to a republican form of government, allowing and subsidizing & inviting a hostile foreign invasion.

Cheney on the other hand is the only thing standing between Bush & impeachment, the liberals fear Cheney, Cheney wouldn't have fired Rumsfeld or allowed an Iranian invasion of Iraq or our bloated pork filled budget.

Cheney would use the line item veto.

Cheney is stuck standing next to the traitor/simpleton obligated to keep his mouth shut while the "decider" ruins the nation and who does Kicinich want to impeach? -Cheney.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bush conspired with AG Gonzalez & Kucinich to impeach Cheney.

Kucinich is a spineless whimp like all the other libs, half the Republicans would gleefully vote to impeach Bush but noooooo he's the lib,s best friend more Socialist that Clinton or Carter ever was.

Liberals have no morals whatsover, they'd sell out their own kids for campaign donations-oh that's right they have already with their bi-partisan bi-sexual tryst with GW Bush.

Posted by: Smitty | April 18, 2007 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Lots of Kool Aid drinkers and tinfoil hat wearers posting here I see. Kucinich is a certified whack job and a loser.

Posted by: dcpro | April 18, 2007 8:53 PM | Report abuse

I was rasied a Democrat, I was never able to grasp the stupidity. It put me as a young man at odds with those around me in WV.
Reading through the stupidity here is amazing.

I met Reagan a true conservative. I am a conservative. But I can not support the decisions of President Bush or Dick Cheney. Not because they took us to war on faulty intelligence but because they won't do what it takes to win. And President Bush ran on tax reform the second time. Not following through on that is grounds for impeachment to me.
See FairTax.org

I will never align myself with the Democrats or the Republicans. Both parties are self serving and they both care only about staying in or regaining power. We need a third party!

Kucinich is an idiot. But he is a good and consistant one. Why can he not champion a cause that could actually do some good. Now that has me wondering about my own Representatives.

Posted by: D Finley | April 18, 2007 8:59 PM | Report abuse

I guess members of Congress don't have to pass a sanity test. Good thing for Kucinich. Prediction: the Cheney impeachment debate will reach the floor of the House during the same week that Rush Limbaugh wins the Nobel Peace Prize.

Posted by: JBaustian | April 18, 2007 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Yea Dennis. Finally some guts in Congress (are we sure Dennis is a democrat?)

The majority of gutless demos won't go along, but even Dennis's filing of Impeachmentwill get the subject out in the open --- and hoefully lead to the gutless, shilling MSM having to report that the vast majority of average Americans want Cheney and Bush cut down (figuratively and literally)

Anything that moves the public toward further and publicized awareness of the fact that our country has been taken over by a guileful global corporate elite Empire which has set-up a facade of "Vichy America" is a step in the right direction. And that direction is to totally and non-violently expunge the elite Empire, expose "Vichy America" as the phony lie that it is, and get back our democracy.

Posted by: Alan MacDonald | April 18, 2007 9:20 PM | Report abuse

There is an old saying that it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Kucinich has left no doubt. If he had any judgment at all, he would be railing at his leader who is trying to be Commander-in-Chief and Secretary of State, roles for which she has no qualifications whatsoever. So crawl back into your hole, Dennis, and wait for the next Groundhog Day.

Posted by: jbell | April 18, 2007 9:20 PM | Report abuse

It is a shame Americans as a whole are so apathetic and ignorant, and allow themselves to be led by the five or so people who control over 90% of American Media. If you understand (and except) Newton's laws of physics you have no choice but to admit that 911 was an inside job. The facts only support one of the two competing theories, and it ain't the governments' story. Look it up for yourself, do your own research, use your own brain.

The current administration is responsible for the deaths of over a million people based on lies and manipulations. That should be reason enough to impeach. America should be ashamed.

Cheney said "we need a new Perl Harbour" and then he got one. Wake-up America!

Posted by: David Doepel | April 18, 2007 9:23 PM | Report abuse

These twisted and murderous denizens of hell in the "white-supremacy house" demand nothing less than to be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity in an international Nuremburg war crime tribunal. Then paraded in shackles and chains around the world for their victims families to hurl stones and curses on them before their final judgement. Is this not true justice? If not in this life, then they will surely face eternal damnation, this we can be sure. Hypocritical so-called Christians will never understand that YHVH is to be feared and obeyed, the final outcome for these world leaders is cleary revealed in our holy books, of all religions.

Posted by: out the sickos | April 18, 2007 9:26 PM | Report abuse

If Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach the president, vice president and "all civil Officers of the United States" for "treason, bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Then that authority must also extend to "The People" of the United States as well. 'All civil officers'....which includes incompetent and corrupt Representatives and Senators.

Posted by: Brian Peters | April 18, 2007 9:42 PM | Report abuse

I 'm not gonna argue but there is no evidence to impeach Bush on. Bush is doing what is good and right.

Posted by: Sam | April 18, 2007 9:47 PM | Report abuse

Representative Kucinich has alwsy had his head on backwards. What is actually funnier than Dennis K are the comments of idiots agreeing with him.

Posted by: JMGreene | April 18, 2007 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Here it is - the ultimate, irreverent Hillary Clinton quotebook.
Never before has one work so damned someone with his or her own words.
It's "I've Always Been a Yankees Fan" - just in time to arm yourself with the truth as the senator from New York prepares for her ambitious mission of becoming the first woman president of the United States.
Remember when she claimed to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary, the famed mountaineer who climbed Mount Everest? Only problem - his accomplishment came years after she was born.
How about the her claim, while running for the U.S. Senate in New York, about being a lifelong Yankees fan. Only problem - she grew up in Chicago rooting for the Cubs.
This is the biggest and best collection of famous and infamous Hillary quotes ever assembled and includes extensive, attributed sources, including recollections from former Clinton aide Dick Morris - fully illustrated, too.
How about her respect for the men and women who risk their lives for her protection?
Here's what she told her Secret Service guard who wanted to keep his hands free in case of a security threat: "If you want to remain on this detail, get you're a-- over here and grab those bags."
Here's what none other than Morris had to say about the book in his forward: "This wonderful little book will give you all the ammunition you need to hold up your end of the argument and make sure that Hillary's quotes and lies are not forgotten but come back to haunt her."
Get "I've Always Been a Yankees Fan" now.
Purchase of this book entitles you to three free trial issues of WND's Whistleblower magazine - a $22.50 value. Be sure to look for that offer during checkout.
NOTE: When shopping in WND's online store you have the option of paying with either a credit card or a check.
If you wish to order by phone, call our toll-free order line at 1-800-4WND-COM (1-800-496-3266).

Posted by: Jackson | April 18, 2007 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Charles Krauthammer nailed this, too:
Bush Derangement Syndrome, Cheney Variant
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/bush_derangement_syndrome_chen.html

You all have done Howard Kurtz proud.
Congratulations.

Posted by: juliannd | April 18, 2007 9:54 PM | Report abuse

alot more terror attacks would happen if we were not in the mid-east. over 100 have been prevented from being in the mid east. GO BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Johnson | April 18, 2007 9:55 PM | Report abuse

You guys are very scary and very deranged. You hate Bush and Cheney so much you don't seem to be able to think clearly anymore. It's O.K. to disagree with policies but trying to destroy someone just because you don't agree with them is just purely poison. And, it isn't good for the country either. Why don't we spend all this energy trying to come up with some worthwhile ideas to solve our countries problems instead of wasting time and effort blaming our country, the Bush administration, congress, and everyone else. Look in the mirror and you may find the real problem with our country today. Keep tearing it up and you may come to appreciate how great it is by loosing it.

Posted by: JT | April 18, 2007 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Impeaching Bush would be stupid!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Jack Dawson | April 18, 2007 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Deacjeff just indicted his
own republican party, which
controlled Congress for 12
years. Listen to his words:

If members of Congress would spend their time addressing issues of violence, gun availability, safety standards in public institutions and things that are actually of interest to us voter / taxpayers - instead of harrassing the administration and playing childish "gotcha" games for political points, the incident at Virginia Tech might not have occurred.

Posted by: Silvio Levy | April 18, 2007 9:58 PM | Report abuse

You Mooreians are too Constitutionally ingnorant to understand how Impeachment works. Please go ahead and draw up the Articles of Impeachment; then let them be voted upon: Results will be nothing except the powerlessness of the Dimicrats will be laid bare for the American people to see, since you don't have the two-thirds vote in the House of Representatives as required by the CONSTITUTION STUPID. If you would do something besides listen to CNN or MSNBC you might know how the country works. Oh, I forgot, y'all went to public school, where they major in IGNORANCE.

Posted by: Dave | April 18, 2007 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Representative Kucinich has alwsy had his head on backwards. What is actually funnier than Dennis K are the comments of idiots agreeing with him.

Posted by: JMGreene | April 18, 2007 10:00 PM | Report abuse

So you think Bush should be impeached. Read this!

• "King of Cons: Exposing the Dirty, Rotten Secrets of the Washington Elite and Hollywood Celebrities"
• Meet "The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"
• 'Mega Fix': Stunning new DVD documents the dazzling political deceit that led to 9-11
• 40% off! Clinton's fatal 'Intelligence Failure'
• "I've Always Been a Yankees Fan: Hillary Clinton in Her Own Words"
• Hillary's Secret War: The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists
• Ron Brown's Body: How One Man's Death Saved the Clinton Presidency and Hillary's Future
• Hillary stars in 'Help! Mom! There are Liberals Under My Bed'
• Previous stories:
• Dick Morris: Hillary wants to be 'President Rodham'
• Hillary preps to jump in
• Constitution Party aims to thwart Hillary, GOP
• Dick Morris: Now or never for Hillary
• Hillary comes out for same-sex marriage, sort of ...
• Court brief alleges crime by Hillary
• Hillary's brother targeted in new investigation demand
• Hillary receives demand to admit campaign fraud
• Clinton fraud case delayed
• Clinton lawyer Kendall accused of filing false statement
• Lawsuit: Clinton scheme cost donor millions
• New Senate complaint prepared against Hillary
• Hillary's dismissal in fraud suit appealed
• Hitler, Stalin ... and Clinton?

Posted by: Jim | April 18, 2007 10:06 PM | Report abuse

One of the above comments mentioned that " a big stink should be made about Cheney." That is all you liberals are capable of doing is making a big stink.

Posted by: J Rich | April 18, 2007 10:06 PM | Report abuse

You peoplep make no no sense. First you fail to realize that the reason we went into Iraq are the exact reason that Clinton order a strike on Saddam when he was president. That info that Bush so called "lied" to everyone about was actually given to him our intelligence....not just "made up"! Why do people want to just ignore facts for something that makes them feel good for "rebelling"? You can't impeach the president or the vp just because you disagree with what is happening in the world......We were attacked 4 TIMES when Clinton was prez and not much was done.....and suprise...guess who took credit for those 4ATTACKS....Radical Islamists.....but no they are not a threat......if you don't like the war so much, why don't you go play kissy face with the real enemy!

Posted by: Hippity Dippty | April 18, 2007 10:10 PM | Report abuse

If the people dont hold our reps feet to the fire impeachment wont happen. Its up to us.

Posted by: Jeff | April 18, 2007 10:10 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich is an unprincipled grandstanding opportunist. The leftists of the 60's used exactly the same strategy of trumped-up war crimes charges during the Vietnam war to destroy political opponents. Loose and baseless allegations were thrown around, smearing and slandering innocent people in the delusional leftist version of McCarthyism. It's sad so many are deceived by the anti-American propaganda campaign again!

Posted by: Doug | April 18, 2007 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Undoubtedly the right move. It may well come to naught, but the principle is right. I look forward to the day when the commander in chief himself might face a similar fate.No one should be above the law.

Posted by: Yolande M. Agble | April 18, 2007 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Yesss... it does seem perspicacious to impeach President Dick before going after King George Jr. Personally... I'd rather send Cheney to a firing squad... and just forget the impeachment.

Posted by: Guy Fox | April 18, 2007 10:26 PM | Report abuse

The phrase you are your own worst enemy applies like a charm to this administration, and US foreign policies since WWII. Muslims are our natural allies, we share a common faith, religion, and unity of God. Had it not been for the godless CIA destruction of Muslim democracies and untold oppression of the people's will, we would be enjoying a relationship of harmony and cultural exchange. Instead we have created a culture of hatred toward the West which will never stop until we the most powerful of nations in all of history shows mercy and compassion, rather than the satanic show of force and murder that has been this country's method of operation for 50 plus years. Is it not obvious, that if we don't stop this Texas Cheneysaw massacre our lives and country will never be the same. The Muslim tribal leaders can take care of these crazed lunatic qaeda monsters, but first we must take of our own!!

Posted by: clean the blood house | April 18, 2007 10:27 PM | Report abuse

HAHAHA!!!! All you idiots think you're on to something here, but don't even have the sense(or education?) to understand that
A. We don't live in a "democracy". The belief that we DO is FAR greater threat to our constitution than anything else out there and also one of the biggest fears of our founding fathers, and B. Debate and discussion may be a healthy part of our political system, the outright aid and comfort given to our enemies in a time of war by liberal Democrats creates a much easier case for articles of impeachment than anything done by the Bush presidency.
If all these so-called "leaders" were SO against the war in Iraq, why didn't they withhold support BEFORE we got into it? Is it better to "seem" unpatriotic BEFORE a war or BE unpatriotic DURING a war? I've been to Iraq and had a nephew swerve there. How many of you sniveling cowards have? More soldiers died in combat related incidents during Clintons presidency than have during Bushes. Think about THAT!

Posted by: Dennis | April 18, 2007 10:28 PM | Report abuse

More soldiers died in combat related incidents during Clintons presidency than have during Bushes. Think about THAT!

Posted by: Dennis | April 18, 2007 10:28 PM
`
That's a ridiculous lie.

Posted by: Sonofabastard | April 18, 2007 10:50 PM | Report abuse

"Send Cheney to a firing squad..."? You disgust me, Fox. You don't listen to Randi Rhodes, do you?

Posted by: Damail | April 18, 2007 10:54 PM | Report abuse

"The lies, deception, and seemingly endless corruptio[...]" specifics, please. What lies? What deception. What corruption? Real facts, not made up half-truths would be nice from those who think any Republican is guilty before any trial. I'd love to see an impeachment, because other than it being a show trial conducted by those who miss Stalin, real facts will show that nothing was done that reaches the level of impeachment.

Posted by: What? | April 18, 2007 11:02 PM | Report abuse

hippity dippy: While I have come to believe that there are Muslim's who are not Jihadists, like you I know that a certain section of that faith have declaired war on the U.S. Yes I have read the Quran and know for the most part that Islam was spread through terror and conquest. I also know that Islam is so "trusting" that they will not allow anyother belief system in areas that they control.
Now we can all wish that things were not the way that they are, but there are people who do not wish to get along. Sorry about the rant above but enjoyed your article.

Posted by: h1m912009 | April 18, 2007 11:21 PM | Report abuse

Is this a Lie?
"Criminals do prefer unarmed Victims"
Yes, this will be a little complex for the Socialist Progressive pea brain but try to figure it out.

Hey all you Socialist Progressives will you please start posting your homes with a sign that reads.

Warning Criminal
The Socialist Progressives that live here are in a "Gun Free Home Zone"
In addition, we will only dial 911 if you let us.

The Culture War has begun my friends keep your powder dry. This is so much fun reading the words of Socialist Progressives blowing a gasket.

Can't think of anything better than BUSH babe.

Posted by: Crazy8 | April 18, 2007 11:54 PM | Report abuse

Cheney should not just be impeached. Bush and Cheney should both be impeached, have their citizenship revoked, declared enemy combatants, shipped off to Gitmo without habeas corpus, water boarded, and put before a military tribunal.

Posted by: Terrell | April 19, 2007 12:00 AM | Report abuse

While he is at it, impeach Pelosi for her felonious violation of the Logan Act. Let's see...who's fourth in line for president? Robert "KKK" Byrd! Damn, never mind. Oh, and any attempt to impeach Bush or Cheney would be unfounded and political suicide for the Dems.

Posted by: Paul Munson | April 19, 2007 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Why do so many demos on this site think impeachment is not an actual doable thing? Dems are now in the majority of both the House and Senate. I agree with the comments of sane-1inthecrowd. Nancy Pelosi is more frightening than the girl puking pea soup in the exorcist. For those of you in the lynch mob for impeachment, look up the Federal Code Section that deals with Misprison of a Felony. Those of you that believe "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Ms. Pelosi went to Syria in the interests consistent with Federal Law and may be planning to meet the Iranian President, turn yourself into to your closest Federal Judge, or U.S. Attorney General Office before you are indicted. I've had it with the Repubs as well, and am a supporter of Ron Paul. I don't believe the condition of this country depends on the party of the President. It certainly takes someone who makes some sense though. So many of the comments I read on this site look like they are from an insane asylum. Has Thorazine been outlawed? The Democrats venom will be why the next President will be another Rep.

Posted by: cnclmark | April 19, 2007 12:21 AM | Report abuse

I have never read so much sniveling in my life if it is that bad just move. I understand the rest of the world hates Bush also so pick a spot and go. If I could pick a spot for you folks, Iran comes to mind. You can surround the Nuke Plant and sing S.P songs.

Posted by: Crazy8 | April 19, 2007 12:30 AM | Report abuse

While he is at it, impeach Pelosi for her felonious violation of the Logan Act. Let's see...who's fourth in line for president? Robert "KKK" Byrd! Damn, never mind. Oh, and any attempt to impeach Bush or Cheney would be unfounded and political suicide for the Dems.

Posted by: Paul Munson | April 19, 2007 12:19 AM


You obviously don't know what the Logan Act says. No one has ever benn charged witht he Logan Act and what Gingrich said about Taiwan in China is far beyond anything Pelosi has ever done. There were State Department officials with Peslosi during the whole visit including ALL the meetings with Syrian leaders. None of the Republicans seem to get mentioned by drooling wingnuts like you?? There were a handful with Pelosi and another group the week before. Get a clue, Pelosi didn't violate any law and members of Congress have visited foreign nations for well over 100 years. Drool away you ignorant fool.

Impeach - prosecute - incarcerate.......give Dumbya and Cheney one more term...life in prison!

Posted by: Dmitri | April 19, 2007 12:36 AM | Report abuse

What's all the fuss - don't you know there's a blinkin' WAR on. Cheney's just a modern confused version of CD Howe

Posted by: Derick FD McLaughlin | April 19, 2007 12:38 AM | Report abuse

Cheney. One of the greats.
Even for the left, new lows.

Posted by: Pamela | April 19, 2007 12:42 AM | Report abuse

There seems to be an overinflated concern with the rest of the world's image of America and a belief that it should shape domestic politics.

The contention that Cheney should be impeached because of what the rest of the world thinks of us is ignoring the immediate impact that would befall American politics here at home.

Sure the French and the Iraqis would cheer in the streets at Fat Dick's ouster, but as the point was made before, that would be a serious rallying cry to all Republicans to embrace their besieged leaders.

The Republican constituent is not the Democratic one. The Reps are far more loyal than even they know and when the time comes for them to reach deep down into the core of their identity, they will remember that they are of the party of Bush. When they are attacking him themselves, it's alright because he is of them, but once an outsider, i.e. Democrat, starts doing it, then it's family and it's personal and the Republicans own the political process again.

Should we risk this situation to appease those who scowl at us from behind the safety of superior attitudes? Huh, Kucinich?

Posted by: El Capitan | April 19, 2007 12:54 AM | Report abuse

Kucinich, the moptop from Ohio, should get the Nobel Peace Prize AND a Profile in Courage Award at the Kennedy Library for his honest, clear-eyed analysis in 2002 while most politicians acted in craven lockstep, authorizing a phony war. I'd even like him for president. Remember that 23 senators, unlike Clinton, saw through the phony arguments and cooked intelligence and voted no. Most of those who voted yea in 2002 still cannot fully admit their grievous error. Read what Kucinich said in 2002 and tell me he doesn't deserve the country's approbation:

http://kucinich.us/files/pdfs/Oct2002Analysis.pdf

Oh... to agree with me on this, you have to really, truly believe that fraudulent wars are very wrong to wage.

Posted by: cyberboston | April 19, 2007 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Sounds like most all of you have been smoking the same crack as Kucinich

Posted by: Jim | April 19, 2007 1:24 AM | Report abuse

Kucinich must have reached far and deep for such a brilliant plan such as this. He's most assuredly the party's genius.

Posted by: Favel | April 19, 2007 1:24 AM | Report abuse

Thomas,
Have you read John Lewis Gaddis? His take is studied, sober and pragmatic. There have always been aspects of our foriegn policy that have not been real pretty, but necessary nonetheless. Had men in the past not had the guts to undertake them, you would not be sitting so pretty today.

Posted by: Smokey | April 19, 2007 1:35 AM | Report abuse

if you want to impeach someone, impeach the entire democratic party for refusing to do the job they were elected to: running the country's business. they have not done anything to confront the problems that really matter to people in this nation;high taxes , immigration,high oil prices.in fact , they have made these problems worse.they're going to let the bush tax cuts expire (can you tell me that you are not paying high enough taxes now?),they refuse to enforce the immigration laws,and will not let drilling of america's oil supplies so that we will always be dependent on foreign nations .these are the real high crimes and misdemanors. it is time they started working on the real problems of the nation and quit wasting my tax payments on things that have no bearing on anyones day to day life.is cheneys impeachment going to put food on your table, gas in your car or pay your daily bills in any way? absolutely not!i am much more concerned about what they are not doing, they are not worried about me and my problems only thier own political fortunes, which they should be if they do not start doing something about the real problems in this country.

Posted by: starider | April 19, 2007 1:42 AM | Report abuse

To those posting here who cry that Bush and Cheney are trying to protect us from terrorists, let me give you some simple facts. And please, none of these dope-smoking peacenik accusations. I fully support war wherever and whenever it is legitimately called for. But this is not real war. This is business.

1) Invading Afganistan was completely justified. But we only invaded the northern half of Afganistan, which allowed most of the Taliban and Al-Qada to find refuge in the south amonst the tribal warlords, where they could regroup. We farmed out the hunt for Bin Laden to many of these same people, who subsequently let him escape into Pakistan.

2) In order for the invasion of Afganistan to completely suceed, we should have invaded with a minimum of 600,000 troops. This would be in line with the percentage of soliders to citizens during the occupation of Germany. We invaded with nowhere near that number.

3) Likewise, if we say for the sake of argument that the invasion of Iraq was justified (which it was not), using the same model, we should have invaded Iraq with 400,000 troops.

In both cases, we took upon ourselves wars in which we didn't send enough troops to do the job. Afganistan was clearly a sideshow; the real target was always Iraq, and it was planned way before Bush came to power.

Conclusion: This administration is not concerned with winning what they call the 'war on terror'. They are concerned only with maintaining it because they've turned it into a business. The idea is simple: defeat enough of the enemy so that you have overall control of the country in question, but spare enough of them so that you have to continually keep fighting them. What did Bush ask for for the surge, 150,000 more troops? That's not enough to win. And they will never send enough because they want to keep pertetuating the conflict. They don't want it to be over. The truth is in the numbers.


Posted by: TommyG | April 19, 2007 2:00 AM | Report abuse

Start by looking in to tower 7, 911 ....

Posted by: gitmo | April 19, 2007 3:02 AM | Report abuse

Dennis Kucinich has it right.
Bush and Cheney have harmed the nation by betraying the public trust and by gross abuses of power. They have broken numerous domestic and international laws and treaties. They have misled the nation into an illegal war of aggression and are guilty of gross human rights violations. They have undermined our civil rights and the violated the US Constitution.
Neither of them have the right to remain in office.
Impeachment is the appropriate legal remedy. Only impeachment will restore our Constitution and the rule of law.

I suggest Ms. Aker's educate herself on the issue of impeachment before she attempts to deal with this issue again. She will less apt to be used as a vehicle for propaganda by unnamed sources if she is better informed.

The snickering unnamed Democrat is guilty of violating his or her oath of office to upholand of dereliction of duty.

Posted by: Cadawa | April 19, 2007 3:37 AM | Report abuse

Comparing 911Gate with other, past, lesser 'gates': http://911gate.us/

The only thing more revealing than the content of Bush's incriminating 9/11 witness statements is the total non-reaction to them by all Dems, including Kucinich.

Posted by: 911gate | April 19, 2007 3:58 AM | Report abuse

Dennis Kucinich is a nutcase of the worst sort. He needs to be institutionalized, not sitting in Congress to waste the country's time with such utter worthless crap.

The people of Cleveland, who continue to elect this psycho, should hide their heads in shame.

Posted by: Tom Flocco | April 19, 2007 4:42 AM | Report abuse

The Great Salamander(Cheney) is an un-touchable. He is unassailable, for, in truth he is not of this world, but a high member of a reptilian alien race who oversee the illuminatti agenda.

Posted by: Chris B | April 19, 2007 6:43 AM | Report abuse

The Iraq war was justified. Even Several Iraqs said that Saddam had moved hus nukes out of the country. Even a U.N arms inspecter said he found evidence that they had been flown out of the country. I beleive if we pull out we are going to see an increase in terror attacks.

Posted by: Tom | April 19, 2007 6:53 AM | Report abuse

No offense to some of you, but most of you seem to be blabbing about stuff you don't even know. Impeach Bush, thats ridiculous, that would probably never pass through the house and senate either.You must be impeached by both, Clinton only got impeached by one.

Posted by: Abrahm Lincoln | April 19, 2007 7:02 AM | Report abuse

I agree with much of what "Hippidy Dippity" says. I wondered if you libs also knew how much Clinton weakened the CIA and FBI. IF it weren't for him 911 might not have happened.

Posted by: Jim | April 19, 2007 7:04 AM | Report abuse

Just so you all know here is how a pres. is impeached. (www.ask.com)(how is a Pres. impeached)
acoording to The Articles of Impeachment are received from the House.
The Senate formulates rules and procedures for holding a trial.
A trial will be held. The President will be represented by his lawyers. A select group of House members will serve as "prosecutors." The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (currently John G. Roberts) will preside with all 100 Senators acting as the jury.
The Senate will meet in private session to debate a verdict.
The Senate, in open session, will vote on a verdict. A 2/3 vote of the Senate will result in a conviction.
The Senate will vote to remove the President from office.
The Senate may also vote (by a simple majority) to prohibit the President from holding any public office in the future. Impeachable Offenses
Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says, "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." In his report, Independent Counsel, Starr accuses President Clinton of committing eleven acts for which he could be removed from office by impeachment. Are any of those acts "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors?" Well, that's up to the members of the House of Representatives. According to Constitutional Lawyers, "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" are (1) real criminality -- breaking a law; (2) abuses of power; (3) "violation of public trust" as defined by Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. In 1970, then Representative Gerald R. Ford defined impeachable offenses as "whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history." An excellent definition, Mr. Former President. In the past, Congress has issued Articles of Impeachment for acts in three general categories:
Exceeding the constitutional bounds of the powers of the office.
Behavior grossly incompatible with the proper function and purpose of the office.
Employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or for personal gain.
In the House of Representatives
The House Judiciary Committee decides whether or not to proceed with impeachment. If they do...
The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee will propose a Resolution calling for the Judiciary Committee to begin a formal inquiry into the issue of impeachment.
Based on their inquiry, the Judiciary Committee will send another Resolution to the full House stating that impeachment is warranted and why (the Articles of Impeachment), or that impeachment is not called for.
The Full House (probably operating under special floor rules set by the House Rules Committee) will debate and vote on each Article of Impeachment.
Should any one of the Articles of Impeachment be approved by a simple majority vote, the President will be "impeached." However, being impeached is sort of like being indicted of a crime. There still has to be a trial, which is where the US Senate comes in.


Posted by: Jack | April 19, 2007 7:20 AM | Report abuse

Why does the Washington Post allow the posting of the individual with the screen name "mmather" who wishes Cheney dead?

Why does the Washington Post tolerate its web site being used for promotion of murder, violence by such individuals? The Washington Post message boards and forums are also a harbor for Neo-Nazism.

What is wrong with the Washington Post in letting this happen?

Posted by: Anonymous | April 19, 2007 7:33 AM | Report abuse

Finally, somebody is doing something honorable and just in Washington. If the crimes of this administration are not at least investigated formally then we may as well have a dictator presiding over this country and run the Constitution through a paper shredder.

I'm very surprised at so many comments from people just willing to bend over for the government. The government is in place to serve YOU, answer to YOU and represent YOU and not the other way around. Perhaps people have lost sight of this.

And Washington Post, why insert a stupid-sounding "quip" with this serious news? You are undermining an important effort right off the bat with an insult to one of the few public servants with integrity. That's extremely disappointing.

Posted by: mister worms | April 19, 2007 7:36 AM | Report abuse


Do a majority of Americans care whether the Rabid Right subverts Democracy and replaces it with Theocratic-Authoritarianism? Is it too late to do anything about it even if we do object. One by one and day by day Republicans are stripping of us of our rights, and nobody is doing a thing to prevent it. They lied and bullied us into an illegal, immoral and unnecessary war for profit, and nobody did a thing to prevent it.

Impeachment is off the table, which gives Bush and his sociopathic followers in congress a green light to do anything they please. Either a majority of Americans don't know what's going on, or they don't care. Maybe both.

Bush and his Merry Band of War-Profiteers are bankrupting the country, but nobody seems to care. In the next depression, people on Social Security will be the few fortunate Americans left with an income, (aside from the War-Profiteers of course) and I will protect myself by whatever means necessary. I'm not going to start shooting Republican politicians until they try to steal my Social Security check, again.

Republicans have demonstrated they have no scruples about accomplishing their goals by illegal means when legal means are blocked. The stolen 2000 election began their reign of lawlessness and they continue full steam ahead, even as we watch with horror.

Evil men always have the advantage because they are not constrained by conscience or the puny objections of the meek. The bout between Democrats and Republicans is like watching Harry Reid duke it out with Mike Tyson.

And Tyson just bit off Harry's testicles .

Kucinich may not be much bigger than Harry Reid, but at least he has balls. Unfortunately, he seems to be the only Democrat who does.
.

Posted by: rabblerowzer | April 19, 2007 7:56 AM | Report abuse

I had a nice sleep.. has it calmed yet?

the govment cyberwarefare trolls: you people are so fat wackers, no wander this whole country is living in hell and a handbag, who is mmather does that stand for mary mather or should we just snoop on the ip number now, you guy is very deranged

the neo-con trolls: you have a brain washington machine by liable media, have you tried the cherry kool-aid, dude don't spillage my bong waters, Liberace is a mental state

the veterans: have you served, yes I am writing from Afganistan, Iraq, see my DD214, I swore an oath, just shut up if you didn't serve

the liberals: itmfa, impeach both, take them all out

the constitutionalists: impeach cheney if he breaks the law, oath of office, restore the constitution

the psychopath: you should have used the force luke, got your mojo to run yet

Posted by: sic.of.it.all | April 19, 2007 8:03 AM | Report abuse

It just seems to me that all you cry baby liberals are more dangerous to this nation than any of the terrorist oversea's. What lie did Bush tell? Don't come up with any lies to back your so-call case, Just the facts!! You can't come up with one. You people want to cry and complain about the deaths over there, but what about over here? Why aren't you liberals doing something about the hunderds that are dying everyday here in the U. S.? I don't see you protesting on the bad streets of U.S. Don't see you protesting on the crack house's that are killing our kids by the hundreds. You do nothing! You hate Bush and Cheney because you look in the mirror and see a coward looking back at you. Just because Pres. Bush had the balls to stand-up to these terrorist, you hate him for being what you wish you could have been. I feel no sorrow for you, just pitty. That you love to protest and hate because it makes you feel important. Sad, very sad that you are hurting America more and more and you are so studid that you can't see it or you don't care. I for one thank all of our armed forces for all that they have done for me and my family. Thank you Pres. Bush for being a man that thinks Amer. is worth fighing for and for all you have done for our Nation.

Posted by: ED BAKER | April 19, 2007 8:07 AM | Report abuse

No impeachment has ever succeeded without the backing of the party in power.

Posted by: archiesboy | April 19, 2007 8:22 AM | Report abuse

Ed Baker is a drowning rat. Pathetic

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 19, 2007 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Hey, "Sleuth":

Why, pray, haven't *you* reached your boiling point yet? What, exactly, is unimpeachable about this administration, which your paper has shilled for on its op-ed page many a day over the past six-plus years?

Surely it has nothing to do with maintaining your access to utterly corrupt power. Somewhere I.F. Stone is laughing, or crying.

Have a productive day.

Posted by: Doug Tarnopol | April 19, 2007 9:26 AM | Report abuse

At first I thought beginning impeachment now would only distract Congress and the nation from other life-and-death matters, until I realized how intent Bush (Cheney) is/are to invade the entire MidEast within the next two years -- perhaps making possible a declaration of military law and suspension of 2008 presidential elections. Now I agree with "worldcan'twait" that we must proceed. I say, Go, Dennis.

The more I hear about Cheney the more frightening he becomes in his relentless pursuit of empirical power for the presidency. I doubt he would hesitate to bump off GWBush if it served his purpose. But as it is, he virtually runs the world while his bumbling puppet distracts us from the real puller of strings. Never doubt that Cheney's fingerprints are all over 9/11 as well.

Let it be said, however, that while Bush personifies a mindless pursuit of power with total disregard for its cost in human life, it is we, the people, who have sat back and watched and perhaps applauded this trend over the past 50 years. We have invaded 200 countries, have 1000 military bases around the world in 150 countries. (How would we like 150 nations to create military bases across our country?) Prior to GW, our military attacked Iraq under orders from Clinton and we caused the death of 500,000 Iraqi children through out economic sanctions. We are reaping what we have sown for years. That's what makes the presidential bid by Dennis Kucinich almost our last great hope for freedom--he is unique in wanting to turn this Ship of State back into Constitutional waters, and at last drop anchor in the Harbor of Peace. (Poetic, but at the same time factually true.)

The Democratic aide may be right that "We'll see a Kucinich Administration before we'll see a Cheney impeachment." But let's reverse the order and hope we can do both.

Posted by: genevieve | April 19, 2007 9:27 AM | Report abuse

I think all of you who want Bush impeached are all unloyal Americans! I have alot of friends in the marines, maybe you all deserve a Pres. like Oboma or Hillary!!

I believe the only one truly focoused on the war on terror is Bush. My friends agree.

Posted by: Tom | April 19, 2007 10:11 AM | Report abuse

3000 something is a small price to pay for the security were getting. Where do you want to fight the terrorists here!!??!

Over 100 attacks have been prevented from being in Iraq.

Posted by: Tom | April 19, 2007 10:14 AM | Report abuse

I agree with ED BAKER. I m not a republican or a democrat. I examine the canidates and then choose. I guess the terrorists are glad seeing all you Americans trying to feed the alligator so he won't eat you last. There is something seriouly wrong with you people who want Bush impeached. If Clinton can commit crime after crime and get away with it, how come you want Bush impeached when he has done NOTHING.

Posted by: Tom | April 19, 2007 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I might email the Post and tell them to delete posts that talk of killing Dem. or Rep. That is PROMOTING violenece. and I can see most of you who put those comments are "Peace" loving Libs...

Posted by: Tom | April 19, 2007 10:27 AM | Report abuse

At least Pelosi is not as vile, detestable and stupid as this dick Cheney or terrorist Bush who has no brains.

Posted by: Herbert-Jean Awuor | April 19, 2007 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, Tom, but 3000 lives is NOT a small price to pay for anything; shame on you for suggesting that. Our military men and women are doing their best to obey their commander-in-chief, while that commander-in-chief cuts their pay, reduces their benefits, demands that their coffins be brought back under cover of darkness with no cameras (and no family) allowed as witnesses, sends exhausted troops into combat for double duty with inadequate protection, and pays his own private troops (the faith-based Christian supremacist, responsible to no law mercenaries) several times a day more than he pays our military who at his orders are dying every day.

This man has shamed us before the world and feels no shame for doing it. He has brought about the deaths of tens even hundreds of thousands and feels not the slightest shred of regret. He refuses to listen to anyone but his own ghosts. There is a name for those who are devoid of feeling, for those who ignore the voices of the people while following the voices inside his head.

Posted by: genevieve | April 19, 2007 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Tom is a fascist mind-slave.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 19, 2007 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Tom is a coward, hiding at home from "lurking" foreign terrorists; while his corporatist/miitarist masters facilitate the arming of domestic freakjobs who turn our schools into shooting galleries. Tom clearly stays away from schools, so I'm sure he is content to have our cops "fight them there, so we don't have to fight them at home."

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 19, 2007 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Hey "Right Wing Conspiracy Theory and Proud of it":

You asked the question, "Bush "invaded Iraq for their oil" ???? Hmmm, why haven't we taken any, then? Can you all answer that simple question?"

The recently enacted Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law privatizes 81% of Iraq's currently nationalized petroleum resources, opening them to "investment" by Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco, and two British oil companies, BP/Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell. These companies expect to sign the rarely used and notoriously profitable contracts called "production sharing agreements" which guarantee them extraordinarily high profit margins: they might capture more than half of the oil revenues for the first 15-30 years of the contracts' lifespan, and deny Iraq any income at all until their infrastructure "investments" have been recovered.

So the Iraqi people will share among themselves all the revenue from 1/5th of their country's oil reserves. But they will get only a fraction from the remaining 4/5ths, where the American and British oil companies expect to generate immense profits.


DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION SUFFICIENTLY? DO SOME RESEARCH (AND LISTENING TO RUSH LIMBAUGH DOESN'T COUNT AS RESEARCH)!

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Tom:
In regards to your charge that those wanting to impeach Bush and Cheney are being "unloyal americans," I suggest you read my April 18th, 5:19pm post.

If you can actually read, of course...otherwise, get someone to read it to you.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Tom:

I'll help you:

"To deal with dissent, Hitlers advisors and his friends
in the press began a campaign to equate his policies
with "patriotism" and the nation itself. In a time of
war, they said, there could be only "one people, one
nation and one commander-in-chief." And so began a
nationwide campaign charging that critics of his
policies were attacking the nation itself. Those
questioning him were labeled "unpatriotic",
"anti-german" or "not good germans," and it was
suggested they were aiding the enemies of the state by
failing in the "patriotic necessity" of "supporting
the valient men in uniform."

Standing up to your government when you believe they are doing wrong is a Patriotic stance. Blindly following leadership is dangerous and is the antithesis of patriotism.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 11:24 AM | Report abuse

This thread needs to be saved for posterity. Comedic gold from both retarded sides of the "debate".

Posted by: Pickle | April 19, 2007 11:32 AM | Report abuse

First,we are no safer from terrorist attack just because we're in Iraq. That logic doesn't compute. We are safer today because the CIA has been revamped and refocused and is no longer preoccupied with having to provide the administration with evidence for an invasion for which there is no real evidence, as they were ordered to do and which is documented. We are also safer because intel between ourselves and other countries has been linked far more effeciently. There is no evidence to suggest that terrorists would not attempt to hit us here just because we're embroiled in a war thousands of miles away. It's fractured logic.

Second, the administration will MAINTAIN the war on terror (their term). They will not WIN either Afganistan or Iraq because they will intentionally not send enough troops to do the job. If Bush ask for 400,000 more troops for each country, I would support him completely. Asking for only 150,000 proves to me that both these endeavors are for show and their only real goal is to provide a continuing conflict in both countries that reap continually huge profits for the corporations to which the administration is closely connected, one of which is actually moving it's headquarters over there.

Thirdly, politicians who support Bush are now towing a standard line that they were so surprised and shocked to learn that the CIA intel regarding Iraq was wrong and proceed to blame the Clinton administration and Sen. Church for damaging the CIA to the point of ineffectiveness. This very well may be true. But it was public knowledge in 2002 and 2003 that our intelligence had no people on the ground in Iraq for a number of years so there was no way we could be receiving accurate intel on exactly what Saddam had and didn't have. But those who attemped to raise that point were largely shouted down as flag burning, anti-American, dope-smoking-peacnik, terrorist-lovers.

Lastly, the Democrats and Republicans in congress were fooled, as was the American electorate, by a minimal amount of evidence that Saddam might have WMDs that was exaggerated using generalities designed to inspire fear, not by a responsible administration that aspired to react to a threat, but one intent on deposing Saddam as part of a larger agenda. But this does not render the Democrats a reasonable alternative. On the contrary, the argument could be made that if the Democrats could be fooled by their own political opposition, they are most certainly no match for our global adversaries.

Posted by: TommyG | April 19, 2007 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Hi guys!

Posted by: mmather | April 19, 2007 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Pickle:

Can't wait to hear your pearls of wisdom on the subject, unless you are just too above it all to post something relevant.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 11:59 AM | Report abuse

You libs are blind. Go read some of the writings of the Koran. In the Muslim world, there are active Muslims and passive Muslims. The actives are responsible for terror and crime, the passives partially co-exist with non-Muslims. For Muslims, JUSTICE ONLY EXISTS FOR ALLAH AND HIS FOLLOWERS. If someone commits an act of terror against non-Muslims "in the name of Allah", they are simply viewed by the passives as mis-guided followers. Because the crime was committed "in the name of Allah", they are forgiven. A non-Muslim committing the same crime must be punished.

This is not new. For centuries, Muslims ruled the World. It wasn't until the 14th century that Christianity began to systematically defeat Muslims. Muslims have been taught thru the centuries that "Allah" will ultimately rule the world, and his followers must stay loyal, even if it means committing crimes against non-Muslims for no other reason than not believing in "Allah". There is no freedom of choice in Islam. You believe in "Allah" or leave yourself open to Allah's wrath.

This is why the war on terror must be maintained. Muslims WON'T STOP. They will teach their children's children to continue oppression on non-believers. This is generational, and will continue long after we are gone.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 12:30 PM | Report abuse

They impeach former president Clinton for oral sex and these cranberries such as Rick and Sam above say there is no rule for impeaching president Bush and VP Cheney? READ THE CONSTITUTION fellows. Remember, treason begins with not upholding your oath to protect the constitution of the United States Of America...geezzzz

Posted by: Karla | April 19, 2007 12:31 PM | Report abuse

The depth of insanity displayed in far too many replies here is disgusting.

Kucinich and the rest of these droolers need a swift kick where you've obviously placed your brains.

Posted by: Disgusted | April 19, 2007 12:38 PM | Report abuse

HAHAHAHHHHAHAHHAHHAHHAHHHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHH!

Dennis K. is a funny little man.

The people who are in support of his funny little plan are just sittin on the train tracks smokin' some righteous spleef, and you don't hear the train coming.....The Bush administration hears it coming and they are trying to shove your sorry butts off the track, but you're too stoned to help.

Posted by: Nox -- Iowa | April 19, 2007 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Prismsinc:
There are clearly factions of fundamental Islam who will be our enemies no matter what we do, but the overwhelming fuel to the Anti-American fire lies in our abysmal foriegn policy.

Former Lieutenant Colonel Robert Bowman (October 2, 1998) commented in the National Catholic Reporter:

"We are not hated because we practice democracy, value freedom, or uphold human rights. We are hated because our government denies these things to people in Third World countries whose resources are coveted by our multinational corporations. That hatred we have sown has come back to haunt us in the form of terrorism ... Instead of sending our sons and daughters around the world to kill Arabs so we can have the oil under their sand, we should send them to rebuild their infrastructure, supply clean water, and feed starving children...

In short, we should do good instead of evil. Who would try to stop us? Who would hate us? Who would want to bomb us? That is the truth ... the American people need to hear."

Anyone who chooses to deny our role in the creation of terrorism is doomed to support policies that will continue to fuel anti-American "blowback."

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree that it is time to impeach both Bush and Cheney. In the meantime, Congress needs to stand fast.
If you, Congress, weaken the wording of the Military Funding Bill, Bush will use signing statements to circumvent your critical policies. Add to that the the disgruntlement that would ensue in this country should the seeking of a unitary government go unchallenged by those whose responsibility it is to do so.
Let Bush veto, then present to him a stricter Bill while initiating Articles of Impeachment against him and Cheney. It is their and their co-conspiritors fault that our troops are "in harm's way" in the first place.
Our troops are the best in the world. I served in the U.S. Army in the '70s and early '80s and have trained with the Germans, Canadians, and Contras. I believe if we unleashed our troops we could win anywhere in the world. However, our troops are not the Waffen SS.
If Bush gets his way, it will prove our greed for oil in the end. We will become the most despicable nation on the planet. And you, Congress, will be blamed in the Annuls of History for having been elected on the premise of ending a war and having been too spineless to do so.
If you think the populations of the Middle East are insurgent now, wait until we start pumping their oil out of their country.

Posted by: James McLain | April 19, 2007 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Thomas:
So some no-name Colonel makes some bleeding-heart comment, and that should be the focus of National Security? If a poverty stricken terrorist seeks out my home with the sole intent of cutting my head off, I'm not going to "rebuild their infrastructure, supply clean water, and feed starving children..."

I gave you a history lesson. Go read the Koran, you idiot, instead of rambling the writings of a wacko Colonel.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 1:02 PM | Report abuse

>>This is why the war on terror must be maintained. Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 12:30 PM

There you have it. Maintained. Not won. Maintained.

Either send a half million more troops into Afghanistan and a half million more troops into Iraq and do the job right once and for all, even if it means a draft, or don't complain to me about liberals undermining the effort. The liberals are not making the decisions here; the administration is. Sending in a piddly 150,00 more troops will do nothing but maintain (translation: drag out) the conflict. This will expand the coffers of the corporations who profit and it will make for a real nice little patriotic show for those lacking the ability to analyze in detail, but it will do nothing in the long run to protect us or anyone else.

Posted by: TommyG | April 19, 2007 1:06 PM | Report abuse

In the world of Islam, ALLAH IS THE ONE AND ONLY GOVERNMENT! If you practice any other form of Government, YOU ARE AN INFIDEL, even to "peaceful" Muslims! 9-11, Hello libs!

Jesus Christ is the one person in world history that sought the "separation of Church and State". We are hated for our beliefs, NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE POOR!

The poverty around the world is a product of OPPRESIVE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS! Dropping loaves of bread on their head isn't going to solve the problem!

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Yes. Maintained. Look at history. The war with Islam is at least 1500 years old. 230 years of American history is not going to overcome this fact. They WILL defeat us if we don't resolve ourselves to defeat them year after year, decade after decade, century after century, millenia after millenia. We don't want this. THEY DO! We're supposed to sit back and wait until they nuke us? Come on. be serious.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Excellent rebuttal. Name-calling? Well done.

Is it your postion that our foreign policy has nothing to do with anti-American resentment around the world? Like in South and Central America? I suppose they are a bunch of Islamic Fundamentalists just pretending to be Catholics?

When our government supports the likes of Marcos in the Philippines, Chiang Kai-shek in China, Syngman Rhee in Korea, Diem, Ky, and Thieu in Vietnam, Batista in Cuba, Somoza in Nicaragua, Pinochet in Chile, Apartheid South Africa, Mugabe in Zimbabwe, Kasavubu and Mobutu in Zaire, the Shah in Iran, and ... yes ... even Saddam Hussein for decades in Iraq, how do we expect the world to feel about us?

We claim that our military interventions are to foster freedom and democracy. Yet our CIA and military have intervened to depose democratically elected governments in such places as Iran (in 1953) and the Dominican Republic (in 1966).

After Chileans elected Salvador Allende president in 1970, Henry Kissinger declared "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people." Three years later, General Pinochet, supported by the CIA, engineered a coup and, for two decades, led one of the bloodiest regimes in the history of South America.

When Daniel Ortega of the Sandinistas was elected president of Nicaragua in 1984 with 63% of the vote in an election that international observers found free and fair, President Reagan continued illegally to fund and arm the Contras until the Sandinistas were overthrown. And just last year, when Hamas won the Palestinian election, the US and its allies withdrew all support with the avowed intention of making it impossible for the victors to rule. Our government has a history of being all for democracy as long as its side wins, but gladly turning to repressive tyrants when it loses.

Yet none of these factors, undisputed events in our history have anything to do with anti-American resnetment?

That defies logic, no?

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Typical liberal filibustering Thomas. I'm talking about 1500 years of world history, and you try to water it down with incidental 50 year historical jargon. GO READ THE KORAN and justify it to me.

I'm of South American descent. Don't talk to me about Latin America's issues. I know them all to well.

I'm talking about the lack of freedom in a 2000+ year old religion that isn't going away anytime soon. You can't accept this fact, so it's easier for you to force the rest of us accept our fate. You can put your head in the sand, don't expect the rest of us to.

You can put your ead in the sand

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 1:28 PM | Report abuse

So you won't answer the question? I'll ask it one more time and I think it's a fair question:

None of these factors, all undisputed events in our history, have anything to do with anti-American resentment? It's not a difficult question.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 1:31 PM | Report abuse

I also love how you evaded the South and Central American example by merely stating you are of South American descent, as though that fact somehow addressed the issue.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Question, Thomas:
None of these factors, all undisputed events in our history, have anything to do with anti-American resentment?

Answer, prismsinc:
The poverty (AND RESENTMENT) around the world is a product of OPPRESSIVE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS! Dropping loaves of bread on their head isn't going to solve the problem!

I answered it, you didn't read it, obviously, like you didn't READ THE KORAN!

Posted by: prisminc | April 19, 2007 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Thomas, READ THE KORAN! Stop trying to convince me otherwise. I'm not going to cave on incidentals of the last 50 years. Stop denying the epiphany I've exposed you to.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 1:38 PM | Report abuse

You still haven't answered my question. Is that a no? All of those things we have done have no impact on creating anti-american resentment? It's a simple yes or no.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 1:38 PM | Report abuse

You prove the idiot you are. If the RESENTMENT is a product of something "other" than us, I shouldn't have to spell it out for you.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Just read this

Many people and politicians have distorted what the second amendment really means.

Some politicians have said guns raise crime and that our founding fathers only meant

guns to be available to the militia. I will examine the cities of Washington D.C and

Kennesaw, Georgia and will look at two additional states in relation to crime rate and gun

Laws. We are now feeling the effect of this as D.C already has laws permitting people

from owning a gun. The causes of gun control are varied, one being the gov. doesn't like

citizens owning guns because this puts them in check if they decide to illegitimately use

power not given to them in the constitution. I will examine also the effects of Sweden

putting guns in the hands of all their citizens during World War 2. I am going to also look

at several cities and states and take note of the causes of their crime rate. I will also

examine the cause of violence in schools.

The first cause I will look at is when Sweden began arming its citizens with weapons.

As Hitler was smashing though many European countries and literally wiping out any

professional army that tried to stop him Sweden declared Neutrality and immediately

began building up its army. But not just its army was building up, every citizen owned a

gun and was prepared to defend their land against the German invaders who had already

violated several Neutral countries by invading them. It didn't take long for the Germans

to draw up plans for a military invasion of Sweden; (they had already taken out France).

Hitler's generals soon changed his mind when they learned that the Swedes were not just

going to fight them with a professional army but that every citizen would also have to be

faced, which would make for pretty dirty fighting. Even though Hitler had invaded

several European nations and though the Swedish had taken in several hundred thousand

Jews, the most Hitler did was make threaten and make fun of their country.

The second cause I will look at is approximately 25 years ago when D.C introduced

laws that made it virtually impossible for anyone to own a gun. The effect, the murder

rate rose over 50%. While in the rest of the nation it declined.

A third effect gun control could have is if the government is overthrown by a coup or

if it just goes bad altogether. If this happens who will protect freedom? All the citizens

would be unarmed and unable to stop the government from taking major power that

wasn't theirs to take. Gun control takes away one of our most important rights and serves

as a check to the government's power. If gun control laws continue to escalate the effects

could be devastating for our country.

At the same time a city called Kennesaw, GA, which was suffering from a high crime

rate, did something completely different. They made it a law that every home must have a

gun in it. The effect, crime went down drastically, nearly 100%. The crime is very low

even to this day.

Vermont is also a very easy state to get a gun in. You do not have to go through any

background check or any other hassles to own a gun, (of course, you have to pay for it).

The effect has been the same as Georgia's, very low crime. In fact, Vermont is one of the

safest places to live.

Florida didn't enact drastic measures like G.A did but they did enact laws allowing

citizens to carry concealed carry weapons. The effect, in all areas of Florida where this

was enacted crime of all types fell significantly.

In Hawaii just before we entered WW11, they had many armed citizens on the island.

The Japanese had been trying to decide whether to make a land invasion or attack by air.

Upon learning that the U.S had many armed citizens on the Island the Japanese chose an

air attack. Though the air attack was devastating it was not nearly as bad as the land and

air attack the Japanese had been planning.

What caused the killing at VA Tech? Could have it been prevented or stopped. Yes it

could have. If at least all the teachers had had handguns the gunman never would have

been able to kill thirty three people. The campus boasted tight gun control laws that

allows no one to carry one. This will probably continue to happen unless laws banning

guns on schools change. Criminals obviously feel safe where people or in the top

example students and teachers, have been "legally" disarmed.

I believe the examples of the states and cities that have and do not have gun control

laws, the fact that guns have prevented military invasions, and the fact that criminals feel

safe where people are legally disarmed, show the cause of high crime rate and the effect

gun control has on it. I believe that more states should enact more lenient gun laws,

because besides being unconstitutional, gun bans only appear to raise crime and not

reduce it. Gun control obviously has a bad effect of crime.

Posted by: moderate | April 19, 2007 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Truly amazing.

So, by your logic, the U.S. backs a coup that removes a democratically elected government and installs a ruthless dictator who rules with an iron fist, repressing the population for decades and stealing their natural resources for our benefit and all of this has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of anti-American resentment? It's merely 'incidentals?'

This makes sense to you?

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 1:42 PM | Report abuse

The only way we can get out of Iraq is to rid ourselves of Cheney and Bush...
Question of whether the Congress has the guts to do this.

Posted by: yws | April 19, 2007 1:42 PM | Report abuse

That was cool Moderate but that really doesn't tie in with impeachment...or does it?

Posted by: Tom | April 19, 2007 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Thomas, your existience is so self-centered, I don't know how anyone can breathe around you. You believe that the History books stop about 1960 A.D. give or take. I'm giving you history that you deny exists. Are you telling me there was no 14th century? Medieval times didn't happen? None of that history counts a wink? So the only history that matters is the time you were alive? You truly are an idiot.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 1:48 PM | Report abuse

You can't answer the question. Amazing. It's a simple question and you refuse to answer it. I wonder why?

I can admit that there are clearly religious fundamentalists who hate us because of their religious dogma. That is clear. There are those who hate us because of our wealth and society. Sure. But I also know, it is ridiculous to imply that our history of massive repression and outright theft of natural resources around the world has nothing to do with the existence of anti-american sentiments.

Why is that so impossible to admit? It's common sense, isn't it?

The U.S. backs a coup that removes a democratically elected government and installs a ruthless dictator who rules with an iron fist, repressing the population for decades and stealing their natural resources for our benefit and all of this has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of anti-American resentment?

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 1:53 PM | Report abuse

And name-calling is juvenile and unnecssary.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Thomas, your historical references ARE FOOTNOTES IN WORLD HISTORY! They do not overshadow 2000+ years of consistent aggressive religious oppression! If anything, they are a drop in the bucket compared to the fact that Islam has not chosen to co-exist for 1500 years! Wake up! The world existed long before you were born!

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Wow...this is actually pretty amazing. Why can't you answer a simple question?

I've admitted that their are certainly those who hate us out of religious dogma. Okay? You can stop yelling that point at me as i have, for the third time admitted as such.

I'll try one more time and please read carefully:

The U.S. backs a coup in CHILE IN THE EARLY 1970'S that removes a democratically elected government and installs a ruthless dictator who rules with an iron fist, repressing the population for decades and stealing their natural resources for our benefit and all of this has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of anti-American resentment IN CHILE?

Please note that Chile isn't an islamic nation.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 2:02 PM | Report abuse

Your silence speaks volumes.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Again, GO READ THE KORAN! I won't acknowledge your incidental facts until you really and truly tell me how we are supposed to deal with these people. I brought the issue up first, quit watering it down with nonsense! Acknowledging "religious dogma" isn't anywhere near sufficient. You obviously don't understand the problem I'm bringing to you, because you don't understand the basics of Islam.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 2:12 PM | Report abuse

About time somebody showed some guts in getting rid of the egregious Cheney. Cheney has lied so much, manipulated us into war, and made a fortune for his war profiteering and oilmen friends. Surely this is worse than playing around with an intern. The very worst Veep in American history and a very evil human being.

Posted by: jude | April 19, 2007 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich is delusional. He needs a johnny-boy edwards $400 haircut, all the way down to his shoulders.

Posted by: shane | April 19, 2007 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Kucinich is just trying to excite his base, or as history would refer to them, his "useful idiots". He knows it will not succeed, which is why he doesn't mind waiting for a slow news day. His schedule is referenced to the press, not to congress. All politicians do this kind of thing, that is, write bills they don't intend to pursue. But I think it is more prevalent among liberals because they care more for appearance than substance. It doesn't take guts to introduce a piece of paper. It takes guts to join an active military.

Posted by: GB | April 19, 2007 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Thomas, Thomas, Thomas

Marcos in the Philippines vs the New Peoples Army

Chiang Kai-shek in China vs Chairman Mao

Syngman Rhee in Korea vs Kim II-sung

Diem, Ky, and Thieu in Vietnam vs Ho Chi Minh

Batista in Cuba vs Castro

Somoza's in Nicaragua vs the Sandinista's

Pinochet in Chile vs Allende

Apartheid South Africa vs the ANC

Kasavubu and Mobutu in Zaire vs Lumumba and the MNC

Am I seeing a pattern begin to develop here? Did you live through the Cold War?

As far as the Shah of Iran, the Pahlavis came to power in 1925, so it was the Shah vs the Alatollah Kohmeini and I don't know where you get Mugabe from, unless we supported his bunch vs Ian Smiths government.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 19, 2007 3:05 PM | Report abuse

>>They WILL defeat us if we don't resolve ourselves to defeat them year after year, decade after decade, century after century, millenia after millenia. Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 01:20 PM

You are talking about fighting a religion, an ideology, as opposed to tactically winning a concrete efford being staged in two material, geographical places. Confusing the two, connected in some ways though they may be, is a recipe for disaster.
There are certain people who are at war with Islam as a religion. Others are at war with people who use terror as a tactic. The president says Islam is a peaceful religion. I don't agree with that. Nor do I believe that any religion has clean hands when it comes to violence or attempting to force itself on "non-believers", with the possible exception of Buddaism.
The war we fought against Germany, successful because we were honestly bent on winning it and not just maintaining it, didn't rid the world of Nazism. But it certainly drove it underground for 60 years and certainly made it's proveyors think twice before
attempting any major action in the name of that ideology.

We have a chance to do the same here. But it will not happen because winning is not the objective. Only maintainence. The terrorists aim is to keep us in a never-ending conflict in both Afghanistan and Iraq, to deplete our men and resources over time. In my opinion, giving in to that senario is exactly what we are doing and that is the same as surrender.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 19, 2007 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Thomas,
Sorry, I forgot my nic.

Didn't know you could post withou a name.

Posted by: easy | April 19, 2007 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Here we go again. Call it whatever war you want, if you don't READ THE KORAN, you don't understand the problem. THEY WON'T STOP! There really are only 2 options;

1) Convert them to Christianity

2) Kill them all

There are way, way too many details about Islam to go into here. If you READ THE KORAN, you will understand what I'm saying.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I understand completely that they won't stop. No matter what. It is what they see as their divine mission...their path to heaven as it were. This is not a point of contension.

We'll never rid America of crime and criminals either. But that simple fact doesn't justify utilizing half-hearted, half-baked methods in dealing with the problem.

But I disagree that there are only the two solutions you mentioned. For example, a healthy doze of rock n roll in their formative years probably wouldn't hurt. It made a lot of people free over here.

Posted by: Tommy G | April 19, 2007 3:45 PM | Report abuse

>It doesn't take guts to introduce a piece >of paper. It takes guts to join an active >military.
>
>Posted by: GB | April 19, 2007 03:01 PM

So Cheney's gonna enlist to avoid impeachment? Great idea! It'll build his character.

Posted by: ubp-gbk | April 19, 2007 4:11 PM | Report abuse

I'm from europ and therefore pardon my spelling mistakes. One question for primsinc: did you went thru the whole koran? It looks like you miss a part of it.

Posted by: michel | April 19, 2007 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashworth: all of them are traitors. Impeach their sorry butts.

Posted by: Socrates II | April 19, 2007 4:13 PM | Report abuse

HAHAHA.....MORE great fodder for talk shows
..dont these folks have a REAL JOB PURPOSE???

Posted by: DR FRYE | April 19, 2007 4:27 PM | Report abuse

sorry about my last post since the basic is about the empeachment of bush or/and cheney. let's go for both. valids reasons are there for the empeachement so better forget about the dialogues and go for the court. i do feel sad that our european governments are badly cooperating with the US administrations. most of all the EU pretend to have courts to follow those kind of cowards and none are working correctly. PS: prismsinc read the koran mayby it will you do good. personally i don't need any god to live on tis planet. just love. that's enough

Posted by: michel | April 19, 2007 4:29 PM | Report abuse

I read the Koran...it was nasty. one ex-islamic said it is a religion of hate. Of course if you only read the "good" parts you wouldn't understand that.

www.worldnetdaily.com

Posted by: TIm | April 19, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Why don't you guys stop calling each other idiots and stop talking of killing people. Your point would get across alot clearer if you guys would just put the facts AND put in evidence!!!! I hate facts without evidence!

Posted by: Signature | April 19, 2007 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Yeah guys! I mean REAL evidence that you gathered yourself!!!

Have a great afternoon guys!

I 've got to go!!!

Posted by: Tim | April 19, 2007 4:38 PM | Report abuse

HALLIBURTON! CHENEY!BUSH!

oh damn. I forgot to wear my tinfoil hat while I was typing this. now they're on to....

Posted by: flyovercountry | April 19, 2007 4:42 PM | Report abuse

WOW and yah think this ROTTEN TO THE CORE Guvmint will actually IMPEACH this DEVIL, ask Billy Clinton.

PS: Did You Know 550,000,000,000 (550 Billion Dollars) in $100 Bills weighs around 60,626 TONS geesh and only 360 TONS of $100s went missing in IRAQ.

Posted by: Judson Witham | April 19, 2007 4:44 PM | Report abuse

IChiefpayne568: I was going to read your 20 point submission but you got it wrong in point No. 1. Congress has not declared war on Afghanistan, Iraq or any other nation state. A state of war does not exist. The USA is not at war. Your President has seized powers which your constitution do not provide for.

Posted by: rbingham | April 19, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse

"So Cheney's gonna enlist to avoid impeachment? Great idea! It'll build his character."

I wasn't referring to Cheney. Many posters stated Kucinich had "guts". My intent was to get a better definiton of "guts". Joining an active military takes guts, for instance.

Most posters here need to calm down, and maybe study logic. I agree my tangent on guts distracted from my main point. My bad.

Posted by: GB | April 19, 2007 5:07 PM | Report abuse

This is a brillant political move. If he were really going to be impeached and the republican front runner were enthroned, then it would be terrible, but Cheney will never be impeached, but public hearings into his incompetence and lies would be fabulous!

Posted by: Rhonda | April 19, 2007 5:18 PM | Report abuse

if he is impeached won't he be pardoned?

Posted by: umm.... | April 19, 2007 6:27 PM | Report abuse

If they "won't stop", then why is it that we didn't have a problem with 'them' until we placed our military forces into their area of the world, and decided to manipulate their forms of government?

As for their religion -- you can find a lot of dirt in the Old Testament, in particular.

Posted by: Shane | April 19, 2007 6:28 PM | Report abuse

LMAO ... Dennis Kucinich is every bit as kooky as his 'separated at birth' look-alike brothers: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Gilbert Gottfried. The difference between the three is Mahmound is a better politician and leader and Gottfried is more in touch with reality. The obvious reason behind it all is PUBLICITY! His career-long abuse of public trust, waste of public resources and visions of grandeur do nothing to inspire. The truth is Dennis is a MAJOR DISAPPOINTMENT to a large portion of his Cleveland district. He lied to the Cleveland Plain Dealer when he got their re-election endorsement and he promised to abandon thoughts about another 'Don Quixote' presidential run ... his 'campaign' is laughable. Other countries such as Australia get many a good giggle from Cleveland's worst political joke.

Posted by: Rod Miller | April 19, 2007 6:31 PM | Report abuse

People, you are wrong if you think Kucinich is doing this for "political" reasons -- you are unaware of his record if you do. You are also wrong if you think he is "way behind" in the polls -- he is not, he is ahead of Hilary in polls of Democratic voters -- the only voters he needs since Democratic voters outnumber ReThug voters increasingly these days. The only place Kucinich comes up short is in his height and in his campaign account. He's not getting any taller, but after the first full debate, he will leap ahead of Obama and whoever else when (Dem) voters find out he supports what they support and doesn't support what they don't. Surely, the Democratic Party bigshots don't want his candidacy because they are owned by the same scum controlling the ReThugs, but not is not the sole factor that matters. If the votes are counted in 2008 -- a very big IF -- and the bush crime family doesn't off Kucinich, he could easily win the presidency.

Posted by: patriot | April 19, 2007 6:38 PM | Report abuse

is it possible that an American presidential candidate would have the courage to say impeach, hold accountable, or even realistically , and openly speak the truth about the untouchable , unimpeachable , we know best blind puppet bodies occupying positions of power in this world? Well I have only one comment; Leaders with vision and ideas to lead the people into a future of understanding, looking over the long term with programs and policy that make the life together on this planet possible, have throughout history been put down and put to death. They killed Socrates, they killed Jesus, and they will go on killing and putting down and totally stopping any ideas of justice until we the people wake up and realize that we are many more than they , and that we don't hate each other like they say we do. Thanks to anyone like David Kucinich . Thanks to those who are not afraid to face the truth, accept the truth, and find a way to agree to live together in celebration of life, liberty, and the persuit of happinesss.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 19, 2007 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Dennis! Stood and voted for you in 04 and will again. Thank God someone in DC has some integrity!

Posted by: kucinichsupprter | April 19, 2007 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Its about time. When Cheney keeps re-iterating the same lies about Saddam, Al Qaeda and 9/11 links without ever offering even a single shred of proof it is obvious by ANY standard that the man is DANGEROUSLY delusional and should not only be impeached and tried for treason and high crimes but should be locked up and force fed anti-psychotics. From the 'Halliburton' ties doing business in Iraq and Iran in the past in direct defiance of U.S. sanctions to his ordering defensive jets to 'stand down' on 9/11 at the Pentagon it is more than obvious he does not serve the American people- he only serves his own personal interest. Per-haps this is why he only emerges from his bunker once in a great while to sput the same meaningless yet emotive B.S. And don't even get me started on Leo Wanta- why do you think they are tanking the dollar?

Posted by: pissedoffpatriot | April 19, 2007 6:42 PM | Report abuse

why is everyone so scared of bush and this administration.i can see that they are making everyone think what the administration want them to think,e.g. that immigration is the main problem in america and is bankripting america,the biggest load of crap,but everyone believes it so much that they got a bunch of racist rednecks on the borders who doesnt even see that they really are losing the country to the current administration and their big business friendsand not to immigrants.you people are jokes.

Posted by: bitterblood | April 19, 2007 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Hey prismsinc what version of the Koran are you reading, is it an approved translation or is it one endorsed by your church??

Did you ever visited an Arab Country.

For your info In the Koran Isa is the Arabic name of Jesus. And Jesus is one of the prophets of Islam.

bytheway IMPEACH

Posted by: Isa | April 19, 2007 6:53 PM | Report abuse

bitterblood:
The big, bad immigrants are the latest in the parade of strawmen that our "leadership" props up for us to fear. Luckily our "leaders" are there to protect us!

And as usual, the "bewildered herd" falls for it.

It's classic propoganda.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Yes, impeach Cheney now! Then we'll start on Bush! Then Karl Rove! We'll get 'em all!
This must be done to punish the Republicans for corruption! Now mind you, we have no probloem whatsoever with Democrite corruption! Rep. Jefferson's $90k in the freezer was a donation to the poor he just hadn't made yet! And Diane Feinstein never steered business to her husband, she is pure as the driven snow!
If it corruption, it is by definition Repubiclan corruption! Democrites are all for the little guy, women, minorities, the disenfranchised, the weak and innocent! They are by definition beyond scrutiny! They are pure, benevolent, and wonderful!

Posted by: Lenny the Liberal | April 19, 2007 7:13 PM | Report abuse

-Although I have yet to read the many responses to this article, I can tell that some critically-thinking persons are examining the material, and of course commenting. I'm trying not to get my hopes up, as the article itself does...so anyway, to make this as short as possible: I just feel that those of us that aren't part of the "clique(s)" that are comprised of the people running the show today need to get our act together and "fix it" ourselves...that's the only way the problems are going to go away. Don't fall for the ol' "divide and conquer" manuever.
Most of us "common folk" who are footing the bill(s) for everything tend to get all wrapped up in "issues" such as abortion, gun-control, etc. And those "issues" then move us one way or the other as far as political direction...but tend to ignore the fact that there are other options than Republicrat. We need major reforms on many levels; we need honesty, justice, integrity, and probably some other values that are severely lacking. We need people that treat others the way they want to be treated themselves, to make it simple. We need people with a soul, a conscience, better judgement, and a good work ethic. I know, I'm rambling on now...and I must be dreaming again. I bid all peace.

Posted by: UnSabbath | April 19, 2007 7:15 PM | Report abuse

It does make sense to go after the VP since he's the head necon and of his past with Haliburton. If you could link that part with the reasons why we did Iraq, then you have the makings of a successful impeachment. Moreover, he's more unpopular than the president.

Posted by: gman5541 | April 19, 2007 7:16 PM | Report abuse

"Lenny the liberal",
As usual, the Bush/Cheney apologists, such as yourself, think making erroneous assumptions about our motives serves as some form of defense to the charges we bring against this administration.

I think we should root out corruption in both parties. Absolutely. Across the board. Let's start with Diane Feinstein's blatant war profiteering? She should face treason charges.

Sound good?

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 7:28 PM | Report abuse

I can see this being the part of a plan to get Cheney out of harm's way. During the proceedings he could suffer a major heart attack - if you know what I mean. He could be falsely declared dead, be moved to a villa in some foreign nation and live quite happily on the millions he's made on the backs of honest Americans and the deaths of many too.

Posted by: Concerned Canuk | April 19, 2007 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Both parties are controlled. Dissent is controlled. Until we have a government that adheres to the Constitutional mandate that money is only in the hands of the Congress - and not a privately owned central bank - our politicians can be bought, sold, threatened and killed at the whim of the individuals and families
that control our economy (and the intelligence agencies of the West). Impeaching any of these twisted, sorry pawns will only mean their replacement with another controlled by the same people. I'm terribly afraid that our empire will not end gracefully.

Posted by: Human patriot | April 19, 2007 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Tales From The Twilight Zone (aka - The U.S. Government)

At a recent Congressional Hearing on the Bush
Administration's policies of Extraordinary Rendition,
Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) said if
European countries did not cooperate with the United
States and go along with whatever the Bush
administration wanted, they were condemning their
countrymen to death by not using extralegal methods to
imprison terrorist suspects. When citizens attending
the hearing, including members of Codepink Women for
Peace and Veterans for Peace, heard Rohrabacher's
statement, they collectively groaned. Then, much to
the shock and disbelief of everyone in the hearing
room, Rorhbacker said to those who had expressed
displeasure at his statements: "I hope it's your
family members that die when terrorists strike."

At that point, Retired Army Colonel Ann Wright had had
enough of Rohrabacher. She stood up and said "I did
not serve 29 years in the US military and 16 years in
the US diplomatic corps to see demise of the rule of
law and violation of our own laws. Rohrback's
statements are outrageous. No wonder the world hates
us!"

Chairman Delahunt gaveled for her to stop speaking and
had her escorted by the police out of the committee room.

Posted by: Thomas | April 19, 2007 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Impeach and prosecute for 9/11 inside job.

Posted by: AdamT | April 19, 2007 9:02 PM | Report abuse

The more I look at it, the more I realize that Bush or Cheney like it or hate it are not going to be impeached. I v'e checked out lots of sites and talked to different people on this subject.

Posted by: Tim | April 19, 2007 9:38 PM | Report abuse

I feel 9/11 was Clintons fault. He really weakened the army as well as the CIA and the FBI while he was in office.

This information is from a man who closely worked with him.

I hear some of you guys like Pelosi and don't like Hillary, what is their difference?? Their voting recs are the same.

Posted by: Thompson | April 19, 2007 9:40 PM | Report abuse

We had lots of terror attacks during the Clinton administration. Clinton did nothing to stop them despite his promises. Bush is just honest and doing what he said clearly he would do.

"Iraq only got rid of their weopens"-UN arms inspector as well as from 3 ex-Iraq agents who worked for Saddam.

Posted by: NEws guy | April 19, 2007 9:43 PM | Report abuse

There isn't MUCH of a difference, only hillary is a but more liberal than Pelosi is. Are there anyother differnces I m missing anyone??

Posted by: News guy | April 19, 2007 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Heres part of a letter to NAncy Pelosi:

Our troops need this funding, and they need it soon. The Senate is in session and ready to work. We respectfully request that you cancel the remainder of your break, call the House back into session, appoint conferees promptly, and work in good faith to pass a clean supplemental funding bill that the President can sign as soon as possible. Every day we don't fund our troops is a day their ability to fight this war is weakened.

Posted by: COmputer man | April 19, 2007 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Hey guys I don't quite understand this. I m a mod Rep. but even though I don't care much for NANCY PELOSI I don't think she is in violation of anything. Any comments?

Turner concludes: "The U.S. is in the midst of two wars authorized by Congress. For Ms. Pelosi to [flout] the Constitution in these circumstances is not only shortsighted; it may well be a felony, as the Logan Act has been part of our criminal law for more than two centuries. Perhaps it is time to enforce the law."

Posted by: Mod | April 19, 2007 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Terrorists called Nancy a great and brave lady and said they hoped SHE continued to win elections
Nancy tours middle-east: What is she up to????
What can we do: VOTE (well they could take away the electoral college though I guess)...

Does anyone have anymore info on the electoral college being taken away??

Posted by: COnsevative...well kinda | April 19, 2007 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Look up waco, Texas on the internet or look at the site I listed in here.

The conspiracy of the FBI, President Clinton, and Janet Reno has resulted in the worst, darkest, most despicable, and most grievous day in American history. The government's insane excuse of acting in "the children's best interests"
http://www.islandone.org/Politics/Waco.McCurry.html
What if they start in on us? What else happens that we don't learn about?

Posted by: Todd | April 19, 2007 9:53 PM | Report abuse

This chip thing is kinda scary!! anyone have anymore info on it??!!!

Do you know what RFID is? It's about to change your life Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID

Posted by: USER 1 | April 19, 2007 9:54 PM | Report abuse

RE: immigration

And what happens to the people who fight back?
Elderly beaten,police attacked,border agents sued and jailed.
A border agent that shot an escaping drug runner is put in jail for 10 years. He didn't even kill him.
Ramos and Compean are in federal prison serving 11 and 12 year sentences for their actions in the shooting of a drug smuggler, Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila-Aldrete, as he fled back to Mexico after driving across the border with a load of 742 pounds of marijuana in February 2005. Sutton gave the smuggler use immunity to serve as the government's star witness and testify against the border agents. ...What they get to get on the witness stand!?
"Conquest of Aztlan": Will Mexicans retake American Southwest?

Posted by: DC | April 19, 2007 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Heres more info. They are going to start putting chips in clothing I heard.

by Katherine Albrecht; Liz McIntyre
RFID, which stands for Radio Frequency IDentification, is a technology that uses computer chips smaller than a grain of sand to track items from a distance. And as this mind-blowing book explains, plans and efforts are being made now by global corporations and the U.S government to turn this advanced technology, these spychips, into a way to track our daily activities-and keep us all on Big Brother's short leash. Compiling massive amounts of research with firsthand knowledge, "Spychips explains RFID technology and reveals the history and future of the master planners' strategies to imbed these trackers on everything-from postage stamps to shoes to people themselves-and spy on Americans without our knowledge or consent. It also urgently encourages consumers to take action now-to protect their privacy and civil liberties before it's too late

Posted by: Blogger1 | April 19, 2007 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Heres more on immigration DC

http://www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/0714%2Cinterlandi%2C76251%2C15.html
TB or Not TB
A nurse's cough turns into a public health crisis in the Bronx
by Jeneen Interlandi
April 3rd, 2007 11:33
For three weeks beginning in January, about 700 workers and patients at St. Barnabas Hospital in the Bronx, including 238 infants, were exposed to tuberculosis by an infected nurse....
WND.ARCHIVES, OCT. 22, 2006 WorldNetDaily Exclusive U.S. immigrants pose TB threat

Posted by: Sam | April 19, 2007 9:57 PM | Report abuse

COrruption.

Clinton corruption still worries, poll says Voters fear 'high levels' of trouble if Hillary elected
ELECTION 2008 Clinton corruption still worries, poll says Voters fear 'high levels' of trouble if Hillary elected
Posted: April 5, 2007 4:00 p.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.A new poll shows nearly half of likely voters are worried over "high levels" of corruption in the White House if Hillary Clinton is elected president.
The Judicial Watch-Zogby poll also revealed one in five Democrats believe Hillary is "very corrupt" or "somewhat corrupt," and a large majority of voters believe the bigger the government is, the more corruption there will be.
"Clinton corruption is not old news for many Americans," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "Over six years after the end of the Clinton administration, a large number of Americans are still concerned about Hillary and Bill Clinton's ethics."
(Story continues below)
The nationwide poll was conducted by Judicial Watch, a public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, in partnership with Zogby International, over attitudes held by the American people about the Clintons and corruption. It was conducted March 22-26.
It revealed that 26 percent of likely voters are "very concerned" and another 19 percent are "somewhat concerned" there will be "high levels of corruption in the White House" if Hillary is elected president, including nearly one in five Democrats (18.8 percent).
"Given this public concern, the media and other public policy leaders have a responsibility to ask tough questions of Hillary Clinton about her (and her husband's) involvement in various corruption scandals. And, frankly, the same goes for John McCain, Barack Obama, Rudy Giuliani and any other candidate with ethical skeletons in their closet," Fitton said.

Posted by: Jeff | April 19, 2007 9:58 PM | Report abuse

I ll try to get more info on the chips man.

WND also has reported on allegations that Clinton family members or associates were paid after he granted An addition to the concerns raised over Clinton advisor Sandy Berger's theft of secret documents from the National Archives, the still-unexplained death of Clinton advisor Vincent Foster, the airplane crash that killed Ron Brown and the discovery of long-sought legal records in the White House WND also has reported on allegations that Hillary Clinton has been involved in illegal actions and how a former staff member for Hillary Clinton was caught illegally misreporting election information.
In fact, a claim by a major campaign contributor that a scheme by the Clinton cost him millions of dollars still is working its way through the federal court system.
a long list of pardons at the end of his presidency.
The Progress Review lists some of the accomplishments of the Bill Clinton presidency: He was the only president impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance, reported the most convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates, had the highest number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation, the highest number of witnesses to refuse to testify - or die suddenly, was the first president sued for sexual harassment and the first president accused of rape.

Posted by: Jeff | April 19, 2007 9:59 PM | Report abuse

read about Project artichoke and Cheney in the CIA.

Posted by: stella | April 19, 2007 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Islamic UN Members Disrupt Call to Condemn Suicide Bombing
At a meeting of the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, the International Humanist and Ethical Union tried to call for a condemnation of suicide bombing--but their presentation was disrupted by Islamic members of the Sub-Commission who objected to the speech as "an attack on Islam:" Criticism of suicide bombers censored at the UN.
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=3&art_id=qw1167856925570B252
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20061
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20061

Posted by: News guy | April 19, 2007 10:00 PM | Report abuse

US Charges North Korea Misused UN Aid Funds
By Peter Heinlein United Nations 19 January 2007
The United States is accusing the U.N. development agency of allowing North Korea to illegally divert tens of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid funds for its own use. VOA's correspondent at the United Nations, Peter Heinlein, reports Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is asking an external audit of all U.N. aid agencies.
The U.S. mission to the United Nations sent a letter this week to the U.N. Development Program (UNDP), charging that the agency's North Korea projects have been systematically used to benefit of the Kim Jong Il regime.
A copy of the letter signed by the U.S. ambassador for U.N. management and reform, Mark Wallace, and obtained by VOA suggests that tens of millions of dollars may have been illegally diverted to North Korea's coffers since 1998, with the complicity of the UNDP board of directors

Posted by: News guy | April 19, 2007 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Lets see what the democrats are doing in congress.
They have brought up a bill on civil unions (marriage)
They have a bill that states homosexuals may adopt kids
You cannot discriminate against gay people,for example if you are going to rent out part of your house and gays walk up and you tell them you don't rent to gays, then they can sue you.

Posted by: Ijustreportit | April 19, 2007 10:03 PM | Report abuse

heres more...

The Logan Act was requested by Adams after a Pennsylvania pacifist named George Logan traveled to France in 1798 to assure the French government the American people favored peace in the undeclared "Quasi War" being fought on the high seas between the two countries, Turner points out. Rep. Roger Griswold of Connecticut explained the object was "to punish a crime" arising "from an interference of individual citizens in the negotiations of our executive with foreign governments."

Posted by: Jim | April 19, 2007 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Is Islam inherently violent? New blockbuster, 'Religion of Peace?,' reveals disturbing facts
THE PROBLEM WITH ISLAM: And What Americans Can Do About It
"The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)"
"Everlasting Hatred: The Roots of Jihad"
Definitive work on Mideast - available only here!
"Israel in Crisis"
"Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict"
Rare biblical masterpiece makes comeback
Perfect gift! Compass that points to Jerusalem
Previous stories:
Terrorists endorse Pelosi's 'good policy of dialogue'
Hamas readies for 'coming' war with Israel
'Iran, Syria prepping for U.S. summer war'
Hamas prepares 'rocket war' in ex-Jewish city
Iran building guerrilla armies in Gaza
Syrian guerrillas 'to launch resistance within months'
'Syria will form own Hezbollah'
Syria's new 'Hezbollah' group training for attacks
Syria to form its own Hezbollah
Syria warns of 'resistance' within months

Posted by: News guy | April 19, 2007 10:05 PM | Report abuse

"not vague canards like "lying to the people"

Please do some research and understand that LYING is not a CANARD.

Don't defend the indefensible, please.

Posted by: allegory VA | April 19, 2007 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Hey guys to get the latest news I wake up early or stay up late and check out these sites: www.cnn.com,www.worldnetdaily.com,www.usatoday.com,www.washingtonpost.com. I use CNN and worldnet mostly though. You should check out both of those sites,or at leat the Breaking news articles. It may help both Democrats and COnservatives in this debate or in future debates.

Goodnight.

Posted by: RIck | April 19, 2007 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Just so you know I m very good with the constitution so if it would help any of you Democrats or Republicans I would be glad to try and answer any questions.

Posted by: Constitution | April 19, 2007 10:28 PM | Report abuse

"I read everything here and found no foundation for impeachment. "

What, exactly did you read?

Please be more specific. Your generalizations are fun to read, but they don't really say much

Posted by: smarmymama | April 19, 2007 10:29 PM | Report abuse

Is there separation of church and state in the constitution, or should I say can we have religious values in public affairs??

If anyone knows please answer.

Posted by: Sonny mod. | April 19, 2007 10:30 PM | Report abuse

If your talkin to me allegory that stuff on islam was stuff I pulled off CNN and WND. If your not talking to me sorry for butting in.

Posted by: Newsguy | April 19, 2007 10:33 PM | Report abuse

"There isn't MUCH of a difference, only hillary is a but more liberal than Pelosi is. Are there anyother differnces I m missing anyone??"

There isn't a tinker's dang worth of difference between "republicans" and "democrats" anymore.

Most people get that. Pity the American press still doesn't.

They're still playing the 'divide and conquer' hand.

Meanwhile, it would be nice if someone could explain why "Willfully Violating Geneva Conventions" or "Willfully Violating the American Constitution" aren't IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES.

Wake. Up.

Posted by: patriota | April 19, 2007 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Goodnight guys! Only 14% of registed voters voted last year.

Posted by: News guy | April 19, 2007 10:36 PM | Report abuse

I personally do not like Vice President Cheney. I think if we dug around we would absolutely find that he was responsible for the CIA exposure case and a world of other things. I blame him more than I blame Bush. I don't even dislike Bush that much - I just think he's not inquisitive enough, not clever enough, to be the president. Impeachable offense? Honestly, no. Cheney, on the other hand, knows exactly what he's doing.

But it won't go anywhere. Do any of you honestly think that any of the Democratic presidential hopefuls for 2008 are going to throw their hats in on this one? Unless Kucinich has some MAJOR dirt it'll be laughed out. . .he's run for President a few times now, and not once has been considered a serious candidate. Without the major players in on this it will not happen, and I think it's too late in this VERY early election season for any of them take the risk.

Posted by: And nothing hereafter. | April 19, 2007 10:45 PM | Report abuse

Loyalty to a political party or religion or nation is akin to loyalty to a particular football team--it's based mostly on upbringing and environment rather than facts and logic. Nothing productive will ever be accomplished by humanity as long as we feel an instinctual level need to organize into packs and defend them to the death. Unfortunately, we're not about to undergo some spontaneous evolutionary spike and overcome this, so I think it's probably safe to say we're doomed.

Posted by: Chris Hughes | April 19, 2007 10:51 PM | Report abuse

The occupant of the Oval Office will be replaced (by a process that may or may not involve impeachment) when that removal serves the interests of the boss class. He will be replaced by the next dolt who will serve the interests of the boss class.

Posted by: youknowit | April 19, 2007 11:06 PM | Report abuse

While it heartening to see so many Americans supportive of Rep. Kucinich's plans, I am distressed at how many are ignorant of their own Constitution or its history. For example, did you know that the House of Representives is the PRE-EMINENT segment of our government. There is no "co-equal" - a reading of the Federalist Papers should be required of every high school student so more people would know this. The "Executive Magistrate" for example, works with the Senate and is only co-equal with that Chamber. Thus, "advise and consent" is NOT rubber stamping, it is intended as a dialogue among equal parties. Neither of which is co-equal with the sovereign, self-governing People of the United States, represented by the House of Representatives, which is why only Members of the House can submit Articles.

As for the emphasis on Cheney, it's important to remember that EVERYTHING that could be interpreted as a high crime and misdeamenor (which, roughly translated from the 18th century, means acting out of scope, abusing your power at the expense of the government of the People) has originated from his office, from those despicable signing statements to the Enabling Acts (The Patriot Acts I & II, the WH-revised charter for the DHS, which includes weapons systems that were not in the Congressional version (yes, I read every last page of those 600-odd pages), and the Military Commissions Act). His office has authored some wicked EO's and quite frankly, if all that is accomplished during an impeachment investigation is to keep his office buried in paper - subpoenas, briefs, etc. - maybe it will keep them too occupied to cause any more mischief in the Middle East or at the CIA. People think Congress is distracted during Impeachment hearings. Not so. The White House is distracted, Congress chugs along as always, because it is structured to conduct hearings and usually does so by the hundreds every session. I lived and breathed Washington (for better and worse) for many years before retirement. I've been around this block.

Ultimate Irony: Cheney and Rumsfeld fell upon this "unitary executive" idea from a comment made by Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers, that the executive magistrate must be a unitary office. Except Hamilton said this lest others bring corruption to the nominal head of state as often happens in the royal houses of Europe. The goal was to keep the executive in his place. After all, 1787 we had been a country for over 10 years without a position such as president specifically because the Founders abhorred the idea of a potential king. They finally caved to John Adams on one condition: That impeachment be included in the Constitution, and it was IN DETAIL (one of only two detailed procedures in the Consitution) in SEVEN locations. It was to be the axe over the head of the executive, literally, because we didn't just fight a bloody war of Independence against a king to install another king. And to reassure the People of New York, for whom the Federalist Papers were written, Alexander Hamilton assured them that the executive would have approximately one-quarter more power than the governor of New York.

Oh, and the reason John Adams persisted in including an office that has a fraction of Congress' power? (Just read Article I - which comes first for a reason - and compare it to Article II.) So that we would have a person to run the bureaucracy when CONGRESS WAS OUT OF SESSION and who could sit with other heads of state to represent us (which is why we elect him, albeit through that peculiar 18th century electoral system). He (She) is not even Commander in Chief except when the People call him to that position in time of war. (That's why there's legislation called Authorization to Use Military Force.) This principle has been reaffirmed THREE times in statutory War Powers Acts.

And Dennis didn't do this for his campaign. He did use his campaign to reach out to ask the question, are we ready for impeachment, and his decision is based on hundreds of thousands of responses from the grassroots.

His campaign will plug along and he'll probably end up with a few more delegates at convention than last time, but won't win. He runs to win, of course (and I think he'd be a great president and will work for his campaign again for that reason), but he has the additional motive all good progressives are known to have: Shift the dialogue to progressive goals. In his case, he wants, over time, to infect every campaign with his emphasis on demilitarization so that it will become part of the campaign dialogue and eventually peace and nonviolence will become a guiding principle. He had a strong influence on how the candidates framed their campaigns in 2004. They didn't become progressives, but they did incorporate some progressive strategies into their campaigns. He's the Eugene Debs of this generation. All he needs is a Teddy Roosevelt to embrace it and take it to 1400 Pennsylvania Avenue. TR wasn't perfect, but it was his administration that helped facilitate anti-trust laws and put an end to the "robber baron" era. He didn't help labor directly, but doing this DID help labor. We still had robber barons, but they were much more constrained to behave like good citizens (more or less). Dennis's issue is peace and nonviolence, but if his message also puts a stop to the present-day rampaging of corporate corruption (not to mention the corruption of special interests having influence exceeding that of the Sovereign People in the Capitol), so much the better.

P.S. Everyone reading this column needs to read John Nichols' book "Impeachment" so we ALL understand this tool that is ours to use to avoid bloody revolutions or coup d'etat. Assuming of course we WANT to fight to save our country and our Constitution. It is ours, unless we allow them to steal it. They've mangled it pretty badly, but we can still rescue it, if we have the will do so. That is, if we are the Americans our ancestors were, committed to self-governance and activism to preserve it.

Posted by: A former Washingtonian who supports Dennis and the Constitution | April 19, 2007 11:08 PM | Report abuse

P.P.S. We were always meant to be a diverse society:

Once it was clear that others were going to settle here, come heck or high water, the "landed gentry" had to accept diversity, which is the crucible for activism. (Granted, their idea of diversity is nothing like those of today's progressives, but it was a far cry from the still-feudal Europe, too. France was on the verge of revolution when the Constitution was being written. As Jefferson was there at the time, you can bet that it was a huge concern for the founders.) The founders understood that only an active, involved citizenry who were willing to express diverse opinions would keep this democratic experiment alive. (They also worried about the extreme, mob rule, but if they could see us now, I doubt they'd be too concerned with that.)

James Madison even wrote this principle into the Consitution. It's called the First Amendment. It would be refreshing if some of the posters here were mindful of this protection afforded one of the inalienable rights detailed in our Declaration of Independence. It's also worth reviewing the indictment of King George III in that document. The parallels just prove that human desire for power and control is so much a part of our nature that it manifests in the worst cases very similarly. And we were given the RESPONSIBILITY to prevent such abuses, with tools including the electoral process and, yes, impeachment.

And guess what, if it's not the will of the majority, it will die, so there is nothing to be threatened about. On the other hand, for activists working the issue (in some cases for years now), the groundswell in the last few months is immense. And the poll numbers are NOT 51 percent. They are 60+ percent thanks to that non-strategic troop surge that just puts more of our good soldiers in harm's way to deal with a non-military political problem for which they aren't trained. Furthermore, if put into terms that do not refer to impeachment, but refer instead to investigating the administration for accountability about the failures in Iraq, the poll numbers jump to almost 75 percent.

Speaking of polls, we voted for Democrats to use their power to supercede this madness in November. That we've been marginalized with typical bickering rather than a strong group of legislators prepared to make the policy we sent them to make (and, by the way, that table doe not belong to Ms. Pelosi, it belongs to US) has only made us more determined to see accountability. With approval of performance from the Oval at 29 percent, Cheney in the teens, if we aren't going to investigate impeachment now, exactly when WOULD be a appropriate time?

Posted by: Former Washingtonian | April 19, 2007 11:45 PM | Report abuse

My,My,My! This thing just seems to grow like topsy! Gulf of Aden the USS Cole, twin towers (1), the embassy bombings,etc. The fact in the Jamie Gorelic posting that the C.I.A. and the F.B.I could not comunicate the results of investigations. Do I agree with Bush on all things? NO!!
Prescription drug coverage, promised by the Democrat party and no I am not in love with the result, brought to you by the Republicans. Alien Immigration problems, and amnesty! The Bush plan will be brought to you by the Democrat Party. As brought to us by the Democrat party the last time, by that Sen. Kennedy who is trying what didn't work the last time. Which bye the bye he had a large part in developing.
Has this country made some blunders and supported some people who were not very nice? YES!! Islam, has been at war with all other religeons for 1,500 years, find a christian or a Buddist in a muslim controled country and I will show you someone who is living on borrowed time. Darfur region is populated with Christian and Multi deist groups, not black Muslim's as has been reported by the press. Thomas instead of spouting try actually reading the Quran, like a true believer not your normal rational self. Mein Kampf, My struggle, Jihad, Struggle. Mein Kampf is a favorite in the Muslim countries even now. Now that should be a cause for consern. Oh, just a thought the 20th is Hitler's birthday are you going to celebrate? I will not!
Ismael's AX on someone's arm, that refers to the Muslim version of Abraham's sacrifice stopped by G-d. Ismael was the father of the Arab race. Something starting to click Kids? Nighty night!! Read, Listen, Think, just not too much it might cause a migraine!!

Posted by: h1m912009 | April 19, 2007 11:58 PM | Report abuse

Impeachment of the Vice President or president would only serve to entertain the sleepy-eyed masses. Around here, we call it changing the bird cage lining. No matter who is installed as president, we are headed for the same thing.....Globalization. And that, my fellow sheep, is what the American People should impeach.

Posted by: Johnny Mills | April 20, 2007 12:00 AM | Report abuse

IChiefpayne568: I was going to read your 20 point submission but you got it wrong in point No. 1. Congress has not declared war on Afghanistan, Iraq or any other nation state. A state of war does not exist. The USA is not at war. Your President has seized powers which your constitution do not provide for.

Posted by: rbingham | April 19, 2007 04:47 PM
Did you forget the vote in the Congress to allow the POTUS to wage war on these countries? You're a blithering idiot among idiots. You can claim duress by saying "patriotic feelings were perversing the natural liberal fears of standing up for ones self, but you CAN'T claim illegality. Lberals just crack me up. 3,368 soldiers dead in 4 years of war is such an admirable total that we should be singing Bushes praises. This country has sustained many times that number in a single DAY and still won the war. The commentary on this blog is bsolutely killing me. You holler about political absolution and freedom of speech when the very act of you typing in your thoughts on here is the absolute definition of freedom of speech. Find me one poster on here who's been harassed because of wh they've said. You can't do it. Bush didn't lie and Cheney is a very good VP. Deal with it and move on.

Posted by: Anonymous | April 20, 2007 12:14 AM | Report abuse

Have any of you actually read the Bible? There is a lot of crazy stuff in there, too. Fortunately, we don't stone adulterers to death anymore or require that a man marry his brother's widow. We don't require animal sacrifices anymore. We don't require that a rapist marry his victim (if she can produce witnesses that she resisted -- otherwise she is stoned for adultery). How hypocritical can you be? An outsider reading the Bible would interpret it in a negative way, just as we do with the Koran.

And if you think the Koran is bad, try reading the Talmud (at least the parts that have been allowed to be translated into English -- there is a vast amount of it that has not been). You want to talk about hatred? You'll find a lot more of it there. I don't see anyone saying we should convert all Jews or kill them. Oh yeah, that's right. They are our "ally". Yeah -- tell that to the crew of the Liberty. It sounds horrible when you say it about Jews, right? Why the different treatment for Muslims? Because a small organization led by Bin Laden (trained by the CIA, by the way) managed, only because of our military's incompetence (sorry - but there is no other way to explain why jets weren't scrambled for 2 hours, unless of course you want to entertain a "conspiracy theory"). So billions of people all over the world are automatically branded as evil because of them. Are we all torturers because of a few bad apples at Abu Ghurayb? Now that we've had the VT slayings -- are we going to hate all Asians? Use some common sense people and stop letting the media tell you what to think. Research it yourself. You don't have to be spoonfed the news to be able to understand it. I least I hope you don't.

But, the Republicans tell us that all Muslims are the enemy -- so we should, as one poster put it "convert them or kill them"? Is Mann Coulter posting here? How does advocating that an entire religion is bad based on the actions of the extremists make any sense?

Jim Jones was a Christian. Does that mean that all Christians will commit mass suicide at a Preacher's direction (although, for those who said no, there were guns to take care of that problem)? Catholic pedophile priests -- does that mean that ALL Catholics are pedophiles? What about the snake handlers and those who speak in tongues? They are Christian, too, but I certainly wouldn't want all of Christianity to be judged on that. Not to mention the Inquisition and Crusades ...

Go ahead. Call me an anti-Semite. Like I care. If it is kosher to hate Muslims -- then, heck, we should become a Christian theocracy and throw everyone else out of the country. Then we can just go on a big campaign from country to country converting or killing the inhabitants. If we do it pre-emptively, we can kill off our enemies, take over their resources and we'll never have to worry about dying a violent death again. United World of America. Republicans everywhere are drooling over the just the sound of it.

If we would stop giving so much attention and importance to these extremist groups (we allowed them to draw us into a lengthy war which will no doubt escalate)

Posted by: sm | April 20, 2007 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Dennis Kucinich is surely right to try to impeach Cheney and for sure he will have the support of the American people, maybe even some of the wimps in Congress. I hope he succeeds but am haunted by the scenario that might then unfold.
Cheney goes, Bush appoints Svengala ConDoll as Vice-president, Negraponte, very familiar with Iran, becomes Secretary of State.
Something: impeachment, hunting with Cheney accident, certification, assassination... happens to Bush and the ConDoll is president.
She runs as incumbent, the insane and/or corrupt 34% who support Bush vote for her plus lots of blacks and lots of women.
Lieberman, Nader and other Independents split the anti-Svengala vote and she wins at a canter.
The Worst President Ever is yet to come.

Posted by: Cashel Boylo | April 20, 2007 12:21 AM | Report abuse

What a collection of losers. This is the largest number of non thinking Democratic Party lemmings I've ever seen in reply to a crack pot.

Posted by: Judd 83 | April 20, 2007 12:25 AM | Report abuse

America has been "Weimared", and nothing short of dragging the whole bunch of them(globalist Dems, Repubs, and others) through the streets, or a military coup followed with a clamp-down against all who are anti-working class, will turn things around. Talk of impeachment is meaningless and for people who have no spine or stomache to effect any real change, their primary interest is to wash their hands and absolve themselves of this mess our country's in.

Posted by: Benjamin Franklin Was Right | April 20, 2007 12:31 AM | Report abuse

Good. After which it will be open season on the oil-robber-barons who [they] are in league with. Full disclosure will make the Teapot Dome scandal look like... well, a tempest in a tea pot! Even if you believe in the validity of the connect-the-dots oil pipeline from Turkey to Asia, these guys botched the job so badly they should lose their Texas/Wyoming citizenships.

Posted by: Wm Fletcher | April 20, 2007 12:40 AM | Report abuse

re: sm and discussion of the bible, I think it's important to distinguish from the New Testament and their Torah(aka old testament hatreds). True Christianity is found in the former, not the latter which is favored by Scofieldite Judeo-christians

Posted by: Benjamin Franklin Was Right | April 20, 2007 12:51 AM | Report abuse

I would like to know about This GrassRoots organization that writes this motivating stuff and it costs a minimum of $20.00 to submit an answer or response.

I'm beginning and have always seen this as a money grabbing racket and would appreciate receiving some information on this organization. I contacted them and got a useless telephone response. I will not spend anymore $20.00 bills in the blind. jsomario@aol.com

Posted by: Joe somario | April 20, 2007 2:40 AM | Report abuse

Kucinich has my support for Pres. He's the only one who seems to have the guts to stand up and do what is right. Enough is enough.

Posted by: patrick | April 20, 2007 4:01 AM | Report abuse

Just so you know Former Washingtonian the government is thinking about eliminatating out electoral vote system. and chief payne568 KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK! I m totally with you on that. SO people don't get confused I might list all the amendments on this site so people can read them before trying to quote them and looking silly (not like any of you have)

Oh yes, I have read the old testament. and no many of the old testament laws are not in effect anymore. Many were not needed once God sent his son down to die on the cross for mans sin and rose again the third day

WHy in the world do you guys keep talking about killing Bush, CHeney, Pelosi. I don't care if its a dem. or a Rep. that your talking about, just put down evidence, no one is gonna listen to a fanatic who talks about killing VIPs.

Posted by: News guy | April 20, 2007 7:22 AM | Report abuse

I agree with you news guy!

ON THIS DAY IN WND HISTORY
WorldNetDaily Exclusive
www.worldnetdaily.com


2000: Uncle Osama wants you
16 months before 9/11, bin Laden called for recruits to 'free the world' from U.S control
--WND
EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
Good news about nuclear destruction
It's not the end of the world - you can survive!
--WND


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by: Rick | April 20, 2007 7:30 AM | Report abuse

History will vindicate Cheney, and show bad mouthers of him as pilitically motivated in attacking the Bush Admin.

Posted by: Daniel | April 20, 2007 8:13 AM | Report abuse

Excerpt from another site.

I think this says a lot.

It is common knowledge that Dennis Kucinich is bats**t crazy, and even Nancy Pelosi has blatantly said there are things the new Dem majority won't touch...gun control (HB 1022 is going to die before it even reaches the floor for debate) and impeachment. She is a lot of things, but terminally stupid isn't one of them. She saw that gun control cost the Dems their majority in congress, and possibly the presidency in 2000/2004...and she saw that the Clinton impeachment, while it didn't cost the GOP gtheir majority, cut their majority to a razor-thin margin. No matter how much she may privately want to impeach Bush and Cheney or take every single gun out of private ownership, she knows damn well what the American public, as a body, will and will not tolerate.

Posted by: Daniel | April 20, 2007 8:16 AM | Report abuse

There are way too many right-wing zealots in here. It's scary. Too much right-wing propoganda being spewed on the radio and TV.

You all should read the book, "Maufacturing Consent," so you can see how you are being systematically indoctrinated into supporting "leadership" that could care less about you or your lives.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Obviously Impeachment is getting off way too easy for this insane bunch of mass mudering TREASONIST bu$h/cheney regime scum.
"We the people" should all watch as we hang them all from the highest tree's so that we can make a stand that we won't ever be fooled again by insane corrupt cowardly scum of the earth who profit from the blood of our brave soliders!
Reasearch 9/11...They did it!

Posted by: Uncle Sam | April 20, 2007 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Yes. Maintained. Look at history. The war with Islam is at least 1500 years old. 230 years of American history is not going to overcome this fact. They WILL defeat us if we don't resolve ourselves to defeat them year after year, decade after decade, century after century, millenia after millenia. We don't want this. THEY DO! We're supposed to sit back and wait until they nuke us? Come on. be serious.

Posted by: prismsinc | April 19, 2007 01:20 PM


A coward, living in fearful delusion. By your standard,how old is the war that Christian Dominionists have been waging against secularists, humanists, and animists?

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 20, 2007 10:23 AM | Report abuse

"It is common knowledge that Dennis Kucinich is bats**t crazy"

That's right, a man who still lives in the same house he bought for $17,000 thirty years ago; who is untouched by allegations of corruption or bribery; and who has earned the strong and unwavering support of his constituents by proactively protecting their little slice of the American Commons is crazy - but only in the diseased brain of a drowning-rat Republican mind-slave.

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef | April 20, 2007 10:30 AM | Report abuse

I'm all for it and I think it's a great idea but I am a little fed up with the bought and paid for by AIPAC (jewish lobbyist group and no I'm not anti-sematic either so don't even try to call me one) Congress and Senate. I think that this country is suffering from the worst case of politican gas that I've ever seen and the smell is getting worse and worse. I'd like to see more of our elected officals take a stand and try to get that lame duck president and that sniveling war monger out of the White House and put people there who put the people of THIS country first and not the needs of Israel or anybody else. Impeachment is a great idea but I'm all for a public hanging.

Posted by: Dion Jackson | April 20, 2007 11:41 AM | Report abuse

To the chicken who wrote "...3,368 soldiers dead in 4 years of war is such an admirable total that we should be singing **** praises." Please give us the name of any one of those 3,368 soldiers whose death you think is admirable. For that matter. why don't you give us your name?

Posted by: James McLain | April 20, 2007 11:46 AM | Report abuse

P.S. I think you consider the amount of students killed in previous school shootings "admirable" as compared to those of the other day.

Posted by: James McLain | April 20, 2007 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Rice, Bolton, Wolfawitz, Tenet, Meyers, Gonzolas...all the way down the line. Round them all up and stick THEM in Gitmo.

Posted by: Impeach, then arrest them all | April 20, 2007 12:39 PM | Report abuse

hi
ım mary very nice works
http://ankara_evden_nakliyat.sitemynet.com/

Posted by: ankara nakliyat | April 20, 2007 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Hey COnstitution could you list the bill of rights? Thanks alot.

Posted by: Jeff | April 20, 2007 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Sure here:


Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.


Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.


Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.


Posted by: Constitution | April 20, 2007 2:20 PM | Report abuse

thanks one more thing, could you list how to change an amenment in the constitution. also if you could add in how impeachmet works that'd be great to. Thanks.

Posted by: Jeff | April 20, 2007 2:21 PM | Report abuse

To propose an amendment 2/3 of house and senate must agree, or the people can propose the it in a convention that was called by 2/3 thirds of the state legislatures.

To ratify an amendment: 3/4 of the state legislatures or conventions in 3/4 of the states must vote for ratification.

The Constitutional recipe for freedom

The Impeachment Process in a Nutshell

The House Judiciary Committee deliberates over whether to initiate an impeachment inquiry.

The Judiciary Committee adopts a resolution seeking authority from the entire House of Representatives to conduct an inquiry. Before voting, the House debates and considers the resolution. Approval requires a majority vote.

The Judiciary Committee conducts an impeachment inquiry, possibly through public hearings. At the conclusion of the inquiry, articles of impeachment are prepared. They must be approved by a majority of the Committee.

The House of Representatives considers and debates the articles of impeachment. A majority vote of the entire House is required to pass each article. Once an article is approved, the President is, technically speaking, "impeached" -- that is subject to trial in the Senate.

The Senate holds trial on the articles of impeachment approved by the House. The Senate sits as a jury while the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial.

At the conclusion of the trial, the Senate votes on whether to remove the President from office. A two-thirds vote by the Members present in the Senate is required for removal.

If the President is removed, the Vice-President assumes the Presidency under the chain of succession established by Amendment XXV.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/impeach/impeach.htm


Posted by: Constitution | April 20, 2007 2:31 PM | Report abuse

A coward, living in fearful delusion. By your standard,how old is the war that Christian Dominionists have been waging against secularists, humanists, and animists?

Posted by: Sir Loin of Beef

Ok I 've researched history and I don't now any recent Christians who have made "WAR" on secularists...of course their opinions are differnet...


Posted by: History101 | April 20, 2007 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Uh, I have friends in Iraq and Afganistan. I know they would agree for what security we are getting 4000 is the unfortanute price we have had to pay.

The media has really twisted things up.

over 100 terror attacks have been prevented here in the U.S by being in Iraq. do you want to fight them hear???

Posted by: 78463 | April 20, 2007 2:39 PM | Report abuse

I see what your saying IChiefpayne568, I beleive we also owe alot to Bush. Its very sad that 4000 troops have died but with the number of terror attacks prevented I think were better of. In the Battle of the bulge we suffered over 50000 causilities in a couple months.

Posted by: 78463 | April 20, 2007 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Impeachment is necessary to restore our faith in ourselves and our respect in the world. Torture does not serve American values or interests. We are a great nation and we have work to do.

Posted by: KC | April 20, 2007 3:37 PM | Report abuse

78463:

You buy those White House assertions about how many attacks were thwarted? I bet you dove into your bunker whenever they changed the "Terror Alert" to Orange, right? Talk about being a lemming......

Meanwhile, our intelligence agencies have agreed, across the board, that we have created more terrorists than ever before and the 9/11 commission gave the administration a grade of 'F' for the utter lack of homeland security initiatives.

It helps when we remember the first rule of good citizenship, pay no attention to what your leaders say, instead focus on what they do. The Bush administration is an absolute failure in the concept of terror reduction. They couldn't have done worse if they tried. It's not surprising, when you consider they have no interest in fighting terror in the first place, 9/11 was the "pearl harbor-type event," the members of PNAC were hoping for in order to invade Iraq and Iran and steal their oil. Anyone who bothers to do the research, instead of just believing White House boilerplate talking points can see this plain as day.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

just for fun, let's put some Bush quotes to the test, shall we?

First, these extremists want to end American and Western influence in the broader Middle East, because we stand for democracy and peace and stand in the way of their ambitions."

Where does one begin on the US record here: 1) the US overthrow of the first democratically elected leader of Iran in 1953? 2) US sponsorship of Iran's subsequent dictator the Shah of Iran? 3) US support for the corrupt House of Saud in Saudi Arabia? 4) continuing support for Israel even after it developed some 150 nuclear weapons, violates several UN resolutions on the Palestinians, and continuing settlement expansion in the West Bank? 5) American support for the Egyptian dictator Mubarak? 6) US sponsorship for several Pakistani dictators, including the current Musharaf? 7) cozy relations with Islam Karimov, until recently, in Uzbekistan? 8) support of Saddam Hussein throughout the 1980s?

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 4:43 PM | Report abuse

On the difficulty of vanquishing these foes, Bush explains:

"Defeating the militant network's difficult because it thrives like a parasite on the suffering and frustration of others. The radicals exploit local conflicts to build a culture of victimization in which someone else is always to blame and violence is always the solution."

At this point we see revealed the habit of projecting America's own foibles on others. The enemy always seeks others to blame for its problems and always employs violence to achieve its goals. Given the US record of ethnically cleansing its own continent and engaging some 200 foreign interventions, the statement might ring true if Bush in a Maoist session of self-criticism were recording the faults of his own government.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Bush then argues that Iraq is not the cause of the current difficulties:

"Some have also argued that extremists have been strengthened by our actions in Iraq, claiming that our presence in that country has somehow caused or triggered the rage of radicals. I would remind them that we were not in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001. (APPLAUSE) The hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue. And it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse. The government of Russia did not support Operation Iraqi Freedom, and yet the militants killed more than 150 Russian school children in Beslan."

Yes and no. First, he errs in saying the US was not in Iraq before September 11th. He ignores his father's invasion and the airstrikes that continued throughout the 1990s right up to the most recent invasion. Then, there were the estimated 500k deaths of Iraqi children due to the UN sanctions, of which then Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, when interviewed, declared "it was worth it."

He then cites the Beslan incident to show Iraq is not responsible for all terrorism. True enough. Russia, which has flattened Grozny and destroyed Chechnya, is certainly considered an enemy by these fundamentalists. But, note Bush fails to observe how Western nations, such as Sweden, that have left these people alone have not been targets. This elephant in the room is simply ignored. The common targets are imperial states that have wielded their economic and military might in the Islamic world.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

QUOTE:

Cleveland was bankrupted during Kucinich's term as mayor because the banks and Cleveland City Council refused to act in the interests of the people of Cleveland. Kucinich was later vindicated for his tough, principled stance, which is why he's been Cleveland's Rep to the US House for the last dozen years. Read up on how Kucinich saved Cleveland MUNY from the corporations 30 years ago, and in the process saved Cleveland residents tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars on there electricity bills.

Kucinich may not be as smooth as The Fonz, but he is a true hero and deserves our support.

Posted by: Heath | April 17, 2007 07:37 PM

END QUOTE:

Yep, Another good reason to hate Cleveland.....

Posted by: penn | April 20, 2007 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Bush's neocons, or should we say the neocons' Bush, then pronounce:

"The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet in many ways this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century."

This transparent, if clumsy, attempt to salvage the current policy failure through linkage to communism will surely keep many intellectuals employed in ever new ways to connect two different movements. Unlike Islamic fundamentalists, communists were on the forefront of the women's movement, struggles against racism, and promoting better conditions for labor when the really existing democracies still banned women from politics, institutionalized racism as policy, and used the bludgeon against insolent workers. The political gulf between communists and fundamentalists could not be wider. Indeed, it was just this gap the US exploited when supporting its allies extermination of communists and allying Islamic fundamentalists to that cause whenever possible. Bush's intellectuals prove alchemists once again, making lies into truth and truth into lies.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Bush then jumps to homeland defense:

"We are reorganizing our government to give this nation a broad and coordinated homeland defense. We are reforming our intelligence agencies for the incredibly difficult task of tracking enemy activity based on information that often comes in small fragments from widely scattered sources both here and abroad."

Hurricane Katrina revealed the mendacity of this statement. The world's richest nation is wholly unprepared to protect its own people in the simple way that impoverished Cuba did when struck by a similar forced hurricane in which they evacuated all and saw none die. The American Gulf's security, unfortunately, was left in the hands of a political crony who brought the credential of managing an Arabian horse stable to the job, in addition, of course, to being an organizer and contributor to the GOP. The war on "terror" is almost entirely offensive. And even here, it fails. For Osama Bin Laden was allowed to escape while the US employed 9/11 to pursue its real agenda in Iraq.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Bush then asserts:

"we're determined to deny the militant's control of any nation which they would use as a home base and a launching pad for terror."

While creating just that in Iraq, he declares we are preventing it. The dizzying heights of Orwellian logic employed here force us to suspend all sense of history and reality to accept his argument. Bush then boldly returns to WMD and area where one thinks he would flee given his total discrediting on this score.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 4:58 PM | Report abuse

He then declares victory in the war waged against terrorists in Iraq:

"Acting on tips from local citizens, our forces have recently launched airstrikes against terrorist safehouses in and around the towns of Ubaydi (ph) and Husaba (ph)."

One should have concern for those attacked here. They may be terrorists, but the reliance on "tips from local citizens" was precisely the Bush regime's "source" that Saddam Hussein had WMD.

Bush then pulls out the familiar theme that our enemy is brutal (which it is) but that America is not:

"The terrorists are as brutal an enemy as we've ever faced, unconstrained by any notion of our common humanity or by the rules of warfare. No one should underestimate the difficulties ahead, nor should they overlook the advantages we bring to this fight."

Bush is defending several dubious arguments here. One, implicitly, is that the brutality of our enemy forces us to torture prisoners at Guantanamo, Abu Graib, and at facilities in the former Soviet bloc. Two, that somehow we are civilized. From the use of Atomic weapons that melted skin off babies, to the use of C130 gunships spraying 6000 rounds of ammunition per minute on villages in Central America in the 1980s, to the use of phosphorous weapons that burn one from the inside out, the US knows a little something about brutality. The irony and outrage is that pressures for democratizing society and curbing excess come from civil society, which the Bush neocons wish to both fight on substance, but lay claim to their existence as proof of the neocons representing democracy....

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Thomas, though I can't say I agree with you I m glad you for one person didn't swear out and bash a bunch of people.

Posted by: News guy | April 20, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Oh and by the ay Thomas I have done LOTS of research...though I cant really say I dove into any bunker... Though that was kinda funny...


Posted by: 7863 | April 20, 2007 5:24 PM | Report abuse

NASA evacuates Houston building amid alert
Authorities checking out report about gunman at Johnson Space Center
--Associated Press

Posted by: News guy | April 20, 2007 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Dick Cheney is the modern architect of the New America. Dick is untouchable. Power to Dick Cheney. Dick Cheney's only crime is that he tried to protect American's interest abroad and made lots and lots of money doing so.
I would rather Dick Cheney be in charge than the likes of Pelosi any day.

Posted by: Mikey | April 20, 2007 5:40 PM | Report abuse

7863:

I cannot imagine how you could have done "lots" of research and not come to the conclusion that the Bush administration has been an abyssmal failure in fighting terrorism.

It doesn't take "lots" of research. It's very easy to see.

Have you researched the Project for a New American Century? How about the Intelligence assessments across the board before and after the war with Iraq? All predicting a massive spike in terror and terrorist recruitment, which has been confirmed after the fact.

Does it not dawn on people to look at the very basic fundamental principle in discovering motives? You've heard the term, "follow the money," right? Let's follow the money, shall we?

Who has gained from this invasion? Oil companies have made record profits and now have gotten their hands on the Iraqi oil supply with the egregious oil thieving "Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law" recently enacted. "Defense" contractors have made hundreds of billions in profits for "reconstructing" what we destroyed. Never mind that the reconstruction hasn't happened and there is no oversight. Bush, Cheney and every virtually every member of the GOP in Congress has personal financial connections to the major "defense" corporations, like General Electric, Boeing and Halliburton.

The war profiteering isn't limited to the GOP, of course. Dianne Feinstein and her husband have war profiteered in the millions, for starters. She should be tried on treason charges, along with the other war profiteers, like Cheney and the rest of his cronies.

Meanwhile, what does the average American gain from all of this? More dead soldiers? More injured soldiers? Increased risk of terror? Tightening of civil liberties under the banner of "national security"? Enormous shortfalls in domestic spending for America's most needy in favor of the industrial military complex?


Not to mention the enormous suffering and death this imperialism causes around the globe. We are approaching one million dead innocent iraqi men, women and children. All for Power and Profit for the privelged few.

Anyone falling for this "war on terror" nonsense needs to wake up and do some serious research.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 5:41 PM | Report abuse

The Constitution deals with the subject of impeachment and conviction at six places. The scope of the power is set out in Article II, 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."

Other provisions deal with procedures and consequences.

Article I, Section 2 states:

"The House of Representatives . . . shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."

Similarly, Article I, Section 3, describes the Senate's role:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present."

The same section limits the consequences of judgment in cases of impeachment:

"Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial,. Judgment and Punishment, according to law."

Of lesser significance, although mentioning the subject, are: Article II, Section 2:

"The President shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

Article III, Section 2:

"The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury . .


Muslim play closed over killing of lambs
'Outrageous that an animal should lose its life in this way for the sake of art'
--London Telegraph

Posted by: colts | April 20, 2007 5:45 PM | Report abuse

I see your opinion Thomas, I guess I feel the same way you do because I can't see why you can't see my opinon, theres not much elese to say...I mean without hardly doing any research I figured out my opinion, which you already know, I did even more and that only strengthed it...

Posted by: 7863 | April 20, 2007 5:53 PM | Report abuse

But your opinion is easily proven wrong. I can't "see your opinion," if I have already gathered enough evidence to make your assertions meaningless.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Where on earth did you do your "research," and come up with a pro-Bush verdict??? FOX News? Limbaugh? Where?

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Let's talk about rank hypocrisy. Here we have liberals howling about VP Cheney while excusing serious breaches of ethics and laws currently occurring right before their eyes.

I'd like to see if the Democrats have the cojones to pursue Rep. Pelosi with the same zeal that they showed in pursuing Scooter Libby, who committed no crime, or in their pursuit of Gonzales for sacking nine US Attorneys, as is the prerogative of the administration to do.

Speaker of the House Pelosi violated the Logan Act, a felony, and therefore deserves to be impeached. There's no place for high ranking opposition party members to be negotiating foreign policy with other nations behind the president's back, particularly with hostile nations during a time of war. Pelosi belongs in prison.

Just because Bush and possibly Cheney have committed impeachable offenses, that's no reason to excuse Pelosi's perhaps treasonable conduct.

Posted by: Recce1 | April 20, 2007 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Recce1:

What on earth are you talking about? She's the speaker of the house and she had GOP congressmen with her on the trip. The Logan Act? Are you serious? Of all the corruption, crobyism, war-profiteering etc, this is what concerns you?

You want to go after a democrat? I'll give you one...Dianne Feinstein for blatant war profiteering. She should be charged with high treason. Sound good? Meanwhile, can you try to put country ahead of party, for chrissakes...

I have.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 10:37 PM | Report abuse

Our country is in an absolute crisis under what is possibly the most corrupt administration in the history of the Country and you are going to make a federal case out of the Speaker of the House leading a bilateral diplomatic visit to another nation? Something that has been done numerous times in the past by Speakers of both parties?

Jesus Christ. Enough already with the partison nonsense....

I think we should hold those who we voted for to a higher standard. How's that for an idea????? Instead of making excuses for them and trying to play tit-for-tat all the damn time. So tiresome and counterproductive. Let's give it a rest.

Posted by: Thomas | April 20, 2007 10:44 PM | Report abuse

I hope Dennis isn't planning on flying any time soon.

Posted by: Kimmer | April 20, 2007 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully, Bush and Cheney will be impeached, convicted and executed for high treason. I doubt they would have the dignity of Sadaam we facing execution. May they both burn in eternal hell for what they have done to the Constitution and the people of the Middle East and Central Asia.

Posted by: Tom | April 21, 2007 2:53 AM | Report abuse

Bush and Cheney have started an illegal war of aggression, trashed the US constitution and trampled international law and human rights, stolen elections, authorized an American gulag and a regime of terror and torture, lied to and spied on the American people.
What more do an American president and his vice president have to do to be impeached? Crown themselves kings?
That a government can commit all these crimes and be allowed to continue its rampage shows what a mix of thoroughly crooked, self-serving, and cowardly characters have taken control of the American political system and what a sham it has become. Mr. Kucinich appears to be the only man in this Congress who has the decency and courage to do the right thing.

Posted by: M. Kluckner | April 21, 2007 2:57 AM | Report abuse

Impeach,Indict & Imprison both of the unamerican traitors.They are only loyal to the AIPAC and money.

Posted by: R.Orosz | April 21, 2007 1:03 PM | Report abuse

The level of stupidity shown in the postings here proves that America is screwed.

The president and vice president have done nothing to be impeached over, except be Republicans.

I guess in the upside-down world of the left, that's reason enough.

Posted by: jdawg | April 21, 2007 1:50 PM | Report abuse

@ Posted by: R.Orosz | April 21, 2007 01:03 PM

"Impeach,Indict & Imprison both of the unamerican traitors.They are only loyal to the AIPAC and money."

Why did you change the argument for Cheney and Bush to Reid and Pelosi?

Posted by: John L | April 21, 2007 2:02 PM | Report abuse

The Dems have launched their payback on the GOP for impeaching Clinton for his actual, admitted crimes.

Thye only cost has been the need to join our enemy in wartime, erase their entire memory banks of everything they ever said about Saddam and eliminate any serious credentials they once held in defense matters forever.

And I'm sure they will think of a Cheney crime sometime soon.

Posted by: RufusLeeKing | April 21, 2007 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"Hopefully, Bush and Cheney will be impeached, convicted and executed for high treason. I doubt they would have the dignity of Sadaam we facing execution. May they both burn in eternal hell for what they have done to the Constitution and the people of the Middle East and Central Asia." - Tom

Anyone who says saddam had any dignity in anything has zero braincells.

I'd call pelosi and co. on their treason of meeting with our enemy. pelosi and co. were NOT elected by the USA, Bush was elected President so you democrat whiners need to DEAL with it.

Posted by: RedWhiteBluepatriot | April 21, 2007 3:25 PM | Report abuse

What a sad day for the USA when half the country is so deluded as to hate their President and Vice-President, who are trying to protect the nation, more than they do the terrorists. And 25% of the people are so addled they think 9/11 was an inside job. If this doesn't improve, America is toast.

Posted by: Pro US | April 21, 2007 3:52 PM | Report abuse

If any one ought to be canned It's the Democrat Congessional Leadership!

JB.

Posted by: J.B. | April 21, 2007 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Food for thought -- What would happen if Cheney and Bush were impeached and we withdrew from Iraq immediately?

The answer cannot be that those who wish harm on America, Al Qaeda and other radical Muslim elements, would stop their clearly stated pursuit of the destruction of America, which is not conditioned on Bush leadership or Republican control of government. This war does not end with Bush's departure. This war was not started with the invasion of Iraq, nor with 9/11. This war was not started by the US.

You can't have unilateral peace. You cannot negotiate with those unwilling to concede anything.

The answer to the above question may well be that a new and different strategy in combating the war on terror would emerge. The change of strategy may well be overdue. But the answer will NOT be the extinguishing of the Islamic threat to Western civilization.

Posted by: Patrick | April 21, 2007 4:37 PM | Report abuse


Nobody is going to change anyone's mind on this site or any site about whether Bush and Cheney should be impeached.

However, much thanks to all of you who have written in who have supported Kucinich and his impending filing of Articles of Impeachment. This administration has"passed with flying colors" any standard of a litmus test for deserving impeachment and indictment. Their deeds speak for themselves. "What goes around comes around" and things are coming full circle just about now. By the way, Gonzalez's testimony on the Hill on Thursday is indicative of the incompetence and corruptness of this Administration as a whole.

Posted by: Joshua, Kingston, N.Y. | April 21, 2007 6:04 PM | Report abuse

I am thrilled that this is going to hopefully happen. I am so tired of the misuse and abuse of the office of president and vice president. It is a crying shame that this country has been led down the path we have based on lies, and shady deals, the media, and the neo-cons warped objectives. I also find it just sickening that just as action may be taken Cheney moves Halerberten OFFSHORE, and how in the hell was he caught OVER billing the U.S. government 61 million dollars for the war, then they paid him anyway. ARE YOU KIDDING ME. Justice hopefully will prevail, as soon as some of these Congress MEN and Senators grow a spine and protect our BILL OF RIGHTS, and the Constituation. This will be intresting to see how this all plays out. I pray that our reputation as a shining star of Freedom and whats right(LIKE WE USED TO) can eventually be restored to the international community. Thanks for letting me post my opnion. And 1 more thing, i keep hearing PEOPLE SAY...that we live in a democracy, FOLKS... WE LIVE IN A REPUBLIC.... A REPUBLIC.. REMEMBER THAT.. LATELY EVEN NEWSCASTERS ARE FUGEn THAT 1 UP.

Posted by: Captain Mike | April 21, 2007 8:16 PM | Report abuse

All this reminds me of Nixon.
One of the best Presidents the US ever had, maybe 2nd only to Roosevelt.
He really was not a crook.
He was railroaded, by special interests who did not care about 'the peoples's' interests. We can guess which and who they are, now. After all this time, can we reflect back, and realise, Nixon was (for most americans) our friend?


Bush/Cheney on the other hand no doubt ARE sticky fingered crooks.

Posted by: pacthed | April 21, 2007 9:43 PM | Report abuse

My Hero. Dennis Kucinich is the only president for me. I feel that Bush and Cheney are traitors to democracy and America. They should go directly to jail after they are impeached. I am so angry at all the other Democrats that say that the process of impeachment takes too much time and engergy. Democrats OWE it to us to put a sudden stop to this diabolical evil that has taken over our country. I am so proud that Dennis Kucinich is man enough to do the right thing. I hope that he can lead other elected officials to join him in a rally for justice and the American way.

Posted by: Elizabeth O'Nan | April 21, 2007 10:03 PM | Report abuse

I really like reading the delusionary thoughts of the Democrats of today. You people have no idea of what our country is facing. Talk about impeachment and Nancy Pelosi all you want...the left doesn't have the stomach to protect your right to disagree with the government.

Posted by: Southside Drug Rep | April 21, 2007 10:06 PM | Report abuse

chiefpayne568 They committed treason, I know you don't like it-who does? But for the sake of this country, you MUST face the facts.

Read, listen to the documentation listed here and THEN tell me they are "innocent".
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/

It's all there...They lied to congress, my friend-and now we have wounded like Fosk - dead soldiers and dead Iraqi babies and children-who never understood they weren't "liberated" when their roof fell in on them from the bombs. Nor do the babies and children drinking sewer water now...

Posted by: All The Evidence is Public | April 21, 2007 11:46 PM | Report abuse

I see that Bush Derangement Syndrome extends to Cheney, Rove, Gonzalez...anybody at all in the current administration. The hatred is getting a bit overwhelming. The sad thing is it is driven by petty, insignificant beings. And will swing in the opposite direction if a Democrat is elected to the Presidency. There will be investigations of every single act by the new administration, forced resignations, and gridlock. I have a business and have enough money set aside that I can close shop, and move. I am disgusted with the conspiracy theories and am ready to cease contributing to this nation. Have fun, left-wing lunatics, living your lives on the internet, creating world of reality inside your heads, just like Kucinich has. Good luck with that plan. Google "John Galt".

Posted by: Kevin | April 21, 2007 11:51 PM | Report abuse

What a sad day for the USA when half the country is so deluded as to hate their President and Vice-President, who are trying to protect the nation, more than they do the terrorists. And 25% of the people are so addled they think 9/11 was an inside job. If this doesn't improve, America is toast.

Posted by: Pro US | April 21, 2007 03:52 PM

America already is toast; look at the value of the dollar, look at how the Constitution has been circumvented, look how porous our borders are. If Bush really gave a damn about our country, the aforementioned issues would not exist.

Posted by: Tom | April 22, 2007 12:37 AM | Report abuse

Anyone who says saddam had any dignity in anything has zero braincells.


Posted by: RedWhiteBluepatriot | April 21, 2007 03:25 PM


Sadaam did show more dignity than his executioners. Any government, including ours, will crush a threat to its continued existence without remorse. The Kurdish rebels threatened secession, which the Sadaam regime could not permit. To my way of thinking that had more legitimacy than our destroying the Branch Davidians in Waco, who posed no threat to the government. So get off your righteous high horse.

Posted by: Tom | April 22, 2007 12:53 AM |