Kucinich: No intent to seek impeachment of Obama over Libya

[robcon]

Source: The Hill

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) is denying any plans to seek the impeachment of President Obama over the U.S. involvement in Libya.

Kucinich recently raised the question of whether Obama could be impeached for leading the U.S. into a conflict — to enforce a United Nations-backed no-fly zone — without going to Congress first.

"I asked the question as to whether that was an impeachable offense; that’s different than actually calling for an impeachment or inducing a resolution, which I am not intending to do," Kucinich told Fox Business Network on Thursday. "I am speaking to the limits of executive power.”

Kucinich said that, in 2007, then-Sen. Obama (D-Ill.) and then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) had raised the specter of impeaching President George W. Bush over American military involvement in the Middle East.


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/151823-kucinich-no-plans-to-impeach-obama-

---

I thought at least Kucinich - a dim-witted but very honest politician - would have been consistent about impeachment. No one thought the president would be impeached, but we expected more of Kucinich than to back away.

Et tu, Dennis?

[Ian David]

1. Finally, our long, national nightmare is over.

I don't know if President Obama could have weathered the furious onslaught of the powerful Dennis Kucinich.

[LaurenG]

2. meh - read your own op

"I asked the question as to whether that was an impeachable offense; that’s different than actually calling for an impeachment or inducing a resolution, which I am not intending to do," That is what he said the first time. Rather he said the same without the added "which I am not going to do."

not so inconsistent.

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

3. is the Fund Drive over so soon?

[sharp_stick]

4. He got his yapping point

and was able to send out a fund raising letter. Now it's time to make nice with the grownups again I guess.

[Bluenorthwest]

5. The limits of executive power is a subject that must be

brought to the spotlight, particularly after years of Cheney/Bush influence in that branch.

[CrossChris]

6. I repeatedly asked the DK-bashers to paste a statement indicating he was seeking impeachment.

Met with silence, and ad hominem slurs.

Somebody REALLY has it out for this guy. I guess that's what happens to principled Democrats. They make compromised Democrats lash out due to their own insecurity.

[still_one]

9. They have it out for him because he questions, when others don't /nt

[treestar]

10. If he's principled, shouldn't he bring up an impeachment bill?

What's so principled about pointing it out and doing nothing about it? It was all just hot air.

[harun]

22. Too early to do that. Not all of the facts are in. DK knows what he is doing.

[NeoConsSuck]

21. They have it out for this guy

becauses he refuses to move further to the right with the rest of the party.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[2banon]

8. K & R'd

:thumbsup:

It's good to know at least a few honest pols occupying a seat in the House. Dennis is one of too few that exist there. Failure to raise this question would have been completely inconsistant, indeed hypocritical with his position during the Reign of Terror of the Bush/Cheney Regime.

[felix_numinous]

11. Oh yes, let the pile on commence

against a man who speaks out about justice and human rights and war crimes. That is definitely "dim witted".

Unrec'd for DK bashing that to me is based on no fact or reason. I often wonder if Rep. Kucinich looked different would he come under so much attack. I cannot for the life of me think of any other reason to hate a principled man so much.

[Poll_Blind]

14. He's a liberal. That puts him at odds with the entirety of the 'pugs, 3/4 of the Democrats and...

...just about all of this current administration. I don't think it's controversial to say that far, far too many politicians are in the pocket of big business, whether that be banking & finance, the military industrial complex or even the financial interests of corporate neo-colonialism.

Kucinich, especially now that the ball is in the court of a Democratic president who appears to be very willing to "play ball" with the status quo, stands out even more. It wouldn't quite be an over generalization to say that both sides of the political aisle have a vested interest in keeping someone like him quiet. Since he isn't able to be bought, they attempt to dismiss him.

In a way, the same thing happens to people on DU. Some users here just keep asking pointed questions regardless of whether the person in charge has a D or an R after their name. It brings out the same kinds of attacks.

And so not piling on to Hugo Chavez, for instance, is fallaciously mistranslated into "You want to make Hugo Chavez an honorary member of the Democratic party!". Being against the unnecessary Libyan War becomes "You love Gaddafi!" These aren't discussion tactics, they're discussion suppression tactics.

Liberal thought in America, I don't mean the depth and breadth of it I mean the "mainstream" version of it, very-much exists in a sandbox which has somewhat well-defined walls which imperils those who go beyond the marked boundaries.

Dennis makes a habit of coloring outside the lines a great deal and they do everything they can to swat him down.

PB

[mvd]

16. Yes, and that's why it's sad to read so much Kucinich bashing at DU

We shouldn't be attacking the few true liberals in Congress. Is he perfect? No. But he's not nuts, only a grandstander, or to be treated like the enemy. Who would bring impeachment articles against their own party's President, unless it's too blatent to ignore? I think Kucinich tells it like it is.

[felix_numinous]

19. Absolutely-- and he is holding a vital position,

just imagine no one speaking up about Bush's crimes or the war. What would it have been like? I for one am so grateful for this man standing his ground, he has been a sane voice in the wilderness, and he sounds extreme because of how extremely off-course this country has become!

[felix_numinous]

18. Nicely said

:hi: Poll_ Blind --discussion suppression tactics, I like that-- seems like an attempt to force people to defend themselves against a false argument, hoping they will just back down. Wow we are seeing a lot of that lately.

[Phoonzang]

12. Doesn't he have more olive pits to chew on? nt

[davidinalameda]

13. if I call him an attention whore

will I get my post deleted

[elocs]

15. Probably not because I've said it here more than once.

It sure seems to me like he is. He can ask himself the question if he thinks it's an impeachable offense and if his answer is "yes" then he is free to bring articles of impeachment to stand with all of his other great legislative successes.

Claiming he was only asking a question allows him to get the attention he craves without having to actually do something about it.

[Politicalboi]

17. I guess he didn't get the money he wanted

Chicken Little go home. In this environment, he should know better than to use the word "Impeachment".
He went on a lot of "news" programs to tell it again. He gave us the impression that he may seek impeachment.

[Zorra]

20. sorry, dude, that's bullshit propaganda you posted, and I'm calling you on it.

"I thought at least Kucinich - a dim-witted but very honest politician - would have been consistent about impeachment. No one thought the president would be impeached, but we expected more of Kucinich than to back away."

So, what are you trying to say? That Rep. Kucinich at some time called for the impeachment of President Obama? If so, please post your evidence. Good luck. There is none. It never happened.

Or, are you inferring that Rep. Kucinich should call for the impeachment of President Obama because Rep. Kucinich so arduously advocated for the impeachment of pResident Bush because of this, and is therefore being inconsistent by not calling for the impeachment of pResident Obama also?

Everyone at DU except for conservative, corporate-friendly Dems wanted to see Bush impeached for his dishonesty in being directly responsible. As did probably over half the people in this country. Should we all be calling for the impeachment of President Obama, even though the circumstances distinguishing the initiation of the conflicts in Iraq and Libya were so very different?

No, I don't think so. Obviously, neither does Rep. Kucinich.

I question your motivation for this dishonest attack on Rep. Kucinich because it is unfounded in fact.

"A dim-wiitted, but very honest politician". This is a very well-known propaganda technique that uses the good cop-bad cop method of personal attack to dishonestly influence the opinion of others and get them to adopt their POV.

The last thing the pro-corporate establishment wants to see is an anti-war labor friendly liberal legislator like Rep. Kucinich, or Rep. Weiner, or former Rep. Grayson, or the deceased Sen. Wellstone, in office.

They'll do just about anything they can to disparage Rep. Kucinich, or other anti-war, labor friendly legislators, by attempting to help create a negative public image about them through the use of propaganda techniques, or any other method to prevent them from effectively legislating progressive policy.

[Desertrose]

24. Thank you!

Couldn't have said it better.

[tootrueleft]

23. Its sad to see democrats attack a man of principal.

Instead of bitchy comments about fundraising, why don't you question the funding of the corporate whore democrats...

[flvegan]

25. It's sad that he needed to clarify that.

But then after watching the kneejerk pileon here on DU, by what I would like to consider a bit more educated group on actually reading a fucking story and interpreting the meaning therefrom, I'm not the least bit surprised.

And your opinion...dim-witted? Pot meet kettle.