ChavezSpeakstheTruth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:03 PM
Original message |
| Impeach Bush = President Cheney |
emulatorloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:04 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. Not to worry, Cheney will be in a federal prison before Bush is impeached |
|
He'll be resigning over plamegate, don't worry.
|
NV Whino
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:04 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Destroy Bushy's base and he collapses (or implodes) of his own accord.
|
Doctor_J
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:04 PM
Original message |
| I can think of no better way to head into the 06 and 08 elections |
|
than with Dick being the face of the GOP.
|
comradebillyboy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:35 PM
Response to Original message |
|
a couple years of big dick in the white house will destroy the republican party. dick for president!
|
marylanddem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:04 PM
Response to Original message |
| 3. Don't worry - if Bush goes down Cheney will be soggy milktoast... |
JuniperLea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:05 PM
Response to Original message |
| 4. I don't think Cheney would last long... |
|
You know he has been involved with everything Chimpy has done. Cheney's hands are just as dirty, if not more so. Bring 'em on and knock 'em down I say!
|
Prisoner_Number_Six
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:08 PM
Response to Original message |
|
They both need to be impeached at the same time, as they're both complicit in the same crimes.
|
Behind the Aegis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:08 PM
Response to Original message |
| 6. Fitz will take care of Cheney. n/t |
paineinthearse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:09 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Dual-impeachment of * & Cheney = President Hastert.
I just cringe if he gets his tits in a ringer, the next in line is Senator Stevens, then Rice.
|
Mr_Spock
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:10 PM
Response to Original message |
| 8. All of a sudden Dumbya seems suddenly less impeachable |
|
:rofl:
He might be the best thing to happen to the Dems in a while!!
:rofl:
|
madmark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:14 PM
Response to Original message |
| 9. Any basis to dispose of Bush would also dispose of Cheney; BUT |
|
you would then be looking at Pres. Sensenbrenner.
|
ChavezSpeakstheTruth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
| 12. Wouldn't it be President Hastert next? |
madmark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
| 28. You're right; I mix those two idiots up |
chicagiana
(993 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
| 29. Assuming you had Senate control ... |
|
Assuming you had control of the Senate you simply would refuse to confirm any nomination for VP. True, if the Republicans had a majority in the Senate, (whith a Democratic House) you would probably have to accept another Ford situation and take it to the mat during the next election.
It is VERY true that you need 60 votes to convict. But the House would be able to embarass the hell out of Republican Senators if they stood behind the president after the truth comes out of House Impeachment hearings.
Personally, I find it far more likely to make gains in the Senate than in the House. People overstate the influence of Rush Limbaugh and Next Gingrich in the 1992 "Redpublican Revolution". Republicans had made gains in state houses and managed to tilt Congressional districting in their favor. The Republicans will be VERY hard to knock off in their safe little white worlds where people read their conservative newspapers and watch Faux News.
I really think the Democrats will reverse the trend in the next election. But we have all been wrong before. KKKarl Rove always seems to come out with a fresh game plan and he's ALWAYS effective. And lets not forget that so many districts are now saturated with those goddam Diebold machines who's results are impossible to validate yet seemingly beyond legal challenge. There is a HUGE hurdle that will need to be jumped for Democrats to retake the house in 2006. Unfortunately, that seems to be the only hope left for Democracy in America.
|
gratuitous
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:16 PM
Response to Original message |
| 10. I'll deal with them one at a time or all at once |
|
Makes no difference to me. Perhaps impeachment and removal of Stupidhead will put a healthy fear of the electorate back into the Republicans. It sure seems to have been missing lately judging from the imperious way they've been governing.
|
The2ndWheel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:16 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Impeach Bush + not changing the structures of power(and certainly nobody is saying disband the NSA) = feel good story, but nothing really changes.
As long as the NSA exists, they will spy. I know, laws. Well, if people haven't been paying attention, those laws are always broken eventually. New laws written, then broken and gotten around again and again.
So if people want to impeach Bush, go for it. Have a damn party while doing it. But since nobody is talking about changing the infrastructure, get ready for more abuses of power. The next will be worse than the last. Then that president will be impeached, the NSA will still continue to exist, and then get ready for even worse absues the next time.
|
Birthmark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:18 PM
Response to Original message |
| 13. One thing at a time, my friend. |
Rosco T.
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:18 PM
Response to Original message |
| 14. Can't they file articles of Impeachment against both at the same time??? |
ThomWV
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:19 PM
Response to Original message |
| 15. I Couldn't Even Explain How Lame That Duck Would Be |
|
Cheney would be utterly ineffective - which would be just fine.
Whoever ended up in the Oval Office would just be a placeholder, set there to keep his finder on the trigger and wait for a legitimate election.
This country could use a nice 3-year cooling off period if you ask me.
|
liberal N proud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:20 PM
Response to Original message |
| 16. Cheney = Heart Attack - wait he doesn't have a heart |
|
Well, I think the pressure would kill him quickly, possibly before a VP could be approved. Hassert will be exposed in the Ambramof case and that leaves Teddy Stevens unless he has resigned.
Could the stars align in such a way?
|
LiberalEsto
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 06:37 PM
Response to Original message |
| 18. When Nixon was president, we had Agnew |
|
and that didn't stop us.
First they indicted Agnew in Maryland, he pleaded no contest, and resigned. Gerald Ford was named VP.
That cleared the field for launching impeachment proceedings against Nixon, who resigned before he could be impeached.
|
More Than A Feeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 07:10 PM
Response to Original message |
| 19. Spiro Agnew was Nixon's first line of defense too |
|
didn't win him much either.
|
Cleita
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 07:14 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Thu Dec-22-05 07:14 PM by Cleita
Cheney won't be there that long. He will either be indicted for Plamegate, or many other things that he has done, or he will have the big heart attack that either will kill him or will render him unable to perform his duties.
It then moves to Hastert who isn't a PNAC guy that I can tell and he will be the lamest of lame ducks regardless until we can replace him in 2008 especially if we take back Congress in 2006.
|
chicagiana
(993 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
| 31. You forgot something ... |
|
In order for Articles of Impeachment to be filed the Democrats must control the House of Representatives. If that is the case, Dennis Hastert would not be speaker. Most likely House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi would be elected Speaker.
|
Cleita
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
| 33. I get it, but I'm hoping we can get some Republicans on board |
|
before the 2006 election to do this because by 2006, it might be too late to save our democracy.
|
Sparkly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 07:14 PM
Response to Original message |
| 21. You mean he's not president now? nt |
deacon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-22-05 08:00 PM
Response to Original message |
| 22. Cheney is 90% president anyway--it would be a formality change |
|
So, impeach and issue strict new oversight.
This is really about the law and the executive branch, it's not about bush, it's about the future of presidential authority. What happens as a result of the law being honored makes no difference.
|
kansasblue
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 12:19 AM
Response to Original message |
| 23. DON'T let that be your excuse! Then every president or... |
|
governor that comes along will just back fill himself with someone worst in the VP or Lt Gov spot and use that to keep him/her from being impeached.
If you believe he should be impeached... then do it.
|
ChavezSpeakstheTruth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
|
still it's a scary thought. Imagine the commerative Franklin Mint plate with his face alongside Washington and Lincoln
|
ddeclue
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 12:22 AM
Response to Original message |
| 24. Impeach Bush and Cheney=President Hastert. |
understandinglife
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 12:41 AM
Response to Original message |
seabeyond
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 12:58 AM
Response to Original message |
| 27. i am not afraid of cheney for a lot of reasons. he is already doing pres |
|
work but he gets to do it in a dark hole like a mole. the lite will be shined on him if he is president. he has really said saome fucked up things as vp. that is different and less trouble than when pres so all that will come out again. he has already done illegal so just a matter of time, as lite shines that he too will get his ass in trouble. i really want to know about the energy meeting he had all those years ago. maybe this will come up again and again and again
|
FlaGranny
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 01:50 PM
Response to Original message |
| 30. That doesn't bother me much. |
|
Cheney is NOT a very likeable person. He's slick, greasy, and nasty. I don't believe he'd get a lot of cooperation as a lame duck.
|
0007
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 01:54 PM
Response to Original message |
| 32. LOL! Man can ya dig Ted (PorkyPig) Stevens? |
rman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-23-05 03:01 PM
Response to Original message |
| 34. so let's impeach him as well |
|
in fact lets impeach the whole gang.
Then put 'm on trial for criminal offenses and put m behind bars.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun Feb 15th 2026, 05:47 AM
Response to Original message |