Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Would you be willing to say President Hastert to stop the attach on Iran?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
yourout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 07:27 AM
Original message
Would you be willing to say President Hastert to stop the attach on Iran?
It would mean the impeachment of both Bush and Cheney and I know the odds
are way against it. But the idea of going after Iran has to scare the shit
out of at least some Republicans. Going after Iran is suicide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cspanlovr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. Why not? We already have to say Pres. Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 07:38 AM
Response to Original message
2. ???????
Why would Hastert be any different?????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yourout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. This is just a hypothetical.
If the Pukes think they are going to loose the House and that the Dems are going to impeach
both Bush and Cheney they may help pull the trigger on it before the elections to keep from
saying President Pelosi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
4. Ford wasn't the Speaker of the House... there is a field
of republicans seeking the presidency as well as democrats. In the event of a double barreled impeachment, I wouldn't expect either side to give someone a leg up on the candidacy. It would be someone that both sides see as unelectable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cyrano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. Ford wasn't speaker of the house, but was selected by a sitting president
Richard Nixon was still president, picked Ford, and the congress approved it.

If Bush and Cheney are both impeached simultaneously, and then convicted, the next in the line of succession is the speaker of the house, Dennis Hastert. It would then be up to Hastert to chose a vice president as the spot would be vacant.

Unless we're willing to throw out the constitution entirely, the chain of succession still stands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. I don't think we are going to do a double barreled impeachment
The republicans are not going to want a President Hastert either for all the reasons I gave above. And we must assume that some part of the Abramhoff nightmare doesn't take him out first, anyway.

I suspect that to get an impeachment document even written in committee the revelations of evidence of crimes committed by Cheney would need to be so overwhelming as to force him to resign. Thus giving the R's a chance to control the succession.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Exit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
5. Yes. And I don't think Hastert would stay president after Shrub's
term ended. And I don't for a minute think he could then win the 2008 election.

And then they'd be gone, in disgrace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosesaylavee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
6. Hastert is in trouble on
so many fronts that I think the govt would tear itself apart. He is linked to Abramoff, Delay and those pesky reports about under the table contributions from Turkish nationals.

Ideally, *co needs to be distracted long enough to get us to the fall elections so we can say President Pelosi for a while.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignacio Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. Then if he doesn't accept the Presidency, we have President Ted Stevens
The President Pro Tempore of the Senate is fourth in the line for the Presidency, and Senator "Bridge the Nowhere" may end up being the 44th President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
7. Not going to happen.
The only way Bush and Cheney get impeached is by a Democratic controlled congress. If the Democrats control congress and do impeach then the Speaker of the House will be a Democrat. So if that happens then the first woman president could be Nancy Pelosi, assuming the Democrats win a majority in 2006 and she is named speaker.

That's why I think we'll see Cheney stepping down this summer and someone from outside the cabal yet still a Republican replacing him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough already Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
8. Why can't we impeach Hastert too? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cyrano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. As long as the Republicans are still in control of the House, the next in
line is the president of the senate pro tem, who is currently Sen. Ted Stevens from Alaska. After that, it's Condi, then Rumsfeld, and on through the rest of the cabinet.

The only way we can win is if we can make it to the fall elections and win the House. This would make Nancy Pelosi next in line after Cheney.

Do you think the thugs would really let this happen? As another poster pointed out, Cheney could step down before the election and they could replace him with someone with a clear record who couldn't be impeached.

Either way, they are still the ones counting the votes, so I'm not holding my breath that we can take over the House in November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paparush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
12. When Bush** Nukes Iran...we will be under Marshall Law..
and there WILL BE NO ELECTIONS!!

Watch and see......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC