T1B

if this shit goes on and it interrupts bok notes i will be pisssed.

R-Jack wrote:Awesome. This gets the wheels in motion to remove him from office within the next year.

Grandstanding Idiots.

If Kucinich truly believes that Bush is guilty, then should it not be his moral obligation to bring forth charges?

Mind you, as a practical matter I see what you're saying in that Bush will be out of the White House by the time the votes are ever in place for an impeachment. Of course, one must remember that Bush cannot pardon himself. So, in the meantime, if there are any "high crimes or misdemeanors" to be found, why not let the Congress investigate?

BSmack wrote:

R-Jack wrote:Awesome. This gets the wheels in motion to remove him from office within the next year.

Grandstanding Idiots.

If Kucinich truly believes that Bush is guilty, then should it not be his moral obligation to bring forth charges?

Mind you, as a practical matter I see what you're saying in that Bush will be out of the White House by the time the votes are ever in place for an impeachment. Of course, one must remember that Bush cannot pardon himself. So, in the meantime, if there are any "high crimes or misdemeanors" to be found, why not let the Congress investigate?

If this were any time between 2000 and 2007, your point would be outstanding. However, since it's five months before the election and another few before he's out of office, this is nothing more than Democrats trying to save some face among their loyal voters who have been crying for Bush to be impeached on anything for 7+ years now. Or, in other words, what R-Jack said.

The only way for this to be worth it is if they have concrete evidence against Bush and hearings can be conducted in a matter of two to three months. In order to do so, they'd have to put all other business associated with running the country aside and focus entirely on Bush's shit administration. So, I suppose the question here is, "Would you rather have your legislative representatives focus on doing their regular duties of attaching pork barrell projects to legitimate bills and partisan arguing over the 2009 budget, or spending all of their time on a (probably) fruitless investigation of Bush that will lead to nothing but a max of a slap on the wrist?

_Porter_ wrote:If this were any time between 2000 and 2007, your point would be outstanding. However, since it's five months before the election and another few before he's out of office, this is nothing more than Democrats trying to save some face among their loyal voters who have been crying for Bush to be impeached on anything for 7+ years now. Or, in other words, what R-Jack said.

Sadly, the avenues for impeachment between 2001-07 were very limited. You know, with the GOP control of the House and all.

The only way for this to be worth it is if they have concrete evidence against Bush and hearings can be conducted in a matter of two to three months. In order to do so, they'd have to put all other business associated with running the country aside and focus entirely on Bush's shit administration. So, I suppose the question here is, "Would you rather have your legislative representatives focus on doing their regular duties of attaching pork barrell projects to legitimate bills and partisan arguing over the 2009 budget, or spending all of their time on a (probably) fruitless investigation of Bush that will lead to nothing but a max of a slap on the wrist?

No, they could amass what evidence they can in the next 6-7 months and then turn over the matter to a special prosecutor after Obama is sworn in. That's about all anyone should expect.

If there's legit evidence (unlikely considering the Bushies declare Executive Privilege on freaking everything under the sun), and it can be done quickly, but following due process and all, fine. But I swear to God if this has anything, ANYTHING, to do with Valerie Plame, I'll salt Kucinich's lawn, lock his dog in the car on a 95 degree day and pay some Euro fruitcake named "Sven" to say that he's been giving DK handjobs at his massage parlor for years.

mvscal wrote:

_Porter_ wrote:So, I suppose the question here is, "Would you rather have your legislative representatives focus on doing their regular duties of attaching pork barrell projects to legitimate bills and partisan arguing over the 2009 budget, or spending all of their time on a (probably) fruitless investigation of Bush that will lead to nothing but a max of a slap on the wrist?

I'm all for the fruitless investigations. Anything to distract them from further picking our pockets.

When it comes to looting, they're effortless multi-taskers.

Still, let them go after impeachment full speed ahead. Impeach Chimpy, AND Cheney. Put Bride of Frankenstein Pelosi in charge for the next 7 months. Much hilarity should ensue

Cuda wrote: Still, let them go after impeachment full speed ahead. Impeach Chimpy, AND Cheney. Put Bride of Frankenstein Pelosi in charge for the next 7 months. Much hilarity should ensue

I hate that fucking windbag and hope everyone that voted for her trips and falls into a puddle of AIDS.

I don't think anyone that far to the extreme end of either spectrum should be Speaker. It's just not good for the process. The only thing worth a shit that she's done since becoming SOTH is the way she handled the HIllary/Obama potential debacle in June. She actually sounded sane, articulate and level-headed. Musta hired a new writer.

mvscal wrote: Anything to distract them from further picking our pockets.

And what do you call appropriating a trillion fucking dollars to a (illegal and catastrophic) Quagmire? Whose money got picked? You pathetic Rove Monkey clown show.

And porta potty, what's your fake take on the outting of Valerie Plame? What, not a crime? Not an obvious smear job by the likes of Rove and Scooter, Feith and Cheney, Novak and Miller, Bolton and Negroponte, Card and....shit that's gonna be a long and busy gallows!

LTS TRN 2 wrote:what's your fake take on the outting of Valerie Plame?

Hopefully if he's got an ounce of sense, his take will be telling you to go fuck yourself.

I don't know why the D_U crowd is still beating that drum like Plame was 007 and now can't infiltrate the USSR because her covers been blown. Gimme a break aleady. All that whore was good for at the CIA was alpha-numeric filing and making a decent pot of coffee.

What I really don't get is why you ultra-donks are still crying about this non-scandal, when there's been like 10 more recent scandals to pop up in the BA since then. I won't be picky, chose any one you want and move the fuck on already.

I hope they can at least impeach Cheney. I want that criminal to be in jail IMMEDIATELY.

PSUFAN wrote:I hope they can at least impeach Cheney. I want that criminal to be in jail IMMEDIATELY.

i'm sure that will have some heavy bearing on whether that happens. want all you want dipshit, ain't happening