Rep. Kucinich reads articles of impeachment. Is there any point?

Great Debates
201

Inspired by all this high-minded badinage, I thought I’d ask the Google about polls on impeaching bush. Went no further than here, for MSNBC.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904

Question: Do you believe President Bush’s actions justify impeachment?

Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.

89% on that one. Kind of a lot for a lunatic fringe of screech monkeys.

No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high crimes and misdemeanors.

4.2% on that one.

No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.

4.6% A battle for second!

Now, of course, this is internet, MSNBC, not scientific, but still…thats a mighty big turnout. Even if the real numer is only half that! Reckon moonbats breed that quickly?

202

[QUOTE=elucidator]
I’d very much like to know that. How about you?
[/QUOTE]

Have either shown any curiousity on the topic, ever?

203

Naw…you know what? I had a long ranting reply but fuck it. I’m tired of this subject already. There is simply no talking to something like this:

[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
Have either shown any curiousity on the topic, ever?
[/QUOTE]

Show me the money. Otherwise this is just the same old horseshit we’ve been hearing about for years now. If Kucinich has the money that’s fine by me…I’ll wait and see if anything comes of it. I won’t be holding my breath though…and after a year or two goes by and President Obama is in the WH, and the Dems continue to control the House and Senate and STILL nothing comes of this…well, I’ll draw my own conclusion as to moonbats and hyperbolic screeching and the power of a meme…

-XT

204

[QUOTE=Bricker]
I missed where that story says Bush (as opposed to “the administration”) did these heinous deeds.

Nixon personally approved the cover-up. Clinton personally lied under oath. Johnson personally fired Staunton.

Bush personally did… what?
[/QUOTE]

:confused:

From link, yet again:

“The commander in chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture”

Honestly, don’t you think all these apologies and legalese BS are getting a bit erm…absurd? How about forgetting about minutia for the sake of Justice and Truth? As in laying it all out on the line. I don’t give a hoot – or know, or care to – how it’s legally done, but the amount of factual information on any number of wrongdoings that’s out there, is simply overwhelming.

Or are you (and Shodan, xt and any number of other professional Bush apologists) incapable of acknowledging that your President and many of his cohorts are simply criminals? Is butchering, torturing and uprooting a literally unknown number of people a peccadillo to be ignored due to Party allegiances?

Insane. That’s what this whole discussion is.

205

[QUOTE=RedFury]
:confused:

From link, yet again:

“The commander in chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture”

Honestly, don’t you think all these apologies and legalese BS are getting a bit erm…absurd? How about forgetting about minutia for the sake of Justice and Truth? As in laying it all out on the line. I don’t give a hoot – or know, or care to – how it’s legally done, but the amount of factual information on any number of wrongdoings that’s out there, is simply overwhelming.

Or are you (and Shodan, xt and any number of other professional Bush apologists) incapable of acknowledging that your President and many of his cohorts are simply criminals? Is butchering, torturing and uprooting a literally unknown number of people a peccadillo to be ignored due to Party allegiances?

Insane. That’s what this whole discussion is.
[/QUOTE]

Honestly, it’s a lot like “one injustice is an outrage, 60 injustices never before seen in the history of American politics is a statistic.” There’s just so much that went wrong, so many people that need to be held accountable, that it simply won’t happen. Some how the Republicans bought a get out of jail card by both agitating the partisan divide over the past 20 years and by impeaching Clinton. Now actual “high crimes and misdemeanors” get pushed away, because it’s too early to put impeachment proceedings into syndication.

206

[QUOTE=XT]
..well, I’ll draw my own conclusion as to moonbats and hyperbolic screeching and the power of a meme…
[/QUOTE]

Well, its certainly good that you’re keeping such an open mind on the subject. Example to us all.

207

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Well, its certainly good that you’re keeping such an open mind on the subject. Example to us all.
[/QUOTE]

The feeling is mutual 'luci…your own open mind on the subject is a beacon to us all in these troubled times…

-XT

208

Yeah, and I know *why * these are such troubled times. And I think you do, too.

209

To be sure. I’m less sanguine than you seem to be that times will be getting better anytime soon though…

-XT

210

[QUOTE=RedFury]
Honestly, don’t you think all these apologies and legalese BS are getting a bit erm…absurd? How about forgetting about** minutia for the sake of Justice and Truth?** As in laying it all out on the line. I don’t give a hoot – or know, or care to – how it’s legally done, but the amount of factual information on any number of wrongdoings that’s out there, is simply overwhelming.

Or are you (and Shodan, xt and any number of other professional Bush apologists) incapable of acknowledging that your President and many of his cohorts are simply criminals? Is butchering, torturing and uprooting a literally unknown number of people a peccadillo to be ignored due to Party allegiances?

Insane. That’s what this whole discussion is.
[/QUOTE]

(bolding mine)

Is that a noose in your pocket?

This is amazing! Stupendous! You want to convict Bush of “crimes”. But you want to forget about the “minutia” of the law in order to attain “Justice and Truth”. And least you came out an actually said what many of your mind think. It would be comedy gold if it were funny in the least. Just amazing. Yes, “insane”, even.

211

Oh, lets not get all excited, we’re way short of the lynching thing. There are a lot of questions need answering, like the all time favorite “What did the President know, and when did he know it? Or does he even now?”

Maybe we can get Red to do the questioning, they’d never expect that.

212

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Oh, lets not get all excited, we’re way short of the lynching thing. There are a lot of questions need answering, like the all time favorite “What did the President know, and when did he know it? Or does he even now?”

Maybe we can get Red to do the questioning, they’d never expect that.
[/QUOTE]

Why not just dispense with the questioning? Red F. seems to already know the answers. All of them.

213

[QUOTE=magellan01]
Why not just dispense with the questioning? Red F. seems to already know the answers. All of them.
[/QUOTE]

So would you or anyone else who’d really care to find out. It’s not like the evidence is hiding in the bushes.

And yes, as 'luc said, I’d love to do the questioning for it is a well known fact that no one expects The Spanish Inquisition. Never mind the fact that I’m not exactly the shy type.

Set it up. I’m ready. Nothing I like more than taking down a thug. And I speak from prior experience.

Arrogant? You bet ya.

214

[QUOTE=RedFury]
… for it is a well known fact that no one expects The Spanish Inquisition…
[/QUOTE]

Ah, hell, Red, I got clean away with that one!

215

[QUOTE=RedFury]
So would you or anyone else who’d really care to find out. It’s not like the evidence is hiding in the bushes.

And yes, as 'luc said, I’d love to do the questioning for it is a well known fact that no one expects The Spanish Inquisition. Never mind the fact that I’m not exactly the shy type.

Set it up. I’m ready. Nothing I like more than taking down a thug. And I speak from prior experience.

Arrogant? You bet ya.
[/QUOTE]

What do you mean by “find out”? What standard will you use? You’ve already said that you don’t want legalities to get in the way, you just want to convict him. So, what is there to ask? Why ask anything? You seem to think you already know all the answers. So, fuck, let’s lynch him. :rolleyes:

Do you have any idea how, how can I say this in this forum, how hard your utterances in this thread makes it for people to not just discount your words?

216

[QUOTE=RedFury]
How about forgetting about minutia for the sake of Justice and Truth? As in laying it all out on the line. I don’t give a hoot – or know, or care to – how it’s legally done
[/quote]
Which is pretty much the problem. Your commitment to Truth and Justice is outweighed by the simple desire to get Bush by any means, fair or foul. Kucinich, on the other hand, is a straightforward left-wing nutcase engaged, as I mentioned, in simple grandstanding.

Yes it is. And yet Kucinich (and you) keep it up.

Regards,
Shodan

217

[QUOTE=Shodan]
Which is pretty much the problem. Your commitment to Truth and Justice is outweighed by the simple desire to get Bush by any means, fair or foul. Kucinich, on the other hand, is a straightforward left-wing nutcase engaged, as I mentioned, in simple grandstanding.
Yes it is. And yet Kucinich (and you) keep it up.

Regards,
Shodan
[/QUOTE]

According to this, “Last week, 251 members of the House voted to refer to Conyers’ committee the 35 Articles of Impeachment offered by U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.”

Now I may not be the smartest man in the universe, and maybe I missed it elsewhere in this thread, but doesn’t this suggest that not only do a majority of Congressmen support this, even some Republicans voted to move this forward?

218

You might want to read the whole thread.

Regards,
Shodan

219

[QUOTE=RedFury]
:confused:

From link, yet again:

“The commander in chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture”

Honestly, don’t you think all these apologies and legalese BS are getting a bit erm…absurd? How about forgetting about minutia for the sake of Justice and Truth? As in laying it all out on the line. I don’t give a hoot – or know, or care to – how it’s legally done, but the amount of factual information on any number of wrongdoings that’s out there, is simply overwhelming.

Or are you (and Shodan, xt and any number of other professional Bush apologists) incapable of acknowledging that your President and many of his cohorts are simply criminals? Is butchering, torturing and uprooting a literally unknown number of people a peccadillo to be ignored due to Party allegiances?

Insane. That’s what this whole discussion is.
[/QUOTE]

Nonsense. This man makes no specific claim about how he knows that the commander-in-chief did that. It’s sheer speculation. He doesn’t say Bush told him, he doesn’t say he saw Bush’s memo… the mere fact that someone says another is guilty is not even probable cause, much less anything more.

HOW DOES HE KNOW THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF “authorized a systematic regime of torture?” It’s not enough to simply say it. He’s guessing. He’s assuming.

And you want to believe it, so you hold it up high and say, “A ha! Proof!”

I assume (I hope!) you dismissed the guy who claimed he had sex and drugs with Obama in the back of a limousine, right? But why? Presumably, because of the same flaw: no proof, nothing but a bald assertion.

ANd I can only imagine your anger if I said we should forget about the legal minutiate for the Guantanamo detainees. There, you insist on our observing the correct legal forms. But when Bush is the target, fuck the legal nicities, let’s get the bastard!

220

[QUOTE=Happy Lendervedder]
According to this, “Last week, 251 members of the House voted to refer to Conyers’ committee the 35 Articles of Impeachment offered by U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.”

Now I may not be the smartest man in the universe, and maybe I missed it elsewhere in this thread, but doesn’t this suggest that not only do a majority of Congressmen support this, even some Republicans voted to move this forward?
[/QUOTE]

You didn’t read this thread, did you?