# Three More and I'll Impeach **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 22, 2007, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744 "2007-07-22T13:19:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Haunted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/898d66/32.png) [@Haunted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haunted)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/1 "2007-07-22T13:19:37Z")
> [@](#): > > House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has said that if three more Congress Members get behind impeachment he will start the impeachment proceedings. > [@](#): > > It appears to be more than that. Bree Walker told me, on the air, that Conyers said that all he needs is three more Congress Members backing impeachment, and he’ll move on it, even without Pelosi. I asked whether that meant specifically moving from 14 cosponsors of H Res 333 to 17, or adding 3 to the larger number of Congress Members who have spoken favorably of impeachment but not all signed onto bills. Bree said she didn’t know and that Conyers had declined to take any questions. [From](http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/) Do you think this can happen? ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/2 "2007-07-22T13:21:06Z")
OG, I hope so!!! ---
**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/3 "2007-07-22T13:43:49Z")
It would at least be a way to shift the news coverage away from Paris, Britney, Anna Nicole, Pacman and Michael Vick. I’d watch it! ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/4 "2007-07-22T13:56:41Z")
Yes, I think it can happen. I also think it’s too late to get the job done while Mr. Bush is in office. Still, it might be useful to get the accusations and denials on the front pages and the evening news. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/5 "2007-07-22T19:19:48Z")
There certainly won’t ever be a chance of getting two thirds of the Senate to vote for the impeachment of Dubya, so impeachment would at most be a symbolic punishment. As any Republican who remembers 1998 can testify, a party that sets its heart on impeachment has to abandon most of its other goals for the space of about a year. So if the Democrats try for impeachment, we’ll enter the 2008 election season with no accomplishments except throwing a spitwad at a lame duck President. Far better to focus on the legislative agenda that we promised in 2006. Without a doubt, Bush has committed many crimes, any one of which is enough to merit impeachment from a moral and legal perspective. But circumstances prevent us from actually punishing him, and there’s nothing we can do to change that right now. I hope he’s prosecuted and punished adequately some time after leaving office. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/6 "2007-07-22T19:20:12Z")
Fail or not , I want the effort. Impeach away and make these guys who would be kings think about what they are doing… I also want a vote recorded for who is for and who against. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/7 "2007-07-22T19:28:06Z")
[QUOTE=ITR champion] There certainly won’t ever be a chance of getting two thirds of the Senate to vote for the impeachment of Dubya, so impeachment would at most be a symbolic punishment. [/QUOTE] The **trial** would be a great deal more than symbolic. (The [procedure](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States) is, the House votes to impeach, the official is tried in the Senate, the Senate votes to convict or not – “conviction” means removal from office, not any criminal penalty.) Everything W and anyone under him has done in connection with lying us into war, drafting the Justice Department into a partisan-political tool, authorizing torture or “extraordinary rendition,” or anything else covered in the articles of impeachment would be laid bare on national television (and not just C-Span, either). Testimony would be compelled. Documents would be published. Even if this did not result in W’s and Cheney’s conviction/removal, it would personally discredit everyone highly placed in the Administration for the rest of their lives; never again could they hope to find their way back into government, as so many of Nixon’s staffers did after he avoided the whole thing by resigning. It would also produce evidence that could be used in criminal proceedings against Bush after he leaves office. (He can’t pardon **himself,** can he?) And I think so much would come out that even some Pubs would feel obliged to vote to convict, even if that means making Nancy Pelosi president, however briefly. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/8 "2007-07-22T19:36:48Z")
Former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega opines [it would be grounds for impeachment](http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4852) for Bush to invoke executive privilege, or use his control of the Justice Department, to stymie Congress’ investigation into the attorney-firings scandal. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/9 "2007-07-22T19:45:49Z")
[QUOTE=ITR champion] So if the Democrats try for impeachment, we’ll enter the 2008 election season with no accomplishments except throwing a spitwad at a lame duck President. Far better to focus on the legislative agenda that we promised in 2006. Without a doubt, Bush has committed many crimes, any one of which is enough to merit impeachment from a moral and legal perspective. But circumstances prevent us from actually punishing him, and there’s nothing we can do to change that right now. I hope he’s prosecuted and punished adequately some time after leaving office. [/QUOTE] Like Nixon was ? Hardly. Just like Nixon, the lesson of the Bush Administration will be that there is no law for the President. And America will be corrupted towards dictatorship that much more. As for the " legislative agenda that we promised in 2006", the Democrats have already caved on that. Caving is what they do. The war, and Bush’s behavior are what matters. Congress has shown that they don’t matter. Not impeaching will simply underline that. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/10 "2007-07-22T19:48:27Z")
[QUOTE=AskNott] Yes, I think it can happen. I also think it’s too late to get the job done while Mr. Bush is in office. Still, it might be useful to get the accusations and denials on the front pages and the evening news. [/QUOTE] President Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998, and acquitted by the Senate on February 12, 1999. It only took two months for that to go through. Tack on another two months for a House committee to explore the issue of impeachment and you have four months, tops. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/11 "2007-07-22T19:50:31Z")
[QUOTE=ITR champion] Without a doubt, Bush has committed many crimes, any one of which is enough to merit impeachment from a moral and legal perspective. But circumstances prevent us from actually punishing him, and there’s nothing we can do to change that right now. I hope he’s prosecuted and punished adequately some time after leaving office. [/QUOTE] What crimes are those? Last I checked Bush has not been charged or convicted of any crimes in the United States since the beginning of his Presidency. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/12 "2007-07-22T19:55:12Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] What crimes are those? Last I checked Bush has not been charged or convicted of any crimes in the United States since the beginning of his Presidency. [/QUOTE] A President does not need to be convicted by a criminal jury to be impeached and removed from office. Impeachment is inherently a political process. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/13 "2007-07-22T19:55:54Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] What crimes are those? Last I checked Bush has not been charged or convicted of any crimes in the United States since the beginning of his Presidency. [/QUOTE] No, he has not. That does not mean we cannot accuse him of crimes. The **law** must presume a person’s innocence until guilt is proven; the public need not. Just ask anyone if OJ is a murderer. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/14 "2007-07-22T19:59:47Z")
[QUOTE=Haunted] **Three More and I’ll Impeach** [/QUOTE] “Twopence more and up goes the donkey!” ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/15 "2007-07-22T20:07:49Z")
[QUOTE=Blalron] A President does not need to be convicted by a criminal jury to be impeached and removed from office. Impeachment is inherently a political process. [/QUOTE] I never said otherwise, in fact many times on these very forums I have rejected the idea that anything is an especially “impeachable offense” because an impeachable offense is whatever the House says it is, period. But I was specifically responding to the claim that **ITR champion** made, he specifically stated that Bush has committed many crimes. I asked what crimes he was talking about, and what evidence he has to support the claim that Bush has committed many crimes (while in office.) ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/16 "2007-07-22T20:09:12Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] No, he has not. That does not mean we cannot accuse him of crimes. The **law** must presume a person’s innocence until guilt is proven; the public need not. Just ask anyone if OJ is a murderer. [/QUOTE] Sure you can accuse him of crimes. And without evidence that he has been charged or convicted it makes people look foolish. OJ was at least charged with murder. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/17 "2007-07-22T20:30:04Z")
[QUOTE=ITR champion] There certainly won’t ever be a chance of getting two thirds of the Senate to vote for the impeachment of Dubya, so impeachment would at most be a symbolic punishment. As any Republican who remembers 1998 can testify, a party that sets its heart on impeachment has to abandon most of its other goals for the space of about a year. So if the Democrats try for impeachment, we’ll enter the 2008 election season with no accomplishments except throwing a spitwad at a lame duck President. Far better to focus on the legislative agenda that we promised in 2006. . [/QUOTE] And, any Party with a Majority can Impeach. The GOP did it to Clinton. If the Dems do it to Bush, then it will pretty much happen every time the oppostiion party gets a majority. The “Impeachment” of Clinton was a travesty. Hopefully if the Dems show some restraint we won’t have this going on every 4 years or so. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/18 "2007-07-22T20:32:57Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] I never said otherwise, in fact many times on these very forums I have rejected the idea that anything is an especially “impeachable offense” because an impeachable offense is whatever the House says it is, period. But I was specifically responding to the claim that **ITR champion** made, he specifically stated that Bush has committed many crimes. I asked what crimes he was talking about, and what evidence he has to support the claim that Bush has committed many crimes (while in office.) [/QUOTE] I’ll take a stab: Violating/ignoring the Geneva Conventions is a crime under international law, the kind you get tried for at the Hague. A case could be made that fabricating a _casus belli_ also qualifies. W is guilty of both. The WH’s use of the RNC server for its e-mails violates the [Presidential Records Act.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Records_Act) Whether the attorney-firings scandal involved criminal conduct is a more complex question. See [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=422199) thread. The Republicans’ use of [“caging lists”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=420582) to suppress Dem votes in the 2004 elections is a crime (I finally found statutory authority for that), but there’s no proof **(yet)** of personal knowledge or complicity on W’s part. If [AG Gonzalez lied to Congress,](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=428270) **that** would be a crime and I doubt W’s complicity would be difficult to prove. ---
**Author:** ![Haunted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/898d66/32.png) [@Haunted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haunted)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/19 "2007-07-22T21:27:39Z")
> [@](#): > > The trial would be a great deal more than symbolic. (The procedure is, the House votes to impeach, the official is tried in the Senate, the Senate votes to convict or not – “conviction” means removal from office, not any criminal penalty.) Everything W and anyone under him has done in connection with lying us into war, drafting the Justice Department into a partisan-political tool, authorizing torture or “extraordinary rendition,” or anything else covered in the articles of impeachment would be laid bare on national television (and not just C-Span, either). Testimony would be compelled. Documents would be published. Even if this did not result in W’s and Cheney’s conviction/removal, it would personally discredit everyone highly placed in the Administration for the rest of their lives; never again could they hope to find their way back into government, as so many of Nixon’s staffers did after he avoided the whole thing by resigning. I agree with **BrainGlutton** on this. I really want this thing to happen but I don’t know if it will. I’ve been writing to everyone I can think of, for whatever that is worth. Even though this just happened with Clinton, I don’t think that should have any impact on any decisions. I mean, Bush and Cheney are actual criminals, IMHO. Clinton, not so much. Just a horndog. Not holding criminals accountable just because we’re afraid of starting a trend doesn’t make sense to me. ---
**Author:** ![Haunted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/898d66/32.png) [@Haunted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haunted)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2007, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744/20 "2007-07-22T21:32:31Z")
Here is a [list](http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/keydocuments) of key evidence of impeachable offenses, according to one group. I haven’t even read all this and am not saying it is accurate or anything like that. It’s just something I’ve been looking at. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/three-more-and-ill-impeach/412744.md?page=2)