We're celebrating what, again ?

POSTED BY: Fremdfirma
UPDATED: Thursday, January 9, 2025 00:43
VIEWED: 10349
PAGE 2 of 13

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Wednesday, July 4, 2007 11:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
What is required is not for Bush or Cheney to have committed "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" but instead for there to be a distinct and visible possibility that they may have committed such things.
Bush admits to warrantless wiretapping, some people believe that this qualifies as such while Bush maintains that it is legal. The next logical step is to draft articles of impeachment.

What are they waiting for? I hear a lot of people expressing a lot of reasons for impeachment. Is everyone just waiting for someone else to make the first move? Will it be a retroactive impeachment since Bush will be gone soon?

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, July 4, 2007 11:54 PM

Quote:
I wrote out a long post about the many, "Why"s but realized the important thing was not, "Why?" but instead your statement, "There's nothing at all which Cheney or Bush have done to warrant impeachment."

That statement really shows you don't know what impeachment is all about.

Actually, I do know what impeachment is about. It's the proceedings which are brought forth in the House, and then , following a simple majority passage, tried in the Senate. After both sides have been given time to plead their case, a 2/3rds majority vote is required for conviction. My original point still stands. There's nothing which Bush or Cheney have done which would even warrant impeachment proceedings in the House. The pin head Representative, Jessie Jackson Jr is even trying to get Bush impeached for commuting Libby's prison sentence, a purely idiotic and clearly politically motivated move on Jackson Jr's part. He should know there's absolutely nothing wrong, nor any abuse of power in Bush's action, but Jackson Jr is simply trying to stir up negative sentiments against the President. It's a show, a game,and I for one find it despicable.

Quote:
Conviction is only necessary if the Constitution allows people to be impeached without doing anything wrong.

Wrong. Conviction is the RULING by the Senate given after the evidence has been presented. It follows that the case HAS been made which proves the person in question did commit a, high crime/misdemeanors, what ever.... while in office. You're convoluted logic is making this far more complicated than needed.

You claim that Bush admits to wireless wiretapping, when instead all he's allowed for is the tracking of calls, not the individual tapping of lines. The language needs to be specific here, because there are distinct difference in actions taken w/ respect to the collection of data. And just as you say 'some people believe that this qualifies' as grounds for impeachment, Rep. Jackson Jr claims commuting of Libby's jail term also qualifies for impeachment. It clearly does not, nor is the false claim of 'wireless wiretapping'. Again, all this is just obstructionism by the opposition party, purely for show, purely for politics.

Quote:
On the side of Cheney you've got a question of involvement in bribery. That he accepted the money is not in question, nor is the fact that he lied about accepting the money.

What bribery? From who ? And for what purpose ? Hard to claim it a fact when no case has been made. First I've heard of it, though I don't read democratundeground or the daily KOS much. Was it worse than Gore getting 'campaign donations' from Buddhist monks in exchange for allowing top secret missile technology to 'fall' into the hands of the Chinese government?

Quote:
Why don't you want to see them proven innocent?

That's putting the cart before the horse. By your 'logic', each and every President , VP and who knows how many officials should be in a perpetual state of impeachment, all to prove their innocence.

Thankfully, our system doesn't work like that. At least, so far.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

CHRISTHECYNIC

Thursday, July 5, 2007 12:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Conviction is only necessary if the Constitution allows people to be impeached without doing anything wrong.
Wrong. Conviction is the RULING by the Senate given after the evidence has been presented.

Please read things before you respond. There would be no need for a ruling in the Senate, or anywhere else, if impeachment could only occur when one had done something wrong. If, as you claim, impeachment requires that the impeached person has done something to warrant impeachment then only guilty people could be impeached in the first place.

If only guilty people could be impeached then all impeached people would, necessarily, have to be guilty. That makes the idea of conviction redundant at best, why require conviction if a person need be proven guilty before they are even impeached? And before you quibble with the word "proven" consider this: The only way to actually know whether or not someone has done something to warrant impeachment is to have it proven (or disproven.)

Quote:
It follows that the case HAS been made which proves the person in question did commit a, high crime/misdemeanors, what ever.... while in office.

Indeed. The case is made in the Senate, which only happens AFTER a person has been impeached.

So tell me, how is any corrupt official ever to be impeached if they can only be impeached after they've had a trial that only takes place after they've been impeached.

Quote:
You're convoluted logic is making this far more complicated than needed.

How is my logic any more convoluted than:
We can't impeach him because we haven't had a trial.
We can't have a trail because we haven't impeached him.
?

Quote:
That's putting the cart before the horse. By your 'logic', each and every President , VP and who knows how many officials should be in a perpetual state of impeachment, all to prove their innocence.

I never said that, nor did I imply that, and you know it.

I said that (and I'm paraphrasing) when charges, not actions, that warrant impeachment are raised they should be investigated, and, if there is enough evidence to warrant a trial the civic official in question should be impeached and subsequently tried before the Senate. It is only in the Senate that it will be determined whether or not the official actually committed the actions he is accused of in the charges warranting impeachment.

Quote:
You claim that Bush admits to wireless wiretapping, when instead all he's allowed for is the tracking of calls, not the individual tapping of lines. The language needs to be specific here, because there are distinct difference in actions taken w/ respect to the collection of data. And just as you say 'some people believe that this qualifies' as grounds for impeachment, Rep. Jackson Jr claims commuting of Libby's jail term also qualifies for impeachment. It clearly does not, nor is the false claim of 'wireless wiretapping'. Again, all this is just obstructionism by the opposition party, purely for show, purely for politics.

Ok, let me rephrase: That Bush has approved commonly referred to as "warrantless wiretapping" by the press which were declared illegal by various judges has been admitted to by Bush.

You're sidestepping though, if you are right and impeachment can only occur if people have done things the whole thing is moot, the impeachments in our history (slightly more than 60, not all of presidents and vice presidents) were almost certainly all out of order, and none of this matters.

Quote:

Quote:
On the side of Cheney you've got a question of involvement in bribery. That he accepted the money is not in question, nor is the fact that he lied about accepting the money.
What bribery? From who ? And for what purpose ? Hard to claim it a fact when no case has been made. First I've heard of it, though I don't read democratundeground or the daily KOS much.

First off I didn't say there was any bribery, I s

HERO

Thursday, July 5, 2007 1:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Ergo, in the end, we have accomplished NOTHING, save to replace one King George with another, and celebrating a lie of this magnitude disgusts me utterly, with rabid patriotism and ignorant self-imposed deliberate and malicious blindness ruling the day as they cheer on the death of liberty.

Your right...the soldiers will be there to kill you for writing this...no wait...they wont...because your FREE!

The right to be ignorant of your rights is what your celebrating with this thread. The "BoomBoomBoom" your hearing are the fireworks celebrating your freedom...not the firing squad illustrating point.

H

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, July 5, 2007 1:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Is anyone else pissed that this so-called holiday has become about the most hypocritical joke EVER?

Celebrating WHAT fucking "freedom" ?

The "freedom" to be declared an enemy combatant and sent off for "extraordinary rendition" ?

The "freedom" to be harrassed and spied upon ?

The "freedom" to be shaken down and felt up by the TSA ?

I'm very tempted to go outside a run a goddamn Gadsden flag up the pole - but I can't take the risk of being arrested and having my home seized for "Terrorism"... ain't that a fuckin laugh ?

Part of what we are celebrating is that people like you can throw these completely ignorant fits because you live in a country that is so free, stable and wealthy and has been so for so long that you have absolutely no context upon which to compare and therefore appreciate the value of what you have. The truth is that you are so spoiled on the freedom and wealth this country has that you have no clue how ungrateful you are. And that is truly something to celebrate.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

JONGSSTRAW

Thursday, July 5, 2007 2:46 AM

BIONICBATMAN

Thursday, July 5, 2007 3:09 AM

Jong, thank you.

Why do people who think America sucks still living here? Get the F out of this country then!

You are FREE to go out and live your life the way YOU want to.
You are FREE to make your own decisions.

There wasnt a war over this for nothing!

AURAPTOR

Thursday, July 5, 2007 3:44 AM

Quote:
Please read things before you respond. There would be no need for a ruling in the Senate, or anywhere else, if impeachment could only occur when one had done something wrong. If, as you claim, impeachment requires that the impeached person has done something to warrant impeachment then only guilty people could be impeached in the first place.

If only guilty people could be impeached then all impeached people would, necessarily, have to be guilty. That makes the idea of conviction redundant at best, why require conviction if a person need be proven guilty before they are even impeached? And before you quibble with the word "proven" consider this: The only way to actually know whether or not someone has done something to warrant impeachment is to have it proven (or disproven.)

Now you're making my case for me. Pick a position, and then stick with it. I'll say again. Bush and Cheney haven't even done anything which would 'rise to the level ' of impeachment. As evident by the absurd remarks by Jessie Jackson Jr, pushing for impeachment for Bush when there's absolutely no case. Bush was well with in his powers to commute Libby's prison sentence, that is undeniable Constitutional mandated power. THIS is what I'm talking about. Happy now ?

Quote:
First off I didn't say there was any bribery, I said, "The only ambiguity lies in whether or not the money was a bribe." If you didn't catch that, whether or not it is a bribe is ambiguous. I don't know it was a bribe, I don't claim it was a bribe, and if it is a bribe I make no assumptions as to what purpose it was for (given the source of the money preferential treatment would make sense but I won't assume it.)

You said 'bribe'. It's right there in the text above your comment. Thats why I asked what the hell you're talking about. Your exact words - " On the side of Cheney you've got a question of involvement in bribery. That he accepted the money is not in question, nor is the fact that he lied about accepting the money. " There IS no question of bribery w/ Cheney. If you have anything of substance to say, then say it. That he accepted WHAT money? Your speaking as if your wild conspiracy theories (Daily KOS, D.U. ,moveon dot org,etc..) were 'common knowledge', when they aren't. You 'claim' your source is from the 'GOP controlled House, but you offer nothing to support your claim, only juvenile insults and specious remarks. Since I don't know your conspiracy theory, I must not care or know about anything that goes on in th is country. Wow, what an asinine comment. If you can't do better than that, then I'm wasting my time.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

6IXSTRINGJACK

Thursday, July 5, 2007 10:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
I trust some will still be as vigilant toward our freedoms should the Democrats take over the White House, and control Congress as well. For it is their plans which truly are designed to strip us of our rights. ( Fairness Doctrine, for example ) There's nothing at all which Cheney or Bush have done to warrant impeachment, though I do understand such talk is inevitable. It is all that some simpletons can muster, when trying to voice some sort of contrary opinion. Lacking the mental capacity to formulate rational thought, they instead simply blurt out "Impeach" . Though if asked 'why?', they could not say.

Wow man.... Repuglican loyalist dillusions. I'm not saying that you're totally wrong, in fact I happen to agree with some of what you're saying. But Bush and Cheney didn't do anything to warrant impeachment? Truely you can't be that obtuse?

Bush and Cheney have pissed all over our Constitution from the very beginning (Cheney did it to line his pockets).... and what more, you're absolutely right about the Demoncrats. F Bush and Cheney and the current Communist Administration. They (Repuglicans) are supposed to be the party that doesn't do this to its people and their freedoms, and yet, they strenghtened the Centralized Government to levels that it had only imagined achieving in it's most tyrannical dreams and has caused the death of liberty and justice for all of us and our children and thier children.

Admittedly, the only thing I fear even more than 8 more years of this shit at the hand of that evil son of a bitch Giuliani, who I belive is infinately smarter and more capable of deception than Bush Jr., is having Hillary or Obama sitting on the throne in 18 months and having a Demon House and Demon Senate playing their yes man. Man.... you think we got it bad now. I'll be paying $200.00 for a carton of cigarettes, and $200.00 more a month for Universal Healthcare, and we'll all be singing the Communist Anthem at the ballgame in 8 years.

A Vote For Ron Paul, Is A Vote For FREEDOM.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

6IXSTRINGJACK

Thursday, July 5, 2007 10:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Why don't you form your own country somewhere...

There were people who tried this not long ago. They were called Davidians. Just ask the charred skulls of the children how much the Government frowns upon what you're suggesting.

Of course, the Lifetime made for TV movie says that David raped all of the women in his commune, so I suppose they all got what they diserved, didn't they?

Go back to your mindless sitcoms and let the adults talk for a while prole.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE