Posted on 08/24/2006 6:28:43 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
Earlier this year, the Left was playing the impeachement drumbeat loud and clear. Then they suddenly got the memo that their calls for "chimpeachment" were counterproductive to the Democrat effort to win back the House and Senate. So for a few months hardly anything was heard again about impeaching Bush. However, now that the election is nearing, the Left simply can't contain themselves. Suddenly the word "impeachment" is sounding loud and clear in the Leftist Blogosphere again. And now adding his two cents to the impeachment drumbeat is Bill Maher as you can see in his Huffington Post BLOG titled, "Why Not Impeachment?" So let us now join the TV host with a face for radio in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, urging the Democrats to continue being counterproductive, is in the [brackets]:
Why Not Impeachment?
[Why not impeach Bill Maher from TV?]
So a judge has ruled that not only is Bush's warrantless wiretapping program illegal, it's also unconstitutional. And not just unconstitutional, but doubly unconstitutional; it violates both the 1st and 4th amendments. We're talking a smackdown of Judge Judy-esque proportions.
[Judge Judy rules in cases where she has a CONFLICT OF INTEREST? Because that is what happened in this case with Judge Anna Taylor Diggs. She should have RECUSED herself from this case because the plaintiff (ACLU) received a $45,000 grant from a foundation in which she is Secretary and Trustee. If anyone deserves impeachment here, it is Judge Taylor.]
Now, I'm not really pushing the impeachment of George Bush, unless it's about lying about that fish I talked about last season. Them I'm all for it.
[However, you are doing a really good impression of pushing impeachment.]
But if this decision stands, and this program is unlawful and unconstitutional, federal law expressly makes the ordering of surveillance under the program a federal felony. That would mean that the president could be guilty of no fewer than 30 felonies while in office. Moreover, it is not only illegal for a president to order such surveillance, it is illegal for other government officials to carry out such an order. And that means Alberto Gonzalez could be tried, convicted, and deported.
[You're going to deport Alberto Gonzalez to San Antonio where he was born?]
So let's just say for the sake of argument that the Supreme Court upholds this decision and says Bush broke the law and violated the Constitution. President Clinton was impeached for lying under oath in a civil case, a case that had no bearing on the public as a whole. This would - unquestionably - be a greater offense.
[Given the fact that Judge Taylor had a CONFLICT OF INTEREST and should have RECUSED herself from this case, your "sake of argument" proposition is an extreme longshot.]
How would you square impeaching Clinton and not impeaching Bush? Or would Bush have to sleep with this judge in Detroit?
[I've seen that judge. If I were Bush I would choose being impeached in a heartbeat.]
It's sort of like the 7 minutes question I always ask Republicans. Are you loyal to the man, or to the principle?
[Why don't you ask a similar question to all those liberal legal "scholars" who a few years ago claimed that perjury was NOT an impeachable offence. And now on to the comments from the HUffers at the Huffington Post...]
Bush is impeachable for many reasons. But of course we have a republican house and senate, so it wouldn't happen. And even if the dems take control in November, I'm not sure it SHOULD happen. That would leave Cheney the president. The logical approach would be to pressure Cheney to resign, replace him with someone we could live with, then pressure Bush to resign under threat of impeachment. Resignation or conviction on the bill of impeachment = another Gerald Ford. I'd settle for that.
[According to the Democrat Underground DUmmies, if Bush is impeached (and removed from office), then John Kerry automatically becomes president. And now you know why we call them DUmmies.]
Judge Anna Diggs Taylor serves as the Secretary and Trustee of a foundation that donated funds to the ACLU of Michigan, a Plaintiff in the case. Nah, thats not a conflict. Is it?
[A HUffie correctly points out one of many reasons why this dopey judicial decision will be REVERSED.]
Cheney would NOT become president. The dems will take back congress and impeach Bush and Cheney. That leaves Pelosi as the president.
[A HUffie admitting that this impeachment talk is definitely POLITICAL.]
Both Bush and Cheney should be indicted for war crimes. Unfortunately, they are backed by a Republican Congress and their lies, corruption and treasonous actions will never surface because the GOP is more concerned about covering up for these criminals. There is plenty of evidence out there to support the fact that if they weren't directly involved with 9/11, they certainly allowed it to happen as a pretense for invading Iraq. Invading Iraq was on their agenda before 9/11. They should be on trial for mass murders in this country and abroad. How dare they talk about Saddam being brought to justice. Who will bring these damn neocons to justice. Where is the outrage of the American people, or have we just allowed them to continue with their New World Order and just call it fighting terrorism
[The HUffies are now being exposed here to the DUmmie LIHOP/MIHOP mindset.]
Why not impeachment? Well, Bill's making light of the issue, but there's a more serious constitutional problem that this Bush regime has made obvious. The presidential line of succession is seriously flawed and needs to be changed. Right now, we are in a no win situation. Bush can't be impeached because then that would mean Cheney is the president, and we all know Cheney is guilty of anything that Bush is guilty of, and probably he's guilty of more than Bush. So, can we impeach them both? I think the law would allow for an impeachment of the administration if it was found that both the President and VP were guilty of the same impeachable offense.
[A HUffie making up impeachment law for the convenience of the Democrats.]
BILL!!!!!!!!!!!! I LOVE YOU!!!!!!!! I want you to be my babys' dady. LOL I am a guy. LOL
[Is that you, John Mark Karr?]
We must impeach, at a minimum, both the President and the Vice President, for these shameful abuses.
[Which would yield a President Pelosi. Not a very attractive prospect for voters this November.]
All I know is that we should have hired Hezbollah to rebuild New Orleans.
[They would have handed out money made in North Korea.]
It's gone past impeachment. He's a war criminal. Milosevic's cell now sits vacant. It's time for Bush, Cheney, Rummy and Rice to move in.
[A DUmmie drifts into HUffieland.]
This is just what Karl Rove wants to hear. He as well as many on both sides of the aisle are convinced that the American people generally don't like the idea of impeachment for any president. Its too divisive and traumatic for the nation. Even many who did not like Bill Clinton opposed impeachment and its aftermath. Not likely to get a Nixon Resigns outcome here. Many believe, falsely I believe, that the desire to impeach Bush is Democratic payback for the Clinton deal and that the clinton deal was Republican payback for Nixon. Many American feel that to impeach Bush will perpetuate the payback syndrome. They may actually be right. The republicans will campaign on the idea that Democrats want to win just to impeach Bush, and that will work to Republican advantage. This will only work when the people have had enough. Democrats should run on solving the problems and getting us out of this mess. The people will support that. Republicans are already running using the face of Nancy Pelosi Ted Kennedy and Reid to say what the country will be like under a Democratic administration.
[Shhhh! Please don't reveal the Secret Rovian Plan.]
I love you Bill Maher! I've told everyone on our website that Friday is the big night, that you'll be back on HBO at 11 p.m. est. I can't wait - it's like I've been living in an alternate universal whenever your show isn't on. Take me home, Bill! Take me home!
[You obviously need to consult your opthamologist about your vision problems.]
Mr Maher, I think you have accurately summed up why the right has absolutely no intention to loose control of the House or Senate this year. The days of law and order have passed. We are now in the days of POWER. He who has it keeps it, no matter what.
[Time to pull out those dopey Guy Fawkes masks.]
Hey guys, the way I see it, we've got about 5 months until impeachment. I'll be putting that bottle I've been saving for Jesus' return on ice for that one.
[Is that you, John Conyers?]
Let me know if you want on the DUmmie FUnnies PING List.
PING!
1ATP?
Top 10!
top 10?
How would you square impeaching Clinton and not impeaching Bush? Or would Bush have to sleep with this judge in Detroit?
There they go again, always with the sex-for-favors theme.
Top 10 again?
top ten
top ten?
This comes about as close as anybody to winning the Kewpie Doll.
As in "huffing airplane glue"?
Jesus' return of the unsealing of the Karl Rove Indictment, whichever comes first.
"Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz" is Hebrew for "Maher Sure Is a Has-Been."
Imagine if a conservative made that crack about deporting an Hispanic person born in the USA? Of course, Bill Maher makes that crack and there is a big yawn about it out there.
Oh, little things, really:
* Republican majorities in both the House and the Senate
* Majority vote needed for impeachment in the House, super-majority needed for conviction in the Senate
* No impeachable offenses
* Two words: President Cheney
SD
Yikes! That one flew in from over the cuckoo's nest.
Yes, yes, that's it! The DUmmie universal reversal rehearsal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.