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?]
So let's just say for the sake of argument that Bill Maher gets the highest-rated program on television and takes over that multi-million-dollar movie deal Tom Cruise had with Paramount.
Simple... Clinton was trying to cover up the adulterous blow job he received in the Oval Office... he lied. President Bush is doing his best to protect us. He has not lied about one single thing and believes he has the authority for the terrorist surveillance program as a wartime President.
Let's see... hmmmm lying to avoid being caught in an affair and doing what one believes is lawful and right to protect us against terrorism. Gee shill maher is correct, there's NO difference between the two. /s
So, this buffoon thinks he'll be celebrating with booze when Jesus returns? Methinks he'll be hard pressed to find any ice at that point.
Sorry, Bill, I missed that one. Along with the rest of the country.
[Is that you, John Mark Karr?]
I was thinking benburch, actually.
"Sorry, Bill, I missed that one. Along with the rest of the country."
Actually, I'm sure there are 20 DUmmies that recall some stupid bit he did about a fish last season. 2 of them showed up here.
Creepy stalker intent on buggery. Just how tolerant are you Bill?
Karr was in the middle of a sex change operation so he was brought to mind. BTW, it is looking more and more likely that Karr is just a wacko flake who did NOT do the murder. But what kind of maniac would admit to a sicko crime he didn't commit?
"I'll be putting that bottle I've been saving for Jesus' return on ice for that one"
Celebrating the fact that you were left behind???
"But what kind of maniac would admit to a sicko crime he didn't commit?"
Justice moves much swifter in Thialand. That and the penalties are stiffer.
He could go from trial to gallows in about 2 months back there.
I'm glad you have such a high opinion of women, Bill Maher, that you dismiss as insignificant the most powerful man in America sexually harrassing a subordinate and then rewarding her with favors for "putting out."
I'm glad you dismiss as insignificant the chief law enforcement officer of the United States lying under oath and suborning perjury from others.
I'm glad you dismiss as insignificant the President of the United States getting tangled up in a web of lies, deceit, and lust--a web of his own making--and thus being distracted and inattentive toward the growing threat of terrorism on his watch.
Look, you guys have trouble living with your own Joe Lieberman, so you wouldn't be satisfied with anyone to the right of Eugene V. Debs.
Besides, there is that little matter of having something to pressure both Cheney and Bush WITH.
Hey, he's tanned, rested, and ready, and hasn't maxed out his years as President. Go for it!
LOUSY FREEPER TROLL!
Methinks the HUffies need to go back and read the Line of Secession.
When you were a child, did you always ask Santa for things wildly beyond the realm of possibility, like a full-size fire truck or your own pet horse?
I know people who do research on graphs. According to them, the "wiretapping" that the NSA was probably doing was to create a graph of calls. Basically, they would only need to know the numbers, or vertices. Then they can draw lines, or edges, between the numbers to represent one number calling another. When they have certain numbers from, say Chicago, which have lines to certain numbers in, say Yemen, that are known to be terrorist numbers, the NSA can take a bunch of numbers, including those of interest and give them to the FBI. The FBI can then go talk to people who have those numbers.
The NSA, in this situation, is not interested in listening in on what you're saying to grandma or to your concubine. They're simply interested in which number connects to which other numbers.
Also, from what I understand, they asked the phone companies for the data. I believe at least one refused the information. I believe that the telephone companies own their own data about the phone calls that they connect on their own equipment. I'm one of the biggest libertarians when it comes to mistrusting the government and property rights, but I really don't think you have a reasonable expectation of ownership regarding the record of a phone call you make using other people's equipment.
That would be like saying that you own the server log entry created when you visit a web site and the owner of the site can't give that to the government when asked. Every web hosting contract and web service contract I have ever seen includes a clause that says the one with the server/equipment will cooperate with law enforcement if necessary.
Thinking through these things takes thought and I suppose you could have a well-thought out disagreement with me. I really don't think the DUmmies, KOmmies, HUffies, or judges like the one in this recent NSA case do anything but respond with their blind hatred and/or desire to be contrary to the Bush administration.
What an idiot. See, most people dont read past the headlines and the first paragraph. People who get INTO the news, understand that the decision was a JOKE. Even the Washington Post thought so. When this judge gets humiliated by the circuit or Supreme Court, what will the liberals say then?
Are there ANY lefty-blogs that are NOT mostly populated by moonbats? Althought I think its funny, I can't help but be... concerned about my fellow humans and their capacity for delusion..
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.