Posted on 04/29/2007 7:16:24 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) said Sunday that Democrats in Congress could consider impeachment as a way to pressure President Bush on his handling of the war in Iraq.
“What I’m saying, there’s four ways to influence a president. And one of them’s impeachment,” Murtha, chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
Murtha has been one of the most outspoken members of Congress on the administration's handling of the war in Iraq; others who have strongly criticized Bush have stopped short of calling for impeachment.
Murtha also expressed doubt that Congress and the Bush administration would be able to work out a compromise soon in negotiations on the $124 billion war spending bill. Congress' emergency funding measure contains a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq.
“They say we’re willing to compromise, and then we don’t get any compromise,” said Murtha. “We’ve already compromised. And we need to make this president understand, Mr. President, the public has spoken.”
Murtha said the Democratic-controlled Congress will pass another war funding bill with similar benchmarks for progress in Iraq after President Bush vetoes the legislation, as he has vowed to do.
“If he vetoes this bill, he’s cut off the money. But obviously, we’re going to pass another bill,” Murtha said. “It’s going to have some stringent requirements. ... I'd like to look at this again in two months.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I’ll be willing to consider impeachment of president Bush as soon as the democrats accept the firing squad for their leadership for their treason. Think we have a deal?
This posturing is insincere. That frothing hardcore fringe among them need constant aggitation to stay motivated and this nonsense is meant to keep their spirits up.
In that the insurectionist Sadr in Iraq is using the democrats actions as a reason to rail against President Bush, I feel they have “given aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war.” They have committed treason and continue to do so and all for purely partisan political reasons. This is not statemanship it is chaos that just further fractures America itself.
It is time for the congress to give a clear funding bill with no strings attached, as the current command-in-chief has requested. In 2008 they can properly use the political process to change war policy by electing a new president with different goals - if they are able. That is the constitutional way to get change accomplished.
However, their current actions only harm the warrior in the field trying to carry out orders. Plus, they cause a loss of moral in those troops by sending a mixed message. No one wants to die in a conflict that may end tommorrow because we turn tail and run. Plus, we would never be able to quell further extremism in that region if this mission fails. If Iraq is not pacified then Afganistan will slip back into Taliban control, and Iran will continue to attempt to become a nuclear power with the desire to fulfill apochalyptic visions. The Islamic extremists in the middle East and elsewhere must be pacified or eliminated. Historian will call us fools if we fail to do this now, however hard it may be. Because although far from being certain that it is doable, it definitely won’t be in the future. I don’t want my child and future grandchildren to have to deal with a problem that I and my fellow Americans need to deal with now. We may not succeed, but doing nothing is not a viable option.
The situation has been thrust upon us, just like preceeding generations have bad situations thrust upon them.
What we have now are Benedict Arnold Patriots who pretend to care for America, who have even served with distinguished service in the military, as did Benedict Arnold.
Of course the Benedict Arnold Patriots will claim that they are presenting dissenting views that it is our tradition and right. Who can disagree! But please explain Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader, declaring the war in Iraq is lost with American and allied troops in the field at risk 100% of the time. Is this not aid and comfort to the enemy? How will the enemy not take comfort in this statement, not an off-handed remark? They just need to wait us out and they prevail. If this attitude continues and America is attacked again, then they must be held accountable. Let them have their opinions but let them also have their responsibilities.
If the war is lost..then why doesn’t Reed tell us who won.
Where did this guy go to grammar school? Not only is his subject-verb agreement incorrect, he can't count. In the interview, he kept saying there were four ways, but he mentioned only three, one of which was impeachment. The others (two) were voting and defunding. I kept waiting for the third one, but he couldn't come up with it.
Where do they get these people from anyway?
“I kept waiting for the [fourth] one, but he couldn’t come up with it.”
The fourth option is to use illegal action, such as a coup d’etat or an assassination. Murtha isn’t going to publicly state that option, but you he (and the other Dems) dream about it.
Sounds like blackmail to me.
Congressman ‘cut and run’ Murtha,
ACCORDING TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NANCY PELOSE,
IMPEACHMENT WAS TAKEN OFF THE ‘TABLE’.
YOU ARE A KNOWN CROOK, WHY DON’T YOU LISTEN TO YOUR LEADER?
ARE YOU ANTI-FEMINIST?
Congressman ‘cut and run’ Murtha,
ACCORDING TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NANCY PELOSE,
IMPEACHMENT WAS TAKEN OFF THE ‘TABLE’.
YOU ARE A KNOWN CROOK, WHY DON’T YOU LISTEN TO YOUR LEADER?
ARE YOU ANTI-FEMINIST?
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.