Posted on 11/09/2006 2:51:41 PM PST by foreshadowed at waco
John Gibson just stated that Rep. Conyers has announced that since Speaker Pelosi said that impeachment is 'off the table' that there will be no impeachment of President Bush.
here's another gem off the same thread at the DU..
RoccoR5955 (65 posts)7:30 PM
Response to Original message
12. Just do this
Impeach the lot of them, and bring every member of the Bush Crime Syndicate up on RICO charges. When they are convicted, none of them will ever be able to hold office in this country. Some could even be brought up on charges of treason, which is still a capital offense.
THAT must have scared even some of them! ;^)
Just owning Halliburton stock is enough, impeachment will be all about getting Bush and Cheney to resign first.
My guess President Bush was given a list of names of who needed to go to prevent impeachment, and he got to choose who would resign from this list, they'll be more stepping down in the months ahead.
I wouldn't pin blame on the democrats for this, however I wonder if Soros would be crazy enough (through some underground liason), a lunie activist or an Al Quaeda agent attempts something dreadful against the president and vice president after the Demo's are sworn in. This would insure that a democrat would become president.
I don/t trust the dems to keep their word about anything Pelose wants to be at the very top and will do anything to push Bush and Chaney out of power and if that happens their goes our civil rights. I beleive she would like to be dictator for life all for her and nothing for us
Sabotage in time of war...
I was kind of hoping they go through with the subpoenas and the impeachment - BEFORE the jihadis attack again.
If they do, the administration can shrug its collective shoulders after the next attack and say: "Well, sorry about that. We were busy gathering info for the subpeonas and the impeachment instead of preventing new attacks. We TOLD you there was a World War on, but YOU didn't believe us..."
The divided government from 1995-2000 seemed to indicate the opposite. Our recent majority streamlined the uncontested passage of pork and we got the most rapid expansion of government since the mid 1960s. Divided government blocks each other's handouts.
Yaeh, I wonder if they nuts will let Pelosi NOT impeach. They own the party.
Oh brother
:)
Keith Olberwomann's head just exploded. Unless of course,he knows full well that the dems are damned liars.
Thats perfect.
Sure impeachment would be good for the GOP, kind of like bleeding is good for the veins.
I was thinking about this today. I realized that Clinton actually had a chance to be in the same position as Bush. He could have declared the war that was going on all around him, and been insulated from the charges by pointing out that we were in a war.
INSTEAD, he declared war on the victim of Muslim deceit & aggression. What a maroon! What a ta-ra-ra-goondi-ay!
The more I think about it, the more I think that the administration should pre-emptively issue a statement pointing out that we're in a war. Nothing more, just that.
If the Dhimmicrats go ahead with their subpeonas and impeaching BEFORE the next jihadi attack, they'll have painted themselves into a corner.
If we're subsequently attacked, the administration could drop everything related to responding to the subpeonas and the impeachment, and arrest the leading Democrat members of Congress for sabotaging the war effort and aiding and abetting the enemy.
Pretty cut-and-dried, actually. We warned you that we were at war, you chose to deliberately impede the war effort, and the jihadis were successful because of you.
Thanks. I actually had an even better idea - see my post #178. I'll bet you like that one even better.
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.