Tomorrows NYSlimes headline: "Republicans vote to impeach Chaney". No reason why, just a headline. Headline should read, Once again the 'minority' republicans stick it to the leaderless democrats.

This was the Dhimmicrat(ic) chance to get the ball rolling for impeachment. What happened? The nutroots should go crazy and I can only laugh at their ineptitude.
When the light shown on the Rats, they ran for cover. The Dems didn't want to have to vote or debate this.

IMPEACH!
Ya know
http://icasualties.org/

Some of you. like me were offended by president Clinton in prime TV telling us a lie about sex in the White House. Seriously, is there anyone here who was duped about the threat to the USA (other than oil)

Who is your hero among your candidates?

I believe that RP is too strange...
but you'll pretend that RP may not exist...
(no misspelling)

Do you really want to delve into how strange the top Republicans appear from a distance?
Cool...let the youtube battles begin..
How is that supporting Democracy in Pakistan going?
ya know...at some point in your life,,you may have to accept that the bad luck in your life at this time....is not becuse of lefty's...
Sometimes we just have
bad luck....
Hmmmm do you support or President our not?
If you do do support our President...
who can YOU trust?

Let me see if I've got this straight. According to decrees of the U.S. House of Representatives:

Trying to cover up an extramarital affair that one's own spouse forgives one for: Impeachable.

Tricking the nation into war, shaming America by committing indecent crimes against humanity, and viciously shredding the U.S. Constitution: Unimpeachable.

That sound about right??

No Herman, it sounds just like you.

Hey, Herman, you made a couple of typos there. Lemme help ya:

Lying under oath in a federal proceeding to thwart a civil lawsuit that would embarrass yourself and cost you a healthy amount of money: Impeachable.

Acting on the same intelligence believed valid for several years, in accordance with a law passed in 1998, and putting teeth to years of empty threats: Unimpeachable.

Using existing and new laws to fight terrorists, their allies, and supporters, defending Americans and American interests: Unimpeachable.

Waging war against those who commit indecent crimes against humanity, including the slaughter of hostages and relentless attacks on civilians: Unimpeachable.

Glad to be of help, Herman. But do try to be more careful in the future -- I can't always be here to clean up your messes for you.

J.

Glad to be of help, Herman. But do try to be more careful in the future -- I can't always be here to clean up your messes for you.

Perhaps a large supository would help with the derranged and dilerious JT. but I doubt it.

I watched KooCoosinich this afternoon while even the CSpan camera was trying to crawl under a desk. There was no one in the house that wanted to be on camera while this loony tune was playing his Area 51 reckoning.

Kucinich stood on the floor this afternoon and quoted Cheney statements that were also made by many leaders on both sides of the political spectrum including world leaders who were supplied the same intell. The state of Ohio should be ashamed of this freak of nature. Next time the 'visitors" show up, maybe they'll take him on a trip.

When is the democratic party going to get serious about national security while they play games with the Vets bill?

Herman and Nogo may be good at the rhetoric, but I'll bet both of them are scratching their heads over the nonsense of what was once a proud democratic party.

Please flush and put the seat down for the ladys......leave it up for the NOW gang and Hillary-----they're used to reaching.

Jay Tea, you often display your woeful ignorance of the constituion in your daily writings but in this case you have made yourself a laughing stock.

As constitutional lawyer Ann Coulter (Funny when you say that isn't it?) says "The derivation of the phrase 'high crimse and misdemeanors' has nothing to do with crimes in English common law for which public servants could be impeached," but had much to do with dishonorable conduct or a breach in the public trust."

the case:

1)Going well beyond the established powers granted in the constituion to fit his batshit crazy Unitaray executive theory qualifies as grounds for impeachment.

2) Selecting evidence to build a case for war while ignoring evidence to the contrary. Grounds for impeachment.

see the following:
a) using the yellocake bullshit that was discredited in the build up to war when they knew it was discredited... grounds for impeachment.

b) ignoring a top source in the Iraqi govt. who said no WMD. letting the american people think the debate was over, when it was so not over. grounds for impeachment.

c) using curveball as a definite source when everyone doubted him. (to again convince everyone the war was the smart thing to do) Grounds for getting kicked out of office.

d) lying about the link between Al quaeda and Iraq. GFI

e) The downing street memo which shows we were going to war before Iraq had chance tocomply with resolutions. GFI

f) Several CIA sources saying the petangon wanted evidence "That painted IRAQ Bad" many expressing the view the VP was ignoring evidence to the contrary. GFI

All of this qualifies a breach of public trust (AND THEM SOME) Much more than lying under oath about a blowjob. not to mention Waterboarding, lying about it, Spying without warrents, and so on and so on and so on.

I'm sure you will delete this and ban me. that is what right wing pussies like you do. to scared to stand up and get your asses kicked in honest debate like men.

Oh I didn't bother spell checking or looking for typos so, I'm sure some of the moron crowd will flame for that. Mind you none of them will take on the arguments too stupid for that. just divert and cry and run the republican way.

cartman
Conservatives can hope your brief will find its way to the floor of Congress.
Conservatives today actually voted in favor for debate on many of your points....the Dems betrayed you.

Cartman, if I was the sort that did what you accuse me of, I wouldn't have left Herman's post untouched. Instead, I posted it as a separate comment.

Likewise, I'm leaving your comment alone.

Yes, practically speaking, an "impeachable offense" is whatever a majority of the House and 2/3 of the Senate say it is. But every single one of your talking points has been at least credibly challenged -- if not discredited. For example, the Downing Street Memo's credibility revolves around the use of the word "fixed." The use of "fixed" meaning "illicitly arranged" is an Americanism; a more British version would be "arranged around or attached to," like a fixed mounting for a gun on a warship. And in the full context of the Memo, it is fairly clear that that is the meaning of the term.

The "yellowcake" was not conclusively proven, one way or another. Joseph Wilson's report (NOT the op-ed he gave to the New York Times) was cited by experts as SUPPORTING the possibility that Saddam was seeking yellowcake

I don't have the time to deal with the rest of them, but AGAIN you miss the point of the Clinton impeachment. The man LIED UNDER OATH IN A FEDERAL PROCEEDING to deny an American citizen (Paula Jones) a fair trial. For all your blathering and hysteria, you can't point to a single case of Bush denying an American citizen justice anywhere near as actively as Bill Clinton sought to deprive Paula Jones of her rights -- and for as purely selfish reasons.

And for the rest of the audience: no, I am not banning Cartman (who, I note, is using an anonymizing service to conceal his IP). Nor did I edit or alter his comment in any way. If he doesn't respond, it's because he chooses not to, not because he can not.

J.

I wish once, just once,Jay Tea that you would work up the balls and a modicum of honesty and just admit what you are. A card carrying member of the far right fringe.You feed us the line of bullshit about being an "independent" and a "libertarian." It's pretty pathetic when you daily repeat the right wing talking points, defend George Bush and his numerous follies, follow the tenets of the fringe right and then have the gall, when challenged, to claim to be an independent.

Either you're deluded, a liar or both. The first step to recovery is the admission. You ought to try it.

Jay tea,

i did not miss the point on Clinton, I diagreed with it.

When you take a look at your response to the downing steet memo I think we should put it in its context

reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

Now you say it hangs on the word "fixed" to me that is like saying whether or not Clinton lied, is based on the words "Sexual Relations"
It just doesn't hold water.

Secondldly, Clinton was disbarred in Arkansas for the crime and I beleive fined. His punishment was handled in a court of law, there was no need to impeach. Nothing about what he did endangered the country.

Now if you beleive "fixed" implies were going to war no matter what (and I'll assume you don't agree with that) then you you must regognize that several things in the build up to the war were lies and that DOES put the nation at risk. Putting the nation at risk is certianly grounds for impeachment.

Now, congress had the right to go after Clinton I don't deny that right. In fact I think the founders wanted the excecutive quaking in his boots at the prospect of impeachment as a means of keeping that branch in check. I question their wisdom in going after him and not going after this administration.

mn srsl hv t b n bslt mrn t b stll spprtng ths prsdnt nd ths vc prsdnt.

Wht knd f cnsrvtv sbmssv pss tks l ftr l ftr l frm ths fls nd dsn't gt pssd?

r thr n rl mn rnd hr r jst lt f sbmssv thrtrn pnss?

h... thght s. N Hnr Rllns n ths Wzbng crwd.
ah....acid reflux! *burp

Kookcinich does something stupid and all the moonbats converge here to pillary Jay and Kim. Why all the undo attention?

Shouldn't you assclowns be at your keyboards screaming at Pretty Pelosi and Stimpy Hoyer?

And there certainly aren't any Churchill's or Reagans either, but you two would make fine lieutenants in Bin Ladin's "company".

What Bush and Cheney have accomplished so you morons can regurgitate, idiots like Nogo, dr lava, and now the man in the cart will never understand or appriciate what sacrifice or protection means to a nation.

Why don't you kids go burn a flag and kick a dog some where?

Just once I'd like to see the democrats back up they're 'he lied to the American people chants'. If you can you can prove that every democrat serving in the 90's lied to the American people, and all should be impeached. All statements about the WMD (a lot of which has been found) are based on the same intel. I guess the thousands of Iraqi's killed by Saddam simply breathed too much sand, no WMD involved. Works for me.

JFO:

"I wish once, just once,Jay Tea that you would work up the balls and a modicum of honesty and just admit what you are. A card carrying member of the far right fringe.

I wish once, just once, JFO that you would admit black helicopters constantly circle your abode, you have a 2 year supply of MRE's stolen from the local National Guard post to outlast ANY Rethuglian apocalypse, a four layer foil hat to ward off the Rovian mind rays and are a Gold Card carrying lunatic in the mold of Kookcinich.

Bwhahahhahahahahaha...

The moonbats crack me up.

Thn wh dnt w ncld TD KNND n tht m thng mn ths dt dms wll d nthng

This is great... on the same day that Jay writes a post about how disingenuously supporting Ron Paul is "dishonest" and causes mischief for the Republicans, we have Kim writing a post about the "great fun" of Republicans disingenuously supporting a resolution to cause mischief for the Democrats. (Although why it would be "fun" to watch a couple of hundred people vote "no" is not made clear.)

Please... more comedy!

the elders of nebulon 7 have just beamed me a thought ray indicating they are pleased with the progress of the cheney impeachment. phase 1 of the operation can now be considered a success, and the weak humans will dither over this while the might galactic nebulonic warriors prepare the invasion fleet!

nmmmmeps! nmmmeps! all hail the dark sith lord hillary!

liberals,

The bottom line is,this was yet another chance to carry through on your "Bush lied"propaganda that you and your liberal heroes in congress keep spewing,and your elected liberals ran from it faster than they have been running from the terrorist for the last few years.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP LIBERALS!!

The Republicans showed today that they want this to hit the floor so it can be debated in front of the
country to show how full of crap your cut and paste
history revision of the past 10 years has been.
The democrats ran from that debate today,plain and
simple.

The downing st. memo is nothing but an unsigned piece
of paper handed off to someone by a "shadow" in a restaurant.No one officially stands behind or will testify in court the authenticity of this cherry picked
document.

Joe Wilson admitted himself in his senate report that
he felt like Iraq had sent a delegate to niger to work
out a deal for yellow cake.
HE SAID IT IN HIS OWN WORDS LIBERAL.
The committee was headed by democrats and Republicans
and signed off by both.Wilson was found to not be credible.Armitage leaked his wife's name and their accusations are so weak they can't even bring a civil suit for all this made up"Treason".

Their are hundreds of quotes and video of liberal heroes like Hillary,Bill,Kerry,Reid,Gore,Durbin,Pelosi,
intelligence,pentagon,Defense Dept.,English,CIA,
French,German,Egypt,Saudi,Israeli,UN...that said Saddam was a threat,retained WMD,ties to Al-Qaeda and other
terrorist groups,nuclear program,responsible for the genocide of between 600,000 to 1.3 million of his own
people,assassination attempt of a US president,killing
thousands of people in Iraq and Iran with WMD's....
But keep on cherry picking quotes from the very few
and the people who change their positions when the going got tough in Iraq so that you can defend Saddam in your pathetic war on Bush.
Their were many people who did not think Hitler was a
threat to America before WW11 and did not think communism was and is a threat to the world.
Hitler,Stalin,and Mao are responsible for the deaths of millions and millions of people.
By your logic liberal,if their is a difference of opinion,the world should have done nothing.The world
didn't in regards to Mao and Stalin,thank god we didn't
listen to idiot Chamberlain liberals in regard to Hitler.
The worlds intelligence agencies,democrats,Republicans
the Americans people,and the press overwhelmingly saw
Saddam as a threat that did not comply with UN resolutions,Sanctions were a failure(Nancy Pelosi even acknowledged this)and abide by his surrender agreement after the first Gulf War to disarm and allow this disarmament to be overseen by the UN and America UNCONDITIONALLY AND WITHOUT OBSTRUCTION.It was Saddam's responsibility to prove that he had no WMD/Nuclear program.
Kicking inspectors out,not allowing them access until
Saddam gave the ok,shooting at our planes,Oil for food,
plotting assassinations,is not compliance liberals. (Clinton felt so strongly that Saddam maintained his
WMD program that he bombed a factory,proudly telling
America how he had taken out a Chemical Weapon factory.
Got a whole lot of people to get in line for lying about Saddam right liberals).
The bottom line is,
NO BODY KNEW FOR CERTAIN WHAT WEAPONS SADDAM POSSESSED
UNTIL AMERICA HAD 130,000 SETS OF BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

Understand liberals,Republicans want you to go forward with impeachment,we want to put ALL the facts
about the lead up to War in front of the American people.
The years and years and years of Clintons,Edwards,
Reid,Gore,and the rest of the super intelligent crowd
telling us how dangerous Saddam was.
We want you democrats to explain to America if all
the evidence was so clear that Bush was lying,
WHY DID YOU DEMOCRATS VOTE FOR THE WAR!!
The 9/11 commission that you liberals abide by so
much,signed off by democrats and Republicans,plainly
stated that Bush did not lie or manipulate pre-war
intelligence.
The Washington Post reported that all the evidence
was there for everyone to see,ALL THE PRE-WAR EVIDENCE
WAS AVAILABLE FOR ALL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO REVIEW.
That is why we pushed for the impeachment vote today
and your liberal heroes ran.

Let me repeat that for you liberal,your elected liberal heroes in congress ran,ducked under the table,retreated when it was time to put up or shut up
with all your cut and paste propaganda and conspiracy theories.
You liberals don't care about Freedom,taking out terrorist dictators that commit genocide,rape,torture
murder by the thousands.
All you care about is pushing your political agenda
and your silly little war on Bush.
The people in this country and abroad that know who
the real enemies to freedom are(you know,the terrorist and communist dictators like your buddy Hugo and Castro) will continue to fight them and do our best to
secure a democratic and free society that represents all people of all religions and ethnicity despite you
liberals and your terrorist hugging agenda.

Here are a couple of distinctions you might have overlooked, Brian:

1) Paul's campaign is in the REPUBLICAN primary, while Kucinich's measure was in the US HOUSE. Purely an internal party matter vs. a matter that, in theory, transcends party affiliation.

2) The Republicans openly admitted that they did not agree with the impeachment, but wished it discussed openly and not quietly killed -- much like my posting the John Edwards ads.

3) Since WHEN is "taking someone from the opposition at their word and helping them to achieve their stated goal and doing what they wish you to do" a dirty trick? Oh, yeah, when the member of the opposition is a raving loony and an embarrassment to the rest of the opposition, who'd prefer he be locked in the basement like the crazy aunt.

J.

JT, you're wasting bandwidth on Brian. The distinction between party politics and official House business is too nuanced for a brain like his.

It amuses me to see nogo et als shifting into their "deflect" mode. I take it they're too uncomfortable defending their Fearless Leaders' bumbling.

Or maybe they are embarrassed to admit they support DK's candidacy.

This is truly funny. There have been a number of liberals who have jumped in here over the last few years arguing for Bush's impeachment. There have been many who claim that Congress' low approval ratings directly reflect their inability to do so - along with their unwillingness to stop the war. Kucinich actually throws it out there in the open and the 'Rethuglicans' are the bad guys for saying, "Alright, let's have that discussion."

??

Then all we hear is "It's a dirty trick!"

Do you want him Bush/Cheney impeached or not? Here's your chance. You should be cheering Kucinich on.

Or is it that you're truly embarrassed by Kucinich, and all your elected liberals who run from this like the plague? (Remember, this is the Kucinich who was sucking up to Assad while his WMD plans were being bombed - and none of you had much, if anything, to say about it.) But you won't admit that so nogo, cartman and herman deflect the conversation here to arguing the merits of Clinton's impeachment, Brian compares apples and oranges, JFO attacks Jay and dr lava gets disemvoweled.

Tragic comedy.

So we had some fun yesterday. Steny Hoyer seems to be one of the more responsible (or at least tactically smarter) people on the Left, and over the course of the year it's been interesting to watch, as it slowly dawns on him that he's been put in charge of a kindergarten class. Meanwhile, every time the going gets tough, Pelosi disappears and leaves him holding the ball.

Meanwhile, every time the going gets tough, Pelosi disappears and leaves him holding the ball.

That's a good point. Where was Nancy all day yesterday, anyway?

"That's a good point. Where was Nancy all day yesterday, anyway?"

Pelosi was trying to secure another passport to Syria?

or

Pelosi was too busy chasing Code Pink ptotesters out of her rose garden with her broomstick?

or

She was hiding under Murtha's desk.

cartman

"Secondly, Clinton was disbarred in Arkansas and I think fined. His crime was handled by a court of law, nothing about what He did endangered the country."

Really? how about boinking an intern reapeatedly while He should have been payin attention to the Al Quaeda threat? y'know, the threat indicated in the documents that Sandy burglarpant's stole out of the archive's..

And if thats Your standard of fairness? where are the criminal charges against Cheney that are being handled by a court of law??

As for "Quisp" Kookcinich.. I think its time for Him? to have a close encounter of the absent minded kind!

Beam Me up Shirley!

Here are a couple of distinctions you might have overlooked, Brian:

Weak, Jay. Even for you.

Purely an internal party matter vs. a matter that, in theory, transcends party affiliation.

So? It's "dishonest" to be disingenuous internally, but good to be disingenuous in national politics?

2) The Republicans openly admitted that they did not agree with the impeachment, but wished it discussed openly and not quietly killed -- much like my posting the John Edwards ads.

Oh, bull. The Democrats also openly admitted they did not agree with the impeachment. Or did you miss the "despite opposition from Democratic leaders" part of the article? Or Hoyer's quote, "Impeachment is not on our agenda"? Republicans did not "wish it discussed". Was anyone calling for a debate on the issue? It was a "a Republican-led effort to force the vote" in an attempt to embarrass Democrats, pure and simple. But it didn't work.

3) Since WHEN is "taking someone from the opposition at their word and helping them to achieve their stated goal and doing what they wish you to do" a dirty trick?

When you take a "raving loony's" resolution that has no support from either party, and would disappear without action, and delay the real business of Congress by making everyone drop what they're doing and react to it.

Or do you think that the full Congress should vote on every resolution brought by individuals of either party?

Oh, and who said "dirty trick"? Is that some new vocabulary you're trying to work into the discussion? Seems to have worked on Oyster.

"The bottom line is,this was yet another chance to carry through on your "Bush lied"propaganda that you and your liberal heroes in congress keep spewing,and your elected liberals ran from it faster than they have been running from the terrorist for the last few years."

Well it looks like Kucinich put up. I too wish the rest had the guts to go after these traitors to America.

"PUT UP OR SHUT UP LIBERALS!!"

Anyone that throws these traitors in Jail has my vote.

"The Republicans showed today that they want this to hit the floor so it can be debated in front of the
country to show how full of crap your cut and paste"

Yeah and the Democrats caved. The are just pussies. the Republicans are traitors.

"history revision of the past 10 years has been.
The democrats ran from that debate today,plain and simple."

Making them nothing more than the lesser of two evils.

"The downing st. memo is nothing but an unsigned piece
of paper handed off to someone by a "shadow" in a restaurant.No one officially stands behind or will testify in court the authenticity of this cherry picked
document."

That's a lie. The Downing Street "Memo" is actually the transcribed minutes of a meeting, in 2002, between the prime minister and his senior advisers. Both UK and US officials have neither affirmed or denied this (which they would if it was a lie) and have validated its authenticity in response to questions (as when Tony Blair replied to a press conference question by saying "That memo was written before we went to the UN.")

"Joe Wilson admitted himself in his senate report that
he felt like Iraq had sent a delegate to niger to work"

This is just poor thinking. The may have sent a delagate but as Wilson also pointed out the CIA report was "unequivocally wrong." A bipartsian co