There is a growing feeling that impeachment is possible and that it will be good for the country. I completely agree and we should make our voice hear!

It would be nice if a list of "impeach" web sites is done!

An actual conviction by the Senate just isn't a realistic goal. There's not enough time nor is there a super-majority for a conviction. But just imagine the truths that would be revealed during the process! Truths that the media could not ignore and that the country should hear about.

It's the process that we are getting. With these bozos in the White House supplying a never-ending string of scandals, my big worry is that they don't have time to deal with all of them.

However, I'm with Artlo on this one. Of course, these pricks in the White House should be watched and their past devilish tricks should be exposed but I don't think the ultimate goal should be I. If it comes...fine.

It's a healthy process. If the Repubs have done nothing against the law, so be it. Even if we get a law that says that no future president may lie us into a war, I would consider that a victory. I expect that's not all they will find.

quote:

There is a growing feeling that impeachment is possible and that it will be good for the country.

Let me just inject a bit of realism into your fantasy.

GWB is consitutionally prohibited from running for a third term. He will be gone soon.

Practically speaking, impeachment would take months. It would make Dems look like small bitchy whiners, not the bipartisan moderates that would appeal to most voters.

Plus, even if lenghtly impeachment proceedings ousted the President, he would be succeeded by Dick Cheney. Is that a better alternative that GWB?

I'm sure you're thinking, "well, let's impeach Cheney then."

Cheney doesn't have a track record as President, so how could you begin impeachment proceedings against a guy who is new to the job? Once again, a fantasy.

You guys need to take a Midol and wait until the next election. That is your best shot at the White House. This impeachment stuff might feel good initially, but politically it will boomerang on you.

Go for it.

I think it takes having proof of impeachable offenses.
Having the libs self destruct would be entertaining though.

We have any number of impeachable offences to choose from, Illegal spying program, outing of a CIA agent, misuse of government resources for political purposes, authorization of torture, this is but a small sampling of those things that we already know about and doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of what may come to light once actual investigations begin.

The votes weren't in the Senate to convict Nixon either when the process started it was only after all the investigation began that the level of support reached the point that Nixon had no choice but to resign.

The fact that the votes aren't there to start should have no effect what so ever on whether or not impeachment proceedings should begin in fact I'd be more concerned if they were because if enough minds were made up before any actual investigations were begun or if it were a party line vote then the proceedings would be as lacking in legitimacy as the kangaroo courts in GITMO.

Neither is the short time between now and the next election a valid excuse for lack of action. If a CFO embezzels from his company the investigation and prosecution doesn't stop simply because he resigns why should an impeachment process cease simply because a Presidents term has expired.

Notice that most of the talk about bipartisanship and this nonsense that "the people" would find such investigations petty or political is coming from the right. Of course they oppose such proceedings I'm sure Ted Bundy thought that the police shouldn't bother investigating him either.

The American people gave the legislative branch to the Democrats was because they were tired of the blatant corruption and incompetance of the Republican party. Why on earth should the Democrats listen to the right on this matter? You've been wrong about everything else so far and past performance is a valid predictor of future success.

quote:

We have any number of impeachable offences to choose from, Illegal spying program,

You may want to hold off on that one. FISA just issued a blanket order and there are three competing legislative bills making it all legal. S2455,S2453,S3001 Congress is going to hard pressed to impeach on something they approved.

quote:

outing of a CIA agent

Still dreaming I see.

quote:

misuse of government resources for political purposes

you'll have to narrow that one down.

quote:

authorization of torture

But Bush says the US doesn't torture people.

quote:

Originally posted by Loganthor:

quote:

We have any number of impeachable offences to choose from, Illegal spying program,

You may want to hold off on that one. FISA just issued a blanket order and there are three competing legislative bills making it all legal. S2455,S2453,S3001 Congress is going to hard pressed to impeach on something they approved.

I don't care how many blanket orders they issue and how many bills are past after the fact. It was illegal when he did it and that makes it a crime.

quote:

quote:

outing of a CIA agent

Still dreaming I see.

It happend it originated from the Whitehouse which proceeded to violate the law by not stripping the individuals involved of their secutiry clearances. You are the one living in the fantasy land in this case.

quote:

quote:

misuse of government resources for political purposes

you'll have to narrow that one down.

One example would be the meetings in the interior dept where they were brain storming ways to assist embattled republicans.

quote:

quote:

authorization of torture

But Bush says the US doesn't torture people.

What ever we have the memo's and the pictures you just make yourself look silly everytime you make a statement like that.

quote:

I don't care how many blanket orders they issue and how many bills are past after the fact. It was illegal when he did it and that makes it a crime.

Really?? Are you the judge and jury? While I will grant you that court case where ever it was, found the program illegal, Everything I have read on the subject says it will be overturned in the higher courts when the government actually show up to court. Which they didn't in the first case.

I personally do not think it was illegal. I cant believe they would be that stupid. Plus if it was, All those Senitors that were in the "know" would have/ should have/ but didn't say anything.

I still dont know the exact details of how, where, and when. I pretty sure you dont either.

Let alone you can prosecute a crime that "used" to be illegal. Or I'll just charge you with Witchcraft.

quote:

It happend it originated from the Whitehouse which proceeded to violate the law by not stripping the individuals involved of their secutiry clearances. You are the one living in the fantasy land in this case.

Do we really need to go though this again? there is only one person to blame, He is no longer in government and apparently did not commit a crime in the release of the information..

quote:

One example would be the meetings in the interior dept where they were brain storming ways to assist embattled republicans.

I dont recall that one, do you have a link or should I go looking?

quote:

What ever we have the memo's and the pictures you just make yourself look silly everytime you make a statement like that.

Naked pyramid is not torture. Nothing I have seen on the list of approved tactic is anything I would consider on par with torture. That’s just me. 10 years from now speaking badly and making someone “feel” bad will constitute torture.

From Loganthor:

quote:

You may want to hold off on that one. FISA just issued a blanket order and there are three competing legislative bills making it all legal. S2455,S2453,S3001 Congress is going to hard pressed to impeach on something they approved.

Well now, this is an interesting question. The Constitution (Art I, sec. 10) clearly bans ex post facto laws, but that isn't what's involved here. Legistative bills to invalidate the FISA law clearly have no chance of passing. I'm not sure who you're referring to as "FISA". FISA is a law, not an agency or a regulatory body. There is a FISA Court, but I can't imagine that this court has the power to unilaterally subvert a constitutional law enacted by Congress.

quote:

Originally posted by Loganthor:
Naked pyramid is not torture. Nothing I have seen on the list of approved tactic is anything I would consider on par with torture. That’s just me. 10 years from now speaking badly and making someone “feel” bad will constitute torture.

That would depend if Janet Reno was part of the pyramid.

Underwear on the head is ghaaaastly!
Not being able to face east to pray in inhumane!
Being embarrassed is beyond comprehension!

Meanwhile, the inmates at Gitmo complain of gaining weight.

quote:

Originally posted by Loganthor:

quote:

I don't care how many blanket orders they issue and how many bills are past after the fact. It was illegal when he did it and that makes it a crime.

Really?? Are you the judge and jury? While I will grant you that court case where ever it was, found the program illegal, Everything I have read on the subject says it will be overturned in the higher courts when the government actually show up to court. Which they didn't in the first case.

I personally do not think it was illegal. I cant believe they would be that stupid. Plus if it was, All those Senitors that were in the "know" would have/ should have/ but didn't say anything.

I still dont know the exact details of how, where, and when. I pretty sure you dont either.

Let alone you can prosecute a crime that "used" to be illegal. Or I'll just charge you with Witchcraft.

This isn't something that used to be illegal and then was legalized then you broke the law this is a case where when the act was commited it was against the law. There is no debate they admitted to the program that's what is known as an open and shut case.

quote:

quote:

It happend it originated from the Whitehouse which proceeded to violate the law by not stripping the individuals involved of their secutiry clearances. You are the one living in the fantasy land in this case.

Do we really need to go though this again? there is only one person to blame, He is no longer in government and apparently did not commit a crime in the release of the information..

Oh one person huh? Rove admited to outing her. Saying oh they were just asking for confirmation doesn't count. If he confirmed it its just the damned same as if he came out and blabbed it himself.
Do you know anything about security and how to keep information secure? Geeze that's basic shit you don't confirm it.

quote:

quote:

One example would be the meetings in the interior dept where they were brain storming ways to assist embattled republicans.

I dont recall that one, do you have a link or should I go looking?

Look for Lurita Doan here is one example.

quote:

quote:

What ever we have the memo's and the pictures you just make yourself look silly everytime you make a statement like that.

Naked pyramid is not torture. Nothing I have seen on the list of approved tactic is anything I would consider on par with torture. That’s just me. 10 years from now speaking badly and making someone “feel” bad will constitute torture.

Bullshit. It's degrading unprofessional and abusive and it is torture. Water boarding is torture having putting a bag over someone's head and attaching electrodes to their genitals is most friggin certainly torture!

I don't what ****ing fantasy land you live in but you really need to get your head checked if you are trying to justify that sort of behavior. We hung people for doing this kind of crap in WW2 and you are trying to say now that it isn't torture?

quote:

That would depend if Janet Reno was part of the pyramid.

OK, I didn't think that all the way though. THAT might be torture. I whip off an email to Amenesty International and Human Rights Watch to get their opinion.

quote:

Well now, this is an interesting question. The Constitution (Art I, sec. 10) clearly bans ex post facto laws,

Actually that does not apply to congress. Congress is the sole body responsible for the creation of laws. Plus, without all the details how can you even determine the laws was broken. If the NSA was aquiring their Data outside the US then it not illegal.

quote:

Legistative bills to invalidate the FISA law clearly have no chance of passing. I'm not sure who you're referring to as "FISA". FISA is a law,

FISA is an Act passed in 1978, Fisa Court is what was established. I was referring to the court as representitive of the act. Congress created the act, They can change it, kill it, clarify it any time their little hearts desire.

quote:

Originally posted by Skex Relbore:
Bullshit. It's degrading unprofessional and abusive and it is torture. Water boarding is torture having putting a bag over someone's head and attaching electrodes to their genitals is most friggin certainly torture!

I don't what ****ing fantasy land you live in but you really need to get your head checked if you are trying to justify that sort of behavior. We hung people for doing this kind of crap in WW2 and you are trying to say now that it isn't torture?

We hung people in WW2 for degrading prisoners? Link?

It is becoming well known to our enemies that they will get free medical, dental, vision, and better food than they are used to. If they refuse to talk, they know they will be released.

The goal is to extract information from enemy combatants that they or their "people" would use to harm Americans.
If that includes mental and physical discomfort and unpleasant conditions, then I'm for letting our people get the information they need.

Cutting off limbs, electrocution, maiming, bamboo shoots under finger nails, ect... and other excruciating actual torture should not be practiced.
Not having enough curry in your food is laughable unless you practice blaming America for everything first.
Then, it's torture!

quote:

This isn't something that used to be illegal and then was legalized then you broke the law this is a case where when the act was commited it was against the law. There is no debate they admitted to the program that's what is known as an open and shut case.

I dont think it is over nor is it that easy to claim it is an open and shut case.

quote:

Oh one person huh? Rove admited to outing her. Saying oh they were just asking for confirmation doesn't count.

sure it does count, It means they ALREADY KNEW. So she was already outed, so he could not have outed her. seems pretty simple to me.

quote:

Do you know anything about security and how to keep information secure? Geeze that's basic shit you don't confirm it

I know my wife doesn't want me to tell people what is in her top Drawer, is that the same?

So you dont confirm that the secret is already let out, as confirm by an already top administration offical. Armitage is not a janitor.

quote:

Bullshit. It's degrading unprofessional and abusive and it is torture. Water boarding is torture having putting a bag over someone's head and attaching electrodes to their genitals is most friggin certainly torture!

I don't what ****ing fantasy land you live in but you really need to get your head checked if you are trying to justify that sort of behavior.

before you blow a gasket or keel over from a blown blood vessal in your head. maybe a little light reading is in order.

Standards of conduct for Interrogation

I don't give a rats ass what Alberto the Torture Guy considers torture.

I'm going with this one.

Torture is defined by the United Nations Convention Against Torture as "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity." In addition to state sponsored torture, individuals or groups may also inflict torture on others for similar reasons, however, the motive for torture can also be for the sadistic gratification of the torturer, as was the case in the Moors Murders.

Here are some more

Military personnel who mistreat prisoners can be prosecuted by a court-martial under various provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ, arts. 77-134).

The War Crimes Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. § 2441) makes it a criminal offense for U.S. military personnel and U.S. nationals to commit war crimes as specified in the 1949 Geneva Conventions. War crimes under the act include grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. It also includes violations of common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; …outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.

A federal anti-torture statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340A), enacted in 1994, provides for the prosecution of a U.S. national or anyone present in the United States who, while outside the U.S., commits or attempts to commit torture. Torture is defined as an “act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.” A person found guilty under the act can be incarcerated for up to 20 years or receive the death penalty if the torture results in the victim’s death.

Military contractors working for the Department of Defense might also be prosecuted under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-778), known as MEJA. MEJA permits the prosecution in federal court of U.S. civilians who, while employed by or accompanying U.S. forces abroad, commit certain crimes. Generally, the crimes covered are any federal criminal offense punishable by imprisonment for more than one year. The MEJA remains untested because the Defense Department has yet to issue necessary implementing regulations required by the law.


And don't try to pass off that bit of Unconstitutional offal known as the military commisions act that thing will only be in force until it goes up for judicial review where it will probably meet the same fate as previous attempts by the Bush administration to undermine the Constitution in this matter.

Oh and I have no doubt that either of you would consider it torture if you were the ones buck nekid with a pit bull snapping at your nuts.

quote:

I don't give a rats ass what Alberto the Torture Guy considers torture.

ok then....

quote:

And don't try to pass off that bit of Unconstitutional offal known as the military commisions act that thing will only be in force until it goes up for judicial review where it will probably meet the same fate as previous attempts by the Bush administration to undermine the Constitution in this matter.

Alright... just as long as you understand that the Military Commission Act trumps all previous laws and treaty's. You probably didn't know it trumps treaties also.

quote:

Oh and I have no doubt that either of you would consider it torture if you were the ones buck nekid with a pit bull snapping at your nuts.

sounds like Saturday night.

quote:

military commisions act

Final passage in the Senate
Party AYE NAY ABS
Republicans 53 1 1
Democrats 12 32 0
Independent 0 1 0
Total 65 34 1



Final passage in the House
Party AYE NAY ABS
Republicans 218 7 5
Democrats 32 162 7
Independent 0 1 0
Total 250 170 12

The Military Commisions act recinds Habeus Corpus which just by itself renders it in violationn to the Constitution which specifically forbids doing so.

There for I don't give a flying frig how many dumb asses in the legislative branch voted for it. It remains unlawful or are you now saying that it trumps the Constitution?

Seriously why do you hate this country and its principles so?

quote:

The Military Commisions act recinds Habeus Corpus which just by itself renders it in violationn to the Constitution which specifically forbids doing so

Kind of an odd quantry isn't it. And they just keep making laws. Your probably right, however one unconstitutional provision within an act does not the whole act unconstitutional. I wonder what the presidential Signing statement said about it.

quote:

There for I don't give a flying frig how many dumb asses in the legislative branch voted for it. It remains unlawful or are you now saying that it trumps the Constitution?

Boy... if only we could all do that to any laws that are passed. I know a great site where they will love having that discussion. the anarchist site of Derrick Jensen. Apparently I do not qualify.

I think speeding laws are very draconian.

quote:

Seriously why do you hate this country and its principles so?

I love this Country. LOVE the priciples even more. BUTT, I hate terrorist, I even loath most felons.

Most of the people in GITMO and Abu Graihb are not terrorists they are just poor guys who were in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong skin tone.

You can hate terrorist all you want it still doesn't justify the sorts of behavior that you are condoning. Because for it to do so you would first have to establish with certitude that they were indeed terrorists even then we know that these sorts of activities do not result in reliable inforation.

Professional interegators will tell you that point blank. It's only the stupid TV educated wannabe tough guys who think that it does.

A couple years back I ran into an old budy of mine from boot camp. This fellow after doing a stint in the Marines reinlisted in the Army as a translator and interegator while talking to him about it I joked about rough interegation techniques (believe it or not I'm not some bleeding heart civilian type) and he very seriously shook his head and pulled out a pack of smokes and laid it on the table and said this is the way we do it. "Do you smoke? are you being treated alright?"

He was very adament that they most certainly did not torture people because it wasn't a very succesful or reliable meathod. That instead the goal of a skilled interegator was to win over the detainy and gain