FYI - The Dem base is still calling for impeachment, despite the claims by Pelosi & Co that it is "off the table."
Could it happen? Not likely. But the base will surely provide just enough support to Conyers to make him think that he should at least bring it up in committee.
Over at DU, they're trying to draft up all of the possible impeachable offenses. Take a gander over at the "reality-based community." (All I have to say is, what drugs did they take to get to their "reality?")
2796694, Fourteen Draft Articles of Impeachment Against Bush AND Cheney
Posted by understandinglife on Fri Nov-24-06 08:30 PM
If we are to impeach, we must impeach both Bush and Cheney. It will not do any good for us to impeach Bush and have Cheney take the Oval Office and pick someone just as radical as he is. It will also not do any good for us to impeach just Cheney and allow Bush to groom John "I'm not knowledgeable" McCain for the 2008 election. Therefore, we must simultaneously impeach both of them so that the 3rd person in succession, Nancy Pelosi, would become the next President of the United States.
What remains to be done is for us to work out articles of impeachment against the President. Others may surface after the Democrats begin their job of investigating and getting to the bottom of the matter. If the Bush administration obstructs or lies to the Congressional Committee chairs, those could in and of themselves be grounds for impeachment and removal of Bush and Cheney.
In the meantime, here are the following 14 possible articles of impeachment against the President and Vice President.
1. Leaking classified information by disclosing the identity of Valerie Plame to reporters.
The President and Vice President unlawfully leaked classified information, the identity of a Non-official Cover, Valerie (Wilson) Plame, to a person or persons not authorized to receive such information, namely, Robert Novak, a reporter for the Chicago Tribune, and Matt Cooper, a reporter for Time Magazine.
National Security Act of 1947.
This is not a joke.
Read all 14.
Add your own.
Thank you Eternal Hope ... you certainly bring more than a little substance to why we should all have hope, and why "We the People ..." need to convert our hope into deeds that will ensure future generations view a horizon of good and not an insurmountable wall of evil.
2796725, I'm up for it.
Posted by Gregorian on Fri Nov-24-06 08:38 PM
Add in the depleted uranium and stolen elections for fun.
2796753, "Federal court ruling contains grounds for impeachment"
Posted by understandinglife on Fri Nov-24-06 08:43 PM
The community is discussing impeachment proceedings against the president and possibly vice president, and it has become evident to me that the full text of Judge Anna Diggs Taylor's ruling from this summer is not widely known. I believe it is important to the community to have this information.
The President of the United States, a creature of the same Constitution which gave us these Amendments, has undisputedly violated the Fourth in failing to procure judicial orders as required by FISA, and accordingly has violated the First Amendment Rights of these Plaintiffs as well.
In this case, the President has acted, undisputedly, as FISA forbids. FISA is the expressed statutory policy of our Congress. The presidential power, therefore, was exercised at its lowest ebb and cannot be sustained.
Finally, in the case of Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), the separation of powers doctrine is again discussed and, again, some overlap of the authorities of two branches is permitted. In that case, although Article III jurisdiction of the federal courts is found intrusive and burdensome to the Chief Executive it did not follow, the court held, that separation of powers principles would be violated by allowing a lawsuit against the Chief Executive to proceed. Id. at 701. Mere burdensomeness or inconvenience did not rise to the level of superceding the doctrine of separation of powers. Id. at 703. In this case, if the teachings of Youngstown are law, the separation of powers doctrine has been violated. The President, undisputedly, has violated the provisions of FISA for a five-year period.
The Bush administration has in the eyes of at least one federal judge broken the law of the land. We all know the scale of the damage that's been done to the country (at least I think we do...). Why is that damage okay? Failure to prosecute crime gives the impression of approval of the crime. I just can't bring myself to say that the gravest of crimes against the Constitution should get a pass.Neither can I and thank you Crazed Weasel for sharing your insights.
Definitely worth reading all of Crazed Weasel's first dKos diary and the full decision by Judge Taylor.
They then go on to discuss whether Cheney would resign before being convicted of impeachable offenses, allowing Bush to short-circuit the ascension of Pelosi to President.
ARC: St Wendeler