Is impeachment the GOP's move for an Obama 2nd term?

YES! Since they can't deny him a 3rd it'll be their new way to obstruct.
50%
NO! Republicans will lose the house & the power to impeach.
50%

3 comments

Craig Bush
Craig Bush's picture
Remember when the republicans

Remember when the republicans held Clinton's presidency up with impeachment just by attacking his sexuality. As a single parent I had a rough time explaining why our country was in crisis over a cum stain on a dress. Republicans are ruthless people willing to do anything it takes to obtain power.

Don't forget how Roosevelt and Eisenhower took on the ruling upper class power elite. We must take heed to their warnings that the military industrial complex will take over our society and we will end up working for them.

Why were there no impeachment hearings during Bush? The biggest failure of our intelligence community in our entire history and not even a hearing? Instead of determining what went wrong we build another new intelligent service? Ask yourself, why are we paying $45 billion more each year to protect us from someone with an assault weapon and a laptop living in a cave?

Why are we letting Americans die without healthcare or shelter? We are not going to die from a terrorist. Our society is killing us.

Suze O
Suze O's picture
Unfortunately, the Democrats

Unfortunately, the Democrats did not impeach Bush and Cheney in 2006 when they took the House, but I don't think it wasn't because they wanted to ruin their chances in the next election by being "divisive", as Thom has suggested. Shortly after that election, the Bush White House invited Pelosi (and perhaps a couple other high ranking Democrats) to a meeting to discuss how the two parties were going to "share power". She then came out and said that impeachment was "off the table". I have doubts as to the reason, although Thom has offered that the Democrats did this to better ensure their chances in 2008.

The real give-away, I think, was John Conyers. He had been so determined to impeach before the 2006 election and suddenly dropped the issue, avoided discussing it, gave lame excuses, and even looked like he was looking for an escape when he was asked on TV about his change of heart. MY guess is that in the aforementioned meeting, Cheney/Rove apparatus actually threatened the Democrats, and informed them that if they knew what was good for them, they were not to go forward with impeachment efforts. After all, Cheney threatened Mohammed al-Baradei and Hans Blix with the ruin of their careers if they did not find WMDs in Iraq ASAP, threatened the Spanish government over Judge Baltasar Garzon's investigation into whether Bush was a war criminal, and also threatened a few other countries' governments when their judicial systems were considering the same. Cheney also constantly applied pressure on the CIA to give him the "evidence" that the Iraqis had WMDs to justify the invasion of that country, worked in secret meetings for the indefinite-detention-of-Americans clause of the Defense Authorization Act, and is supected of all kinds of other manipulative actions. As Gore Vidal once put it, we do not have two political parties in this country, we have one political party and the Mafia. I would not doubt for a minute that the Republicans will try to find SOMETHING to get in the way of Obama getting anything done. At the very least they will use up a huge sum of taxpayer money doing all kinds of investigations to find something they can use against him. Making trouble is all they know how to do.

 

 

HalFonts
HalFonts's picture
It all depends on the

It all depends on the election. I hope for some decisive majorities of either affirmation or rejection. We need direction, not a split system, bogged down in stalemate. Right now I can't vote as I can't predict what will be the tactics after the election -- possible the most important election of our times.

Please register or login to post a comment.