Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Articles of Impeachment against Dick Cheney

host · 05-05-2007, 11:56 AM

From post #3:

Quote:

Originally Posted by loquitur

The fastest thing to improve Bush's approval ratings would be impeachment proceedings against him or Cheney. Kucinich can't really be that stupid. If he thought it would actually go somewhere I doubt he'd have done it.

If you've refused to consider impeachment of Cheney and Bush as a realitstic or even an appropriate response for the democrats to undertake, consider what influences have shaped your opinion, and whether they are trustworty:

.....Why is big corporate news media trying to convince us that the majority does not want the investigations by the new congress, that we actually believe are necessary and appropriate?

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews
Democrats' Momentum Is Stalling
Amid Iraq Debate, Priorities On Domestic Agenda Languish

By Jonathan Weisman and Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, May 5, 2007; Page A01

....."The primary message coming out of the November election was that the American people are sick and tired of the fighting and the gridlock, and they want both the president and Congress to start governing the country," warned Leon E. Panetta, a chief of staff in Bill Clinton's White House. "It just seems to me the Democrats, if they fail for whatever reason to get a domestic agenda enacted . . . will pay a price.".......

....and a WaPo article trotted Panetta out with the same message, (Jonathan Weisman....in both stories...) just a month ago:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...040100766.html
Democrats To Widen Conflict With Bush
Some on Both Sides See Plans as Risky

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, April 2, 2007; Page A01

...Leon E. Panetta, who was a top White House aide when President Bill Clinton pulled himself off the mat through repeated confrontations with Congress, sees the same risk. He urged Democrats to stick to their turf on such issues as immigration, health care and popular social programs, and to prove they can govern.

"That's where their strength is," Panetta said. "If they go into total confrontation mode on these other things, where they just pass bills and the president vetoes them, that's a recipe for losing seats in the next election."....

But recent polls show just the opposite: (results here show 60 percent satisfied with amount of time spent investigating by congress....or they want even more...)

Quote:

http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/315.pdf
FOR RELEASE: THURSDAY, MARCH 29, 2007, 2:00 PM

pages 3 and 4:

Congressional Investigations
The Democrats’ stepped-up pace of investigations has not drawn much in the way of
negative reaction. Just 31% believe Congress is spending too much time investigating possible
government wrongdoing, while slightly more (35%) say they are spending too little time on this,
and a quarter believe that the time spent on investigations has been appropriate.

Little Evidence of Investigation Backlash.....

...and it doesn't seem that sentiment has changed much since before last november's elections:

Quote:

http://www.pollingreport.com/bush.htm
CNN Poll conducted by Opinion Research Corporation. Aug. 30-Sept. 2, 2006. N=1,004 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).

"Do you think it would be good for the country or bad for the country if the Democrats in Congress were able to conduct official investigations into what the Bush Administration has done in the past six years?" Half sample, MoE ± 4.5

____________Good _____Bad ______Unsure
_______________% _______% ______%

8/30 - 9/2/06____57 ______41 ______2

The state Democratic Convention last week, in the most populous state in the US, passed a resolution that called for

Quote:

......using congressional subpoena power to investigate the administration and apply "appropriate remedies and punishment, including impeachment."

Quote:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NGCGPGFRB1.DTL

.....In addition to the presidential contest, convention delegates also are going to turn their attention to more than 100 separate resolutions, including strongly worded calls for the impeachment of President Bush, a quick end to American involvement in Iraq and other hot-button issues. Many of the resolutions are so controversial that party leaders would rather not see them debated on the convention floor, one reason the party's resolutions committee, appointed by party Chairman Art Torres, is expected to trim those down to a dozen or so of the most important, which delegates will vote on Sunday morning...

The San Francisco newspaper, quoted above, did not report on the outcome of the impeachment resolution vote.

Doesn't the democratic party in California, consist of the largest number of registered voters, by an overwhelmingly high number, of any state party membership, in the country?

Why was coverage of the party's impeachment resolution, shunned or downplayed so dramatically by all of the news media?

The other two major California papers that did report on the outcome of the impeachment resolution vote, did not lead their stories with it, and they downplayed the significance:

Quote:

http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/163432.html
Convention continues Iraq pullout pressure
Democratic candidates Edwards, Richardson stir up anti-war passions on final day of party's gathering
By Peter Hecht and Andy Furillo - Bee Capitol Bureau

Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, April 30, 2007

.....Many spent the weekend parading with banners demanding the impeachment of the president and vice president and stronger action by Democratic leaders to end the war.

They bristled in angry protests when state party leaders favored more restrained policies, ultimately leading delegates to pass a resolution that demanded a "full investigation into abuse of power by President George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney."

While not calling for impeachment, the resolution called for using congressional subpoena power to investigate the administration and apply "appropriate remedies and punishment, including impeachment."...

Quote:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/p...0notebook.html
Even in GOP county, Obama's king of cash

By Bill Ainsworth
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

April 30, 2007

.....Iraq, impeachment resolutions
The California Democratic Party approved resolutions yesterday seeking the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and calling on Congress to investigate the actions of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney and take appropriate action, which could include impeachment.

The Iraq resolution calls for Bush to immediately begin the orderly withdrawal of combat forces.

The impeachment resolution calls on Congress to investigate if Bush has abused his power and to “take necessary action to call the administration to account with appropriate remedies and punishment, including impeachment.” .....

A google news search of the quote, "appropriate remedies and punishment, including impeachment."
http://news.google.com/news?ie=UTF-8...22&btnG=Search

...demonstrates support for the opinion that it got no widespread coverage....

Quote:

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/face_042907.pdf
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2685133.shtml
CBS News
FACE THE NATION
Sunday, April 29, 2007

(Page 7...)

Rep. MURTHA: Well, in the first place we gave the president everything he
asked for and then some. We gave him $4 billion more. We gave him for PTSD,
we gave him for brain damage, all those kind of things, more money for Walter
Reed to take care of those problems. But what--if he vetoes this bill, he's
cut off the money. But obviously we're going to pass another bill. It's
going to have some stringent requirements. I'd like to see two months. I'd
like to look at this again in two months later...
SCHIEFFER: Just fund it for two months, rather than a year.
Rep. MURTHA: Fund it for two months, instead of a year, and then look at it
again.
SCHIEFFER: White House says no.
Rep. MURTHA: White House says no. But the White House has said no to
everything. They say we're willing to compromise, and then we don't get
any--we've compromised on waivers for the requirements of the troops, which is
their own requirements, and also goals instead of requirements for the
benchmarks. So we've already compromised, and we need to make this president
understand, `Mr. President, the public has spoken.' There are three
ways--four ways to influence a president, and one is popular opinion, the
election, third is impeachment, and fourth is--and fourth is tighten the
purse.

SCHIEFFER: Are you seriously talking about contemplating an impeachment of
this president, congressman?
Rep. MURTHA: Bob, what I'm saying is there's four ways to influence a
president.
SCHIEFFER: And that's one of them?
Rep. MURTHA: And one of them's impeachment...

SCHIEFFER: And that's one option--that's an option that's on the table?
Rep. MURTHA: ...and the fourth one that is on--I'm just saying that's one
way to influence the president. The other way, is your purse. And the purse
is controlled by the Congress, who's elected by the public. In the last
election, public said we want the Democrats in control....

Quote:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=9929716
Democrats Prepare Contingency Plans for Bush Veto
NPR.org, April 30, 2007 ·

....There's four ways you can influence a president. First of all, there's the polls, which didn't influence him. Second of all, there's an election, which should have influenced the president. It has had some influence: He fired the secretary of defense. Third, there's impeachment, and fourth, there's the power of the purse. We're using the power of the purse to negotiate with the president, and I hope we'll be able to work out a – we want to work with the president to end this long conflict, where our troops are caught in a civil war.

Congressman Murtha, when you include impeachment in that list of four, are you raising that as a realistic possibility of something that could happen here?

Well, I'm just saying that's one of the options that Congress has on the table. I'm getting more and more calls from the public about impeachment. Realistically, obviously the power of the purse is the most powerful influence that the public has, and we have to exert that influence to our utmost ability.

You're saying you're getting calls from the public on impeachment. Is the call for impeachment anything that you would consider?

Well, it's just one of the things that we always consider. That's part of the process. We're very careful about that. I've been through two impeachment proceedings. It's a very difficult proceeding, and I don't think it's appropriate at this time. But it's one of the things, certainly, that I always consider.

Even CBS news provided no news reporting of Murtha's impeachment references, originally broadcast on their own network news, Sunday morning program.....

Contrast the lack of coverage about references to impeachment of Bush and Cheney with this "message"....from "the people":

Here are polling results from polls taken just before this Chris Matthews program aired:

Quote:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/t...03-26-poll.htm
USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,007 National Adults, aged 18+, conducted March 23-25, 2007:

14. Do you think Congress should -- or should not -- investigate the involvement of White House officials in this matter?
Yes, should No, should not No opinion
2007 Mar 23-25 ______________72 _____________21 ____________ 7

15. If Congress investigates these dismissals, in your view, should President Bush and his aides -- [ROTATED: invoke "executive privilege" to protect the White House decision making process (or should they) drop the claim of executive privilege and answer all questions being investigated]?

BASED ON –526—NATIONAL ADULTS IN FORM A
Invoke executive privilege Answer all questions No opinion
2007 Mar 23-25 ________________26 _______________________________68 _________________6

Quote:

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com...ves/10322.html
March 26, 2007
A painful four minutes

The Chris Matthews Show devoted four minutes to the prosecutor purge scandal over the weekend, which quickly worked its way onto YouTube. Glenn Greenwald <a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/03/26/matthews/index.html">called it</a> “the most revealing” YouTube clip ever. Before watching it, I thought he was probably exaggerating. Then I saw it for myself.

....MATTHEWS: Welcome back. The legend of Karl Rove has been over a decade in the making, ever since he teamed up with George W. Bush in 1994 in a down-and-dirty defeat of Governor Ann Richards. And of course, continuing with the wins over Gore and Kerry. The Bush-Rove team has developed a reputation for ruthlessness that’s earned them the hatred of a lot of Democrats, and also some grudging respect. When I interviewed Joe Biden on “Hardball” in 2005, he admitted there’s envy.

(Clip from July 12, 2005)

MATTHEWS: Do you think the Democrats wish they had a guy as good as Rove?

Senator JOE BIDEN: Oh, yeah. Absolutely. But I hopefully–yeah, yeah.

MATTHEWS: OK.

(End of clip)

MATTHEWS: Joe’s honest. Democrats are frustrated that Rove wasn’t indicted in the CIA leak case, but now that he’s been implicated in the firing of those US attorneys, it looks to some people as though Democrats are smelling blood.

Gloria, are they after Rove?

Ms. BORGER: Sure. You know, he’s the cross between Ahab and Darth Vader for them, for the Democrats. And honestly, they would love nothing more than to get him up before a congressional committee.

MATTHEWS: OK, OK.

Ms. BORGER: But they want to change the subject, Chris. They don’t want to talk about how they’re doing on the war in Iraq or where they’re…

MATTHEWS: You’re with me on that. They divide over the war and fund-raising, but this makes it simple. It’s good for fund-raising.

Ms. BORGER: Right.

MATTHEWS: Guess who’s making this case? Chuck Schumer, who’s the chief fund-raiser.

Ms. BORGER: Of course.

MATTHEWS: Rick, here’s the question. When the dog catches the car, what do they do? They want a confession, like on “Perry Mason,” where Rove just says, `You’re right, I’m no good.’ Do they want him to show his horns and be really nasty? Or do they want him to get into a perjury rap? What’re they after with this guy?

Mr. STENGEL: Well, as Joe Biden implied, it looks like the car would run over the dog in that case. And there are no–there are no “Perry Mason” moments except for “Perry Mason.” I am so uninterested in the Democrats wanting Karl Rove, because it is so bad for them. Because it shows business as usual, tit for tat, vengeance.

MATTHEWS: (Unintelligible).

Ms. BORGER: Mm-hmm.

Mr. STENGEL: That’s not what voters want to see.

MATTHEWS: So instead of like an issue like the war where you can say it’s bigger than all of us, it’s more important than politics, this is politics.

Mr. STENGEL: Yes, and it’s much less. It’s small bore politics.

O’DONNELL: The Democrats have to be very careful that they look like they’re not the party of investigation rather than legislation in trying to change things.

MATTHEWS: Yeah.....

Watch them giggle...the fourth "branch" of government....on a "mission" to constantly challenge those in power, or not?:

Quote:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...ews/index.html
Glenn Greenwald
Monday March 26, 2007 08:47 EST
The most revealing three-minute YouTube clip ever

 Just as was true for their virtually unanimous insistence that there was no wrongdoing worth investigating in the Plame case -- including the serial lying and obstruction of justice from the Vice President's top aide, one of the most powerful people in the White House -- they also see nothing wrong whatsoever with serial lying and corruption by the Attorney General in this case.

Think about this: there are only two instances in the last six years where real investigations occurred in any of the Bush scandals -- this U.S. attorneys scandal (because Democrats now have subpoena power) and the Plame case (due to the fluke of two Republican DOJ officials with integrity, James Comey and Patrick Fitzgerald). And in both cases, it was revealed conclusively that top Bush officials -- at the highest levels of the government -- repeatedly and deliberately lied about what they did. Isn't that pattern obviously extremely disturbing?

....... These are not journalists who want to uncover government corruption or act in an adversarial capacity to check government power. Rather, these are members of the royal court who are grateful to the King and his minions for granting them their status. What they want more than anything is to protect and preserve the system that has so rewarded them -- with status and money and fame and access and comfort. They're the ludicrous clowns who entertain the public by belittling any facts which demonstrate pervasive corruption and deceit at the highest levels of our government, and who completely degrade the public discourse with their petty, pompous, shallow, vapid chatter that transforms every important political matter into a stupid gossipy joke.

<h3>Here are several of our media elites from our nation's most influential journalistic outlets -- including from Time, U.S. News & World Report, The New York Times, and NBC News -- all sitting around on the Chris Matthews Show giggling for three and a half minutes straight about the silly U.S. attorneys scandal. The whole thing is just a fun game for them, and it's absurd to them that anyone could take things like this seriously.</h3>

And what is most notable is that they express outrage at one part, and one part only, of this whole story -- namely, they are furious over the fact that the foolish, unfair Democrats would even dare to try to force Karl Rove to testify. Why, firing U.S. attorneys and lying to Congress and the country about it is all fair game, but that -- trying to get Rove to answer questions -- is really beyond the pale. Just watch how the people who have done so much damage to our country think and behave:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZuulS3xfKs&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Esalon%2Ecom%2Fopinion%2Fgreenwald%2F2007%2F03%2F26%2Fmatthews%2Findex%2Ehtml">Chris Matthews Show - 070324 - Purge Scandal YouTube</a>

If you've watched the video, consider this:

Quote:

http://theimpolitic.blogspot.com/200...a-is-mess.html
Monday, March 26, 2007
The media is the mess

....This gossipy, frivolous tripe masquerading as political commentary is coming from Chris Matthews of NBC; Norah O’Donnell, chief Washington correspondent for MSNBC; Richard Stengel, editor of Time magazine; Gloria Borger, national political correspondent for CBS News and a columnist for U.S. News and World Report; and Patrick Healy, a political reporter for the New York Times. You have to watch it to believe it.....

......For those who can't watch videos, Steve Benen has <a href="http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10322.html">the transcript</a> but it's not nearly as strong without the four minutes of incessant giggling going on among these "serious" pundits. They're not concerned about the burgeoning evidence that the administration has engaged in six years of serial lying to the detriment of our national security. But they're outraged that anyone -- namely Democrats -- would call the White House to account for its criminal behavior.....

Contrast what Andrea mitchell has reported twice....with:

Quote:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200703130010

Ignoring polling to the contrary, NBC's Mitchell claimed "most people think ... Libby should be pardoned"

Discussing the recent conviction of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby on the March 12 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, NBC chief foreign correspondent Andrea Mitchell claimed that polling "indicates that most people think, in fact, that he should be pardoned -- Scooter Libby should be pardoned." Mitchell did not indicate to what specific "polling" she was referring. But a CNN poll released earlier that same day indicated that an overwhelming majority of Americans do not believe Libby should be pardoned.

The CNN poll, released at 4 p.m. ET on March 12, found that 69 percent of respondents felt President Bush "should not pardon" Libby, while only 18 percent felt the president "should pardon" him. CNN appears to be the only major news outlet thus far to have posed the question in a poll since Libby's March 6 conviction on federal charges of perjury and obstructing justice in connection with an investigation into the leaking of the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame....

Quote:

http://www.pollingreport.com/whprobe.htm

Gallup Poll. March 11-14, 2007. N=1,009 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
"As you may know, a jury found Libby guilty on four out of five criminal counts. Do you think George W. Bush should or should not issue a presidential pardon for Lewis 'Scooter' Libby?"
.
Should Should Not Unsure
% % %

3/11-14/07 ______21 ________67 __________12

Time Poll conducted by Schulman, Ronca & Bucuvalas (SRBI) Public Affairs. March 9-12, 2007. N=1,711 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, Louis 'Scooter' Libby, was convicted last week of lying to a grand jury and to FBI agents investigating the leak of the name of a secret CIA operative in 2003. Do you think that President Bush should give Libby a presidential pardon, or not?"

Should Should Not Unsure
% % %

3/9-12/07 _______18 ________72 __________11

....and here was Andrea Mitchell observed again, on April 26, telling the same lie about favorable sentiment for a Libby pardon:

Quote:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/013860.php
(April 26, 2007 -- 02:32 PM EDT)

You probably remember a few weeks ago when NBC's Andrea Mitchell went on the air and announced that the American people supported pardoning Scooter Libby when they actually overwhelmingly opposed it, according to all available polling.

Well, this morning TPM Reader CG caught her at it again, this time with Nancy Pelosi. And we grabbed the clip for a TPMtv Extra.

Take a look ...

....so, all ye "conservativolk", no need to confine your viewership to foxnews....all of the major media seems beholden to your opinions....