Lemuria Press - I Do Not Favor Impeachment

Lemuria Press - I Do Not Favor Impeachment
Strange Adventures on Other Worlds

Date:	2007-07-02 17:15
Subject:	I Do Not Favor Impeachment
Security:	Public
Location:	Work
Music:	La Marseillaise

For the record, and in light of the shameful commutation of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the Vice President's claims of being above and outside the law, and pretty much everything Alberto Gonzales has said or done in the last three years, I want to make it clear that I do NOT favor impeachment for this gang of criminals.

There are other solutions.

Post A Comment | 17 Comments | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link

User:	kirkmona
Date:	2007-07-03 02:40 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Well, as I pointed out in my blog post

http://kirk.blogspot.com

today, George W. Bush is guilty of violating Title 18 United States Code, Section 113C a.k.a the federal torture act. The punishment for violation of the law is death. Reading it closely though, there are some catches. First, the death penalty applies only to torture that killed people (which has clearly occurred) and he would have had to be the one who actually did it. Telling other people to do it may or may not count. (We'll decide at the Tennis Court.)

In part C it states that "A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy."

So, conspiracy to commit torture is exempted from the death penalty. It is, however, punishable by a life sentence in jail.

~K

Reply | Thread | Link

User:	lemuriapress
Date:	2007-07-03 03:12 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

I can support that, too, though I'm not sure it's as patriotic.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	talmun
Date:	2007-07-03 05:16 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

I find myself pondering your choice of photos...message there or just an appropriate pic?

Reply | Thread | Link

User:	lemuriapress
Date:	2007-07-03 06:53 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Both. I find that the analogy's historical accuracy grows and grows by the week.

And it's been growing a long time.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	bccreations
Date:	2007-07-03 11:18 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

I was surprised that you hadn't posted about this when I saw the Transformers trailer. That teaches me for not scrolling down far enough.

The poor have known for a long time that the rich hold themselves to a different set of laws. It's always been that way in this country. W is just flaunting that fact a little bit more than usual.

Reply | Thread | Link

User:	mordicai
Date:	2007-07-03 12:02 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Well, I will say that I consider abuse of authority in a different light than the abuses that come with money; largely the difference is ethical. The holder of authority is supposed to be above all that, theoretically, not the facilitator.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	bccreations
Date:	2007-07-03 13:31 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

The holder of authority is supposed to be above all that, theoretically, not the facilitator.

Theoretically, or more appropriately, ideally, has that actually been the case?

Even the presidential race is measured in dollars.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	mordicai
Date:	2007-07-03 15:12 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Hey, you're preaching to the choir. A big part of my basic disintrest (though not lack of participation) in American government is that the only political opinions debated are how to best keep the status quo. Plutocracy is rampant & more-over government clearly needs to evolve to deal with information media (luckily America had a bunch of insightful dudes on top of it a little with their whole "Bill of Rights" gig) & corporations (which who can parse? weird memetic vampires? huh?).

I personally vote almost unilaterally third-party, as the enfranchisement of the artificial two-party system is a total betrayal of the possibilities of the Republic. Or at least, I figure.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	bccreations
Date:	2007-07-03 15:22 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Having volunteered for multiple democratic campaigns, I saw just how extreme that enfranchisement is. I don't place much value on the democratic/republican rivalry. It's a puppet show to make sure one of them remains in power.

And you know what? It works. I have rarely found 3rd-party candidates that are a suitable replacement for the mainstream candidates. The machine, as it's currently structured, almost guarantees that a republican or a democrat will get elected. I am impressed that Vermont has 5 progressive congressmen in their state legislature. It would be interesting to see that on a national level. Easiest way to manage that would be to elected as a republican or democrat and then change parties, not that it's likely to happen more than the occasional Lieberman.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	mordicai
Date:	2007-07-03 15:50 (UTC)
Subject:	Or Bloomberg!

Yeah, but I vote from a position of ideology intersected with pragmatism (as do many, I suppose); I'd rather see my vote inch the "other" percent up insofar as the popular vote (in the case of the presidency) is only used as a guideline by the Electoral College. Which I'd like to point out I support: republic over democracy any day of the week.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	mordicai
Date:	2007-07-03 11:59 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Colbert made a joke on "The Word" when he mentioned that the Democrats had taken impeachment off the table; on the side-bar it wrote "See: President Cheney".

Reply | Thread | Link

User:	kirkmona
Date:	2007-07-03 13:04 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Well you could still impeach the president but then the Senate would have to vote to convict before we'd have president Cheney. I'd settle for simply an impeachment in that case but the real beauty is that Cheney is more guilty of these crimes than Bush so we should, impeach and convict them both.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	bccreations
Date:	2007-07-03 13:32 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Dennis Cucinich introduced a bill to impeach Cheney. The only magazine to carry the story was Wired.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

User:	mordicai
Date:	2007-07-03 15:21 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

I'm not a fan of the use of impeachment as a gesture; I opposed it in Clinton's case (though the idiot went & perjured himself instead of just telling everyone to fuck off) on the same grounds. Using political process as a shame-circus is rubbish.

I agree that Cheney is the real offender (Not in the Executive? Then he tried to abolish the office of oversight?) & should probably be tried. Or promoted. One of the two!

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link