Wexler/Dodd/Kucinich '08.

Time is running out. Only about 11 Months before Bush says,

Thanks Suckers. Have fun cause it ain't my problem no more.

Thank YOU Rep. Wexler. There are few things that prompt me to sign my own name to but this was a no-brainer.

well, it's now over 85 thousand signatures.....including mine.

We should prosecute Neocon Nancy for conspiracy to commit treason. She's a big reason the Dems haven't moved forward on this. I am completely, irreversibly convinced she she is a crook just like Darth and W. "Praying with the President" indeed.

The tide is finally turning. Next year is going to be hell for the Republicans.

An election is coming and Americans are waking up, looking back, and thoroughly rejecting the banana republican government we have been subjected to under Bush.

the other crooks and liars threads on this subject also track the metrics, it surpassed 112,000 today, the the tally was altered/hacked? back down to 83,000....somethings fishy here!

karl, get off that damn computer and go 'spend more time with your family'!

well, thanks, i suppose, for doing your job, congressman wexler.

you still don't deserve a pay raise until you actually pry him from his fortress, though.

hey, can the C&L sitemonitor please link the other threads so newbies to this thread can see and learn about the discussions and reference articles already posted related to this subject?

THANKS

this is excellent news!
if you haven't signed, do so now.

Let's push the bar up to one million signatures. You can probably get that much by next week and those Republocrats are going to have to take notice.

they have almost 86,000 already.....I'd sign...but I already did...........c'mon people now......

purvis ames @ 20:

Let's push the bar up to one million signatures. You can probably get that much by next week and those Republocrats are going to have to take notice.

That would be tough with no media coverage................well.........KO...what are ya gonna do?

Signed. I guess this means the NSA will get to listen to me order Chinese now.

Just look at these two other C&L threads, they indicate that we reached 80,000 almost 12 hours ago. How can it possibly only be at 85,000 now when they were adding 1-2 per second?
Do the math people, and don't use Karl's Calculator!

1st thread
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/15/congressman-wexler-calls-for-ch...

2nd thread
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/16/wexlers-goal-of-50000-signature...

Current thread
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/17/cl-exclusive-rep-wexler-thanks-...

I hope Wexler runs against Mel Martinez for FL senate when Mel's term is up

Truth B Told @ 17:

Bill Clinton says if Hillary is elected President, he and President HW Bush will travel the world repairing the damage caused politically by W.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/12/17/bill-clinton-george-hw-bush-will-help-president-hillary/

there isn't a single republican in america who will cross over and vote for hillary clinton. the mere thought of addressing slick willie as "first gentleman" will be enough to mobilize the entire army of orcs, come november '08.

i strongly suspect this is why rupert murdoch threw a fundraiser for hill.

Randi Rhodes radio talk show discussed it for two hours on Friday, you will find the link on one of the other two threads where i posted it earlier. Enjoy!

I think we easily already have over 115,000 but something is screwing up the metrics on Wexler's website. I hope the are monitoring the input coming in and if the numbers don't match, investigating for possible fraudulent activity.

The stakes could not be higher, merely the fate of this once great Democratic Republic!

No-one is above the law, and that includes Cheney and Bush. Hold them accountable for their crimes and malfeasance..

DailyKos Covers Impeachment Signatures Surpassing 90,000 over four hours ago!

Action: 90K Signed Impeach Cheney Petition; Will You?
by ammasdarling
Mon Dec 17, 2007 at 04:07:26 PM PST
On Friday, Representatives Wexler, Gutierrez, and Baldwin issued a joint call for hearings in the House Judiciary Committee about impeaching Vice President Cheney. All three sit on the committee. They wrote an op-ed column, but so far the MSM has ignored their call and not published the op-ed. It is important to note that the few polls that have been taken about impeaching Cheney have shown a majority for it.

Rep. Wexler posted an online petition to show support for the hearings. In just three days, 90,000 people have signed it. You can sign the petition (and read the op-ed) here.
With enough support, we will reach 100,000 signatures before noon tomorrow!
Sign here!
ammasdarling's diary :: ::
Tags: Impeachment, Dick Cheney (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions
Permalink | 17 Comments

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/17/185312/92/606/423501

I have a great fear that in actuality Cheney and Bush ARE above the law. So far my fear has been proven right over and over again for the last six years. NOBODY has been able to stop their train. Heroes like Dodd, Kennedy, Feingold, and Wexler fill me with hope.
THANK YOU.

No, thank you congressman Wexler. Helping get this career asshole Chaney is our pleasure. Don't worry Dick, you'll get a fair trial, you evil fuck!

Why does Wexler need the media or our signatures in order for him to do his job and hold hearings into the obvious crimes of the Vice President? Just investigate him. The attention of the nation will come as the investigations commence. True story?

www.WexlerWantsHearings.com Pass it on.

TheNextDylan @ 39:

I am signer 46,007. I think.

i was number 59

Corporate Media Means No Real News
by Dave Lindorff (excerpt and link)
Monday Dec 17th, 2007 5:39 PM
Americans DEMAND impeachment hearings... where is the establishment media on this?
Photograph of Article Included!
(Readers of Indybay.org know what is happening!)
http://www.indybay.org/search/search_results.php?search=Lindorff

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/12/17/18467567.php

Part of Wexlers campaign for congress is "LEGALIZATION OF ONLINE POKER
AND GAMES OF SKILL" WTF!!! I smell lobbyists. How is this important to everyday Americans?

I am starting to suspect that Wexler may only be doing the Cheney Impeachment thing to get donations on his website.

larkztongue @ 36:

FRED P @ 25:

OK FIRST YOU WANTED 50,000 AND NOW YOU WANT 250,000....? UM ISNT THAT WHAT IS KNOWN AS RAISING THE BAR. FU%K THE 250,000 START THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS NOW!!! WE HAVE WAITED TO LONG FOR THIS!!! DO YOUR JOB AND IMPEACH THE FU#$ER!!!!

Last month there was that "rumor" that Pelosi would put Impeachment back on the table if she got 10,000 hand written letters. I sent mine.
Wexler asked for 50,000 signatures, we gave him 85,000-Now he wants 250,000?
F__K-IT, Lets give them 350,000 or 500,000!
Let's get rid of Dick-I am SO tired of Dick-And that's something else coming from a gay guy!

FYI- I signed this petition on Saturday.

FRED P @ 25:

OK FIRST YOU WANTED 50,000 AND NOW YOU WANT 250,000....? UM ISNT THAT WHAT IS KNOWN AS RAISING THE BAR. FU%K THE 250,000 START THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS NOW!!! WE HAVE WAITED TO LONG FOR THIS!!! DO YOUR JOB AND IMPEACH THE FU#$ER!!!!

how long have you been an asshole who sits at his computer doing nothing but bitching?

McDuff @ 51:

"I was shocked when no newspaper would publish the op-ed I wrote with Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI). "

Don't be shocked, Representative. After reading the news that made headlines today on the internet I sat down as usual around 6 pm surfing the TV for the local and national evening news. I watched some BBC news and then put on Brian Williams and Katie Couric to see what they were reporting about.

I felt as if I was watching recorded broadcasts from years past, mostly because the main stream media seemed out of touch with reality. I asked myself, "Do these people live on the same planet I live on? I saw nothing but fluff pieces and shallow reporting. It's as if the internet and the mainstream media exist on two different planets.

Is it any wonder why some people, especially the 25% who are still supporting this government seem to be out of touch with reality?

History is in the eye of the beholder.

History is written by....the winners.

It's Me @ 41:

An impeachment of Bush/Cheney is a total non-starter as long as the United States Justice Department has been STACKED with Loyal Bushies who have no intention of prosecuting witnesses or agencies who refuse to testify or produce documentaion to support the charges. And it HAS BEEN STACKED with Loyal Bushies in this way. It would be a HUGE waste of time going into the next election year. I know all the arguments about how it's the bedrock of our democracy and all that. But there is simply no time for it.

The case for the impeachment of Bill Clinton began in earnest among the Republicans in Congress the day he announced his run for president in 1992. Two years is not enough time to impeach Bush/Cheney and still get other things done so they can show how much more effective a Democratic Congress is than a Republican Congress.

If you hate Repubicans so much, stop bashing the Democrats in Congress and the Democratic presidential candidates and vote for them against every Republican on the ballot next November. You want to really piss off the Bushies? Vote for Hillary Clinton and put her in the White House.

In the last 20 years or rather 5 presidential terms, TWO families have controlled the White house-add 2 or 3 more years to that if you feel Reagan really wasn't at home in his second term.
Is it a good idea to put one of those two families BACK in the White House?

I believe there are actually two prerequisites to impeachment.

1. The official in question must be a Democrat.
2. The alleged offense must involve sex.

I'm sure it's in the constitution somewhere...

The main stream media should also be held accountable for their Orwellean treasoneous behavior.

We need impeachment in order to protect our national security. The next president -- and congress -- needs to know the full extent of the Bush administration's activities in order to make good decisions regarding national security. Clearly the only possible way to get the truth from the Bush administration is to bring them into a legal procedure which will require sworn testimony accompanied by a clear explanation of the laws and punishments regarding perjury, and a stated commitment to executing those laws, in addition to the laws concerning the statute of limitation on the charge of treason.

Dear Senator Wexler,

Thank you for having the courage to pursue this in the light of Democratic fear.

Wish I lived in your District.

organmeat @ 48:

Part of Wexlers campaign for congress is "LEGALIZATION OF ONLINE POKER
AND GAMES OF SKILL" WTF!!! I smell lobbyists. How is this important to everyday Americans?

It could be important to the people of his district. Perhaps it has proven a terrific revenue generator in his region. I don't know, I'm just speculating.

Why should gambling be illegal anyway? Personally, I'm all for removing all statutes that make consensual behavior illegal.

I am starting to suspect that Wexler may only be doing the Cheney Impeachment thing to get donations on his website.

Because he champions an issue you don't?

Karen @ 70:

organmeat @ 48:

Part of Wexlers campaign for congress is "LEGALIZATION OF ONLINE POKER
AND GAMES OF SKILL" WTF!!! I smell lobbyists. How is this important to everyday Americans?

It could be important to the people of his district. Perhaps it has proven a terrific revenue generator in his region. I don't know, I'm just speculating.

Why should gambling be illegal anyway? Personally, I'm all for removing all statutes that make consensual behavior illegal.

I am starting to suspect that Wexler may only be doing the Cheney Impeachment thing to get donations on his website.

Because he champions an issue you don't?

No. I do champion that issue. I signed the petition yesterday. Why do people have to polarize everything? Cause I am questioning a Dem I am a repub. But, if I question a repub I am a dem. Can't we all vote for what is best like impeaching Cheney to save our constitution or no legal gambling cause I don't want some moron robbing me to support his habit.

L.A. Confidential @ 4:

AlphaFactor @ 2:

250,000 signatories in a week...

And the Democrats want to avoid impeachment hearings... WHY????

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

You misspelled "Not enough loyal Senate votes."

AlphaFactor @ 2:

250,000 signatories in a week...

And the Democrats want to avoid impeachment hearings... WHY????

As President Bush said: "Sometimes, money trumps... peace" And apparently everything else... including our Constitution.

organmeat @ 76:

Karen @ 70:

organmeat @ 48:

Part of Wexlers campaign for congress is "LEGALIZATION OF ONLINE POKER
AND GAMES OF SKILL" WTF!!! I smell lobbyists. How is this important to everyday Americans?

It could be important to the people of his district. Perhaps it has proven a terrific revenue generator in his region. I don't know, I'm just speculating.

Why should gambling be illegal anyway? Personally, I'm all for removing all statutes that make consensual behavior illegal.

I am starting to suspect that Wexler may only be doing the Cheney Impeachment thing to get donations on his website.

Because he champions an issue you don't?

Sry was off the mark off what you said. No. It's because the issue he champions (I'm sure that word doesn't fit the context of legalizing gambling) is as absurd to enter into our national debate as it is for us to talk about baseball players doing steroids.

Okeedoke...previous comment retracted. :)

I respectfully disagree with your assessment, though. While I agree that legalizing online gambling is hardly the most pressing issue our country faces right now, to me, it's just another civil liberties question. I see no reason for it to be illegal, but it is illegal.

Steroids in baseball, however, is flat out irrelevant to the affairs of government.

I also still don't understand how his campaign to legalize online gambling in any way undermines his credibility or sincerity vis-a-vis impeachment.

Karen @ 78:
I do not understand your question. How would legalizing online gambling put you in any greater danger of being robbed?

Here's how http://www.dailyherald.com/story/print/?id=96597 I love Gov. Rod Blagojevich but someone who works for him robbed the tax paying citizens because of his gambling problem. And is robbing the public of their trust in a good Gov.

We all need to help get the word out and advise our friends about the Wexler Hearings for Cheney Impeachment Project. If there was just minimum media assistance, the support number could easily challenge some of the popular themes on YouTube, that eclipse 7-figures. The Wexler Hearings for Cheney Impeachment Project is a very good way to teach students about the US Constitution and explain to them that our Representatives sometimes have obligations to the United States as Statesman and not just Politicians. The timing for this Constitutional exercise could not be better, as these hearings would be the perfect prelude to the 2008 Election. At the absolute minimum, the Wexler Hearings for Cheney Impeachment Project will provide a nice footnote for this grim period in our countries history.

organmeat @ 83:

Karen @ 78:
I do not understand your question. How would legalizing online gambling put you in any greater danger of being robbed?

Here's how http://www.dailyherald.com/story/print/?id=96597 I love Gov. Rod Blagojevich but someone who works for him robbed the tax paying citizens because of his gambling problem. And is robbing the public of their trust in a good Gov.

That article deals with a person robbing the public in order to pay for his illegal gambling.

People are going to gamble without regard to its legality, especially the addicts. And it's the addicts who are likely to steal in order to cover themselves in desperate situations.

Legalizing and regulating online gambling would have, at worst, no net affect on your chances of being robbed, and at most, a positive one, given that whatever taboos regarding admitting one's addiction and receiving help for it might begin to break.

I see no reason for consensual behavior to be illegal. Drug use, prostitution, gambling, etc. Their illegality costs all of us in wasted resources (vice cops who should be patrolling streets for violent people instead; tons of money down the drain of the already-stressed criminal justice system) and overcrowds our jails with people who may not have been violent upon entering, but likely will be upon exiting.

Odus @ 65 "The next president -- and congress -- needs to know the full extent of the Bush administration's activities in order to make good decisions regarding national security."

Go fish. If you think these facts aren't already known, they aren't going to be revealed by an impeachment trial.

"Clearly the only possible way to get the truth from the Bush administration is to bring them into a legal procedure"

A Senate trial is NOT a legal procedure, other than as that body is legally engaged in its business/duties. Conviction has ZERO consequence other than removal.

"which will require sworn testimony accompanied by a clear explanation of the laws and punishments regarding perjury, and a stated commitment to executing those laws, in addition to the laws concerning the statute of limitation on the charge of treason."

No such charges will be in evidence in the Senate. Cheney will NOT appear. His lawyers will NOT offer up information. For the most part, a Cheney impeachment will sit and moulder in the Senate, and eventually be voted down.

That's, btw, why it has been off the table. Nothing has changed -- and getting 250,000 signatures doesn't change anything. We already know there are 50 million people or so who want Bushco impeached (and so on). Even putting a couple of million in DC will not force a conviction if the R and DINO want to go down with the ship.

It's a POLITICAL issue, though that is hard for a lot of people to understand. I support Pelosi's actions because I understand why this person who WILL herself vote for impeachment in a heartbeat has put the process off the table -- because she knows this is a coup, and she knows that the Senate is blocked but good.

Still, I think the time has come to let Leader Reid hold the hot potato. It is, after all, mostly his problem.

Karen @ 82:

yogi-one @ 9:

We should prosecute Neocon Nancy for conspiracy to commit treason. She's a big reason the Dems haven't moved forward on this. I am completely, irreversibly convinced she she is a crook just like Darth and W. "Praying with the President" indeed.

Pelosi might be a disappointment for various reasons, but your irreversible conviction is -- to put it politely -- way over the top.

Precisely what evidence even convinces you the Speaker is a neo-con, much less a crook? Indeed, she refuses to move ahead with impeachment, and I disagree with her about this. Nevertheless, Pelosi is clearly a progressive. Even a brief skimming of her record would reveal this.

Nancy Pelosi is impotent and presides over a house of representatives that is held in even lower esteem (by We the People) than the Bush admin....

(she knew about torture) ...and said nothing...

milquetoast @ 88:

I hope she loses it to Cindy Sheehan

Count the votes. 1/3 of the Speaker's support is from Jews. 1/3 is from business and unions. Those are solid votes. 1/3 is from gays, leftists, the general public.

Since Cindy Sheehan is not already campaigning -- going door-to-door and working REALLY HARD, and since she is not getting significant funding, she is not going to get the chance to be a freshman Rep. to replace the Speaker of the House. She ought to run against a REPUBLICAN, or a DLC/Blue Dog Dem. Running against a powerful Progressive is counterproductive, your unfounded opinions notwithstanding.

I like cocaine because it is a fun thing to do.

milquetoast @ 91:

Karen @ 82:

yogi-one @ 9:

We should prosecute Neocon Nancy for conspiracy to commit treason. She's a big reason the Dems haven't moved forward on this. I am completely, irreversibly convinced she she is a crook just like Darth and W. "Praying with the President" indeed.

Pelosi might be a disappointment for various reasons, but your irreversible conviction is -- to put it politely -- way over the top.

Precisely what evidence even convinces you the Speaker is a neo-con, much less a crook? Indeed, she refuses to move ahead with impeachment, and I disagree with her about this. Nevertheless, Pelosi is clearly a progressive. Even a brief skimming of her record would reveal this.

(she knew about torture) ...and said nothing...

I'll give you that one. The recent revelations about her behavior when briefed on torture years back was disturbing.

Even so, it's still over the top to call her a neo-con.

Nancy Pelosi is impotent and presides over a house of representatives that is held in even lower esteem (by We the People) than the Bush admin....

Political impotence in the face of the body she heads should give one pause before criticizing her actions. She herself is a long-time progressive. Not every Democrat in the Congress is.

As for Congress' low approval rating, it is not as significant as many seem to think it is. Congress always has a staggeringly low approval rating. Individual voters tend to regard politicians a rather lowly lot at large. But they think that their guy in their district fights the good fight. The result? Virtually the same Congress every two years, and the same low approval rating.

These days, indeed, the bar has dropped, since people ushered in a new Congress, and (rightly or wrongly) feel betrayed. But the "even lower than Bush" number doesn't mean very much.

gn all...be well...

You'd figure the guy that said he enjoyed cocaine would circulate a better press photo. There he kind of looks like he wants you to do a line with him.

"Let's get some blow and impeach Cheney!"

Not that I can complain, my rep. is Corrine Brown. :(

Karen @ 97:

I'll give you that one. The recent revelations about her behavior when briefed on torture years back was disturbing..

What do you expect her, the minority whip at the time, to do about it? She is in a briefing in which the DoJ has signed off on the procedures as LEGAL. If you have any idea what kind of evil shit you have to be briefed on in order to be part of this government, you would not think she should take the blame for being BRIEFED, in whatever way that was, under the pressure of a 'war' president after a terrorist attack that has given that president the general support of the public, and certainly of the MAJORITY party in the House.

It is the Judicial system which is under the requirement of determining legality of Executive policies. It is far from clear where the dividing line is in cases of national security, as should be obvious by now.

The other piece of absurdity is when Glenn Greenwald freaked out about Reyes being put in charge of the Intelligence Comm. instead of Blue Dog Harmon, who personally represents the military industrial complex, and who Minority Whip Pelosi served with during those days. The Speaker blocked Harmon from leading that committee, and stripped her assignment to the committee, because she doesn't trust her.

Now, if you don't know either politician, you can blame Pelosi for that. Knowing Pelosi's career (pretty well), and having fought Harmon in 2006 (although in a neighboring district), it is CLEAR that putting one of the top aerospace district reps in charge of the intelligence comm. would have furthered the Bushco war effort and the coverup.

Instead, GG and the suspicious release of that briefing rumor, built Harmon into the honorable one. Gee, I wonder why that is?

Karen @ 104:

For the benefit of anyone reading:

A while back, I vowed not to argue with Paul in LA. I'll be sticking to that.

awwwwww c'mon....say it! (Nancy Pelosi sucks)...its very easy!

Karen @ 106:

milquetoast @ 105:

Karen @ 104:

For the benefit of anyone reading:

A while back, I vowed not to argue with Paul in LA. I'll be sticking to that.

awwwwww c'mon....say it! (Nancy Pelosi sucks)...its very easy!

Though she has disappointed me over the past year and a half in certain ways, I actually don't agree with that. :)

So you would say she blows? How rude...

.

Rep. Wexler writes:
Originally, my goal was to gain 50,000 online signatures on behalf of impeachment hearings. Today, our goal is 250,000 supporters."

E X C U S E
M E???????

Moving the goal posts?
What's next?
When we hit that "NEW" magic number, no matter how arbitrary it is, what's next?
A MILLION?

This IS BULLSHIT!

Lazy ass Congresspeople wouldn't know the Law if it bit them on their noses.
Just HOW is Congress supporting and defending OUR constitution of the U.S.A. when they consistently allow it's usurpation and wanton and willful violation. Forget the fact tha Congress doesn't care they've been supplanted by the Administration, for they deserve what they tolerate, but to NOT support and defend THE PEOPLE'S RIGHTS...

IS BETRAYAL OF THE HIGHEST.

T R E A S O N!

Such hesitation can only be justified when one understands that in their Oath, they swore to it's undertaking, freely, WITHOUT mental reservations OR purpose of evasion.

Just what are they supporting and defending IF NOT OUR RIGHTS?

Each evasion and obfuscation, each attempt to justify issues that act against deeply sacred and American values such as Habeas Corpus, the Right to redress and Due process, WARRANTS, council, etc, is an act AGAINST AMERICA AND EACH AMERICAN.

T R E A S O N!

The terrorists didn't suspend Habeas Corpus, nor did the president or V.P....
... CONGRESS DID!

The terrorists didn't refuse council, redress and due process...
... CONGRESS DID!

The terrorists haven't been briefed about WARRANTLESS WIRE TAPS OF AMEIRCANS or TORTURE...
... CONGRESS DID!

T R E A S O N!

.

miss_kitty @ 100:

Tom Foley lost to a novice in 1992. And that guy did not have the recognition factor that Sheehan has. Sheehan can probably count on national donations.

Foley lost in 1994, not 1992.

"Foley lost in a narrow race that coincided with the Republican electoral triumph of 1994. Foley became the first sitting Speaker of the House to lose his bid for re-election since William Pennington (R-New Jersey) in 1860 to Nehemiah Perry." (wikipedia)

It's rare. In that case, the House shifted to the R for the first time in 30 years or so, a big partisan shift. No such shift against is imminent.

"Sheehan can probably count on national donations."

She can. From REPUBLICANS (like Nader).

However, where do you think the time is going to come from? It's going, going, gone. If GSM Sheehan does not actively door-to-door campaign, the suggestion that funded ads will be sufficient to unseat a popular or at least powerful gov't official -- that's very rare indeed.

It's a pipedream. I support GSM Sheehan as a honored victim of GWB's crimes. But that doesn't mean she is qualified to replace one of our top Progressive politicians, and that thought will cross the mind of the 1/3 of the electorate that is in play.

But Speaker Pelosi is, btw, possibly the top non-gay GLBT activist in the gov't. She has made herself a GLBT hero for twenty years. Some leftist GLBT will vote against her, but her representation of her district has been just about sterling, except for this disagreement of the advisability of an attempt to remove the head of a conspiracy when the upper body of Congress is 75% in the head's employ to one degree or another.

Six months from now, Rep. Pelosi will be reelected. Whether or not she is made Speaker again in late 2008 will depend on many factors. This spurious effort to remove her will backfire as did the attempt to do a sit-in in Chairman Conyer's office.

Karen @ 72:

organmeat @ 48:

Part of Wexlers campaign for congress is "LEGALIZATION OF ONLINE POKER
AND GAMES OF SKILL" WTF!!! I smell lobbyists. How is this important to everyday Americans?

It could be important to the people of his district. Perhaps it has proven a terrific revenue generator in his region. I don't know, I'm just speculating.

Why should gambling be illegal anyway? Personally, I'm all for removing all statutes that make consensual behavior illegal.

I am starting to suspect that Wexler may only be doing the Cheney Impeachment thing to get donations on his website.

Because he champions an issue you don't?

thank you karen, this guy with low self-esteem just does not see past his own hypocracy.

Thank You ! Congressman Wexler.

It reassuring to know that there are still a few more Congressman left on our side that stands for LAW and ORDER.

Now lets make it happen.............so that WE can restore BACK the BALANCE of POWER to the co-equal branch of government before this unprecedented expansion of power and abuses IS past on to the NEXT PRESIDENT.

IMPEACHMENT is the only way to stop this MADNESS the BUSH ADMINISTRATION and their cohort put the whole world in.

Perhaps when all is DONE the WORLD can begin to heal from the TRAUMA that this regime caused.

Karen @ 87:

organmeat @ 83:

Karen @ 78:
I do not understand your question. How would legalizing online gambling put you in any greater danger of being robbed?

Here's how http://www.dailyherald.com/story/print/?id=96597 I love Gov. Rod Blagojevich but someone who works for him robbed the tax paying citizens because of his gambling problem. And is robbing the public of their trust in a good Gov.

That article deals with a person robbing the public in order to pay for his illegal gambling.

People are going to gamble without regard to its legality, especially the addicts. And it's the addicts who are likely to steal in order to cover themselves in desperate situations.

Legalizing and regulating online gambling would have, at worst, no net affect on your chances of being robbed, and at most, a positive one, given that whatever taboos regarding admitting one's addiction and receiving help for it might begin to break.

I see no reason for consensual behavior to be illegal. Drug use, prostitution, gambling, etc. Their illegality costs all of us in wasted resources (vice cops who should be patrolling streets for violent people instead; tons of money down the drain of the already-stressed criminal justice system) and overcrowds our jails with people who may not have been violent upon entering, but likely will be upon exiting.

thank you again..............you have an excellent grasp of reality....what is and is not worth trying to regulate and enforce. right on about prison........many times a soft criminal comes out of prison harden to life.

Paul in LA @ 116:

... I know of NO party that has as many seasoned professional Progressives as the Democratic Party, leftist disaffiliation notwithstanding.

Too bad there are only a few of them in Congress. And none of them are the ones you so often vociferously defend here.

rduke @ 120:

When they get the 250k.. they will ask for a million..

He's trying to impress the Committee. That's worthwhile. Congress is impressed by public EFFORTS, and one way to persuade is by showing you can get it to happen.

To accuse the Congressman of making you jump through hoops for his own entertainment or aggrandizement is disgusting. However, no politician wears sack cloth, so if you sign the second form and get on Wexler's mailing list, yeah, they will increase their political power by these means as well.

Paul in LA @ 118:

Max-1 @ 114 "Progressive means to move forward, not to obstruct it's movement."

No, actually 'progressive' means to ACTUALLY progress.

Why try to argue over what the definition of IS is?

If Pelosi is progressive, your claim, then where is the progress.

Prove me wrong.

.

p.s.
Paul in LA and other who are concerned,

As Wexler stated, for those who care, the obvious is painfully clear.

Impeachment IS an obligation, NOT a choice.

If it is a choice, then prove that warrantless is legal. Then prove wars of aggression are legal. Then prove lying to a joint session of Congress so as coerce them into passing unconstitutional laws.

Pelosi, like every elected Federal Officer, took an Oath to the entire Constitution, not to what suits them politically. For anyone to attempt to argue the legitimacy of such lunacy, make the DOJ scandal PALE in comparison. Just what principles do Americans value?

.

miss_kitty @ 119:

Paul in LA @ 116:

... I know of NO party that has as many seasoned professional Progressives as the Democratic Party, leftist disaffiliation notwithstanding.

Too bad there are only a few of them in Congress. And none of them are the ones you so often vociferously defend here.

Except your Pelosi goddess.

"Beyond that, the duty of a Speaker is to promote the comity of the House. During a coup, it is certainly reasonable to attempt to shake the House affiliation with that coup first. That didn’t work, but it wasn’t a bad strategy".

It didn't work because it has been discovered that Pelosi, whom you support so strongly is part of the coup. A coup d'état.

It came to light as to why SHE continue to defy her duty to uphold the Constitution by holding Cheney to an hearing. An Impeachment Hearing.

Paul in LA, are you for or against the rule of LAW? Would YOU defend our Constitution from all enemies, domestic and foreign? Or would you allow breaking the LAW or other manipulative tactics for a political end? It seems to me that you're advocating and support Pelosi's actions even when it is illegal so long as it progresses from point A to B.

An actual progressive does it's action within the LAW and if the road map does not include such laws to get us to the end, then we have the device to make that happen. The legislature's is that device. In this case, Speaker Pelosi who leads the House of Congress that makes laws is expected to adhere to the same standard of LAWS it passes.

But Pelosi single-handedly and arbitrarily decided to break her oath of office and duty to Impeach, therefore IS a LAW breaker herself.

So do you support pelosi's action over our Consitution?
Are YOU for our Constitution or NOT?

This is friggin' PATHETIC! I'm a HUGE fan of C&L but rarely read the blogs...and here we are on a blog about Wexler and impeaching Cheney and what do you self-aggrandizing fools do? You argue between yourselves about effin' online poker, Nancy Pelosi and Cindy frickin' Sheehan. You say you hate the mainstream media but yet you argue the merits of its biggest creation this century (Sheehan) while missing he entire point of this blog -- Impeaching Cheney. It stinks. It wreaks. It's shameful. And you guys are probably considered the most informed people 'on the left' -- what a joke. You all should be embarrassed. Everyone of you. No wonder the Dems can't get anything right. Look at its base bashing each other.

Everyone here HATES the media yet all you do is regurgitate the same arguments they instigate on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, et al. Guess what? Bill Clinton is the one who sent all of our jobs to China and India thus destroying the middle class (so you can't blame that one on Bush). Did you ever wonder about Wal-Marts meteoric rise back in good ol' Arkansas when Bill was in office? What about the de-regulation of media that allowed all this crap to spewed over the airwaves that you all hate so much now? That was Bill, too. Folks, Obama, Hillary, god help us, Romney, Guiliani and all will only bring more of the same.

We've gotta break this system up and they're all part of the system. Think outside of the box. I get the feeling we free-thinkers can't see the forest for the trees and it's beyond pathetic...it's sad.

.

ARGUMENT:

The DA has been presented a rape case.
What would it make that DA if he were to tell the victim, "When more people come forward, THEN I'll prosecute." ?

Congressman Wexler,
Begging you read this.

CRIMES HAVE BEEN COMMITED.
Congress has a duty nay, an OBLIGATION... NOT a choice, to bring about a course correction and administer the proper hand of justice.

YOUR WORDS... "AN OBLIGATION!"

ACT ON THAT OBLIGATION and stop using it for political advantage.

You're making the DOJ scandal PALE in comparison.

.

It took ONE Congressmans' ACTION (HR333) to spark a discussion that progress (motivated by the catalyst of people) for Congressman Wexler to push for an IMPEACHMENT hearing.

There are 300 million people in AMERICA, 250,000 is not asking much.

Thanks to Congressman Dennis Kucinich, we would not even be at this point.

Proud American,
Contrary to what you may believe, this country is NOT a democracy but rather a democratic REPUBLIC. Look it up. How many of those 300 million are kids or elderly or don't have the online access to know about Wexler's little ploy? Oh, goodness gracious, Wexler was 'shocked' that newspapers wouldn't pick up his op-ed...guarantee they wudda picked it up if it came along with Articles of Impeachment instead of some whine-fest. Does he have people going door-to-door to acquire signatures? No.

You're another that says "Hey, great, nice try Wexler, we'll get 'em next time...and Timmy, we don't keep keep score in our soccer games cause it doesn't matter who wins or loses you played a great game...what? Yes, I saw you eating boogers when the other team scored but you had to get it off your finger somehow."

This country gets what it deserves.

dray @ 135:

Proud American,
Contrary to what you may believe, this country is NOT a democracy but rather a democratic REPUBLIC. Look it up. How many of those 300 million are kids or elderly or don't have the online access to know about Wexler's little ploy? Oh, goodness gracious, Wexler was 'shocked' that newspapers wouldn't pick up his op-ed...guarantee they wudda picked it up if it came along with Articles of Impeachment instead of some whine-fest. Does he have people going door-to-door to acquire signatures? No.

You're another that says "Hey, great, nice try Wexler, we'll get 'em next time...and Timmy, we don't keep keep score in our soccer games cause it doesn't matter who wins or loses you played a great game...what? Yes, I saw you eating boogers when the other team scored but you had to get it off your finger somehow."

This country gets what it deserves.

Well gag me with a spoon!

dray @ 138:

Paul/Kucinich in 2008

Kucinich not Paul.

The whole system has to be busted up. Paul actually can win as an Indy or Lib. We're almost ready for it. And if this got into debates with three any Rep., any Dem., and Paul the country would stand on its ears as Paul tears them apart. As much as I love Kucinich he can't win as the headliner...he saw UFO's for fck sakes (and that's just for starters) but I do like him.

As speakers go Feinstein is the best, but he is not running. Want looks? Mit Romney looks like a model but he is insane. Paul believes in things i don't support. Only Kucinich understands the way the world should work of all the candidates.

dray @ 144:

Bravo, Joze. But if you're a real conservative (like most Americans...less government more freedom) why not vote Paul? There is no Dem that even comes close to fitting the bill.

Not any more. Most registered voters in America are noe Democrats.

Impeach the press?!...you mean the ones Clinton gave all the power to? That's exactly why we need someone who's not part of the system! Impeach Bush/Cheney (or bring them up on criminal charges as Joze wisely suggested) and get someone in there who ERRS ON THE SIDE OF FREEDOM. We do (or did) have checks and balances and if Paul goes too far then Congress will be there to check him.

Either one of them?

Xoites,
You make my point for me. Most aren't Democrats and believe in exactly what I said 'less government, more freedom'.

Sorry to be the one to tell you but Dems believe in more government and look to government to solve the ills. I want the government out of my life as much as possible.

Proud American,
If Wexler as a Representative in a Republic sees an "obligation" then he has already been selected to act on it. That's what Representatives do in a Democratic Republic. He doesn't need to ask for 50,000 then up it to 250,000. I'm not stuck on anything...Wexler is. We put him there act on his 'obligations' not to ask us again cause he's scared.

Xoites,
I friggin' can't stand Bush. I'm not defending him. He should be in prison. I'm asking you to think outside of the two party system. We're getting two sides of the same coin, as I said earlier. That's where voter apathy lives. You assume that if I say "Most Americans believe" this, that or the other and it doesn't jive with what you think then I must be in favor in Bush. That couldn't be farther from the truth. Bush has expanded government more than any president since...Clinton! It's all the same chit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA

copy and paste this in browser and tell me what you think.