Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Eight House Dems Back Impeachment Probe (Demsheviks in action)
News Max ^ | 01/08/06 | News max

Posted on 01/08/2006 7:35:22 AM PST by dbostan

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last
We need to throw these commies in jail and then forget about the key for the next fifty years...
1 posted on 01/08/2006 7:35:24 AM PST by dbostan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dbostan

No way! I find their extremism very useful as an example.


2 posted on 01/08/2006 7:37:57 AM PST by Pox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Two more and we can send them to Cuba to play baseball.


3 posted on 01/08/2006 7:38:48 AM PST by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
This is nothing more than an attempt at revenge for impeaching Clinton.
4 posted on 01/08/2006 7:39:23 AM PST by wolfpat (Dum vivimus, vivamus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
The bill, first proposed by Rep. John Conyers last month, claims that there is "at least a prima facie case that these actions" violated federal law. According to the Atlanta Progressive News, HR635 has attracted the support of seven co-sponsors so far, including Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA).

The same cast of characters....or usual suspects as I prefer to call them...

5 posted on 01/08/2006 7:39:33 AM PST by mystery-ak (End Freepathons, become a monthly donor...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
How did "Snake Eyes" (Cynthis McKinney) miss getting in on this one?


6 posted on 01/08/2006 7:41:24 AM PST by capt. norm (Politicians are like diapers. They both need changing regularly and for the same reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

It is the same group of people who stir up all the sh!t all the time. This should be of no surprise to anyone on this site.


7 posted on 01/08/2006 7:44:12 AM PST by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
BRING IT ON!

Then maybe we can put this Bush "lied" hysteria to bed. I'm sick of it.

8 posted on 01/08/2006 7:44:51 AM PST by manwiththehands (Repeal the 17th Amendment. Now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mystery-ak

All a part of the dingy dozen.


9 posted on 01/08/2006 7:45:44 AM PST by o_zarkman44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Maybe it is time for a MURFA type vote in the House. Let's see the demoncrats go on the record.


10 posted on 01/08/2006 7:45:46 AM PST by stormannorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Are they saying they're ready for President Cheney? Go for it, sheepdips!


11 posted on 01/08/2006 7:47:55 AM PST by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Conyers' district in Detroit is one of the most crime infested in the nation. People live behind bars in their own homes. You can't even park your own car in your own driveway without getting it stolen.

It'd be nice for a change if Mr. Conyers would concentrate on helping the people of his district respond against crime. My mother lived in his district until she was mugged. I moved her out because the Detroit police told me they could not protect her.

It's time for Mr. Conyers to work on something more meaningful.


12 posted on 01/08/2006 7:47:59 AM PST by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kjo

It is amazing that all the crime ridden areas are "led" by democrats. Sorry to hear about your mom, but glad that you were able to get her out of their into a safer and hopefully happier environment (meaning sometimes its hard for people to leave an area after living their for a long time).
Take care.


13 posted on 01/08/2006 7:53:14 AM PST by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

We need to throw these commies in jail and then forget about the key for the next fifty years...""

You forgot a digit: 500 years.


14 posted on 01/08/2006 7:53:20 AM PST by ridesthemiles (ridesthemiles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Thank you. My Mom is much happier and now lives with me in Grand Rapids.


15 posted on 01/08/2006 7:57:26 AM PST by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: capt. norm

Cindy's a little preoccupied with solving the Tupac Amaru Shakur Murder Mystery.


16 posted on 01/08/2006 8:11:51 AM PST by RedRover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
HR 635

Conyers and seven co-sponsors? Well, it's cheaper than a full page ad in the NYT.

"Sure, Congressman, you can put anything you want in a resolution. Good luck getting it on the agenda."

17 posted on 01/08/2006 8:15:24 AM PST by siunevada (If we learn nothing from history, what's the point of having one? - Peggy Hill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Which brings up he question, what if the RATS take over the house and Senate in 2006? I don't think it will happen, but worst case scenario, what if? You know they'll try to impeach the President. What should we do about it?


18 posted on 01/08/2006 8:15:48 AM PST by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Three of those seven are members of Communism Lite - literally. Waters & Woolsey (D [CA]), and Payne (D [N.J.]) are members of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Hang 'em after a trial for treason.


19 posted on 01/08/2006 8:16:23 AM PST by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon Liberty, it is essential to examine principle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

I could have predicted most of the people on the list without even reading the story.


20 posted on 01/08/2006 8:18:43 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

It's not so amazing. Told by their leaders that they cannot escape their lot except by government gifts, they sit in a morally decaying culture waiting for someone else to do something. Their reps repeat that they are trying, but the white majority won't let their rescue happen. And so it goes...


21 posted on 01/08/2006 8:21:10 AM PST by TheGeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
Good luck getting it on the agenda.

Well, may be not now, but if they win the House, it will be the first item on the agenda. Which is why we need to make sure they do not win.

22 posted on 01/08/2006 8:24:04 AM PST by nwrep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wolfpat

In the minds of some few Dem'crats, it has become an impeachable offense to even BE a Republican. So the drumbeat will always be there, and stirred up at the least provocation.

The times have not been kind to the aging hippies who make up most of the voice of the Dem'crat party today. All their "new ways" have proven to be but the old tired ways with a bad retread job, and now there is failure after failure in the attempts to convert the US into a third-world (and third-rate) country.

A growing percentage of what is laughingly called "the leadership" within the Dem'crat party do not regard themselves as citizens of the US, but as "world citizens". Their concept of patriotism revolves around "the world", as opposed to that troublemaker country in which they had the misfortune to be born.

Nationalism has no place in their intellectual view, and is probably what they consider to be the #1 problem in the world today, leading to endless conflicts over "sovereignty" and ethnic differences.

"Terrorists" are just "world citizens" trying to break up this fixation with nationalism, and as such, they are noble warriors in the war on US nationalism. "World citizens" cannot, by definition, exclude terrorists from their circle of camaraderie.


23 posted on 01/08/2006 8:25:20 AM PST by alloysteel (There is no substitute for success. None. Nobody remembers who was in second place.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

You're right. And don't forget that in their minds, the only reason socialism hasn't worked is that they weren't in charge.


24 posted on 01/08/2006 8:30:11 AM PST by wolfpat (Dum vivimus, vivamus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Will it ever occur to this group that there are a few million people living between New York and California that don't give a crap what they think?


25 posted on 01/08/2006 8:44:17 AM PST by jennyjenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Its a damned shame DDT has been banned.


26 posted on 01/08/2006 8:44:36 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Don't buy Bose. Their warranty is no good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
Impeachment inquiry? The libwacks should just go completely off the deep end and introduce an actual impeachment resolution on the House floor.

Not like it hasn't been tried before...

PRESIDENTS WHO HAD IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTIONS INTRODUCED AGAINST THEM IN CONGRESS:
John Tyler ("upsurging presidential powers")
Andrew Johnson (violation of Tenure of Office Act)
Grover Cleveland (acting against the public decency)
Hebert Hoover ("extreme neglect of duties and incompetance in office")
Harry Truman (Communist subversion in government)
Richard Nixon (Watergate)
Ronald Reagan (Iran-Contra)
Bill Clinton (perjury, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power)

PRESIDENTS'S WHOSE IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTIONS WERE ACTUALLY APPROVED BY THE JUDICIARY FOR A VOTE INSTEAD OF LAUGHED AT:
Andrew Johnson
Richard Nixon
Bill Clinton

PRESIDENTS WHO WERE ACTUALLY IMPEACHED BY THE FULL HOUSE:
Andrew Johnson
Bill Clinton

PRESIDENTS WHO WERE CONVICTED AFTER IMPEACHMENT AND REMOVED FROM OFFICE:
None

BTW, since the libwacks now think "lying" about Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction" is "impeachable", does this mean they think Clinton should have been re-impeached after he decided to bomb Iraq to stop "weapons of mass destruction" during his FIRST impeachment?

27 posted on 01/08/2006 8:45:01 AM PST by BillyBoy (Find out the TRUTH about the Chicago Democrat Machine's "Best Friend" in the GOP... www.nolahood.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
Figures:

4 - from CA
1 - from NY
1 - from NJ
1 - from TX

RAT, RAT, RAT, RAT, RAT, RAT, and RAT. TX has their problem in certain area, but RAT land CA, NY, and NJ. But NY after they let Clintoon destroy the Military Intelligence and the CIA and then 9/11. Wow, talk about brain dead.
28 posted on 01/08/2006 8:49:34 AM PST by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

How about some of those rats that won with 55 or less joining in? Hee hee hee.


29 posted on 01/08/2006 9:03:11 AM PST by jmaroneps37 (We will never murtha to the terrorists. Bring home the troops means bring home the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

So lets see...It was Republicans that killed the impeachment against Clinton even though they had the power to carry it through.

And, if it ever comes to it, it will be Republicans that made it possible to happen, even though without them it would never have gotten off the ground.

The question is, why would the Dems start something they know they do not have the power to carry through?

This life long Republican is a whole lot less Republican than I used to be.


30 posted on 01/08/2006 9:06:50 AM PST by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

NOOOO don't send them to jail, send them to Iraq, and send that many of our troops home, let them fight the killers over there, then JUST maybe, but I doubt it, they might be glad President Bush is doing what we want him to do, fight the war over THERE.....


31 posted on 01/08/2006 9:40:19 AM PST by HarleyLady27 (My ? to libs: "Do they ever shut up on your planet?" "Grow your own DOPE: Plant a LIB!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfpat
The left is never able to MoveOn despite all the hysterical shrieking that "conservatives won't get over Clinton." The 'rats better get something more than Bush hatred and retread socialism if they want to be taken seriously.
32 posted on 01/08/2006 9:42:44 AM PST by Mad_as_heck (The MSM - America's (domestic) public enemy #1.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HarleyLady27

I see that Sheila Jackson Lee was a co-sponsor. Now is'nt she always trying to get face time with President Bush at the State of the Union speeches. Let's see if she aggresive she is to get her mug with President Bush at the State of the Union.

Remeber she had to take a limo for a couple of blocks from her office to Congress.

It should be Queen Sheila!! What a piece of work.


33 posted on 01/08/2006 9:57:08 AM PST by texas01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Wait until the Republicans get their new leadership all lined up and they'll be jumping on board too.


34 posted on 01/08/2006 10:06:49 AM PST by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
HR635 has attracted the support of seven co-sponsors so far, including Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA).

No surprises here.

35 posted on 01/08/2006 10:18:21 AM PST by operation clinton cleanup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

Demsheviks. I like that word.
I hope you won't mind if I steal it.


36 posted on 01/08/2006 10:19:21 AM PST by Cheburashka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan

I, too, am very concerned about the "Republicans" in Congress. So much so that, each time I receive a request for money from the RNC, Frist, Lott, Mehlman etc, I return it with a note saying I will give no more money until the Republicans begin to stand up and support our President and our country. If I subscribed to Democrat policies, I would have voted for Democrats. I'm tired of the Rinos aligning themselves with Dims. The RINOs seem to be increasing in number and more blatant in their actions.


37 posted on 01/08/2006 10:20:45 AM PST by 4integrity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

The Gang of Eight (rectal apertures).


38 posted on 01/08/2006 10:23:06 AM PST by pankot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee
Two more and we can send them to Cuba to play baseball.
---
I suggest we send them to Cuba right now.
In a '56 Ford outfitted with pontoons.
And we charge them their congressional pensions, and everything else they own, for the opportunity.
We could hire a helicopter to fly alongside and videotape the trip.
39 posted on 01/08/2006 10:23:21 AM PST by Cheburashka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: capt. norm
How did "Snake Eyes" (Cynthis McKinney) miss getting in on this one?
---
She thinks impeachment has something to do with fruit and said she'd be d----- if she's going to send President Bush a complementary gift basket.
40 posted on 01/08/2006 10:28:33 AM PST by Cheburashka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

DEMSHEVIKS!!! HAAAAAA....i like it.


41 posted on 01/08/2006 10:29:39 AM PST by KOZ.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mombrown1; Badray

Ping


42 posted on 01/08/2006 10:30:08 AM PST by Dr. Scarpetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbostan
I wonder if Old Charlie Rangel is more serious about this one than he was with the old *Draft bill right before the election* play. Of course the draft bill was just an attempt to overthrow what he knew would be the peoples choice for prez, and so the commies could take over our election.....

Hey! Wait a minute.....

43 posted on 01/08/2006 10:30:42 AM PST by Diva Betsy Ross (Embrace peace- Hug an American soldier- the real peace keepers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kjo
It's time for Mr. Conyers to work on something more meaningful.
---
The only thing Mr. Conyers is capable of doing that is meaningful involves finger-painting.
44 posted on 01/08/2006 10:32:30 AM PST by Cheburashka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: texas01
Now is'nt she always trying to get face time with President Bush at the State of the Union speeches. Let's see if she aggresive she is to get her mug with President Bush at the State of the Union.

Yeah, she's the one who gets in many hours prior to normal people assembling for the speech. IF she does do this again, I hope the President blatantly and obviously ignors it... I mean her.
45 posted on 01/08/2006 10:34:24 AM PST by plsvn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: balch3
Which brings up he question, what if the RATS take over the house and Senate in 2006? I don't think it will happen, but worst case scenario, what if? You know they'll try to impeach the President. What should we do about it?
---
What to do about it is work for Republican candidates in 2006.
If they get a majority in the House impeachment is inevitable, even if the charge is that President Bush committed the high crime of tying his right shoe first this morning.
They won't get 67 votes in the Senate, so it won't go anywhere, like Clinton's impeachment. But the Democrats will do it as payback.
46 posted on 01/08/2006 10:39:46 AM PST by Cheburashka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
So lets see...It was Republicans that killed the impeachment against Clinton even though they had the power to carry it through.
---
This statement makes no sense. Without at least 12 Democrats who would be willing to fulfill their oaths of office and vote for conviction it was not going to happen.
It was the Democrats voting along party lines that stymied impeachment, not any Republicans. Even if they had all voted for it it would have failed.
47 posted on 01/08/2006 10:58:53 AM PST by Cheburashka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: penowa

Well I'm really waiting for the pubbies to crawl out from under their desks everytime a RAT walks by their office....it will finally be refreshing to witness..


48 posted on 01/08/2006 11:08:41 AM PST by HarleyLady27 (My ? to libs: "Do they ever shut up on your planet?" "Grow your own DOPE: Plant a LIB!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: dbostan

The usual suspects:

Sheila Jackoff Lee
Maxine Water-on-the Brain


49 posted on 01/08/2006 11:24:23 AM PST by punster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheburashka
It was the Democrats voting along party lines that stymied impeachment, not any Republicans. Even if they had all voted for it it would have failed.

You halfway make my point.
-Dems vote along party lines.
-Republicans do not.

Why should any Dem break ranks if the Republicans have set themselves up for a loss right out of the gate. Still, I understand your point.

50 posted on 01/08/2006 6:58:14 PM PST by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson