House waves off impeachment measure against Bush »
Posted By libsRfunny 1 year ago in NewsThe House has voted to send articles of impeachment against President Bush to a committee that is not likely to hold hearings before the end of his term. By 251-166, House members dispatched the measure to a committee on Wednesday--a procedure often used to kill legislation.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
1129 Views Share Story 67 Comments Report
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 294 of 307 Comments (view all)
-
-
0%
libsRfunny1 year ago
I wonder if this news will get the same treatment as the story about Kucinich submitting article of impeachment did yesterday on Propeller. Will the anchors recommend it?
Reply -
0%
MRCOFFEECAKE1 year ago
You see, I voted for your story because it is newsworthy and then you and your anti-social glib pals had to vote down all of my comments..Only you great uniters could go out of your way to get me to rescind and sink..Congratulations, to spite yourselves you are still successfully dividing America!
Reply -
-
Shankari25Comment removed: User banned.
-
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.2 Replies
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ranchhandComment removed: User banned.
-
-
-
-
KvilleTXComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
Centinel1 year ago
Is there any surprise here? The republicans have destroyed any chance of ever regaining a majority in congress. Why do you think their "bed buddies", the oil industry, have skyrocketed gas prices? This is the last chance to GOUGE the American people for obscene wealth. Of course this went to committee. Pelosi is a republican wolf in sheep's clothing. She has already been "BOUGHT". Why else would she pull impeachment off the table before she even achieved "speaker".
I fear too many "progressive" changes by the democrats is going to back fire. Far too many women and minorities are being installed in our government. We are heading for "MINORITY RULE" and an exponential increase in PATERNAL government. I hope I die soon so I will not have to weep over my destroyed country.
Reply -
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: User banned.
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
hdthehn1 year ago
KvillTX-
Her is the legacy for you neoconists:
http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2008/06/10/r...
Wolfie tell that to Scott Mcclellan
Reply-
-
0%
pc251 year ago
well apparently McClellan who had limited access to the actual workings of the Bush administration and Douglas Feith are in complete disagreement.........
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/...
One such narrative is, "Bush lied; people died." The claim is that "neocons," including Feith, politicized intelligence to show that Saddam Hussein's regime had weapons of mass destruction. Not so, as the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Silberman-Robb Commission have concluded already. Every intelligence agency believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, and the post-invasion Duelfer report concluded that he maintained the capability to produce them on short notice.
what was that again.....THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITEE and the SILBERMAN_ROBB COMMISSION.........EVERY INTELLIGENCE AGENCY BELIEVED SADDAM HAD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.......
Reply
-
-
ranchhandComment removed: User banned.10 Replies
-
-
0%
unome21 year ago
Well, I guess that answers my question from yesterday, Apparently murder is not an impeachable offense.
Reply -
-
DeLeMaComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
unome21 year ago
Well according to your little boy scotti mac , bush and his cronies lied us into an illegal war that has killed several hundred thousand Iraqis, not that Neo cons see them as human beings but he also led 4500 young Americans to their death, that must mean something to your party of death.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib1 year ago
Not my boy. He's an ex staffer who's working on his retirement fund and thought that blowing with the liberal wind would sell some books. I'll admit that he's legit if you can admit the same about Dick Morris and his claims regarding Clinton...not!
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
jovial1 year ago
Kucinich did his job. Out of all the Congressmen and women he will go down in history as one that stood up for our laws and constitution. 160 votes is a significant amount of congress. That's more than a third. These people are our elected officials. If over one third of Congress saw fit to hear it, then the message ran loud and clear. The Democrats who opposed this measure for political reasons are on record for putting politics above the rule of law.
Reply-
0%
jovial1 year ago
I now know that all 166 votes for the measure came from Republicans. They wanted to tie the Democratic congress up with impeachment hearings. Putting it to committee may be a good idea, as long as it is acted on eventually. Bush will get away with the things he did while he was in office, but it's on the record now and all theses issues can be brought up again after he leaves office.
Reply -
-
-
0%
willottica1 year ago
Please re-read the article if you think they voted on impeachment today.
What the articles says is that they voted on whether to consider it immediately.
Republicans voted to do so (in an attempt to start an embarassing debate), Liberals largely chickened out and decided to send it to committee instead.
Maybe it was weakness, or maybe they really intended it to go to committee to be worked on. I guess only time will tell, but I'm guessing that the democrats (once again) abdicated their responsibility to the constitution.
Reply-
0%
libsRfunny1 year ago
lol, you actually got it right. They hushed it up by voting to send the bill to a committee that won't meet before sine die day.
The committee chair, Dem. John Conyers of Detroit, claimed he was going to ensure a hearing the last time Kucinich tried it. Now nothing.
The Dems know Bush wasn't lying and they would have had egg all over their faces based on their own support over the years.
Reply
-
-
0%
david_nwpa1 year ago
It seems to me that this article was an expedient choice for the Propeller powers that be. A safe bet if you will, in that we knew Tuesday that this bill stood no chance of passage. Even Kucinich voted against his own resolution, so could it honestly go anywhere? It got the public's attention for a few days, and will disappear as a historical footnote. That is precisely how the powers that be at Propeller should have handled this story.
Reply -
0%
truthiness1 year ago
so, if you are tasked with law enforcement within a certain jurisdiction, and someone points out evidence suggesting criminal activity in your jurisdiction and you choose not to investigate it in order to further personal gain (elections) doesn't that make you guilty of being an accessory after the fact?
Reply-
0%
david_nwpa1 year ago
I am all in favor of the impeachment proceedings. The point to which I object is how smug the right wing reacts to the Dems shelving it. For the sake of political expediency, Nancy Pelosi has chosen a course by which Democrats cannot push the worst president in history out of office. She has abdicated her position and should not be House Speaker.
Reply -
-
-
0%
silvera1 year ago
Lots of cute little one liners oozing forth from the usual right wing troglodytes, but the fact remains that G.W. Bush has the blood of 1000's on his hands and he needs to be held accountable. He lied us into a preemptive, unnecessary war that has pretty much destroyed a country, displaced millions, looted our treasury, made a mockery of our Constitution, and seriously diminished our standing in the world community. You can marginalize Dennis Kucinich all you want but even if half of his 65 points are true, Bush should not only be impeached but tried as the war criminal he is.
Reply -
0%
truthiness1 year ago
Why we let Bush get away with being a criminal
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/10/658...
Reply -
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.