Impeach

House votes 238-180 to send impeachment article to the Judiciary Committee for hearings

Submitted by Atheinostic on Wed, 2008-07-16 21:43.

The House of Representatives voted 238-180 to send Kucinich's impeachment article to the Judiciary Committee for hearings.

Nine Republicans voted with the Democrats in favor:
Congressman Kevin Brady (TX)
Congressman Wayne Gilchrest (MD)
Congressman Walter B. Jones (NC)
Representative Don Manzullo (IL)
U.S. Congressman Tim Murphy(PA)
Congressman Ron Paul (TX)
Congressman Dave Reichert (WA)
Congressman Christopher Shays (CT)
Representative Mike Turner (OH)

Sign the official petition to impeach Bush

Submitted by Atheinostic on Sat, 2008-06-21 22:52.

Dennis Kucinich has introduced articles of impeachment against President Bush. You can sign the official petition for Congress to impeach Bush here.

Kucinich introduces 35 articles of impeachment against President Bush

Submitted by Atheinostic on Mon, 2008-06-09 22:56.


Fuck yeah!

See the actual torture memo, complete with Bush's signature

When did we start trying to legislate life?

First, it was the news that Mississippi Lawmaker(s?) have proposed a bill that would make it illegal for restaurants to serve obese patrons.

There are so many things wrong with situation, I doubted whether or not I wanted to write about it. Why would anyone discriminate against a group of people (a majority in the US)?
I couldn't wrap my mind around it, not to mention how there is no way it's constitutional. Nevermind, how terribly, horribly, mean that is.

Besides, who would decide what qualifies as obese? What would be the deciding factor? Some people doubt the truthiness or quality of the BMI scale. So, what would you go by? Some hostess in some random restaurant's suggestion or opinion?

Not to mention the douchebag Republican Lawmaker that doesn't even think it will or should pass.

"I do not have any intention of this becoming law," says the Desoto County Republican. "I don't think it has a Chinaman's chance. I'm against intrusive government. I don't think that's what we're here for and what we should be doing."

So why draft such controversial legislation?

"The reason I put the bill in," says Mayhall, "was to call attention to the seriousness of the obesity epidemic in Mississippi."

Oh! So you proposed a bill you don't even agree with or want to pass, because you want to alienate a certain group of people because you disagree with their lifestyle. Ahh, so very Republican of you.

I don't care what your opinion is on the state of the people in your state, lose weight like Mike Huckabee did. Or actually try and think about doing something that might make a difference an encourage people of unhealthy weight to do something about it, instead of estranging those who you're trying to 'help'.

Just because Mississippi has been ranked #1 in amount of obese people in the US for the past 3 years, doesn't justify this kind of unethical behavior. That's simply ridiculous.

Then, a California man is being sued by his city, San Carlos, for canceling his trash pick up, because he was environmentally conscious.

SAN CARLOS (Map, News) - A man who claims to have reduced his waste to nearly nothing out of concern for the environment now faces a lawsuit from San Carlos for canceling his garbage-collection service.

Eddie House, 53, says he was shocked when he was served with a lawsuit Sunday at his Cedar Street home.

The lawsuit, filed by San Carlos Deputy City Attorney Linda Noeske in San Mateo Superior Court on Jan. 22, seeks a permanent injunction forcing House to maintain garbage service. City officials are also seeking to recoup from House the costs of the lawsuit.

The lawsuit claims House broke the city’s municipal code requiring all residential, commercial and industrial properties to contract with Allied Waste for pickup at least once a week — a standard requirement in most cities, San Carlos Deputy City Manager Brian Moura said.

I shit you not. A guy recycles and composts all his waste, therefore he doesn't need his trash service. And? He gets sued. SUED.

I can see how the city would be concerned about people having plenty of waste, and not throwing it away or wanting to pay the trash guys, but if he has no trash then what in the hell are they expecting for them to pick up?

It makes no sense. Any rational, logical, or reasonable person would applaud his efforts, and let him be. But apparently we're too concerned with the laws themselves to worry about who we're enforcing them on, or why we're enforcing them.

And it's not like the City just got confused, and they didn't know the whole situation (Which, really, who does before they SUE SOMEONE). But they're trying to recoup their expenses from HIM for the lawsuit.

Sometimes, I seriously wonder if we’re too wrapped up in silly laws that seek to govern our every step. It’s almost as if we live in a country that believes it will behave in exactly the same way 200 years from now. Change and the rights of the individual are covered in layers of codes and red tape. This is a perfect example. And was it truly necessary to sue? Couldn’t there have been some other action taken to resolve any issues between the city and the homeowner? Ridiculous.

I get it, we're a nation of laws. But since when do they dictate everything we do? From being overweight to being environmentally conscious.

I've never met them, so I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty sure The Founding Fathers didn't mean for laws to go this far.

Since when is the legislative process not for actually proposing legislation that might better the state and its people, but is instead meant to get your opinions on the news?

Since when do we care more about going by the books like some kind of mindless robots, than analyzing the situation like real, rational people?

I think we need to reevaluate our situation in this country, and maybe start voting for change.

Our government needs to start answering to us, rather than the other way around. Isn't that what a Democracy is supposed to be anyway?

Tell Nancy Pelosi to impeach!

Submitted by Atheinostic on Mon, 2007-07-02 20:07.
::

Tell Nancy to impeach Bush, Cheney, the Gonz, etc.

Then, tell your Representative to support impeachment.

* Update: Don't forget to contact the House Judiciary Committee.

Bush may be facing "Contempt of Congress"

Submitted by Abortions Tickle on Fri, 2007-06-29 20:16.

Source.

No one was all that surprised when the Bush administration announced Thursday that it would not cooperate with congressional demands for documents and testimony by prominent former officials that would likely confirm this White House's reckless disregard for the rule of law.

What was surprising, and encouraging, was the decisiveness with which key players in Congress responded.

After the White House asserted executive privilege in rejecting subpoenas issued by the House and Senate Judiciary committees as part of the ongoing probe of abuses within the Department of Justice, House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers wasted no time expressing his sense that a Contempt of Congress citation is in order.

"The President's response to our subpoena shows an appalling disregard for the right of the people to know what is going on in their government," explained Conyers, a Michigan Democrat who is the only Judiciary Committee to have participated in the fight between Congress and the Nixon White House for Watergate-related documents. "At this point, I see only one choice in moving forward, and that is to enforce the rule of law set forth in these subpoenas."

Well, I have to say: It's about damn time. They should have issued a Contempt of Congress citation when he first got elected, because that's all he's shown them in the last 6 years.

Bush defies congressional subpoenas - could impeachment be next?

Submitted by Atheinostic on Thu, 2007-06-28 17:35.

Today, the White House announced that they would not be complying with the subpoenas coming from the House and Senate, citing "Executive Privilege" and the Writ of Douchebaggery. This will eventually go to court, and probably won't be resolved until Bush is out of office.

However, if the House of Representatives were to initiate impeachment hearings, the Bush Administration would not be able claim executive privilege. Could it actually happen? Chairman Conyers had this to say:

"The charges alleged in this investigation are serious – including obstruction of justice and misleading Congress – and the White House should be as committed to this investigation as the Congress. At this point, I see only one choice in moving forward, and that is to enforce the rule of law set forth in these subpoenas."

Though we don't have the votes to convict Bush in the Senate, I believe that could change very quickly for a few reasons:

  • Impeachment hearings will dominate news coverage worldwide, and more people will be paying attention to the case for impeachment.
  • Once Congress has the documents proving that Bush broke the law and purposefully misled the public, public support for his removal - already over 50% - will go up even higher.
  • Bush's current approval rating is already down to 26%, and Republican senators up for re-election next year are already under pressure to distance themselves from Bush.

Video: The Gonz - Remembering things is Hard Work!

Submitted by Atheinostic on Fri, 2007-05-18 18:21.

Why haven't they fired the Gonz yet?


Obviously, the Gonz has been afflicted with a contagious memory-attacking brain virus. We know it is contagious because, after the Gonz testified before the House committee, none of the representatives could recall how to initiate impeachment proceedings.

Lone Ranger becoming lonlier

The Lone Ranger becoming lonlier as negligence for the law no longer falling on ignorant, Republican-lead ears.

Republican Senator Chuck Hagel suggests that there are ways to deal with a president who says, "I don't care".

DO WHAT NOW?!?!?
Hold up, Back this HERE Truck up and let's review.

1.)Presidents aren't supposed to send a huge middle finger in the air every time they pass anything? It's been so long when that's all we've seen, it's difficult to recall.
2.)AND, There are ways to reprimand Presidents who do this?! How long has this existed? I MUST KNOW. It obviously couldn't have been before last week, because it would've been stupid not to reprimand a President who signed your bill into law, then sent you a statement saying, "NAH. I WAS JUST KIDDIN' 'BOUT THAT!" They're all just like a big pranks on Congress every single time he signs something. Sooner or later they'll learn to quit askin' him to sign stuff. (And that's not to mention all the rest of this list of stuff he's done. Lied about Iraq, Illegal prisons, Huge Frat party at White House every Friday, etc.)

This is all just too much. I must sit down to let this vast expanse of NEW information to seep in.