digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

Impeachment Happening in Congress Right Now!

afterdowningstreet.org — Congressman Dennis Kucinich is on the floor of the House of Representatives right now introducing 35 articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • poetas, on 06/10/2008, -51/+590Thank you Dennis!!!!!

    now is up to *US*... we need to flood the House telephone system!!!!
    • Ajajadude, on 06/10/2008, -6/+73Too bad they couldn't have done this a long time ago. By the time they get anywhere with it, it'll be time for the next president to be sworn in.
      • u8myfoood, on 06/10/2008, -4/+65It's only about 5 or 6 years too late... I think he should be charged with something worse than impeachment, because he only spent a couple trillion dollars on a war that only certain businesses, and corrupt government officials approve of.
        Besides, he has given the US a bad name like no other president before him, at least Nixon didn't choke on a pretzel.
        • flogistan, on 06/10/2008, -3/+89Don't credit the democrats. Kucinich has been fighting this battle alone all along. He wanted to do this years ago. He still can't get support for it. He has been true blue every step of the way. Never forget it.
        • allisonaxe, on 06/10/2008, -2/+15kind of makes you think how things would've gone differently if he *had* choked on that pretzel. do you really think having cheney at the top would've been any different?
        • LordVance, on 06/10/2008, -0/+28He's not being charged with impeachment. In his current position, Bush can not be charged with any crime. Impeachment is the process of removing him from office so that he may be charged with something.

          No matter what the crime is, impeachment is always the first step for a president.
        • viggooo, on 06/10/2008, -2/+3Mirror:
          http://www.democrats.com/kucinich-introduces-35-ar ...
        • viggooo, on 06/10/2008, -1/+8Updates with 15 minutes of video.
          http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Kucinich_presents_Bu ...
        • ChildeRoland420, on 06/10/2008, -4/+6"a war that only certain businesses, and corrupt government officials approve of."

          What are you talking about? 98 Senators voted FOR that war
        • Shigatsu, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4They fall under corrupt government officials.
        • JasonHaley, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1You could make Kucinich's voice louder if you make phone calls to the media, C-Span, or the government and declare your support for Kucinich.
      • Devilboy666, on 06/10/2008, -1/+12Dennis-party at my house tonight! Come dressed as Dennis or his wife.
        • PorchSong, on 06/10/2008, -26/+2Wuhoo, a party at your house!!! Thank would be great, except the local stores in your area would run out of "Douche Bag" and "Dildo" costumes. Ass.
      • kirkness, on 06/10/2008, -1/+6once impeachment starts officially, Bush cant hide behind executive privilege..and once this ball is rolling, we can prevent him from those traditional presidential pardons. which would kind of be a big deal.

        biggest fear is Cheney as president tho. even if it is very briefly.

        Impeach both of them.
        • murdocsvan, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2I'll be happy to see the humiliation. Even if it doesn't have much effect now, the most we can do is mark him down in history with something significant like this.
      • wejmahtin, on 06/10/2008, -1/+7Hey Kucinich tried long ago man... I wanted him to be our next president so badly. Everyone else in congress ( dems included ) were too chicken ***** to take a stand with him and move for impeachment. So sad...
      • pedepy, on 06/10/2008, -2/+3it was no use impeaching Bush as Cheney wouldve ended up president. Also, it's lot like Bush is the one pulling all the strings, so yanking him out of the portrait wouldnt have solved what was truly wrong with this administration.

        Getting him impeached probably takes a long time anyway ... id say go for it, itd be just fitting to see him get thrown out the door forcefully right at the end..
        • rz8472, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1The best we can hope for is aggressive prosecution - whether by the next president or a private entity - of Bush and his cronies after they leave office and are stripped of most of their protections. Even then, it's going to be an uphill battle.
      • jeremyduffy, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3It still matters! It still shows that the scumbag won't get away scott free! Even if he doesn't end up in jail, I would be so happy to see that his presidency ended in concrete failure!
    • dfsjdkflasjk, on 06/10/2008, -23/+34It won't happen.
      • aadsfasdf, on 06/10/2008, -11/+5That's not constructive at all you giant *****.
      • Vironex, on 06/10/2008, -5/+13Just let me go into work in a good mood, you bastard.
      • jphillips1, on 06/10/2008, -12/+4Not only won't it happen, it shouldn't happen. Why waste our time? Bush is already insignificant. By making this an issue it will rally the conservative base for McCain and force Obama to take a stand on the issue. If Barack says yes, impeach him, a lot of the voters on the fence will hate him. If he says no, a lot of his base will see him as soft. It's a lose lose situation for us liberals.
        • SpyDerMann, on 06/10/2008, -1/+26If he's not impeached, it will mean the whole government supported the most criminal US president of all time. It does matter.
        • jphillips1, on 06/10/2008, -2/+3I agree. But politically speaking, considering the upcoming election and its importance, it is not wise. The Clinton impeachment partially fueled the fire that was the Bush political machine described by Scott McClellan as the never ending campaign. We need to get away from that. The best way to go about this is to have President Obama and a Democrat controlled Congress reverse what Bush f'd up since 2000.
        • ChildeRoland420, on 06/10/2008, -4/+3@SpyDerMann,

          You need to look into your history. There have been much more criminal administrations.
        • jzuska, on 06/10/2008, -5/+2Prepare to be disappointed. This can't even make it to CNN you silly bitches. No legs no traction nuttin. You smarmy libs are digging your graves with BS like this. ***** Obama.
      • cappa1983, on 06/10/2008, -0/+8Whether it's done in vain, or not, the point is, we are to do it! Bush has pulled this country through the proverbial mud and gotten away with atrocious acts of negligence as well as criminal acts. Think of the thousands of innocent lives that have been lost because of this supposed war on terror? Every step counts.
    • yuanzhoulu, on 06/10/2008, -26/+6what difference does it make? he only has a few months of office left, the damage is already done.
      • ISIfunded911, on 06/10/2008, -3/+33If he ends up in jail, presidents in the future will think twice before using their power like traitors.
      • jaznova, on 06/10/2008, -2/+6223 days in office. 7 1/2 months. yuanzhoul outs himself.
    • Larsonal777, on 06/10/2008, -20/+12I'm sorry... I just... I just can't get over the fact that he is easily biologically old enough to be his wifes grandpa. Why does that creep me out? Does that creep anyone else out?

      Second of all... (actually first I don't really hold that above statement/question against him) this really seems to me like a ploy to get the eyes off congress (newly blue) and onto Bush... I mean... Bush has made plenty of mistakes no doubt but seriously when is anyone in congress going to step up and take some responsibility... impeaching the president is NOT taking responsibility or going to fix anything.

      To me especially at the end of his term... its like we don't want to go down in history as the bad guys so we will point all fingers at Bush! It's like a classroom full of children that writes all over the walls and when the teacher comes in everyone throws their crayons on Bush's desk!

      So what we take up all of congresses time (what little they have) to impeach someone who is going to be out of the office in a year! Congress has a hard enough time using their time to do anything good!

      Oh and another question... who the hell is/has been doing Clinton, Obama, and McCains jobs for them this whole last year... cus they certainly can't be doing anything in congress!
      • jdent08, on 06/10/2008, -5/+5I concur. This seems more like a bid for vice president on kucinich's part.
      • momallrat, on 06/10/2008, -2/+0For your information. Each of the three senators have taken a lot of days off campaigning to be present for votes and debate within the senate. All three were also kept well updated as to what they needed to be doing to represent their constituents.
        • starsarebent, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3I like how anyone with a legit argument, or contribution to anything on digg gets burried.

          That was sarcasm... here's what you must have to get voted up on digg;

          -A strong hatred for Bush.
          -A witty comment.
          -Something negative about the iPhone, (however a new application for the iPhone will have the same effect.)
          -GOD forbid someone REPOST something. As if we all sit here and click refresh all Goddamn day.
          -A reference to Hitler or as stated below "Serial Killers!" (lol)

          Digg is full of fascists, hypocrite, and one track minded assholes.

          Just because you have a stong opinion of something doesn't mean it's the truth. Doesn't mean you shouldn't explore and find a source other than "flamingliberal.com" or whatever the *****.

          Bottom line: the Government is ***** up, and Bush, McCain, Obama... nobody is going to change that. The only difference is the amount of corruption any given president will let the public see. It's been corrupt for years, and it's not Bush, it wasn't Clinton. It's just *****. Accept that and know that voting whoever in office isn't going to change that. *****.
        • Larsonal777, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/09/bush.congre ...

          Ok... read that article and tell me something isn't amiss... both Obama AND McCain were not there to vote... WTF... don't defend them... it is their responsibility to BE there... each state gets 2 senators... so 50% of their respective states say was thrown out the window for their ambitions... while they each spend millions on campaining... its rediculous!
      • Winston84, on 06/10/2008, -2/+4Yeah, let's also not prosecute serial-killers, they just need a few more kills
        before they stop on their own ..
        or don't you believe criminals should be charged, convicted and locked away ?
        What are you, some kind of Liberal ?
      • awtripp, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2You lost me at "biologically old enough"
    • DarkenKO, on 06/10/2008, -15/+7first of all, this is a waste of time and our tax money. its too late to do anything, and Bush is already a lame duck (and now im waiting for puns and jokes beyond my post) in office. so really we are wasting money by trying to do this. how about we just move on and hope and beg the new president to do a better job? sounds like a much more painless solution.

      basically a waste.
      • Qeveren, on 06/10/2008, -4/+16Yeah, it's always a waste of time to try to hold the head of one's government to the rule of law.
      • kholburn, on 06/10/2008, -3/+19Yeah and let's be real, there's no presidential sex involved here, only a whole bunch of dead people and most of them aren't even americans.
        • floorman56, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3Yeah and let's be real, there's no presidential sex involved here

          Didn't you get the note? ...The Clinton's are bad people now you are not suppose to defend them
      • CelebVoy, on 06/10/2008, -3/+10Why should we have to beg? The president should fear the people, not the other way around. This whole Bush presidency has been a big joke, I don't think he deserves to be free for another day. The man is too stupid to tell up from down, he should be punished for the wrong doings he has committed.

        Aside from that, we, the people, should also take responsibility. Every single one of us made it happen. I don't care if you voted for Kerry or Bush or Gore, when the people are not happy with their government, they are not only allowed, but commanded by the laws governing this nation to rise up and find another way. If anyone here really thinks digging up an article about Gore or Paul will make a damn bit of difference, you are too lost in your mind and thinking these people running the place give a damn about some CNN article.

        I urge the flooding of phone calls, I urge the writing to your congress members, I urge you to simply try to make a difference. Good Luck for all of those who do.
        • jdent08, on 06/10/2008, -3/+5An you think this will make Bush fear the people? Are you out there protesting right now? Are you sitting in on congress with your friends cheering on? Or are you sitting at home, on your computer?
      • Winston84, on 06/10/2008, -3/+4waste of your tax-money ?
        Impeachment costs maybe 0.00000001% of what that
        criminal is wasting on wars.. YOUR tax-dollars, down his greedy
        Halliburton-friends pockets..
    • mickrussom, on 06/10/2008, -3/+36This criminal government has also allowed the taxation of every American through inflation and non-stop overspending, over taxation, wars, keeping 700 military bases open the world over, and when a cyclone happens in Myanmar, and an earthquake happens in Bande Ache, and the US bombs Iraq and Afghanistan, all the while our own US citizens rot in New Orleans.

      This whole government is a horrible defunct piece of garbage, and only Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich deserve to remain after a complete vote of no confidence.

      This impeachment is a worthy start.

      I don't agree with DK's stance on gun-grabbing / anti-firearms stance, but this guy has stones.
      • xBDVx, on 06/10/2008, -8/+1Excuse me for a minute. I'd like to ask what this would accomplish. It seems that instead of doing anything good, it will divert the public's attention from the war (which the dems should be ending), our failing economy (which they should be working to fix), our lack of civil liberties (which they should be working to restore), etc, etc.
        This isn't doing anything to help the American people. All it does is satisfy the sickening revenge fetish that is a part of American culture. This is why we are at war in Iraq (don't get me wrong, I agreed with the Afgan war). This is why we still execute prisoners. It's a disgusting character trait, and it's the one thing that makes me ashamed to be an American sometimes.
        • xBDVx, on 06/10/2008, -3/+1(I ran out of time to edit?!)
          The democrats would like to think that they are all high and mighty being against the war whatnot, but in some cases they are no better than these neo-con dimwits that got us into Iraq. Now Dennis wants to pull America into some media circus which is basically a political war against the Republican party and George Bush.
          Now I'm a democrat and I hate Dubya as much as the next guy, but it seems to me he's already committed political suicide and will go down in history as a terrible president. Why 'honor' him with one of the only impeachments of a president? Besides, like I mentioned above, there are other things we need to focus on, like winning back the White House and fixing the country's problems.
        • Malacandra95, on 06/10/2008, -0/+6This isn't about revenge for this president: it's about repudiating the precedents set by this administration. If they are allowed go get away with their criminality, no matter what the next administration does, some future power-hungry administration will come along and be able to point to the Bush years to justify gutting the constitution and ceding limitless power to the executive.

          Every elected official takes an oath to protect the Constitution, and they need to do so now. If you want a durable restoration of our rights, there needs to be a clear and unambiguous legal process for renouncing the administrations many, many lawless actions. And the only remedy in the Constitution is impeachment.
        • effedup, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3only *one* thing makes you ashamed to be american? interesting.
        • wejmahtin, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1How about; it also helps to show the rest of the world that we're not all douchebags... If we boot his ass out of the white house we'll at least look a little bit better in their eyes, and maybe it will do something to alleviate the international grudge everyone is holding against Americans for how stupid we've been over the last 8 years.
      • 0x1d3n, on 06/10/2008, -13/+3***** Ron Paul
      • PawnsOfJoshua, on 06/10/2008, -7/+3Only somebody dimwitted enough to think Ron Paul is a viable choice for president would also be dimwitted enough not to see the positive benefits of impeaching a flagrantly power-abusive president, at any point in his term.
        • Dugout21, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2how dare you insult ron paul. don't you realize this is his last remaining home where people are too delusional to realize he's lost?
      • vat0r, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2It's idiotic to judge others based upon the Presidential Candidate they support. I wouldn't say that if there were ten thousand candidates but in reality there's only a few who actually have a chance. That's a pretty narrow field for voting Americans to choose from.
    • ISIfunded911, on 06/10/2008, -3/+20If he ends up in jail, presidents in the future will think twice before using their power like traitors.
      • Monk22, on 06/10/2008, -2/+2no they will just have to be more sneaky about it.
    • mostfynest, on 06/10/2008, -10/+4After the impeachment comes EXECUTION. Good F***N job on behalf of the international community outside the US.
      • laserblazer, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Legally, execution is the remedy for traitors that wound America as deeply as Bush and his cronies have done repeatedly.

        The Bush supporters don't like to hear it, but their unholy idol has committed offenses for which the traditional remedy is death.
    • whiterice0, on 06/10/2008, -12/+3Excuse me while I yawn. YAAAAWN. If this is such huge news, why is it that no major network is carrying it? I challenge you to go to any major news site. You won't see a single mention of it. It's only huge in ultra-liberal Digg's eyes -- where no one cares what you think. Articles of impeachment from some podunk congressman. I guess it's a little amusing.

      What a waste of tax dollars. Someone should impeach Dennis Whatshisface for wasting important congressional time on bogus issues.
      • rdmaxx, on 06/10/2008, -0/+5Do you not get the Media is in on it? You seem to think its free and independent. The media is just as guilty as the White House if for nothing else not checking out the claims of the hype machines. They were used and should be pissed. I am glad to see this on Digg. Also this happened at 11:00 PM for a reason. They do everything they can to keep this stuff down.

        http://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/id ...
        • mostfynest, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Damn Straight!
        • halliburke, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1I agree that the media isn't free and independent... if anything it is liberally biased. Of course, liberals want to dispel any notion that this might be true, so you charge that it is controlled by right-swing interests.

          I know it's liberally biased for a number of reasons, but two that stand out particularly well in my mind right now is the fact that 1) the vast majority of Iraq coverage is (or should I say "was"... now that we are doing much better in Iraq, it's no longer covered in news stories) focused on the shortcomings of our effort there. There was very little emphasis on the job that is being accomplished there. 2) The media practically gave Obama a free pass. Virtually all of the liberal media's energies were focused on trying to damage Hillary's campaign or pointlessly uplift Obama... whether by endlessly focusing on Bill (not on Michelle Obama, who only recently became "proud" of this country, among other things) or talking about just how nasty Hillary is, or by giving Obama the benefit of the doubt regarding his associations with his pal and financial supporter Tony Rezko or his mentor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright.

          So yeah, I agree with you, I don't think the media is free and independent at all. Perhaps this is the one thing that we do agree upon ;) Good day.
      • ophello, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Ahh, the greatest sign of ignorance. If it's so important, why isn't it on TEE VEE?!

        Surely you know how much of a fool you are for saying that, right?

        Excuse me while I block your dumb ass.
    • Schatzjm, on 06/10/2008, -1/+7Anytime is the best time for JUSTICE
    • zig145, on 06/10/2008, -10/+6
      Yay, Dick Cheney for president. W00t!
    • humangrenade, on 06/10/2008, -1/+12I've always respected Kucinich. He has more stones than a quarry.
    • huertanix, on 06/10/2008, -4/+3Is this battletoads?
    • snowblind113, on 06/10/2008, -8/+2who cares.. he is gone soon. ***** leave it to diggers to spam political BS.
    • Eezyville, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1lol denial of service attacks?
    • Peetweefish, on 06/10/2008, -8/+3Too bad that there is no true legal reason that Bush can be impeached. Everything he has done is protected by his position as president. By law, there is no way he can be impeached. This is just a waste of time on the part of the democrats. Bush has not broken any laws, therefore he can not be impeached. You idiots don't understand that you can't just impeach a president who is unpopular or takes actions contrary to your beliefs. Learn the particulars of impeachment processes before you shoot off your mouth. Can any of you name a single legitimate LEGAL reason that Bush can be impeached and under what pretense?

      I have often discussed the idea of impeachment with my friends who are law students, and they agree that there is no foundation for impeachment. Go ask someone who has studied this ***** rather than reading an article about some pissed off senator trying to make a political statement and assuming that because a senator does it publicly, it must be a legitimate proceeding.
      • LordOfTheSponge, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2Well they got Clinton for lying about Monica Lewinski about a blow job.

        W. lied about intelligence and led us to war over it. causing thousands to die and wasting our taxpayer money.

        Which is worse?
        • NJank, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1which is worse is irrelevant. the question is: which can be proven legally.

          Clinton lying under oath: recorded proof.
          Bush lying about intelligence: no smoking gun, and plenty of other fall-guys.
        • Peetweefish, on 06/10/2008, -1/+0Clinton committed perjury, which is a felony. Bush has not done anything illegal. Whether he had good intelligence or not, nothing that he has done as a result is illegal since he is president.

          Why do you think no one has impeached him yet? There is no legal weight to the argument.
    • mephyt, on 06/10/2008, -1/+2Anyone considered that Cheney is next in line?

      I'm not exactly a Bush fan, but uh... Cheney?
    • teh_techie, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3http://c-span.org/pdf/bush_impeach.pdf

      That is the link to the PDF record. It's one LONG ASS speech!
    • RobotCitizen, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1"we need to flood the House telephone system!!!!"

      You mean it's not enough just to digg the submission?
  • chrissku, on 06/10/2008, -18/+155It'a on C-SPAN right now.
  • ekspiulo, on 06/10/2008, -46/+494There's no feeling like watching a good man publicly excoriate a traitor on national television.
    • zyklon, on 06/10/2008, -5/+32As treasonous as Bush is, I thought he'd be untouchable. If these impeachment hearings go through and he's given the wooden paddle, I think I might actually be able to sleep at night.
      • hosanojo, on 06/10/2008, -25/+5What a dreamer! Bush will never be impeached. Get a life!
      • diggrnumber1, on 06/10/2008, -7/+3i guess you won't ever be able to sleep at night
      • viggooo, on 06/10/2008, -1/+2Sadly, he has to many accomplices who will help him get out of trouble. He's not as dumb as he might appear to be.
    • Frostman3D, on 06/10/2008, -10/+4Any reason you chose the word "excoriate" instead of "denounce"? I'm just curious, because most people don't know the meaning of the word.
      • dharmacrat, on 06/10/2008, -0/+6Any idiot can read by context.
      • Ursapater, on 06/10/2008, -0/+6It's called a dictionary. BTW a lot of people don't know what denounce means either...
        • Loonacy, on 06/10/2008, -0/+5What's a "dictionary"?
        • Vindexus, on 06/10/2008, -3/+1I went out and bought a dictionary. The first thing I did was look up the word "dictionary". It said... "you're an *****."




          /demetrimartin
    • Drewnami, on 06/10/2008, -4/+1You're right. I'll let you know when I see that.
    • palehorse864, on 06/10/2008, -5/+11You just wanted to say excoriate. :)
    • ronaldst, on 06/10/2008, -2/+11The real question is when's the rest of the sleazebags are going to get their turn? Bush isn't the only one who's guilty. Almost all members of Congress are equally guilty.
      • ISIfunded911, on 06/10/2008, -6/+2Obama, McCain, Clinton: these members of the CFR keep on funding that horrible Iraq war every time Bush the puppet of the military industry asks for more tens/hundreds of billions. They should all be jailed. Instead, the capitalist mass-media (partly owned by the military industry) managed to make you believe that they were the only viable candidates. Most of you are manipulated sheep.
        • Ranvier, on 06/10/2008, -3/+2Yeah, let's vote to not fund the soldiers so they can die even faster! Bush has shown he doesn't care if they are well equipped for battle, he'll send them out anyway. So to vote against the war funding is like signing a death certificate for the soldiers.
        • thirteenthcor, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4No, its not. Less money = EXTRACTION. Does anyone know what happens when a war loses its funding? Anyone? Anyone? IT GETS CALLED OFF!
    • 9bpm9, on 06/10/2008, -13/+5You vote these people in, deal with it.
      • pcghost, on 06/10/2008, -1/+4And just wtf do you think Rep. Kucinich is doing if not "dealing with it"?
      • Elranzer, on 06/10/2008, -1/+5I didn't vote for Bush.
    • JonGalt, on 06/10/2008, -12/+5You're all *****.
    • thereisnostate, on 06/10/2008, -2/+7What about the millions of traitors who voted for Bush twice..
      • laserblazer, on 06/10/2008, -1/+5Hell awaits them.
      • danieldrehmer, on 06/10/2008, -1/+3even thought they voted in him so they could go to heaven
    • vconn, on 06/10/2008, -1/+4I can't pronounce "excoriate", so I just replaced it with ****. The sentence works just as well!

      Thumbs up.
    • Peetweefish, on 06/10/2008, -5/+0Learn the ***** precedent for impeachment to occur. You have to break the law as president before you can be impeached, moron. Bush, as unpopular as he is, has not broken any laws since everything he has done is protected by his position as president. There is no way that this proceeds past a pissed off speak by Dennis.

      Don't ***** jump to conclusions because a senator is making a public political statement, you tard.
      • thirteenthcor, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4He hasn't broken any laws? GTFO n00b.

        How about Bill of Rights Amendments ONE, FOUR, FIVE (Big One), SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, AND NINE!
        • Peetweefish, on 06/11/2008, -1/+0You are a dumbass. Presidential action in the way he has exercised is completely legal. ***** talk to someone who knows some ***** about law.

          God, you people are spewing more rhetoric with no factual basis. Just because you are pissed off and have personally interpreted his actions as illegal doesn't mean he has broken the law. Seriously, if there were any possibility of impeachment they would have done something by now. There is no legal precedent, so he has remained not impeached.
        • XyZeR, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1We would agree with you, but we haven't been lobotomised yet, how is that working for you ?

    • burnin8r28, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1ok lets be honest. without bush the white house is going to be really boring
    • peaceofpie, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1excoriate
      ikskoreat
      1. to tear or wear off the skin of; 2. to censure strongly; denounce

      Yes, Washington needs a new skin and some strong censuring.
      Good word choice.
      Kucinich knows how to excoriate well, and I think as many members of congress as possible should help with the excoriation before the next coronation.
  • RomanticRights, on 06/10/2008, -46/+446I truly believe that history will look favorably on Dennis Kucinich.

    Thank you for all you've done, sir.
    • DarkenKO, on 06/10/2008, -18/+5no... history might say:

      WHY wasnt it done earlier

      kucinich is just lame for waiting till the last second so he can do his best to waste our money. and clog up congress with a petty and time consuming impeachment process. lets move on and fix this ourselves instead of causing a congress clog
      • notoneofus, on 06/10/2008, -1/+14Kucinich has pushed for this for a long time. History will look unfavorably on others who wouldn't back him.
        • ISIfunded911, on 06/10/2008, -5/+4Like: Obama, Clinton, McCain. All complicit of the traitor in the bloody White House. And not just passively complicit: they vote to fund the Iraq war every time, and send hundreds of billions in the pockets of the military industry: Halliburton, Carlyle, Blackwater,...Bush could not do it alone.
        • DarkenKO, on 06/10/2008, -2/+1obviously kucinich didnt do enough.

          again point is... waste of time and money now.
    • zmigliozzi, on 06/10/2008, -1/+6Haven't you heard, only winners write the history books. This will go no where.
      • SpyDerMann, on 06/10/2008, -1/+2Wrong. Only winners write *official* history books. But sooner or later, history teachers adopt the other books.
      • itsthebrod, on 06/10/2008, -0/+7Historians write history books, and by the looks of it, Bush is still going to be screwed: http://hnn.us/articles/48916.html
        • laserdog, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2Yeah, but school board members decide what history books K-12 students read.
      • psyjoniz, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4the internet is in our history telling teh truthz
    • TangTKE402, on 06/10/2008, -2/+16Well, I'll still look favorably on his wife.
    • Stormwern, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2As soon as his hair comes into style.
    • skyscape, on 06/10/2008, -4/+1LOL. This is a big story only on Digg.
      If you goto drudgereport.com, it is nowhere to be found
      Another words the impeachment is garbage it will nothappen, it is only useful for digg idiots.
    • HeavyWaters, on 06/10/2008, -9/+3"I truly believe that history will look favorably on Dennis Kucinich. Thank you for all you've done, sir."

      I'd laugh if it wasn't so embarrassing. You liberals are so pathetic. Nothing will come of this. Kucinich is an ignorant opportunist who WANTS to be remembered by history, but never will be.

      Enjoy your mock impeachment fools.
    • transmothra, on 06/10/2008, -2/+3i completely agree. he's one of The Good Ones (of which there are precious few).
    • smashthetv, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1This is why I voted for him in 2004. The man has great character.
  • Goodanswer, on 06/10/2008, -29/+186Looks like hell CAN freeze over.
    • dudefather, on 06/10/2008, -1/+9LETS KICK SOME ICE!
    • AquaOSX, on 06/10/2008, -1/+6Nah, Hell is still very very hot. Contrary to this article's title, impeachment is NOT "happening in congress right now." The majority of the House needs to approve the articles of impeachment, and as it stands now, Pelosi has said impeachment is off the table.

      Moreover, even if the votes in the House were there, and the impeachment process were to begin (which is not likely), we would need a 2/3 vote in the Senate to convict.

      • Goodanswer, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1I have taken your view point into consideration and have concluded that tey are waiting to hand him over for a war tribunal. He will not be impeached but much, much worse... Way to leave a mark on the world.. silly Neocons.... your time is up.
    • snowblind113, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1in dantes inferno it already is frozen...
    • ExRe, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1This has been brought up before the house multiple times already. What makes you think it'll pass now?
    • toonworld, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1I was wondering why I was seeing pigs fly... I thought I was just high!
      Boy am I relieved!!!
  • hotdigdog, on 06/10/2008, -33/+150Dennis Kucinich, the one real representative I have in congress! Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Dennis!
    Congress needs to assert the authority they have as a coequal branch of government and impeach Bush Junior for high crimes and misdemeanors. Call your representatives and senators early and often.
    • lucutus, on 06/10/2008, -1/+7Yeah I've called and e-mailed. Did anyone notice all the while MSNBC and CNN has nothing to report but details of 5 sailors rescued from the sea.
      How many ways can they ask "What was it like"?-Wet and Hot
      "What was going through your mind?" Uh I am wet and hot.

      No mention of impeachment in the MSM
    • skyscape, on 06/10/2008, -4/+2Oh shut up hothead.
      Dennis is salesman who did a good job to convince idiots like you that something is happenning.

      Stop wasting your emotions on fake stuff, because no one is getting impeached except congress for having lowest rating in history. Our congress is circuss.
      • hotdigdog, on 06/10/2008, -0/+0I am NOT a fracking HOTHead,,,, Yopu won't be call me a fracking hothead after I shove my Mossberg 500 up your buttttt '

        lilberal indeed......frickin emotional sheesh my ass!11!!!
    • HeavyWaters, on 06/10/2008, -3/+1Hotdigdog provides us with a perfect example of the breathless hysteria of the liberal mind. They are ruled by emotions and never by facts or logic.
      • jspegele, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3wait, does that make Bush a liberal?
        • HeavyWaters, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Actually yes.
        • jspegele, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1wow, i'm scared as hell of what your political views must be
      • hotdigdog, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1I already am aware that you and your ilk think the congress is not a coequal branch of our government as defined by the constitution. Your buddy Bush hasn't let his fascist excuse for a mind let that fact bother him either.

        You must be in line for the court jester job.
        • HeavyWaters, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1There you liberals go throwing the word "fascist" around again without actually knowing its meaning.

          You are a ridiculous person hotdigdog.
  • seanmc303, on 06/10/2008, -34/+335Regardless of the fact that Dennis looks like a magical woodland being, he has some of the biggest kahones in Washinton. Go Dennis!
    • SuperWinner, on 06/10/2008, -4/+11Go hard Dennis you gnome looking little crazy mofo!
    • iPirate, on 06/10/2008, -2/+55*cojones
    • hosanojo, on 06/10/2008, -24/+0Dennis is such a h0m0 it's embarrassing
    • InSectWar, on 06/10/2008, -6/+1I find he looks a bit similar to a certain wabbit hunter as well
    • yardie, on 06/10/2008, -6/+1it's cajones
    • DestroyFascism, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1Similar to Pajero...(Which bush and Pajero drivers are...)



    • genepooldesign, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4Aww he looks just fine.

      And yes, he does have a set! And a hot wife!
    • pe5t1lence, on 06/10/2008, -1/+12No *****, have you seen his wife? Proof of his balls right there. I can only imagine their first meeting gong something like:
      "Excuse me Ms. Harper, I know I am twice your age (literally), and that I look like a troll, but I have HUGE cajones, and I am going to make you my wife. No discussion."
    • hosanojo, on 06/10/2008, -6/+0There's more than a few morons online here tonight. Kucinich is a wierdo from outer space. No wonder nobody's listening to him.
    • BlueSkyfish, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1He must be one of those japanese raccoon things.
  • THUORN, on 06/10/2008, -33/+124WOOHOO!! someone deserves a raise....

    I will be donating to his campaign next time his runs for whatever office he goes for.
    • pintomp3, on 06/10/2008, -2/+23he's running for reelection:
      http://kucinich.us/
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2And his own party is stabbing him in the back. They want him out.
    • DMCer, on 06/10/2008, -10/+2Might as well throw your money into the wind. America's been screaming "Hell no" at him for quite some time now.
  • SuperWinner, on 06/10/2008, -43/+94Any chance they can get that MoFo bush into prison before he starts a holy war with Iran?
    • koan, on 06/10/2008, -2/+12It is beginning to look like they are trying to get Israel to do their work for them this time. Sigh.
      • Rekutyn, on 06/10/2008, -0/+13Yeah. Because we'll totally stay out of that one. /sarcasm
      • PopcornDave, on 06/10/2008, -1/+5This time? That's what we *usually* do isn't it?
        • babak147, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1No buddy , Its other way around, we usually fight the wars for Israel
    • leonhyral, on 06/10/2008, -3/+3Haven't heard "MoFo" in some time.
    • 9bpm9, on 06/10/2008, -13/+8President's have done worse and not gone to prison. This man has done nothing to go to prison.
      • crackedlogic, on 06/10/2008, -3/+7just because you outsource your murderers doesn't mean that you're not still guilty of a crime worthy of a prison sentence.
        • trumpydumpy, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3Exactly, Charles Manson is still in prison, why isn't Bush?
      • McHoffa, on 06/10/2008, -3/+5i honestly can't believe i read that on here, that someone has seen enough articles on digg and still convinced bush is a saint....
        or maybe you purposefully come to digg just to defend your saint bush?
        i even voted for the guy once (i am truly sorry america, please forgive me) but i can see what he has done with our troops and our country
        • ChildeRoland420, on 06/10/2008, -1/+2He didn't say he's a saint. It is true that presidents have done MUCH worse.
        • Demener, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1I've already forgiven everyone who has realized their mistake. Many were just voting along party lines, or were voting because of an issue that doesn't matter or he was lying about. One of my best friends voted Bush in 04 because he was the more 'honest' choice. I still shake my head at that reasoning.
          I voted independent in 2000 and vehemently against him in 2004. Not that he won the 2000 election fairly anyway.
      • millertime588, on 06/10/2008, -1/+5Don't feed the trolls.
    • vbullinger, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4We'll be attacking Iran soon enough, no matter who's president: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697 ...
      • ciaran036, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1Even though the truth is out that Iran does not even have nuclear weapons, they're still making threats. And your absolutely right. Obama made threats against Iran almost immediately after Hillary stood down.
  • LloydBentsen, on 06/10/2008, -33/+461I really wish this had a chance. :-(
    • t3rmv3locity, on 06/10/2008, -6/+33I sorta want to bury you for reminding me that it dosen't...but I dugg you up cause unfortunately you are probably right...
      • prleet, on 06/10/2008, -3/+1You see, what disappoints me is not the fact that this is insignificant and there will be nothing out of it but it won't even make it to the house floor or even be scheduled or assigned/reviewed by committee, or even get out of the closet where it will be stashed by the majority speaker in some drawer for the review time to expire......welcome to American government. :)
        ps
        to the submitter: do the honor and not submit stuff like this.....thnx
    • mearom, on 06/10/2008, -7/+2I see it as a good way for the republicans to save face with their constituency, which gives it a chance, but you are most likely correct. Besides, those "republics" had it coming to them. How much sorrow have they wraught?
      • hwy9nightkid, on 06/10/2008, -1/+5this shouldn't be about republicans or democrats, it's about justice and doing what is right. Never think that a party has anything coming, or this back and forth bickering will contin....

        oh wait that's how the world turns..nm
        • mearom, on 06/10/2008, -3/+1George is already a lame duck president, so all this would do is make politicians look good at home and the us look good on the internatinal scene. Mere impeachment, purely for justice, would be insultingly inadequate to the innocent victims of, say, white phosphorous, in Iraq.

          And from a purely objective standpoint the past eight (mainly republican) years for the us havent been it's best
        • Metasquares, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2Political parties were doing this sort of bickering since Adams was President (back then, it was the Republicans and the Federalists). I don't think they'll ever stop and serve the good of the people.

          I think they were a really awful idea from the start.
    • joe122370, on 06/10/2008, -3/+4if only people cared about Kucinich or anything he says..........:-(
    • nalen33, on 08/29/2008, -6/+1I really wish they didn't waste time on this when they could be, oh I don't know, cutting spending and working on creating better oil independence for us as a country. But no, that'd be intelligent and cost effective, not something that Congress is very good at.
    • mrboris, on 06/10/2008, -2/+4Hey, Clinton was impeached for much less =) So you gotta think this has some sort of fighting chance, especially with talks of him invading Iran before his leave.
    • Naieve, on 06/10/2008, -5/+4I agree,

      This has absolutely no chance.

      He waits till it doesn't matter anymore and has no chance of passage, and then goes for impeachment as a political grandstand.

      How much money is this going to cost the US taxpayer?

      I mean, everyone knows it's not going to work, why WASTE OUR MONEY.

      If he wants to make a pointless political statement, perhaps he should use his own money.
  • doshindude, on 06/10/2008, -28/+93sadly, I don't think this is going to get very far...but we can dream.
    • techfire, on 06/10/2008, -0/+12If we only had the ability to listen to his phone calls without a warrant so we could classify him as an "enemy combatant" and hold him without trial for 6 years in Guantanamo.
    • lpferris, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3Instead of dreaming, why not pick up the phone and call your representative?
    • BESTenemy, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2The only place Bush will get "impeached to" is Dubai, along with Rumsfeld Cheney and Bernanke.
  • Cedargrove, on 06/10/2008, -24/+210Did I just see a human on the House floor?
    • skyshock1, on 06/10/2008, -14/+1Human? I think he looks more like E.T. really.
      • mearom, on 06/10/2008, -3/+5on an unrelated note kusinich does believe in ufos

        Kusinich FTW anyway
      • eqisow, on 06/10/2008, -1/+3He believes flying objects where seen which were never identified?! Say it's not so! >
    • AzureRise, on 06/10/2008, -5/+2No. They are not like us. They are....congressman.
    • spanglegluppet, on 06/10/2008, -2/+7No, you saw Dennis Kucinich.
    • Hincapie, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1egads, i believe he's right!
    • unearth, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2I, for one, welcome our new human legislator overlords.
  • digitallysick, on 06/10/2008, -21/+20so what will it take for this to happen?
    • devzor, on 06/10/2008, -2/+17a miracle

    • Frostman3D, on 06/10/2008, -2/+9It won't happen. No chance in Hell. Ron Paul is more likely to win the republican nomination after McCain dies on the toilet.
      • PopcornDave, on 06/10/2008, -1/+4No, the corpse of Grover Cleveland is more likely to win the next American Idol.
      • mrgreenjeans, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Thanks for that mental image, McCain all red-faced, veins popping out of his forehead.
    • ISIfunded911, on 06/10/2008, -10/+1For this to happen, it would take...Obama becoming human, honest, courageous,...instead of merely being a comedian of change. What change? Where? When? Kucinich IS change: he wants to jail traitorous politicians. While Obama funded Bush's (and the military industry) wars every time he asked for money to kill people.
      Obama did not try to impeach the most traitorous president in US history. How dare he ask people to vote for him? What an infamy!
      • Vironex, on 06/10/2008, -2/+5A war needs funding unless you'd like soldiers to wear cardboard armour.
        • ISIfunded911, on 06/10/2008, -9/+1You are mentally ill. You probably suffer from necrophilia to write that "a war needs funding". Because it means "death needs funding".
      • Nollykin, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2lSlfunded911: You are so misled it isn't funny. What Vironex means, is that AFTER the war was GOING ahead regardless (AFTER obama opposed and was 'outvoted'), he funded it. Of course he did! If, now that it's happening, he hadn't helped, it would have been sending troops in without enough funds, therefore risking american lives. Remember, he's an american candidate first. That's who he looks out for.
    • Suricou, on 06/10/2008, -1/+17Can't happen. Party loyalty - Bush could murder Obama on stage and grant himself an immediate presidential pardon, and the republicans would still oppose impeachment.
      • Pittance, on 06/10/2008, -5/+2Probably true, but goddamn that would be funny to witness, even if horribly sad.
        • ISIfunded911, on 06/10/2008, -3/+2CFR members killing each other sad? Terribly funny!
      • viggooo, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Sad but true
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3But the record will hold the articles of impeachment for history to read. Before, it just had people's memories of a good ol' boy president who tried to stop terrists. Kucinich has listed his crimes as bullet points that Lou Dobbs won't be able to sneer down. Set it in stone.
    • cave, on 06/10/2008, -0/+6A blowjob and some nut screaming "think of the children!"
  • kemp34, on 06/10/2008, -25/+68To hell with the doubters. Get it done!!
    • Waterrat, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1 There is no hell.

      I do want to see B and C tarred and feathered and chased through the DC zoo.
  • Skurj, on 06/10/2008, -21/+67better late than never.
    • alpha88, on 06/10/2008, -2/+23better earlier than late.
    • AnarkeIncarnate, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2Don't rush a miracle man. You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles.
      • Skurj, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1Bush = Humperdink
        • AnarkeIncarnate, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1Does that make Cheney the king's father? He's just as clueless.
    • lAmoebal, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3Better late than pregnant.
    • nazsco, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1but still damn late.
  • Skurj, on 06/10/2008, -20/+80this is really exciting. i'm looking forward to seeing where this goes!!!
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=1qy3z7XWtQc
    • ichbeineinrcg, on 06/10/2008, -2/+18It will go the same place it did last time, nowhere, because the Democratic leadership has no spine.
      • hosanojo, on 06/10/2008, -1/+2It's going nowhere. Go back to bed.
      • Larsonal777, on 06/10/2008, -6/+2Or because its a distraction... seriously... is it really in our best interest to have congress spending lots of time on pointing fingers... if all he has is war crimes its rediculous... Congress is the one who can declare war... if the President wants to go to war... he goes to congress and they determine if its the best for the nation... they can't come back later and say... but but the president didn't give us all the information we needed... thats B.S. If congress doesn't think we should have gone to war now then they can't blame it on the president.
        There was a seriously unstable dictator over there... killing his own people... who actually saaaid that he had WMDs... that is reason enough to go to war.

        If you are the decision maker... you have to take responsibility for YOUR decision... not pass it off onto someone else.
        • sweeneypng, on 06/10/2008, -0/+5well, I guess Congress is probably pretty glad they never declared war, then, huh?
        • barnett25, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3We now know that the administration had made up it's mind about what it wanted to do with Iraq. It then did whatever was necessary to start the war. It purposely only provided information that would push us into the war, without providing the other side of the story.
          This arrogant behavior by a few people in the administration thinking that they had the right to decide the fate of the country themselves is a betrayal of the public trust.
          I thought we should go to war when this all started. I thought this because I was certain that the president would not try to go to war unless he knew something we didn't. It turns out I was wrong to trust him, and I take it as a personal offense.
    • forceuser, on 06/10/2008, -1/+3Why is the rating so low?
  • kidneyd08, on 06/10/2008, -23/+34FINALLY...
    • sambapati87, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2This has happened several times before. It never goes anywhere.
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1No, once, and they were read in for Cheney. Kucinich introduced those as well.
  • MarimbaFire07, on 06/10/2008, -22/+48Well it's about damn time.
    • nekroskoma, on 06/10/2008, -1/+2took the words right out of my mouth
    • diggrnumber1, on 06/10/2008, -2/+2he's done this before and failed miserably. he will probably fail even more miserably this time, as he wasn't even able to get the house to keep quiet for him to give the speech. it looked like most of the people weren't even there to hear it.
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3He has not failed; he has epic win. His party and his country have failed him. He went over the hill himself, and no one followed. He and Byrd and a few others will be the heroes of this time.
  • Skurj, on 06/10/2008, -52/+25i usually get grumpy when i see people posting long personal, rambly rants.. so excuse the hypocrisy.
    most ppl who know me have rarely seen me express any interest in politics. and even if i did, well.. bush's almost done anyways so what's the point?

    well, the way i see it, this isn't about "justice" as people like to call it.
    there is absolutely no way the people behind the atrocities committed by the bush administration will ever really atone for it. and the american people will never really be compensated.

    okay.. so.. no justice.. why are you so excited about this potential impeachment?

    well, it shows one very very good sign!

    the USA as we see it today, is all kinds of ugly. it's been cast as a fat, gross, inconsiderate, blubbering buffoon of a nation. oafishly throwing it's weight around.

    impeaching bush is ONE IMPORTANT STEP closer to the nation taking back it's identity.

    there was a time when being an american was something to be proud of. not so much these days, but there was such a time and it wasn't really all that long ago!

    by actually calling bush and his people out on this crap... and not just letting him skulk away into the shadows... america will be saying "Hey! we know what you did! and it's not okay! we do not support this! we were decieved."

    yes yes there is all kinds of messy politics and war etc that will have to be dealt with. it wont magically fix the economy or feed poor people all over the world or make people give up their seats less reluctantly on the bus for old people... BUT
    (and it's a big but)
    BUT, it is the nation (provided they hold fast on this one) taking back it's name. salvaging what dignity it can, and standing up and saying "NO! WE DON'T BELIEVE IN THIS. ***** YOU!"

    so even if it IS too little too late, it's much much much better than nothing.

    i'm much more interested in this than i thought i'd be. i'm like a little kid at christmas time... i was exhausted and upon hearing of this i.. ah i just can't sit still!!!

    :D
    • ralphthemagi, on 06/10/2008, -11/+3TL;DR

      Please try again. Or don't.
    • timo1teo, on 06/10/2008, -10/+2stfu please
    • gandhii, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4ummmmm.. this post is basically supporting the whole story that is being way dugg up. I don't see any majorly embarrassing typos. Why is it getting dugg down?
      • downneck, on 06/10/2008, -1/+3because diggers are ***** retarded
      • yodaj007, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2I think it was this:

        "bush's almost done anyways so what's the point?"

        When I read that, I almost dugg him down then and there knowing that the rest of the post was some anti-impeachment rant. Luckily I decided to keep reading. This might be true of other people.

        In any case, unless you keep reading you don't realize that his question was rhetorical. That's my 2c on it, anyway, speaking from my own experience.
    • Demener, on 06/10/2008, -1/+4Seriously why is this post being dugg down? It's completely correct and absolutely on topic.

      Oh wait, ADD forum trolls that can't read past 2 sentences before getting bored. Sorry.
  • RRJackson, on 06/10/2008, -57/+36Wow, what an excercise in futility. "Look at me!!!"
  • aaeyers, on 06/10/2008, -24/+18Good luck with that. I hate Bush as much of the next guy, but just think about what impeaching him would mean.. Think about who would take over..
    • lewiscb, on 06/10/2008, -6/+5With your logic it would be cheney, but you probably are unaware that Dennis put in a resolution last year to impeach Dick. They have yet to vote on it yet......
      So actually Pelosi would be prez if (and i HOPE, When) both are impeached...
      • JHB800, on 06/10/2008, -1/+12Actually, thats not how it works. They can't impeach both at the same time. If Bush goes first and gets removed, Cheney becomes president. (and chooses his own VP) If Cheney goes first, Bush chooses a new VP.

        There is no situation in which Pelosi becomes president.
      • hivoltage815, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3Pelosi is just as bad anyways. She has nothing to offer our country.
    • pintomp3, on 06/10/2008, -5/+8you can impeach both.
    • trixterIreland, on 06/10/2008, -5/+14bush would, impeachment does NOT mean out of office, its a formal reprimand saying "you were bad dont do that again" and little else. When nixon was impeached he resigned, he wasnt forced out of office technically (yes there was political pressure mostly under the guise that he has lost credibility).

      And if Bush were forced out of office, Cheny would take over so sayeth the constitution.
      • cjsedwards, on 06/10/2008, -1/+7No President has been impeached by both houses. Nixon resigned before it got that far, and Clinton was acquitted by the Senate.
        • DeviantDragon, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3That's because both houses don't impeach. The House impeaches and the Senate tries the impeachment.
      • MightyE, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Impeachment is only a legal declaration of formal charges.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment

        Clinton *was* impeached, the Senate only cleared him of Obstruction of Justice charges. Impeachment itself is akin to indictment. It only says, "We think you did the following things wrong, and we will start an investigation and trial into this." It's the first of the two stages of involuntarily removing the official from office, the second one being conviction. Clinton was not convicted.
  • adminmatt, on 06/10/2008, -29/+35hahaha. good luck. no matter what side you're on, if you think this will follow through you need to take your rose colored glasses off for a minute.
    • spudhead, on 06/10/2008, -3/+5You're missing the point.

      Speaking truth to power is a good thing. Standing up, on the record, is a good thing.
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -1/+3Colbert couldn't hurt Bush either, but everyone remembers what Colbert did. A billion jokes in support of Bush on late night TV will be lost to national memory, but the sight of Colbert facing down the evil bastard at the Press Corp dinner and calling him what he truly was, that will be with us forever.
    • carbonetc, on 06/10/2008, -2/+3I guess we should just give up then. Cynically mocking the people trying to improve the country is a lot easier anyway.
      • adminmatt, on 06/10/2008, -2/+1I'm not being cynical, I'm being realistic, and you should too.
      • foxbuntu, on 06/10/2008, -3/+1Move to mexico you ass pirate
    • Bakebehe, on 06/11/2008, -2/+1Yea, ***** trying, nothing ever gets done if it doesn't get done instantly.
  • lozzobear, on 06/10/2008, -12/+54Kucinich should have done this before the Democratic nominations started.
    • osmaker, on 06/10/2008, -1/+13Because we all know that the best thing that could've happened was to give the Republicans something to all come and rally around...

      I think not.

      I admire Kucinich for his guts (he tells the public he believes in UFOs and actually tries to impeach Bush). But there's a good reason (no matter how double faced they've been about this...) that the democratic leaders have opted to just let the burning Bush burn out naturally in January.
      • Pittance, on 06/10/2008, -9/+2UFOs? So Kuncinich is just an idiot then who is starved for attention and likes hitting hot button issues. I'm all for someone trying to impeach bush, but when the guy doing it is a moron, it doesnt help anyone.
    • jordan314, on 06/10/2008, -1/+34He tried to impeach Cheney in 2007.
      • Stavrosian, on 06/10/2008, -0/+12At least he's got the balls to try and do what everybody in the world knows is the right thing, even if he stands no chance of succeeding. His lightweight, bought-and-paid-for colleagues should be ashamed of themselves that he appears to be the only one voicing the opinion of the public on this matter.
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1"Impeach" is the trial before the assembled Congress and Supreme Court. Conviction is what happens after impeachment and a guilty verdict. What Kucinich does is introduce articles of impeachment to get the ball rolling. He does as much as one man can do.

        And for that, the Democratic party is attempting to kick him out next election.
    • trixterIreland, on 06/10/2008, -1/+5Why? Now they can do it without claims of political pandering even though its happening 6 months before Bush's term is over, and essentially he has been a "lame duck" for a while (look at the 4th circuit court of appeals, Senate wont confirm anyone so the appeals court doesnt have enough justices for an en banc hearing).

      The reality is that this is a key in trying to win in November, by doing it now, right after the DNC has decided on its nominee, and the fact that the biggest part of Obama's message is that McCain is just like Bush the worse they can make bush, the worse they can make McCain look, and thus try to pick up a few more voters for November.
      • RuffRidr, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2"The reality is that this is a key in trying to win in November, by doing it now, right after the DNC has decided on its nominee, and the fact that the biggest part of Obama's message is that McCain is just like Bush the worse they can make bush, the worse they can make McCain look, and thus try to pick up a few more voters for November."

        Sooo, it is political pandering then.
  • trixterIreland, on 06/10/2008, -20/+14remember impeachment is only congress saying "you were bad dont do it again" it doesnt do anything else really.

    • mike17032, on 06/10/2008, -6/+16Your understanding of the process is seriously flawed.
    • thescorpion420, on 06/10/2008, -4/+10Impeachment is basically the same as an indictment in a criminal trial. It is a formal statement of the charges. Then a trial is held. Clinton was impeached but not convicted. If convicted, the President is removed from office.
      • Rivetgeek, on 06/10/2008, -0/+7why are people digging this down? THis is true.
        • trixterIreland, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1because they dont want it to be true.

          Impeachment can lead to removal of office (its required in fact for removal) but impeachment itself is not removal and someone can be impeached without actually being removed.

          Look at http://www.law.cornell.edu/background/impeach/impe ...

          They kinda blur other things in together, but it is possible to impeach and then fail to meet requirements for removal. As a result actual impeachment is just a "you were bad dont do it again" thing.

          But hey why trust one of the larger law universities when someone on digg contradicts that? After all he has more diggs than the post saying what the law university says so it must be true right?

          With that said the article itself is not even about impeachment hearings. What the real news on this is, is one guy going against the dem party is trying to start the impeachment process. It was expected by many to not go anywhere since both the DNC and GOP are against it.
        • senseinobaka, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1It's mostly true. Impeachment is indictment by the congress of an elected official. When congress indicts it usually means that the evidence of criminal activity is pretty much conclusive.

          Clinton's criminal activity was very well documented and had it gone to trial he would have been found guilty, but he plea bargained. Hence the reason he was disbarred and can no longer practice law..anywhere.

          Bush being impeached will prove very difficult. Whatever 35 articles that Dennis feels he has needs the burden of proof.

          That's why rule of law is so comforting. Libs can feel that the president is doing something illegal all they want, but laws and the constitution protects those who find themselves under such political ire from those idiots.
  • elliotys, on 06/10/2008, -28/+6Impeaching the President = Gangster. . .
    • bbqsalad, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1No, How in the hell would that be "Gangster"?.. If anything it would be smart.
  • DiggityDugged, on 06/10/2008, -17/+57It was good to seem him bring up old stuff that most people never think about anymore. Like the Katrina disaster and the warnings he was given of 9/11 and the overall fishiness of his election fraud in general. Better late than never? Sure, but at least this is one more tarnish on his record for people to look back on in 100 years -- so that they know . . . he was officially a douchebag.
    • Zarchon, on 06/10/2008, -20/+8 Bush could not deal with Katrina until asked to do so by the state.

      There were NO warnings about 9/11.

      Both 2000 and 2004 were straight up elections that the Dems tried to steal.

      Now I have just given every one of you liberal conspiracy nut jobs a reason to digg me down. Don't disappoint.
    • cjb65, on 06/10/2008, -2/+5Kind of like how we all care about when Andrew Johnson was impeached?
    • 9bpm9, on 06/10/2008, -2/+10God I hate when people bring up Katrina. You know the mayor of the state and city must request aid from the national government correct? Because it's illegal to send troops into a state without the consent of the state. So actually, by doing nothing, he was protecting all of the rights you people bitch about here being taken away on digg.
      • laserdog, on 06/10/2008, -2/+5Because FEMA did awesome once they were "legally" called in.

        The guy was eating birthday cake w/McCain and playing guitar while the rest of us were watching an entire city being destroyed live on CNN.
        • flashfry, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2I assume then, that you dutifully wore a hairshirt and whipped yourself with a scourge for the entire period that anyone was inconvenienced by the disaster? Still have that hairshirt on today? It is still a crisis for some people out there.
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -2/+1No, the governor does not have to request help, like some welfare applicant. It was a national disaster, and common sense and centuries of precedent tell a sane human to do what he has to do to help people. The law is silent for humanitarian aid, anyway -- what do you think, the President will be impeached for sending in troops to LA without permission? Will you listen to yourself? What did you think would happen, the NG would open fire on the Army for invading their territory ? This is *****.

        Regardless, she did ask for help. Bush refused to send in troops unless she put her NG under his command, and this was days after the disaster -- Rove's idea was to blame the Democrats by implicitly declaring them incapable of command. Bush REFUSED to send in troops unless she signed -- a BS move he did not pull in Mississippi. He knew damned well she asked for troops, and he was refusing to send them. Or Rove was -- Bush may have been deliberately misinformed about the law by Rove. Days after she demanded he do his job did he send in troops, long after the dead were stacked high and the buses were rolling. Operation Blame the Donkeys was a success - the Governor was canned and the city of New Orleans was emptied of its darkies. A Republican state and city now stand there, being colonized by condo developers.
        • Demener, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Don't worry, the next flood there won't be a disaster either.
      • DigDugDigger, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Wasn't there a bill, I think the Defense Authorization Act in like '06 or '07, that gave the President power over every states' National Guard?
    • TheTSArt, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3What about all those liberal Democrat politicians in Louisiana who were siphoning the money that was supposed to be used to build up the levys and other structures that keep New Orleans dry?

      They are the real bad guys in the Katrina story, but it's just easier to pile all problems on President Bush, isn't it?
      • Demener, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1New Orleans had infrastructure to survive category 3 hurricane.

        Katrina was category 5 (maybe 4 but I think it was 5).
        • 9bpm9, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3And they had been getting money for years to improve it, you know where it went? In the ***** mayors pocket.
    • hivoltage815, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2Bush is not culpable for Katrina considering it was not his jurisdiction, the state did not give the federal government permission to intervene until it was too late, and once they did intervene, they did a marginally good job. My father commands a search and rescue unit that had over 1,500 rescues, the largest coordinated rescue effort in American history. Any of FEMA's failures are in their court. There is no grounds for impeachment there. The 9/11 warnings is one of hundreds of possible attacks the President hears about everyday. And the word "fishiness" means nothing.

      They need to get more fact-based and relevant to have a legitimate impeachment. From my perspective, if they prove Bush lied to convince America to go to war, that is the best case they've got. Everything else is baseless for now.
  • ChuyMX, on 06/10/2008, -21/+6i think it's a little late
    • gandhii, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1As long as he is still alive he can be brought to court and jailed for life. That goes for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet and his other cronies as well.
  • nyx210, on 06/10/2008, -19/+5Guess who'll be running for president again in 2012?
  • techfire, on 06/10/2008, -18/+150The sad thing is that it probably won't amount to anything. People are more concerned with the latest version of the iPhone than how the President is making a mockery of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
    • MediumPimpin, on 06/10/2008, -0/+6Dugg, and dugg this article as well in hopes that you are wrong.
    • aladrin, on 06/10/2008, -1/+11You might be right... But at least he's trying, instead of sitting around saying how pointless it all is.
    • farfromperfectx, on 06/10/2008, -1/+25But the Bill of Rights doesn't have GPS...
    • omenmedia, on 06/10/2008, -0/+6And that's exactly the way "they" want it to be.
    • Ayumi01, on 06/10/2008, -0/+8Excuse me, sir, but I care about both equally. :p
      • Anonchrist, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3Dugg for advocating tech news, but your hate for bush should exceed your love for apple.
    • Nutmegan, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1But I don't know if Kucinich even has an iPhone.
    • BenDoverTW, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3But you can turn it sideways...
    • twertyto, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3..but have you seen the new iPhone?
    • hagfish70, on 06/10/2008, -0/+3But its gots 3G! 3G!!!!!
    • hivoltage815, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Have a little more faith, this story is at the top of Google News and Digg.
    • tehHardcorez, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1But secks.
  • mike17032, on 06/10/2008, -50/+19Kuctards are still at it I see.

    Keep making those worthless motions, all hail Comrade Kucinich!
    • mearom, on 06/10/2008, -8/+8all hail mike17032,fuher trolltard!
    • hosanojo, on 06/10/2008, -7/+0There's more than a few morons here tonight. Kucinich is a wierdo from outer space. Get real, guys - nobody's listening to him.
      • mike4444r, on 06/10/2008, -5/+0kucinich is just another red...only morons follow morons like him
  • bennjammin, on 06/10/2008, -23/+102even canadians like me think its about time
    • sexypeon, on 06/10/2008, -1/+51I am pretty sure the whole world thinks it's about time.
    • hosanojo, on 06/10/2008, -33/+3I'm not surprised. Canadians are so gay
    • arctic, on 06/10/2008, -18/+3Good for you, but I think you should study your own country and worry about yourselves now... mmmm k?
      • DekarCorvus, on 06/10/2008, -2/+16as a canadian myself...i can say we worry about it more then you guys do.

        bush is a threat to world peace...and the majority of americans are ignorant to what really happens outside of what fox news tells you.

        most americans do not realize they are THE MOST HATED country in the world. seriously...this may be news to you, and i apologize for being the bearer of bad news... but most countries around the world have more respect for islamic nations, then they have for the US.

        (i don't personally care for you or islamic nations fyi)

        but seriously...you guys are hated as dick waiving warmongers clinging to your guns, and qouting passages from the bible as if it was literal word given to you directly from god...

        as a canadian...i fear my nation is in threat, by proximity...i live in southern ontario....if a country was tired of putting up with your ***** and waged war on your soil...and nuked new york, or even chicago, michigan or cleveland..i'd be screwed too....mind you..only new york is a good target outta that list... but still....


        plus..because of the north american free trade agreement, that we were bullied into...everything that happens in the states...impacts us directly. so forgive us for caring about how your country forcefully impacts us.

        bush is the biggest terrorist and threat to freedom we may ever see in our lives....and americans for the most part...do nothing. these are scary ***** times...
        • bingostud722, on 06/10/2008, -0/+5Being American it saddens me to say you are completely right. Not only is our president completely corrupt, but our society is going in the tank, kids today (who will be future leaders) are completely clueless, religious freaks are taking over the country, and just a cluster**** of more things happening..

          The saddest part is there really isnt anything sensible Americans can do. There are a lot of great people in America, but the amount of uneducated, ignorant people far outnumbers us.

          The American culture has been on a steady decline for years now, and I really hope we can turn it around - which all starts with an honest, good willed leader. Lets hope one of the candidates can do that.
        • MooNinja, on 06/10/2008, -3/+2Yeah, since you can be trusted to know what the majority of Americans know. 18% approval rating doesn't happen because no Americans understand what is going on. Also, we are by miles not the most hated country in the world, much like pop stars, we are the country that gets the most air time, so we get the largest amount of scrutiny. That's not to say we are liked, I fully acknowledge what the Bush administration has done to our international disposition. Once, Bush is out of office, and we Obama in, we can repair our public face.

          Its amazing how blind some of the initiated are on Digg, while our numbers of the 'unintelligent' are slightly greater than some other countries, it isn't a massive disparity. Every country has it's worts, even digg love Canada, those just don't get exposed as often.

          Lol the digger above me is hilarious, the American culture has been in decline for years. You are writing on an outlet of American culture now, it's progressing further than ever before. Gay rights, rights for minorities, rights for the religious and the non-religious, are all making incredible strides, but to a self loathing emo American I don't think any of this would ring true to you. For some reason people on this site seem to think every other country in the world has been pro-interwebz, non-religious, and everything else that diggers hold true since their inception. Sadly, you all are mistaken. One of these days, when y'all get old, have kids, and actually spend time in these other countries, you will understand how little difference there is between the U.S. and those.
    • whitebishop, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Canadians like me thought it was time 5 years ago
      • Demener, on 06/10/2008, -0/+2Americans like me thought it was time 5 years ago.
    • HeavyWaters, on 06/10/2008, -6/+1What do you mean "even canadians like me"? It should be "of course canadians" like you. Canada is a socialist cesspool. My dad was born and raised in Canada, and when I was born he had the good sense to get me out of there while I was still an infant and raise me in America, thank God.
      • Ducttape21, on 06/10/2008, -1/+0We're one nation, under god. Canada is our god.
      • rhartman, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4Do some research as to what the word really means before you start tossing it around. Democracy is alive, well, and comparatively untarnished in Canada. State Ownership of property, resources and major corporations is what defines a country as "socialist"; Universal Healthcare and other tax-funded "social" programs ... not so much.
  • anizzle, on 06/10/2008, -17/+25I'm sorry, but if we impeach Bush, and then he is eventually relieved of his position, then doesn't the father of evil Dick Cheney become president...
    • jordan314, on 06/10/2008, -1/+16He had the right tactic, he tried to impeach Cheney in 2007 but it was shot down. This will too, but it's worth getting it on public record.
    • whatever01, on 06/10/2008, -13/+7Impeachment does not mean you're removed from office. Nixon wasn't actually impeached, but he resigned before it was brought to vote because he didn't want to be - and it was made clear to him that he would be. Clinton was impeached, and convicted, but didn't resign.

      HTH
      • iBenzin, on 06/10/2008, -0/+24Clinton was never convicted.
      • Pittance, on 06/10/2008, -0/+4Correct. The vote when through and it was acquitted, or whatever it is called.
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1Clinton was absolved! He was NOT convicted. Sheesh. Hyde practically wet himself in rage.
    • grantface, on 06/10/2008, -1/+2Hasn't Cheney already been president for the past 7 plus years anyway? :P
  • jordankasteler, on 06/10/2008, -23/+72Kucinich for president!!!
    • DamnLogins, on 06/10/2008, -2/+15Nice sentiment, but I think it's unlikely. On the other hand, VICE-president sounds pretty good to me.
    • JesusHimself, on 06/10/2008, -1/+16i really do hope Barack chooses him as a runningmate
    • insinuate, on 06/10/2008, -8/+1Paul, Kucinich 2012!
    • Pittance, on 06/10/2008, -3/+11Do you guys know anything about him except that he is trying to impeach the administration? Really?
      • wampastompa, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Anyone who was even paying the slightest bit of attention to the democratic primaries does.
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1And that is relevant to the point? Ad hominem? When nothing else is left...
    • Mier, on 06/10/2008, -4/+3You guys are pathetic. That guy couldn't lead a boy scout troop out of a mall. You might as well vote for Trotsky while you're at it. Also if you want to put him on the ticket with Barack then just get ready to have another Republican president.
      • transmothra, on 06/10/2008, -1/+1???????
      • catbeller, on 06/10/2008, -1/+2He's been elected to office. And you?
      • Mier, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1Yeah cause getting elected is just so awesome a statement of your value as a person. It means you spent the most cash, kissed the most ass, and dumped those most pork in your district. Funny how the Democrat run Congress still has a problem with earmarks. Guess that talk about doing whats right was just that....talk.
  • Drogoganor, on 06/10/2008, -26/+38He deserves to be impeached and conservatives can't stand that fact.
    • casek, on 06/10/2008, -1/+17we actually welcome it for the whole regime. bush, cheney, rumsfeld, wolfy, condi rice, etc. etc.
      you're just falling into that whole "there's a left and a right" deal. please stop it.
    • Khanvalescent, on 06/10/2008, -1/+11Agreed. Most conservatives will tell you Bush is not a very good