Decision ‘08

Kucinich To File Articles Of Impeachment Against Cheney

Sigh…it’s a good thing there’s not real work to be done in Congress:

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), the most liberal of the Democratic presidential candidates in the primary field, declared in a letter sent to his Democratic House colleagues this morning that he plans to file articles of impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney.

Kucinich has made ending the war in Iraq the central theme of his campaign. He has even taken aim at the leading Democratic presidential candidates in the field for their votes on authorizing the war.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach the president, vice president and “all civil Officers of the United States” for “treason, bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Sources tell the Sleuth that in light of the mass killings at Virginia Tech Monday, Kucinich’s impeachment plans have been put on hold. There will be no action this week, they say.

Kucinich’s office had no comment on the Congressman’s “Dear Colleague” letter — which apparently was drafted over the weekend, before the school massacre — or on what the focus of articles of impeachment against Cheney would be.

But Kucinich shouldn’t hold his breath on getting anywhere with his impeachment plan. “We’ll see a Kucinich Administration before we’ll see a Cheney impeachment,” quipped one Democratic aide.

Dear God, please no! Don’t tell me the odds of a Kucinich Administration are THAT good…

15 Responses to “Kucinich To File Articles Of Impeachment Against Cheney”

1 Aaron Says:
April 17th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
I wonder if all the investigations and/or scandals to which Peter alluded a few threads back could also backfire on the Dems. Maybe I’m seeing this through Republican-colored glasses, but I could imagine that:

1) The American people will get just as tired of the Democrats investigating purely political scandals (or conducting dog-and-pony shows such as this) while there are important issues to be addressed, much as they were fed up with the GOP trying to ban flag burning and gay marriage when there was real business to be tended.

2) Even if all the scandals are legitimate, might people start to wonder if the Democrats are just inventing some of them?
2 JB Says:
April 17th, 2007 at 10:42 pm
It’s a good thing that the American people put the Dems in power. You know, because they’re more responsible and will focus on the issues that really matter to regular Americans. [sarcasm off]
3 SpiderMonkey's SilentMusings Says:
April 17th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
Kucinich to Attempt Impeachment of Cheney…

Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), sometime Boy Mayor of Cleveland and Congressman, now styling himself Presidential candidate, is going to file Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney….
4 too many steves Says:
April 18th, 2007 at 5:34 am
Good point Aaron. Can we revisit the legislative agenda offered up by Democrats during the campaign to see how they are progressing at implementing those critical items? I’m thinking of the promise to implement (all of) the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, etc.

Meanwhile, this latest move (or soon to be move) by Kucinich appears to indicate that he thinks we’ve forgotten about him and that he is an unhinged nutcase.
5 Scott Says:
April 18th, 2007 at 9:07 am
I would suggest that many of you have got it all wrong once again. Kucinich is good for the Democrats and their public perception because he makes the leaders of the party look more moderate. Pelosi’s numbers are good and Reid’s numbers are good enough. Until the administration stops lying to public (or stops getting caught), the Republican’s don’t have a chance of catching up in terms of public perception.
6 Aaron Says:
April 18th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Does that mean that Pat Robertson’s association with the GOP makes Republicans look good?

And advertising someone as liberal as Pelosi as the moderate wing of the Democratic Party will only increase the public perception of how left-wing that party is.
7 Scott Says:
April 18th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
It’s always relative. Whenever Republicans dismiss Pat Robertson as being radical (like when he advocated assasinating Chavez), they look more moderate. Hiring 150 of graduates from his 4th tier law school - not so much. If the democratic leadership votes with Kucinich, then you have a point; I don’t think they will. Speaker Peliosi, by the way, has done a great job holding together her majority which includes conservative Democrats. Her polling has been very good.
8 Aaron Says:
April 18th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
The hiring of 150 lawyers from a 4th-tier school isn’t really ideological, or at least it’s not immediately apparent as such. I would be surprised if many people cared about that a great deal. It’s one of the purely politcial scandals to which I alluded earlier. How much does it affect the average person. Will it be extremely harmful to America if these lawyers get to keep their jobs for another ~~two years~~ year-and-a-half? As compared to say, addressing issues that will affect many people (Social Security, Health Care, Immigration, etc.), whether their solutions are leftwing or otherwise. Even if they create institutionalized socialism, universal gov’t-provided health care and an open-border policy, at least then I won’t be able to fault them for not accomplishing (or at least attempting to accomplish) anything.
9 Aaron Says:
April 18th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
And as for Ms. Pelosi’s numbers being “great,” I don’t recall a similar characterization of the president’s ratings when he was at 43%.
10 Scott Says:
April 18th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
Copied from The Washington Post-ABC News Poll
Monday, April 16, 2007
4. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Nancy Pelosi is handling her job as Speaker of the House?

Approve Disapprove No opinion
4/15/07 53 35 12
2/25/07 50 31 18
1/19/07 54 25 21

Are you going to dismiss based on the Post being part of the liberal drive-by media? Fine with me, go ahead and tell yourself that Kucinich will bring the Republicans back to power. That was our original discussion.
11 Aaron Says:
April 18th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
According to Rasmussen, which has generally been more reliable, it’s only 44% with a positive view and 46% with an unfavorable view. Your assertion that she’s doing better than Harry Reid, whose approval ratings are only slightly more than half of the president’s (20%) seems to be accurate, though. And she’s definitely doing much better than the majority leader, who is at about 14%.

Why not scroll back up and read some of our original discussion? Maybe then, you’ll notice that Kucinich is only one point of an argument, that argument being that Democrats are more concerned with embarrassing the president than they are with fixing problems.

The Democrats may very well just cease to exist after 2008 for the same reasons that the underground railroad went away in 1865 and speakeasies closed in 1933. The only real “ideology” — if you can call it that — holding them together is being anti-Bush.

But of course, you have no response to my question of how the electorate will respond to a do-nothing congress (probably because I think we know the answer from past experience).
12 Scott Says:
April 19th, 2007 at 12:41 am
And here is where our discussions merge. I just think that you have a lack of understanding for other’s perceptions. The point is not to “embarrass” Bush any more than it would be to “insult” cancer. You just want cancer to stop eating your body and you want Bush to stop destroying checks and balances, getting soldiers killed, etc. Though I admit that it would be a bonus to stop a guy like Bush from ever being elected again. But these are noble causes; only your lack of ability to see from a different perspective stops you from seeing this.

Political parties are often on the verge of breaking up and building different coalitions. Had they lost in 2006 it would likely have been curtains. (If they couldn’t win then, when would they) You are correct that GW Bush as been a great unifier for the Democratic party. Parties like boogey men. But they will be coming out of this very healthy with a new healthy respect for diversity. Their ideology is strong. Not enough time tonight to explain it to you, and I’m not so sure that you really want to know. There is no way that a social conservative will end up being president in 2008 - that’s a huge victory.

Time will tell after that. I think you are deceiving yourself, but you deserve to sleep well. Frustrating as it is, I enjoyed our conversation tonight. Don’t know what coast you are on, but it’s really late on mine - I’m going to bed.
13 Aaron Says:
April 19th, 2007 at 12:57 am
Yeah, and all the Democrats had to do to prevent the election of a social conservative to the White House (even though a McCain presidency is far from impossible) was to elect a bunch of social conservatives to congress themselves.
14 Aaron Says:
April 19th, 2007 at 1:11 am
Actually, I don’t know that the Democrats had anything to do with the lack of viable socially conservative candidates in the GOP field this cycle. I think it’s mostly due to the fact that all of the well-known Republicans who have a serious shot at winning aren’t all that socially conservative. The same was true in January 2005, when the most commonly-mentioned names were still John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. Sure there was talk of Bill Frist, but even then people were saying he had the charisma of an undertaker. And as for Brownback, Huckabee, and Sanford, they never had much name recognition outside of their respective states.

The one exception to this would be George Allen. The fact that he lost his re-election to the Senate in 2006 is indisputable. However, how serious is the claim that it was the Democrats who beat him, and not that he, incredible idiot that he is, just beat himself. I don’t think Jim Webb made George Allen use a racial slur on video — referring to the person who was videotaping him, no less (prior to this point, IIRC, he was leading Webb by double-digits).

In any case, I still think it is not unlikely that if congress continues to be more concerned with investigating than it is with legislating, it is doomed. But what do I know. Congressional approval ratings are now almost double what they were last December, all the way up to 20%.
15 young but concerned Says:
February 2nd, 2008 at 11:10 am
cheney needs a mascot…maybe the great dane that shot his owner in the back? (read the rolling stone and you’ll know what i’m talking about.)