858126 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
Printable View
858126 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
858432 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
Hey April!
Thank you for doing this.
I have been checking the numbers daily.
It is amazing.
Keep up the good work!
You are very welcome! I am happy to do it! :D
858834 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
859064 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
859419 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
860011 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated dail
860200 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
860767 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
861819 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
Again, the numbers do not ring true. I have followed the progress of this bogus petition since you posted it. The increase in signatures has been amazingly steady, yet at that pace it would have taken over 12 years for that number of signatures to have been amassed. I'm calling fraud on this nonsense (again). The anonymous organization allegedly behind this petition provide zero information as to their funding, backing, or membership, nor can or will they authenticate the alleged signatures. Don't believe me? Try writing them to ask for authentication or for records of who is putting up the money for this sham. I personally suspect George Soros or some other DNC operative.
For the record, I have absolutely no problem with concerned Americans legitimately signing petitions for ANYTHING they believe requires action. I DO have a problem with phony petitions from shadowy groups clearly faking their numbers for propaganda purposes, and that it what we have here.
Republican Congressman and Presidential candidate Ron Paul says U.S. President Bush has presided over a system wide doctrine of violating the Constitution, from the Iraq War in the "War on Terrorism" and pursuing a North American Union agenda, without legally required Congressional oversight. Such oversight is legally prescribed by the U.S. Constitution.
During an interview with Alex Jones on the GCN Radio network, Paul had outlined the likely scenario as to how impeachment proceedings would unfold.
"I'd be surprised if they win both - I think they're going to win one body and if they win the House right now they do not say they would have an impeachment but I think the way that place operates I think they probably will make every effort," said Paul.
"If they happened to have a ten or fifteen vote margin that would be a political thing - it would be payback time."
Paul said that Bush should be impeached not under the umbrella of partisan vengeance but for ceaselessly breaking the laws of the land.
"I would have trouble arguing that he's been a Constitutional President and once you violate the Constitution and be proven to do that I think these people should be removed from office."
Opining that the U.S. had entered a period of "soft fascism," Paul noted that the legacy of the Bush administration has been the total abandonment of Constitutional principles.
"Congress has generously ignored the Constitution while the President flaunts it, the courts have ignored it and they get in the business of legislating so there's no respect for the rule of law." said Paul.
"When the President signs all these bills and then adds statements after saying I have no intention of following it - he's in a way signing it and vetoing - so in his mind he's vetoing a lot of bills, in our mind under the rule of law he hasn't vetoed a thing."
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/F ... 01456.html
862236 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
That doesn't change the fact that this petition can be mathematically demonstrated to be a sham. It doesn't change the fact that the cowardly propagandists behind it refuse to provide contact information or even so much as an "about us" page.
862359 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
For those of you who are new, there are Impeachment links on page one of this thread for informational purposes. I post new links when I find them. This thread is for the people to have access to information about Impeachment and to be able to investigate their options. Below is a new Links I found that will be placed on page one with the others.
I am not promoting anything on this thread other than the FREEDOM and RIGHT for each person to be informed and make choices on their own!
http://impeachforpeace.org/index.php
http://impeachforpeace.org/ImpeachNow.html
How Do You feel about George Bush's positions on illegal immigration?
I think he is doing a great job!__ 1.38% (16)
He's doing a fair job.___ 2.15% (25)
I don't know what to think of Bush on this is ____ 5.60% (65)
He is doing a terrible job. _____________33.68% (391)
He should be impeached. __________6.55% (76)
He should be impeached and tried for Treason.__________ 50.65% (588)
Total Votes: 1161
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=S ... &pollID=38
"People" do not have options when it comes to impeachment. Only Congress may impeach the President, and ginning up phony petitions with falsified numbers does nothing to change that fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by April
These sites are not for informational purposes. They are partisan propaganda sites. Any legitimate site includes and "about" page that names the operators of the site or organization and provides information as to the sources of funding. These sites don't contain that information because its provision would make obvious the fraudulent and partisan nature of the sites.
Note to CG: I am tired of your repeated attacks, which have gone on for quite some time ,so from now on,I will not be responding nor will I be reading any post of yours to me. Please do not waste any further time harassing me. As for this thread and what is on it ,people can decide for themselves, most people DONOT need someone rampaging around telling them how to think. God gave them their own powers of deduction. Please write this somewhere, where you can see it daily, LIVE AND LET LIVE . Oh another good one, "Judge not lest ye be Judged. Matthew 7:1 further reading Matthew 7:2-5
862520 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
Excuse me, April, but I am not attacking YOU, but rather these cheesy and anonymous sites and their fuzzy math that you have linked. The problems I have noted with these sites are not a matter of opinion but of demonstrable fact. Specifically, they provide no information as to the operators of the sites or the originators of the petitions. They provide no information by which a determination as to the financial backers of the effort may be determined. The steady trickle of additional names added to the lists may be readily extrapolated into a predicted volume, which cannot produce the numbers claimed. There is no means of verifying the dodgy-looking numbers because there is no information provided by which the petition operators may be contacted for verification. If you don't like my criticisms of the site, tough. Anything that anyone posts here is subject to rebuttal. You don't own this thread and your posts are not immune from factual debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by April
Please do not attempt to protect your posts from scrutiny by feigning personal affront when the sole focus of my commentary has been the nature of the linked sites themselves and not your person. I get damned tired of people using this cheap ploy to avoid scrutiny of the links they post.
Here is an aritcle I thought I would share with the authors top ten reasons for the president to be impeached. It is interesting to read different peoples perspectives and opinion. I like that the NAU is his number 1 reason. There is a yourtube video at the bottom of the page at:
http://infowars.net/articles/december20 ... chment.htm
Ten Reasons To Impeach The President
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
"The act of writing up Articles of Impeachment is not difficult. You just write them on a piece of paper,"
-US Rep. McKinney (D-GA)
Remember what Bill Clinton was impeached for when reading the following ten reasons why George W Bush should be impeached:
North American Union, Amnesty program, Killing sovereignty
The open plan to merge the US with Mexico and Canada and create a Pan American Union has long been a Globalist brainchild but its very real and prescient implementation on behalf of the Council on Foreign Relations has finally been reported on by mainstream news outlets.
The framework on which the American Union is being pegged is the NAFTA Super Highway, a four football-fields-wide leviathan that stretches from southern Mexico through the US up to Montreal Canada .Coupled with Bush's blanket amnesty program, the Pan American Union is the final jigsaw piece for the total dismantling of America as we know it.
Illegal legislation / Re-writing law: Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, Wiretapping
The party line often heard from Neo-Cons in their attempts to defend the Patriot Act either circulate around the contention that the use of the Patriot Act has never been abused or that it isn't being used against American citizens. Here is an archive of articles that disproves both of these fallacies.
Neo-Con government mouthpieces and others are claiming that the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which heralded the official end of the "great experiment" of the American democratic republic, does not affect U.S. citizens, only illegal aliens and foreign terrorists. Recent history of how terror legislation was used to target American citizens clearly indicates the legislation will be used domestically.
Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the bill also contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal.
The wiretapping program violates the Fourth Amendment and FISA and will chill free speech. The Fourth Amendment protects the right of the people of the United States to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures and requires court approval except in an emergency. As a bipartisan group of legal experts—including Judge William Sessions, the former Director of the FBI under President Ronald Reagan—concluded after analyzing all the constitutional and statutory assertions of the administration: “the Justice Department’s defense of what it concedes was secret and warrantless electronic surveillance of persons within the United States fails to identify any plausible legal authority for such surveillance.”
Bush is also planning to abolish parts of the War Crimes Act of 1996 that makes it a felony to commit grave violations of the Geneva Conventions. He is systematically re-writing laws that could make him accountable for previous crimes against humanity.
UNESCO and UN treaties
For reasons inexplicable to most sensible Americans, in September 2002, President George W. Bush told the United Nations that the U.S. will rejoin the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), a wild-eyed bunch President Reagan abandoned in 1984, noting that it was utterly corrupt and the U.S. had no business being a member of such a group.
Destruction of the Dollar
Former World Bank Vice President, Chief Economist and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz has predicted a global economic crash within 24 months - unless the current downturn is successfully managed. Asked if the situation was being properly handled Stiglitz emphatically responded "no,".
Stiglitz caused controversy in October 2001 when he exposed rampant corruption within the IMF and blew the whistle on their nefarious methods of inducing countries to fall under their debt before stripping them of sovereignty and hollowing out their economies. Stiglitz agreed that the process of hijacking and looting key infrastructure on the part of the IMF and World Bank, as an offshoot of predatory globalization, had now moved from the third world to Europe, the United States and Canada.
New Freedom Initiative
Enforced and mandatory psychological testing and drugging is now a proposed federal law, to be done nationwide under Bush's 'New Freedom initiative'. Bush established the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health in April 2002 to conduct a "comprehensive study of the United States mental health service delivery system." The commission issued its recommendations in July 2003. Bush instructed more than 25 federal agencies to develop an implementation plan based on those recommendations
Real ID act
The Real ID Act essentially turns your driver's license into a national identification card. Or at least licenses issued by 2008 will be. That's when the program is to start.
Congressman Ron Paul: "Proponents of the REAL ID Act continue to make the preposterous claim that the bill does not establish a national ID card. This is dangerous and insulting nonsense."
The Senate has passed the Real ID bill, creating a backdoor national ID card. After weeks of activism directed towards them senators knew the full scale of this horror but voted for it 100-0 anyway.
Lies that led us to war
The Downing Street Memo and other documents prove that Bush knew there were no WMD before the invasion of Iraq. Bush's WMD statements, in chronological order, were:
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."
-- United Nations Address, September 12, 2002
"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."
"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."
-- Radio Address, October 5, 2002
"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."
"We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."
"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States."
"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" -- his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."
-- Cincinnati, Ohio Speech, October 7, 2002
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
-- State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
-- Address to the Nation, March 17, 2003
Buying fake news and engaging in domestic propaganda
In 2004, several news stations around the country broadcast a story on plans for a White House advertising campaign on the dangers of drug abuse. But the "journalist" who reported this story was not a journalist, and his report was actually produced by the Bush administration.
The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, ruled that this amounted to illegal "covert propaganda."
The GAO said the Department of Health and Human Services violated two federal laws when it created fake news footage to support the administration's Medicare drug benefit bill.
Hurricane Katrina response
The event paved the way for the standard government response to a crisis - sabotage the rescue efforts, dominate and enslave the victims, then reap the windfall from the tragedy.
Katrina was a trial balloon for widespread gun confiscation under the pretext of a crisis. Every aspect of government involvement with the event unveils scandal, corruption, deceit and criminal negligence.
9/11
Bush personally backed the FBI off Bin Laden before 9/11.
The Bush administration moved to block transparency of secret bank accounts, which in part facilitated the 9/11 terror attacks.
The demeanor of Bush on the day of 9/11, doe eyed, unsure, taking the decision to read an upside down book about a pet goat for half an hour after he’s told about the biggest attack on America since Pearl Harbor.
Impeachment and indictment is the only way to go to save America and democracy. Bush is a figurehead but we need to show the world that he and his handlers are not our leaders.
862664 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
Then we may as well prepare the obituary, because as has been well-chronicled, there is not an icecube's chance in Hell that Bush's co-conspirators in Congress are going to impeach him on crimes in which they are complicit. Period.Quote:
Impeachment and indictment is the only way to go to save America and democracy.
It is far too easy for people who have no understanding or concern as to how government operates to suggest far-fetched solutions. After all, screaming "Impeach!" is just a cop-out to avoid the difficult task of crafting a workable solution.
Sign the petition sheeple...er, um...I mean people...baaaaah!!!
http://www.hereinreality.com/weblogfeed/hellosheep.jpg
862838 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
863102 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
Perspective from Jerome Corsi on Bush and the NAU
North American Union to Replace USA?
by Jerome R. Corsi
5/19/2006
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965
President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy.
Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically, setting the stage for a North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.
President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.
The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled "Building a North American Community" published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration's actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:
At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.
What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:
In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.
To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.
The perspective of the CFR report allows us to see President Bush's speech to the nation as nothing more than public relations posturing and window dressing. No wonder President Vincente Fox called President Bush in a panic after the speech. How could the President go back on his word to Mexico by actually securing our border? Not to worry, President Bush reassured President Fox. The National Guard on the border were only temporary, meant to last only as long until the public forgets about the issue, as has always been the case in the past.
The North American Union plan, which Vincente Fox has every reason to presume President Bush is still following, calls for the only border to be around the North American Union -- not between any of these countries. Or, as the CFR report stated:
The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.
Discovering connections like this between the CFR recommendations and Bush administration policy gives credence to the argument that President Bush favors amnesty and open borders, as he originally said. Moreover, President Bush most likely continues to consider groups such as the Minuteman Project to be "vigilantes," as he has also said in response to a reporter's question during the March 2005 meeting with President Fox.
Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union. The administration has no intent to secure the border, or to enforce rigorously existing immigration laws. Securing our border with Mexico is evidently one of the jobs President Bush just won't do. If a fence is going to be built on our border with Mexico, evidently the Minuteman Project is going to have to build the fence themselves. Will President Bush protect America's sovereignty, or is this too a job the Minuteman Project will have to do for him?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians," and most recently, "Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America's Borders." He will soon author a book on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and the prospect of the forthcoming North American Union.
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w...USHJUANFOX.jpg
President Bush , Juan Hernandez and Vincente Fox
863255 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
863489 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
863747 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily
864123 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/
Do you believe President Bush's actions justify impeachment? * 425676 responses
Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.
87%
No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high crimes and misdemeanors."
4.5%
No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.
6.1%
I don't know.
1.9%
864352 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
by Phyllis Schlafly April 4, 2007
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2007/a ... 04-04.html
To: President George W. Bush, The White House, Washington, DC 20500, Dear Mr. President:
I am glad to see that you fired some U.S. Attorneys. But you missed one: U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, who prosecuted Border Guards Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean instead of a professional drug smuggler, and who prosecuted Texas Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez instead of a professional people smuggler.
Yes, you have the presidential prerogative to hire and fire U.S. Attorneys for any reason or for no reason. Any prosecutor has large discretion in whether to bring a case to trial or not, and the public has the right to know why he made that decision.
So much has come out since the Ramos and Compean trial which proves that the decision to criminally prosecute them was a gross miscarriage of justice. Their alleged violation, if true, deserved, at most, an administrative reprimand.
Ramos and Compean did not get a fair trial, and that's a terrible blot on your administration. It's hard to say which was more shocking: the withholding of exculpatory evidence or giving a professional drug smuggler immunity and other goodies to be the star witness against them and withholding evidence that would have discredited his credibility.
Keeping Ramos and Compean in solitary confinement instead of letting them go home pending their appeal shows a maliciousness that is unworthy of your administration.
Is it really the policy of your administration that our Border Guards are not permitted to use force against fleeing illegal aliens, but should allow them to flee across the border with impunity? If so, you should change the rules of engagement.
Is it really the policy of your administration that our border guards, in the act of apprehending a smuggler, may not use their weapons unless they first get permission from headquarters, and that they must assume that drug smugglers are not armed? If so, you should change the rules of engagement to protect our border guys who are risking their lives every day to protect us.
It's not enough to grant a pardon to Ramos and Compean. I hope you will publicly admit that they never should have been prosecuted for using their weapons in the course of doing their dangerous jobs.
I hope your administration will instruct U.S. Attorney Sutton to ask the court, first, that they be freed pending their appeals (so they won't be beaten up again by the criminal illegal aliens housed in the same prison), and second, that Sutton should ask the judge to vacate the convictions on the basis of prosecutorial illegalities in the first trial.
It's become pretty clear that the Ramos-Compean prosecution is not an anomaly but is part of a policy pattern. In the district adjacent to Johnny Sutton's, Border Patrol agent David Sipe was convicted in 2001 for using excessive force against an illegal alien coyote.
The U.S. prosecutor gave immunity to the Mexican criminal in exchange for his testimony and also withheld exculpatory evidence from Sipe. Because of this prosecutorial misconduct, the district court granted Sipe's motion for new trial, but incredibly, the U.S. prosecutor appealed that decision.
The Fifth Circuit upheld the order for a new trial and, instead of dropping the case, the U.S. Attorney forced Sipe to stand trial again. He was finally acquitted on Jan. 26, 2007.
Sipe is now free, after losing seven years of his life and all his savings, while the illegal alien coyote bought a ranch in Mexico with the $80,000 payoff he was given by the U.S. government.
Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez of Edwards County, Texas, was prosecuted by Johnny Sutton for a 2005 incident in which Hernandez allegedly used excessive force against a fleeing carload of illegal aliens. He was convicted on Dec. 1, 2006.
Sutton requested a prison term of seven years, but fortunately the judge sentenced him to only one year. Maybe that was a rebuke to Sutton.
We want to know if these unjust prosecutions were demanded by the Mexican government. You should make public the messages between your Justice Department and Mexico in regard to these cases.
We simply can't have a national policy of intimidating our border guards from arresting drug smugglers -- or even defending themselves against smugglers (who should be presumed to be armed and dangerous). We don't want Ramos and Compean to be the hallmark of your administration's border policy.
Respectfully,
Phyllis Schlafly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
864576 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
865063 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
Rally video
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bOnMGeLFU5c& ... ed&search=
865548 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
April, I have already added my vote some time ago, but what is the goal that they are looking for in numbers? How many votes will it take to get this accomplished?
It's just that I'm a little curious.
The goal is not to get anything accomplished. First, there has to be an impeachable offense for which Congress is willing to pursue the charge. This is just a political acctack site, which is why the site gives absolutely zero information about who is behind it or paying for it, or what they plan to do with the petition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hylander_1314
I would also suggest that there is virtually no chance that the petition will be used for anything constructive because, as I have previously noted, it is mathematically unlikely that even half the names on the list are legitimate, given the average rate at which signatures are being added. If the numbers are phonied up and/or unverifiable, the petition has no value.
Sorry it took so long to answer you Hylander, but I have been VERY busy working for the cause the last few days with calls , faxes and emails etc.
If you look on the link you see that their goal on this webite is a million, Hylander.
http://pepib.convio.net/site/PageServer ... e=homepage
Let's Make It a Million!
866555 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
How convenient. If you do the math, that should be accomplished about two or three months AFTER the next President is inaugurated.Quote:
Originally Posted by April
http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs. ... 004/NEWS03
Vt. Senate urges Bush impeachment
April 21, 2007
By DANIEL BARLOW Vermont Press Bureau
IMPEACHMENT VOTE ROLL CALL
Voting yes
Sen. Claire Ayer, D-Addison
Sen. Susan Bartlett, D-Lamoille
Sen. James Condos, D-Chittenden
Sen. Ann Cummings,
D-Washington
Sen. Edward Flanagan,
D-Chittenden
Sen. Harold Giard, D-Addison
Sen. Robert Hartwell, D-Bennington
Sen. Jane Kitchel, D-Caledonia
Sen. Sara Kittell, D-Franklin
Sen. Virginia Lyons, D-Chittenden
Sen. Mark MacDonald, D-Orange
Sen. Richard McCormack,
D-Windsor
Sen. Alice Nitka, D-Windsor
Sen. Doug Racine, D-Chittenden
Sen. Peter Shumlin, D-Windham
Sen. Jeanette White, D-Windham
Voting no
Sen. William Carris, D-Rutland
Sen. William Doyle, R-Washington
Sen. Vincent Illuzzi, R-Essex/Orleans
Sen. Hull Maynard, R-Rutland
Sen. Richard Mazza, D-Grand Isle
Sen. Kevin Mullin, R-Rutland
Sen. Phil Scott, R-Washington
Sen. Richard Sears, D-Bennington
Sen. Diane Snelling, R-Chittenden
Absent from the vote
Sen. John Campbell, D-Windsor
Sen. Donald Collins, D-Franklin
Sen. George Coppenrath, R-Caledonia
Sen. Hinda Miller, D-Chittenden
Sen. Robert Starr, D-Essex/Orleans
MONTPELIER – In a stunning reversal, the Vermont Senate approved a resolution early Friday morning calling for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
The vote makes the Senate the first state legislative body in the country to call for Bush's impeachment. At least nine other states have similar resolutions pending.
The 16-9 vote urging the U.S. Congress to begin impeachment hearings came without debate. The vote fell mostly along party lines, although three Democrats joined six Republicans in opposing it.
The approval comes after weeks of pressure by impeachment activists on Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, D-Windham, who has said he supports Bush's impeachment but thought the body lacked sufficient time this session to vote on it.
Attention now turns to the Vermont House, where an impeachment resolution introduced early in the session this year has gone untouched in that body's Judiciary Committee. House Speaker Gaye Symington, D-Jericho, has been a vocal opponent of an impeachment resolution.
Still, Rep. David Zuckerman, P-Burlington, one of the issue's strongest supporters in the House, said Friday he and others are collecting signatures for a new resolution identical to the one passed by the Senate Friday.
That resolution should be introduced on the House floor next week, possibly on April 25.
Shumlin said a bipartisan effort in the Senate brought the resolution to a swift vote Friday morning. A single senator could have moved to send the issue to the Judiciary Committee, which would have delayed the vote until next year, but none did, he said.
"I've always been a supporter of impeachment and today we joined the nearly 40 Vermont towns that voted for this during town meeting," said Shumlin. He was influenced by testimony earlier this week from impeachment supporters, he said.
The symbolic gesture — which says senators have "serious questions of constitutionality" regarding the administration's foreign and domestic actions — was a Senate resolution only and will not be forwarded to the House, although supporters expect the issue to be raised in that body next week.
James Leas, a South Burlington attorney who has been organizing impeachment rallies at the State House, called the vote a victory for the grassroots movement, which sprung out of the tiny Windham County town of Newfane last year.
"This really shows the value and importance of citizen participation," Leas said, referring to Tuesday's rally, which brought 130 impeachment supporters to the State House. "Peter Shumlin's conscience won out and he moved forward and took action."
Sen. Kevin Mullen, R-Rutland, one of the six Republicans in the room Friday morning who voted against the resolution, said he was disappointed Shumlin wasted the time of legislative staff to prepare the measure.
"Vermonters are looking for us to address rising property taxes and other meaningful issues and not resolutions that are essentially meaningless," Mullen said. "It's time to go back and talk about those real issues."
Symington, speaking to reporters from her office Friday, said she would send the issue to a House committee if it is raised next week. Even if it does come to a floor vote, she and other House Democratic leaders said, it is unlikely to pass.
"I think the outcome would be different in the House," said Symington, who said she "deplores the actions and policies" of the Bush administration but believes the Vermont Legislature should focus on local issues over which it has authority.
Rep. Mike Fisher, D-Lincoln, who sponsored a House resolution in February calling for an end to the Iraq War, agreed that House Democrats may not have enough votes to pass an impeachment resolution.
"The proponents of impeachment had a victory today," Fisher said. "I ask them to consider how it might be different on the House floor … because it may not be as easy or possible as it was in the Senate."
Robert Roper, the chairman of the Vermont Republican Party, said the Senate vote perpetuates the image that the state's values and beliefs are "out of the mainstream." He criticized Shumlin for proposing the resolution.
"It really just looks like Shumlin caved to please the impeachment supporters," Roper said. "He shucked and jived until he had no choice but to offer the resolution."
Friday's Senate vote came when Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie, a Republican who normally presides over the chamber, took a scheduled absence to look at colleges with his son in California.
Shumlin presides over the Senate when Dubie is gone, and he said he contacted the lieutenant governor Thursday night to inform him of his plan to introduce the resolution. Shumlin said Dubie's absence had nothing to do with the timing of the vote.
Dubie said Friday he would have sent the resolution to the Senate Judiciary Committee, just as he would do with any "complex or controversial" bill.
"I do not support this resolution because I do support the president," said Dubie, a member of the U.S. Air Force Reserve who attended Bush's speech at Ground Zero in New York City days after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Vermont impeachment supporters – a grassroots coalition that has been building since Newfane voted at its 2006 town meeting to remove Bush – had been pressuring the Legislature to vote on the issue in hopes it would trigger a vote in the U.S. Congress.
Citing a provision in Jefferson's Manual of Parliamentary Practice, an 1801 handbook written by then-Vice President Thomas Jefferson, supporters hoped that a "yes" vote in the Vermont House and Senate would force the U.S. House, where presidential impeachment hearings would begin, to propose that legislation.
Shumlin said he agrees with supporters that passage by both houses of the Vermont Legislature would require the U.S. House to take up the issue.
"This strengthens their case," he said.
But Symington disagreed with the validity of the parliamentary procedure. Legal staff informed her that the procedure only references past impeachment practices relating to appointed federal positions serving within the same state as the legislature, she said.
"My impression is that this manual has been misunderstood," she said.
Still, Vermont's congressional delegation – including U.S. Rep. Peter Welch, its lone congressman in the House — is not interested in pursuing impeachment in Washington, at least not unless the numerous investigations the Bush administration is now facing produce evidence of any impeachable offenses.
Hours after Friday's state Senate vote, Welch and Vermont's two U.S. senators – Patrick Leahy and Bernard Sanders – released a joint statement saying they "fully understand and share the frustration and anger of Vermont legislators and many Vermonters with the Bush administration – one of the worst and most destructive in American history."
The statement added, "Currently, for the first time since President Bush has been in office, there are a number of investigations taking place regarding the actions of the Bush administration … Before we talk about impeachment, it is imperative that these investigations be allowed to run their course and we should then follow wherever the facts lead."
Impeachment supporters will hold a rally today outside of City Hall in Burlington at noontime to drum up support for action in the Vermont House and U.S. Congress.
Contact Daniel Barlow at Daniel.Barlow@rutlandherald.com.
866934 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
867360 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush!
(figure updated daily)
868242 :
the number of people
who have already voted
in the referendum
to Impeach Bush