Raw Story reports impeachment motion gains a cosponsour

[solarbird]

Raw Story is reporting that Rep. Kucinich's Resolution to Impeach President Bush has gained a co-sponsour.

I strongly suggest contacting your Representatives to encourage them to add themselves as co-sponsours. I also actively request people link to my original post, here:

http://solarbird.livejournal.com/654198.html

...to try to at least in part counteract the continuing de facto media blackout of this story.

Comments

[leftbase.livejournal.com]

Link posted; petition signed. It worked for me on the first try.

I still don't expect this to go very far, but I'm hopeful. Thank you!

[mspurplepearl.livejournal.com]

The media isn't "blacked out" as far as I can tell:
http://news.google.com/news?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=kucinich+impeachment&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=1

Gives me results from:
Huffington Post, NY
OpEdNews, PA
Salem-News.Com, OR
Alalam News Network, Iran
Ventura County Star, CA
American Chronicle, CA
Shelbyville Times-Gazette, TN
American Chronicle, CA


Thanks for alerting me to this.
Pearl

[solarbird]

And almost all of the coverage is subsets of the same seven-sentence minimum-coverage story from the UPI or five-sentence version from the AP, buried deep in wire-feed land. "Coverage in some minimal form exists at all" is does not mean you do not have a functional blackout; 99.9% of all readers (and even fewer viewers) will know the story is out there.

[partywhipple.livejournal.com]

So who would that leave in charge...?

[solarbird]

Don't care. I'm not going to like any of the caretakers in line. (For the record: Cheney, Pelosi, I forget after that.) The refutation is the important thing. This would be a valid, if to my mind minimally acceptable, validation.

[llachglin.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, it's all symbolic at this point. If you only go for Bush, Cheney comes in, and nothing's changed. If you go for both of them, it looks like Pelosi is committing a constitutional coup, which I think is the main reason she's not willing to do it. The votes aren't there in any case. Even if you impeached and convicted them both and Pelosi came in, we'd have a new president elect in November and a new president in January.

Also, if impeachment actually did get going, it's likely that Bush would preemptively pardon as many people as possible, so that no criminal penalties could be pursued. There's a case to be made for waiting until Bush and Cheney are out of office and then pursuing criminal charges, with pardons off the table.

That said, the symbolism is important, so I still support the effort.

[solarbird]

He's gonna blanket-pardon on the way out regardless; that's why he didn't pardon Scooter Libby completely, but instead commuted the sentence. And nothing happens on this in this country after he's out of office. So the only person you can get is Mr. Bush, and the reason to do that is to refute the policies completely, so that future officeholders attempting the same tactics know this can and will happen. That's the entire point from my view.

[denelian.livejournal.com]

i didn't link your original post, i emailed it to most of my address book.

it seemed to be a better idea at the time