Good Lord

Alexander Hamilton was the last guy shot by a sitting Vice President before Dick Cheney blasted his buddy full of buckshot a couple years back. Hamilton might have been a lousy duelist, but he was prescient when it came to impeachment:

“The prosecution of them, for this reason, will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” [emphasis mine]

From the Federalist Papers, #65

"Comparative strength of the parties" is eloquent Founding Father speech for "pussies will always get beaten, even if they have Reason, Morals, a strong Majority, and the Law on their side." The Democrats are a bunch of pussies. If you look up "Reasons for Impeachment" in the Federalist Papers, there is a picture of Dick Cheney. The Founders knew about him from the writings of Nostradamus. Or Publius. Whatever.

The Democrats suck. I hate them. Dick Cheney is ranked in national opinion polls just above colo-rectal cancer, and they are afraid to go after him. There is ample evidence that Cheney is corrupt and unfit to serve. He's a war monger, a war profiteer, a liar, a cheat, a hypocrite, a felon who shot his friend after drinking too many Schlitzes and covered it up, a draft-dodger, and he can't even stay awake during Cabinet meetings.

But Pelosi, Reid, and Hoyer want to protect him from the oh-so-powerful Dennis Kucinich. Oh my God. What a trainwreck. Throw the bums out! And don't get me started on Feinstein and Schumer. Jesus. Fuck them.

Impeach Gonzo at your own risk

I'm all for impeaching Alberto Gonzales; I think there's sufficient evidence not only to impeach his ass, but to chuck him in the clink today. He spent another few hours lying to the Senate yesterday, and now he doesn't even bother feigning respect or humility while using the Bill of Rights as Depends undergarments. He lies in a condescending manner, sneering at times with open contempt for the very processes he's sworn to uphold and protect. I was against Gonzo from the get-go, and upon his nomination pointed out that he was worse than the lunatic he replaced. John Ashcroft would never attempt to pressure a hospitalized and sedated AG to overturn the Constitution, as Gonzales did. Ashcroft would perhaps have anointed the sedated's head with oil and sung a rousing song about eagles...

The problem with impeaching Gonzales is that Bush has even worse assholes waiting in the wings. I suspect this is intentional, a sort of bizarro self-protection racket. "Impeach me, muthafuckas," Bush thinks to himself, "and you get Preznit Cheney. Impeach Alberto and you get Theodore Olson, or John Yoo."

The fact that we finally have a Senate that won't rubber-stamp whatever hoodlum the Administration sends up for approval means nothing to Bush. Recess appointments, baby.

Legally Blind

Oh my God, I like so totally invoke my fifth commandment right to avoid saying stuff that may tend to incriminate my former boss the President.

A Particularly Good This Modern World

Just do it

Imp
Peach

Bush

Now!

After Kyle Sampson's testimony, Congress must act immediately to impeach Alberto Gonzales. Enough is enough.

Reductio ad absurdum

Keith Olbermann did a great job poking holes into (and poking fun at) Alberto Gonzalez's lame TV interview with Pete Williams. Brief summary?

Uh, I know for a fact that these attorneys were asked to resign for reasons completely appropriate, but I don't know any particulars, nor was I at all involved in the process, but I do know why they were fired and it wasn't for political reasons, but I have no knowledge of the reasons they resigned. Other people who know my job advised me to fire them, so I did.

Hmmm. That's a bit like using the "these attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President" argument for firing the attorneys, and then claiming the President had nothing to do with the terminations, and no knowledge of the machinations involved.

Of course the enormous document dumps of emails and memos reveal that Gonzo and Rove and Miers and Bush were heavily involved.

Now Gonzo's senior counselor won't testify. Impeach the sonofabitch! Bush will only with great reluctance hang him out to dry because he'd rather have Gonzo inside the tent pissing out then outside pissing in, to paraphrase LBJ on Hoover.

Mentí, estoy mintiendo, mentiré

It's as if someone in the Cheney Administration is reading about Nixon's demise in order to brush up on how to unravel in the same manner. We've even had CIA guys with hookers again. The parallels grow more uncanny daily. Unfortunately (well, perhaps fortunately) we don't have cable TV at the new place yet. I can't see what kind of coverage the Gonzalez/Rove Justice Department purge of attorneys who would not use their office to suppress Democratic voters is getting. These guys love to purge and surge, they surely do.

Lots of good coverage at Kos (here, here, here). The WaPo and the Times appear to be working the story, almost to the point I'm considering re-subsribing.

It's a serious, serious thing, and yet another in a long list of articles of impeachment that need drawing up should be drawn up for this. Remember Harriet Miers' sudden departure last year? Now Gonzalez' Chief of Staff has resigned as well. Get them in front of Congress and seize their passports post haste.

The Moral Majority

Newt Gingrich--who recently admitted he was engaged in an extramarital affair while enthusiastically pursuing impeachment during Monica Gate--justified himself thusly:

"The president of the United States got in trouble for committing a felony in front of a sitting federal judge," the former Georgia congressman said of Clinton's 1998 House impeachment on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. "I drew a line in my mind that said, 'Even though I run the risk of being deeply embarrassed, and even though at a purely personal level I am not rendering judgment on another human being, as a leader of the government trying to uphold the rule of law, I have no choice except to move forward and say that you cannot accept ... perjury in your highest officials."

That sinuously evasive logic won't get you through the eye of the needle, Newt. You took it upon yourself to cast the first stone, which is contrary to the tenets of your belief system. Or is that belief system merely a facade contrived to fool the Christers and pulpit-thumpers?

Which paragon of family values will win the Republican nomination? I don't care how many affairs or divorces a presidential candidate has--but outright hypocrisy I can't condone. Gingrich hasn't announced yet of course, but I'm sure he'll join his fellow divorced adulterers soon.