What should President Paul do on his first day.

[Independent Operator]

well, for starters, in the very moments following bush's handover to paul (at the very moment he finishes shaking pauls hand), i hope he summons the FBI/secret service to arrest Bush and his junta as a traitors and a war criminals.

slap the cuffs on him/them, and lead him/them out in front of the whole world to prison. give them a trial, and sentence them according to the nurmburg priciples.

that is what i would like to see

[Mesogen]

Now that would make my day. Hell, that would make my decade.

[forsmant]

Take the full tour. Get new curtains. Meet the permanent staff.

[Independent Operator]

Meet the permanent staff.

then FIRE them!!!!

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

I would love it if we went back to the way it used to be and that RP would throw an American party where the American people could walk through the gates of the white house, party all night on the lawn and Ron Paul would shake hands with the common man.. Hey, it's our house we should be able to party there if we want!.. If this happens than the beer is on me :D

[PatriotOne]

well, for starters, in the very moments following bush's handover to paul (at the very moment he finishes shaking pauls hand), i hope he summons the FBI/secret service to arrest Bush and his junta as a traitors and a war criminals.

slap the cuffs on him/them, and lead him/them out in front of the whole world to prison. give them a trial, and sentence them according to the nurmburg priciples.

that is what i would like to see

I like that scenario except I would change "shaking Paul's hand" to "getting drop-kicked in the nuts by Paul"

[IChooseLiberty]

well, for starters, in the very moments following bush's handover to paul (at the very moment he finishes shaking pauls hand), i hope he summons the FBI/secret service to arrest Bush and his junta as a traitors and a war criminals.

slap the cuffs on him/them, and lead him/them out in front of the whole world to prison. give them a trial, and sentence them according to the nurmburg priciples.

that is what i would like to see

The world would love us for this and it would show democracy through action instead of inaction.

[Bossobass]

He should convene the Joint Chiefs and serve notice that he expects a complete Iraq withdrawal proposal on his desk ASAP, and that he also wants to see plans for base closings around the world with projected cost savings and consequences.

Balancing the budget and beginning retirement of the national debt is at the top of the list in importance and this would be the first step Ron could take without needing the approval of Congress.

Bosso

[Mesogen]

I would love it if we went back to the way it used to be and that RP would throw an American party where the American people could walk through the gates of the white house, party all night on the lawn and Ron Paul would shake hands with the common man.. Hey, it's our house we should be able to party there if we want!.. If this happens than the beer is on me :D

Just make sure there is beer in the keg and not C4.

[microsect]

I say let him rest and kick back.

[MrCobaltBlue]

Arrest Rupert Murdoch for Electioneering, as well as Diebold for Voter Fraud, And The Bush Reich, Bill Kristol, Irving Kristol, Bill-O, and Frank Luntz for high treason.

[Mesogen]

well, for starters, in the very moments following bush's handover to paul (at the very moment he finishes shaking pauls hand), i hope he summons the FBI/secret service to arrest Bush and his junta as a traitors and a war criminals.

slap the cuffs on him/them, and lead him/them out in front of the whole world to prison. give them a trial, and sentence them according to the nurmburg priciples.

that is what i would like to see

Whoa! I was just looking around on the internets and I found out that Ron Paul voted AGAINST impeaching Dick Cheney. I'd LOVE to know why.

Maybe the above scenario is a fantasy that has no basis in reality. Would Ron Paul actually hold these criminals to account? Before I thought it was obvious t hat he would. Now I'm not so sure and now I'm wondering if I should even show up on primary day. This is getting worse and worse for me.

Why o why would he NOT vote to impeach Cheney when he said that Bush and Cheney should both be removed from office?

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-did-ron-paul-vote-against-impeachment-by-manila-ryce/

Shit, I keep coming across bits of information that make me think that I'm being lied to and made a fool of.

This pisses me off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hLVhgm_glc
Not enough evidence that they were lying?

I'm seriously starting to think that Ron Paul should not be the first politician that I vote for in my life and that I will simply stay home on election day. I can't believe I donated money to this liar.

[kushaze]

Bring the troops home and then send them over to Fox News. j/k

[ErikBlack]

Whoa! I was just looking around on the internets and I found out that Ron Paul voted AGAINST impeaching Dick Cheney. I'd LOVE to know why.

Maybe the above scenario is a fantasy that has no basis in reality. Would Ron Paul actually hold these criminals to account? Before I thought it was obvious t hat he would. Now I'm not so sure and now I'm wondering if I should even show up on primary day. This is getting worse and worse for me.

Why o why would he NOT vote to impeach Cheney when he said that Bush and Cheney should both be removed from office?

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-did-ron-paul-vote-against-impeachment-by-manila-ryce/

Shit, I keep coming across bits of information that make me think that I'm being lied to and made a fool of.

This pisses me off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hLVhgm_glc
Not enough evidence that they were lying?

I'm seriously starting to think that Ron Paul should not be the first politician that I vote for in my life and that I will simply stay home on election day. I can't believe I donated money to this liar.

Ron Paul voted to refer the bill to the House Judiciary Committee, which is the proper next step in the process. If you are harboring any delusional fantasy that the first post in this thread has any basis in reality you should put that out of your head right now. Ron Paul is not running for dictator. Only dictators arrest or persecute their opposition upon gaining power. The president of the United States has no authority to arrest the previous president, not to mention the fact that the political will for such action outside of a few fringe groups DOES NOT EXIST. The vast majority of people are content to let Bush finish his term and be rid of him. They do not desire revenge against him.

[Mesogen]

Ron Paul voted to refer the bill to the House Judiciary Committee, which is the proper next step in the process. If you are harboring any delusional fantasy that the first post in this thread has any basis in reality you should put that out of your head right now. Ron Paul is not running for dictator. Only dictators arrest or persecute their opposition upon gaining power. The president of the United States has no authority to arrest the previous president, not to mention the fact that the political will for such action outside of a few fringe groups DOES NOT EXIST. The vast majority of people are content to let Bush finish his term and be rid of him. They do not desire revenge against him.

So they are just opposition and not criminals?

A dictator lets his criminal friends run loose.

And the FBI certainly has the authority to arrest traitors.

And you are here telling me that only fringe nut jobs want Bush and Cheney arrested?

[Independent Operator]

The president of the United States has no authority to arrest the previous president

you are correct (and this is only minor point you are correct on, but that is because you didn't read the post), because i never said paul would arrest anybody. you see, that is what the fbi is for. all the probable cause exists. all the fbi needs is a new administrator with the will to actually do what is necessary.

probable cause is all you need to arrest the person. hell, they arrest people all the time based only on reasonable articulable suspicion which is far less of a hurdle than probable cause.

overall you are completely mistaken and incorrect.

[Independent Operator]

So they are just opposition and not criminals?

A dictator lets his criminal friends run loose.

And the FBI certainly has the authority to arrest traitors.

And you are here telling me that only fringe nut jobs want Bush and Cheney arrested?

well said!!

[Mesogen]

dammit.

I'm looking at these roll call votes and nothing makes sense. I guess RP had good reason to table (kill) the bill.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1037.xml
On the motion to table the bill (kill the bill without a hearing).

Paul votes Aye with most of the Dems, but most of the Republicans vote No along with Kucinich the author of the bill.

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=1038
On ordering the previous question. (Ends debate and prevents amendment.)

Paul votes Aye with most of the Dems. Most of the Repubs vote No along with the author of the bill.

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=1039
On Motion to Refer the Resolution. (Refers the motion to committee.)

Paul votes Aye along with most of the Dems, but the Repubs vote No along with the author of the bill, Kucinich.


WTF is going on here. Can someone explain this?

[ErikBlack]

What laws have Bush and Cheney broken?

The war in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act and all of the various offenses they have committed against the people of the U.S. and the world have been done in the proper legal manner with the express authorization of Congress, who are the representatives of the people. They did not operate outside of the system. They manipulated the system to work for them. To think that Ron Paul is going to assume the presidency and start kicking butt and taking names and righting all the wrongs of the past is absolutely ludicrous! He will have to fight tooth and nail against the political establishment just to achieve some of his goals for the future, which are far more important.

Besides, to assume Paul supports these things is to deny his personal nature. He gives people the benefit of the doubt, even when they don't deserve it. He is more likely to accuse Bush and Cheney of being "misguided" than criminals. He believes firmly in the political process and the rule of law. He is not likely to overstep the bounds of his authority or manipulate the system to carry out his personal agenda because that would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater. He has promised to reduce the power of the Executive branch (himself), restore and preserve the system of checks and balances in American government, adhere to the Constitution, cut spending and promote individual liberty. None of those goals is consistent with a NeoCon house-cleaning witch-hunt.

People really should stop reading their own agendas into Dr. Paul's candidacy.

[Mesogen]

What laws have Bush and Cheney broken?

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/alerts/95+


Deception of Congress and the American Public
Committing a Fraud Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371)
Making False Statements Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 1001)
War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)
Misuse of Government Funds (31 U.S.C. § 1301)
Improper Detention, Torture, and Other Inhumane Treatment
Anti-Torture Statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340-40A)
The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 2441)
The Geneva Conventions and Hague Convention: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
United Nations Convention Against Torture, and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
Command Responsibility (for known illegal acts of subordinates in the military)
Detainment of Material Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 3144)
Retaliating against Witnesses and Other Individuals
Obstruction Congress (18 U.S.C. § 1505)
Whistleblower Protection (5 U.S.C. § 2302)
The Lloyd-LaFollette Act, or "anti-gag rule" (5 U.S.C. § 7211)
Retaliating against Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 1513)
Leaking and other Misuse of Intelligence and other Government Information
Revealing Classified Information in Contravention of Federal Regulations (Executive Order 12958/Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement)
Statutory Prohibitions on Leaking Information (18 U.S.C. § 641, etc.)
Laws Governing Electronic Surveillance
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq.)
National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. chapter 15)
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. § 222)
Stored Communications Act of 1986 (18 U.S.C. § 2702)
Pen Registers or Trap and Trace Devices (18 U.S.C. § 3121)
Laws and Guidelines Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest (28 U.S.C. § 528, etc.)

[bbachtung]

dammit.

I'm looking at these roll call votes and nothing makes sense. I guess RP had good reason to table (kill) the bill.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1037.xml
On the motion to table the bill (kill the bill without a hearing).

Paul votes Aye with most of the Dems, but most of the Republicans vote No along with Kucinich the author of the bill.

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=1038
On ordering the previous question. (Ends debate and prevents amendment.)

Paul votes Aye with most of the Dems. Most of the Repubs vote No along with the author of the bill.

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=1039
On Motion to Refer the Resolution. (Refers the motion to committee.)

Paul votes Aye along with most of the Dems, but the Repubs vote No along with the author of the bill, Kucinich.


WTF is going on here. Can someone explain this?

Yes, the Republicans allied themselves with Kucinich so that they could embarass the Democrats by voting on impeachment without any investigation (impeachments have always been investigated by the House Judiciary Committee BEFORE any referrals are made to the full House to vote on whether to impeach), and forcing the Democrats to vote against impeachment because there would be no evidence (which would have been gathered / presented by the Judiciary Committee, as was done in the Nixon impeachment investigation and the Clinton impeachment) and it would have looked like a witch hunt.

But you can read Ron Paul's own words here:



Statement Regarding Impeachment of Vice President Cheney

Ron Paul Speech to Congress

November 6, 2007



Mr. Speaker, I rise, reluctantly, in favor of the motion to table House Resolution 799, Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors, and in favor of referring that resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for full consideration. I voted to table this resolution not because I do not share the gentleman from Ohio's desire to hold those responsible for the Iraqi debacle accountable; but rather, because I strongly believe that we must follow established protocol in matters of such importance. During my entire time in Congress, I have been outspoken in my opposition to war with Iraq and Iran. I have warned my colleagues and the administration against marching toward war in numerous speeches over the years, and I have voted against every appropriation to continue the war on Iraq.

I have always been strongly in favor of vigorous congressional oversight of the executive branch, and I have lamented our abrogation of these Constitutional obligations in recent times. I do believe, however, that this legislation should proceed through the House of Representatives following regular order, which would require investigation and hearings in the House Judiciary Committee before the resolution proceeds to the floor for a vote. This time-tested manner of moving impeachment legislation may slow the process, but in the long run it preserves liberty by ensuring that the House thoroughly deliberates on such weighty matters. In past impeachments of high officials, including those of Presidents Nixon and Clinton, the legislation had always gone through the proper committee with full investigation and accompanying committee report.

I noted with some dismay that many of my colleagues who have long supported the war changed their vote to oppose tabling the motion for purely political reasons. That move was a disrespectful to the Constitutional function of this body and I could not support such actions with my vote.

I was pleased that the House did vote in favor of sending this legislation to the Judiciary Committee, which essentially directs the committee to examine the issue more closely than it has done to this point.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=976

[Mesogen]

Ok, so I'll still go to the polls. :)

Damn, those tricky Dems and their tricks. Almost had me.

I think it was the "no evidence" crap on C-Span. I still think Paul needs to splain that.

[ErikBlack]

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/alerts/95+


Deception of Congress and the American Public
Committing a Fraud Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371)
Making False Statements Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 1001)
War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)
Misuse of Government Funds (31 U.S.C. § 1301)
Improper Detention, Torture, and Other Inhumane Treatment
Anti-Torture Statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340-40A)
The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 2441)
The Geneva Conventions and Hague Convention: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
United Nations Convention Against Torture, and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
Command Responsibility (for known illegal acts of subordinates in the military)
Detainment of Material Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 3144)
Retaliating against Witnesses and Other Individuals
Obstruction Congress (18 U.S.C. § 1505)
Whistleblower Protection (5 U.S.C. § 2302)
The Lloyd-LaFollette Act, or "anti-gag rule" (5 U.S.C. § 7211)
Retaliating against Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 1513)
Leaking and other Misuse of Intelligence and other Government Information
Revealing Classified Information in Contravention of Federal Regulations (Executive Order 12958/Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement)
Statutory Prohibitions on Leaking Information (18 U.S.C. § 641, etc.)
Laws Governing Electronic Surveillance
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq.)
National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. chapter 15)
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. § 222)
Stored Communications Act of 1986 (18 U.S.C. § 2702)
Pen Registers or Trap and Trace Devices (18 U.S.C. § 3121)
Laws and Guidelines Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest (28 U.S.C. § 528, etc.)

Thanks for the list. If these charges have any weight and enough political will exists to pursue them in court, I'm sure that Ron Paul will act in accordance with the constitutional duties of his office and abide by proper procedure, which, as you can see from his voting record, he is a stickler for. My guess is that this is just a haphazard laundry list designed to convey the appearance of righteous indignation toward the current administration by politically motivated Democrats and it will never see the light of day.

[PatriotG]

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/alerts/95+


Deception of Congress and the American Public
Committing a Fraud Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371)
Making False Statements Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 1001)
War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)
Misuse of Government Funds (31 U.S.C. § 1301)
Improper Detention, Torture, and Other Inhumane Treatment
Anti-Torture Statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340-40A)
The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 2441)
The Geneva Conventions and Hague Convention: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
United Nations Convention Against Torture, and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
Command Responsibility (for known illegal acts of subordinates in the military)
Detainment of Material Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 3144)
Retaliating against Witnesses and Other Individuals
Obstruction Congress (18 U.S.C. § 1505)
Whistleblower Protection (5 U.S.C. § 2302)
The Lloyd-LaFollette Act, or "anti-gag rule" (5 U.S.C. § 7211)
Retaliating against Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 1513)
Leaking and other Misuse of Intelligence and other Government Information
Revealing Classified Information in Contravention of Federal Regulations (Executive Order 12958/Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement)
Statutory Prohibitions on Leaking Information (18 U.S.C. § 641, etc.)
Laws Governing Electronic Surveillance
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq.)
National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. chapter 15)
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. § 222)
Stored Communications Act of 1986 (18 U.S.C. § 2702)
Pen Registers or Trap and Trace Devices (18 U.S.C. § 3121)
Laws and Guidelines Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest (28 U.S.C. § 528, etc.)

Yup....Sounds about right.
Im sure we could find a couple of more....

[Harry96]

I'd like to see something like this:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=13247

[foofighter20x]

I think he should have a Dr Pepper and relax a little. :p