Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 35

Thread: Paul votes against impeachment

  1. #1

    Default Paul votes against impeachment

    Strategic move so it's sent to the judiciary rather than dying on the floor?



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    There should be a hearing and debate before someone is impeached even if it is Dick Cheney.
    "Instead of the “end of history,” we are now experiencing the end of a vocal limited-government movement in our nation’s capital. While most conservatives no longer defend balanced budgets and reduced spending, most liberals have grown lazy in defending civil liberties and now are approving wars that we initiate. The so-called “third way” has arrived and, sadly, it has taken the worst of what the conservatives and liberals have to offer." -Ron Paul

  4. #3

    Default

    Due process is for all just like civil liberties.
    No one reads signatures.

  5. #4

    Default

    I wish that you people would leave this subject alone. Dr. Paul has made it very clear that he is against impeachment of either the President or Vice President. Talking about this will not win over the Republicans that we need to win the primaries.

  6. #5

    Default

    This was disccussed in another thread. Congressman Paul does not support impeachment. However, he was against a vote without it going through proper channels. He would have voted the same way on ANY bill regardless of how he intended to cast his final vote (providing the bill ever makes it to the floor).

  7. #6

    Default Statement Regarding Impeachment of Vice President Cheney

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

    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.

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by All4Paul View Post
    Strategic move so it's sent to the judiciary rather than dying on the floor?
    I am glad he voted against it. Constitutional proccedure aside, impeachment was not meant to be used for incompetence.

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by traviskicks View Post
    I am glad he voted against it. Constitutional proccedure aside, impeachment was not meant to be used for incompetence.
    Intentionally decieving the public, ie "I know for certain they have WMD's" is not incompetence. It is grounds for impeachment.

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by traviskicks View Post
    I am glad he voted against it. Constitutional proccedure aside, impeachment was not meant to be used for incompetence.
    True. In addition, it was Congress that $#@!ed up. They're the ones that transfered authority to the President. They should have voted on Congressman Paul's declaration of war. But no, they didn't want to be responsible. They were more than happy to pass the buck. Now they want to impeach?! What $#@!ing nerve!

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brandonyates View Post
    Intentionally decieving the public, ie "I know for certain they have WMD's" is not incompetence. It is grounds for impeachment.
    There was no intentional deception. Intelligence agencies all over the world thought that there were weapons. Stop acting like Cindy Sheahan...

  12. #11

    Default

    Ron supports a much better bill the American Freeom Agenda Act 2007.
    Checkout Ron Paul's legislation, write your representatives and spread the word!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legisla...ed_by_Ron_Paul

    Lord of the Rings and Liberty: http://www.lewrockwell.com/carson/carson10.html

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillInMiami View Post
    There was no intentional deception. Intelligence agencies all over the world thought that there were weapons. Stop acting like Cindy Sheahan...
    Yeah, Ron Paul being in favor of impeachment would have been a stupid move.
    He talked about his first trip around the Hawkeye State, the one where he realized the White House was his destiny, and how the mist was rising up from the fields after a rain. The former boy-mayor of Cleveland then saw something he had never seen before: "Rainbows, dancing from field to field. Rainbow Farms!"

    He got weirder from there and ended by promising that under President Kucinich, we'd all see the dancing rainbows.

  14. #13

    Default

    In my opinion, it is far more important to impeach and arrest the concepts that Bush/Cheney stand for: global government, imperialism, totalitarianism

    We don't need to do anything but reveal the evil forces that drive these guys with a Ron Paul victory.

  15. #14

    Default

    What is important is moving forward - recognizing that people that have taken over the Republican party and morphed it into something other than what it once was and kicking those people out of the party through the election process. All of this impeachment talk is counter-productive to our goals.

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillInMiami View Post
    There was no intentional deception. Intelligence agencies all over the world thought that there were weapons. Stop acting like Cindy Sheahan...
    Cindy sheehan? Because I question the motives of the Bush administration you want to relate me to some naive liberal shill? Cmon man, dont be like that. Have you ever read "rebuilding america's defences" by the Project for a New American Century?


    Before the invasion, UN inspectors had found NO indication that iraq possessed a WMD.

    In addition, the al-queda/ iraq ties came from a source who the defence intelligence agency said should not be trusted (prior to the war).

    There is much more evidence as well.
    Last edited by brandon; 11-09-2007 at 10:54 PM.

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brandonyates View Post
    Cindy sheehan? Because I question the motives of the Bush administration you want to relate me to some naive liberal shill? Cmon man, dont be like that. Have you ever read "rebuilding america's defences" by the Project for a New American Century?


    Before the invasion, UN inspectors had found NO indication that iraq possessed a WMD.

    In addition, the al-queda/ iraq ties came from a source who the defence intelligence agency said should not be trusted (prior to the war).

    There is much more evidence as well.
    Whatever. This type of talk is counter-productive to our goals and will accomplish nothing more than alienating republican voters when we need them the most - the primaries.

    As for the UN inspectors, I don't trust the UN on anything. Why would I trust the inspectors to either be competent OR tell me the truth? The United States should not be exporting the business of intelligence gathering...

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brandonyates View Post
    Intentionally decieving the public, ie "I know for certain they have WMD's" is not incompetence. It is grounds for impeachment.
    agreed but the GOp was making a mockery of the impeachmnet process to embarras dems NOT b/c they take Cheneys impeachmnet seriously. RP is right

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillInMiami View Post
    There was no intentional deception. Intelligence agencies all over the world thought that there were weapons. Stop acting like Cindy Sheahan...
    NO, THEY MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT!!!

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/breaking-...344306427.html
    http://edition.cnn.com/2006/US/04/23...raq/index.html

    ' Drumheller said the administration officials wanted no more information from Sabri because:
    "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy." '
    Last edited by TheEvilDetector; 11-09-2007 at 11:35 PM.
    "A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicity." - Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

  20. #19

    Default

    This has really saddened and confused me. RP voted to impeach Clinton, whose worst crime was cheating on his wife (which doesn't affect his leadership abilities whatsoever), but DIDN'T vote to impeach one of the biggest mass murderers and corporate bloodsuckers in American history?!?!

    Please, someone tell me why Ron did this!!!

  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRey View Post
    This has really saddened and confused me. RP voted to impeach Clinton, whose worst crime was cheating on his wife (which doesn't affect his leadership abilities whatsoever), but DIDN'T vote to impeach one of the biggest mass murderers and corporate bloodsuckers in American history?!?!

    Please, someone tell me why Ron did this!!!
    I think this is about following the accepted procedure.
    "A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicity." - Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

  22. #21

    Default

    [QUOTE=TheEvilDetector;386032]NO, THEY MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT!!!

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/breaking-...344306427.html
    http://edition.cnn.com/2006/US/04/23...raq/index.html[/QUOTE

    Sorry to have offended you Mrs. Sheahan but what part of "this is counterproductive" do you not get? I could swear that I've said this at least twice in this thread.

    If you want to believe that Cheney is Darth Vader fine. However, I don't see how discussing this toipic on this board helps Ron Paul win the Republican nomination. In fact, I believe it actually hurts the campaign. Sort of like when the Alex Jones crowd says the silly $#@! that they're always saying...

  23. #22

    Default

    [QUOTE=WillInMiami;386055]
    Quote Originally Posted by TheEvilDetector View Post
    NO, THEY MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT!!!

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/breaking-...344306427.html
    http://edition.cnn.com/2006/US/04/23...raq/index.html[/QUOTE

    Sorry to have offended you Mrs. Sheahan but what part of "this is counterproductive" do you not get? I could swear that I've said this at least twice in this thread.

    If you want to believe that Cheney is Darth Vader fine. However, I don't see how discussing this toipic on this board helps Ron Paul win the Republican nomination. In fact, I believe it actually hurts the campaign. Sort of like when the Alex Jones crowd says the silly $#@! that they're always saying...
    Your opinion right or wrong deserves to be heard, hypocrisy (unintended or otherwise) notwithstanding.

    PS. I do not have anything in the slightest to do with Mrs Sheehan (whose name you cannot spell).
    Last edited by TheEvilDetector; 11-09-2007 at 11:46 PM.
    "A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicity." - Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRey View Post
    This has really saddened and confused me. RP voted to impeach Clinton, whose worst crime was cheating on his wife (which doesn't affect his leadership abilities whatsoever), but DIDN'T vote to impeach one of the biggest mass murderers and corporate bloodsuckers in American history?!?!

    Please, someone tell me why Ron did this!!!
    You are very wrong. He voted to impeach Clinton for actual crimes - purjury and obstruction of justice. There was not article of impeachment for "cheating on his wife".

    If you cannot sort out the differences and truly believe that the sitting President is a "mass murderer" you should probably vote for Kusinich...

  25. #24

    Default

    "whose name you cannot spell.."

    Big $#@!ing deal. I didn't bother to look up the proper spelling of the ignorant bitches name. I'm not here to win a name spelling contest...

  26. #25

    Default

    Yes. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction like Will said and it was done in the proper manner like evil said. Back to Cheney though, perhaps all of these different opinions here are the reason why an investigation, debate, and hearing need to take place before impeachment occurs? Ron Paul did the right thing here.
    "Instead of the “end of history,” we are now experiencing the end of a vocal limited-government movement in our nation’s capital. While most conservatives no longer defend balanced budgets and reduced spending, most liberals have grown lazy in defending civil liberties and now are approving wars that we initiate. The so-called “third way” has arrived and, sadly, it has taken the worst of what the conservatives and liberals have to offer." -Ron Paul

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillInMiami View Post
    "whose name you cannot spell.."

    Big $#@!ing deal. I didn't bother to look up the proper spelling of the ignorant bitches name. I'm not here to win a name spelling contest...
    I am willing to overlook the grammatical deficiencies, since you feel so strongly about the matter.
    Last edited by TheEvilDetector; 11-09-2007 at 11:50 PM.
    "A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicity." - Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

  28. #27

    Default

    Look, both parties are guilt in this, what are they guilty of? cherry picking the constitution for their gain when they want it, and slamming people when they dont. Cheney is guilty of the same, and cherry picking the ripest intel he could find.
    the true fault in this lies in the legislative branch, they are the chickens that turned over THEIR responsibility to the executive unconstitutionally. THEY did this, both D's and R's, no one is willing to admit they are wrong and correct it, so don't expect any developments anywhere.
    No one reads signatures.

  29. #28

    Default

    are people in this thread reading the statement from Dr. Paul?

    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.

  30. #29

    Default repeating for BuddyRev

    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRey View Post
    This has really saddened and confused me. RP voted to impeach Clinton, whose worst crime was cheating on his wife (which doesn't affect his leadership abilities whatsoever), but DIDN'T vote to impeach one of the biggest mass murderers and corporate bloodsuckers in American history?!?!

    Please, someone tell me why Ron did this!!!
    http://ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=976

    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.

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRey View Post
    This has really saddened and confused me. RP voted to impeach Clinton, whose worst crime was cheating on his wife (which doesn't affect his leadership abilities whatsoever), but DIDN'T vote to impeach one of the biggest mass murderers and corporate bloodsuckers in American history?!?!

    Please, someone tell me why Ron did this!!!
    I believe the way it works is that you go through due process and then determine if impeachment is necessary.

    Clinton was charged (but not convicted) of perjury. Cheney has yet to be charged with anything. You can't impeach without someone being charged with something.

    Also regardless of what we believe, Ron Paul does not know if they "intentionally" mislead us, and at this time, there is no way to prove it.

    There is no proof. There is no charge (yet) and so there can be no impeachment.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast





Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 154
    Last Post: 03-16-2013, 07:04 AM
  2. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-17-2012, 04:04 PM
  3. Ron Paul votes catching up to Obama votes!
    By yeshuaisiam in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-10-2012, 07:26 PM
  4. Ron Paul votes for impeachment
    By christagious in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-21-2008, 12:49 PM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-29-2007, 11:45 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •