Why Did Ron Paul Vote Against Impeachment? By Manila Ryce

I agree with Manila, it doesn’t make sense that Ron Paul does NOT support impeachment. ~ Lo

Dandelion Salad

By Manila Ryce
The Largest Minority
Published Wednesday, November 7th, 2007, 10:08 pm

To paraphrase the late, great Ricky Ricardo, Ron Paul’s got some splainin’ to do. I would like to urge all first-time pro-Paul visitors to my leftist pinko blog to please save all reactionary hate mail until after you’ve actually read what I have to say. Paul’s vote to table the impeachment resolution, then to refer it to committee is especially troubling coming from a supposed constitutionalist. He voted with the Democratic leadership on both accounts.

There are a few excuses being kicked around the internet which are all rather weak. Firstly, I don’t buy the excuse that he knew the bill wouldn’t go anywhere so he decided not to vote in favor of it. After all, Paul got the nickname of “Doctor No” by adhering to his constitutional principles regardless of the politics surrounding the issues. Did he not? Secondly, I also don’t buy Paul’s own line that there isn’t sufficient evidence to suggest that the Bush administration has done anything illegal, as there supposedly was to warrant his vote for the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Cheney’s own words are sufficient evidence in themselves.

More importantly, impeachment is not an actual trial, and requires no evidence at all (not that there isn’t any). It is merely an indictment to formally accuse an official of committing a criminal offense. Voting to table the resolution was a vote to prevent such an investigation. The evidence is presented after the House votes in favor of impeachment, not before.

Perhaps even more confusing is this interview from the far-right website InfoWars from March:

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.

I don’t think even Neocon fluffers like Traitor Joe can argue that Dennis Kucinich engages in “partisan vengeance,” so that excuse is out the window as well. Ron Paul’s commitment to the constitution was tested yesterday, and it unfortunately fell short of our expectations. It’s contradictory to say there isn’t sufficient evidence to warrant an impeachment against the very same people you say are violating the constitution. Impeachment isn’t just an option, it’s an obligation. There’s no glory in defending the indefensible, and Paul’s vote was just that. I urge his supporters to contact Paul about his vote. Tell him to vote in favor of impeachment the next time Kucinich brings it back to the floor. And liberals, don’t forget to do the same with your representatives.

You can also call Paul’s office and leave a message:
(202) 225-2831

see

Kucinich: I have 3-inch binder documenting Cheney’s crimes By David Edwards & Jason Rhyne (link)

Impeachment: What to do next (Action Alert; updated)

Rep. Wexler Will Urge the Judiciary Committee to Hold Immediate Hearings on Impeachment!!!

Kucinich is Wrecking the Dem 2008 Strategy

Naomi Wolf: Impeach, Prosecute and Save America! (video)

Advertisements

63 thoughts on “Why Did Ron Paul Vote Against Impeachment? By Manila Ryce

  1. I generously supported Dr. Paul in his bid for President in the primaries, but after this, I am sorry that I wasted my money on him. This will be the last time I send my hard-earned money to some millionaire to help get him elected.

  2. Pingback: Ron Paul distortions and smears by Glenn Greenwald « Dandelion Salad

  3. The only reason you Paul fans are surprised is because you haven’t really paid attention. He has always talked a big game about the constitution, but it’s always been an act.

Comments are closed.