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


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)

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

  1. Pingback: Noam Chomsky on Ron Paul « Dandelion Salad

  2. Ron Paul voted FOR articles of Impeachment. In other words, to start the required investigation. Congress failed to do that investigation so Paul hasn’t been presented with any “evidence” to vote for it. Nancy Pelosi said Impeachment is off the table… of course it is, because Congress failed to do any investigation!

    Paul voted to get the ball rolling, but Congress stopped it.

  3. Happy New Year.

    Oh, and I just looked up the roll call votes. You must ask why Paul voted along with the vast majority of Dems and the vast majority of Repubs voted along with Kucinich, the author of the bill.

  4. Amazing…..you have all these Paul supporters who are just as bad as Bush supporters in that they refuse to see something they don’t like.

    Face it, by not voting to impeach and not putting forth effort to get others to do the same, he is allowing Bush and company to continue which not only could lead to the destruction of the Earth by starting nuclear war, and/or allowing continued and escalating environmental damage by huge corporations, etc. If that doesn’t happen, this administration could very well cause the damage to our Constitutional Republic to continue to a point that there is no returning from, and then add to that sending a message to the rest of the world that we really don’t care at all about our own laws, nor do we want to stop a lunatic group that wants to threaten nuking Iran and refuses to follow any international laws or treaties.

    And some of these people say he’s going to fix it all when he gets in office?

    First, what if he doesn’t get in office?

    Second, how can he undo all the damage that will be done before he would get in office?

    There are times when you have to realize your hero is not what you thought. He might have a good record of voting for the Constitution and what it stands (stood) for, but this is the biggest test he has ever seen in his life and he failed us.

    Some people’s spouses cheat on them. Some people’s parents lie to them and maybe even steal from them. Priests can do bad, Dr’s can do bad, ANYONE CAN DO BAD either by directly doing a bad thing, or by their inaction allowing and being complicit in the bad thing and none of those examples I made is something you want to see or admit or even imagine, but it happens and the guy is human and he failed us.

    I used to like him. But he is NOT standing up for the Constitution. And if the full truth be told, he would have initiated impeachment a few years ago if he really loved the Constitution as much as he claims.

    Look at the big picture and realize that who you love, worship or follow should not get your support to the point of not questioning what they do. The Constitution, the US of A and the whole world are way more important than you having to admit you have to rethink who should get your support.

    Logic should rule, not emotion.

  5. Pingback: Just a Theory: Ron Paul Doesn’t “Accept” Evolution By Manila Ryce (video) « Dandelion Salad

  6. Dec 21, 2007 8:35 AM
    When congress votes to impeach it is not a final judgement, it is a legal statement of charges. To my knowledge there is nothing in the constitution that says that impeachment legislation has to go to the Judiciary Committee. If congress votes on impeachment, then by law it must me voted by another body of government. If that follows through it goes to court. If congressman Paul believed that the charges needed to be brought to court, he should have voted yes. I honestly think he was just trying to make a statement to his party, which he says he disagreed with how they were voting. He doesn’t have the integrity to act on what he believes. There are even other ways to impeach such as the “Jefferson Manual” which allows citizens of america to vote for impeachment. Any citizen can partake at this website: http://impeachforpeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

  7. As a Paul supporter I agree with your criticism. It is very valid in my opinion, I would like to hear his defense because it is not the vote I would expect from him. Even Ron Paul may let us down if he were to get into office. However, out of all the candidates in both parties I still believe that his views allign more closely with mine than anyone elses. Unlike the majority of the democrat and republican partisians I know…we would let him know if he didn’t address inconsistencies like this.

  8. This is a bit troubling, but let’s look at things as a whole. If there’s a problem Ron Paul would have as president, it would be that he’s too principled to get anything done. In politics, some compromise is necessary unfortunately. This vote, while against his principles and that of the constitution, at least proves Paul can be pragmatic.

  9. Please Correct me if I’m Wrong:

    Paul voted to TABLE before voting to COMMITTEE…


    Therefore the Paul Apologists would appear to misunderestimate this important fact of Paul’s stance on Impeachment.

  10. I subscribe to VoteToImpeach.org and they said this was just what they wanted. It’s in review now before the Judiciary Committee.

    Ron Paul didn’t take impeachment off the table, it’s just been put under review

    Go to votetoimpeach.org and do your part to make it happen.

  11. Maybe he’s afraid that impeachment will prompt the Cheney camp to stage another 9/11 so that Bush can declare martial law. Elections would then be suspended. Congress could not even review the decision for six months.
    “President Bush has signed executive orders giving him sole authority to impose martial law, suspend habeus corpus, and suspend elections. Executive order #11921 provides that the president can declare a state of emergency that is not defined, and Congress cannot review the action for six months.”

  12. This question has been well-answered on ronpaulforums.com, dailypaul.com and lewrockwell.com.

    Basically, Ron voted to send this to the Judiciary committee because such weighty matters as impeachment should only be debated on the floor in front of the house after an independent council or some sort of committee finding or hearing. This was followed appropriately for Nixon and Clinton.

    This will move through committee quickly because of the strong initial vote to bring it up. The Republican team-players voted en-masse to bring it to a floor vote along with Kucinich and other Dems in order to embarrass the Democrats by forcing a vote with only 1 trivial hour of preceding debate. It’s a bunch of BS. Ron’s vote was correct on several levels. He stands above these partisan games. Among other things, he was helping to keep his buddy from across the aisle, Kucinich, from making a fool of himself and his party.

  13. Pingback: Ron Paul on Impeachment of Cheney, Bush, Clinton (+ video) « Dandelion Salad

  14. lo, please post paul’s response to the impeachment question. it deserves a fair hearing.

    as for me, i think he is taking a more effective route with his “american freedom agenda.” if you strip the executive branch of all the unconstitutional powers it has accumulated especially over the last couple of years, then it doesn’t matter who is in office, they will be very limited in what they can do.

    do you really think that merely by impeaching cheney the criminals within this administration wouldn’t just fill the vacancy with another puppet (like pelosi or whomever is next in line) who will continue the racket for war?

    our goal should be to target the infrastructure, cut the root, then the hydra-headed beast is bound to fall.


  15. Pingback: Federal Reserve is Causing Dollar Value to Plummet by William Mac « Dandelion Salad

  16. The official statements of Ron Paul can be found at:

    The following is quoted from the above source:

    “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. …” read the rest on this post: Ron Paul on Impeachment of Cheney, Bush, Clinton (+ video)

    As you can see, Ron Paul is only following the constitution as he always does, voting his conscience responsibly. He is for the impeachment, but only if it is done correctly.

  17. The impeachment bill is not illegal. An impeachment is an indictment not a conviction. An indictment charges someone with a crime, it doesn’t declare them guilty. Its sad and pathetic that Paul’s supporters think enforcing the US Constitution is a waste of time.

    I’ll tell you whats a waste of time. Supporting Ron Paul is a waste of time.

  18. Ron Paul knows that this ‘impeachment’ bullcrap is a WASTE OF TIME. He doesn’t engage in such pettiness.

    Get over it….

  19. lol… If we started impeaching everyone for not following the constitution then we would HAVE TO IMPEACH ALMOST EVERY SENATOR AND CONGRESSMEN.

    The income tax is unconstitutional!
    Giving Bush the power to bomb and occupy Iraq without a decleration of war is unconstitutional!
    The list goes on and on.

  20. Pingback: Bruce Fein on Impeachment (video link) « Dandelion Salad

  21. Decision concerning impeachment and Ron Paul: Our nation has become a land where people disappear, become ill or die in a shroud of mystery. We need to restore the land first. Do not forget H.R.3835 and all that it entails.

  22. Pingback: Ron Paul V. Fed Chair Bernanke: Free Market Smackdown! (video) « Dandelion Salad

  23. Ron Paul is a fraud. If he doesn’t support enforcing the Constitution then he doesn’t deserve to be President. Upholding the law is more important than advancing his political career. What is this crap the GOP won’t support Paul if he supports impeachment? The GOP isn’t going to support Paul no matter what he does. Anyone who claims there isn’t sufficient evidence to impeach the Bush administration is full of garbage. Ron Paul voted to table the bill which means he voted to kill it. Then after the effort to table the bill failed, Ron Paul voted to send it to committee to avoid debating it. Yes a President can be arrested, indicted, and convicted in a court of law after he leaves office unless he receives a pardon. Even with a pardon he could still be arrested and prosecuted in other countries or in an international court.

    “I agree with Sean Galt. Those of you who want to make Ron’s campaign a side show and co-opt it for promoting YOUR petty issues should just get lost.”

    “It’s all about Ron Paul NOT about you and your useless exercises in ‘liberty’.

    I didn’t realize that enforcing the US Constitution is a petty issue. I guess Ron Paul and his supporters like George W Bush believe the US Constitution is just a “god damn piece of paper.” I guess Ron Paul supporters don’t believe in liberty after all. I didn’t realize that Ron Paul becoming the President is more important than defending the rule of law and preventing World War 3.

  24. There are two candidates who give a mad fuck about our future, neither of whom were a threat to the establishment until the Fifth of November. H.R. 333 was submitted to the House on April 24, 2007 and sat for six months without any debate or vote. It is no coincidence that the establishment did a 180 degree turn the day after Ron Paul showed he could raise more money than any of them without corporate lobbyist financing.

    It’s too bad an investigation was not done before Kucinich made accusations. Declaring a verdict before a hearing and before even an investigation makes Kucinich look like a nut. NeoCons knew that Ron Paul could not support H.R. 333 because declaring someone’s guilt before an investigation is about as far from the Constitution as you can get. (See also: Illegal Impeachment Bill Divides Ron Paul Supporters)

Comments are closed.