Is it time to begin Impeachment hearings for Bush?

im all for that!

the north american union is a violation of the sovereignty of this country, which public officials swear an oath to defend.

but i agree that that one is kind of gray. however, there is no gray area when talking about torture, illegal wiretapping of american citizens and paying reporters to write favorable news stories - those are all illegal acts which the administration engaged in. felonies which should land these criminals in prison.

 

If they have no desire to follow the rule of law. If they use the US Constitution like toilet paper. If they revile and denigrate the US Constitution as being just a G-- D--N piece of paper like our fearless leader then, yes lets start the house cleaning and demand those bozos to do their job OR ELSE!

Incidentally that is why the illegal shamnesty failed. This bill was doomed to failure and only one side would have benefited and it would not have been the American people. While the American people I believe do see that viable immigration reform needs to take place, they have the sense to know you don't fix a problem by sealing off the back door and then, leaving the front door wide open. Until we secure our borders and seal our ports, the Mexican government will continue to be insolent and belligerent about addressing the problems that arise from illegal immigration instead will continue to pawn off their responsibilities and deny seeing any problem with what they are doing.

The American people saw what was for what it was and connected the dots that our mass media largely wished to ignore and even misinform. So, yes we DO matter, Mr President!

 

fein who wrote the articles of impeachment against clinton on moyers.

 

Can someone please start a new thread on this:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/130707greatdanger.htm

 

Are we really going to try to impeach the President every time he becomes unpopular? At least with Clinton, he arguably committed perjury. I disagree ardently with Bush's substantive policies as well as his usurpation of power for the executive - but impeachment isn't exactly a proper remedy.

Also, some people have a serious misunderstanding about what it means to violate the law. Moral outrage isn't a substitute for legal proof. Even unconstitutional action isn't necessarily a crime, however repugnant it may be.

 

I think he's done plenty to deserve impeachment, but I also think it would be a mistake for the Democratic Party to push for it now. A distraction we (my party) don't need. Wait this idiot out, elect a Democrat in 2008, and hope Junior doesn't invade another country before he gets his sorry ass out of the Oval Office.



D&D. Go Rocks!

 

Even though Cheney is the architect of most of the White House plans in recent years, I was under the impression that the buck stops at the President. Bush is the one who ultimately signs acts into legislation, so how could Cheney be held responsible ultimately. I'm kind of lost?

 

can you really not come up with crimes bush has committed?

how about we start with an easy one. he violated FISA.

 

no, he should be impeached b/c he broke the law.

it is if you break the law.

if you break the law are you not in violation of the law?

 

i wish democrats would put the good of the country above partisan politics. i do believe that your reasoning is the only reason that impeachment is not being pursued further. these criminals are a danger to our security and we really cant wait another 18 months - they need to be removed immediately. these criminals are salivating for a chance to attack iran. i wouldnt be suprised at all to see another gulf of tonkin incident to draw us in.

 

So would you see Cheney become President? And do you honestly think both could be successfully impeached? I have my doubts about one, unless people being quiet start talking.


D&D. Argh!

 

all of you that have doubts about impeachment being necessary.

please watch this moyers.

 

hell no! of course it goes w/out saying that you have to clear all the rats out. i just figured it was a given at this point that anyone talking about impeachment means for both of them. and if it was one, we need to get cheney out - he is far more dangerous than bush for the security of this country.

 

can we do a recall?

lol

 

well, you are one of those people who has a misunderstanding then. if you are the government and you violate the constitution, yes, it is not a crime, but it is a violation of the law.

Crimes violate social norms and laws are made to create standards and punishments. However, the constitution governs the principles that run our government. If you violate both, you violate the law.

SO yes, if the government does something that is unconstitutional, it is violation of the law.

 

I didn't favor impeachment for Clinton, either. Essentially, I'm opposed to impeachment as a political tool.

 

but isn't it? it's a political way to rectify wrongs.

 

I don't know how many times that I have to say it but impeachment is a political tool. If it was a legal tool it would be up to the Judicial branch but its not.

Impeachment doesn't have to occur when the President does something illegal. Infact when Clinton was impeached he hadn't been convictedof breaking any law. There was a presumption of guilt that had yet to be proven. If I recall correctly Clinton was never legally convicted but accepted disbarment to head off potential conviction.

Impeachment has the trappings of a legal proceeding but it is all political.