Why NOT Impeach Bush and Cheney ? The Republicans Will take Him Out!

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Wait. Lets go with he lied blah blah b;ah and it was intentional.

Is lying under oath impeachable? Yes. It doesnt matter what the subject matter is, a lie under oath is a lie.

Is lying to the public or to the media agaisnt the law or impeachable? uh...NO.

WTF is wrong with you people? Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

We wont hold our breath.

NO need to prove it to you then right?

since I guess lying to the public doesnt matter.

The Bush Administration lied. And you don't matter.

He went back on his Oath...do you remember that?

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

There is his lie. But again, you don't matter.

So, it should say "to the best of what the public thinks my ability" is?

Answer my assertion: Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

Lying to the public is not an impeachable offense,

Thanks.

No it should say exactly what it does.

And if GWB cant handle the job we should have the power and the recourse to kick his ass out. the outcomes, the chickens coming home to roost, of his adminstration is my ASSERTION that he can't handle the job, he has failed his oath under God to Protect the Constitution and by extension this land and it's citizens.

thanks.

The answer you seek is: He has been under oath since day one, his inauguration.

And tell us, oh great contitutional expert, how his actions WERENT the best of his ability? If he's the idiot you think he is, why would you expect anything BUT a mistake? Hmmm?

and since when is a public oath = under court oath? It isnt.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Wait. Lets go with he lied blah blah b;ah and it was intentional.

Is lying under oath impeachable? Yes. It doesnt matter what the subject matter is, a lie under oath is a lie.

Is lying to the public or to the media agaisnt the law or impeachable? uh...NO.

WTF is wrong with you people? Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

We wont hold our breath.

NO need to prove it to you then right?

since I guess lying to the public doesnt matter.

The Bush Administration lied. And you don't matter.

He went back on his Oath...do you remember that?

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

There is his lie. But again, you don't matter.

So, it should say "to the best of what the public thinks my ability" is?

Answer my assertion: Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

Lying to the public is not an impeachable offense,

Thanks.

No it should say exactly what it does.

And if GWB cant handle the job we should have the power and the recourse to kick his ass out. the outcomes, the chickens coming home to roost, of his adminstration is my ASSERTION that he can't handle the job, he has failed his oath under God to Protect the Constitution and by extension this land and it's citizens.

thanks.

The answer you seek is: He has been under oath since day one, his inauguration.

And tell us, oh great contitutional expert, how his actions WERENT the best of his ability? If he's the idiot you think he is, why would you expect anything BUT a mistake? Hmmm?

and since when is a public oath = under court oath? It isnt.

One simple example. If he was lead by the nose to start a war with Iraq and remove Saddam then that shows he is unfit to lead a nation.

If he lied to us about the reasons for going to war with Iraq then he lied and boot his ass out.

He is either not fit because he "mistakenly" approved and utilized intelligence that was later found to be grossly inaccurate. Or he lied about it.

your choice.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

OK, I don't like Bush.

Please cite the law and the instance along with evidence which is not hearsay which in fact makes a case strong enough to remove a sitting President.

No "should be" or "we must"

Cite the law violated, and the specific evidence (which op-eds are not)

Pretend you are an attorney trying to convince a Congressman that there is a substantial case IN LAW.

Whatcha got?

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: daveymark
Everyone other than the far right will think GWB will not be impeached because congress doesn't want to impeach, and those fringe right batties will think he won't be impeached because there is no case for impeachment. either way, he's not going to be impeached.

now that we've got that out of the way, we can focus on who will be the next president.

/thread

fixed.

remember only ~28% of Americans aprove of GWB, and YOU are one of them. congrats are in order for keeping your head in the sand for this long.

the only congrats around here go to you for making such a gullible, ultra left wing moonbat ASSumption. the chances of you providing a link to where I stated I approve of GWB are as good as you providing proof that GWB lied.

GWB isn't going to be impeached, no matter how much you gnash your teeth. deal with it.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Bush has shown that American democracy no longer works. The system of checks and balances no longer works. Rot has set in. All politics is bought and paid for by the rich. I see no hope unless Obama can some how pull off ground up change. Wish I didn't fear the ground is rotten too.

If politicians were the cause of the problem before, what are the odds one will bring the cure?

And people wonder why battered women keep returning to their abusers - American voters are the same way. They keep getting burned by pols posing as messiahs, but their cynicism only lasts until the next one. Obamamania is just the latest traveling medicine show, yet even here some are caught up in the smoke and mirrors.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Wait. Lets go with he lied blah blah b;ah and it was intentional.

Is lying under oath impeachable? Yes. It doesnt matter what the subject matter is, a lie under oath is a lie.

Is lying to the public or to the media agaisnt the law or impeachable? uh...NO.

WTF is wrong with you people? Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

We wont hold our breath.

NO need to prove it to you then right?

since I guess lying to the public doesnt matter.

The Bush Administration lied. And you don't matter.

He went back on his Oath...do you remember that?

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

There is his lie. But again, you don't matter.

So, it should say "to the best of what the public thinks my ability" is?

Answer my assertion: Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

Lying to the public is not an impeachable offense,

Thanks.

No it should say exactly what it does.

And if GWB cant handle the job we should have the power and the recourse to kick his ass out. the outcomes, the chickens coming home to roost, of his adminstration is my ASSERTION that he can't handle the job, he has failed his oath under God to Protect the Constitution and by extension this land and it's citizens.

thanks.

The answer you seek is: He has been under oath since day one, his inauguration.

And tell us, oh great contitutional expert, how his actions WERENT the best of his ability? If he's the idiot you think he is, why would you expect anything BUT a mistake? Hmmm?

and since when is a public oath = under court oath? It isnt.

One simple example. If he was lead by the nose to start a war with Iraq and remove Saddam then that shows he is unfit to lead a nation.

If he lied to us about the reasons for going to war with Iraq then he lied and boot his ass out.

He is either not fit because he "mistakenly" approved and utilized intelligence that was later found to be grossly inaccurate. Or he lied about it.

your choice.

Either way, != lied under oath. Sorry. Keep grasping.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK, I don't like Bush.

Please cite the law and the instance along with evidence which is not hearsay which in fact makes a case strong enough to remove a sitting President.

No "should be" or "we must"

Cite the law violated, and the specific evidence (which op-eds are not)

Pretend you are an attorney trying to convince a Congressman that there is a substantial case IN LAW.

Whatcha got?

QFT. Being a disaster of a president, in and of itself, is not an impeachable offense.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
You really don't want to set the precedent of lowering the bar for impeachments.

The idea of impeaching the Pesident because he lied about an affair and tried to cover it up was ludicrous, imo. And I hated Bill Clinton.

i want to raise the bar

impeach bush for lying and starting a war of aggression

The US looks good again, even the republicans gain a little self-respect by getting rid of a stupid, blame-shifting liar - he is blaming his own ALLIES in the Congress
- he is insane!

Take out the trash .. too simple for you?

By supporting him - now after America is ruined by him - you are also complicit in your heart with him

If i was a Republican Congressman i would be disgusted, repelled and i would lose all respect for the man i once supported - the same Liar who is now trying to blame me - and wreck MY chances for re-election

Getting rid of a lying and corrupt administration - IS painful - but overall it is Win-win

Again, for sake of argument, lets say he knowingly and deliberatly lied to the public.

You want to amend the constitution to allow impeachment for that?

What in God's name is wrong with you? Even if you want it to be that way, it isnt. So tough shit. He isnt impeachable. Get over it.

Bull shit. If the American people said impeach or we will recall you he would be impeached in the blink of an eye.

 

[MonkeyK]

Impeachment

In the United States, impeachment can occur both at the federal and state level. The Constitution defines impeachment at the federal level and limits impeachment to "The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States" who may only be impeached and removed for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." [2]. Several commentators have suggested that Congress alone may decide for itself what constitutes an impeachable offense. In 1970, then-House Minority Leader Gerald R. Ford defined the criteria as he saw it: "An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history." [3] Four years later, Ford would become president when President Richard Nixon resigned under the threat of impeachment (see below).

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dphantom
Being wrong is quite different than being a liar. if Bush is a liar, then so were numerous peole before him.

I do not like what has occurred in Iraq, but that does not make anyone a liar.

Bush is a Dirty Liar
-- by his spineless "shift the blame" speech he is now NAKED before the world

Congress just need someone - an honest man - damn hard to find, who is not afraid .. first .. to SIMPLY stand up for America - for everything we hold dear - and say "impeach" the Liars!

we - the thinking people of these United States - will eventually also wise up and the masses will follow .. once again

Bush is simply insane ... and also deathly sick i think; but that does not excuse him; he wanted to be Messiah - hero, with his "Mission accomplished" ..

the cosmos ultimately does not reward liars

lets just give Bush his well-deserved reward right now
- impeach him!

the world will realize america's Greatness and wisdom - that we were fooled by a Popular Liar who manipulated US according to his own twisted reasoning

Thank you for a typically cogent response from the left wing looney bin.

 

[GrGr]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK, I don't like Bush.

Please cite the law and the instance along with evidence which is not hearsay which in fact makes a case strong enough to remove a sitting President.

No "should be" or "we must"

Cite the law violated, and the specific evidence (which op-eds are not)

Pretend you are an attorney trying to convince a Congressman that there is a substantial case IN LAW.

Whatcha got?

QFT. Being a disaster of a president, in and of itself, is not an impeachable offense.

If they wanted to they could make a laundry list a mile long.

Nixon was about to be impeached by the House of Representatives for misusing the CIA and FBI.

They found dirt on Clinton and grilled him until he lied under oath.

Bush could be had for domestic spying, war crimes, defrauding the US, any number of reasons really. Impeachement is very broad and sweeping.

Impeachment is a POLITICAL not legal procedure. It is up to CONGRESS to decide if the president is guilty of a High Crime or Misdemenour.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK, I don't like Bush.

Please cite the law and the instance along with evidence which is not hearsay which in fact makes a case strong enough to remove a sitting President.

No "should be" or "we must"

Cite the law violated, and the specific evidence (which op-eds are not)

Pretend you are an attorney trying to convince a Congressman that there is a substantial case IN LAW.

Whatcha got?

You're right, but....

You shouldn't be able to stand up in a theatre and yell fire then get out of it by saying that you smelled smoke. That's basically what the Bush defenders are arguing.

Then you have Bush's use of secrecy, his use of executive orders and don't forget his pardoning of Scooter. I think I'm smelling smoke too. 😉

Maybe after this election whoever get's in can shine some light in places that we can't now, but right now it's a case of too little, too late to impeach Bush. I don't know what would be legal but if possible we should find a way to serve up a big healping of justice.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Wait. Lets go with he lied blah blah b;ah and it was intentional.

Is lying under oath impeachable? Yes. It doesnt matter what the subject matter is, a lie under oath is a lie.

Is lying to the public or to the media agaisnt the law or impeachable? uh...NO.

WTF is wrong with you people? Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

We wont hold our breath.

That's not really true at all. Congress can impeach and convict him for pretty much anything it wants to. It is the source of indictment, of prosecution, and of conviction. It can pick one of a million reasons to do so, and if they convicted do you think the Supreme Court would try and overturn it? Riiiiiiiiight.

Again, it's all about politics, not about law.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Wait. Lets go with he lied blah blah b;ah and it was intentional.

Is lying under oath impeachable? Yes. It doesnt matter what the subject matter is, a lie under oath is a lie.

Is lying to the public or to the media agaisnt the law or impeachable? uh...NO.

WTF is wrong with you people? Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

We wont hold our breath.

That's not really true at all. Congress can impeach and convict him for pretty much anything it wants to. It is the source of indictment, of prosecution, and of conviction. It can pick one of a million reasons to do so, and if they convicted do you think the Supreme Court would try and overturn it? Riiiiiiiiight.

Again, it's all about politics, not about law.

To a point you are correct, but if Congress ever decides that impeachment of a sitting President can be done on essentially what you are saying is a whim, our form a democracy is at an end.

Clinton lied under oath which in any normal case (you or I) would result in a conviction and jail time if proven true. Should he have been impeached - my personal opinion is no.

Bush, Clinton, Gore, Kerry and Cheney all were wrong on Iraq's WMD. Should they be impeached for being wrong. No, I don't think so. Being an idiot is not IMO an impeachable offense.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK, I don't like Bush.

Please cite the law and the instance along with evidence which is not hearsay which in fact makes a case strong enough to remove a sitting President.

No "should be" or "we must"

Cite the law violated, and the specific evidence (which op-eds are not)

Pretend you are an attorney trying to convince a Congressman that there is a substantial case IN LAW.

Whatcha got?

You're right, but....

You shouldn't be able to stand up in a theatre and yell fire then get out of it by saying that you smelled smoke. That's basically what the Bush defenders are arguing.

Then you have Bush's use of secrecy, his use of executive orders and don't forget his pardoning of Scooter.

Did you really just offer use of the presidential pardon as grounds for impeachment?!? :shocked: :roll:

This is why Bush was president, and for 8 years - his followers may be idiots, but so are his critics.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK, I don't like Bush.

Please cite the law and the instance along with evidence which is not hearsay which in fact makes a case strong enough to remove a sitting President.

No "should be" or "we must"

Cite the law violated, and the specific evidence (which op-eds are not)

Pretend you are an attorney trying to convince a Congressman that there is a substantial case IN LAW.

Whatcha got?

You're right, but....

You shouldn't be able to stand up in a theatre and yell fire then get out of it by saying that you smelled smoke. That's basically what the Bush defenders are arguing.

Then you have Bush's use of secrecy, his use of executive orders and don't forget his pardoning of Scooter. I think I'm smelling smoke too. 😉

Maybe after this election whoever get's in can shine some light in places that we can't now, but right now it's a case of too little, too late to impeach Bush. I don't know what would be legal but if possible we should find a way to serve up a big healping of justice.

So more of the "shouldnt be able to" argument? Still not impeachable. As you know.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Lemon law
As long as the GOP has 49 Senators who will say no to conviction in the Senate, going for impeachment is an exercise in futility. I certainly agree with grounds are not lacking, if nothing else, there is the matter of the some 750 laws GWB is ignoring.

But if just 17 GOP Senators change their minds, just like in the case of Nixon, impeachment and conviction could be accomplished in a single day. I do not underestimate the ability of GWB&co. to really really screw up, and then the GOP may be forced to act.

Until then, I blame the GOP.

Bring up the god damned impeachment and let them go down in history as opposing it. You impeach that bastard because he can and should be impeached not because he will be. You put your name down on where you stand so the folk who don't like your position can vote you out. You think those fucking scum bags are going to let that happen? You blame the assholes but I blame the cowards who won't bring impeachment up.

I can respect a man of principal. :thumbsup:

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: GrGr

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK, I don't like Bush.

Please cite the law and the instance along with evidence which is not hearsay which in fact makes a case strong enough to remove a sitting President.

No "should be" or "we must"

Cite the law violated, and the specific evidence (which op-eds are not)

Pretend you are an attorney trying to convince a Congressman that there is a substantial case IN LAW.

Whatcha got?

QFT. Being a disaster of a president, in and of itself, is not an impeachable offense.

If they wanted to they could make a laundry list a mile long.

Nixon was about to be impeached by the House of Representatives for misusing the CIA and FBI.

They found dirt on Clinton and grilled him until he lied under oath.

Bush could be had for domestic spying, war crimes, defrauding the US, any number of reasons really. Impeachement is very broad and sweeping.

Impeachment is a POLITICAL not legal procedure. It is up to CONGRESS to decide if the president is guilty of a High Crime or Misdemenour.

Actually, more poignantly, impeachment is a constitutional procedure. And it would be quite a stretch to define lying to the public as a high crime or misdemeanor.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Mursilis
QFT. Being a disaster of a president, in and of itself, is not an impeachable offense.

Going back to my first post, though it was ignored, I think creating a war in mistake IS an impeachable offense. Legal, illegal, forget those arguments - the damage done by his mistake is huge and it should very well be something Congress can impeach over.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
OK, I don't like Bush.

Please cite the law and the instance along with evidence which is not hearsay which in fact makes a case strong enough to remove a sitting President.

No "should be" or "we must"

Cite the law violated, and the specific evidence (which op-eds are not)

Pretend you are an attorney trying to convince a Congressman that there is a substantial case IN LAW.

Whatcha got?

You're right, but....

You shouldn't be able to stand up in a theatre and yell fire then get out of it by saying that you smelled smoke. That's basically what the Bush defenders are arguing.

Then you have Bush's use of secrecy, his use of executive orders and don't forget his pardoning of Scooter.

Did you really just offer use of the presidential pardon as grounds for impeachment?!? :shocked: :roll:

This is why Bush was president, and for 8 years - his followers may be idiots, but so are his criticis.

I didn't offer any reasons for impeachment, as a matter of fact I said it was "too little, too late" but do your feeble best to try to put words in my mouth. I just hope whoever gets elected decides to shine some more light on the whole situation.

Right here is the part of my post you so coniventley snipped out of what you quoted:

Maybe after this election whoever get's in can shine some light in places that we can't now, but right now it's a case of too little, too late to impeach Bush. I don't know what would be legal but if possible we should find a way to serve up a big healping of justice.

Now, do you have a point or do you just like typing?

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Mursilis
QFT. Being a disaster of a president, in and of itself, is not an impeachable offense.

Going back to my first post, though it was ignored, I think creating a war in mistake IS an impeachable offense. Legal, illegal, forget those arguments - the damage done by his mistake is huge and it should very well be something Congress can impeach over.

There was plenty of opposition toward US involvement in WWI, the Korean War, and Vietnam at the time too, and Vietnam (which has cost more lives than Iraq so far) is still considered a mistake by many. I find your criteria overbroad.

 

[Moonbeam]

A study of the fall of civilizations recently revealed that those that fall do so when the leaders are not accountable. If Bush can't be held accountable watch your civilization fall.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Mursilis
QFT. Being a disaster of a president, in and of itself, is not an impeachable offense.

Going back to my first post, though it was ignored, I think creating a war in mistake IS an impeachable offense. Legal, illegal, forget those arguments - the damage done by his mistake is huge and it should very well be something Congress can impeach over.

There was plenty of opposition toward US involvement in WWI, the Korean War, and Vietnam at the time too, and Vietnam (which has cost more lives than Iraq so far) is still considered a mistake by many. I find your criteria overbroad.

A war of aggression based on false evidence is criteria enough and not similar to your examples.

Also, please note the results of our actions. Iraq helped keep Iran in balance, and now we have empowered a self declared nemesis with nuclear and ballistic technology in heavy development. We?re in a very bad position now.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
at this point it's not worth spending the political capital to do so.

That's the sort of answer that has a breezy sort of informed sound to it, but is pretty much BS.

One, since when is the impeachment process tied to 'being worth political capital', not crimes?

Two, Nixon won the Presidency in 1972 by the largest margin in history at the time, as opposed to Bush's relatively close election, yet the Democrats were going to impeach him.

And then, they won the presidency the following term against an incumbent a year after the unpopular Vietnam war had ended.

Three, the Republicans did a baseless revenge impeachment against Clinton - and then (technically) won the presidency in 2000 with a goofball despite peace and prosperity.

 

[Bird222]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: OrByte
NO need to prove it to you then right?

since I guess lying to the public doesnt matter.

The Bush Administration lied. And you don't matter.

He went back on his Oath...do you remember that?

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

There is his lie. But again, you don't matter.

So, it should say "to the best of what the public thinks my ability" is?

Answer my assertion: Unless, of course, you can give an example of him lying UNDER OATH in ANY court of law.

Lying to the public is not an impeachable offense,

Thanks.

Why not impeach and let the Senate decide if he is guilty? We better do something about BushCo because if we don't it is gonna take that much longer to restore our standing in the world.