Isn't it PAST DUE that we, the People, should demand the Impeachment of George W. Bush for crimes in office?

Question

For starters, invading another country on false pretenses is grounds for impeachment. Also, the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution essentially says that the people have the right to be secure against unreasonable government searches and seizures and that no search warrants shall be issued without probable cause that a crime has been committed. And the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) requires that warrants for national security wiretaps be authorized by the secret FISA court. The law says that it is a crime for government officials to conduct electronic surveillance outside the exclusive purviews of that law or the criminal wiretap statute. President Bush’s authorization of the monitoring of Americans’ e-mails and phone calls by the National Security Agency (NSA) without even the minimal protection of FISA court warrants is clearly unconstitutional and illegal. Executive searches without judicial review violate the unique checks and balances that the nation’s

founders created in the U.S. government and are a considerable threat to American liberty. Furthermore, surveillance of Americans by the NSA, an intelligence service rather than a law enforcement agency, is a regression to the practices of the Vietnam-era, when intelligence agencies were misused to spy on anti-war protesters—another impeachable violation of peoples’ constitutional rights by LBJ and Nixon.

President Bush defiantly admits initiating such flagrant domestic spying but contends that the Congress implicitly authorized such activities when it approved the use of force against al Qaeda and that such actions fit within his constitutional powers as commander-in-chief. But the founders never intended core principles of the Constitution to be suspended during wartime. In fact, they realized that it was in times of war and crisis that constitutional protections of the people were most at risk of usurpation by politicians,

who purport to defend American freedom while actually undermining it.
The Bush administration’s FBI has also expanded its use of national security letters to examine the personal records of tens of thousands of Americans who are not suspected of being involved in terrorism or even illegal acts.
Apparently the president is also taking us back to the Vietnam era by monitoring anti-war protesters. Information on peaceful anti-war demonstrations has apparently found its way into Pentagon databases on possible threats to U.S. security.
Finally, the president’s policies on detainees in the “war on terror” probably qualify as impeachable offenses. The Bush administration decided that the “war on terror” exempted it from an unambiguous criminal law and international conventions (which are also the law of the land) preventing torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners. An American president permitting torture is both disgraceful

An American president permitting torture is both disgraceful and ineffective in getting good information from those held. Furthermore, the administration concocted the fictitious category of “enemy combatants” to deprive detainees of the legal protections of either the U.S. courts or “prisoner-of-war” status. The administration then tried to detain these enemy combatants, some of them American citizens, indefinitely without trial, access to counsel, or the right to have courts to review their cases.

All of these actions are part of President Bush’s attempt to expand the power of presidency during wartime—as if the imperial presidency hadn’t been expanded enough by his recent predecessors. President Bush usually gets the Attorney General or the White House Counsel to agree with his usurpation of congressional and judicial powers, but, of course, who in the executive is going to disagree with their boss? According to the Washington Post, the Bush

administration describes the president’s war making power under the Constitution as “plenary”—meaning absolute. The founders would roll over in their graves at this interpretation of a document that was actually designed to limit the presidential war power, resulting from their revulsion at the way European monarchs easily took their countries to war and foisted the costs—in blood and treasure—on their people. Conservative Bob Barr, a former Congressman from Georgia who was quoted in the Post, said it best: “The American people are going to have to say, ‘Enough of this business of justifying everything as necessary for the war on terror.’ Either the Constitution and the laws of this country mean something or they don’t. It is truly frightening what is going on in this country.”
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1639

Will read it later il jack - No I didn't know ! Very interesting.
ISN'T IT amazing who almost every Neocon or Rightist who answers a question like this sounds angry as all hell at the notion that I'm even ALLOWED to post the question and screams "SHUTUP!" or "You're UN-American" -
Are Neocons the new House Un-American activities committee?
ROFL! Very consistent with my notion (though it may be wrong) that most Republicans on the far right and their supporters are emotionally underdeveloped people.

Answer 1

For Loubean, Nicolasraage, antipater, WildandFree and ginafor4u:

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
--Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. "
--Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

These two men anticipated sheeple like you and said these things. You are a most un-American person.

For the person who said he has the weight of the country on his shoulders, well my friend, no one forced him to take the weight on. He claimed he can do it and so he ran for office, so if he can't do it, he is liable to be criticized. If you hire and man to mow your lawn and find out he can't mow your lawn, do you still keep him or do you fire him?

Answer 2

Impeachment of Bush was started over a year ago. Where were you all this time? Googgle it, you can read articles for impeachment.
Impeachment will move forward when we control the house after November. If you recall Clinton was impeached in the House and they knew full well the Senate would not convict. They did the deed just before election time for president. The Republicans also knew full well that the House impeachment was un-constitutional and would not stand that test in the High Court, they did nor care, all they wanted was to drag Clinton into the mud before elections. Seems to have worked then well.
BTW, Cheney and Bush are both draft dodgers, they could care less how many die in war. They also care less about the 300,000 civilians in Iraq who are dead, they also don't care about the 2587 brave Americans killed for no good reason. Or the 18,000 wounded. They care about tax cuts for the wealthy, that way you pay the $2 trillion cost of war. Republicans that don't care about all the harm bush has done would vote for him again if they could. All they care about tax cuts for the wealthy.
Btw, GuitarGadfly, it took me a while but I finally came to the answer. Neocons, right wingers, Republicans are stupid. There is nothing I can do about stupid people. They are alos not well educatied and don't read much. They prefer to be spoon fed by FOX and Rush. They also always ask others to do the dirty work for them. While like Bush, Cheney and Rice, they hide in war.
read also "Against all enemies" by Richrad Clark. A real hero.

Answer 3

Definitely! Nixon did not do as much as Bush has. The US has been disgraced enough! We are no better than the countries we are invading and pushing our laws upon. What about the throwing of the election- not once, but twice! Thank you to all you people who did not vote for Al Gore who would have stopped the pollution that is now causing so many problems due to the O Zone depletion. Some called him a "tree hugger", but if there are no tress to hug, what are you going to do then hug the money you made from polluting for profit!

Answer 4

We are protected against UNREASONABLE searches and seizures...the Bush administration is behaving perfectly reasonable during wartime. We did not go into Iraq under false pretenses...it may be a lack of communication, or the WMD's have yet to be located.
The Bush administration is not monitoring the average American's emails...he doesn't know your yahoo address, so relax. But our civil rights can be mildly impeded when circumstances require...would you rather have another 9/11, or let the President hear your phone call to your Grandma?

Answer 5

Impeachment is surely not the answer...the last thing we need is to "Exploit Our President, Our Leader" It is a shame that we are exploiting our Military Men however...this is a "Time Of War" we are dealing with heartless, ruthless brain-wasted people, who have no value for life...and then we send our American Sons & Daughters there to fight for a problem and cause not of our making, not worth fighting for...this is a "Tradgedy" A Shame" for our country...and what makes us look so bad and play into their hands, is when we let "The Press" take pictures and record the
retaliation on part of our Military..the worst thing that ever happened...is when we did not limit the press...keep them friom exploited out men and cause this shame. The press is political as is everthing dealing with dollars and that is all they are there for...President Bush should have put his foot down and stopped our press from going inside our Military Sites and as President, realizing this is a war "Remembering the Geneva Convention..this is not the way to treat our Military...we are putting our men thru HELL! and for what? No! no Impeachment! If you have some time and inergy to spare...do what I tell all our Countrymen and Women...make our Congress work for us...get off their asses and earn their salaries...BRING OUR MEN AND WOMEN HOME!...but until then, protect their means of survival and keep the press OUT!

Answer 6

The initiative to realize this (presuming that there is a sturdy case to be made) could desire to come from the Democratic participants of Congress. The media circuses of Watergate and OMG the Pres have been given a BJ did little sturdy (and doubtless even undesirable) for the social gathering who initiated technique. possibly the Democratic social gathering is extra in touch concerning to the 2008 election and does not want to open themselves to the GOP snarking that is inevitable in any election 365 days impeachment technique.

Answer 7

Ugh, you liberals are really starting to sicken me. Why are you so quick to defend terrorists, and so quick to condemn those trying to stop them.

For starters, we did not "invade" another country on false pretneses. All of your liberal hero's agreed with this:
http://answers.yahoo.com/my/profile;_ylt=Am06oIIs9YmzlGuV5LMswIwezKIX?show=0be40883cda87908f53a4d31aa8c04c9aa
And we are fighting WITH the majority of the Iraqi people, not against them.

During a time of war, phone calls to enemy countries can be monitored, and every president has done this since WWII.

When you say monitoring calls/ emails, I believe you mean keeping record of it, so if someone is found to have ties to terrorism, their fellow terrorists can be found. There is nothing illegal about it. Have you ever heard of the police looking at someones phone records during murder investigations?


GET OVER IT!!!! Thank God that someone like Bush is protecting you instead of your coward, traitorous Kerry.

Answer 8

This is quite a rant, however, the President has never engaged in an impeachable offense, and it is neither past due nor warranted. Let's just say this: there are seven major conflicts in the world, and all of them, save Darfur, have one element in common....islamic fanaticism (which is really a misnomer, because the vast majority of islamic people want to kill western values, and subjugate its people...much as they have in countries they control).

So if we need to spy on them and engage in pre-emptive war to prevent these terrorists from killing people, then so be it. Remember, if you are not doing anything wrong...you have nothing to fear. Thanks for coming out.

Answer 9

Action should have occurred right after the 2000 election. Hordes of right-wing lawyers descended on Florida to bully the election their way. Thousands of people should have been in the streets letting the future junta know that they were not going to hijack the election. I am ashamed that we let this cabal take over and do to my country and the world, what they ended up doing. We should demand that the entire junta resign immediately.

Answer 10

It won't happen because it is up to the Senate to bring impeachment procedings. Since the Senate is under Repub control, nothing will be done. Vote Dem in Nov. and maybe we can toss these criminals out.