2006-08-24
13:40:47
·
28 answers
·
asked by
itsallover
5
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
They found wmd's..That wasnt a lie
2006-08-24
13:44:59 ·
update #1
Clinton lied under oath, its called perjury..
2006-08-24
13:46:02 ·
update #2
Dont insult serpents Skerry...
2006-08-24
13:47:14 ·
update #3
Your right jnglfishing,..He still hasnt found Osama..Clinton had him OFFERED to him after he blew up our embassies and USS COLE, Clinton didnt want him.Clintons fault for 9-11..
2006-08-24
13:53:51 ·
update #4
Wake up surrounded,..your dreaming up shitz
2006-08-24
13:55:55 ·
update #5
►Because their narrow little minds tend to believe if we tuck our tails and run out of Iraq like good little boys and girls, then they'll leave us alone. So, they think Bush is keeping us in there just for the heck of it. Obviously, they watch too much CNN, which is a liberal news station.
►Second, they honestly think that we're over there for oil. Bush tried to get them to drill in Alaska when he first came into office.......OH NO those Liberals and the EPA wouldn't allow him to do that. So now, they're blaming him for the gas prices going up. I don't like to pay the high price either, that's just the way it is during any kind of war. I'm not blaming Bush for it. That would be like blaming him for 9/11. That's totally absurd!
►As for Clinton, well I was having a good day until u mentioned him. LOL I never could stand that idiot! He was the most two-faced individual I have ever seen. They should've prosecuted him on treason a long time ago! Not to mention, if Clinton would've taken Osama Bin Laden when he was given to him, we wouldn't be where we're at today! Ask Col. Ollie North!!!!
►And if anybody out there is stupid enough to believe that Hillary is just a good old fashioned wife that stands by her husband, you're crazy. She used ol' Bill to get elected and she'll continue using him to get re-elected.
2006-08-24 14:01:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by KD 3
·
1⤊
6⤋
Spying on citizens is breaking the 1st amendment. Finding an empty shell in Iraq doesnt mean there are WMD in iraq which i know you like to believe. Making up evidence to fight a war may not be impeachable but it should be and Bush should admit there were NO ties with Al Quieda and iraq. Clinton lies his wife gets hurt Bush lies and 3,000 soldiers die hmmmmm which is worse
2006-08-24 21:32:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sundown 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
Liberals are dumbasses just like the conservatives. But the liberals are right that Bush sucks at his job. He's the reason for the violence going on in the entire middle east. If he had stayed out of Iraq, Saddam would have still been in charge, but at least the balance he created between all the muslim radicals would have remained and there would be no civil war in Iraq, and no war between Israel and Lebanon/Syria/Iran/everyone else in the middle east.
2006-08-24 20:51:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by Crimson King 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
It's not a liberal issue. But Bush has broken lots of federal laws. And several federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have verified this.
Read 50 U.S.C. §1801 et al. (FISA) Warrantless wiretapping is illegal if anyone US citizen or resident alien is a party to the conversation. Then read 18 U.S.C. § 2511: Compliance with FISA "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance... may be conducted". Unless authorized by court order, or within one of the narrow exceptions, warrantless wiretapping is a felony offense, punishable by up to five years per violation.
Read 18 U.S.C. §2441. Violations of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention are defined as War Crimes by US federal law. The Supreme Court has determined that Bush has directly ordered hundreds of that federal statute.
Bush has admitted to the above actions. And been found by federal courts to have committed them. What more do you want?
Article II Section 4. "The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
2006-08-24 20:43:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
4⤊
4⤋
I agree with don. He went in and blew up a country that was suppose to have wars of mass destruction? NEVER FOUND IT.
He went in there because it was "family" related starting with his father. Dont know which one is dumber! Hes all about making money for the rich including OIL. It is illegal to tap peoles phones..
I would rather have Clinton back in office. I could care less if he had "sex" with Monica!! He and Hillary have to deal with that anyways. BTW he still hasnt found Osama yet..
2006-08-24 20:49:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by brock 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
They found wmds? What bizarro news are you watching? Do you mean the degraded weapons that never wouldhave actually worked? That they found with the *first* gulf war? lol. Seriously, time to expand your knowledge a little bit and not just believe everything that liars like O'Reilly and Limbaugh spoonfeed you. Isn't being spoonfed a little emasculating?
2006-08-24 20:47:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
Like you, I disagree with the whole impeach Bush thing, but I guess I'm a little behind: what laws did Clinton break?
2006-08-24 20:44:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Elizabeth 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
I believe wire-tapping without a warrant is still considered illegal.
Instead of upholding the Constitution as he promised when inaugurated, he refers to it as a goddamned piece of paper.
They found WMD's from the '90's of which the Bush administration clearly admits are not the WMD's that we invaded Iraq over. Check your facts, even Faux News reported that one.
2006-08-24 20:43:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by Pitchow! 7
·
4⤊
3⤋
Any laws?
You mean FISA? Or the Constitution?
2006-08-25 13:31:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by Zhimbo 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because they're damned degenerates that think adulterous liars are heroes and people who defend freedom/America are evil.
Liberals are serpents.
Coragryph, LMAO.. You're a comical liberal. Take it up with congress who write the laws. As always Cora, neal on common sense. When have the Geneva conventions applied to guerillas who hide behind children? The GCs apply to nations and their militaries not guerillas. It's totally amazing how we have "intellectual" law philosophers wanting to scrutinize each word to find someone guilty who is defending America. Maybe they can scream "GENEVA CONVENTIONS" really loud in a Burkha? Damn! It's too bad we had to get a COURT ORDER for a phone call that lasts 30-60 seconds.
2006-08-24 20:46:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
6⤋