Is getting Bush out of power that necessary that making Cheney the official President and allowing him to appoint his VP (with advice and consent of the Senate) a better alternative?
2006-09-27 04:40:37 · 34 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I don't really believe this is a posibility, I am not pro-impeachment, I just threw out the idea to see if the pro-impeachment crowd new what they were asking for. But just say that Bush is impeached and before the Senate approves Cheney's nomination for VP, if the Republican's retain the HOR, then Dennis Hastert assumes the Presidency. If the Democrats win the House in November (which is liekly) then my guess would be Pelosi would be named speaker and she would take over as President.
2006-09-27 04:56:51 · update #1
(I know I just misspelled knew as new in the paragraph above, save yourself the trouble of pointing it out ad nauseum.)
2006-09-27 04:58:01 · update #2
Love it Jesi..,keep up the good work.I think thats what the libs are pushing for isnt it lol?
2006-09-27 04:48:27 · answer #1 · answered by halfbright 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I agree with Super Shiraz, pro-impeachment types are hoping that Democrats take over both houses, in which case they'll go after both Bush and Cheney.
They might even want to go after both if the Democrats only take over the Senate - figuring that an impeachment of that magnitude will destroy any chance Dennis Hastert would have of getting anything accomplished.
It would take a year or more to go through the impeachment process, Hastert wouldn't have a chance to to be President very long.
2006-09-27 14:21:39 · answer #2 · answered by Will 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The process of impeachment will bring to light information that will almost certainly implicate Cheney. In any case things will not get worse because Cheney is already effectively in charge of the Administration - clearly George W. Bush couldn't organize a snort up in a cocaine factory (though he seems high on something)
An impeachment process will force important issues in to the media may help jolt many complacent Americans out of their slumber.
2006-09-27 04:51:58 · answer #3 · answered by Bring back Democracy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well thats the reason why impeachment is such a difficult and double edged tool to wield in a democracy.
The nation facing the impeachment option must be willing to take a risk on the next guy in line. Of course they can attempt to remove the next guy, or even the next two or three guys in line. But I would then ask: Who's in charge now?
Any impeachment attempt (and for that matter any government policy) should be approached cautiously and rationally... unless you're willing to take emergency elections (if thats even possible).
2006-09-27 04:53:04 · answer #4 · answered by betterdeadthansorry 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, It's not a better alternative at all.
This impeach Bush stuff is pointless, I agree.
That's why I think it's important for everyone to vote: we need to actually pass a law requiring everyone to vote such as in Australia.
If only everyone had access to all the third party candidates and what they stand for, and if only our corrupt elections system would allow ALL candidates to debate with the two headed monster in a public forum.
When that isn't allowed, what are we to think about how this thing is run?
2006-09-27 04:47:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Jesi, u have put a scary though in my mind over the weekend!
Can we do a "buy one get one free" scheme? Can Bush not be impeached, and both Cheney and he goes together? Cheney is any way the evil brain behind the presidency.
2006-09-27 04:50:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, nobody seems to like Dick Cheney. I can think of two reasons.
#1 - He doesn't smile a lot. Matter of fact, he reminds me of another damn smart businessman named Lee Iacocca.
#2 - He was the CEO of Halliburton, which (despite all the darts and arrows slung against it), is a world-class engineering firm which is indispensible to America and which was awarded some non-competitive contracts by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers because no other company in the U.S. could do the job. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to name one, but you'd better know what you're talking about, because I DO and I can tell everyone why you are wrong.
2006-09-27 05:22:44 · answer #7 · answered by senior citizen 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can relax. Bush won't be impeached or removed from office. If you don't like the current president, you can thank our forefathers for having the insight to limit the presidential term to 4 years.
2006-09-27 04:46:40 · answer #8 · answered by bardstale 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Cheney is Bush's impeachment insurance.
And just to clarify, an impeachment doesn't mean removal from office. It's an indictment, and then there has to be a trial.
Clinton was impeached, but was not convicted.
2006-09-27 04:49:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If investigation were ever opened on the Bush Administration the whole executive branch would fall. Everyone realizes that would be bad for the country on a global level so these investigations will never take place.
2006-09-27 04:58:44 · answer #10 · answered by DEEJay 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
impeachment does not get the President out of the office, it is sort of a write-up. Although if impeached, it is best for the President to resign on his own, and save a little bit of dignity.
2006-09-27 06:04:40 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋