They sometimes talk about Bush lying under oath, but in which concrete cases is that supposed to have happened?
2006-10-07 07:30:50 · 17 answers · asked by me 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Basicaly its anything they can think of.
But they won't because all these nuts who think he's done things wrong don't want the real evidence to come out because he would be cleared and they would look like exactly what they are,,,,, nuts.
2006-10-07 07:35:17 · answer #1 · answered by chupakabra123 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It never happened. In fact, the times that they accuse him of lying WERE lies. They have no proof of any of their accusations. Notice that they are saying all this stuff they are going to do towards impeaching Bush when they are in power? All they are saying, in a subtle way, is that they are going to go on all these witch hunts. These commislamic fascists actually hate Bush and will do their damnedest to destroy him and his family. They will, as they are doing now, lie, speak half truths, cast innuendos and do any despicable thing they can to "get even" because GW beat them in two different elections.
2006-10-07 08:17:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
so a ways curiously Bush knowingly lied approximately sending us into Iraq. no longer unsuitable intelligence. mendacity. that's an impeachable offense. the percentages of the impeachment dealing with are narrow considering that Bush has conveniently granted himself retroactive immunity to any rates. You the two have concepts harm or are heavily delusional in case you do no longer think of Bush has committed crimes.
2016-12-08 10:10:40 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the Democrats re-take control of congress, it won't be just the liberals wanting to impeach Bush. Moderates and even many conservatives will join in the impeachment movement as well. What are his "high crimes and misdemeanors"? Almost too numerous to print here. Let's just start with not not defending or protecting the Constitution. How about reckless incomptence and his fitness to serve? I don't want to bore you, but if I reallly have to answer this question, you haven't been paying attention.
2006-10-07 07:40:30 · answer #4 · answered by PrimeConcern 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Liberals want to Impeach Bush for being a man of his word and for defending the United States from enemy's foreign and domestic.
Bush proved that character matters and the Democrats have none.
2006-10-07 07:32:06 · answer #5 · answered by Shiraz Syrah 1 · 1⤊ 3⤋
The liberals do not have one shred of evidence on impeaching President Bush except for a bunch of made up lies!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-10-07 07:39:32 · answer #6 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
He's unable to keep a straight lie about why we're in Iraq, he let massive damage happen to the nation, Katrina and New York (9/11) in particular. And that's not including Abu Garib and Guantanamo Bay.
2006-10-07 07:41:45 · answer #7 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
there isn't evidence period because it didn't happen. There is no "war crime" here. There is no lying under oath...that was the previous administration. Liberals have creative memory.
2006-10-07 07:33:51 · answer #8 · answered by Stormy 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Pre-emptive war on a country based on shaky if not fabricated evidence to do so.--
Defying the Geneva conventions.
2006-10-07 07:38:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
He hasnt lied under oath.
He could be tried with war crimes.
2006-10-07 07:32:31 · answer #10 · answered by stephaniemariewalksonwater 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋