They have all the reasons in the world to go for impeachment proceedings but they are saying its off the table. Do you think they are afraid of the Bush Crime family ? If the shoe was on the other foot the republicans would be relentless with impeachment. Remember what they did with Clinton over a simple oral sex scandal.
2006-11-14 07:13:50 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
NO CRIME???????? FAILING TO PROTECT 3,000 PLUS CITIZENS AS THEIR LEADER IS CRIMINAL IN MY BOOK AS WELL AS TAKING US TO WAR UNDER FALSE PRETENSESIN IRAQ!
2006-11-14 07:27:50 · update #1
well... it's actually a "first things first" attitude... I've heard some say that some investigations will be done... since few have been done...
and if those investigations turn up credible evidence... then I would think they would make some actions...
but right now, nothing has been investigated yet, so they are moving on with everything else...
2006-11-14 07:19:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It would be a waste of their time and it would make the Democrats look as bad as the Republicans did when they impeached Clinton. And they had a reason to impeach Clinton. Even if the House decided to impeach Bush, they don't have the 2/3 necessary in the Senate to remove him. It would only hurt their own image.
2006-11-14 07:17:26 · answer #2 · answered by Chris J 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, I don't think they are afraid of the Bushes. I think that, with only two years left in his term and his forced return to acting like an elected official and not a dictator, that they have more important business to attend to. It's clear what the majority of the nation thinks of George Bush - wow, a 31% approval rating, ouch lol. We've got his number now, let's not waste time with tying up the Congress with impeachment proceedings when we need to desperately address the war, the economy and terrorism. I'm not a Democrat, but I respect the prevailing good sense of the moderate Democrats in this area and part of the reason I voted Democratic this time was exactly this reason. When Pelosi said that was off the table before the election even took place, I was very happy they would not run the route of the Republicans before them and go after the President out of revenge. I hold no love for GW, I think he's an incompetent and dangerous blowhard with illusions of grandeur. But, they are doing just what they need to do, simmer down the hotheads and attend to our country's business.
2006-11-14 07:21:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
You saw what the Republicans did to Foley and anyone of them that broke the law.
However, in the case of Bush this goes to his ideology, not any act of crime. The Law can not be based on your whim that is why the Dems are not going to impeach. They think they have a shot at the white house. Imagine if they could be impeached on ideology. Libs would be gone and more moderate Dems would come into office.
Your Problem is with Moderate Dems. There more grounded then the pot smoking Libs.
2006-11-14 07:30:25 · answer #4 · answered by marcus93257 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Impeaching the president would be a waste of time, effort, energy, and resources. Why not demonstrate a willingness to stick to the sink full of dirty dishes and show the people that they are capable of running an efficient government. That would be enough of a change and wouldn't make a huge spectacle which is what many think they want to see. We don't have the attention span for a proceeding of that length, besides it would detract from the task at hand which is demonstrating to the American people a willingness to work on the task at hand.
2006-11-14 07:17:59 · answer #5 · answered by shrill alarmist, I'm sure 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are afraid that Bush will stop covering-up for Clinton.
Bush has the facts that would cause Clinton to be charged with treason.
Now, if the Democrats find out that Bush has destroyed the information that Clinton was a Traitor, they will go ahead and try to impeach him.
2006-11-14 07:20:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
All the reasons in the world? How about an actual crime? That's the ONLY reason for impeachment, and it is one reason you have NOTHING to impeach him for.
Follow my logic. No crime, no impeachment. Was that too fast for you?
Clinton lied under oath and obstructed justice. These are known as CRIMES. It doesn't matter what he perjured himself for, just the fact that he lied is the crime.
To proceed with a call for impeachment would require them having something to impeach him for. All they have in their hands, besides their limp *****, is a bunch of "I hate Bush" and "War for Oil", hardly the stuff of legal (or intellectual) merit.
--------------
Failing to have prevented 9/11 is a 'crime'?
Then are you saying that Clinton's failure to protect against the OK City bombing and the 1st WTC bombing were crimes? How about the assault and murder of the Branch Davidians in Waco? How about the unprovoked attack on Serbia? Where were the 1,000's of dead Kosovars in mass graves, that was one of the reasons given for the bombing of Serbian civilians targets? And thus Clinton's 1998 bombing campaign against Iraq, based on similar intelligence that Bush received, is that also a crime?
Or am I asking too much of you by throwing facts and reason at your absurd beliefs?
2006-11-14 07:19:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It would waste too much of their time. They have slim majorities and only have 2 years to get ready for a presidential election. Bush is now a Lame Duck President and they have their eyes set on a bigger prize.
2006-11-14 07:16:41 · answer #8 · answered by STEVE S 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Why would they need to? Not to mention, Bush couldn't be more uncomfortable with a Blue Congress to work with. The firing- oops, "resignation" of Donald Rumsfeld could tell you that.
2006-11-14 07:19:17 · answer #9 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Last time I checked, you needed a valid reason to impeach someone.
Sorry, "I don't like him" does not count.
2006-11-14 07:18:06 · answer #10 · answered by Dr. Quest 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋