They wanted to Impeach Clinton over Ms Lewinsky, Bush Fraudulent about WMD is not sufficient to Impeach him?

Answer 1

not sure why would they do that because Cheany in not any better

Answer 2

Yes, there is a case for 'high crimes and midemeanors' against both the President and the Vice President. However, if the Democrats persue that option, they will spend the next two years on that, rather than taking care of our country.

The GOP abandoned issues like homeland defense, border security, terrorist threats, the economy and illegal immigration for almost two years to concentrate on "getting Clinton". They wasted huge amounts of tax-payer money because Clinton had been too successful. He'd built up a vibrant economy, had reduced our national debt every year he was in office, and had achieved a balanced budget. He had surpluses - the first time that had happened in 20 years. They HAD to take him down, and that was their entire focus.

Do you want the Democrats to be the same type of government? The fact is they couldn't impeach the President before the next election anyway, and he can't run again.

I want to see the Democrats strengthen our borders; implement the recommendations from the 9/11 commission (ignored by Bush); ensure all containers by ship and air coming into this country are scanned for explosives (ignored by GOP for six years), and get us out of Iraq - Bush's gift to his business friends at Haliberton.

Answer 3

There is plausible deniability there. Bush claims to have gotten faulty evidence, and George Tenet practically took the fall for that.

Also, it requires a 66% Senate vote for an impeachment to carry, so there's no sense in trying it with a 51% democrat majority there.

Better ground for impeachment is the domestic surveillence. It was judged illegal and unconstitutional on the same day that the news story about Jon Benet's murder stole the headlines a few months back. That means Bush knowingly broke the law.

Answer 4

Bush and his henchmen are definitely war criminals; Clinton is just over-sexed. Since when is that grounds for impeachment? No crime was committed.
Bush and his buddies have shown utter disregard for the US Constitution, the Supreme Court, international law, or the UN. There you go-- plenty of reasons for impeachment! Not to mention the impropriety of the Halliburton no-bid contracts; seems like a major conflict of interest to me. So, there are ethical questions, too.

Answer 5

Democracy is a ephemeral idea. Some people are able to dance around the very concept of what it stands for. Communism or Democracy at certain core levels they are similar in concepts. For the common man. Problem is in communism it seems more outwardly tyranical which is not to say the democratic model is not prone to abuse. Overwhelming evidence of incompetence is not enough to remove the diminutive Bush. A determined opponent is what he needs and unfortunately we are lacking anyone with enough clout to face this Napoleon.
He says Saddam was a tyrant. Look in the mirror dude. Same thing but just less obvious more subtle same final effect, controlled nationwide actions.

Answer 6

There are proposals to impeach Bush-- check them out. But impeachment is costly. Tell Nancy Pelosi that the people want impeachment

Answer 7

Bush should have been impeached years ago. Maybe he and his "Dick" will be charged for war crimes when the term has ended, huh? Just like they wanted to do to Rumsfield. They went over there and killed so many people, our people, for nothing. We should be in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Their charge, war crimes for oil.

Answer 8

strongly agree. and they spent 50 million dollars investigating Clintons sex life, and they spent half a million on the 911 commission, smells fishy.