Should Bush be impeached? Or tried after his presidency for crimes against humanity?

Answer 1

Do a Yahoo search for Depleted Uranium Weapons to answer once and for all any questions about crimes against humanity.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8771242169036524915&q=Depleted+Uranium+weapons&hl=en

Answer 2

properly first of all the form would not enable for a spiritual impeachment. "The President, vice chairman and all civil officers of america, would be removed from workplace on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or different severe Crimes and Misdemeanors." uncertain that any of those have been violated. As for William Jefferson Clinton...the domicile of Representatives impeached President Clinton on December 19, 1998, on grounds of perjury to a grand jury (balloting 228-206) and obstruction of justice (221-212). 2 different articles of impeachment failed — a 2nd count form of perjury in the Paula Jones case (205-229), and one accusing Clinton of abuse of capability (148-285). The Senate impeachment trial lasted from January 7, 1999, till February 12. No witnesses have been called for the time of the trial. A 2-thirds majority, sixty seven votes, could have been mandatory to eliminate the President from workplace. the two costs have been defeated: perjury (40 5-fifty 5) and obstruction of justice (50-50).

Answer 3

I dont think he should be impeached, at this length into his presidency whats the use or sense of it. Also Clinton was impeached for nonsense. If people tried to impeach Bush then what? Republicans would turn around and try to impeach the next democrat president, democrats would try to impeach the next republican president - it could be a never ending thing just being done out of revenge and spite.
Regardless, anyone who thinks Bush is doing a great job needs their head pulled out of their asses more than Bush needs impeached.

Answer 4

No. If anyone has fallen down on the job it has been Congress, both the GOP and the Dems. The president yeilds 1/3 of the power in this nation. Don't forget that the majority was for the war prior to the percieved problems in Iraq. Americans have a very short memory. Has Verdun been forgotten?

Answer 5

Bush should not be impeached.

He should be left in place where he will continue to screw up everything he comes near, and will dig a hole so deep he can drag the entire Republican party into it.

And for all you experts in international law who say Bush has not committed any crimes against humanity:

Under the Nuremberg Principles and the Geneva Conventions planning a war of aggression is a crime against humanity.

Answer 6

The reason why talks of having bush impeached or tried for some abstract crime havent gone any further than talking is because there is nothing to charge him with. If you want to see him tried so badly, you take the time out to come up with some actual incidences to charge him with and track down the evidence yourself. If you do this I only ask that you dont make all of your ilk look like ****** idiots by saying that you "dont like him" or being too general in your claims. Courts and committees like specifics and evidence.

Answer 7

Let's do it. Oh, but wait. Shouldn't we also impeach and try Kennedy and Johnson for Vietnam? What about Roosevelt for the various "attrocities" in World War II? What about Truman for dropping the Bomb? How many innocent people is Abraham Lincoln responsible for killing? Remember Sherman's March to the Sea in the Civil War? What about John Kerry's role in Vietnam? How many innocent people did we accidentally kill in Somalia when troops were sent there by Clinton? Should we try him as well?

I'm not defending Bush's policy. I did once, but now I realize my error. But he hasn't done anything to be impeached for. Poor policy is punished at the ballot box. High Crimes and Misdeamnors are punished with impeachment.

As for crimes against humanity, what Bush has done doesn't merit it. Making war against someone, even for a stupid reason, doesn't merit it. You have to wilfully cause genocide or be responsible for the killing or rape of numerous innocent people that could not be avoided. Think Hitler. He set up at system whereby there were 20,000 camps and other detention centers in which millions and millions of innocent people were killed, enslaved, imprisoned, and brutalized. 20,000 seperate places where people were held or ultimately imprisoned. 20,000 places throughout Europe!!!! And, among other ethnic groups, two out of every three Jews died during this period. 2/3rds of European Jews died!!!! Bush doesn't even compare.

Bush may have done stupid stuff. We can question his judgment and his handling of the war in Iraq and even the decision to go into Iraq. We can question his leadership of men who ultimately harmed prisoners of war. But what he did was no crimes against humanity. He wasn't trying to kill innocent Iraqis. That may be the result of his policies, but it wasn't his intention. He was trying to make America safer and get revenge on the terrorists.

Would I like to see a change in Administration? Absolutely. Do I think it is wise to impeach and try Bush. Absolutely, not!!! If we do it, the next time a democrat falls on his face, he'll be the next in line to be impeached and tried. So all politicians will be so concerned about avoiding impeachment and trial that they'll constantly cover their rear ends and then we'll get even less good stuff done in Washington than we do now.

Answer 8

The framers of the constitution actually believed that the process of impeachment would be invoked much more often than it is, or ever has been. But that isn't your question.

Bush ought to be impeached, but I don't see it happening. The problem is, we have a person who lies (not like politicians are steretyped for lying, but he truly LIES about what he is doing, or what he has said) and is completely untrustworthy.

He ought to be impeached, but the Democrats are still sore from taking the pipe with Clinton.

Answer 9

Yes
Bush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq.
Bush conducted illegal wiretaps of American citizens.
Bush violated International Law by invading a sovereign country for illegal purposes.
Bush violated the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners of war.
Bush held prisoners without formal charges and without legal representation. [1]
Bush used government funds for domestic political propaganda. [NYT] [2]
The Bush team used uniformed military personnel for Republican party political purposes. [1] [2]
Bush was negligent in his slow response to help victims of Hurricane Katrina.
Bush shows contempt towards our Constitution and our democratic ideals.
See also our page on "Grounds for Impeachment".

Answer 10

Bush should be impeached.

I don't have my links right on hand... other computer... but there is a quite a long list of his violations.

It goes as far back to 2002 where he knowingly lied to congress about Iraqi WMD intelligence. It also goes through his use of rendition to allow torture, his 'attempt' to redefine the Geneva Convention... all the way up to his directly violating the constitution he took an oath to uphold.

He has committed crimes against the constitution of which the Supreme Court slapped him around about last July in their ruling on G. Bay prisoners. Without my notes, I can't give you specifics but the Supreme Court has ruled against him 3 times now as violations... not to mention what most of the public is not aware of, the ICC, International Criminal Court, has pending charges.

Answer 11

I dont know if you could say he has committed any crimes but i do think he should be booted out of office for complete and total lack of leadership-a complete failure in leading the country through some very troublesome times. Ignoring documents detailing a upcoming attack on America (Bin Laden determined to attack) For making very bad decisions, leading us into a war on faulty intelligence, the buck should stop with him on that one. There is more than enough failures on his part to remove his entire staff from office, but it will never happen.