We hear a lot of "Impeach Bush!" Can somebody tell me what he's done that justifies impeachment?

Question

He's a bad speaker. Is that all?
Bad policy won't get you booted, just unpopular.
If you think he lied about the war, then why are you supporting your Congress who overwhelmingly voted for the war. Maybe you should be mad at them instead for not fully reading the legislation. Also remember that there are tapes of Dems saying that Saddam has WMD's.
If he needs to be impeached, then why aren't there any charges being brought?
And dont bring up Clinton either. Remember, he was on trial for impeachment for lying to the Grand Jury investigation, not for his involvement with Ms. Lewinsky.

Answer 1

I've asked this many times and no body gives any reason besides their looney consiracy web sites

Answer 2

I often think we would be better off without him at the helm, he had congressional approval for the war, so maybe we could impeach them all, I believe but can not prove he has committed some crimes in office, however prrof is the burden, and I think we're stuck like chuck for 2 more years, just because I disagree with him and think we should have gone after Saudi Arabia and Bin Ladden rather than bog down in his daddy's war, doesnt mean I have found crimianl grounds,recaling yes I beolieve we should be allowed to recall any offical and then Id say yeah. We cant prove he knew about 911 before hand, covered it up, as underlings did that, cant prove many of the things I somewhat believe to be true where he is concerned, like rigging the election of 2000,. Lying to the public isnt a crime, and hes covered his but on other legal issues I am afraid. The wiretapping thing we cant even get him on as congress authorised it!

Answer 3

I think that the truth is far more convoluted and complex. Halliburton and the Carlyle Group are my reasons for believing this. The involvement of this administration in those two groups is very suspicious to me. Congress was lied to, but why? Was it because George W. hated Saddam Husein because he threatened to kill his father? If so, why?This goes back to the Gulf War. Why did Daddy Bush get the US involved? Did it have something to do with propping up the price of oil? If so it worked. It has worked again with Iraq. We need much more information on this subject in order to understand if impeachment is appropriate. However, if it is, it should not be just brought against George W. but also against Dick Cheney.

Answer 4

He has butchered the English language in cold blood. For this offense, impeachment is too good for him. He should be tied up and forced to watch re-runs of Laverne and Shirley. Iraq is truly Bush's war. It is a war of choice not necessity. W's own father warned about getting too involved over there. A friend of mine lost his son over there. As a former Marine I hate to see other Marines fight in a conflict where the reasons for being there keep changing and for which there are no clear definitions of what winning is and no exit strategy. Unfortunately, incompetence is not an impeachable offense.

Answer 5

Since the previous GOP Congress has NEVER held any meaningful hearings into ALLEGED war profiteering by corps such as Halliburton, never held hearings into tweaking of CIA intelligence that justified the invasion of Iraq, never held hearings into the possible coverup of authorization of torture of prisoners, never held an inquiry into authorization of illegal wiretapping and survelance on US citizens, never fully explained the outing of a CIA agent to the press by a WH official . . . who knows?

The point of IMPEACHMENT is not the removal of the President per se, but the full investigation of the numerous questions that have arisen throughout the last six years regarding the conduct of foreign policy by this administration which may or may not have violated the Constitution or criminal law.

Even the Republican Senator from Oregon has stated publically that the invasion of Iraq may have involved 'criminal' activity. Such allegations, from a member of the president's own party, are worthy of full investigation. The Constitutional oversight requirements of Congress demand it.

Answer 6

The fact of the matter is that all the people screaming for impeachment simply do not care that no violations of the law actually occurred.

And in so doing they are proposing that we ignore the US Constitution.

Answer 7

Bush has exceeded his powers as President and undermined our system of checks & balances. He has been responsible for warrantless wiretapping contrary to the law, kept Congress out of their proper supervisory position, violated Habeaus Corpus, detentions without Due Process, and suborning torture. All that and he started a war based on lies-- whether the Democrats believed him and voted for it is immaterial.

Of course, all that is not as significant as lying about a bl0wjob...

Answer 8

His signing memos, his stacking trade agreements with text that would limit US sovereignity over disputes and immigration.

For that matter, I think Congress acted unconstitutionaly when it gave him 'fast track' trade authority. The separation of powers is to protect the people of the US, not the Congress, and it takes a Constitutional amendment to change that. The Supreme Court can't just say 'yeah, Congress, go ahead and decide for yourself if laws are constitutional' for example.

Fast track authority as a practical matter eliminates the power of Congressional oversight of trade with other countries.

Answer 9

we actually have a president that is looking out for Americans everywhere and now people are ticked off at him.. man who knew that Americans can be so utterly indecisive about our leader... by the way i am an American and proud of it

Answer 10

Well, I think spying on Americans without a warrant is illegal. Fourth amendment in the Bill of Rights. One could easily argue that many American's rights were ignored.