Sandy Berger is a criminal.
2007-01-29 05:45:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
I don't think the democrats hold a large enough majority to start impeachment proceedings. And even if they could somehow pull it off history has shown that an impeached president has never been removed from office. Bush has less than a year left in office by the time the proceedings end there will be a new president. And as with the Clinton Impeachment it will only serve to put the country into turmoil. Not a good thing.
2007-01-29 13:58:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by ikeman32 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
According to the Constitution of the United States, a sitting President can only be impeached for certain reasons. Article 2 section 4 states "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
Bush and Cheney are not elligible for impeachment. Those who call for his impeachment are obviously ignorant on Constitutional matters.
2007-01-29 13:54:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by anarchisthippy 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
There are several possibilities for impeachment--Bush has apparently broken laws by allowing wiretaps without warrants from the FISA court. The courts have yet to rule on whether his signing statements are constitutional or not, but it they rule them unconstitutional and Bush defies them, this would also be a basis for impeachment. I would recommend you closely watch the Libby trial to see if any information comes forth that indicates that there is a possibility of laws being broken by members of the Bush Administration, such as Dick Cheney.
Of course, it will take numbers in the House to bring impeachment, and right now it appears that there are not enough Representatives who feel that it is politically expedient to impeach (my source is the Ed Schulz Show).
2007-01-29 13:53:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by KCBA 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The country cannot financially afford impeachment, nor is the diversion safe in the current international battles. I love the idea of disgracing Bush, but am not interested in the money or safety issues that would abound.
What I do like about your question is your comment about politicians serving the people. This would be a nice change. While voting against minimum wage increases last week, did you know that Congress enjoyed 8 increases in their own pay in the last 10 years?
2007-01-29 13:48:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by Super Ruper 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Democrats are just as guilty in this matter for lots of reasons. They just sat back and bought everything that was said and so did you most likely.
Your just speaking the big easy answer thats been plastered in the minds of people everywhere. Wanna make a difference? look to the next election and stop crying for something that never will happen.
You lost a lot of credit the moment you stated BUSHCO....FYI ..your a member of BUSH CO...impeach yourself.
2007-01-29 14:15:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by BOB the horrible. 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
So, what crimes have they committed to make them "criminals"? That would be a start. Just because YOU irrationally hate them and accuse them of lying, doesn't make it so.
As for serving the people, I believe that ensuring that our enemies are on the run and that our national security is improved are good evidence of service. Tax cuts that helped jump start the economy after the 2000 recession, and the reduction of taxes that has buoyed a strong economy and job growth, and the lowest unemployment average ever, is a pretty good evidence of service.
And Bush's efforts to fix social security were also a service, which would have helped Americans greatly if the gutless wonders of Capitol Hill had done their part.
But there's no crimes, no impeachable offenses, no justification for removal. To believe otherwise is to leave the realm of reality.
2007-01-29 13:53:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Never heard of BUSHCO. Please explain. Oh you mean the president and the mention of an impeachment for the 1,000,000,000,000th time? Get over it, it ain't gonna happen for one major reason. He hasn't commited a crime. the Vice-president hasn't committed a crime. Just because the president does something you don't sgree with doesn't mean he can be impeached. Not everything revolves around you and your latte drinking buddies.
2007-01-29 13:50:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
In the highly unlikely event the President and/or Vice President were to commit a high crime or misdemeanor, I say go right ahead. Until that time comes, "Bush sucks" is not an impeachable offense.
2007-01-29 13:46:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by Rick N 3
·
7⤊
0⤋
Since you asked for my "thoughts", I will tell you. I THINK you are uneducated in the political sector.
I THINK you are unable to do anything other than throw blind allegations around, without being able to back up your clearly partisan accusations, with facts.
I THINK people like you are an embarrassment to our country. You put your blind agenda of getting a democrat elected over the safety of your nation. You care nothing about the lives of the soldiers and marines you put in danger by giving support to the enemy.
I THINK you are a traitor.
2007-01-29 13:48:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
It does appear that way. Bush NOW wants to co-operate with congress. NOW? What an insult, chickens-h-it! He and Cheney are clowns and need gone. I don't know anyone that wants this fd up mess, or someone that can clean ti up without killing thousands. His handling of the Gulf coast as simple as it was scares the hell out of me seeing him trying to handle Iraq where there is bombs being used.
2007-01-29 13:53:40
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋