hell no, if clinton didn't, bush won't
2007-02-23 14:50:11 · 21 answers · asked by takeamericaback 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Impeached?! He should be hang just like Saddam H................
2007-02-24 11:14:54 · answer #1 · answered by ILSE 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
From the looks of things he should be impeached but he won't be.
The reason being that If the Dems impeach they may stand to loose a few votes in 2008 and it is more important for them to win the White House than attempt to serve justice.
One of the excuses they submit is that impeaching
Bush wouldn't accomplish anything and that they would have to impeach both Bush and Cheney.
So what's the problem with that?
Nope, they see a good chance for victory in 08 and they aren't about to upset the apple cart in the house with an impeachment that would almost surely fail in the Senate on a partisan basis.
2007-02-24 15:00:12 · answer #2 · answered by Daniel O 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
-No. While there is great animosity towards Bush, the Democrats don't have anywhere enough votes to successfully push impeachment through both Houses of Congress.
-To the poster who stated that Clinton is the only President to be impeached, that is also technically incorrect: Andrew Johnson, a Republican sitting president during Reconstruction after the Civil War also had the misfortune of being impeached - by a Republican-dominated Congress. While Clinton and Johnson were both impeached, it was NOT confirmed in subsequent Senate hearings.
2007-02-23 23:21:13 · answer #3 · answered by True 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. Impeachment is an intensive process that takes time. Clinton's impeachment process took 3 months after it got to Congress. The grand jury testimony and Independent Counsel investigation leading up to the impeachment took months. To spend the time and money on a President who is basically a lame duck with 10 months left in office would be a waste of time, and would likely only have further negative impact on the public's confidence in the federal government. Even if impeached, it is unlikely that the impeachment would lead to removal from office; it has never been accomplished in the country's history.
2007-02-23 23:02:52 · answer #4 · answered by Mangy Coyote 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There is no basis to impeach bush, he hasn't done anything to get impeached. You don't just impeach presidents all the time. Only 2 presidents in our history have been through impeachment hearings and one was Clinton.
2007-02-24 02:24:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, Clinton was a completely different thing altogether, but no I don't think there is any chance of Bush being impeached.
2007-02-23 23:02:40 · answer #6 · answered by barbara b 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No I don't think he will be impeached. He should be and theres a big difference between what Clinton did and what Bush is doing. They are not even close to comparable.
2007-02-23 22:58:45 · answer #7 · answered by coffeedrinker1980 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Clinton DID get impeached.
2007-02-24 07:54:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Although the little jerk deserves to be impeached and shot,
I doubt he will. A shame too, ever since 9-11 it's been the same song and dance, we don't leave until the job is done. What job? this is a Shite-Sunni thing. No one else got involved when the civil war of 1865 went down, So, what's my point you may ask. Here's my point, what are we doing in someone else's business?? MHO.
2007-02-23 23:44:41 · answer #9 · answered by nsrailfan6100 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Clinton was the ONLY President in U.S. history to be impeached. Bush will never be impeached. God Bless you.
2007-02-23 22:58:07 · answer #10 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
I doubt he will be impeached. With his followers he will probably be awarded some medal or something after he leaves office.
2007-02-23 23:33:12 · answer #11 · answered by In God's Image 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋