Read this first:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070325/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq;_ylt=ApX8gGMM_DxF0oN7lhNaKIGs0NUE
Then tell us what you think.
2007-03-25 12:46:14 · 16 answers · asked by MathBioMajor 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Hagel is talking in circles a little bit. You can't impeach a president just because he is executing a war that Congress approved.
You might be able to get him on "high crimes and misdemeanors" if you can prove that he lied to Congress about WMDs, Iraq's capabilities and/or the threat posed by Iraq to America and/or her interests. You might be able to get him on his orders to conduct wiretaps, especially in light of the revelation that the FBI monitored the calls and emails of a lot of American citizens who weren't remotely suspected of anything. At a stretch you might be able to get him on impeding various investigations. Here it will be interesting to see how Bush responds to investigations by a Democrat-controlled Congress, because the Republican-controlled Congress always gave him a total pass on cooperating fully with investigations into 9/11, the Iraq War, etc. But I can't think of other grounds for impeachment.
2007-03-25 12:55:41 · answer #1 · answered by lesroys 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hagel opposes Bush and Iraq because they weakened the Empire. That's weak motives.
If you're looking for a Republican with strong motives and who has been against Iraq from day 1, look at Ron Paul R-TX14. He's a presidential candidate as well. He's as firmly against the war as Kucinich and he'd impeach Bush after an investigation turned up all his corruption.
2007-03-25 13:09:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I really don't care whether they impeach him or not. In fact, I think they are al afraid of the man.\and so I just think of him as what he is.
A Lame Duck.with three 6-month terms to go, give or take one more week, and counting.
2007-03-25 12:56:58 · answer #3 · answered by rare2findd 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
George W. Bush should never have been selected President by the Obscene Court. Once selected, he should have been impeached immediately.
2007-03-25 12:51:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
One. According to your link Trott said nothing of the kind. All they quote is Hagel
2007-03-25 13:10:00 · answer #5 · answered by ohbrother 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is the impeachable offense?
Congress does not have the authority to withdraw troops from anywhere, they do however control the money, which funds the troops.
But, they can't pass any bills requiring troops to come back home.
2007-03-25 12:51:39 · answer #6 · answered by Little J 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think Hagel is about to get kicked out of his party. You can oppose the president, but the higher party heads will view him as disloyal and look to see him either not seek another term or be openly opposed in a primary. All the Republican money will go to someone else-count on it.
2007-03-25 12:49:44 · answer #7 · answered by Big John 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I don't want bush impeached, until the puppet master cheney is gone.
bush impeached gets you cheney, and that's worse
bush and cheney gone, gets you Pelosi, and there isn't a white man in DC that's going to let that happen.
cheney gone, bush gulps, tucks his tail, his dad smacks him on the back of the head and says "I told you so" and we elect a real president in 2008.
without cheney, bush would be lame duck, the vp would have to be nominated and vetted, and after his legacy of honesty, cold day in hell comes to mind.
2007-03-25 13:07:49 · answer #8 · answered by Tango 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
They are beginning to see the light. Hagel is a brave man.
2007-03-25 12:49:11 · answer #9 · answered by notyou311 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It isn't a good political move for anyone. Pelosi will not risk her political life after seeing what happened to Newt. And it really is her call.
2007-03-25 12:50:14 · answer #10 · answered by kittenbrower 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋