Would you agree with the impeachment of George W. Bush? Why or why not. Lets see how the numbers are.
2007-05-15 02:08:09 · 21 answers · asked by LawNerd 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Look at this video and tell me if he is saying th true. And don't tell me that youtube media does not count. You may find that video in CNN's files.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_SDGb-TJcU
2007-05-15 02:20:13 · update #1
They wanted to impeach Clinton for the Monica's case, because Clinton lied. Haven't Bush lied?
2007-05-15 02:25:08 · update #2
Sorry "lawnerd", there has to be an impeachable offense first. Back to the books!
2007-05-15 02:11:59 · answer #1 · answered by evans_michael_ya 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I would not want Bush impeached for two reasons.
1. I think that the country has enough issues without going through an impeachment process. It would also send the wrong messages to the world. Yes - he is not well liked or respected but he should serve his term.
2. The more important issue is that Mr. Cheney would then be in charge. He is the most dangerous person in the administration and I believe he is the "brains" behind the whole efforts in the White House. If anyone should be impeached, it should be him.
2007-05-15 09:34:03 · answer #2 · answered by ustoev 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No.
He has committed no high crimes and misdemeanors to justify the action of impeachment. Further, an unsuccessfuly impeachment (meaning the House impeaches and the Senate fails to convict) removes the sting and erodes the power of impeachment. Twice we have impeached a president and twice we have failed to convict. A third time will erode the dangers of impeachment.
2007-05-15 09:16:18 · answer #3 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Disagreeing with him is fine, but according to the constitution, he has to commit a high crime or misdemeaner to be impeached. You know, like Perjury to a Grand jury, or obstrution of justice....oops, that was Clinton...my bad.
2007-05-15 09:24:06 · answer #4 · answered by booman17 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I am a democrat, but still think it would not be a good idea because it would make Cheney the president and he has a bad heart, so he might die from all the stress.
I would hate to see that happen.
He is not a healthy man.
2007-05-15 09:20:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely yes. The problem is we don't have Janet Reno for a Attourney General, we have Senor Bushlicker Gonzalez, who won't start investigations or press charges.
If Reno was still there Bush & Cheney would be long gone.
2007-05-15 09:15:27 · answer #6 · answered by truthspeaker10 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
DEFINITELY! He has put our country in a rut. Too many lives are being lost and we have nothing to show for it but heart ache. Bush does everything for the benefit of himself. I can give you a list...This man is an idiot!
Example:
Reporter: "Mr. President, why can't we find Bin Laden."
Pres. Bush: "Because he's hiding."
2007-05-15 09:12:38 · answer #7 · answered by wrtrchk 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Absolutely! This man has lied, lied, lied, lied! He has done nothing but lie since he's been in office! Even his election was a lie!!! Both of them! Its time for us TRUE AMERICANS to fight back! Impeach the lier!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-05-15 09:12:47 · answer #8 · answered by ? 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
yes
I believe cause can easily be found.
Even if there isnt enough time to institute a full impeachment, just the trials alone would fill me with glee
2007-05-15 09:11:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Nope. That would make Cheney president. Bush is bad enough.
2007-05-15 09:11:10 · answer #10 · answered by Alice K 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋