Why isn't Pres Bush being impeached?

Question

Pres Clinton was impeached for perjury which basically means lying & his attempts to conceal and cover up his various affairs with CONSENTING ADULTS. I KNOW people hated ABSOLUTELY hated Pres Clinton for what he did. They felt betrayed. Don't you feel more betrayed now? I don't recall him being impeached for the deaths of thousands of people. Why? On the other hand, Pres Bush & his cronies have LIED about the reasons for the Iraq War, probably lied about 911, probably caused 911, killed over 100,000 Iraqis & over 3000 US troops with increasing numbers, spent BILLIONS OF DOLLARS with the lie that America is safer now than ever before. Internationally Americans are hated now because of this war that we won't be able to leave anytime soon or with dignity. I don't care about the Keyboard Bullies that are staunch Repubs and how they will fight tooth and nail to tell me why they see it another way but the way I see it, its apples & apples so tell me why AGAIN isn't Pres Bush being impeached?

Answer 1

Ok bob, and bush choose to ignore multiple warnings from not only the CIA but also from intelligence sources from at least a half dozen foreign countries in regards to 9/11.

To the asker, read about The Project for A New American Century http://www.newamericancentury.org
It openly the states the agenda that Bush is promoting.

Answer 2

I agree with Henry about the repercussions of having Cheney as President.

Even thought there may be reasons for bringing Articles of Impeachment against Bush, it would be more destructive to the Democrats at this point in time. When the Republicans did this against Clinton it made them look petty and partisan. The Dems now have regained some momentum due to the partisan nature of our government over the past years. They could lose that quickly by appearing that their mission is payback for the destructive personal politics that they have faced.

The direction we are going would not change under Cheney, it would only get worse. You can't eliminate malignancy by just removing the tumor. The only way to make change is wait for 2008 and vote.

Answer 3

Because in order to be impeached acoording to the constitution, you have to commit a high crime or misdemeaner. Bush has not commited a crime. Clinton was impeached for perjury ( lying to a grand jury ) and obstruction of justice. Both crimes, and it doesn't matter what the subject is when testifying under oath before a grand jury, you are co
mpelled to tell the truth.
As for Bush lying, you guys yell that all day , but you can't give one example of a lie he has told. Weapons of mass destruction? We know he had them, he used them to kill 10,000 kurds in Northern Iraq! Everyone who saw the intelligence from the CIA, MI5,KGB, and the Mossad, agreed that he had them. John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Harry Reid all saw the same evidence and said the same thing. As a matter of fact, Kerry said, " if you don't think that Saddam Hussein is a danger with weapons of mass destruction, then don't vote for me!", guess they are all liars too? And are you really that dumb? Bush caused 9/11? Get a grip on something besides the move-on dot org koolade. Safer now.....gee, don't remember any terrorist attacks in this country since 9/11, but quite a few have been foiled. The most recent, a plan to assault and kill US troops at Ft Dix. Get yoor head out of the sand.

Answer 4

First of all, "probably" isn't gonna get anybody legally convicted. Second of all you assume he lied. There is absolutely no proof of these "lies". He proposed an Iraq invasion on intelligence. Congress approved this invasion based on this intelligence. So far the intelligence proved to be pretty lousy. But it was there, and most of the country was behind it. There's absolutely no proof this intelligence was fabricated in any way by George W. Bush. So sorry, I was one of the few against the invasion, but it certainly isn't an impeachable offense. If so, then everybody in Congress who voted for it would have to be held accountable. Bill Clinton lied under oath. Which is an impeachable offense. Just because you feel it wasn't as bad as going to war. Doesn't mean you can impeach every President who approves act you feel are worse. I know I'll get a bunch of thumbs down for defending G.W. but it's pretty much why he isn't being a impeached.

Answer 5

I believe Clinton lied to a court under oath, which is perjury. They impeached him, but didn't find him guilty. Bush, on the other hand has broken no law (lying to a court, etc.)

With your line of thinking, Congress probalby should have impeached Washington when he sent the troops to western Pennsylvania to put down the Whiskey Rebellion and told Congress they were just collecting taxes.

Answer 6

two words
President Cheney
No seriously Impeachment has to be started with a majority vote in the House. In 1994 the house had been taken by the republicans in a big way. The dems just took the House back last year but the margin is to narrow and the party not nealry as united as the Repubs were on their witch hunt to prove "the betrayal of American Trust" i.e. the infamouse b!owjob.

Answer 7

Disregard the smokescreen put up by Bush's mind-washed lemmings. There have been impeachable offenses committed, but the Democratic Party is opposed to calling for impeachment. Pelosi says: "that impeachment would be a diversion from Democrats’ main goals of ending the Iraq War, and passing important legislation."

At any rate, check out this site to see a list of impeachable offenses committed by W.:

http://impeachforpeace.org/evidence/

You can decide for yourself whether these items merit impeachment or not.

Answer 8

Unlike Billybob Clinton, President Bush hasn't committed any crimes and hasn't had to have cronys like Sandy Berger steal documents to cover up for them. See, the law's funny that way. You have to commit a crime before you can be charged with one. A President can't be impeached just because some loopy leftys don't like him.

I'd like to know just why you loopy libs keep saying that President Bush lied about the WMDs when Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, Sandy Berger and others were quoted as saying that Saddam had WMDs as far back as 1998. Here's a news flash: BUSH WASN'T PRESIDENT THEN!!!

Oh, I know, he used a time machine to go back to 1998 and whisper these lies in their ears.

Answer 9

There are articles of Impeachment already in congress, unfortunately, the Republicans still set the agenda as to what bills will be heard. It won't come up any time soon.

Answer 10

Sigh...yawn...this same type of questions has been asked over and over and over again, and the answer is the same: No impeachable offense has occurred. Get a reality check quickly. Your accusations are outrageous.