The amount of damage and criminal activity of nearly everyone involved in the Bush Administration has done a lot of damage to the USA. Why not impeach those that are only out for their personal gain at the expense of the nations well being?
2007-05-21 08:40:05 · 27 answers · asked by gopakrz 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Contrary to what others say, there are plenty of reasons to impeach (they are listed on www.impeachbush.org) however, she was pretty clear right from the start that she was going to work with, not against, the president. Many states are pushing petitions and it might be very soon that she wakes up to the fact that America wants him gone. She knows who gave her the power and respects their wishes so you may be seeing articles of impeachment filed soon. we can only hope.
2007-05-21 08:49:15 · answer #1 · answered by Alan S 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
definite, she replaced into clever. initially, the Speaker of the living house would not unilaterally make certain who gets impeached and who would not. each and every of the Speaker does is preside over Congressional instructions. i do no longer comprehend why human beings think of she tells Congress what to do; she would not have that authority. Secondly, to pursue impeachment at this late date, without information of a criminal offense, could be (like Clinton's impeachment) an marvelous waste of Congressional time and supplies at a time while our government desires to concentration on extra pressing concerns. If it replaced into very sparkling that Bush had dedicated a criminal offense, i could sense in any different case. Being a bad President isn't unlawful, although, and that i'm ill of human beings pushing for impeachment purely as a results of fact they do unlike him.
2016-11-25 22:31:03 · answer #2 · answered by niesporek 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm so tired of answering this question, I'm just going to copy/paste what I've previously written:
Again, the standard for impeaching a President is "high crimes and misdomeanors." The reason that Clinton was impeached was that he did commit the crime of perjury.
There is no evidence or charge that Bush has committed any crime. You may not like his policies, and you can certainly argue about his results (or lack thereof). However, all this talk of impeachment is ridiculous until you can give some sort of proof of a crime.
It's probably not the best one I've written, but it will do.
2007-05-21 08:50:54 · answer #3 · answered by Pythagoras 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
1. There are no grounds for impeachment
2. It's the last thing Mrs. Bill Clinton wants, why drag up the past administration to justify this administration and her stand on the issues then.
3. It's the last thing Bill Clinton wants, he's would rather move into History Revisionist mode.
4. Smart republicans would use the event to show how impotent the Dem's really are in congress.
2007-05-21 08:55:18 · answer #4 · answered by ROIHUNTER 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
With posting this question, you simply prove that you cannot be reasoned with, think rationaly or have any deductive capabilities.
Bush and his administration isn't half as bad as you are led to believe. Secondly, members on the Left are equally as bad and in some cases twice as evil as anyone of the Right has been proven to have been.
Nancy "Nazi" Pelosi is positioning herself as the next Hitler in the world. Between herself and Hillary they will take America to a place that even Adolf never dreamed of.
2007-05-21 08:57:01 · answer #5 · answered by hanio_john_kerry 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Just supposing there is something impeachable....they are almost out of office. They are better of playing nice with upcoming elections. And if there isn't then they end up with egg on their face. The likelihood of a Republican winning the next election is currently less then a Democrat. They aren't going to stire the waters too much.
2007-05-21 08:46:52 · answer #6 · answered by chickey_soup 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The Democrats in congress have prooved yet again that they are a bunch of wimps. Probably don't want to hurt his feelings. Sad thing is I am a Democrat leaning towards the middle, but still I vote Democrat. Makes me sick. Not to mention most of everything they have done wrong holds no proof to it, so mighty hard to get the impeachment. We know they did wrong, but there is such a cover up that you never will get proof.
2007-05-21 08:55:29 · answer #7 · answered by bs b 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
There is no solid ground to impeach Bush. In fact, it is not even 1/100 solid as in Clinton's case.
2007-05-21 08:49:08 · answer #8 · answered by DeadManWalking 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because they don't have the votes, and they also have no help from the justice department (headed by Speedy Gonzalez). If Janet Reno were still the attorney general Bush would of been gone years ago.
2007-05-21 08:54:04 · answer #9 · answered by truthspeaker10 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
By the time the investigation was finished, Bush would already have reached the end of his term. What would be the point, except to waste Congressional time and taxpayers' money?
2007-05-21 08:53:32 · answer #10 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋