On what grounds? He has committed no impeachable offense.
2007-06-03 04:30:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Brian 7
·
9⤊
5⤋
If Bush is impeached or put on trial by the Senate, what would be the charges?
Just because many disagree with his policies doesn't mean that he did anything illegal. We shouldn't abuse the justice system because it makes a mockery of our legal system and it sets dangerous precedent to impeach any future President when the Congress disagrees with his policy. This will effectively weaken the office of the President and throw our system of checks and balances into Peril.
The difference between him and when Clinton was impeached was that Clinton actually committed a crime, he lied under Oath which is Perjury.
One last point, let's say Bush was impeached and found guilty and removed from office, then the only guy the left hates more than Rove, (I'm talking about Cheney) would be the President. That's probably why he hasn't been attempted to be impeached, because seriously think about it, the left hates Bush enough to abuse the system of impeachment to smear him when there is no evidence he has broke the law but they would hate the idea of a Cheney presidency even more :D
2007-06-03 04:38:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Nickoo 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Yes because the democrats say so. What is the impeachable offense? He dropped a pencil!
Now lets hear from all of those psycho idiots with stupid reasons for impeachment. Get a grip and learn the law.
2007-06-07 03:56:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
On what grounds? The standard is "high crimes and misdemeanors" and I guess we learned that perjury doesn't meet that standard. Someone once said that you could indict a ham sandwich so since impeachment is nothing more than an indictment I guess you could. What would be the cost? The democrats complained of occupying Clintons time and we weren't at war then. Suppose you move to impeach which would likely take 6 months to do. What happens if a sucessful terrorist attack occurred? Is it the fault of the radicals running impeachment or a distracted President?
2007-06-03 04:45:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
What EXACTLY are you going to impeach him FOR? He went to war, Congress approved it, just because it's not turning out the way Bush wanted, or that the information given was tainted politically ( many wars are ), there would be little grounds for impeachment without implicating many others including Democrats. So, unless you find a SINGLE event that he's broken the law in ( war powers are vague, adultery is not ), I doubt you could make an easy case for anything he's done politically that can be traced 100% to him, unlike Monica ( Bill had a gun to his head to play with a cigar? ). Hmm. No. So, I doubt there's much of a case to be made against George, unless something new comes to light. Just because a Presidency isn't perfect ( and none are ) doesn't make failure or poor judgement grounds for impeachment, especially if it was due to bad advice, or political maneuverings.
2007-06-03 04:39:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
Constitutionally, we should impeach him. He has committed offenses that appear to rise to the required level of 'high crimes and misdemenors'. There could be dispute about any of the charges - the point of the impeachment process is to determine if the President has actually done anything wrong; simply going through the process is an appropriate means of discovery.
The issues surrounding the entry of America into a war with a sovereign nation without first being attacked should be examined - did he have a real belief that America was being threatened by Saddam, and if not, did he lie to get approval of Congress?
He admitted illegally wire-tapping Americans - this is a much clearer charge against him.
However, you asked "should we". That's a different issue. If the Democrats launch impeachment proceedings, they will take up most of the Congressional time between now and the next election. Even if they succeeded, he would likely serve out the rest of his term before a decision could be made. Should the Democrats allow themselves to be consumed by this one issue, when there is so much damage in our nation that needs repairing? We need to get ourselves out of an unjust war, do something about the estimated 6 million children in the US that go to bed hungry every day and the 4 million children that have NO access to health care. These are the pressing needs of Americans. If we have to let Bush off for his various crimes, then so be it. In reality, even if impeached, Bush would not suffer any real consequences for his actions, and we can't afford to waste our time on this man.
2007-06-03 04:38:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋
Yes, definitely. There are plenty of reasons to, also. The crimes he's committed during war time, such as torturing prisoners of war and ignoring NATO and the UN - these are in place for a reason people. Not to mention all the lies he's told us. I'm not liberal, but nobody died when Clinton lied - I think they both should have been impeached, personally. Thousands of our troops and theirs (not counting all the civilian deaths) have died for what? For greed and money? These are horrible reasons for so many to die. Especially considering Iraq had nothing to do with the twin towers in the first place. Impeach King George now! Then charge him with war crimes.
2007-06-03 05:49:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by khorne70 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Regardless of how YOU feel he's running this nation, he's been voted into the office by a Majority of United States Citizens, and any actions he takes also have a majority ruling. The key is to support whomever is in office...you can agree to disagree on positions, etc, but the man was voted into office by your peers...
Have I missed the news or something??? I don't recall hearing about any impeachable actions?
Either way, he also has term limits, and presidential campaign 2008 is strongly under way. I suggest you attempt to education yourself on who's running for next term, apply your civil duty and go vote, and support (grumbling or not) whomever is in office.
2007-06-03 04:52:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by ndngrlz 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, Bush is taking some unpopular steps which are neccesary for the national security of America. He would rather do things that will make his numbers in the polls go up, but a leaders choice is not always being in the side of issues that polls well. He has access to information that you and i do not have. Any good leader will not act differently from the way Bush is carrying on. November 2008 upwards will prove him right.
2007-06-03 04:40:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by iscan12345 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
Well i dont know what school you go to, but i would say its a libreral one that is full of Bush haters. Impeachment isnt going to happen. Why would it now when he has about a year left on his term? These so called educators who will fail a student because he/she didnt watch the propaganda Gore movie on global warming should lose thier tenure too, but that wont happen either. Why? Because liberals consider themselves to be smarter and wiser than the typical conservative. Bush has done nothing impeachable. If your teacheres even mention that it was because he lied about Iraq, i suggest you go thru the archives to where all the liberals such as Hilliary, Biden, Kennedy all said the same thing. OH but this was before Bush was elected.
2007-06-03 04:38:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by ob10830 2
·
4⤊
2⤋
A President cannot be impeached based on performance polls or popularity. This isn't American Idle - in order to be impeached, the President has to be convicted of a serious crime (lying under oath, for instance.) Since he has not been charged with any crimes, the question is moot.
2007-06-03 04:37:36
·
answer #11
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
4⤊
1⤋