Who has another reason to impeach Bush/Dick?

Question

1) Seizing power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the rule of law; carrying out a massive assault on and occupation of Iraq, a country that was not threatening the United States, resulting in the death and maiming of over one hundred thousand Iraqis, and thousands of U.S. G.I.s.

2) Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war.

3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable.

4) Instituting a secret and illegal wiretapping and spying operation against the people of the United States through the National Security Agency.

5) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently changing its government by force and assaulting Iraq in a war of aggression.

6) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions of governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

7) Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda about the conduct of foreign governments and individuals and acts by U.S. government personnel; manipulating the media and foreign governments with false information; concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment concerning acts, intentions and possession, or efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction in order to falsely create a climate of fear and destroy opposition to U.S. wars of aggression and first strike attacks.

8) Violations and subversions of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, both a part of the "Supreme Law of the land" under Article VI, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in wars and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and others and usurping powers of the United Nations and the peoples of its nations by bribery, coercion and other corrupt acts and by rejecting treaties, committing treaty violations, and frustrating compliance with treaties in order to destroy any means by which international law and institutions can prevent, affect, or adjudicate the exercise of U.S. military and economic power against the international community.

9) Acting to strip United States citizens of their constitutional and human rights, ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to counsel, without charge, and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the Executive of a citizen as an "enemy combatant."

10) Ordering indefinite detention of non-citizens in the United States and elsewhere, and without charge, at the discretionary designation of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense.

11) Ordering and authorizing the Attorney General to override judicial orders of release of detainees under INS jurisdiction, even where the judicial officer after full hearing determines a detainee is wrongfully held by the government.

12) Authorizing secret military tribunals and summary execution of persons who are not citizens who are designated solely at the discretion of the Executive who acts as indicting official, prosecutor and as the only avenue of appellate relief.

13) Refusing to provide public disclosure of the identities and locations of persons who have been arrested, detained and imprisoned by the U.S. government in the United States, including in response to Congressional inquiry.

14) Use of secret arrests of persons within the United States and elsewhere and denial of the right to public trials.

15) Authorizing the monitoring of confidential attorney-client privileged communications by the government, even in the absence of a court order and even where an incarcerated person has not been charged with a crime.

16) Ordering and authorizing the seizure of assets of persons in the United States, prior to hearing or trial, for lawful or innocent association with any entity that at the discretionary designation of the Executive has been deemed "terrorist."

17) Engaging in criminal neglect in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, depriving thousands of people in Louisiana, Mississippi and other Gulf States of urgently needed support, causing mass suffering and unnecessary loss of life.

18) Institutionalization of racial and religious profiling and authorization of domestic spying by federal law enforcement on persons based on their engagement in noncriminal religious and political activity.

19) Refusal to provide information and records necessary and appropriate for the constitutional right of legislative oversight of executive functions.

20) Rejecting treaties protective of peace and human rights and abrogation of the obligations of the United States under, and withdrawal from, international treaties and obligations without consent of the legislative branch, and including termination of the ABM treaty between the United States and Russia, and rescission of the authorizing signature from the Treaty of Rome which served as the basis for the International Criminal Court.

oh yeah, sorry,

http://www.impeachbush.org

also, I'm a registered republican, have been for the 12 years I've been legally allowed to vote and no, I have 2 children, live in my own house and hope that they grow up in a country that demands personal responsibility from its citizens AND government. Now we're just a bunch of tools. hmm... being a tool... that should be impeachable...

for more info:

http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer

oh yeah, I stopped wearing my tin foil hat ever since I realized that it couldn't stop major league baseball from reading my inner most thoughts.

The Simpsons, people... watch it.

Answer 1

1) The President was authorized to use force in Iraq by the Congress, even though, contrary to your assumption, there is no Constitutional restriction on use of force at the President's discretion. The Constitution only requires that war can only be declared by Congress.

2) The President relied on sources deemed reliable by all parties who had reviewed the evidence, including most of the Democrats who are now saying that he lied, and former President Clinton. Any falsities in his rationale were not his fault, nor his administration directly.

3) The first two point have no basis. I have seen no evidence where direct attacks on civilians were ordered by the President or Vice President. As for the third, there are times in war where military targets of significance must be destroyed for the sake of protecting your military forces. If civilian casualties are unavoidable, you can only take measures to minimize civilian casualties, which our military strives to do.

4) This type of activity happened all the time during the cold war (see the newly released CIA information), and while it may not be legal, there are arguments that it actually IS ethical, because information could be gathered that could save thousands of lives, while they have no real impact on the lives of the majority of the people that they listen in on. It's an invasion of privacy, but almost every President since Lincoln should have been impeached if it is an impeachable offense.

5) Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator, and it has been our nation's policy since 1917, when we entered World War I, to take action to remove or contain dictators who have threatened or acted aggressively towards us or our allies. Saddam Hussein paid the families of Palestinian homicide bombers, and therefore was a sponsor of terrorism against an Ally (Israel). What was President Clinton's rationale for removing Milosevic from power in Bosnia? He had not even threatened our allies, and was nothing of a threat to the U.S., yet I would venture that you would not use that as a reason for wanting to impeach him.

6) Unfortunately, torture is relative, and what some may consider torture is not considered torture by others. What many of the prisoners describe as torture-urination on copies of the koran, playing country music in the prison, stripping them, etc.-are no more than playground bully tactics grown up. That doesn't mean that they are right, but if it happened on a playground, you wouldn't call it torture, you would say it was mean. So? It's not like we administer the death of a thousand cuts... As far as the assassinations, executions, kidnappings, etc. I don't know where you've come up with these accusations.

7) The "false information" was corraborated by a plethora of agencies and intelligence individuals, both of our nation, and of other nations, from Israel to Iran, Great Britain, and Turkey. There is little doubt that Saddam was making efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. He had even used them in the past (1980s against the Kurds, and against Iran, and in 1991 against U.S. troops). He had made it very clear from his own speeches that once he had WMDs, he fully intended to use them against Israel, and if he could, the United States.

8) The United Nations Charter and International Law are NOT in any way, shape, or form, part of the Constitutional Supreme Law of the Land. We are a fully sovereign and independent nation, with the full authority to act within our own policies and direction, just as any other nation within the United Nations. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, and the Constitution alone. The U.N. is merely a place where nations, even those at war, can come together peacefully to discuss direction and ideas. But, their resolutions and decisions are in no way binding. They are merely intended to aid in the interactions between nations, and, where possible, to communicate international will.

9) There are no public cases where U.S. citizens have been detained without reason or counsel. While foreign enemies have been detained without counsel, and without appearing before civil courts, in any case where the combatants were citizens of the U.S., or one of our close Allies, they were remanded to the authority of the appropriate national civil court system.

10) To my knowledge, there is no restriction on the detention of prisoners of war, as long as the conflict continues. There were prisoners taken in World War II, who were prisoners for the entire war, and were not released until it was over. The administration has the authority to detain enemy combatants until they are no longer deemed a threat to our nation and our military, or our allies.

11-13) See above. As enemy combatants, there are very few rights that they have, beyond humane treatment under the Geneva Conventions, which our prisoners receive. Can you give evidence of summary executions of prisoners following tribunals? I have not heard of this until now.

14-15) What evidence do you have of these secret arrests? I believe that much of these accusations are conjured up out of fear about what the PATRIOT Act allows... For the issue of eavesdropping, see my response to number 4.

16) The seizure of assets is not automatic, and it only applies to assets being transferred to the "terrorist" organization. Any lawful activities are not restricted. If, through due process, the organization is able to prove that it is not tied to terrorism, the parties can pursue legal routes to have their assets restored. This type of thing happened often in the 1920s-1930s with people dealing with the Mafia, the 1940s with Nazi and Japanese sympathizers, the 1960s-1980s with Communist sympathizers, etc. It is not a new practice, and is not illegal.

17) The FEMA is not responsible for being the first responding agency to a local natural disaster, and they typically don't get to one until a week, or so, after the disaster strikes. The local and state authorities are responsible for responding, and establishing a working support system in the early stages of an emergency. The President declared it a disaster area, freeing up federal funding, right after Katrina hit, which is his sole responsibility in disasters. There is no case for any criminal neglect by the President in this case. If you are looking for neglect, you will find it in the Governor of Louisiana and the mayor of New Orleans, who took three days to ask for federal funding, even after it was made available by the President.

18) I think that you're way too caught up in this spying thing. You may notice that most of the people who want to kill us all are not Christians, or Jews, or even Athiests... There is a reason that profiling is used, if you stop and think about it. Do you know of any little old Christian ladies who have strapped bombs on themselves to blow people up? No. Almost all of those terrorist activities are carried out by members of radical political groups (Timothy McVeigh, Japan subway gassing), or radical Islamic fundamentalists (Sept. 11, the Madrid Bombings, London bombings, Israel suicide bombings, etc.).

19) Most of these documents are protected by Executive Privilege (a legal concept that has long been upheld). Aside from that, if you are overseeing a project, you don't have to have access to every e-mail, phone conversation, memo, etc., to know if the job is being done. You look at the results. Documents only need to be released when there is illegal activity going on. They don't need them just to address accusations of botched policies.

20) Finally, the constitution is silent on the procedure for withdrawing from a treaty, and as such, there is much latitude in how a president decides to go about withdrawing from them. Many presidents chose to go about doing so with the consent of both houses of Congress, some chose to do so on the advice of the Senate alone, and still others took it upon themselves to withdraw from them. There is no Constitutional violation in doing so.

In summary, if you really take a step back and look at the accusations that are being leveled at the President in an attempt to justify impeachment, they are weak, at best, and don't really hold any water. Most of them are not violations of any law, and almost all of them have been accepted Executive practice for decades.

Answer 2

Cheney's recent semantics-dance about whether the VP office is or is not a part of the Executive Branch, then declaring it to be "not an agency" of the govt - there just HAS to be something illegal in all that. At the very least, every American who likes our Constitution should give him a middle-finger salute and demand he resign.

I don't understand how anyone can call themselves "patriotic" and allow that stuff to go on, when they were SO eager to impeach a guy for having an affair.

Answer 3

Impeachable offenses are:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Treason is defined as:the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one's country or of assisting its enemies in war. (Which would make Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, among others, traitors for their visits to the enemy and comments about the war 'being lost')

High Crime is defined as:A high crime is one which seeks the overthrow of the country, which gives aid or comfort to its enemies, or which injures the country to the profit of an individual or group. In democracies and similar societies it also includes crimes which attempt to alter the outcome of elections.

Bribery you can figure out on your own.

Now, please produce evidence of Mr. Bush's impeachable offenses.

Answer 4

for one why dont you cite your work idiot. if you were the president i would get you impeached for plagiarizing.

on numba (2) its called false intelligence, all country have that. they were saying that there were bombs and **** in there country assembled.

with the patriot act i don't go for it much but you need a warrant from a court in order to "tap" into your phone line and look through your documents. What the hell are you hiding that makes you so hyped up about it.

and hey why don't you read the news for one and not off of this liberal bullshit. stop listening to your drunk *** redneck friends who put bushes name in vein. there have been many other presidents that were worst than bush.

Answer 5

placing sleeper terrorist cells in each state under the guise of non partisan DOJ members in order to challenge any Democratic candidate's character by trumping up charges against them just prior to the '08 elections. Doubt it? take a look at what they did to Georgia Thompson in wisconsin. To the righties, disprove any item presented, site your resources and then you may speak. If these people are not held accountable they why should anyone follow the rule of law? Is there a statute of limitations on murder? no. should there be a statute of limitations for Gonzales/Dick/Bush attempting to destroy our constitution and overthrow our government? no.

Answer 6

Where'd you get that list? It's funny. Did you assume that nobody would actually read it? Did you make up that list or clip it from some odd ball web site. Anyway, he's only got a year and a half to go so unless you have the votes, don't even think about it.

Answer 7

about 301 million American citizens have reasons to expect punishment to Bush and Dick

but considering impeachment is now par for just getting a bl0wj0b - the GOP themselves has hilariously raised the bar of punishment for this kakistocracy

and based on THAT justice scale it seems beheading and piking would be fit for the likewise atrocious actions of THIS administration

save the impeachment for bl0wj0bs

and here's to us all getting some impeachable offenses this weekend!~!

Answer 8

Sorry Dude, Im not big on politics but I just needed to note that you used Bush and Dick in the same sentence.

Answer 9

What makes idiots think they can impeach someone without any just cause?

Answer 10

You need to change the tin foil in your hat. Have some kool-aid and shut up. If you want to lie do it to your family. Not the public, wich is too smart to believe anything you say from now on. Go away hippy.

Answer 11

none of those are real reaons, your probably just some conspiracy therist who still lives with his mother in the basement still playing everquest. Stop being a biggot and following the crowd. Because you know every cool person like Bush has a pack of haters following them, don't follow the crowd man, make your own.