HR #333 calls for the impeachment of Dick Cheney, shouldn't Bush be thrown in the same barrel?
An Oath has been taken by all of our representatives to protect and uphold the constitution, so why are they not movong forward with this issue.
2007-07-05 06:16:28 · 8 answers · asked by pecker_head_bill 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
You people (posters above) seem to be comfortable with your heads buried in the sand. HR 333 spells out the impeachable offenses very articulately. If you don't see the crimes that are spelled out in the text of this document, then I can only assume your head is buried somewhere where sunlight is unable to penetrate. Does a person have to get a BJ before you consider them criminal?
Congressman Kucinich by the way is not the first to present artcles of impeachment. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney did also in December.
2007-07-05 06:47:10 · answer #1 · answered by David M 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It all starts with an "impeachable" offense. We need specific laws that were broken and what the violations of those laws were first. Until that happens, let's just enjoy the love and prosperity of our Nation.
2007-07-05 13:23:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
******************************************
A common misconception is that impeachment means 'removal' which it does not. Impeachment is the first of 2 stages of a removal process. Impeachment is like an indictment.
Conviction is the 2nd stage. This is the actual point where a crime is charged, proven, and a punishment can be handed out.
Bill Clinton was impeached but was found innocent. Andrew Johnson was the only other president of the United States that has been impeached. Nixon resigned for fear of impeachment.
****************************************
2007-07-05 13:33:02 · answer #3 · answered by Fun Haver 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Apparently Cheney...
"has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, to justify the use of the U.S. Armed Forces against Iraq in a manner damaging to U.S. national security interests; and has openly threatened aggression against Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and has done so with the U.S. proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining U.S. national security."
I mean... what? I think they couldn't think of anything else to say about Bush so they've moved on to Cheney. We simply must get one of those horrid Republicans out of office before they doom us all by doing their best to eradicate terrorism.
2007-07-05 15:48:52 · answer #4 · answered by csbp029 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You mean the "do nothings" you finally put in congress are doing a little something that they promised? I bet HR#333 will never come up for a vote---nor should it!
2007-07-05 13:20:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
According to the Constitution, you actually have to commit a crime to be impeached. Since neither has, this is just the Dems in Congress wasting more time and accomplishing nothing. Go Nancy, Go Harry, the Reps best friends.
2007-07-05 13:19:19 · answer #6 · answered by booman17 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Get the first one to gather more than 6 signatures before considering starting a 2nd that won't stand a chance.
2007-07-05 13:19:44 · answer #7 · answered by wizjp 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Where is the crime?
Congress is not moving forward because there are too many that have their own "skeletons in the closet".
2007-07-05 13:21:34 · answer #8 · answered by Truth is elusive 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋