Who wants the president impeech? And why?
2007-08-04 08:40:52 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
sweet jesus!! im a man who always looks at all sides of an issue before i make a judgement!!
its right in front of your face!!!
talk about denial!!!
his empire is tumbling down!!!
get a clue!!!
he needs meds right away, help the man, hes lost it!
why cant he just bow out repectivly and peacefullY?!!!
2007-08-04 09:08:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
For willful violation of federal laws.
For conducting warrantless wiretapping in violation of FISA (50 USC 180x) and Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control Act (18 USC 2511) -- by his own admission, he violated those requirements. Any affirmative defense (justification, etc.) can be raised at trial.
For committing federal war crimes (18 USC 2441) by violating requirements of the Geneva Conventions. As confirmed by the US Supreme Court (Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld). Any affirmative defense (justification, constitutional authority, etc.) can be raised at trial.
For federal contempt of congress (2 USC 192, 18 USC 1001) by ordering individuals to ingore Congressional subpoenas -- executive privilege does not excuse appearing before the committee at all, at best it just allows someone to refuse to answer any questions. Ordering someone (Miers, Rove) not to appear at all is a felony.
Those are teh simple ones to prove, because he's already admitted the underlying facts. Hence, a prima facie case is already made. Any affirmative defense can be raised at trial.
And if anyone thinks that they can prove that he never did the things above -- despite his admissions to doing so -- I'd be happy to hear your legal arguments privately. Or publicly.
Remember -- impeachment means "trial". it doesn't mean conviction. I'll fully grant that the Senate would never vote 2/3 to convict -- it doesn't matter how much evidence or legal proof is presented. Because that's a political issue.
But no rational person can deny that he performed these actions, which have been widely publicized. And nobody who bothers to read the law has ever been able to explain why those actions do not at least make out a prima facie case -- excluding any affirmative defenses to be proved at trial.
2007-08-04 15:57:35 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Isn't going to happen in this life time. And it's standard procedure on here to get the 10 points for a best answer.
2007-08-04 15:59:53 · answer #3 · answered by Brianne 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You don't have the votes to impeach him nor the charge.
2007-08-04 15:55:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
He has done nothing impeachable. Next.
2007-08-04 15:55:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
not me. and it is impeached.
2007-08-04 17:08:00 · answer #6 · answered by Poke_the_Bear 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you have no votes, no charges, and no case. but thanks for playing.
2007-08-04 15:57:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋