2007-08-31 22:45:32 · 12 answers · asked by rayman 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
We can save the discussion about WHY we went into Iraq for another day, but regardless what you think of the war, impeachment is not for punishing the President for a "mistake"...it is for committing a crime.
2007-09-01 00:17:02 · answer #1 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
WMD was not a fiasco. I think there was and is plenty of evidence that they did or still do exist.
We did not go to war against Iraq or invade them. We are fighting the war against terrorism. Plenty of terror was there.
President Bush has committed no impeachable offense.
2007-09-03 09:01:33 · answer #2 · answered by Gerry G 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For the same reason that no senators have been when they changed the Constitution to suit their own needs (which is more money bilked from the people they are supposed to represent) back in the 1930's. If it profits politicians, it isn't illegal and since they make the laws, there are provisions that you would normally never see that protect them from prosecution. I am sure the Presidency has those same protections built into that office. Of course this is all only my opinion.
2007-08-31 23:04:37 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
WMD...does that stand for "We May Drill"?.....it was obvious from the very beginning there were no weapons of mass destruction...and the only real reason was the oil.....he is responsible for all the blood spilt (american and iraqi) and it doesnt matter if he's impeached or not...he'll reap what he sows in the Hereafter.....
as for intelligence...haha...this coming from a guy who can not even read a primary school book the right way up!
2007-08-31 23:28:23 · answer #4 · answered by destinys_final 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Because it does not rise to the level of high crime or misdemeanor.
An impeachment cannot be held simply because the President has injured the feelings of the radical left.
On a practical note the majority in Congress is to slim to support an impeachment. Many of the congressmen who won their seats ran as moderates. An impeachment would not enhance their claim to moderation.
2007-08-31 22:58:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 4⤋
Do you mean the WMD's that were FOUND in 2004? Or the one's that the UN smuggled into our country for God know's what?
2007-08-31 23:22:42 · answer #6 · answered by Linderfan 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
well first of all we didn't "invade" Iraq, and secondly we were asked by the Iraqis to come there to help end a tyrant's rein. Neither has anything to do with a reason to impeach.
2007-08-31 22:52:55 · answer #7 · answered by sophieb 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Because most people realize he was going on the intelligence he had. The same intelligence Bill Clinton had when he bombed them during Monicagate.
2007-08-31 22:51:18 · answer #8 · answered by Jeff E 4 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Bush , unlike Clinton, has NOT committed an impeachable crime. That is why. Like it or not.
2007-08-31 22:56:59 · answer #9 · answered by mamadixie 7 · 5⤊ 5⤋
He still has too many people convinced that he is the best president ever. I think he's pure evil. But he's got enough money to buy his way out of all his lies.
2007-08-31 22:53:06 · answer #10 · answered by countrygirl30143 2 · 5⤊ 7⤋