Surely there is some basis for this never ending crap about impeaching Bush. What law has he broken? Are low approval ratings illegal, because if so, we should just clean the entire federal government out from top to bottom.
2007-09-27 06:22:22 · 30 answers · asked by Brad the Fox 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Henry VIII, I've never agreed with you, but I don't remember you being so gullible as to believe that kind of crap. If there was any evidence as to any of that, he would have been impeached a long time ago, except for the wire tapping, which to date the legality still hasn't been determined. Outing a CIA agent, I don't think his name was ever even brought up in that. For that matter, it was a democrat who did that. You need to lay off the left fringe websites.
2007-09-27 06:38:18 · update #1
Santrega, thanks for the soap box speech, but you could not come up with one impeachable offense. Save your rants for a question about whether Bush is doing a good job or not.
2007-09-27 06:52:10 · update #2
They are just still mad that Their beloved idiot Clinton was impeached for doing exactly what THEY do
2007-09-27 06:24:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 7⤋
The specific standard is set by the Constitution: "high crimes and misdemeanors."
Has Bush broken any laws? In all seriousness, that's not entirely certain. But--he has (among other things) authorized warrentless surveillance of American citizens, authorized the denial of due process to detainees--and in some respects to American citizens as well.
When I say this, I am not referring to Bush's particular actions, per se. That these abuses haeve occurred is certain. The extent to which Bush knowingly approved some of these acts is--in all fairness--not proven. Personally I think he's guilty as h--l. But--inpeachment is not conviction. When and if it comes, it should be voted on jsut as a jury would vote in a regular trial--on the evidence uncovered and presented at the time.
You are correct, though--it is not and should not be about apporval ratings--nor even Bush's incompetance. Being a screw-up isn't a crime.
Cleaning out the entire Federal govenrment would be a good idea anyway! :)
2007-09-27 13:32:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Technically they can begin impeachment proceedings for just about anything. The Constitution loosely defines the grounds for which a politician can be impeached as "high crimes and misdemeanors". The tricky part is when they actually have to prove their charges against him. This is where their whole case falls apart.
Edit: Proof, evidence, truth, and facts were never liberal strong points.
2007-09-27 13:31:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Corporal Punishment is apparently a little slow. Either that or he thinks that most Clinton supporters run around perjuring themselves in front of a Grand Jury--not sure about you other guys, but Ive never even been in front of a Grand Jury.
Ford said that Congress decides what is impeachable at the moment, there is no set rule. That seems logical considering the wording. Bush has championed many unconstitutional Acts and has issued grossly unconstitutional Executive Orders. That could easily be seen as an impeachable offense, but then most of Congress would be going down with him, so its not going to happen. Basically, anything he could be impeached for Congress agreed to, and theyre not going to get enough people to vote to end their own careers just to take out one man.
2007-09-27 13:35:58 · answer #4 · answered by Showtunes 6 · 0⤊ 5⤋
A question for the left. If there were grounds for impeachment, why hasn't it already happened? If they could get rid of both Bush and Cheney they could have Pelosi as their president for the next 16 months. Now it doesn't seem like such a good idea, does it? Nancy could never be reelected, so Hillary would be a sure thing to win, though. Right?
2007-09-27 13:30:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋
There are absolutely NO GROUNDS for impeachment. If there were, you can bet that liberal loonies like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Ted Kennedy would have initiated impeachment proceedings the first chance they got. But they didn't because Bush has done nothing wrong. Being unpopular isn't grounds for impeachment. Sorry.
2007-09-27 13:26:32 · answer #6 · answered by ? 5 · 10⤊ 2⤋
There are no grounds. And with the clock running out on the Bush administration the Dems won't want to tie themselves down back in Washington on a two-year legal proceeding on a 16 month administration during fund-raising and re-election prime time.
The voters would perceive it as useless, political posturing. Nobody will touch it.
2007-09-27 13:33:18 · answer #7 · answered by nileslad 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Because I didn't vote for him in the last two presidential elections and I worked really hard for Kerry to get elected and we still lost! That's not fair so Bush must have stolen the election even though the ACLU and the NYTimes found otherwise. They were just bought off by the government. Has to be. I don't like Bush so we should impeach him!
That's basically how the liberal Democrats see it.
2007-09-27 13:26:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Thank you for asking this question. There are none. Until the impeachment nuts realize that there is no chance of impeaching him, their energy will be wasted when it could be going into other more important matters.
2007-09-27 13:26:35 · answer #9 · answered by Frank 6 · 9⤊ 2⤋
There are absolutely NO GROUNDS for any impeachment proceeeding against President George W. Bush!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-09-27 19:45:34 · answer #10 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
#1. For starting a war of aggression based on known fraudulent intelligence.
People in his administration told him BEFORE he CHOSE to use the Niger Uranium evidence that it wasn't solid!!
#2. For commanding his Attorney General to use warrantless wiretaps against the citizens of the United States effectively subverting the 4th Amendment.
For arresting and/or detaining U.S. citizens without the rights provided in the 6th and 8th Amendments.
#3. For not abiding by International treaty laws signed by the United States through The Geneva Conventions.
2007-09-27 13:40:45 · answer #11 · answered by Kelly B 4 · 1⤊ 5⤋