I keep hearing that Bush has gone agianst the Constitution. But I can't find where he did. I want the pecific Admendment.
2007-10-16 06:00:30 · 15 answers · asked by DALE M 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bromide:
Hillary voted for the Patriot Act. She voted for it again when it came up for renewal. Is she qualified for impeachment already?
Can we finnally clean house in congress and get rid of all the congressman and senators that voted for it an violated the constitution?
2007-10-16 06:07:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 4⤋
"the pecific Admendments" are
IV-warrantless wiretaps and searches
V-detaining people without charge and depriving people of life and liberty without due process
VI-Accused shall be informed of the nature and cause of accusation and has the right to a speedy and public trial
VIII-Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishment inflicted
Bush has been criminally negligent of his Constitutional responsibilities as Commander In Chief specifically, but not limited to his failure to act when repeatedly informed of an iminent attack on America.
Bush has failed to uphold his oath of office regarding preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution.
Bush has violated Amendment I by curtailing free speech into zones and by funding certain religious establishments.
2007-10-16 06:29:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Amendments 4 + 6
2007-10-16 06:28:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The main job of the feds is to provide for the common defense - this means close the border! It isn't just Bush - through the years we have lost our 1st, 4th, 5th, and 6th amendment rights. The Supreme Court has taken some. The laws of the one world government take precedence over the Constitution.
2007-10-16 06:14:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Article 1, Sec, 9.
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion or the public safety may require it."
I don't know about you, but I see no rebellion, invasion or immediate public threat. So what the hell is this national embarrassment called Gitmo?
And you might want to drop that "lib" crap. Makes you sound ignorant.
2007-10-16 06:43:29 · answer #5 · answered by douglas l 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The patriot act did not give the President the power to conduct wiretaps on anyone without a court order, The President did that illegally, according to the supreme court.
2007-10-16 06:14:58 · answer #6 · answered by redd headd 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says that no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law. This means your property cannot be taken from you without a fair trial in which you are found guilty. Despite this, George W. Bush has signed an executive order that directs the Treasury Department to seize any and all assets of individuals who are deemed to pose a threat to the United States.
However, I seriously doubt you are actually interested in the truth.
2007-10-16 06:10:34 · answer #7 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 6⤊ 3⤋
Pecific, as opposed to Etlantic?
2007-10-16 06:15:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Read the following two documents.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/powersurge_healy_lynch.pdf
http://www.counterpunch.org/boyle01172003.html
2007-10-16 06:12:50 · answer #9 · answered by Ian W 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Sure, glad to help.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
2007-10-16 06:05:56 · answer #10 · answered by Think 1st 7 · 12⤊ 4⤋