Why do you think Congress isn't conducting impeachment proceedings against President Bush?

Question

There is a list of high crimes and misdemeanors that can be charged and proved against this President.

For starters:

1. Manipulating intelligence to engage the U.S. in a war of aggression against Iraq.

2. Engaging the U.S. military in acts of torture that conflict with International treaties that the U.S. was predominately responsible for creating and enforcing.

3. Instructing the A.G. Gonzales to conduct unlawful domestic warrantless wiretaps and arresting/detaining American citizens without allowing them their constitutional rights such as holding them without charge, without access to counsel, indefinitely.

That's 3 so far!

Why isn't anyone like Nancy Pelosi seriously pursuing this?

Flipper: *****
Yours is the only correct answer!
Soon I hope Americans realize this.

IMO many are hoping to expand and benefit from the powers this President and the formers have created AGAINST the citizens.
Pay very close attention to Pakistan. What's going on there is a trial run for declaring Martial Law in the U.S.. This measure should be easily attainable after the next attack on American soil! Remember Chertoff's 'gut' feeling?
Forewarning!

Answer 1

Because they don't have the votes necessary to carry it through.

Answer 2

You've left out the newest and most damning crime of President Bush.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel LeVin visited a military base and had them waterboard him. It was filmed and played on msnbc last night.
When LeVin returned to the White House, he informed Attorney General Gonzales and the President the waterboarding is, indeed, torture. He was fired. The President O.K.'ed water boarding after being informed by the AG that water boarding is an illegal method of torture. Bush will be imprisoned, though maybe not impeached by this weak Congress.

Answer 3

When Clinton was impeached, it costs America somewhere around $80 million dollars. With President Bush spending every dime we have, and some we don't, where is the money going to come from to pay for that? Besides, he would be found innocent, and the impeachment process would take longer than he has left in office. Be satisfied that he will be remembered as having a low approval rating and also that he will be remembered for negatives, and not positives.

Answer 4

Only those in the House of Representatives know the answer to your question. Even if they did manage to pass the articles of impeachment, they're not going to get the necessary 2/3 majority in the Senate to secure a conviction and get him removed from office. The most they can get is impeachment. He will still be the President when it's all done.

Answer 5

For one thing none of that is what you think it is.
For another thing he will be gone in 12 months and it would take longer then that to get it started.
If Pelosi pursued anything she would get caught up in it too.
And you could also look at the hundreds of times this has been asked and find an answer you would understand.
Finally, do you have proof that all of this was done by the President?
I bet he had fun going out and torturing those people.
Don't know too much about anything, do you?
Watch this one folks. She is due for white jacket time. Trial run for martial law, how idiotic. Conspiracy abounds. We have had martial law several times and elections were held. Are you really so naive to think something like that could happen. Poor child.

Answer 6

Why not impeach Nancy Pelosi for going to the middle east, earlier this year, to encourage the leaders of the terrorist and their supporters to further the fight against the American Troupes ???
60 + years ago, this was called " HIGH TREASON" !!!!!
They are all guilty of various acts. Like peas in a pod, can you really tell any difference??

Answer 7

The real reason that Congress doesn't impeach Bush is because Congress is filled with gutless politicians who refuse to take a stand on the important issues. That is the reason that there is no talk about world overpopulation, La Reconquista, impeaching Bush, and raising taxes on oil? No guts, no glory!

Answer 8

1. Manipulating intelligence to engage the U.S. in a war of aggression against Iraq. - One he didn't manipulate intelligence. CIA did. Also used intelligence from other countries. So it was not just him making it up as you say. Another thing they would have to say that they got duped and no one likes to acknowledge that. But they weren't so is moot point.

2. Engaging the U.S. military in acts of torture that conflict with International treaties that the U.S. was predominately responsible for creating and enforcing. - Treaties are for other nations who are in uniform. Any torture was done to those that don't follow the same treaties you are thinking about.

3. Instructing the A.G. Gonzales to conduct unlawful domestic warrantless wiretaps and arresting/detaining American citizens without allowing them their constitutional rights such as holding them without charge, without access to counsel, indefinitely. - All arrests of US citizens and any wiretaps were done with warrants. Others done without warrants was done to none US citizens.

SO they have nothing to impeach him on.

Answer 9

i think of for this u . s . a . to regain any legitimacy and credibility in this international, impeachment courtroom situations may be triumphant. i admire the remark above how Bush did to the full u . s . a . what Clinton did to "lady buddies." i ponder whether maximum folk be attentive to approximately this... i be attentive to that CNN reported no longer something approximately this till a minimum of here day. like it replace into 2d website information. With Clinton they have been just about blasting the tiniest progression with loudspeakers. even nonetheless Bush in ordinary terms has in simple terms over a a million/2 365 days in place of work, human beings should be attentive to the actuality. To Reader.author under this, you're forgetting with regard to the tens of 1000's of Iraqi deaths, do you think of they are all terrorists? You point out 9/11, the place the huge majority of hijackers have been Saudis, what does this could do with Iraq? in simple terms via fact they are all Arabs? it would be like if Canada attacked Russia inflicting Russia attacking the US, in simple terms via fact we are close by. i think of going into Iraq has made the area extra volatile for destiny peace for the US. If we had centred on Bin weighted down fairly of Saddam Hussein we does no longer be coping with an empowered Iran now. there have been books recently released by utilising human beings on the brink of the conflict and the administration, examine 'em out. Written by utilising Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez (the onetime commander of U.S. troops in Iraq) and Scott McClellan. They the two provide solid situations for impeachment. The regulation is the regulation. Bush broke it. human beings dies, are demise, and could proceed to die. 9/11 replace into in simple terms an excuse to invade Iraq, he might have invaded if 9/11 did no longer ensue. surely, i do no longer think of 9/11 belongs in a communicate related to Iraq. the two issues are no longer linked.

Answer 10

They are waiting for the evidence. Actually impeachment requires proof of high crimes and misdemeanors and there does have to be proof that Bush was a fully knowledgeable party to such crimes.

Answer 11

because they all lie just to get into office.nancy pelosi, talked a tough show before she was voted into her office.now there you won;t hear anything else from her.she got what she wanted from the american people.there are no good politicans left in the white house.they will all sell their country out if the price is right.