I know I'd happily volunteer.
2007-11-18 01:12:59 · 14 answers · asked by The President 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The evidence is already there.
As to why they will not do it, because the majority of our Congress (Both Democrats and Republicans) sold their souls years ago to corporate interests.
2007-11-18 01:16:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
No, Colin Powell would never and should never testify against Bush. Look, as much as I personally hate George Bush for getting the country into such a mess, I still believe in honor and loyalty and that a man should never betray his own. Besides, Powell's own role in the administration is unclear. Any testimony he gives could also incriminate himself. As the Secretary of State, Powell should have had access the same information. If any of the information pointed to the fact that there was no WMD, then Powell should have stepped up immediately then to stand against the war. Instead, he chose to ignore the fact that the intelligence of WMD was dubious and fictitious, and stood by as Bush deliberately led us into a war based on wrong information. To put this bluntly, Powell failed the American people, if indeed he knew the truth back then and didn't come forth with the truth.
2016-05-24 01:59:42 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Seriously, I'd be a little frightened. I've wondered why so many people who made anti-Bush statements in the press or in their books quickly retracted them. Some examples are former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil, nuclear arms inspectors David Kay, IAEA head Hans Blix, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan... I know there are at least three more, but that's all I can think of now...In any case, I get the clear impression that people who have information and who come out publicly are threatened or bribed or maybe both.
2007-11-18 01:35:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Love the portrait of GWB .Yes Yes Yes i would testify in a heart beat.War crimes,mis leading America about everything he has said or done.Hunting down and smoking out the wrong perpertraors,Cheating in elections see Florida 2000]hiding the Bin Laden family ,oil ties to Saudi.If there ever was a president who needed to be impeached it would be monkey boy GWB.Job rating 24 % lowest ever in American history.
2007-11-18 01:35:00 · answer #4 · answered by wanna know 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I will take no part in the frivolous impeachment process.
I never liked Clinton, but I also thought it was a waste of time when He was impeached by the House of Reps.
2007-11-18 01:38:55 · answer #5 · answered by Neal 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If I was subpoenaed by Congress... I suppose I would have to.
But if Bush gets impeached, you get President Cheney. Way to plan ahead.
2007-11-18 01:17:31 · answer #6 · answered by Citicop 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes
2007-11-18 01:18:59 · answer #7 · answered by RELAX 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes, I would certianly impeach him. I am from New Orleans and you should see how they are trying to get our land down here.
2007-11-18 01:20:43 · answer #8 · answered by fred g 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Sure... to keep the lefts political circus going, Then Nancy and Harry can keep those 11% aapproval ratings and ensure they go down in history as the worst congress elected...
Hey naming post office is much more important than funding troops....... "We Lost" Harry Reid and Kookininch are doing a wonderful job.
2007-11-18 01:18:50 · answer #9 · answered by garyb1616 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
So long as I was not asked to lie under oath.
2007-11-18 01:16:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋