Should have happened years ago but its too late now. Besides, we'd have to take Cheney down at the same time or it would be pointless. We'll replace the cons the old fashion way 11 months from now. Oh and for those of you that are just now awakening from your 7 year coma first of all; Welcome back, and second, cited below lists your president's impeachable offenses as they are too numerous to list here.
2007-11-28 16:37:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by David M 6
·
1⤊
6⤋
To impeach (and convict) a sitting president requires that he commit a crime (like perjury for example). "Failure in Iraq" is not a crime. As for the old and tired "he lied" bs, I remind you that not only our intelligence services believe Iraq had WMDs, but so did those of Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany. Even Saddam's own generals believed they had them. Testimony from former high ranking officials (those that knew) show that Saddam wanted the world to think that so Iran would think it also since he was afraid of what they would do if they knew the truth. We (and everybody else) were wrong. But being wrong is not the same as lying. Too bad the people (Bush hating politicians) who tell you what to think don't understand that. It's very simple (so simple even you can understand), if Saddam had let the U.N. inspectors verify the lack of WMDs, we would not have had that reason for the war. Wonder if he regretted that right before he hit the end of the rope?
2007-11-29 05:03:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Jay 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
While President Bush has certainly done some things of questionable legality, failing in Iraq and having the dollar lose value on his watch are not impeachable offenses. In addition, it would be very much like the pot calling the kettle black. I believe many members of Congress should be impeached for abdicating their constitutional responsibility to declare war to the executive branch when they passed the resolution "authorizing" military action. In essence, they said, "Mr. President, you make the decision." That is not what the constitution calls for!
2007-11-29 00:38:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by Will G 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
President Bush made no false statements regarding WMD to the American People that has been proven in any regard. He made a decision based on information he had in order to protect the American People and our country as we know it! The terrorists implied they had such weapons and there was no solid proof one way or the other. I would hate to live in a country where the President did not care enough to do the same thing and make the same decision in a time of uncertainty. After all, the American dollar will be worth nothing if our country no longer exists!
2007-11-29 00:39:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by Q1 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
As for failing in Iraq - incompetence is not a crime. As for lying to congress - I am still unaware of him taking an oath so doubt this is a crime - and anyway Republicans have managed to make plenty of hay by pleading ignorance whenever they have been caught lying (remember Iran-Contra).
Impeaching Bush would be a partisan politically motivated and thoroughly pointless exercise. Ginchrich and his following may have thought this was worth jeopardizing national security for by taking Clinton's attention away from defending the nation (and criticizing him when he did continue to defend the nation anyway) but I believe the majority of the Dems are above this.
2007-11-29 00:44:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by Sageandscholar 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Dick Cheney is the reason why Bush has not been impeached. He's even scarier than Bush and democrats don't want him for the president. Besides, he'd be out of office before they could get the hearings on the docket.
2007-11-29 00:44:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
No. He has done nothing wrong. There is heroic progress happening in Iraq. The American people admire President Bush for his courage and integrity in the White House.
2007-11-29 01:13:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by Liza 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Do us all a favor and go back over the voting records and you ll see that the house,and senate and Hillary voted for the war(IN IRAQ).Bill Clinton supported it also,and the presidents decision to go into Iraq,dont believe me,go to Bills Library and look up the archives.I tell you this because I see the truth from us is incomprehensible.Look for yourself!
2007-11-29 00:46:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by stygianwolfe 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Impeaching Bush would be political suicide.
Sounds like the surge is working and the so-called lies are the same things that the "impeachers" were saying when they voted for the war. Also, no attacks on our soil since 9/11.
Sounds like success to me. It may take you 10-20 years to figure it out. I'll forgive you, liberals have always been a little slow on the take.
2007-11-29 00:35:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by Freedom Guy 4
·
5⤊
3⤋
Oh boy, here we go again. Blah, blah, blah. We've heard it all before. To impeach a president, you need proof of a wrongdoing, and there isn't any. Add on the fact that messing up a war isn't a impeachable offense and I think we can say Congress wouldn't have a leg to stand on if they tried this.
2007-11-29 00:33:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
2⤋
What ground would they legally have to impeach Bush? None! The reason we have a weak dollar is because our government is spending to much money period and not on things that are important like protecting our troops! If we reduce our national debt by spending LESS not by RAISING taxes then the dollar will make a comeback!
2007-11-29 00:34:54
·
answer #11
·
answered by Calvin T 2
·
4⤊
3⤋