Not SHOULD but *WILL* he be impeached?

evenkat

Byrnzie wrote:

I strongly believe that there is enough concrete evidence available which proves beyond reasonable doubt that senior figures in the Bush Administration had prior knowledge of plans to attack key targets in the U.S using hijacked planes, and that they allowed the attacks to happen.
If you need clarification of this, then read this book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Pearl-Harbor-Disturbing-Administration/dp/1844370364/sr=1-1/qid=1163113704/ref=sr_1_1/203-1304400-2249523?ie=UTF8&s=books

Thanks for sharing. I usually go to the bookstore on Sunday mornings. I'll look for it.

world

Dubya will NOT be impeached, and SHOULDNT be impeached.

btw, dont bash me and call me a neo-con. I dont like Bush and im happy the dems won the House.

evenkat

world wrote:

Dubya will NOT be impeached, and SHOULDNT be impeached.

btw, dont bash me and call me a neo-con. I dont like Bush and im happy the dems won the House.

I think there should be investigations and hearings before we say whether Bush should be impeached or not. Bush may have made a big mistake but he also could have deliberately misled the country into war with Iraq for other reasons.

Songburst

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

He will not be impeached, and he shouldn't be. I love the last line in your first paragraph, "his apparent involvement on "the worst terror attack ever on American soil." Your joking right?

He won't be impeached but hasn't he doubled the number of Americans who have died as a result of 9/11? But I'm sure that because of his decision making and courageous actions, America is much less likely to be a target and every American is safer than they were on Sept 12.

The worst part is that if he wasn't a complete idiot (or puppet), he had a chance to go down as one of the best President's in history. He had 2 major catastrophes on which he could have built a heroic legacy if he would have done something right and he blew both chances miserably. I still can't fathom that anybody defends anything that this loser does. He is nothing short of a punch line in the history of the States.

hippiemom

Byrnzie wrote:

I strongly believe that there is enough concrete evidence available which proves beyond reasonable doubt that senior figures in the Bush Administration had prior knowledge of plans to attack key targets in the U.S using hijacked planes, and that they allowed the attacks to happen.
If you need clarification of this, then read this book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Pearl-Harbor-Disturbing-Administration/dp/1844370364/sr=1-1/qid=1163113704/ref=sr_1_1/203-1304400-2249523?ie=UTF8&s=books

Oh, you don't need to convince me that he broke the law. As far as I'm concerned, the warrantless wiretapping alone is enough, or sending prisoners off to be tortured, or ... well, you get the idea, I think there's plenty of reasons, whether or not he was involved in 9/11 (and I'm not saying he was or wasn't, I haven't read that much about it).

But the democratic leadership doesn't agree, a good number of the democrats elected last Tuesday are moderate (some are former republicans), and in any case they'd never get a 2/3 majority anyway, so it ain't happening.

Jeanwah

Songburst wrote:

He is nothing short of a punch line in the history of the States.

"The worst president EVER".

And he should have been impeached when all the lies he's made were fresh on the minds of Americans. But the Dems dropped the ball. We're past the point of impeachment now, I'm just hoping the Dems will just try to get America back on the right track. Now's the time to make a change, not an impeachment.

hippiemom

Jeanwah wrote:

"The worst president EVER".

And he should have been impeached when all the lies he's made were fresh on the minds of Americans. But the Dems dropped the ball. We're past the point of impeachment now, I'm just hoping the Dems will just try to get America back on the right track. Now's the time to make a change, not an impeachment.

No, the republicans dropped the ball. The democrats had no power in congress. That's not to say that they wouldn't have dropped the ball given the chance, but it's unfair to say it was their fault. The republican leadership wouldn't let anything come to the floor, wouldn't even give the democrats a room to have their own hearings, or when they did get a room, the republicans turned out the lights and the power to the microphones. Besides, they were a minority, they'd have never gotten a simple majority to vote for impeachment, much less the 2/3 required, and they wouldn't get it now either, which is why they're not going to waste their time.

Androgynous Mind

don't gimme no wrote:

Argue all you want. His ordering of the illegal wire taps and overseeing the forging of documents that lead to war absolutely does fall under the category of "high crimes and misdemeanors." He's yet to be held accountable for either thing and no one's pressed it....but they will. Not to mention his overseeing of crimes against humanity in Iraq, his endoresement of torture, and his apparent involvement on "The worst terror attack ever on American soil."

So....Now the question is - Will Bush 43 be impeached? I think so. I think both he and Cheney will be held accountable for their criminal behavior over the past six years.

No way...the Democrats are going to make a big deal and might try it, but it won't happen. They should focus their efforts on the future of America and try to do something now that they have majorities in the House and Senate. They have been bitching about everything the Republicans have done wrong, so it is time to see what they can get accomplished. It is time to focus on the positives and keep our nation strong.

SpinMyWorldToBlack

Songburst wrote:

He won't be impeached but hasn't he doubled the number of Americans who have died as a result of 9/11?

No. Terrorists are killing our brave men & women, not President Bush.

Songburst wrote:

The worst part is that if he wasn't a complete idiot (or puppet), he had a chance to go down as one of the best President's in history. He had 2 major catastrophes on which he could have built a heroic legacy if he would have done something right and he blew both chances miserably. I still can't fathom that anybody defends anything that this loser does. He is nothing short of a punch line in the history of the States.

You could arguably say the same thing about President Clinton after the numerous terrorist attacks on American interests both home and abroad. Most notably, you had the 1993 WTC bombing. Hell, Clinton even had an infamous hurricane (Andrew in '93). Clinton isn't know for riding to the rescue in the case of the latter or the former. You're nitpicking, IMHO.


Oh and I think they will impeach him in the House. They cannot resist themselves nor the MoveOn.org wing of the party. It's win/win for the GOP either way b/c the electorate will not react positively to impeachment proceedings AGAIN. Especially since the Dems have been stressing bi-partisanship in their drive to winning control of Congress.

jlew24asu

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

He will not be impeached, and he shouldn't be. I love the last line in your first paragraph, "his apparent involvement on "the worst terror attack ever on American soil." Your joking right?

sadly he's not. there are about 7-10 on this board who firmly believe the bush, rummy, cheney, wolfowitz or combination thereof, sat at starbucks and came up with the plan and carried it out on 9/11. makes me sick.

its part of the problem with freedom. we have to tolerated garbage like that.

Gary Carter

SpinMyWorldToBlack wrote:

No. Terrorists are killing our brave men & women, not President Bush.

yes it cause bush put them there to fight a senseless war.where are those wmds huh please tell me and i thought the war was over too.the mans a dickhead and should be impeached for war crimes.yes the ass will be impeached

momofglynn

zstillings wrote:

Political education by bumper stickers and slogans is definitely a good idea.

it's not a bumper sticker it's the fucking truth....Clinton got impeached because he got a fucking blow job. Like he was the only president that ever got a blow job in office before? Fuck! Marilyn was doing both Kennedy brothers.

Bush has done so pretty messed up things but I highly doubt he will be impeached, I do not want him to be impeached. I agree with the other's person comment that 2 presidents in a row to go through that, would show a very bad sign to the world. He's only got 2 years left. I am just counting the days when that bastard is gone.

I do not think the democrats are the answer to all our problems. But what I do think is that this election sent a pretty clear message to Washington that the American people are tried of the bullshit. Tired of the lies. Tired of a war that should had never started. To me, that's what took place on Tuesday, it was to send a very clear and loud message to Washington and it worked!

I do not think I have smiled this much during an election period for a long long time. I am still chuckling just thinking about how Bush must had felt Wednesday.

JaneNY

I don't think he will be. If the democrats are smart, they'll focus on the issues that are important to the country and that have been neglected - healthcare, wage issues, education, better iraq strategies (and I have NO idea what that would be at this point). It would be wasteful to squander this victory by focusing energy on just impeachment when there's so much that needs attention. I guess that's sliding back into *should* rather than *will*. No I don't think he will be. I think the democrats (of which I am one) are smarter than that.

floyd1975

momofglynn wrote:

it's not a bumper sticker it's the fucking truth....Clinton got impeached because he got a fucking blow job.

He was not impeached because of a blow job. To say that he was is either purposely misleading or ignoring your "fucking truth" that you seem to think you are touting.

BogoEN

zstillings wrote:

He was not impeached because of a blow job. To say that he was is either purposely misleading or ignoring your "fucking truth" that you seem to think you are touting.

Yes, you are right-he was impeached because he lied under oath. Certainly a bad choice. But it's hard not to see, even from a nonpartisan perspective, that Republicans took advantage of their majority and Clinton's mistakes as revenge for taking the White House. Honestly, should a President have been removed from power because he denied that he had oral sex with a woman? Even if it was under oath. No president should be REMOVED for that, certainly criticized and reprimanded, but not removed. It was a political coup.

floyd1975

BogoEN wrote:

Yes, you are right-he was impeached because he lied under oath. Certainly a bad choice. But it's hard not to see, even from a nonpartisan perspective, that Republicans took advantage of their majority and Clinton's mistakes as revenge for taking the White House. Honestly, should a President have been removed from power because he denied that he had oral sex with a woman? Even if it was under oath. No president should be REMOVED for that, certainly criticized and reprimanded, but not removed. It was a political coup.

I don't think Clinton should have been impeached. I also thing that the impeachment hearings were a huge waste of time and money. I do, however, think that "Clinton was impeached for a blow-job" is juvenile bumper sticker logic.

Skitch Patterson

No is my answer to the thread.



for my comments on the other thing being debated here, please refer to zstillings posts.

callen

jlew24asu wrote:

sadly he's not. there are about 7-10 on this board who firmly believe the bush, rummy, cheney, wolfowitz or combination thereof, sat at starbucks and came up with the plan and carried it out on 9/11. makes me sick.

its part of the problem with freedom. we have to tolerated garbage like that.

don't let it make you sick...there are folks on the fringe....but they are few and far between.....I know of none of my lib friends that believes this....we feel Bush and croanies are to incompetent to pull something like this off. (-: