Somewhere, I think possibly in the constitution, there may be a distinction between poor decisions and breaking the law. Oh, plus how can we go against the will of Uncle Neil?
...
...
The problem is.. Bush didn't violate the Constitution... he perverted it by working around it... like, getting Congress to relinquish its Wars Power Act to him so he could unilaterally (along with his drinking buddy, England, Austrailia and some busboys from Costa Rica and two guys from Tonga) to go into Iraq... or warping the warrant process to allow wiretaps.
He didn't wipe his ass with the Constitution... more like, pissed on it.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
What if there is no '08 election? What if a major catastrophe happens and Bush rules martial law?
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I think it would be the worst possible decision ever, even dumber (for those that thought it was dumb to go to Iraq) than going to Iraq.
How vindicated would the terrorist feel? Talk about giving those whacks jobs propaganda material? Shit, talk about creating more terrorist!!!!
So we're running this country based on how the terrorists feel? Do you honestly believe there are less terrorists now compared to before the war? We've fullfilled their false prophecy with Iraq and Lebanon....
...
Impeachment for what? Making one poor decision after another after another after another after another after another after another is not an impeachable offense.
maybe not impeachable, but talk to grey (gray?) davis. maybe they'd call for a "do-over".
this country has been "impeach" crazy in the last couple decades.
"PC Load Letter?! What the fuck does that mean?"
~Michael Bolton
An impeachment is a trial, not a conviction. And there is plenty that deserves evaluation: His relationship with Ken Lay, outing a CIA agent, misleading into war, fixing intelligence, jailing protesters, money for influence, warrentless spying,
An impeachment is a trial, not a conviction. And there is plenty that deserves evaluation: His relationship with Ken Lay, outing a CIA agent, misleading into war, fixing intelligence, jailing protesters, money for influence, warrentless spying,
haha oh yeah i forgot all that stuff. I was focused in on the war itself..
okay, he DEFINETLY deserves impeachment.
Clinton got it for getting a hummer for christ's sake...
Clinton got it for getting a hummer for christ's sake...
Not to pick on you PJ & T but do Americans know what Clinton went throught Impeachment hearings for? This after I saw people complaining that some Americans still belive there are/were WMDs in Iraq. Amazing.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
...
The problem is.. Bush didn't violate the Constitution... he perverted it by working around it... like, getting Congress to relinquish its Wars Power Act to him so he could unilaterally (along with his drinking buddy, England, Austrailia and some busboys from Costa Rica and two guys from Tonga) to go into Iraq... or warping the warrant process to allow wiretaps.
He didn't wipe his ass with the Constitution... more like, pissed on it.
Well, I'm tired and lazy but I'm confident there are several attorneys who specialize in constitutional law that say he definitely broke the law with the whole wiretap bullshit. And yeah, as others have mentioned, he's a war criminal. Sure I can't back it up but it's got to be true, right? If I weren't so tired I'd try to back up anything I say but again, I'm lazy and tired so without backup I'm sure it means nothing. Other than I'm usually right...hehe.
I was little at the time maybe i got my facts mixed..
That's right. He lied in an attempt to keep his sex life private, as it should be. There's a clear difference between lying about head that lead to...well, nothing and lying about WMDs that lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent humans.
Not to pick on you PJ & T but do Americans know what Clinton went throught Impeachment hearings for? This after I saw people complaining that some Americans still belive there are/were WMDs in Iraq. Amazing.
He was impeached because he got a blowjob - and blowjobs are sexy and they sell. The lying part was just a technicality they needed to make it all, you know, legit.
After all, he sure as hell wouldn't have been impeached if he lied about a kiss.
That's right. He lied in an attempt to keep his sex life private, as it should be. There's a clear difference between lying about head that lead to...well, nothing and lying about WMDs that lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent humans.
If he was trying to keep his sex life private then that should have been his answer. The lie was stupid and he got caught. I have to laugh how people try to justify it though.
Makes you wonder if he was willing to lie to Congress over something as inconsequential of a blowjob what would make anyone think he'd stoop to telling the truth on serious matters.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
If he was trying to keep his sex life private then that should have been his answer. The lie was stupid and he got caught. I have to laugh how people try to justify it though.
Makes you wonder if he was willing to lie to Congress over something as inconsequential of a blowjob what would make anyone think he'd stoop to telling the truth on serious matters.
Makes you wonder about Republicans in congress who campaigned on fiscal responsibility and then spent millions of dollars of taxpayer money on a political witchhunt. The only things more stupid than the lie he told were the questions they asked him.
I laugh when I think about an opposition party that detested him so much that they'd use his personal life to find a way to take him down.
"Of course it hurts. You're getting fucked by an elephant."
That's right. He lied in an attempt to keep his sex life private, as it should be. There's a clear difference between lying about head that lead to...well, nothing and lying about WMDs that lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent humans.
If the Dems win the house in November, should they impeach Bush?
No. Bush should be tried at the Hague for crimes against humanity, along with the rest of his administration, and along with Blair, and the Israeli leadership.
No. It's a silly question. He's done nothing worthy of impeachment.
Lying to the US people is not worthy of impeachment? Wow, you hold the lives of your countrymen in disrespect.
How about; (1) saying that there were direct links between Saddam Hussein and Al-Queda, (2) that Saddam Hussein had WMD's that could reach the US at 90 mins preparation and was ready to launch at the US, now totally dismissed by US investigators and a Pentagon report. (3) invading 2 soveriegn nations under the pretext's laid out above, which (4) has led to the deaths of thousands of US troops, which has also led to (5) the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent peoples, acts which, the crazy world of American constitutional law excepting, render him personally liable under Human rights conventions and or War Crimes tribunals. Or, maybe (6) illegally wiretapping every home in the US, or , maybe, (7) continuing to incarcerate innocent (no charges, no trial, equals innocent) detainees in Guantanamo which BREAKS A SUPREME COURT RULING.
Need I go further?
The world's greatest empires progress through this sequence:From bondage to spiritual faith; spiritual faith to great courage; courage to liberty;liberty to abundance;abundance to selfishness; selfishness to complacency;complacency to apathy;apathy to dependence;dependency back again into bondage
Lying to the US people is not worthy of impeachment? Wow, you hold the lives of your countrymen in disrespect.
How about; (1) saying that there were direct links between Saddam Hussein and Al-Queda, (2) that Saddam Hussein had WMD's that could reach the US at 90 mins preparation and was ready to launch at the US, now totally dismissed by US investigators and a Pentagon report. (3) invading 2 soveriegn nations under the pretext's laid out above, which (4) has led to the deaths of thousands of US troops, which has also led to (5) the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent peoples, acts which, the crazy world of American constitutional law excepting, render him personally liable under Human rights conventions and or War Crimes tribunals. Or, maybe (6) illegally wiretapping every home in the US, or , maybe, (7) continuing to incarcerate innocent (no charges, no trial, equals innocent) detainees in Guantanamo which BREAKS A SUPREME COURT RULING.
Need I go further?
No - you needn't go further - you have already shown everyone here that you love terrorists and hate your own country.
Go live in France in you don't like it here - Cut and run wimp!
"Sean Hannity knows there is no greater threat to America today than Bill Clinton 15 years ago"- Stephen Colbert
Lying to the US people is not worthy of impeachment? Wow, you hold the lives of your countrymen in disrespect.
How about; (1) saying that there were direct links between Saddam Hussein and Al-Queda, (2) that Saddam Hussein had WMD's that could reach the US at 90 mins preparation and was ready to launch at the US, now totally dismissed by US investigators and a Pentagon report. (3) invading 2 soveriegn nations under the pretext's laid out above, which (4) has led to the deaths of thousands of US troops, which has also led to (5) the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent peoples, acts which, the crazy world of American constitutional law excepting, render him personally liable under Human rights conventions and or War Crimes tribunals. Or, maybe (6) illegally wiretapping every home in the US, or , maybe, (7) continuing to incarcerate innocent (no charges, no trial, equals innocent) detainees in Guantanamo which BREAKS A SUPREME COURT RULING.
I'm not going to argue with 1 or 2 because I agree that there was a lot of misrepresentation. 3 and 4 are results of the first 2, so are redundant as reasons. 5 is silly. You are the second poster who has suggested that breaking some international convention is grounds for impeachment. 6 is a misrepresentation of reality and is no different than what you acsuse Bush of doing in your #1 reason. AND 7 MADE YOU START YELLING FOR SOME REASON, SO I'LL YELL BACK. You have a funny notion of innocence. Enemy combatants and terrorists shouldn't be afforded the same presumption of innocence as US citizens are, and it only broke the supreme court's ruling once they made the ruling WHICH JUST HAPPENED. You can't be accused of breaking a ruling that didn't exist when you started.
I'm not going to argue with 1 or 2 because I agree that there was a lot of misrepresentation. 3 and 4 are results of the first 2, so are redundant as reasons. 5 is silly. You are the second poster who has suggested that breaking some international convention is grounds for impeachment. 6 is a misrepresentation of reality and is no different than what you acsuse Bush of doing in your #1 reason. AND 7 MADE YOU START YELLING FOR SOME REASON, SO I'LL YELL BACK. You have a funny notion of innocence. Enemy combatants and terrorists shouldn't be afforded the same presumption of innocence as US citizens are, and it only broke the supreme court's ruling once they made the ruling WHICH JUST HAPPENED. You can't be accused of breaking a ruling that didn't exist when you started.
Please don't. You're really starting to stretch here.
I think Bush is a creep. I didn't vote for him. But I see this continued talk of impeachment to be nonsense.
(about #5) Breaking international law requires he be tried internationally right...? Like nurembourg?... So i guess technically impeachment would be out for that and all other stuff like that.
The wiretapping thing, if not technically illegal, is backhanded, completely immoral, and just running through loopholes in our laws. But honestly, god knows what else he's doing. Everytime we've discovered something about that he's said "no that's not true".. but it's proven true..
"No we don't know about any calls you're sending/recieving"
- false.
"Okay, but we only know calls from outside the country coming in"
- false.
etc..
His #7 would probably fall under the nurembourg thing...
He might not be able to be impeached solidly, but he sure as HELL is a war criminal and should be tried as such.
Comments
The problem is.. Bush didn't violate the Constitution... he perverted it by working around it... like, getting Congress to relinquish its Wars Power Act to him so he could unilaterally (along with his drinking buddy, England, Austrailia and some busboys from Costa Rica and two guys from Tonga) to go into Iraq... or warping the warrant process to allow wiretaps.
He didn't wipe his ass with the Constitution... more like, pissed on it.
Hail, Hail!!!
Drag the whole administration out of the White House tomorrow and have them tarred and feathered.
Acutally... that would be kinda funny. Tar and feather them all and make them go on a quail hunting trip with Cheney.
Hail, Hail!!!
Yes. Because Bush is a war criminal and a blatant violator of the Constitutional protections afforded to Americans and legal residents.
Then it would prove my theory that he is, indeed... the Anti-Christ.
Hail, Hail!!!
thousands of people dead in a country that had nothing to do with 9/11= ok
blowjob from intern in the oval office where nobody died= impeachment
i don't get it.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Apparently not, since he wasn't impeached for receiving a BJ.
So we're running this country based on how the terrorists feel? Do you honestly believe there are less terrorists now compared to before the war? We've fullfilled their false prophecy with Iraq and Lebanon....
maybe not impeachable, but talk to grey (gray?) davis. maybe they'd call for a "do-over".
this country has been "impeach" crazy in the last couple decades.
~Michael Bolton
I think he could and possibly should be tried for war crimes..
but as far as i know he's guilty of nothing more than gross incompetance and seemingly having no value on human life that is non-american.
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
okay, he DEFINETLY deserves impeachment.
Clinton got it for getting a hummer for christ's sake...
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
But why was he on trial? What did he lie about?
Getting a hummer... ?
Wasn't that it?
I was little at the time maybe i got my facts mixed..
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
After all, he sure as hell wouldn't have been impeached if he lied about a kiss.
Makes you wonder if he was willing to lie to Congress over something as inconsequential of a blowjob what would make anyone think he'd stoop to telling the truth on serious matters.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
attacking Iraq was completely against international law and any other ruler would be punished for this.
2010: Newark 5/18 MSG 5/20-21 2011: PJ20 9/3-4 2012: Made In America 9/2
2013: Brooklyn 10/18-19 Philly 10/21-22 Hartford 10/25 2014: ACL10/12
2015: NYC 9/23 2016: Tampa 4/11 Philly 4/28-29 MSG 5/1-2 Fenway 8/5+8/7
2017: RRHoF 4/7 2018: Fenway 9/2+9/4 2021: Sea Hear Now 9/18
2022: MSG 9/11 2024: MSG 9/3-4 Philly 9/7+9/9 Fenway 9/15+9/17
2025: Pittsburgh 5/16+5/18
Huh? Any other ruler wouldn't face impeachment by the US congress. And presidents aren't impeached for disobeying international bodies like the UN.
As far as I know we're still a sovereign nation.
Makes you wonder about Republicans in congress who campaigned on fiscal responsibility and then spent millions of dollars of taxpayer money on a political witchhunt. The only things more stupid than the lie he told were the questions they asked him.
I laugh when I think about an opposition party that detested him so much that they'd use his personal life to find a way to take him down.
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
No. Bush should be tried at the Hague for crimes against humanity, along with the rest of his administration, and along with Blair, and the Israeli leadership.
Lying to the US people is not worthy of impeachment? Wow, you hold the lives of your countrymen in disrespect.
How about; (1) saying that there were direct links between Saddam Hussein and Al-Queda, (2) that Saddam Hussein had WMD's that could reach the US at 90 mins preparation and was ready to launch at the US, now totally dismissed by US investigators and a Pentagon report. (3) invading 2 soveriegn nations under the pretext's laid out above, which (4) has led to the deaths of thousands of US troops, which has also led to (5) the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent peoples, acts which, the crazy world of American constitutional law excepting, render him personally liable under Human rights conventions and or War Crimes tribunals. Or, maybe (6) illegally wiretapping every home in the US, or , maybe, (7) continuing to incarcerate innocent (no charges, no trial, equals innocent) detainees in Guantanamo which BREAKS A SUPREME COURT RULING.
Need I go further?
No - you needn't go further - you have already shown everyone here that you love terrorists and hate your own country.
Go live in France in you don't like it here - Cut and run wimp!
I'm not going to argue with 1 or 2 because I agree that there was a lot of misrepresentation. 3 and 4 are results of the first 2, so are redundant as reasons. 5 is silly. You are the second poster who has suggested that breaking some international convention is grounds for impeachment. 6 is a misrepresentation of reality and is no different than what you acsuse Bush of doing in your #1 reason. AND 7 MADE YOU START YELLING FOR SOME REASON, SO I'LL YELL BACK. You have a funny notion of innocence. Enemy combatants and terrorists shouldn't be afforded the same presumption of innocence as US citizens are, and it only broke the supreme court's ruling once they made the ruling WHICH JUST HAPPENED. You can't be accused of breaking a ruling that didn't exist when you started.
Please don't. You're really starting to stretch here.
I think Bush is a creep. I didn't vote for him. But I see this continued talk of impeachment to be nonsense.
The wiretapping thing, if not technically illegal, is backhanded, completely immoral, and just running through loopholes in our laws. But honestly, god knows what else he's doing. Everytime we've discovered something about that he's said "no that's not true".. but it's proven true..
"No we don't know about any calls you're sending/recieving"
- false.
"Okay, but we only know calls from outside the country coming in"
- false.
etc..
His #7 would probably fall under the nurembourg thing...
He might not be able to be impeached solidly, but he sure as HELL is a war criminal and should be tried as such.
(don't flame me if I misspelled 'nurembourg'
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
They should impeach him now, but instead, they're holding back because they're nothing but WHIMPS!