Originally Posted by Rasheed1
To be honest. Sheehan is absolutely right... Impeachment is not a fringe movement. It is the medicine by which we cure ourselves of situations like the one we are in right now....
I been listening and watching some constitutional historians and lawyers talk about this situation and they state over and over that this president should be impeached... there is an abundance of evidence that should be used to do this..
the democrats are shirking their duty to enact the changes that the American people have sent them to Washington to achieve...This war could be stopped but the democrats (and republicans) dont have the guts to stand up and do it.....
We are losing our sense of (real) freedom.. this is becoming a nation of bureaucracy and politics.... We are acting like cowards these days...
I wish there was a way to make people understand how critical this time in history is to this country.
The same people loved him following 9/11. The people don't impeach a president the House does. And if you can show me any findings of President Bush committing high crimes then lets go.... Reality check...the liberals have wanted to impeach the president for some time now and would if they could...they simply do not have a leg to stand on. The people have no say in this matter.
There is not a case for high crimes against this president. If there was surely Peloski and Reid would be all over that.
Mistakes and failures are not high crimes.....during the Clinton impeachment we learned of what high crimes is and the standard is pretty high. If you want to say war....the congress gave him powers, you want to say he lied, every leader in this nation said the same thing, were they all liars or mistaken. High crimes is a rough road there simply is not a case against this president that goes to this level.
I don't know what high crimes or misdemeanors Bush has committed. I voted for Bush the second time, but it was more of a vote against Kerry. That being said, I'm not much of a Bush fan now because of immigration, McCain/Feingold,Prescription Drugs, and total lack of effort on Social Security and Tax Overhaul (Fair Tax). I certainly don't think that there are ANY grounds to impeach Bush because of the War. If there are grounds because of the statements made by his Administration leading up to the war, then you'd certainly have to impeach Hillary, Kerry, Reed, etc, etc.
I don't think you can impeach a president for unpopularity. You have to do it on the basis that crimes have been committed, and there simply have been none. Even the BIGGEST scandal of the Bush presidency was a farce: A prosecutor knowing no crime had been committed, knowing who leaked the name, and still pursuing a baseless investigation with only the intent, IMHO, of looking for inconsistencies in testimony. Pursuing a bogus investigation with the intent to indict for perjury is more of a scandal for Fitzgerald in my opinion.
Simply no basis for impeachment. And hell, he's out of there in 18 months anyway. What would really be the point? Revenge for Willy?
There is no legal, or political, reason for impeachment. Otherwise, the Democratically controlled Congress would have proceeded with it.
What high crimes and or misdemeanors is President Bush guilty of under the law? Anyone that is in favor of impeachment, should cite the actual law(s) that he has broken, that warrant an impeachment.
Most of the things that the Libnuts complain about - like fighting terrorists and cutting taxes - are actually the GOOD things that he's done.
There is a reason that impeachment has been so rarely used in US history and it is too important a part of the constitution for morons to be screwing around with on partisan hack motives. Like it or not, Clinton lied under oath and was convicted for it as well as disbarred. That IS a violation of the law. Bush has only been "perceived" as doing anything illegal.
CLinton's impeachment may have been politically motivated BUT it was based on fact while the move to impeachment Bush is politically motivated but based on perception. Not the same thing. And IMO a complete waste of time and energy.
But then again, the surrender-rats have been spinning their wheels since W's first election anyway, why change now?
We don't hold a popular vote on impeachment. If the president did something illegal, he can be impeached. If not, not. That's it.
You don't impeach a President because you don't like what he has done, if he hasn't broken any laws. We aren't governed by mob rule.
When liberals whine and cry about how they want the President impeached, what I truly don't understand is this: for what? Impeachment is removal from office for a crime committed. If you just don't like his politics, you use the recall process. So are liberals just insane and contriving some crime to convict him of because they don't like his politics, or is there some actual crime they believe he has committed?
Being impeached and being removed from office are not the same thing.
Being impeached means you are accused, like being indicted. You have to be convicted to be removed from office. Clinton was impeached, but not convicted, which is why he wasn't kicked out of office. Clinton was impeached specifically for perjury and obstruction of justice. There were four specific crimes he was accused of. I have yet to hear any specific accusation against Bush. When the Senate voted on whether or not to remove Clinton from office, they only considered politics, not guilt or innocence. They admitted as much at the time, too.
It would help if people understood the Constitution and the meanings of the terms before bloviating about impeachment. But then, maybe that's why people are bloviating about impeachment: because they don't know the Constitution any better than Jesse Jackson, Jr. who thinks the President committed a crime by issuing a pardon.