It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

D-Rep Releases Potentially 'Lethal' Impeachment Doc

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
You have one advantage over me. At least no one has posted anything insulting to you.

They get ME everytime.


You have to have a very thick skin to hang around here. I know.


Something insulting to you, at you, on you....hah! Gotcha.




posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jadette
I almost posted something related to this last week, but didn't when I couldn't find much being said about this elsewhere and I wanted to be sure that it was true.

It seems that a motion to censure Bush and Cheney was introduced in the House last week.

Introduced by John Conyers, for providing misleading information to Congress in advance of the Iraq war, failing to respond to written questions and potential violations of international law.

To view the resolution to create investigative body to determine if offenses are impeachable:

rawstory.com...

The resolution to censure President George W. Bush:

rawstory.com...

And, the resolution to censure Vice President Dick Cheney:

rawstory.com...







Something insulting to you, at you, on you too....hah! Gotcha too.



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 10:11 AM
link   
I would like to see this fully investigated by the congress. Will it lead to charges or impeachment? Can't really say at this point. Should it be investigated? Yes, regardless of what party the president is any significant allegation of criminal acts should always go through the investigation process.

This is really not a blue vs red issue. The issue is presidential powers. Bush and Cheney have both said they want the powers restored to the level they were before Nixon. Fine, but before that happens we should have a bi-partisan investigation into what powers they want and why.

In the end, most politicians seem fine with bending the rules to fit their own personal needs. If that bending breaches a legal barrier, investigate it. If it is justified as they say, let them stand before congress and argue that point and then let there be a ruling made based on the information presented.

This government is made up of three distinctive branches for the primary purpose of ensuring that no single branch has unlimited power. It does appear that the current administration draws a very wide line in which to operate. If that is what we as a nation want, we must first decide this to be the case through due process, not just randomly as one brach sees fit.



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Conyers. Yep, he's the perfect person to carry the flag for all you Bush bashers. Recall that Conyer's previous effort was to sponser a bill in congress to re-introduce the military draft. The real purpose of the bill, of course, was an attempt to embarrass the administration - like they did to Bush Sr. after his infamous "no new taxes" promise. However, I think it only got something like 3 yes votes when they put it to a vote, because even the democrats in congress recognized if for the foolishness it was.

I really don't think this will prove to be the tool that results in an impeachment that you all are are so desperately seeking. So, your attempt to get revenge for what happened (quite correctly) to your hero and mentor Clinton will just have to wait awhile longer.


[edit on 12/27/2005 by centurion1211]



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Here is a bit more to add to the mix. Can America throw these Neo-criminals out of power, the whole world hopes so.



Congressmen Request WMD Intelligence Info; Bush Arrogantly Ignores FOIA Demand


The White House and DOD have failed to turn over WMD evidence after 500,000 Americans signed a petition delivered to Bush six months ago. He also has failed to answer questions or turn over documents requested by 52 Congressmen after the Downing Street Memo also surfaced in May. Many observers feel Bush thinks he's above the law, acting like Hitler in Nazi Germany.
27 Dec 2005

By Greg Szymanski

Snip~~

Although support is fading, the administration appears anxious to further its war agenda, displaying outright arrogance while knowing the President is insulated from serious impeachment action due to what many critics feel is “a one-party dictatorship created after a 30 year neo-con power grab has now fully cast its dark shadow over the Washington D.C. landscape.”


It’s no secret American is trouble going into 2006. But the question remains how can the people fight back? Or the bigger question looms: Do enough Americans really care?

~~
To illustrate how uncooperative the administration has become with FOIA requests, it took the Department of Defense (DOD) almost five months to respond to Rep Conyers initial request when On Nov. 30 DOD officials told Conyers in part:

~~
“The request would take considerable time to process,” asking Conyers his willingness to pay fees for the WMD documentation, estimated by the DOD to be $110,000.

~~
Since Rep. Conyers has not received an adequate response from the administration, last week he has introduced bills to censure Bush and Cheney for their refusal to respond, the Resolutions to be voted on by the House when it again convenes in January 2006.

www.arcticbeacon.com...




posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
... for all you Bush bashers.


You have obviously failed to read the thread, and numerous statements therein (which by the way makes you look extremely ignorant). This is not, I repeat, NOT about Red or Blue! (Should I 'splain it in crayon for you?)


Originally posted by centurion1211
... attempt to get revenge for what happened (quite correctly) to your hero and mentor Clinton


...whose hero? Not mine. Liars are not heroes to me. Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc., etc. = all liars. Thanks for your oSPINion, anyway.


Remember... deny ignorance. You should try it sometime.

[edit on 27-12-2005 by unmarked01]



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by unmarked01
Remember... deny ignorance. You should try it sometime.


Always like to welcome the newbies to ATS.

Looks like you've got the "Deny ignorance" tag line memorized already.

And I'm sure with a little more 'seasoning' that you will someday make a valuable contribution to the threads you post on.

Until then ...


[edit on 12/27/2005 by centurion1211]



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 04:04 PM
link   



Rep. John Conyers (D-Mi) is tired of the Bush arrogance and flaunting of federal law concerning the Iraq War and other matters. Friday he released a document called "The Constitution in Crisis," seeking a Congressional Resolution to again investigate Bush's possible impeachment.

By Greg Szymanski
12-24-5


Snip ~~

In the lengthy report submitted to Congress and being distributed widely across America for citizens signatures, Sen. Conyers said he took this drastic action to “save the country” after President Bush arrogantly refused to respond to a letter submitted by 122 members of Congress and more than 500,000 Americans last July, asking him whether information in the infamous Downing Street Memo, alleging doctoring of WMD intelligence, was accurate.


Maybe if Greg could figure out the difference between a Congressman and a Senator, people would start to take him seriously as a reporter. As it is . . .


[edit on 27-12-2005 by HowardRoark]



posted on Dec, 27 2005 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Oh wait, whats that small print on the botttom........

Not a Scientifically Valid Survey.

Typical, presenting opinions as facts.



posted on Dec, 28 2005 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
Oh wait, whats that small print on the botttom........

Not a Scientifically Valid Survey.

Typical, presenting opinions as facts.



Good pick up pavil, I didnt notice that. I dont care much for using information from any media source, whether its Fox News or ABC. To me they are all equally unreliable.



posted on Dec, 28 2005 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Do you guys even know what the qualifications for a scientifically valid survey are?

If not, I don't see how you can make any judgments on that survey because of that statement.



posted on Dec, 29 2005 @ 10:53 AM
link   
If any of you ever took a college statistics class you would all know that any survey can be easily, and legally, skewed. You cant believe anything stating "popular" public opinion. Whether you agree with the politics of either side, you cannot deny that America: Land of the Free needs to investigate any leadership that even smells "fishy." Even a stout Bush supporter has to admit that things are looking a bit odd. How long can we equate our current situations as coincidence after coincidence. If you dont believe info was manipulated, and lies were told, then you have to trust in out systems of gov't to figure out what happened. If you are truely a patriotic american, you will see nothing wrong with a legit investigation/trials/hearings to get to the bottom of all this. If they are just coincidences, it will be proven so. Our checks and balances have worked for years, and now it appears as though the powers that be are trying to tilt the scales a little more in their favor. If he lied, let it be proven, not speculated. I dont like Bush as a leader, but I do believe he thinks he is doing right. He has the heart. I just think he is a bit misguided. But if I'm wrong...God save America, cause he is destroying us.
One LOVE



posted on Dec, 29 2005 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Do you guys even know what the qualifications for a scientifically valid survey are?

If not, I don't see how you can make any judgments on that survey because of that statement.


This is how I can make a judgement on this particular survey.
If you can potentially vote more than once and only those interested in the topic vote, it can hardly be called an accurate representation of a general population. I simply walked over to my wife's computer and my laptop and voted 3 times on this particular live vote.
If you had a survey on a Red Sox website about the Yankee's would it be scientific and/or accurate of the poplulation in general? Cmon now, at least read the site before you go off questioning my questioning of it. It is not a scientific survey.

Explanation on MSNBC Live Vote site

ONLINE SURVEYS
In contrast, MSNBC's online surveys (Live Votes) may reflect the views of far more individuals, but they are not necessarily representative of the general population.


To begin with, the people who respond choose to do so — they are not randomly selected and asked to participate, but instead make the choice to read a story about a certain topic and then vote on a related question. There is thus no guarantee that the votes would reflect anything close to a statistical sample, even of MSNBC.com users: The participants in a Sports Live Vote and a Politics Live Vote may overlap, but each group is likely to be dominated by people with an interest in each particular area. In addition, while MSNBC.com’s Live Votes are designed to allow only one vote per user, someone who wants to vote more than once could simply use another computer or another Internet account.


According to Nielsen//NetRatings, nearly 75 percent or 204.3 million Americans had access to the Internet from home in early 2004. In contrast, more than 90 percent of Americans live in homes with a telephone.

This does not mean that Internet polling cannot be scientific. Harris Interactive, for example, has set up a system with checks and balances that allow it to use the Internet to obtain survey results comparable with more traditional methods.


But MSNBC’s Live Votes are not intended to be a scientific sample of national opinion. Instead, they are part of the same interactive dialogue that takes place in our online chat sessions: a way to share your views on the news with MSNBC writers and editors and with your fellow users. Let us know what you think.



posted on Dec, 30 2005 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Why does the legislative branch in this country always get a pass? Don't we elect these people to do a job? Listening to someone like Conyers, Boxer, Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Reed, Byrd etc. you'd think they were just passive observing journalists. To come back after the fact and criticize things they were previously informed about shouts of a job not performed. ANY MORON can look back in history and say "I would have done things this way" after the fact. People love to bash Bush. It's in fashion and many people are slaves to the fashion and the mainstream elitists media. Many are nothing but brain-dead, hate filled followers of an elistist liberal sludge pump. If you think all these things are lies from the executive branch, why not ask your leftwing representatives in Congress and the Senate why they did not do diligence in their jobs at the time the data was given to them?

Bottom line, nothing in that laughable Conyers doc is impeachable from any legal sense. It's nothing more than a witch hunt from those too petty and intellectually bankrupt to emancipate their minds from hate. The left is in political death throws. They've seen the red and blue map. They are like an injured, cornered, animal fighting for viability irrationally.

Scary thing is, many of the hate filled cretins would cheer if St. Louis was blown off the map from a terrorist just because they figure it would be another way to bash Bush. Americans dying is an acceptable consequence in their mind if the result is making W "look bad".

Time for many of you to take some self inventory.

[edit on 30-12-2005 by Apoc]

[edit on 30-12-2005 by Apoc]



posted on Dec, 31 2005 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
Why does the legislative branch in this country always get a pass? Don't we elect these people to do a job? Listening to someone like Conyers, Boxer, Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Reed, Byrd etc. you'd think they were just passive observing journalists. To come back after the fact and criticize things they were previously informed about shouts of a job not performed. ANY MORON can look back in history and say "I would have done things this way" after the fact. People love to bash Bush. It's in fashion and many people are slaves to the fashion and the mainstream elitists media. Many are nothing but brain-dead, hate filled followers of an elistist liberal sludge pump. If you think all these things are lies from the executive branch, why not ask your leftwing representatives in Congress and the Senate why they did not do diligence in their jobs at the time the data was given to them?


3 words for you
Republican
Controlled
Legislature

it's hard for the party with a minorty in both the house and senate to get anything done, much less get in the way of the party that controls all 3 branches of the government.

mod edit to shorten quote

[edit on 31-12-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jan, 3 2006 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Would someone like to explain what in the downing street minutes is really that big of a deal? The administration felt that, in light of the events on 9/11, Iraq was now too much of a threat to leave alone. I agree, as they were the most likely country to strike the US if they found a way, and would have been encouraged by the success of 9/11. That, having identified Iraq as a threat, the administration built a case for war is no crime. It is planning to protect the nation.
Now, was war necessary? Can't say, as the general public is not privy to enough information to determine this. I'm not convinced it was, based on the evidence that is public. I think an investigation into the justification of the war is pointless, though. It happened, it was the course chosen. The people chose the president, and the events that occurred were how he saw fit to respond to the threat. I fail to see the crime in this. Is there more evidence? Some other documents? If not, we are wasting time on this. More important would be to fix this issues that led to war, so it doesn't happen again, whomever the president may be.



posted on Jan, 4 2006 @ 05:48 AM
link   
A study cannot be labelled as a scientific study unless it is performed in a precisely controlled environment.

Unless you want to take each person, place them in identical rooms with identical surrounding, temperatures, etc. and have an identical voice ask the same identical question.
Then no... you cannot call it a scientific study. Hence why they have printed at the bottom, not a scientfic study.

And no, those answers couldnt be askewed by wording. The questions are the same as the category results displayed. Every time you place your answer up there, it simply adds one more number to the category you voted for. No re-wording, no misuse of statistics.


On another note, I found it humerous how Fox and CNN plagarised the exact same story. Take a look back there... the two stories are identical... even in the spacing. What? They cant afford writers any more? Oh well.


And those of you coming in labeling each other as Left Wing Crazies, Right Wing Fachists (Or any other derogatory terms) should be ashamed. This is a forum for denouncing ignorance... not spreading it.

Analyse each others points... if you have something contrary to their point, then express it. Otherwise, dont simply argue for the sake of arguing. You make yourself look stupid, and you end up wasting our time.



posted on Jan, 4 2006 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by saturnine_sweet
Would someone like to explain what in the downing street minutes is really that big of a deal? The administration felt that, in light of the events on 9/11, Iraq was now too much of a threat to leave alone. I agree, as they were the most likely country to strike the US if they found a way, and would have been encouraged by the success of 9/11. That, having identified Iraq as a threat, the administration built a case for war is no crime. It is planning to protect the nation.


That line of reasoning only applies in the case where a real threat exists. So far, it seems that there was no real evidence that Iraq posed any threat to the US or it's interests. Fabricating the 'threat' is the crime, or at least at odds with what this country is supposed to stand for.



posted on Jan, 4 2006 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Disliking America is not a threat. Not to defend Saddam, cause he's a *fool*, but I dont think he wanted anything to do with us. They werent involved in 911, we didnt find WMDs, the Iraqis gov't itself didnt even put up much of a fight. Its the civilians that are fighting to keep an occupying force out. The world is a better place with Hussein gone, but what has it cost us as far as human life and world image? If you dont believe in projecting a good image, and portraying ourselves as a friendly, loving nation you should move to North Korea. We are not a conquering country. We DO NOT overthrow governments and massacre people. This is the image we are beginning to portray. Those of you who support our actions in the mideast should be a little more concerned about how this looks from an outside perspective. Its way too easy to say,"Theres the bad-guy, lets go take over." There is no intelligence in that. Where is the diplomacy?

[edit on 5-1-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Hillary for president? HA HA HA HA God help us all.

I can see the Dems campaign now:

Elect us!!! We'll impeach Bush, and keep our intelligence agencies from wiretapping Al-Queda and their associates, and thereby put citizens and soldiers lives at risk.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join