It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Republican Congressman Predicts Bush Impeachment

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 08:28 AM

Republican Congressman Ron Paul has gone on record with his prediction that the impeachment of George W. Bush is right around the corner but warned that in the meantime the US was slipping perilously close to a dictatorship.

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show and addressing the port sell-out, Paul stated that, "it probably will contribute to the Republican's failure in the next election."

Asked if the Democrats would use gains in the mid-term elections to set in motion impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush, Paul responded,

"I predict that would happen."

"I think he (Bush) has numerous things that the Democrats if they get a chance, not only will they be after him for that but it will be payback for the Clinton impeachment."


I also think he will be impeached. I dont think it will be payback for Clinton, it will be a well-deserved move.

Do you think Bush will be impeached? I think personally, he's 2 lies away from impeachment. Thats a real short time, imho.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 08:38 AM
Although I'm all for impeachement, this message by Ron makes my skin crawl.

It sounds like the start of a propaganda campaign to brainwash the people.

So when and if an impeachement process is started, the People think its mainly about payback for Clintons impeachement rather then because all of the misdoings, lies and crappy management done by the Bush administration.

I smell a rat here.

[edit on 3/3/06 by thematrix]

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 08:55 AM
I don't think it will pass.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 09:41 AM
Personally I don't think it will happen nor do I think it should happen. What I see here is a Republican congressman with too much anxiety over the upcoming mid term elections spouting his mouth in hopes of gaining some support from those farthest from his fan bases. :shk:

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 10:11 AM
There's a very good chance that George W. Bush will be impeached. I don't think there's ever been a president who more richly deserved impeachment. His recent OK of the selling of American port operations to a country directly involved in the September 11th attacks is only the latest in a long line of anti-American actions by this war-profiteer and theofascist. He only became President thanks to a purely political decision of the Supreme Court, since he lost the popular vote, and if it hadn't been for the overwhelmingly right-wing media's fear-mongering, wouldn't have stood a chance in '04. Today, his approval rating stands in the low 30s, approximately where Nixon's were the day before he resigned. The man is a piece of garbage.

A recent poll shows that he's even unpopular among American military personnel, and these are people who are trained extensively to fawn over the President, and not to think critically of the Commander in Chief.

Bush's actions have taken the entire Republican Party into the toilet. In a few months, when the '06 election season starts in earnest, you will see GOP congressmen running away from Bush as fast as possible.

If it wasn't for the bought-and-paid-for talk radio hosts like Limbaugh and Hannity, Bush would have already been impeached.

And here's a prediction. Within the next 15 months, Dick Cheney will resign. The only hope Republicans have of getting the White House again is to have a candidate who can campaign from the White House. Since Dick Cheney couldn't get elected to clean sewers, he will resign, allowing one of the few Republicans who have any credit with the American people at all to have a chance at the Presidency. In fact, I'm so sure of Cheney's resignation that I'm willing to accept 2:1 odds on any wager up to a thousand dollars that it will happen by June of 2007.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 10:48 AM

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Personally I don't think it will happen nor do I think it should happen. What I see here is a Republican congressman with too much anxiety over the upcoming mid term elections spouting his mouth in hopes of gaining some support from those farthest from his fan bases. :shk:

FYI: Ron Paul speech of Feb 15th 2006

Is he showing anxiety over the mid-term elections here or the possible upcoming economic crash?? I dare say that he has the guts to say what's really happening in the government.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 11:06 AM
i can see this happening to many toes and freedoms stepped on.i really dont see a great outcome of the party of bush.911/watergate both have the same feel.its just in the form of ports oil nuke deals and making up your own rules to suit your needs.better leadership is needed....

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 12:04 PM
if bush is impeached it would be the smartest thing the american government has done in a long time. people have recently compared bush's regime to nixon, but it is far worse than that. bush needs to be removed and doing so will vastly improve the quality of the government plus it will improve the worlds opinion of the us finally recognising their mistakes.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 12:46 PM
The best thing a real US citizen can do is :

1) Impeaching Bush.

2) NOT voting for his Democrat counterpart.

3) But voting for a Constitutionalist candidate !

4) Getting out of the U.N and all the others wordly institutions ( CFR and so on... ).

5) Closing all the US borders for at least 100 years.

6) Taking back at home all the US troops, based around the world, and just let the rest of the world deal with itself ( it's gonna be fun to see the mess it will be right after the first week )

7) Sending back, to their origins countries, all those who want to live in the US but who don't want to integrate the US society and her values.

8) Sending back to cro-magnon era and stone age all the nations who don't agree with points 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8 and want to make something to stop the US to fullfill point 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8

It was just my 2 cents.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 01:19 PM
Personally, I don't think that Bush will be impeached. I think that a lot of Democrats would assassinate Bush if they thought they could get away with it, but will settle for fantasizing about impeachment. You don't impeach Presidents because they are unpopular. You don't impeach them because they have lurid affairs in the Oval Office. Presidents are impeached for breaking the law.

There is one thing that even the most ardent Bush hater must admit, even if it is secretly. GW is about twenty times smarter than his detractors try to make him out to be. I stopped watching Letterman because the Bush is stupid jokes just aren't funny anymore. Actually, it was the Cheney is an assassin jokes that drove me over the edge, but anyone who watches will know what I'm talking about.

It seems to me that if there was a case for impeachment, it would be public by now. I don't know a lot about Ron Paul, but the headline to the article from a highly dubious source is misleading. Paul is not predicting that Bush will be impeached because he has done something wrong, but because with more seats in the Congress, Democrats might make such an effort to avenge the impeachment of Clinton.

Paul is not the only person alleging that the US is leaning toward dictatorship and that is always a fear of many when government power is increased, even when such an increase is justified, but there is one thing that the doomsayers seem to forget, but not really, and that is, there will be a Presidential election in 2008.

Oh, yeah. If Bush is removed from office, who will become President? I can hear the howls from the peanut gallery now.

[edit on 2006/3/3 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 01:49 PM
Grady, isn't the question of whether he SHOULD be impeached the real underlying theme here? Forget Ron Paul and Letterman- I'll give you 20 good reasons:

1) Seizing power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the rule of law; carrying out a massive assault on and occupation of Iraq, a country that was not threatening the United States, resulting in the death and maiming of over one hundred thousand Iraqis, and thousands of U.S. G.I.s.

2) Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war.

3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable.

4) Instituting a secret and illegal wiretapping and spying operation against the people of the United States through the National Security Agency.

5) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently changing its government by force and assaulting Iraq in a war of aggression.

6) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions of governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

7) Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda about the conduct of foreign governments and individuals and acts by U.S. government personnel; manipulating the media and foreign governments with false information; concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment concerning acts, intentions and possession, or efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction in order to falsely create a climate of fear and destroy opposition to U.S. wars of aggression and first strike attacks.

8) Violations and subversions of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, both a part of the "Supreme Law of the land" under Article VI, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in wars and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and others and usurping powers of the United Nations and the peoples of its nations by bribery, coercion and other corrupt acts and by rejecting treaties, committing treaty violations, and frustrating compliance with treaties in order to destroy any means by which international law and institutions can prevent, affect, or adjudicate the exercise of U.S. military and economic power against the international community.

9) Acting to strip United States citizens of their constitutional and human rights, ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to counsel, without charge, and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the Executive of a citizen as an "enemy combatant."

10) Ordering indefinite detention of non-citizens in the United States and elsewhere, and without charge, at the discretionary designation of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense.

11) Ordering and authorizing the Attorney General to override judicial orders of release of detainees under INS jurisdiction, even where the judicial officer after full hearing determines a detainee is wrongfully held by the government.

12) Authorizing secret military tribunals and summary execution of persons who are not citizens who are designated solely at the discretion of the Executive who acts as indicting official, prosecutor and as the only avenue of appellate relief.

13) Refusing to provide public disclosure of the identities and locations of persons who have been arrested, detained and imprisoned by the U.S. government in the United States, including in response to Congressional inquiry.

14) Use of secret arrests of persons within the United States and elsewhere and denial of the right to public trials.

15) Authorizing the monitoring of confidential attorney-client privileged communications by the government, even in the absence of a court order and even where an incarcerated person has not been charged with a crime.

16) Ordering and authorizing the seizure of assets of persons in the United States, prior to hearing or trial, for lawful or innocent association with any entity that at the discretionary designation of the Executive has been deemed "terrorist."

17) Engaging in criminal neglect in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, depriving thousands of people in Louisiana, Mississippi and other Gulf States of urgently needed support, causing mass suffering and unnecessary loss of life.

18) Institutionalization of racial and religious profiling and authorization of domestic spying by federal law enforcement on persons based on their engagement in noncriminal religious and political activity.

19) Refusal to provide information and records necessary and appropriate for the constitutional right of legislative oversight of executive functions.

20) Rejecting treaties protective of peace and human rights and abrogation of the obligations of the United States under, and withdrawal from, international treaties and obligations without consent of the legislative branch, and including termination of the ABM treaty between the United States and Russia, and rescission of the authorizing signature from the Treaty of Rome which served as the basis for the International Criminal Court.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 01:57 PM
TA, why the list of reasons when you know that such a list can be discussed, debated and rehashed. As a matter of fact, they have been on this board and elsewhere.

May I warn each and every member not to get led down the path of derailment and hijacking, as could easily be done. I almost fell into it while reading TA's enticement.

Also, do not allow this thread win anyone a political troll warn as those things are EXPENSIVE; right, dgTempe?

Be careful, all.

DG; I thought you weren't going to cause me any trouble?!?

[edit on 3-3-2006 by Thomas Crowne]

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:02 PM

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Personally, I don't think that Bush will be impeached. I think that a lot of Democrats would assassinate Bush if they thought they could get away with it, but will settle for fantasizing about impeachment. You don't impeach Presidents because they are unpopular. You don't impeach them because they have lurid affairs in the Oval Office. Presidents are impeached for breaking the law.
[edit on 2006/3/3 by GradyPhilpott]

So cheating on your wife is breaking the law?

Also, TA, that is a darn good list. Reminds me of Daily Show when they were playing a game, shows the Press Secretary

"I can not comment on that." Then it goes back to the DS and says

"Was he commenting on A: Dick Cheney hunting people, B: Plame Scandal, C: Wiretapping Scandal, D: Bush Selling ports to terrorists, E: Spending trillions on the War for Oil, F: Halliburton COntract, G:.."

then cuts away to commercial, then when it comes back from commercial it has it again, but had gone through so many that they are on Greek Letter things

"Beta: WMDs not in Iraq, Alpha: Katrina screw up, Omega: Tax cuts for rich while cutting programs for poor"

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:05 PM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Grady, isn't the question of whether he SHOULD be impeached the real underlying theme here? I'll give you 20 good reasons:

If any of those thing were true and could be proven, yeah, we could justify a coup d'etat, but I think you're overstating the case and even if you could get a vote for impeachment, none of those allegations would stand up to legal scrutiny.

It seems to me that Bush has followed the letter of the law and what is more, America is safer for it. It will take a long time I think for the world to catch up, but in the long haul, Bush will go down as one of America's greatest Presidents. I didn't recognize Reagan's greatness until years after his administrations, not that I approve, even now, of everything he did during is eight years in office.

Still, that's a pretty impressive list with some fancy wording. Did you compile that yourself or did you find it somewhere else?

[edit on 2006/3/3 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:13 PM

Originally posted by DevinS
So cheating on your wife is breaking the law?

The reasons for Clinton's impeachment are outlined at the below link in detail, from which I quote:

On August 17, the President testified for over four hours before Starr's grand jury on closed-circuit television from the White House. In his testimony, he admitted the Lewinsky relationship, but denied that he perjured himself in the Paula Jones deposition because he did not interpret the conduct with Ms. Lewinsky as constituting sexual relations. On the same evening, he appeared on national television and admitted that he had an "inappropriate relationship" with Lewinsky and had misled the American people about it.

On September 9, Independent Counsel Starr submitted a detailed report to the Congress in which he contended that there was "substantial and credible information that President William Jefferson Clinton committed acts that may constitute grounds for an impeachment" by lying under oath in the Jones litigation and obstructing justice by urging Ms. Lewinsky "... to to file an affidavit that the President knew would be false". On September 11, the House of Representatives approved House Resolution 525 by a vote of 363 to 63 authorizing a review by the Committee on the Judiciary of the report of the Independent Counsel to determine whether sufficient grounds existed to recommend to the House that an impeachment inquiry be commenced and also approved the public release of the Starr report. On September 21, the Judiciary Committee released nearly 3,200 pages of material from the grand jury proceedings and the Starr investigation, including transcripts of the tesimony [sic] of President Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky.

On October 8, House Resolution 581 introduced by Congressman Henry J. Hyde, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was approved by the House in a 258 to 163 vote to authorize and direct the Judiciary Committee to investigate whether sufficient grounds existed for the impeachment of the President. After its staff interviewed various witnesses in private, the Judiciary Committee's public hearings commenced on November 19 with an opening statement by Congressman Hyde followed by additional hearings in which the Committee reviewed the issues and allegations of the Starr report and additional testimony provided by witnesses to its staff. The Committee also heard contrasting views from constitutional experts on the legal basis for impeachment as applied to the factual allegations pertaining to the Lewinsky matter.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:20 PM
Nope, not my own, that's exactly where I got it Grady, from your link. The points still stand though and I beg to differ whether all of those points would stand up to legal scrutiny or not. I think some might, and others might not. But unless someone tries to at least bring these points to bear in a court proceeding soon, this administration will keep taking every last inch of the proverbial thread and take this country into ruin if he hasn't done it already. I think Bush will hardly go down as one of the great Presidents and quite to the contrary.

And TC, I am not trolling. The list summarizes the way I feel, like it or not. If I was trolling, I woulda posted it in my own thread. I feel the list is relatively accurate, and that's just my opinion.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:30 PM
Also, TC, I wanted to post that list for any that might read the story and wonder, "Why in the hell would we impeach Bush?" The story includes no reasons (other than mostly in retribution for Clinton's impeachment), and I felt that a list may help to reinforce Ron Paul's position somewhat. That's it. If you feel it is inappropriate TC, then remove it at your discretion.

[edit on 3-3-2006 by TrueAmerican]

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:40 PM

Originally posted by vuoto
There's a very good chance that George W. Bush will be impeached.

Actually, there's no chance Bush will be impeached.
1. It's an election year
2. People hate Cheney more than Bush
3. Only the House can impeach a president, the house is and will still be Rebuplican after the elections.

In fact, I'm so sure of Cheney's resignation that I'm willing to accept 2:1 odds on any wager up to a thousand dollars that it will happen by June of 2007.

Count me in. I bet the full $1000 that barring any health issues he won't resign.
Why would Cheney resign? Who said he's going to run for president? And if he was going to run for president, why would he resign from the vice president spot? That makes no sense.

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 04:02 PM
I wont cause you trouble, TC. :shk: :shk:

As much as i would love to see this impeachment happen, i dont think it will take place either. Grady, thanks for reminding me who would get the presidency.

The ideal thing would be to get rid of the deadly 4. Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld.
Is there a provision for this? Is this something that could happen?

new topics

top topics


log in