Originally posted by dbates
What exactly are the charges that are going to be brought up? You could say that he lied to get us into the Iraq war, but then pretty much all of congress saw the same intelligence and voted to give him the authority and funding to start the war. At worst you could say that he was guilty of believing bad information.

--The charges have to do with "signing statements" that repudiate Constitutional checks and balances. They have to do with a male prostitute in the White House for 200 days out of a year. They have to do with 750 laws that the Bush junta overrules. They have to do with lying to Congress. They have to do with violations of Geneva conventions and international law. This administration is criminal, not merely corrupt.

The Valarie Palme "scandal" isn't much of a scandal. The special prosecutor hasn't found anyone suspected of being guilty of anything other than lying about a non-criminal issue.

--It's not a "crime" when nearly one hundred intell agents in foreign nations are murdered, offed, killed and eliminated who knew everything about WMD in Iraq?

--I don't think the deaths of Plame's team are insignificant, due to Bush's revelations. Further, it is against the law to expose intell agents to harm by exposing their networks. That's what Bush did. There's a LAW AGAINST that, specifically.

The "domestic" (actually international) spying isn't anything new and you'll be hard-pressed to find fault with the President when the Attorney General said it was legal and the Senate Intelligence committee was briefed numerous times on the program.

--Domestic surveillance is a labor-intensive and expensive but harmless activity so long as individuals are not being slandered and prosecuted while innocent.

Of course this spat with Iran is nothing more than a few words tossed back and forth. Can't convict on that yet. The only crime I'm sure that will stick is the crime of not following the Democratic parties wishes. Basically this is a partisan issue and not one in which you'll be able to point to evidence and point to an existing law that shows guilt. All this of course is if and only if the Democrats are able to get enough seats in the House this election term. By then we could be in a war with Iran and who wants to Impeach a president during war times? Come on! How un-patriotic! The cycle never ends.

--Imperialism and international terrorism (which the Administrations of some several presidents have been guilty of going back to Truman) are prosecutable war crimes. I hope to see the day when the cabal in power all get hung at the gallows. And you can include the Queen of England in it as well. She's right in there.

*some satire was used in this reply

--satire? I wish some of this were funny.

It's disappointing to see people on a site that deals with issues requiring an engaged brain confuse being against the current president as being "anti-American." Does this mean they considered themselves anti-American when they were calling for Bill Clinton's impeachment? Of course not.

This country was born of extremists and revolutionaries. Rugged individualists dedicated to keeping government out of their lives.

For the most part, America has forsaken its roots.

GWB is not a conservative. Conservatives do not run up trillions in deficits or finance unnecessary wars.

The FISA violations alone are reason enough to start impeachment. The sad thing is that most Americans seem to more readily understand oral sex than understand the violation of laws that keep the system of checks and balances in place.

It seems we're in this situation because too many people didn't learn a thing about what this country stands for in school. And as adults, rely on other people to tell them how to view current events. And those people are for the most part, right wing "yell radio" hosts and entertainers.

We get the government we deserve. But our children and children's children will be paying for this one.

I agree with you, Mr. Peel. But I would add that the voter apathy you complain of is largely imaginary. The neocons want everyone to believe this is fact, but it has more to do with stolen and supressed minority votes ("challenged") in key states. Throw in the demolition of the towers and a couple made to order bad guys in Osama and Saddam and you have the ingredients for a fascist revolution.

The voting public is largely (based upon historical patterns) engaged and has been since Gore ran. Gore won. Kerry won. The voters did not select Bush, his Supreme Court did. The problem is that people have their lives to run. Just getting on this board (ATS) is hard for many people, let alone marching in protest. Which points to a very real problem we have - how do we organise to effectively challenge these hooligans? Many are trying to do that but with the levers of govt. in the hands of these thieves and murderers it is increasingly difficult.

I believe the coming elections will show whether this is still a nominal democracy. Poll numbers show the Repubs are in for a rocky road to reelection. If they win out we will know that their control of "elections" is complete. Simply put, there are too many ass-kissers out there willing to do whatever it takes to "succeed" politically from local secretaries of state to media personalities. We need more integrity from all concerned - especially the pols, but integrity and politics mix like oil and water these days. And money talks and you know what walks ...

Actually Bush has been found guilty of violating the FISA with the whole warrantless wiretapping fiasco. This is a known fact. No dispute there. It is considered a felony and is punishable by jail time. Also a violation of US Constitution.

Military Commissions Act - Violation of habeas corpus, spelled out in constitution.

No bid contracts for Halliburton and its subsidiaries- This is actually Dick Cheney here, but the impeachment movement wants him out as well.

Torture - The Bush administration and officials operating under its jurisdiction have interrogated prisoners of war in ways that the Geneva Conventions define as torture.

Abuse of signing statements - usage of signing statements to reject certain portions bills in such a manner that upsets the balance of power between the three branches of American government as outlined in the constitution.

Falsified and/or exaggerated intelligence data to support preemptive war with Iraq, a war which had the condemnation of most of the western world right from the start.

I suppose that congress hasn't done anything because they are very lazy. They have taken more time off than any other US congress in history. It is also very late in the president's term to proceed with impeachment. At this point, he would be out of office before the proceedings did anything.

[edit on 18-10-2007 by erkokite]

The Bush administration may have broken over two dozen federal laws and regulations - some of them multiple times - according to an unreleased report from the House Judiciary Committee Democrats.

The laws implicated by the Administration's actions include federal laws against making false statements to congress [sic]; federal laws and international treaties prohibiting torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment; federal laws concerning retaliating against witnesses and other government employees; Executive Orders concerning leaking and other misuse of intelligence; federal regulations and ethical requirements governing conflicts of interest; the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act; communications privacy laws; the National Security Act; and the Fourth Amendment.

see here:

www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/conyers-report/?resultpage=1&.

The only reason I can see that the Democrats in congress have not begun impeachment proceedings is simply politics. They don't want to give any potential fodder to the right's spin machine that could be thrown at them during next year's elections. It's disgusting that they are playing politics this way. Bush does deserve impeachment more than Clinton did. I am a pretty hardcore dem but in the end I am more interested upholding the rule of law and protecting our constitution than party politics. Clinton DID lie uneer oath which was impeachable so that was legit, if not overwrought and exaggerated by the Republicans who went after him. Bush and Cheney's transgressions pose a far more serious threat to the foundations the U.S was created on. The laws they have crushed or ignored combined with the precedent of super-secrecy they have created around the executive branch should scare the holy hand grenades out of EVERYONE regardless of party affiliation. These are not powers that many (from either party) is going to be willing to rescind once Bush leaves office. If anything, these horrible powers might be expanded under a Guilliane or a Clinton presidency, let's face it, they are both pretty power hungry and Bush has opened up pandora's box on the imperial presidency.

The only other reason I can even phathom for their lack of movement on impeachment is that they are TRULY scared of Cheney ascending to the post of President. (I mean, we should be I think).

Obs out

Originally posted by seattlelaw
The neocons want everyone to believe this is fact, but it has more to do with stolen and supressed minority votes ("challenged") in key states.

Right. And even if true, which has never been proven, if you factor in the voting of dead people, illegal aliens, etc. used by the dems, it would probably be a wash.

IMO this is really beating a dead horse AND shining some light where the dems really don't want there to be any, since their voter fraud is documented as far back as the Kennedy election in 1960.

I always dislike bush and till recently hated him, I voted for Gore and Kerry in the past elections and proud of it. Bush damaged this country allot by 9/11, Iraq War for Oil and this upcoming war with Iran. Bush is paying more intention to the lost cause of Iraq then America. Bush is the worst thing hit the USA, More people hate the USA more then ever cause of that idiot.

I support Impeach Bush Now!

Originally posted by centurion1211
Right. And even if true, which has never been proven, if you factor in the voting of dead people, illegal aliens, etc. used by the dems, it would probably be a wash.

IMO this is really beating a dead horse AND shining some light where the dems really don't want there to be any, since their voter fraud is documented as far back as the Kennedy election in 1960.

I'll have to agree. I read that a lot of absentee votes were trashed because they figured many came from military members, and they were afraid they'd vote mostly Republican.