Is Impeachment a conspiracy?

Whom will the HATERS HATE when the HATED is no longer in office?

I suspect they will go through withdrawal symptoms for about 2-3 years and still continue to blame everything on the man.

Maybe it will be P.E.S.T. ( Post Election Selection Trauma) in reverse.

I was just trying to prove my point because you seem to twist everything i say.

[edit on 25-10-2007 by captainplanet]

reply to post by Alxandro


I'm not a "Bush hater", I'm a constitution lover, impeachment is a lawful procedure.

[edit on 25-10-2007 by captainplanet]

[edit on 25-10-2007 by captainplanet]

i'm done with this though because next year Ron Paul will be president and he will fix it.

someone accessed my computer after that and i just want to say that i'm just 23 year old guy who is just getting into politics and perhaps i was misguided. I couldn't sleep last night and am stressed. I'll stick to voting, not talking about crap i don't know enough about to argue properly, my bad. Maybe i'll go register to vote, i haven't even done that yet because i've never cared before.

[edit on 25-10-2007 by captainplanet]

i can't help but feel like it wouldn't have happend if some people could just argue their points like men and not run around pointing fingers. If your right you could have just proved it here, i'm a very resonable person. I feel like a jew in germany right now and i'm stressed as hell

FUTURE POSTER:


just let this thread die, and sleep before you post about real crap.

If none of this is enough to impeach, then something is seriously wrong in this nation:

I have more recovered from the shock of being hacked. I don’t who it was, but some one did connect to my computer, twice. I made a stupid statement trying to imply that if they are arresting people who speak freely, then they should arrest me. I thought I was proving my freedom of speech. Problem was it was in all caps and people are paranoid these days, myself included apparently, so it may have been the government trying to see who I am. I don’t know, but I am an American with nothing to hide and I have freedom of speech. But I do not enjoy being hacked, so I am done here. I apparently underestimated the level of paranoia I was implying.

reply to post by Twiggie


I do want to compliment that video before i go though. It ends with:

www.impeachbush.org

[edit on 26-10-2007 by captainplanet]

Ah, no one has Adversity Rights in this Nation. Impeachment is solely up to the Congress and that is up to them. All you can do is vote them out. Political Parties also do not have Adversity Rights, no one does have any of those kind of Rights.

I repeat, that some people have these bold opinions about giving out Orders when it is clear that they are not in charge. Like in California, the person was shot, because of setting fires.

In case, no one really knew it, at least to me, the Civil War of the previous '60's never really ended, the agenda was changed, and if it reverts back, then again people can be considered to be domestic enemies and shot in this Nation. Now also to me, things are somewhat twisted, so do not try and spread this Evil on me. I already am not willing to keep receding so that others like in California can claim once again their excuses for treating other people -- some of which on not U.S. Citizens better then the USA is willing to treat their own Citizens. Also with some corporations that ended up going completely out the door - like Enron, and others who folded because some other people called employees thought they also ran the corporation. Some towns perhaps also included -- including all the website links one can look up on Google about the Supreme Court Decision called "Eminent Domain".

Originally posted by Brother Stormhammer
President Clinton wasn't impeached because he lied about a sexual act with an intern. He faced impeachment because he lied about a sexual act with an intern while under oath. Whether you're a President or a Peon, there's a legal term for that. It's called perjury, and has nothing to do with the subject of the lie...simply with the willing commission of a lie under oath.

Has anyone noticed at what lengths President Bush takes to avoid having to testify over *anything* under oath, in front of a judge, or the senate?

Originally posted by SimiusDei
reply to post by Mr Mxyztplk

 

HAHAHA funny funny.


Nah, I'm down with the assassi......umm impeachment of both of them.

Jasn


NOTE: Dept. of Homeland Security AND ATS mods, it was a joke.

If you take a look at the stars on other's posts and the ones on yours, I'd say that your little joke there was pretty popular.

I know I loved it.

NOTE: DHS you can quote me on that.

reply to post by Mr Mxyztplk

Nobody wants to impeach Bush because that would mean president Chaney and you want that?

My thoughts exactly. I know if I was American, I wouldn't want MR. Haliburton running the show.

And Runetang made a good point also. It is kinda strange how Bush has managed to avoid testifying under oath.