Bush/Cheney Impeachment

[narcimund 0]

Instead of saying, "Yes, that's a good idea. I'll show you how dignified we can be," you continue to attack unrelated points to distract from the main issue.

I guess you're not ready yet.

We can all wait. Take your time.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[mnealtx 0]

Speaking of avoiding the issue.... we'll be waiting as well.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I can forgive lying under oath about a blow job. I can't forgive lying (even when not under oath) in order to invade a country that results in the death of thousands of innocent Iraqi people and American soldiers.

Then you are willing to admit to a double standard.

I don't think it's a double standard at all. I think one is a forgivable transgression and the other is not.

Sexual assault (I believe the Jones complaint meets that term) is forgiveable? What if he had done it a few hundred times instead of just a few times?

And if it is about scale - Clinton ordered a few mass bombings of Iraq to try to keep Saddam in line (funny enough, the GOP complained at the time). No doubt hundreds or thousands of Iraqis died directly or indirectly. So at what level of death is it acceptable foreign policy, and at which point is it not? Let me remind you that the justification was the same for both attacks.

Personally, unless we accept that impeachment is an entirely political concept rather than one of justice, I can't see the cause for the same Congress that approved this war to now impeach the Executive for it. I think the Democratic leadership will be happy to let various states and cities pass resolutions to toot their horns and that will be all.

BWAHAHAHA!!!! I'd say that's a DESPARATE attempt to make Bush look innocent by comparison....lol.

Paula Jones???? Now SHE's a reliable person...HAHAHA!!!

Desert Fox? Funny how many people have completely forgotten all about it. It was actually over in a few days, we didn't occupy any nation, and casualties were mostly what they were intended to be....weapons, military targets. Do you think that people will forget about Desert Storm and our occupation of Iraq so quickly? Wonder why that is....

For the record, I think Clinton's a bit of a scumbag. But GWB has proven to be a downright danger to us all. He wants to protect us from "the terrorists?" I think he's a bigger threat than any terrorists.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[matthewcline 0]

It is disappointing to see you throw the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines away so easily.

They do stand up for your rights and freedom. If you feel you can stand up alone, please try. They however will be right there when you need them whether you ask or not. They will even stand between you and one who would try and censure you for exercising your right to free speech, even though you don't support them.

You need to separate the military from the Administration. The Administration decided the course our country is on, not the military, even the President last night said the military is not to blame for the course we are on, he is and he alone (paraphrased). Even though some may forget, the military executed the orders given it, that had the support of the US Congress and a UN resolution.

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[warpedskydiver 0]

I dont care about Iraq, or about the troops in Iraq. If they get hurt or killed, its too bad for them.

Nice, and what country do you live in???

You bitch and moan and yet, you can because they are willing to fight for your rights, it may not be the case in Iraq, but it is the truth.


But, it is nice knowing how you feel about US Troops.

You are welcome to go live somewhere else....maybe they will embrace you.

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

you are absolutely right, perjury over a blowjob is much more serious than incompetence resulting in the death of tens of thousands.

I mean, one is about sex, which we all know is bad. The other is about killing people, which we all know is good.

You miss their point. They don't mean that it's WORSE. In fact, they know it's not related at all.

They simply want you to be distracted by talk about Clinton -- ANYTHING about Clinton -- instead of Bush.

Why? Because talk about Bush embarasses them. They're reawwy reawwy upset -- poor things.

Nope, while I disagree with a lot of the crap about Bush I'm not defending him here, I just dislike all the gobshite and lies by fawning Clinton apologists. If people hadn't climbed up Clinton's ass in this thread I'd never have posted to it. I can't even recall posting about the Clinton perjury before, but the lying, ignorance and revisionism over this gets worse.

It has absolutely no bearing on things except to highlight how utterly corrupt political thinking is in the USA. Jeeze in Britain anyone would have been turfed out for this. Here idiots are still arguing over the obvious and lying even about what the charges were in the case. What a joke of a political process. It's like a fucking banana republic when it comes to intellectual honesty in politics here.

[willard 0]

Quote

The sooner Bush and his gang are out, the sooner we can all get our lives back.

It's too bad you let the people you obviously hate so much totally ruin your life like they have.

"Half the people you hate don't know, and the other half don't care."

[livendive 8]

Quote

Three members of the Illinois General Assembly have introduced a bill that urges the General Assembly to submit charges to the U. S. House of Representatives to initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States, George W. Bush, for willfully violating his Oath of Office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and if found guilty urges his removal from office and disqualification to hold any other office in the United States.

Although I'm pretty much against impeachment right now and think we deserve to suffer the consequences of our election, I have to admit this part got to me. I imagine just about everyone here will agree that Bush has at least toed the Constitutional line as much as he possibly can on some issues, and quite a few of us believe he has crossed over that line whenever he thinks he can get away with it. Neither posture is consistent with upholding his oath, as he obviously has no respect for the Constitution and thinks it should be suject to interpretation in whichever way allows the most Executive branch authority.

So I guess I'll say maybe... I don't want to see us go through another impeachment, but I can also see that one may be warranted.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[willard 0]

Quote

....and quite a few of us believe he has crossed over that line whenever he thinks he can get away with it. Neither posture is consistent with upholding his oath, as he obviously has no respect for the Constitution and thinks it should be suject to interpretation in whichever way allows the most Executive branch authority.

That seems to be a commonality among those who have held the office of President. I think it's actually in the job description.

[billvon 2,991]

>You keep just ignoring that he pleaded out one day before he left office.

Not at all. He's slimy and he lied. He was also found NOT GUILTY during the legal proceeding known as an impeachment. Right wingers can't accept that, but there it is. That's the way the legal system works in our country. If you do not accept it, that's fine. But don't bash other people for not accepting it, if a similar thing happens with Bush.

>No, but you are making claims with no proof.

I'm not making any legal "claims." I do not claim he is guilty of a crime warranting his removal from office. He has deceived the US and started a war that has killed 3000 americans and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis, and history will judge him for that. Sadly those things are not crimes when US presidents do them.

>Like I said, you could say Bush got a DUI. I would not disagree nor
>defend it.

Right. Now let's say Governor Bush was arrested for DWI, went to court and was acquitted, and afterwards he said "I made a mistake, and drank before I drove. I'm glad I was able to show that I was not completely impaired, and I will endeavor to never do such a thing again."

If I were to use your standards on such a thing, I would then claim "he's GUILTY! He's GUILTY! He DID drink and drive and he WAS drunk! He admitted it!" And then proceed to say that for the next 20 years.

[billvon 2,991]

>>I can forgive lying under oath about a blow job. I can't forgive lying
>> (even when not under oath) in order to invade a country that
>> results in the death of thousands of innocent Iraqi people and
>> American soldiers.

>Then you are willing to admit to a double standard.

I absolutely admit to a double standard, and I suspect you would too. I feel starting a war and killing tens of thousands of innocent people is worse than lying about a blowjob. I strongly suspect if you knew two people, one of whom lied on their taxes, and one of whom killed a close friend of yours, you would feel more strongly about one vs the other as well. You might even consider the murder more serious than the tax evasion - even though they might both be criminals.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Yea, okay, we've heard from you and all the other Bush supporters who support Iraq, support the troops in Iraq, think that the Iraquis are out to get us, blah blah blah. You want your Iraq 'war', as you so call it, then it is only fair that you all should fund the 10 million dollars a day it cost to maintain it. Fair enough?

I dont care about Iraq, or about the troops in Iraq. If they get hurt or killed, its too bad for them. And dont give me any rhetoric about them fighting for my rights, I didnt ask them to do that. Im perfectly capable of fighting for my own rights, thank you. Besides, it isnt rights theyre fighting for, its oil. I guess you could say they are fighting for my oil.

Based on what thats costing the taxpayers, I can honestly say it would be a lot cheaper to just drill for it. It doesnt cost 10 million dollars a day to do that.

I beg to differ. Some of those offshore drilling rigs are pretty expensiveOne example>http://www.digis.net/webnews/wed/cm/Uus-oilrig.R1Xd_FN9.shtml[url] Now multiply that by hundreds for exploratory drilling. I will add that I am against the war in Iraq

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

One was proven, the other is not. And thats kinda my point.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And so what? The former still pales in comparison to the latter. Their difference in magnitude makes your argument about double standards moot.

No. One is a fact, the other conjecture.

We have what you consider to be a nothing offense. But we know it happened. Vs. an offense that is large, but may not be true.

So you will let the known fact slide, but wish to crucify based on only allegations.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Being misled by the intelligence on WMDs in Iraq is pretty bad, but Bush was not at all alone in this regard, so I hesitate to call it a big fuckup

I would call that a major fuckup. If he did the misleading, I would call it criminal.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Breaking news - mnealtx and davinci (and others) STILL crying over 97 sex act between consenting adults.

Breaking news - nacimund still can't understand the difference between facts and opinions.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

It's so revealing of age behavior. It's like Little 9-Year-Old Bobby accused of stealing the cookies screaming, "But Tommy stole candy last month." Be that as it may, Tommy was dealt with already and now it's your turn.

Oh look, character attacks from you!!! Where is my surprised look!

[billvon 2,991]

Both of you cut it out.

[Royd 0]

Quote

The sooner Bush and his gang are out, the sooner we can all get our lives back.

I've not lost one minute of sleep, one day of work, or fun since Bush became president.

How did he ruin your life?

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

He was also found NOT GUILTY during the legal proceeding known as an impeachment. Right wingers can't accept that, but there it is

He was still fined for it. So you saying he was fined illegally?

See if you plead out to get the charges dropped, it still means you did it.

Hell, he ADMITTED IT! It does not matter that he was found not guilty, he SAID HE DID IT!

Quote

He has deceived the US

Got proof? If not it is just a claim.

Quote

Right. Now let's say Governor Bush was arrested for DWI, went to court and was acquitted, and afterwards he said "I made a mistake, and drank before I drove. I'm glad I was able to show that I was not completely impaired, and I will endeavor to never do such a thing again."

If I were to use your standards on such a thing, I would then claim "he's GUILTY! He's GUILTY! He DID drink and drive and he WAS drunk! He admitted it!" And then proceed to say that for the next 20 years.

Big difference, Clinton admitted to lying under oath. Not almost lying, or not being glad that he didn't lie enough to be really lying.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

I absolutely admit to a double standard, and I suspect you would too. I feel starting a war and killing tens of thousands of innocent people is worse than lying about a blowjob. I strongly suspect if you knew two people, one of whom lied on their taxes, and one of whom killed a close friend of yours, you would feel more strongly about one vs the other as well. You might even consider the murder more serious than the tax evasion - even though they might both be criminals.

Difference is you refuse to admit the guy that cheated on his taxes is a criminal. Saying, "Its just taxes, not a big deal. But that other guy killed someone." All the time not providing proof of the guilt.

[billvon 2,991]

>Difference is you refuse to admit the guy that cheated on his taxes
>is a criminal.

If he was taken to court and acquitted he is NOT a criminal, no matter how much you want to believe otherwise. It's how our justice system works.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

>Difference is you refuse to admit the guy that cheated on his taxes
>is a criminal.

If he was taken to court and acquitted he is NOT a criminal, no matter how much you want to believe otherwise. It's how our justice system works.

If the IRS then still fines him he IS still guilty.

[billvon 2,991]

>If the IRS then still fines him he IS still guilty.

Nope. The issue of guilt or innocence of a certain crime is determined in court. If a court says he is not guilty of a crime - he is not guilty of a crime. Period. Again, you may not like it, but that's the way our system works. Sorry.

Someday you may be late paying a phone bill and get fined by the phone company. That does not make you a criminal, nor does it make you legally guilty of anything.

Now, someday you may go to such extreme lengths to avoid paying bills that someone takes you to court for fraud. If you are convicted, THEN you are guilty, and are a criminal under US law.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

BWAHAHAHA!!!! I'd say that's a DESPARATE attempt to make Bush look innocent by comparison....lol.

Paula Jones???? Now SHE's a reliable person...HAHAHA!!!

Desert Fox? Funny how many people have completely forgotten all about it. It was actually over in a few days, we didn't occupy any nation, and casualties were mostly what they were intended to be....weapons, military targets. Do you think that people will forget about Desert Storm and our occupation of Iraq so quickly? Wonder why that is....

For the record, I think Clinton's a bit of a scumbag. But GWB has proven to be a downright danger to us all. He wants to protect us from "the terrorists?" I think he's a bigger threat than any terrorists.

Gotta same, it's disappointing that you dodged the question presented.

If Bush's 'crime' is really about scale - the number of US and Iraqi deaths - then you need to have an idea of at what point the scale is too high. This isn't some brainless Clinton-Bad, Bush-Good tripe that some here might present. It is the reality that the US policy and justification towards Saddam since 1991 has been consistent across 3 Administrations. Clinton's actions under it killed a number of innocent Iraqis. Personally, I blame Hussein for these. Some Democrats now want to blame Bush for all of them.

The end point is that if you want to impeach or malign Bush, it can't be over the number of deaths or you're really indicting the US government in whole.

---
I don't presume to know the truth of Paula Jones's accusations. Her support does seem rather political. That said, it was an accusation of a serious crime, Clinton lied in the first trial and having been found out, paid her off to avoid a second trial.

I myself don't believe scale determines the grossness of a crime.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I myself don't believe scale determines the grossness of a crime.

OUR prosecutors at Nueremburg certainly did.. based on the verdict given out to those who perpetrated the crimes.