It's time to IMPEACH Bush!

[AK_Conservative]

It's time to IMPEACH Bush!

Good luck with this.

:rofl

I know.. what foolishness! :donkeyfla

 

[democrat17]

bush needs to wake up and see what he is doing to the country, why not just step down? cheney already runs the country, just step down, but after he fires cheney.:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by kmhowe72:
The problem is there is nothing legally we can impeach him on.

Starting a war before receiving authorization from Congress is an impeachable offense.

 

[MSgt]

Starting a war before receiving authorization from Congress is an impeachable offense.

Then impeach him. Have a good time.

 

[AK_Conservative]

Starting a war before receiving authorization from Congress is an impeachable offense.

He did not need approval from congress becuase, in fact, this is not classified as a "war"! Niether was vietnam! But did Johnson or kennedy get impeached? The last time we have been at war was in WW2.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by AK_Conservative:
He did not need approval from congress becuase, in fact, this is not classified as a "war"! Niether was vietnam! But did Johnson or kennedy get impeached? The last time we have been at war was in WW2.

So what! This isn't Sunday Night Smackdown.

 

[kmhowe72]

Then why don't they impeach him

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by kmhowe72:
Then why don't they impeach him

Because half this country thought it was moral to elect a liar.

 

[AK_Conservative]

Because half this country thought it was moral to elect a liar.

:roll:

A liar huh? Besides you 'opinion' on the iraq war (which he did not, your just expressing rhetoric about justification of your anti-war movement in this war), what else has he lied about?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by AK_Conservative:
A liar huh? Besides you 'opinion' on the iraq war (which he did not, your just expressing rhetoric about justification of your anti-war movement in this war), what else has he lied about?

Uranium tubes.

 

[AK_Conservative]

Uranium tubes.

explain...

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by AK_Conservative:
explain...

Bush said in his State of the Union Address that Hussein was trying to buy "uranium tubes" from Nigeria. This came out of a report from the British. They informed the CIA nine months before that their source was not reliable and could not be trusted. After the CIA informed the State Dept. of this, Bush blew off CIA and ran with the story anyway which has since proven to be not true.

Go to the "Proof Bush Lied" thread for more information. In the first post, I list quite a few.

 

[RightinNYC]

So what! This isn't Sunday Night Smackdown.

Cute.

Answer the question: Should we have impeached Kennedy or LBJ?

 

[AK_Conservative]

Bush said in his State of the Union Address that Hussein was trying to buy "uranium tubes" from Nigeria. This came out of a report from the British. They informed the CIA nine months before that their source was not reliable and could not be trusted. After the CIA informed the State Dept. of this, Bush blew off CIA and ran with the story anyway which has since proven to be not true.

Go to the "Proof Bush Lied" thread for more information. In the first post, I list quite a few.

I think that any information that the cia brings against potential nuclear weapons should be addressed in the serious matter that he did approach it, brought in the U.N. Saddam denied access to potential spots! That tells us something is suspicious.. We gave him a deadline which he did not meet! Though, later we found out the information was not in fact true, to our knowledge. Him going off intelligence that has a cinsiderable pontential, knowing Saddams past, has credibility within itself! Therefore, what every so called "Fact" which you can provide would be beaten by this arguement here! If Saddam did not want an invasion and had nothing to hide.. why did he decline access for the UN inspectors to many vital areas?

And yes, im still waiting on your answer on the vietnam presidents!

 

[AK_Conservative]

Then why don't they impeach him

Cause he has not committed an impeachable offence! Simple as that! But some people do not want to realize that!

 

[MSgt]

Did you people get President Bush impeached yet? No? Keep plugging away.

 

[kal-el]

If Saddam did not want an invasion and had nothing to hide.. why did he decline access for the UN inspectors to many vital areas?

Yea, ok, Saddam didn't deny access to anything. There were over 400 weapons inspectors in Iraq. It didn't matter whether Saddam fully complied with the weapons inspections or not, this war was going to take place whether anyone likeed it or not.

 

[cnredd]

Yea, ok, Saddam didn't deny access to anything. There were over 400 weapons inspectors in Iraq. It didn't matter whether Saddam fully complied with the weapons inspections or not, this war was going to take place whether anyone likeed it or not.

uhhh....He denied access and then kicked out the UN people in 1998....

And if we remember correctly, that's when (under terms described in this forum) the war criminal Billy Jeff declared missile attacks upon the innocent people living in the "soverign" nation of Iraq.

PRESIDENT CLINTON'S ADDRESS

December 16, 1998

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Good evening.
Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world. Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec98/clinton_12-16.html

Howz about that?...Without the consent of the United Nations AND the United States Congress...

Quick...Grab a phone and get me the Hague!!!!!:roll:

 

[kal-el]

uhhh....He denied access and then kicked out the UN people in 1998....

And if we remember correctly, that's when (under terms described in this forum) the war criminal Billy Jeff declared missile attacks upon the innocent people living in the "soverign" nation of Iraq.

PRESIDENT CLINTON'S ADDRESS

December 16, 1998

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Good evening.
Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world. Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec98/clinton_12-16.html

Howz about that?...Without the consent of the United Nations AND the United States Congress...

Quick...Grab a phone and get me the Hague!!!!!:roll:

No ****. In 1998 the weapons inspectors concluded Saddam did posses WMDs. Hence he kicked them out, Hence Clinton bombed Iraq. But that was years from the buildup to this "war" (if you wanna call it that). So the actions of '98 bear no relevance. He did let inspectors in and thoroughly search all the sites in question in '02-'03.

 

[MSgt]

No ****. In 1998 the weapons inspectors concluded Saddam did posses WMDs. Hence he kicked them out, Hence Clinton bombed Iraq. But that was years from the buildup to this "war" (if you wanna call it that). So the actions of '98 bear no relevance. He did let inspectors in and thoroughly search all the sites in question in '02-'03.

There was also no proof as to where or when these weapons were disposed of or shipped away. He consistenly refused to offewr anything to prove anything. He toyed with that notion. We were just supposed to believe that they disapeared.

Well, now we know for sure that they weren't being stored in buildings, don't we? We still don't know where these weapons went.

 

[cnredd]

No ****. In 1998 the weapons inspectors concluded Saddam did posses WMDs. Hence he kicked them out, Hence Clinton bombed Iraq. But that was years from the buildup to this "war" (if you wanna call it that). So the actions of '98 bear no relevance. He did let inspectors in and thoroughly search all the sites in question in '02-'03.

It bears no relevance to you because someone said the name of "He whom shall not be blamed".:roll:

The relevance to '98 is clear...Read the UNSCOM report again(Or, for you, I'm guessing, for the first time)...

There were chemical agents not found but declared by the Iraqi government itself! And the Iraqi government did NOT prove what happened to them...Remember the words from Post #1 the "WMDs & UN Inspectors" thread...

The burden of proof was on Saddam and his regime...NOT the inspection team!

These agents...TO THIS DAY...are still unaccounted for...NOT "went up in a puff of smoke"...NOT given to the UN for destruction like (*cough*) the resolutions "demanded"...simply unaccounted for....

Did you sleep well knowing the head of a regime that has used WMDs previously AND has attacked his neighbors was going through life with weapons that were "unaccounted for"?...Were you willing to say "well he MIGHT just be lying"...

On another note...

I'd still like to know why "He whom shall not be blamed" gets the greenlight for intervening on behalf of the UN's (*cough*) resolutions(Without a Security Council vote, I might add), but when Bush does it, all of a sudden it becomes "hell to pay".:roll:

 

[RightinNYC]

It bears no relevance to you because someone said the name of "He whom shall not be blamed".:roll:

The relevance to '98 is clear...Read the UNSCOM report again(Or, for you, I'm guessing, for the first time)...

There were chemical agents not found but declared by the Iraqi government itself! And the Iraqi government did NOT prove what happened to them...Remember the words from Post #1 the "WMDs & UN Inspectors" thread...

The burden of proof was on Saddam and his regime...NOT the inspection team!

These agents...TO THIS DAY...are still unaccounted for...NOT "went up in a puff of smoke"...NOT given to the UN for destruction like (*cough*) the resolutions "demanded"...simply unaccounted for....

Did you sleep well knowing the head of a regime that has used WMDs previously AND has attacked his neighbors was going through life with weapons that were "unaccounted for"?...Were you willing to say "well he MIGHT just be lying"...

On another note...

I'd still like to know why "He whom shall not be blamed" gets the greenlight for intervening on behalf of the UN's (*cough*) resolutions(Without a Security Council vote, I might add), but when Bush does it, all of a sudden it becomes "hell to pay".:roll:

I understand why it's confusing for you. It's because you operate under this system called "logic." Stop it.

 

[MCcorno89]

IMPEACH BUSH MOVEMENT!

Bush has failed us in oh so many ways.

Our "National Guard" is stuck fighting in a nation (QUAGMIRE) called Iraq instead of tending to domestic affairs, as needed.

Hurricane Katrina has OVERWHELMED this Government, as did the WTC attacks on 9/11/01!

FEMA Director Brown, who Bush told "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job" 5 days after Hurricane Katrina hit, has resigned and who does Bush appoint as interim Director? David Paulison, the frickin' "duct tape and plastic sheathing, in the case of chemical attack", guy!

Oh boy, don't we feel safe now! NOT!

My goodness George Bush hadn't even seen any footage and didn't have any idea how serious Hurricane Katrina was until the NEXT DAY!

Mississippi still hasn't been tended to by FEMA in many areas.

Hurricane Katrina has shown America and the world the readiness of the United States in case of an emergency. You'd think 4 years after 9/11 we'd have done MUCH BETTER than we did. The Bush Administration has FAILED US AGAIN!

How much more should we have to endure of this President? How long can Rightwing America condone his EVERY MOVE?

Where's the OUTRAGE?

FIRST OF ALL THIS IS A NON BIAS FORUM, SECOND OF ALL, LIBERALS TWIST THE FACTS IN SO MANY WAYS, AND THIRD OF ALL THIS SO CALLED IMPEACHMENT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WILL FAIL, SEEING THAT OUR CONGRESS IS MAJORITY REPUBLICANS CURRENTLY, THEY MOST LIKELY SUPPORT BUSH AND HIS DECISIONS. YOU WILL NEVER GET 36 VOTES TO WIN THE MAJORITY VOTE. Out of curiosity, what would you be accusing Mr.Bush of? unless you don't really know the meaning of impeachment, sir.

 

[ban.the.electoral.college]

A messege I recently recieved from http://www.votetoimpeach.org

We were hoping that 100,000 people would surround the White House on September 24 for the big demonstration. But more than three times that number came out in a march that was so big that it lasted over five hours. The marchers went directly on Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House with thousands upon thousands chanting Impeach Bush! The turn-out from the impeachment campaign from all around the country in Washington, D.C. was fantastic. Tens of thousands of people from the impeachment movement also joined the anti-war demonstrations in Los Angeles, San Francisco and elsewhere making the call to Impeach Bush heard across the U.S.

When Ramsey Clark called for impeachment, it resonated as perhaps the most popular chant of the day. The chorus of 300,000 people chanting, “Impeach Bush, Impeach Bush” directly in front of the White House was heard all over downtown Washington D.C. This was a peace demonstration but it was also an Impeach Bush demonstration perhaps the largest demonstration calling for impeachment in U.S. history. The strong sentiment for impeachment was reported in much of the media coverage.

Everyone in the ImpeachBush.org movement thanks the hundreds of volunteers who helped this happen. The big ImpeachBush.org/VoteToImpeach.org Tent on the Ellipse was a gigantic success. Thousands of people stopped by to pick up leaflets, placards, signs and Impeachment petitions. The beautiful bright yellow impeachment signs could be seen everywhere. Volunteers collected many thousands of new names from people who wanted to join this grassroots referendum.

With the names collected Saturday we are now over the 600,000 mark of people who have called on Congress to take actions against Bush and other high officials for their criminal conduct. The most important thing now is to keep the pressure on Congress. Although more than 300,000 people personally participated in the September 24 demonstration they actually speak for the sentiment of many millions of people who would have joined the demonstration if they could have made it to Washington D.C.

On Monday we launched the "Tell Congress to Impeach Bush Now" mass email campaign. We have created an on-line communications instrument called “Tell Congress.” It is for the millions of people who may not have be able to come to Washington D.C. but who support the goal of the demonstration. It allows everyone to join the demonstration from home and work by sending a message directly to their elected officials that they, like the marchers in Washington on September 24, insist that Bush should be impeached now! It is becoming so successful that we are extending the campaign - so if you haven't voted DO IT NOW! Ask you friends and family to participate if they also want to see Bush impeached.

By clicking here, you will can get to the Impeach Bush Now email campaign where an easy to use mechanism will let you quickly send your customized message directly to the politicians. There is sample language provided which you can edit, and there is also a "tell-a-friend" page which lets you easily send a message to several friends urging them to participate.

The impeachment movement wants to thank every person who made a donation to help the September 24 demonstration become such an historic event. Because the price of bus tickets was kept low many people were able to come to Washington D.C. Without the continued contributions from people who believe in impeachment the signs and leaflets and other publicity materials could not have been printed.

The September 24 mass demonstration is not really over. We can keep it going with your help. The “Tell Congress” campaign can spread all over the internet by impeachment members forwarding and circulating the call to join the campaign so that their friends, family members, co-workers and fellow students can also send a message directly to their elected officials calling for impeachment. We are also preparing to launch the next round of newspaper ads around the country and begin doing radio spots. In the past we have placed full page ads in the New York Times, Boston Globe, San Francisco Chronicle and in other newspapers.

We want to also start running 60 second and 30 second radio ads so that people all over the country learn about the impeachment movement and how they can join the the “Tell Congress” campaign.

This movement is growing because of the generosity and commitment from people who recognize that the movement cannot do this work without adequate funding. We ask you to continue to help by making a contribution. To make a donation now, click here.

Let's build on the momentum of September 24th!

-All of Us at ImpeachBush/VotetoImpeach.org

 

[MSgt]

Bwahahahahaah!

Just checkin' in.
President Bush get impeached yet?
No?
I'll check in again later.