1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Vermont pushes bid to impeach Bush

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Koios, Apr 21, 2007.

  1. Koios

    Koios New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "The senate in the northeastern US state of Vermont passed a resolution Friday calling on Congress to begin impeachment proceedings against President George W. Bush, senate officials said.

    The largely symbolic move, which stands little chance of going much further, was approved by 16 votes to nine and followed a public rally this week in the state capital Montpelier calling for Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney to go."

    [Source]
     
  2. Dave

    Dave New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Largely Symbolic?" Try completely symbolic. Doesn't a state legislature have anything better to do with its time than sit around holding mock votes that don't carry any weight? They must be coming up on an election year.
     
  3. n0spam4me

    n0spam4me Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Please see DIY Impeachment
    on the web, Congress has been working very hard at ignoring the FACT that George W. Bush is very impeachable and there are a lot of voters and taxpayers who want JUSTICE. Nixon was able to resign and get the VP to pardon him, this time around I'd like to see the crooks have to serve jail time for their crimes.
     
  4. vyo476

    vyo476 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,401
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    If this measure ever managed anything (and here in reality it won't) we'd wind up with President Nancy Pelosi.

    Now that's something to wrap your brain around.
     
  5. TheWaffle

    TheWaffle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Are you serious? I'm sorry but to imply that Bush should be impeached is completely ridiculous. It steals away credibility from criticisms against him. And most importantly we want a functioning nation. Not only does it look like revenge for Clinton's impeachment but it sets a dangerous precedent where we start impeaching every president who's party is different from the Congress. You should not try to impeach someone simply because you don't agree with their actions.

    Also establishing this idea that impeachment something to be taken lightly poses a dangerous threat to the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches. And as much as I don't approve of Bush's tactics I can't say that I would rather have this load of political oppurtunists we have in office calling the shots.

    Most of the complaints that are levied against Bush regard actions they believe to be unwise but the majority are in no way illegal. The only truly illegal and dangerous action in my opinion was the release of the CIA agent's name. It was a digusting act of political suppression. Most of the administrations questionable actions (such as that one and Guantanamo Bay detentions) cause self-inflicted wounds that hurt them more than they help.

    Our country cannot go through another impeachment scandal. Clinton's impeachment started this awful seperation between the parties in this nation and I don't want to see that worsen.
     
  6. marilynj55

    marilynj55 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2007
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    impeachment ridiculous???????


    You say the majority of Bush's actions are in no way illegal. This is incorrect.

    1. On March 19, 2003, George W. Bush invaded the sovereign country of Iraq in direct defiance of the United Nations Security Council. This constitutes a violation of Chapter 1, Article 2 of the United Nations Charter and a violation of Principal VI of the Nuremberg Charter.

    2. He provided misinformation to the United Nations Security Council, Congress, and the American people overstating the offensive capabilities of Iraq, including weapons of mass destruction, as justification for military action against Iraq.

    3. He repeatedly manipulated the sentiments of the American people by erroneously linking Iraq with the terrorist attacks of September 11th by Al-Qaeda.

    4. He repeatedly claimed that satellite photos of sites in Iraq depicted factories for weapons of mass destruction in contradiction with the results of ground inspections by United Nations teams.

    5. He stated that "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" in his State of the Union Address after being told by the CIA that this was untrue and that the supporting documents were forged.
    Influencing, manipulating and distorting intelligence related to Iraq with the intention of using that intelligence to support his goal of invading Iraq.

    6. He repeatedly ordered the NSA to place illegal wiretaps on American citizens without a court order from FISA.

    7. He retaliated against whistle-blowers who try to point out errors in statements made by President Bush.

    8. He directed millions of dollars in government funds to companies associated with White House officials in no-bid contracts that pose serious conflicts of interest. One example is Halliburton, of which Richard Cheney was once CEO.

    9. He diverted military resources from pursuing known terrorists such as Osama Bin Laden who have repeatedly attacked the United States of America.

    10. He generated ill will among the peoples of the world with an offensive and aggressive foreign policy.

    11. He weakened the effects of International Law by defying the United Nations thus encouraging other nations to violate International law by example.

    12. He diverted the National Guard to foreign wars where they are unavailable to serve the needs of American citizens at home who, for example, are suffering from Hurricane Katrina.

    13. He appointed unqualified personnel to critical government positions as political favors where their incompetence places American citizens at risk. An example being the appointment of Mike Brown as head of FEMA.

    14. He proposed military strategies involving the first use of tactical or low yield nuclear weapons in violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty, which is an inherently destabilizing strategy that encourages participants in a conflict to strike before the other side can do so.

    Wherefore, George Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.

    Clinton's "crimes" are NOTHING compared to what this criminal Bush has done to our country!
     
  7. Dave

    Dave New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Marilyn, half of what you posted is debatable, what isn't debatable isn't illegal and doesn't come close to meating the requirement for impeachment.

    Waffle, as for the CIA leak, we're force to get into another debate of who knew what, and when, but I don't really see why the White House would need to discredit Joseph Wilson when Congress had already made a fool out of the guy when he testified before the Senate intelligence committee.
     
  8. vyo476

    vyo476 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,401
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    How many people had even heard of Joseph Wilson before the Plame scandal even happened?
     
  9. vyo476

    vyo476 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,401
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Massachusetts
  10. God

    God New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bush doesn't even like me, deep in his heart he hates me. Impeach that cockroach before I blow up the planet.
     
  11. TheWaffle

    TheWaffle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Jesus Christ God you're everywhere!
     
  12. God

    God New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Tha'ts right. What did you expect?
     
  13. TheWaffle

    TheWaffle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Look dude, I'm on your side. I think that Bush is a scumbag. But I'm also saying that if you impeach him now you are doing more damage to America than it's worth. Also most of these facts, thought generally common knowledge would be almost impossible to make them stand up in court.

    And many of them that used to be illegal are now not illegal because our congressmen passed the Patriot Act. Any complaint of wiretapping and the retaliation of whistle blowers can easily be discounted because the act was intentionally vague.

    Other points you made are not illegal, just lacking in foresight. This sets another dangerous precident. If we started judging the actions of our government after the fact you'd have to go back and convict all of the Vietnam presidents.

    Also don't completely judge all of Bush's actions until you take another look at some of our other past presidents, particularly John Kennedy. He took deliberate military action to protect the country, and while I believe Iraq posed no threat to America whereas Cuba did, there is no way of proving it and so you end up with an empty impeachment trial that looks like nothing more than a political side show. And what our congress needs to do is establish themselves as a real congress rather than one obsessed with showboating.
     
  14. GraceAustin

    GraceAustin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    >>>>

    Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives, allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of a state legislature. While the House has the power alone to impeach, it appears they don't have the power alone to initiate the process.
     
  15. El Jefe

    El Jefe New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Er, that's not an impeachable act under US law.
    Ditto.
    3 for 3.
    That would be four acts that are not grounds for impeachment under US law.
    Make that five. Just because you don't like something, or even if something is evil, doesn't mean you can remove a president from office because of it.
    Now, here you would have something, except that I suspect these illegal wiretaps all took place after passage of the Patriot Act. Now, while I believe those portions of the Patriot Act to be in violation of the US constitution, the Supreme Court has not ruled that yet. I would find impeachment under those grounds to be quite dubious...what congress would impeach a president who followed an (illegal) law that the very same congress passed?
    Er, examples, please? I haven't heard of any of these, and I'm somewhat sceptical that the mainstream media would suppress verifiable reports of same. I mean, what sells more newspapers than a big, juicy government scandal?
    I strongly suspect that when you do the research, you'll find that the signature on the contract belonged to someone at a much lower level than the president. And although this might be a dubious and even unamerican practice, (repeat after me) it isn't necessarily an impeachable offense. Blatant contract fraud would almost certainly be impeachable, but simple no-bid contracts may not be necessarily so. Like the Patriot Act, there's a good chance that there's some bad law protecting the president's butt.
    In order for this to be impeachable, you'll have to show that it was part of a conspiracy to preserve Osama Bin Laden's status as a viable and hated enemy. Good luck with that one.
    Dumb, but definitely not impeachable.
    Not even close to being impeachable under the constitution (and some people would like to give him a medal for this, not throw him out).
    Sadly, the Supreme Court is not on your side on this one. And that's just with respect to doing things with the National Guard that he's purportedly not allowed to. As to weakening the country's response to natural disasters, you'll have to show that this was deliberate. Again, good luck.
    Oooh, that word, unqualified. I do not think it means what you think it means. Try using the word, "incompetant". It's much more accurate. Unfortunately, that's even less impeachable.
    Thank God that merely proposing something constitutes an offense only in certain narrowly-defined circumstances, or else the First Amendment would effectively be dead. To say nothing of the fact that merely proposing something would only be an impeachable offense in very nearly the same narrow circumstances.
    Um, nope, not even close, not by a country mile. Even losing a war is still not an impeachable offense, at least not by itself.
     
Loading...

Share This Page