Vermont pushes bid to impeach Bush

Bush began to wage war on Iraq BEFORE getting congressional approval (illegal), and the Defence Secretary at that time refered to these bombings as, "spikes of activity.":
http://www.newstatesman.com/nssubsfilter.php3?newTemplate=NSArticle_NS&newDisplayURN=200505300013

Contrary to some previous comments, knowingly misleading the congress into a war IS a crime:
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20C15F73B5C0C708CDDA90994DC404482
Numerous sources told the administration that the yellow cake claims were untrue:
Cheney requested an investigation, and when Wilson arrived in Niger the Ambassador there said she has already told the administration it was false - and Wilson's report concluded it was extremely unlikely. George Tenet advised White House officials and the National Security Advisor that Bush should not include the yellow cake claim in his Oct. 7th speech. Former head of covert ops in Europe (a 28yr. vet of the agency) said the allegations did not hold together - he not only told White House officials that the evidence was weak but that Intel from Saddam's inner circle indicated that Iraq, "had no active weapons of mass destruction program." The Director General of the IAEA sent a letter to the White House and the NSC warning senior officials that he believes the documents were forgeries and should not be cited by the administration as evidence that Iraq was actively trying to obtain WMD. In spite of several follow-up calls to the WH, the NSC and the State Department there was never any response to either the letter or the calls. In January of 2003 the State Department told the CIA that the intelligence reports containing the uranium claims were based on forgeries: <a href="http://impeachforpeace.org/evidence/data/fordmemo.pdf">Declassified Memo</a>

AND the UN declared the documents were "obvious fakes" in March 2003:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/14/sprj.irq.documents/

So don't tell me that the administration didn't KNOWINGLY mislead the public and the congress - a crime.

The <a href="http://impeachforpeace.org/evidence/data/alleightdowningstreet.pdf">Downing Sreet Documents</a> are infamous because British Intelligence reported that Bush was determined to attack Iraq even though the evidence was far too thin to warrant such action, and so the "...intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." High crime to knowingly mislead the people and the congress into war, and abuse of power.

Bush failed to meet requirments laid out in the Oct 2002 approval, such as enforcing "all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq," and removed inspectors before they could complete their job so he could attack.

In fact, Bush said he was going to attack no matter if the UN found evidence of weapons or not and that he told Blair that, "The diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning,"
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,1700881,00.html

A note on another comment I'd seen here: The illegal wiretapping did indeed begin BEFORE the Patriot Act was enacted, but to my knowledge, the PA did not overturn the FISA Act anyway. Either way, the wiretapping that happened before, even long before 9/11, was indeed criminal. As is well documented in Part 2 below.

There's a four part series that lists several impeachable offences committed by Bush, all linked to everything from news reports, videos and official documents:
<a href="http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=340571&rel_no=1&back_url=">Part 1</a>
<a href="http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=340571&rel_no=2&back_url=">Part 2</a>
<a href="http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?menu=&no=340571&rel_no=3&back_url=">Part 3</a>
<a href="http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?article_class=3&no=340571&rel_no=4">Part 4</a>


Whatever your position on impeachment, now is the time to cast your historic vote (yes or no) with the House. Speaker Pelosi's office is taking YOUR calls on the impeachment of both Bush and Cheney:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x79062

Call her office directly at: 202-225-0100
Or use any one of these toll free Capital Hill switchboard numbers here:
1 (800) 828 - 0498 1 (800) 459 - 1887
1 (800) 614 - 2803 1 (866) 340 - 9281
1 (866) 338 - 1015 1 (877) 851 - 6437
 
Werbung:
The President is allowed to deploy troops abroad for a period of 90 days before Congress declares war, so those bombings were nowhere near illegal. Learn a little history.

The yellowcake documents were, at best, disputed. Some said they were real, some said they were fake. A couple of sources outside the U.S. government have even claimed that the fake documents were churned out by the Italian press and have absolutely no connection to the reports the intelligence community had been using. Secondly, you might want to use a site that you don't have to pay for if you are trying to use it in a debate. Your NY Times article can only be viewed with a subscription, and with the leftist agenda they are pushing, I'm not about to pay to hear their propaganda.
 
Just my $0.02 worth on this subject,
Richard Cheney was in charge of NORAD on 9/11/2001
and the FACT is that that the PENTAGON got hit with something.
Now if it really was "FLT77"
WHY is it that an off course commercial airliner could fly for over half an hour in airspace that is as well monitored as our eastern seaboard? Considering the fact that all of this is AFTER the second hit to the WTC!

My take on this is that either Cheney intended for the PENTAGON to get hit,
OR he is so incompetent as to be unemployable at ANYTHING.

WE_THE_PEOPLE pay taxes to support a DEFENSE DEPARTMENT and on 9/11/2001 said DEFENSE DEPARTMENT FAILED to DEFEND!

I don't know about all the other taxpayers around here, but I feel like I've been SCREWED!
 
Just my $0.02 worth on this subject,
Richard Cheney was in charge of NORAD on 9/11/2001
and the FACT is that that the PENTAGON got hit with something.
Now if it really was "FLT77"
WHY is it that an off course commercial airliner could fly for over half an hour in airspace that is as well monitored as our eastern seaboard? Considering the fact that all of this is AFTER the second hit to the WTC!

My take on this is that either Cheney intended for the PENTAGON to get hit,
OR he is so incompetent as to be unemployable at ANYTHING.

WE_THE_PEOPLE pay taxes to support a DEFENSE DEPARTMENT and on 9/11/2001 said DEFENSE DEPARTMENT FAILED to DEFEND!

I don't know about all the other taxpayers around here, but I feel like I've been SCREWED!

I've explained this to you half a dozen times already, but you just don't listen. Stop trying to hijack the thread.
 
Note for Dave
Do you know about H.Res.333 ?

Do you as a taxpayer feel that your money was spent properly,
when the so-called leaders of this country can NOT defend even this nations CAPITAL? If you where to write a job performance review on Richard Cheney, would you give him high praise for his excelent performance?
Personally I'd have him fired for case!

The fact is, there are grounds for impeaching Cheney and Bush.

This administration has
Using 9/11/2001 as the EXCUSE
enacted UNCONSTITUTIONAL legislation in the form of the
"Patriot act" an the "Military Commissions act" and other laws.

A!
Where are we going
and why are we in this handbasket?
 
Note for Dave
Do you know about H.Res.333 ?

Do you as a taxpayer feel that your money was spent properly,
when the so-called leaders of this country can NOT defend even this nations CAPITAL? If you where to write a job performance review on Richard Cheney, would you give him high praise for his excelent performance?
Personally I'd have him fired for case!

The fact is, there are grounds for impeaching Cheney and Bush.

This administration has
Using 9/11/2001 as the EXCUSE
enacted UNCONSTITUTIONAL legislation in the form of the
"Patriot act" an the "Military Commissions act" and other laws.

A!
Where are we going
and why are we in this handbasket?

House Resolution 333? You mean Dennis Kucinich's feable attempt to get his name in the papers for his election campaign? Dennis Kucinich is the lunatic fringe of the Democratic Party.

If the subjective view of job performance was enough for impeachment, then half of the Presidents in America's history would have been kicked out of office. Simply because they are unpopular doesn't mean you can impeach them. If the Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act are truly unconstitutional, then let the Supreme Court say so. Personally, I can't think of a single U.S. President that hasn't had at least one piece of legislation overturned by the Supreme Court at some point or another. By your logic, does that mean every U.S. President should be impeached? Also, these laws were passed by Congress. The President just merely signed them into law.
 
You may think HR333 is somekinda publicity stunt ..... HOWEVER ....

Have you seen this lawsuit http://www.hawkscafe.com/107.html

You can have your opinion, however there are people who are seriously seeking JUSTICE here. There is considerable suspicion that the "official" 9/11 report is nothing but a cover-up and that Cheney and Rumsfeld are involved.

Do you really believe the "official" 9/11 report?

If Cheney really was criminally involved in 9/11 - then we MUST bust him.
and a LOT of evidence points to Cheney!
 
If anyone's looking for justice it isn't Dennis Kucinich.

I can't speak for everyone, but I do believe the official 9/11 report - mostly. What I believe is that when something so large and cataclysmic happens there are necessarily pieces that don't quite fit - because we can't ever know everything about what happened. Some things don't quite add up - well, yeah...that's just how life is.
 
Yeah, really. Who the hell cares what Bruce Willis, or any other idiotic celebrity thinks. What makes him more qualified to give an opinion than me?
 
You may think HR333 is somekinda publicity stunt ..... HOWEVER ....

Have you seen this lawsuit http://www.hawkscafe.com/107.html

You can have your opinion, however there are people who are seriously seeking JUSTICE here. There is considerable suspicion that the "official" 9/11 report is nothing but a cover-up and that Cheney and Rumsfeld are involved.

Do you really believe the "official" 9/11 report?

If Cheney really was criminally involved in 9/11 - then we MUST bust him.
and a LOT of evidence points to Cheney!

If Cheney knew the Pentagon was going to be hit, Why was he in it at the time? Wouldn't the logical thing be to get far away from the site? There's plenty about your story that doesn't add up either.
 
Just the State, the House and Senate have repeated passed resolutions that had no chance, rather than negotiate and get a bill that they could pass with republican support the pushed forward with partisan pollitics, so much for the campaigne promisses.
 
"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.

I think it's great. Doing this helps keep them from spending time screwing the citizens of Vermont.
 
Werbung:
Just the State, the House and Senate have repeated passed resolutions that had no chance, rather than negotiate and get a bill that they could pass with republican support the pushed forward with partisan pollitics, so much for the campaigne promisses.

What the heck are you talking about?
 
Back
Top