BS: Should Bush be Impeached?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Nov 04 - 10:55 PM

I get the gray boxes too, but I think only on pretty long threads somewhere towards the end. I've been wondering about them myself.

The Republicans have set a big trap for the Democrats.
They are falling into the trap.
Good.

Thank goodness I'm not a Democrat.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 11 Nov 04 - 10:03 PM

Jaze:

I think this must be an artifact of your own system, not the Cat -- I read the threads on both OS X and Win 2K platforms and have no encounters with grey boxes.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: jaze
Date: 11 Nov 04 - 07:51 PM

Why do grey boxes sometimes cover up parts of some posts?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Barney
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 11:45 PM

The Republicans have set a big trap for the Democrats.
They are falling into the trap.
Good.

Barn

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 11:39 PM

Sorry, I didn't mean to click submit.

Now I have to say something. Since impeachment just brings another whole string of assholes, wouldn't it be better to try him for the criminal he is? Can he be tried for treason? Can he be tried for war crimes?

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 11:34 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: LadyJean
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 10:55 PM

Like every other male who ever breathed, except Jesus Christ, and possibly St. Francis of Assisi, William Jefferson Clinton lied about his sex life.
Nobody died because of it. (Much as I kept hoping someone would shoot Ken Starr.) No homes were destroyed. No children were orphaned.
George Walker Bush lied about the threats posed to our country by Saddam Hussein.
Because of this, several thousand people are dead. Homes are destroyed, and children are orphaned. IMPEACH THE BASTARD NOW!    How I wish there were still men like Howard Baker in the Senate.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 09:33 PM

They're still venting about Clinton, jaze. They never stopped.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: jaze
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 08:02 PM

I find myself wondering how many of these Bush folks were feeling pretty much the way we are now when Clinton was elected overwhemingly a second time. They probably vented until they got it out of their system then moved on. Just as we will.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 07:37 PM

Another case of latent polymorphous perverse guilt, Amos....

Comes out in all kinds of anti-social behaviors...

Get the couch...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 07:03 PM

Martin,

You have a lot of smarts, obviously, but it sure beats me why you insist on acting like a brutish low-brow jerk, and more important, why you enjoy exercising cruelty toward others. What is it about causing pain and discomfort that you find so satisfying?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 03:28 PM

I'll take what you call as slash and burn over your brand of navel gazing, Amos.

Amos, "what if" your fingers didn't smell so bad?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 03:13 PM

Martin:

Just love that old Slash and Burn school of communication, huh? The Superior Man at work. When in doubt, invalidate the other person. Sure makes a lot of sense.   


In case you cannot read ordinary English the post to which I was responding stated "Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Fieth", none of whom were voted into orifice.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:54 PM

We'll see, Martin.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:53 PM

Quit whining AND fooling yourself.

The election is over.

Kerry lost.

You ought to change your name to Cleopatra. Queen of denial.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:52 PM

"Daddy Bush! Daddy Bush! The bad people keep talking! We don't like it! Make them stop!"

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:49 PM

Again, Kerry lost.

That remains to be seen.

Quit whining yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:33 PM

Again, Kerry lost.

Sore losers. sour grapes.

Quit whining.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:32 PM

Doug, remember "the buck stops here...". It's not just words - the President has the ultimate responsibility, not those who "empowered" him or voted him into the position.

But it's too late now. I mentioned impeachment back in February/March, only to be told by people "it's OK, we'll vote him out". But if you believe someone to be a criminal, you prosecute them, you don't just push them out of the door to be someone else's problem.

To undertake impeachment proceedings now - even if it were a practical proposition, which I doubt - makes it look like a "sour grapes" action; just an alternative method of getting rid of someone at the top.

But the high moral ground has been lost. It should have happened before the elections.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:30 PM

Yeah Carol , but Kerry got the other half!!

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:29 PM

Well, not the whole electorate, Akeneton. Bush only got about 51 percent of the vote (assuming he actually got that much, which remains to be seen). That's only slightly more than half.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:18 PM

Dont often agree with Doug, but he has made a very good point.

I would broaden it out a little

Why not impeach the whole electorate.
If the German people were to blame for the rise of the Nazis.....

The Republican regime shows all the signs of latent fascism...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 01:51 PM

A second thought: maybe you should also impearch the members of the House of Representatives and the U. S. Senate who voted to empower the president to go to war! Might be a tough sell though.

Ramsey Clark, the loser liberal who just loves to champon and lead losing causes. Yep, there is a guy to follow into battle, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 01:41 PM

Sure, Amos, impeach him! Perhaps you should share whatever knowledge you have that Bush has committed offences serious enough to warrant impeachment with a willing Democrat who can begin impeachemnt proceedings. How about John Kerry?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 12:45 PM

George W. Putsch sent innocent young men and women to Iraq to kill innocent Iraqis who are fighting for their land. Amerika uber alles.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 12:42 PM

Who says we only get one chance?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 12:31 PM

"Yowzah!!

T'ro' da bums out!"

Uh, you had your chance. You lost. remember?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 12:28 PM

That would be (have been actually) Strom Thurmond (my he RIP).

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 11:21 AM

The line of sucession is president, VP, Speaker of the HOuse (Hassert) After that I think I think Senate majority leader is next.   At one point the 100 year old senator (can't remember his name right now) from South Carolina was number 5 in line for presidency.   He must of been head of the right committee.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 10:52 PM

Yowzah!!

T'ro' da bums out!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 10:40 PM

I'd like to impeach all of those unelected people who are really running the administration (plus Cheney, of course), people like Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Fieth, and probably a few others I can't remember right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 10:30 PM

I dunno why we should hold back on that basis, Carol. Cheny would have to give way to the Speaker of the House, but I am not clear after that. The point is that this is no basis for not calling crime when a crime has occurred.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 10:23 PM

But then we'll be left with Cheney. What good is that? And if they impeached Cheney, who would be president and vice president?

Subject: The Case for Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 09:47 PM

President Bush can run, but he cannot hide from the Constitution of the United States. The election does not pardon the President for past, or future "high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Impeachment is not a partisan political issue. The House of Representatives, possessed of the "sole power of impeachment," is required to consider a bill of impeachment on the facts even if every Member were of the same party, or political persuasion, as the President. The seven specific provisions of the Constitution setting forth the powers and duties of the Congress in considering impeachment intend that any President or other civil officer of the United States who has committed a high Crime or Misdemeanor "...shall be removed from Office."

The power of impeachment assures the people against criminal acts and despotic ambitions by government officials.

We, the People have the power to require the House of Representatives to do its duty and act on a bill of impeachment after full investigation and consideration. If it fails to do so those House members who failed to perform this Constitutional duty can and should be voted from office. Remember that President Nixon resigned under threat of impeachment for Watergate less than two years after his landslide reelection in 1972.

IMPEACHMENT IS IMPERATIVE

For the American people who support and defend the Constitution of the United States, who want to prevent further crimes by a lawless administration, who believe we can redeem our country in the eyes of those we have assaulted and those who have witnessed this brutality and who dare to demand of future government leadership, NEVER AGAIN, Impeachment is Imperative. A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that we Americans should declare the causes which impel us to impeach.

President George W. Bush chose to wage a war of aggression against Iraq, which had not attacked the United States and presented no imminent threat to our people, or legitimate interests. A small cabal, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Feith, Libby and Rove wrested decision making processes from established institutions of government to reinforce President Bush's desire to seize Iraq, defying international institutions, the opinions of humankind and the rule of law to commence a disastrous criminal military adventure.

A CAMPAIGN OF DECEIT AND FALSE PROPAGANDA

War of aggression is the first offense listed in the Nuremberg Charter as a Crime against Peace. The Nuremberg Tribunal after hearing evidence of Nazi crimes in World War II convicted the leaders of waging wars of aggression, which it called "the supreme international crime."

At Nuremberg, the Chief U.S. Prosecutor, Robert H. Jackson, promised posterity that in the future all nations, including our own, would be held accountable for such crimes.

President Bush and key administration officials engaged in a lengthy campaign of deceit, concealment and false propaganda to create support for, and acceptance of, its war of aggression by claiming Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, harbored terrorists, had close ties with and supported Al Qaeda and intended to attack the U.S., U.S. citizens and U.S. interests. A free society, democratic institutions and constitutional government cannot survive such deceit by its own government.

The U.S. has made civilians and civilian facilities its direct object of attack. It has pursued assassination and summary executions as official policy. President Bush boasted of summary executions in his State of the Union message in 2003. Excessive and indiscriminate force and illegal weapons have been used. Many thousands of Iraqi citizens, whole families, women, children, elderly Iraqis have been killed as a result.

U.S. military casualties exceed 10,000 including more than 1,100 deaths with many additional thousands returned to the United States for physical and mental illnesses.

The U.S. has employed torture, including torture to death, rape and sexual assault and humiliation, as approved and ordered policy from Afghanistan and Guantanamo to Iraq, inflicted on thousands of prisoners, many, if not most, without any evidence of wrongful conduct. An admitted 37 human beings have been murdered while being held in captivity by the United States under these conditions. We know not how many more. All the mounting evidence makes clear that this program of torture and death is not aberrational conduct of rogue or undisciplined soldiers but is rather the policy adopted at the highest levels of the Bush/Rumsfeld chain of command. All this in violation of the Geneva Conventions, the International Convention Against Torture, the laws of all nations and common human decency.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States provides: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, Shall Be Removed From Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

MORE THAN 100,000 DEAD BASED ON A LIE

We learn from the prominent medical journal Lancet of the report by researchers at John Hopkins University, Columbia University and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad that the U.S. war of aggression against Iraq and military occupation has cost "at least" 100,000 Iraqi lives already must civilian, women and children. Already President Bush has launched a massive aerial and ground assault on Falluja which may kill thousands of defenseless civilians.

Haiti, where President Bush forced the elected President Jean Bertrand Aristide from office, is in chaos with many thousands killed by widespread daily violence committed by U.S. supported paramilitaries against Aristide supporters.

Nearly 500,000 have voted to impeach. Help us increase that number into millions the Congress cannot ignore.

Every American should choose whether to vote for impeachment entirely on the facts, straight up, or down, without political, or partisan fear, or favor. We owe this to the country, its future, the Constitution and our common heritage. Impeachment is Required Now.

Impeachment now is the only way we, the American people, can promise ourselves and the world that we will not tolerate crimes against peace and humanity by our government. Knowing what we know, to wait longer is to condone what has been done and risk more.

Sincerely,

Ramsey Clark

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Taibnor
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 09:59 PM

Go ahead and impeach. Democrats still haven't figured out what they are doing wrong. They keep loosing ground and instead of fessing up to their own shortcomings they blame it on Evil Republicans.

They snatch defeat from the jaws of defeat. Impeach away and loose more ground in the process.

Talk about not admitting to your mistakes, Harf!

Taibnor

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 12:18 PM

Sour Grapes, dianavan.

Very predictable response.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 11:01 AM

Rodney - This thread is not about the election. This is about impeaching Bush. Actually, I hope he is tried for war crimes. I think it may have to come from the international community. Obviously, the mind control in the U.S. is far greater than anyone expected. Either that or the citizens of the U.S. are just, plain vicious war mongers.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Rodney
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 08:17 AM

Yeah adult like having adult language such as shithead, dumbass, idiot, fuck you, low-life double-faced, twisty-tongued, cross-eyed sonofabush. That kind of post?

If one points out why and how they tnik that John Kerry violated the Hatch act and the UCMJ, they get called avery name in the book in very strong adult language.

Does anybody here care to see why I think the Democrats lost so much ground in this election?

Rodney D

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: katlaughing
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 06:22 AM

As I write this dubya has 254 to Kerry's 252 electoral votes and that is according to npr, the Denver Post and a few other news outlets. Regardless, dubya is hardly getting a huge amoutn of any support. I also doubt that Ramsey Clark, and those of us who agree with him, will let up on the impeach bush efforts. I certainly hope it moves forward.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 04:00 AM

Oh, Doug R -

There are plenty of grounds for impeachment.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 03:22 AM

As I write this, Fox News (yes that dreaded news source Liberals love to hate)reports that GWB has 269 Electoral Votes, one shy of the amount necessary to win the election. The Kerry campaign is sending a bunch of lawyers to Ohio to see if there is anyway to turn this election into the fiasco of 2000, but assuming they can't find a way, Bush will likely be re-elected as President. Even more disturbing to my Liberal friends, though, is the fact that it appears that the Republicans will gain an even larger majority in the House and the Senate. Even if there were a case for impeachment (which there isn't)it might be a bit difficult to get it under way.

So Impeach away I say. I'm sure it will go ...where?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 07:00 PM

Yo Dougie,

I think you might want to rearead more of Rag's posts before coming to his defense. Hey, I gave Rag the benefit of the doubt. It's Rag who has no particular interest in debating the issues. He's just a hair above an outright troll...

Larry K,

I'm not sure that anyone has given up anything but with a close election, with Diebold factored in, the Dems are gonna have to face the real possibility that getting the most vots cast isn't the same as getting the most votes counted. Dem know this. It will take at least 51%, more like 52% Kerry to win the election Anything under 51% will get manipulated and the Repubs will steal it.

Rodney, mah man,

One thing I've learned 'round this joint is that if you post adult posts you will get a better share of adult reponses. So, other than branding all Catters as childlike, perhaps you'd liike to pick a topic, start your own thread, and see what happens. I think you will be surprised. Sure, you'll get yer fair share of lightweights but you'll also find a lot of folks here with much better minds tha 4 years olds...

Jus a suggestion.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 06:59 PM

Nixon was not-quite impeached, but the offenses for which he *almost* was tried -- he avoided trial only by resigning -- occurred near the end of his first term, as part of his effort to be re-elected, and came to life only after said re-election, early in his second term.

So: Yes, Amos, the "high crimes and misdemeanors" for which a President can be impeached need not have occurred since his most recent re-election. They *may* need to have occurred during his current (multi-term) tenure, but it doesn't matter if he's already in the second term and the bad stuff happened during the first.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Rodney
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 06:38 PM

I am beginning to realize that there is no such thing as respect for other people's opinions here. It's sorta like the 3 year olds vs the 4 year olds.

If someone tries to bring up a fact for consideration they are attacked for attempting to pull a dirty trick.

Most People can tell fact from fiction. The ones that can't, need to be constantly supported by their cronies that the poster is an evildoer.

They can't think independently of the crowd.

Rodney D

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 01:34 PM

I was not attacking the poster. I was pointing out that his rhetoric consists of trashing and dramatizing.

Does anyone know, by the way, if a sitting second-term Pres canbe impeached of first-term crimes?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Peace
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 01:32 PM

DougR:

Ragnar made a few personal attacks, and he got some RETURNED. That's life pal.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 01:29 PM

Rush Limbaugh has been predicting for weeks that right after Bush was reelected, democrats would start an impeachment proceeding against him.   Thanks for being so predictable and validating Rush Limbaugh again.    An impeachment attempt right after election would only help the midterm elections in reaching a 60 vote majority in the Senate to avoid fillibusters.

Today is election day.   Have all of you given up already.   I don't understand.   The votes have not been counted.   Why are you already planning on defeat.   Anything can happen and I don't take anything for granted.

A note on natural resources.   The USA is second worst in the world in amount of resources used per population.   Canada is number one worst in the world using slightly more resources per person.   One could aruge however, that the cold climate contributes to that.   Still- the Canadian record is not one to be proud of in resource usage.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 01:20 PM

That's it, Amos, attack the poster!

Ragnar: I don't know how long you have been posting to the Mudcat, but if you do so expecting that other posters will respect your opinions, or even that you have a right to an opinion (without being personally attacked, ...get a life!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Peace
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 12:02 PM

Wait one, here. I too am a raving, whining peacenik. I fail to see the glory in war; was a private once, and they feed privates to the machine first. (And ya know that's gotta hurt.)

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 10:13 AM

THere's a big difference, Rag: Kerry does it constructively, by communicating. You do it destructively, by dramatizing and trashing others.

BIG diff, man.

A