Hasn't Bush done enough to warrant impeachment proceedings?
358516
First, to answer your question, yes!!!!!!!\n\nNow for the poster that said Clinton was impeached.  He was not.  It was never even put on the Senate floor, it was only a show of force in the Congress.\n\nAs for Bush, he can lie, steal, cheat and do whatever he wants.  The republicans are too scared of him to even censure him.  But just wait until the next Democrat takes office.  They will be investigated if they use toilet tissue instead of a Kleenex to blow their nose.  Lets see, what kind of charge could that be?  Improper usage of government property?  God help this country!!
1153597
Bush should be impeached for the following reasons:\n\n1.) Lying about the reason for the war prior to invading Iraq:  \nBush and his team deliberately misled Congress and the American public about the rationale for invading Iraq. Bush convinced a majority of Americans that Iraq was involved with Al-Qaeda and responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Yet the evidence shows that Iraq was not involved. Bush said in his State of the Union Address that "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" to build nuclear weapons. But he had already been told by the CIA that the evidence was forged. Former Ambassador Joe Wilson challenged Bush about the falsity of these State of the Union claims and, in retaliation, senior white house officials outted his CIA wife Valerie Plame.  Bush claimed to have hard evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. But the UN investigators could not verify any of these claims and searches of Iraq revealed no such weapons.  Furthermore, the recent "discovery" of more than a decade old chemical weapons, despite the rhetoric, does not signify that weapons of mass destruction have been found.  Dick Cheney claimed that Iraq possessed deadly weapons of mass destruction that were a grave threat to the security of our nation.  The weapons that were found recently were unuseable and no longer effective due to the age of the material.  Chemical experts have stated that they were no more dangerous than a typical household cleaning substance.  Bush knows that he cannot use this insignificant find to justify his war, other wise he would be doing so...\n\n2.)The illegal wiretapping of American Citizens: \n"George Bush authorized the NSA to conduct illegal wiretaps on American citizens. Bush claimed that these were justified on the basis of national security. But there is a legal mechanism for conducting emergency wiretaps followed by court approval within 72 hours. Bush ignored that mechanism and exceeded his executive authority. Bush claims he has authority to wiretap anyone he wishes but legal scholars, including some Republican lawmakers, disagree."\n\n3.)  Torture of Prisoners:  \n"Bush and his team have set up a system of prisons around the world where prisoners can be tortured. They have transported prisoners from the United States, Europe and elsewhere to other countries for the purpose of having them tortured. They have fought hard to build a legal case for torture but the fact remains that torture is highly illegal. It is also considered an ineffective means of getting reliable information from a prisoner. Bush is guilty of violating of the Federal Torture Act, the UN Torture Convention and the Geneva Convention."  Alberto Gonzales, our Attorney General, is famous for referring to the Geneva Convention as being "quaint and obsolete."  Just recently, the bodies of 2 American soldiers were found, who had been brutally tortured before eventually being killed.  Policies supporting torture are a direct threat to the safety of our troops in the field and need to be stopped!!  Come on all you troop supporting "Patriots!"\n\n4.)  Violation of International Law:\n"According to our Constitution, International Treaties are part of the "supreme Law of the Land". They are not something that can be ignored when they are inconvenient. Bush's violations of the UN Charter and the Nuremberg Charter are, therefore, impeachable offenses."\n\nOf course, despite all of this, you will not see a movement towards impeachment in Congress due to the simple fact that the majority party is none other than the Republicans.  They will not impeach Bush because it will reflect poorly on themselves and their party.  Yes, it is disgusting that rather than caring for the security and dignity of our nation and its people, they are worried for their own careers and reputation...but, sadly, its
439376
First, a member of the House of Representatives has to introduce a bill to form an impeachment panel.   This has already been done; the bill has been presented by Democratic Congressman John Conyers and has 29 co-sponsors. \n\nIf there’s enough support to form the panel, the panel conducts an investigation to see if there is grounds for impeachment.\n\nThose grounds for impeachment are, "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."\n\nClarification continues, ". . . those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself." \n\nThis would include going to war for political gain and the disenfranchisement of voters, both of which I believe President Bush has done and can be proven.\n\nContinuing, "[I]f the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds to believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty; . . ."\n\nHis connection with Ken Lay and Tom DeLay could be considered suspicious and I believe by defending them as he has done, Bush would be inclined to protect them.\n\nHere’s the main foundation for advancing with impeachment procedures against President Bush, "...must certainly be punishable for giving false information to the Senate. He is to regulate all intercourse with foreign powers, and it is his duty to impart to the Senate every material intelligence he receives. If it should appear that he has not given them full information, but has concealed important intelligence which he ought to have communicated, and by that means induced them to enter into measures injurious to their country, and which they would not have consented to had the true state of things been disclosed to them, -- in this case, I ask whether, upon an impeachment for a misdemeanor upon such an account, the Senate would probably favor him."\n\nThere in no doubt, by his own admission, President Bush gave false information to the Senate about Iraq.\n\nHere’s a complete list of grounds for impeachment which President Bush can most likely be proven to have committed:\n\nBush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq. \nBush conducted illegal wiretaps of American citizens. \nBush violated International Law by invading a sovereign country for illegal purposes. \nBush violated the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners of war. \nBush held prisoners without formal charges and without legal representation. \nBush used government funds for domestic political propaganda.\nThe Bush team used uniformed military personnel for Republican party political purposes.\nBush was negligent in his slow response to help victims of Hurricane Katrina. \nBush shows contempt towards our Constitution and our democratic ideals. \n\nThen after the panel concludes their investigation, the results will be presented to the House of Representative for a vote.
597624
Actually, you may not have to wait, with about 1/2 of the Republicans against George W. Bush now,     1ST Stage: the House of representatives can vote to impeach, "articles of impeachment", 2ND Stage: the Senate actually tries the case, with a two-thirds vote required for conviction.\nThe Vice President can be impeached as well. \nBill Clinton was impeached, but not convicted.
412340
bush should not be impeached
490708
I'm all for impeaching Bush. Get him and his entourage out of there before they either a) finally succeed in bankrupting the country, or b) touch off WWIII. This administration is answerable under the Constitution of the United States, as previous administrations were, and November, I feel, will prove that for all and sundry to see.\nWe need reforms, good, honest reforms, and these guys to rid off into the sunset or whatever...
855759
Yes, he lied about the reasons to go into war which has caused the deaths of people he is sworn to protect. If Clinton could be impeached for lying about his private sex life, then Bush can be impeached for some far more sinister.
1151910
HELL YES !! YES !! YES !!\n\nHe does not act like the president of the world most powerfull and DEMOCRATIC country. He acts like a clone of Hitler before WW2.\n\nThe list of impeachable offenses is much too long to list here. Suffice to say ANY one of them is a much more serious offense than lying about a bl*w job in the Oval office. And several are as bad or worse than Milosevitch or others that have been prosecuted for war crimes. Just because he is the president of the US doen't make him above our laws or any laws.
381907
I think that if it is proved that he lied, he (or any other public servant for that matter) should have to face justice.\nYour question is very important\nBush supporters, if it is proved beyond doubt that he lied, shouldn't he have to be impeached? of course he should just as a democrat would have to if he lied.\nIt's not a matter of being a democrat or a republican, it is a matter of law and following it.\nDon't get all angry about it conservative. The question is objective and clear. It deserves an equally objective and clear response
757351
If he hasnt commited any crimes we cant impeach him. So, no, it wouldnt help. All it would do is make the democrats happy. That doesnt solve anything.
406857
President Bush has not been impeached because his party controls the branch of government that does the impeaching. That is the answer, and it is exactly that simple.\n\nIntelligent people on both sides of the aisle can debate whether or not the president should be impeached, but the people whose opinions matter are in congress. \n\nA president would have to act in a significantly egregious manner before his own political party would participate in his impeachment. Even then, an impeachment is unlikely.\n\nThe Bill Clinton impeachment is an accurate and recent example of the process. A Democratic party controlled House of Representatives would never have impeached him, but a Republican House did. The Democrats did have enough members in the Senate to block Clinton's removal, so that is what happened.\n\nWho was correct? The answer is not particularly relevant to this question. The fact that both sides tend to stick to the party line is the main relevant factor.\n\nIf the Democrats gained control of the House in the 2006 elections, an impeachment attempt would be highly likely.
1169202
I don't know how you people could honestly believe there is no need or cause for impeachment.  My God, this Administration has pretty much alienated us from other Countries, well, the middle east for sure, they have started unjust war, causing thousands and thousands of innocent men, women and children to lose their lives.  INNOCENT CHILDREN PEOPLE.  \n\nThe only way I could figure it, is all of you who are in favor, must of gotten the lucky tax cut like all of Bushies other friends.  The richie rich are the only ones who may even benefit the slightest bit from this holy war, but my God, is it really worth it?  Is it really worth the death of all these children?  For Pete's sake.\n\nMM5243, just out of curiosity, what would be grounds for impeachment according to you?
1066331
No!\n\nArticles of Impeachment\n\nof\n\nPresident George W. Bush\n\nand\n\nVice President Richard B. Cheney,\nSecretary of State Condoleezza Rice,\nSecretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and\nAttorney General Alberto Gonzales\n\nThe 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. - - ARTICLE II, SECTION 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA\n\nPresident George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales have committed violations and subversions of the Constitution of the United States of America in an attempt to carry out with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes and deprivations of the civil rights of the people of the United States and other nations, by assuming powers of an imperial executive unaccountable to law and usurping powers of the Congress, the Judiciary and those reserved to the people of the United States, by the following acts:\n\n1) Seizing power to wage wars of aggression in defiance of the U.S. Constitution, the U.N. Charter and the  rule of law; carrying out a massive assault on and occupation of Iraq, a country that was not threatening the United States, resulting in the death and maiming of over one hundred thousand Iraqis, and thousands of U.S. G.I.s.\n\n2) Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war.\n\n3) Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable. \n\n4) Instituting a secret and illegal wiretapping and spying operation against the people of the United States through the National Security Agency.\n\n5) Threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq by belligerently changing its government by force and assaulting Iraq in a war of aggression.\n\n6) Authorizing, ordering and condoning assassinations, summary executions, kidnappings, secret and other illegal detentions of individuals, torture and physical and psychological coercion of prisoners to obtain false statements concerning acts and intentions of governments and individuals and violating within the United States, and by authorizing U.S. forces and agents elsewhere, the rights of individuals under the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.\n\n7) Making, ordering and condoning false statements and propaganda about the conduct of foreign governments and individuals and acts by U.S. government personnel; manipulating the media and foreign governments with false information; concealing information vital to public discussion and informed judgment concerning acts, intentions and possession, or efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction in order to falsely create a climate of fear and destroy opposition to U.S. wars of aggression and first strike attacks.\n\n8) Violations and subversions of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, both a part of the "Supreme Law of the land" under Article VI, paragraph 2, of the Constitution, in an attempt to commit with impunity crimes against peace and humanity and war crimes in wars and threats of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq and others and usurping powers of the United Nations and the peoples of its nations by bribery, coercion and other corrupt acts and by rejecting treaties, committing treaty violations, and frustrating compliance with treaties in order to destroy any means by which international law and institutions can prevent, affect, or adjudicate the exercise of U.S. military and economic power against the international community.\n\n9) Acting to strip Uni
534802
Bush needs to be impeached.  We can impeach a president for lying about extra martial affairs (and what man WON'T lie about that) but we don't impeach a president who authorizes the illegal wire taps of AMERICAN CITIZENS under the guise of finding terrorists?  He needs to go!  And don't even get me started on our borders!
952942
Too late kids. It amazes me how so many people are clueless to how impeachment works. There's not enough time to impeach Bush plus he hasn't done anything you can impeach him for.\n\nDon't give me some whiney hack rhetoric about "starting an illegal war". The Gulf War that started in 1991 legally speaking never ended. Saddam signed a cease fire agreement UNSCR 657 and in short order violated it. Under cease fire terms the nations are still at war they just aren't fighting. Saddam also violated UN Charter 51 by authorizing assassination attempts on US diplomats and on former President Bush. You'd have a hard time making a case based on that because by right the US could have invaded Iraq at anytime. Saddam has only himself to blame.\n\nCongress gave Bush approval for war even if the evidence had been tainted Bush could just invoke UN Charters and security council resolutions plus the fact we were already at war with Iraq. Bush is not as stupid as you would like him to be the only thing they can get him for would be falsefying a document submitted to Congress.\n\nWiretapping?? So? There were already wiretap laws in effect approved in the 70's the new laws approved by congress just shortened the time frame and remember these were not domestic calls they were international. A call from Syria to the US is not a domestic call. \n\nIt took Kenneth Starr 5 years to impeach Clinton for perjury...let me repeat that. Clinton was NOT impeached for having oral sex he was impeached for perjury and even though he was impeached he was not evicted. \n\nThe numbers aren't there. You need 2/3rd majority to impeach Bush and remove him from office and the numbers just aren't there. The democrats have a tiny majority and not all of them are willing to impeach.\n\nBush will not be impeached so put it out of your mind hippies have been calling for it since he won back in 2000 and 6 years later he's still here until 2008 when his term ends and John McCain becomes the next president.
886117
LETS IMPEACH BUSH!!\n\n\n\n(Even though he's done nothing to be impeached for)
889711
No, they should not hold impeachment trials against bush, however, they should let him know they will keep that on the table IN CASE he tries to veto everything Congress tries to pass.