Why aren't Dean and Pelosi trying to impeach Bush if he "lied"?
832065
Pelosi and Dean spread that provocative propaganda to create a stir and regain power.  They knew it wouldn't stand to reason.  The lower level liberals are still feeling the ripples, not realizing that they were used, simply residing at the bottom of the donkey's food chain.\n\nPelosi retracted her demands for impeachment.  They won the election.
358999
No.  You can't impeach someone because you disagree with them or because they are unpopular.  The Constituion specifies impeachment only for High Crimes and Misdemeanors.  Nixon's covering for the Watergate Break In probably counts, everything since (the Whitewater stuff is a stretch the evidence was a little thin) just lacks proper legal standing.  Congress needs to stop treating impeachment as a political toy and reserve it for what it is, a very serious proceding not to be undertaken lightly or in a partisan manner.
328372
Because only Congress can impeach the president. And since congress just happens to be controlled by Bush's republican buddies, there aint a snowballs chance in hell of his getting impeached any time soon. Hes probably going to get away with all the lies and killing... Its depressing really.\n\n\npeace
359216
It is something that needs to be done and if we leave it to the repuglicans it will never get done. Impeachment is probably not going to happen do to the control of the House but at least it will get in front of the American people and that is real important with the election coming up in November. The repuglicans are to corrupt to do it but just the publicity alone is worth the trouble. I wonder how they will spin this movement around to make their hero look good.
1099801
They try to defend the evil fascist bush by pointing a finger at Clinton. When clinton lied nobody got killed. Bush lied to get us into this war.
122594
Democratic leaders aren't so immature and petty as to go around impeaching everyone they don't like.  Unlike Republican leaders who impeached a president for his lying about his sex life, Democrats are able to behave in a mature and responsible fashion and realize that impeaching a president for a couple minor infractions like forging evidence to starting a war and ordering illegal wiretaps on US citizens won't accomplish anything.\n\nI, however, am not as mature as many of our political leaders and think it would be really freaking cool if Bush were impeached.  However, if he were removed from office we'd be left with Cheney.  This would be unfortunate in that we'd have all the same policy without Bush's highly entertaining abuse of the English language.\n\nOh, and just to clarify, Clinton was impeached.  Impeachment does not refer to removal from office, but rather the initation of a hearing to determine if removal is necessary.
716561
Lying under oath is why Clinton got impeached.  Apparently, lying about getting head is more treasonous and dangerous to the United States than lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
770267
Impeachment, I seriously doubt the democrats are going to make that blunder. Maybe a new way of looking at things should be...if the republicans block everything the democrats do try to accomplish, will this hurt them even further next election? The democrats already have plans in the works. If America agrees with their proposals the republicans would be cutting their own throats by defeating the bills. Someone in the republican party needs to wake up and realize you guys are no longer in the cat-bird seat. The republicans are now the bad guys. Obstruction politics will not help their cause. A little bi-partisanship may help their cause.
298595
It only takes one Congressman (or Congresswoman) to bring criminal charges.  Impeachment is not necessary if a crime has been committed.  Special Counsel is appointed and the matter is investigated.\n\nIt hasn't happened for one of two reasons:\n\n(1)  The entire congress (including Shrillary Clinton) is secretly in cahoots with George Bush in  plot to take over the World)\n\nor\n\n(2) The screams of agony from the liberals in congress are just that.  Screams.  No Substance, no crime.  The intent is to destroy the president, not to accuse him.  He hasn't accomodated them by committing a crime so they accuse him and when it is disproven they invent another.\n\nRemember that if you ever vote.  Voters need the integrity to know what's going on.
988273
First off thank you very much for telling the truth on here.  Bush is a great president and there is no reason to impeach him.  Liberals are so unhappy that there is no decent liberal cadidate for president they have to rip apart ours in any way possible, sad huh.  It is worth it for the libs to lie about our country so it looks bad making our president look bad, pathetic.
593903
Like you said, they still don't know anything about government. Bill Clinton was never impeached, it takes both sides of congress to impeach a President, and it has to be by more than 75%. The Senate never impeached Bill Clinton, so this is another Republican lie. Just look at the ones on here now talking about Bill Clinton's private parts. It is sickening. Why doesn't George Bush, and the rest of the government talk about it? It's because he wasn't impeached numb-nuts!!!
790090
Technically, impeachment is not removal from office, but the process to consider doing so.\n\nAs the process was initiated, technically, Clinton was impeached... although removal did not suceed.\n\nShame on him for lying about a BJ! But apprarently it's okay to lie to create a war? Go figure.
892319
Bush is afraid of Nancy Pelosi, and here is why Rumsfeld was fired: LINK\nhttp://stream.paranode.com/imc/portland/images/2003/12/276084.jpg\nhttp://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/12/276083.shtml
7576
he can be impeached for high crimes and mistemeaners. So there would have to be a specific charge.  If he was given erroneous information and he thought it to be true, then it is not a lie.
277125
The current Congress will not impeach Bush, however, with the midterm elections this fall, we may have a whole new power structure in Washington come 2007.  The Republicans will probably lose their majority in the House and Senate this year and then the Democrats will have the ability to start the long impeachment process.\n\nIt’s very probable that the President did break the law in respect to this recent wiretapping fiasco, maybe so egregiously that he will be removed from office, but this raises another problem.\n\nDick Cheney.\n\nDoes anyone out there think the Democrats want to put Dick Cheney into the White House where he could run as an incumbent in 2008 if he decides he does enjoy being President after all?  On a number of occasions, the V.P. has said that he doesn’t want to be the Commander in Chief, but do the Democrats really want to risk that?\n\n\nOn top of that, the country is developing a dangerous trend of impeaching or recalling our elected officials when we do not like them.  One must look at Italy, California and much of South and Central America to realize that this is not a path that the Federal government should walk.\n\nNo one has a crystal ball here, but the end result of an impeachment is probably going to be worse than sticking out a few more years with our current President.
720822
Lying Comes Naturally to Republicans\nWhenever Republican politicians find themselves in trouble, their automatic knee-jerk reaction is to blame Democrats. If there is nothing to blame Democrats for, they merely make something up - they lie. This is exactly what the Republican National Committee (RNC) chairman, following the lead of his boss George W. Bush, has done and is doing. He is placing the blame of the mean and punitive House immigration bill on the Democrats, when he knows that it is an outrageous lie.\n"To be anti- George Bush is to be pro-American," \n\n I think he's dangerous, and he has to be stopped." \n\nU.S. Troops Killed in Iraq Tops 2,400 <words/latestnews/index.php?id=6682>
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.