Bush will visit Hanoi where a US citizen is being held on treason w/o being able to see an attorney.  Ironic?
928809
No, not ironic. Not even close. Those in Gitmo had been captured on the battlefield, or had been through prior screening processes to make sure they were the right people to be there. Illegal combatants. Who ARE and have been able to see attorneys.\n\nYour attempt to compare the two is very weak. But at least you're trying to use facts to impugn Bush. That's much better than most of the delusional Bush-bashing crowd.
456060
I don't know, only bush's cabinet can tell you that. Only I think that they want bush to clear up the mess in which he started in Iraq or most likely leave the British to finish off. I think it is just another Vietnam where they get in a mess, leave in a hurry and no-one gets put on trial. I also think when coalition troops do pull finaly out iraq, I think bush go on trial for War Crimes.
467805
No! many soldiers that died in Nam were not US citizens. Illegals have to have a valid work permit to join also there is an extensive background check by the FBI before you take the oath to defend this country.
427764
Site you facts Mister.  If you were in the military you know darn well that any american citizen, applying for or holding a job (especially in the government) who is officially listed as AWOL, will be apprehended and held over for an administrative determination under the UCMJ (do you know what that stands for).  \n\nIf pres. Clinton pardoned them, they are no longer AWOL.
726669
That is illegal and a felony to over throw the USA Government and is actaully a form of treason,  plz leave if you do not like it here.
995929
No, but the REAL scary thought is...\n\nIf he declairs Martial Law on the whole country he can serve indefinate if he makes up enough excusses to keep Martial Law in effect.\n\n;-)\nTwisted...
534408
Very doubtful.  Not even to visit, but it'll be up to France.  The USA will allow him to travel if he is off parole or if he receives permission from his P.O.
629911
He could try it. I dare him.\n\nBut speaking from a purely legal perspective, they're not his citizens, so he cannot pardon them. Unless an individual is either a citizen (either by birth or naturalization), a resident (in process with a Resident Alien Card), or a visitor (via visa good for at least 6 months), then there is no legal jurisdiction at all.\n\nThat's why, when thousands of illegal immigrants took to the streets to protest, it was just the most bizarre situation. Let me put it this way, by way of analogy: If I were to fly to, let's say Pakistan, as a tourist (which still makes me legal), and I organized a rally (to protest I don't know what) with other tourists (who are also legal entrants), how crazy would that be? Who would actually listen? The reaction would be, "Who are you people?" And rightly so.\n\nCurrently, there are thousands of people immigrating into this country. They are in process and will be for several years. They've paid the fees and waited patiently in dozens of huge lines, wasted whole days at INS/DHS buildings all across the nation. I, too, was one of these people. It took me five and a half years to become a citizen. Now, I'm not particularly bothered either way, but I can imagine a lot of those people being pretty angry. It's kind of like sitting in a 200 car lane behind some road works, and watching as some sh*thead takes the next lane and forces their way in ahead of everyone. It's just crazy that they would be allowed to get away with that, and ultimately win the same rights as those of us who broke no law and worked extremely hard to do so.\n\nBut... I will say this once more, as I've said before:\n\nThe whole illegal immigration issue has been made to take center stage for one reason only. It is intended as a distraction technique to take the heat off of the worsening situation in Iraq, the developing situation in Iran, and the president's sliding approval ratings. It is purely a means to sustain the Republican Party long enough to keep their majority in the Senate and the House. I truly believe that once the mid-term elections are out of the way the whole issue will evaporate.
577822
See short answer from Sully already posted.  Under trial for "high crimes and misdemeanors" YOU BET YOUR SWEET ASS HE COULD!  If zippergate qualifies, taking away guaranteed constiutional rights from Americans privacy via passage and reauthorization of the Patriot Act (specifically section 213 and 215 which deal with "sneak and peak provisions" and the expansion of access to citizen's private medical records.)  SCREW THAT!
855169
It means that the president will be able to designate anyone he wants as an enemy combatant, for almost any reason.  As a result, you can be sent away to a secret prison, held indefinitely without being charged and without legal representation, and possibly tortured.  All in the name of fighting terrorism.  We might as well flush the Constitution down the toilet.
781099
I'm surprised to read people saying that there are more important things to do.  What's more important than at least investigating an executive who broke US and international law?  If we ignore that it sets a very dangerous precedent in my opinion.
141600
Agreed that the president isn't above the law, but with some many american associations not doing their jobs (INS especially), it has made this an option.  Did you know the terrorists that blew up the world trade center buildings were here for 6 YEARS on an EXPIRED VISA?  Had someone taken care of that, like noticing that and kicking them from our country, the towers might still be there.  But, how many more people have to die by the time you get a warrant?  What more valuable to you?  Your life or your privacy?  That's the real question...
526105
thats spaying on someone else, and its a federal crime,\njust the Bush administration can do it, and no one else.\n\njk\ngood luck
535502
off books..hmmm. if he went bankrupt...hmmmm. the sitch does not look good...but, if i were you i would call the State and complain to the State Department of Human rights.
620264
no,as a private citizen you have to write your congressman\nI agree there is no doubt of treason.\nbut it is unlikely to be dealt with in an appropriate\nmanner.WE know the truth!
197142
She should not be "honored for voicing her opinion at a time when no one really wanted to hear a dissenting opinion" as is said above.  She not only betrayed the country but-even worse-she betrayed the soldiers over there.  Read some of the stories told by actual Americans who were over there and what happened in some of the POW camps she visited.  Does the word "treason" mean anything?
741123
Bush also be booked under similar charges. He lied to the world about Weapons of Distruction and bombarded Iraq. Killed so many. Why Bush should not be hanged for misinterpretation and mis representation.