Will the democrates start investigating G.W.Bush ? In reference to impeachment or war crimes.?
919149
Yes HR 6166 EH has a clause which allows past and future war crimes. That doesn't make the bill legal, most of it is unconstitutional.  It has no effect on international law, something Bush doesn't seem to understand, and preparations are being made in other countries to charge him and others with war crimes.\n\nHe will be in his little territory (paid for with black appropriations) in Paraguay with his families Nazi buddies when they try to put him on trial.
802739
President George W. Bush and his Administration has not\ncommitted any impeachable offenses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
582120
we will smoke him out~! lol.... so funny......\nVote this Loser of a President out this November~!\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.
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.
590901
Assuming the Democrats have the courage of their convictions to act decisively and without fear of reprisal, I would like to see them go after the vile bush and his entire administration of criminal scum (beginning but not ending with cheney, rumsfeld and piggy-man rove). I want impeachment trials, soon to be followed by (very public) criminal trials. \n\nAnd yes, by all means, let's finally have at the evil all-powerful corporations who basically control our completely corrupt system of government, to say nothing of our lives. Going after the religious right is also perfectly justified, especially those churches and organizations who have benefited from the so-called faith-based initiative. \n\nI want jail time for these villains. I want vengeance. I want blood. These hateful people have destroyed this country and my own faith in it. There can be no worse crime than that. Hmmm, we are at war... and treason in time of war is punishable by execution... bush, cheney, rumsfeld, piggy-man... I wonder if we can put their fat heads on pikes like they used to do at the Tower of London? ;)
713408
Don't insult chimps!  Alas, our totalitarian president will not be impeached, as the Democrats are too afraid of disrupting the country despite the fact that Bush broke the law, admitted it and is proud of it.  (If we need totalitarian tools like warrantless wiretaps to fight terrorists, then the terrorists have succeeded in destroying the United States of America.)\n\nHowever, it is important that any impeachment proceedings include the equally evil Dick Cheney.  Bush is bad enough!
283940
yes & also O.B.L.   if bush can ever find him... haha lol\nHelp spread the word..... (IMPEACH)
1005960
FEBRUARY 21, 2006 – In these highly-charged political times, it is the word that dare not speak its name:  impeachment. Democrats and other opponents of the President, as well as people in the media, are afraid to raise the topic for fear of being called too partisan or extreme.\n\nBut the startling revelation of the President’s warrantless wiretapping campaign may be the straw that broke the camel's back: In the halls of Congress and on the front pages of a growing number of mainstream periodicals, impeachment is being discussed more and more openly. And many leading constitutional scholars agree: there has never been so strong a case for impeachment since Richard Nixon.\n\nIn ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH, Michael Ratner, Bill Goodman and other experts at one of our nation's leading institutions of constitutional scholarship, the Center for Constitutional Rights, set out the legal arguments for impeachment in a clear, concise, and objective discussion. In four separate articles of impeachment detailing four separate charges –warrantless surveillance, misleading Congress on the reasons for the Iraq war, violating laws against torture, and subverting the Constitution’s separation of powers – it is, say the CCR attorneys, a case of black letter law, with abundant evidence.\n\nARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH details that evidence, the relevant laws and the legal precedents. It also explains what the Constitution says about impeachment – an informative discussion further illuminated by supplemental material that includes a history of impeachment, explanation of its procedures, and the previous articles of impeachment brought against Presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.\n\nWith leading Republicans calling for investigations of the domestic spying campaign, a special prosecutor investigating the suppression of evidence used to launch the Iraq war, and hearings on innumerable instances of torture, ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH may be more timely than any of us would like to admit.
985325
She has stated that there will be an investigation.  This said, depending on the findings, congress shall act accordingly.  I just hope she uses the same type of intelligence seeking tools used by this administration to come up reasons to invade Iraq. . .It would serve justice with a poetic flair!
1056513
We havent impeached him yet.  Fear not, for the mighty 20 year curse will decend upon Bush, and sometime in 2007, According to the curses pattern, He should begone from this world, never to be heard from again.  Patiece, my friend.
746351
There will be investigations.  They will start at the bottom  and work up.  If the public wants it to go all the way to the source, we will have to loudly support it, for otherwise it would be political suicide for the dems to do it.  Remember, it was only a few weeks ago that if you disagreed with the President, you were for the terrorists  and a traitor.
609361
Well, there are a few variables that would need to come into play if that were to happen.\nFirst of all, YES, HE DID LIE UNDER OATH:  the oath he took when "sworn in" as president.. so, I don't want any more comparisons to "Clinton lied, bush didn't".. bacause, again bush has lied to all of us!\nHowever, in order for this (UGH) president to be impeached, we will have to have a democratic (or liberal) congress.  If this does finally take place in November, the boy may be impeached, after all!\nMe; I'm all for it!  \nAnd, by the way:  Nixon was impeached during Viet Nam.. so, yes;  we can impeach him even though we are at war!  Of course, the boy did say the war was over about 3 years ago.. hmmm... rmeember the whole "Mission Accomplished" fiasco?
308736
I certianly hope so.\n\nThe current President of the United States has shown little regard for out 3 tiered system of government and has done quite a few things that are impeachable.\n\nPresident Bush (acording to Libby), authorized the leak of classified information (in effect de-classifying parts of it), which resulted in the outing of a CIA operative as well as her contacts and assets.  He did this to defend the assertion that Iraq was attempting to aquire WMD's.  We now know that there were no WMD's in Iraq, and in retrospect we can see that the President sold out a CIA agent for a lie.\n\nAs Iraq disintegrates beneath us, as Afganistan fades into obscurity, as Osama Bin Laden roams free and we talk about dropping nuclear weapons on Iran, we need to step back and really look at this spoiled child that somehow got into the White House.\n\nCan Bush be impeached?  Oh, yes.  He sure can.\n\nShould Bush be impeached?  Absolutely.  \n\nWill he be impeached?  That is up in the air.  Let's see how the elections go.
442890
1) Why are impeachment hearings not going on for President Bush?\nA) wire tapping\nB) lied to american people to go to war\nC) has been quoted after 9/11 saying, "find a way to get us into iraq"\n\nAnswers:\nA) The wire tapping was legal, and judged so by the courts.  Your efforts to encourage impeachment in a time of war is seditious and a serious condemnation of either the level of your education, or the commitment you have to our country.\nB) Lied? Consider the following: \nKerry, Former President Clinton (during and after his terms), Edwards, Former First Lady Hillary Clinton, the U.N., all of these said Saddam had WMDs (We know he did, we watched him use them on his own people).  President Clinton said in one speech that our experts watched Saddam smuggle weapons out back doors while the U.N. investigators were coming in the front door (during his terms).\n\nThe excuse that they all depended on President Bush's "lie" doesn't work.  President Clinton said Saddam had them before President Bush ever did, and Saddam himself was telling his allies that he had them!\n\nYour seditious rumor that "Bush lied" is seen for what it is by the U.S. citizens, and expect it to be an expensive attempt to undermine our country and our elected leaders.  Not that we will all vote Republican!  I'm a Democrat, but I have no interest in voting for name-calling, seditious, lying representatives who carelessly spread rumors.  I will vote for a Democrat with ethics, or if their isn't one, perhaps whoever has the most ethics in another party.\n\n3) All of us have had enough of people taking sound-bytes out of context.  Do some actual research instead of attacking our country and look at the rest of what the President said.  He did say it.  The U.N. was not getting the job done, Saddam wouldn't allow U.S.A. inspectors to come in.  President Bush wanted to "get into Iraq" to get the job done the U.N. failed to do for a decade.\n\nWe see what you are doing, both Democrats and Republicans.  We know that we (Democrats and Republicans) are not the enemy.  Oh, we disagree, but we stand behind the elected leaders of our country, majority democratic choice, legal dissent and disagreement, and most of all, each other.\n\nWe stand against name-calling of our leaders (Presidents Clinton or Bush, or any other).\n\nWe stand against spreading unfounded rumors and lies.\n\nWe stand against what you are doing.\n\nYou want to actually discuss wire tapping?  Do some research and then dissent, without trying to attack our leader.\n\nYou want to disagree with why we went to war?  Great.  Stop telling us a lie about the President.  He may have been wrong.  That is not a lie.\n\nYou want to quote him?  Quote him in context and at least quote something about the subject you are actually talking about rather than transposing a quote from one subject (getting U.S. inspectors into Iraq) to another (the decision to go to war).\n\nWhat you do sickens us, and our country, literally.\n\nYou may have Free Speech, but so do we.\n\nExpect us to answer you.
744901
Did you actually listen to what she had to say?  Is that what you want the Democrats to do?  Spend their time tying up the Congress with impeachment proceedings?  She's right, it's a waste of time.  There are only two years left in Bush's Administration and she's right that they would love nothing more than for the Democrats to prove they are what the Republicans have been saying all along.  Thirsting for revenge and hatred of Bush is the Dems only platform - that's what the Republicans were saying before the mid-terms.  Now you want that to be true?  Not me.  I want the war, our economy, and terrorism addressed on a bipartisan level.   There are going to be investigations into the constitutionality of many of Bush's actions, that's a given.  I hold no love for George Bush, but those thirsting for impeachment/revenge will have to find water elsewhere and I couldn't agree more.
613630
I don't think waiting it out is the best path to take...If Bush did something illegal, something to deserve impeachment he should be punished. Perhaps his problem is that he's been getting away with things for far too long. Our leaders need to be held accountable.
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.