Impeach Bush?

Politics International Politics
1

I recently found a website run by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark in which Clark “has drafted articles of impeachment setting forth high crimes and misdemeanors by President Bush and other civil officers of his administration.”

Although there are too many violations to mention here, some are glaring examples of why Bush should be impeached.
Among the articles I want to highlight are

2)" Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war."

The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. Hussein had no wmds. Bush and his camp claimed he did in order to justify attacking Iraq. Enough said about this.

  1. “Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable.”

Thousands of innocent Iraqis have lost their lives since this war started and I can’t ever remember reading once where the Bush folks even remotely tried to minimize the number of Iraqi casualties. The only thought given has been “Did we kill some Hussein supporters? If yes, then the hell with the rest of the folks in Iraq.”

  1. “Ordering indefinite detention of non-citizens in the United States and elsewhere, and without charge, at the discretionary designation of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense.”

Yes, there have been and continue to be individuals held in the USA without benefit of counsel, and with no concrete proof that they have done anything wrong concerning terrorist activity. They are being held in solidary confinement and they are released at the “whim” of the American government.

I urge all of you to visit this website by Clark to see for yourselves just how deserving of impeachment Bush happens to be. votetoimpeach.org/

When I think back to the time Clinton was in office, and how he was treated by the Republicans, I can just imagine how they would have been leading the charge for his impeachment if he were in Bush’s place.

2

Clinton was impeached over his inability to keep it zipped, so impeachment of Bush should be pretty easy. Should be some appropriate charges for weakening America’s defense just to fatten Halliburton’s wallet… smells like treason, comes out of the mouth of a Republican… probably a load of Bushit.

3

Some of this is exactly why us opponents of the Iraq war have been given such a bad reputation. Look, I was against the war as and when it happened too, but that’s no reason to put blinkers on and ignore facts. That’s what the Bush side has been accused of, why succumb to it ourselves?

[quote=“cableguy”]2)" Lying to the people of the U.S., to Congress, and to the U.N., providing false and deceptive rationales for war."

The whole war in Iraq was based on a lie. Hussein had no wmds. Bush and his camp claimed he did in order to justify attacking Iraq. Enough said about this.[/quote]
To assert that Saddam had no WMDs is just blind optimism bordering on ignorance. Look, I was as opposed to the war happening when and how it did and a lot of people, but it’s pretty clear Saddam had WMDs; he was probably smart enough to ditch them either through some disposal scheme or by heaving them over the border to a mate. You don’t get to be a dictator for that long by being an idiot. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Even Robin Cook, who resigned from the British parliament in protest over the plans for war, said in his resignation speech:

[quote]3) “Authorizing, ordering and condoning direct attacks on civilians, civilian facilities and locations where civilian casualties were unavoidable.”

Thousands of innocent Iraqis have lost their lives since this war started and I can’t ever remember reading once where the Bush folks even remotely tried to minimize the number of Iraqi casualties. The only thought given has been “Did we kill some Hussein supporters? If yes, then the hell with the rest of the folks in Iraq.”[/quote]
How about some supporting resources for this lack of attempt to minimize civilian casualties? Do you honestly think that US soldiers - and remember, it was the soldiers that did the shooting, not Bush and company - wantonly and deliberately killed civilians? Yes, mistakes were made which shouldn’t have been, but that is a far cry from them going out and deliberately knocking off Iraqi civilians. And civilian deaths are always going to happen, no matter how hard one tries to avoid them. I’m not saying it’s right, just that it’s part of war.

[quote]8) “Ordering indefinite detention of non-citizens in the United States and elsewhere, and without charge, at the discretionary designation of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Defense.”

Yes, there have been and continue to be individuals held in the USA without benefit of counsel, and with no concrete proof that they have done anything wrong concerning terrorist activity. They are being held in solidary confinement and they are released at the “whim” of the American government.[/quote]
I’m 100% with you on this one.

4

When Kerry gets elected, Bush will have a few months to try to shred the paper trail and delete the emails (does he know how to work a computer?)… still I doubt the GOP will catch everything.

5

It’s stupid that the loser in a presidential election should hang on for three months after losing. Why don’t they adopt the British way of doing things and as soon as you lose, you leave? Simple. I understand the need for a transition but why not with the winner as the president rather than the loser? Why waste 25% of a year waiting for a bloody inauguration?

As far as impeachment goes, what’s the point? When he’s voted out, that will be enough. If it’s proposed to just to humiliate Bush, then go for it.

BroonAndover

6

Not necessary to impeach a guy who has been voted out… but it might be interesting whether there is solid grounds for treason charges. Perhaps, taking a cue from the Republicans, we could start with “serious” charges and end up with matching Bush’s DNA to samples taken from Osama’s robes.

7

No need for that; it’s pretty obvious they’ve fucked each other.

BroonStain

8

I confess to not being conversant with US law, but if Bush is impeached then fine his job is gone, but is that the end of the case, if so, then why not wait until he is no longer President and then prosecute for treason, the custodial sentence would provide much greater satisfaction surely.

9

Bush could be put into Abu Ghraib… Ms. England would be glad to ride him like a pony.

10

That psycho-bitch trailer trash slag from hell would be too heavily pregnant by then and as Bush has no backbone, the riding spectacle wouldn’t last too long. I say, vote him out and then they can move in with each other in some low-life trailer park. Preferably above a sink hole.

BroonAccommodation

11

Maybe Charles Grainer could do a few things for Bush during conjugal visits. Grainer sure seemed to be giving a big thumbs-up to piles of naked men. This could be the hallmark of the Bush presidency.