Petition to Impeach Bush

[oldwirehands]

Dennis Kucinich now has a petition on his site that you can sign.

http://impeachment.kucinich.us/petition/

Since the last Kucinich thread got some good responses, I figured you guys would like this as well.

[MisFit4Me]

The impeachment process would take longer than it would for a new President to be elected... sadly. However, it would tear down his reputation a little.

[thespearkid]

Don't really see much of a point. There's no way he can get enough support in the Senate for this.

[4N6 science]

I will be signing this when I get home from work..

[MisFit4Me]

No one has a problem impeaching Clinton for getting a little, but a man starts an war and lies to the public about a million things in order to do so, and no impeachment is required. The Senate is fucked.

[thespearkid]

No one has a problem impeaching Clinton for getting a little, but a man starts an war and lies to the public about a million things in order to do so, and no impeachment is required. The Senate is fucked.
Clinton was impeached for lying under oath.

[MisFit4Me]

Eh, we all know that's not what anyone cared about. He lied about getting some. That's his personal life, the public isn't obligated to know if he got a blow job or not.

[brentkid]

Eh, we all know that's not what anyone cared about. He lied about getting some. That's his personal life, the public isn't obligated to know if he got a blow job or not.
Pretty sure the public doesn't control impeachment so that argument is pretty irrelevant.

[MisFit4Me]

Who was his lie being broadcast to? What right does the Senate have knowing who he's fucked? I'd understand if he lied about selling weapons or lied about who he's done deals with, but sex?

[thespearkid]

Who was his lie being broadcast to? What right does the Senate have knowing who he's fucked? I'd understand if he lied about selling weapons or lied about who he's done deals with, but sex?
Update your history on the situation before you try to discuss it. Monica Lewinsky got a nice job at the White House, sucked the presidents dick, wanted to be more than just a squeeze for him, he said no, and, a month later, she was fired/transferred (not totally sure which one). So then she was sad and said he got her fire/transferred to try and keep the dick sucking private. Congress investigated, Clinton said he didn't do it (lie). Come to find out, he did do it. Thus, impeachment process began. It had nothing to do with him getting his dick sucked but the ethics of everything he did afterward.

[Dan Hollister]

Yeah, because the other 2754320 attempts didn't work, but hey, 2754321's the charm!

[ActionActionFan]

No one has a problem impeaching Clinton for getting a little, but a man starts an war and lies to the public about a million things in order to do so, and no impeachment is required. The Senate is fucked.

You're an idiot.

[oldwirehands]

Yeah, because the other 2754320 attempts didn't work, but hey, 2754321's the charm!

No congressmen has put an effort like this one. To just not sign this and let this guy get away with murder is ridiculous.

[thespearkid]

I see no point in trying to impeach him now. We're a few months away from electing a new president anyway.

[MisFit4Me]

Yeah, agreed. Maybe a couple years back would have been nice though.

[Praetor]

The impeachment process would take longer than it would for a new President to be elected... sadly. However, it would tear down his reputation a little.
Because his reputation is already so good.
No one has a problem impeaching Clinton for getting a little, but a man starts an war and lies to the public about a million things in order to do so, and no impeachment is required. The Senate is fucked.
Do you really think you're the first person to think of this? Clinton wasn't impeached because he was "getting a little", he was impeached for perjury.

[MisFit4Me]

Alright, thanks, I've already been informed, I was going for a cheap joke, but it's okay. I'll just shutup.

[timchoke]

Not that I agree with a lot of Bush's policies and actions, but! Most of the listed "offenses" are neither impeachable offenses or are just as much the fault of Congress (some of them having occurred while the DEMOCRATS have been in control). Yeah, Bush is the President, but Congress has authorized him to do many of the things that Kucinich has listed. Not that this makes it justified, but I'm just pointing out fact.

Although, the one about spying on citizens (thereby violating the 4th Amendment) IS definitely worthy of impeachment. Sadly, though, even this was done with Congress' approval.

[MisFit4Me]

Let's impeach congress. QUICK, SOMEONE GET AN INTERNET PETITION THAT PROBABLY WON'T WORK!

[saysmydoctor]

No one has a problem impeaching Clinton for getting a little, but a man starts an war and lies to the public about a million things in order to do so, and no impeachment is required. The Senate is fucked.
Yeah, as President of the USA you aren't allowed to have sex with Monica or your wife. Gtfo.

[open mind]

Not that I agree with a lot of Bush's policies and actions, but! Most of the listed "offenses" are neither impeachable offenses or are just as much the fault of Congress (some of them having occurred while the DEMOCRATS have been in control). Yeah, Bush is the President, but Congress has authorized him to do many of the things that Kucinich has listed. Not that this makes it justified, but I'm just pointing out fact.

Although, the one about spying on citizens (thereby violating the 4th Amendment) IS definitely worthy of impeachment. Sadly, though, even this was done with Congress' approval.

call me crazy but i'd say you aren't immune to prosecution just because you have alot of accomplices.
that said i'm not really a big supporter of impeachment. i'd rather bush be brought to trial in a criminal court as a ex-president no longer in power because he'll be out of office by the time they could really get to impeachment, congress wouldn't have to waste anymore time on it, and it would most likely end up costing less to do.

[timchoke]

Fine, but then you also need to charge every Congressman and Senator who voted in approval for these crimes. Congress gave him the budget for the war, Congress didn't take the initiative to insure the military had proper armor, Congress didn't stop the wiretapping.

I don't really disagree with you, but if these charges are so serious, why just stop with cutting Bush's balls off? An accomplice to murder in charge, so the accomplices (Congress) in these impeachment articles also need to be charged.

[open mind]

Fine, but then you also need to charge every Congressman and Senator who voted in approval for these crimes. Congress gave him the budget for the war, Congress didn't take the initiative to insure the military had proper armor, Congress didn't stop the wiretapping.

I don't really disagree with you, but if these charges are so serious, why just stop with cutting Bush's balls off? An accomplice to murder in charge, so the accomplices (Congress) in these impeachment articles also need to be charged.

you don't need to charge everyone involved because you can't really make the case that congress knew all of what the bush administration did because they don't all have the same (at least on a practical level) access to intel that our presidents do........and there were some in congress who didn't vote for it to.

[timchoke]

Well, for one, I still think that's bullshit. At the very least, the committees on intelligence would have had those same reports. And, again, it was their duty and responsibility to seek out and thoroughly understand those documents if they weren't readily available. We elected these people to do a job, and they flat out didn't when it came to educating themselves about this war.

Article IX: Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor. If nothing else, Congress had control over rectifying this one. I'm almost positive Bush never vetoed a bill because it gave too much funding to armor supply.

And I know a lot of them didn't vote for any of this nonsense. I applaud them. They shouldn't have anything to worry about. But those that did vote to authorize Bush in much of the impeachment articles should also be charge.

[open mind]

Well, for one, I still think that's bullshit. At the very least, the committees on intelligence would have had those same reports. And, again, it was their duty and responsibility to seek out and thoroughly understand those documents if they weren't readily available. We elected these people to do a job, and they flat out didn't when it came to educating themselves about this war.

Article IX: Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor. If nothing else, Congress had control over rectifying this one. I'm almost positive Bush never vetoed a bill because it gave too much funding to armor supply.

And I know a lot of them didn't vote for any of this nonsense. I applaud them. They shouldn't have anything to worry about. But those that did vote to authorize Bush in much of the impeachment articles should also be charge.

the intelligence commitees are not congress. if you don't have the security clearances to access documents it's not your fault for not reading them. i could see charges of criminal negligence being brought (but not sticking) maybe, but not the same charges that ought to be brought against bush and his administration.

[Dan Hollister]

Does any of this even matter? The guy is gone in a few months. Disregarding the obviously lunacy of this petition for a couple of minutes, just consider the amount of tax dollars that it would require to even get this thing noticed. It is not worth it. He is gone soon.

At this point, such a petition is more of an emotional move, rather than a strategic one. There is absolutely no valid argument for why spending time and money on an impeachment this late in the game is more efficient or better for the country than just focusing on getting a Democrat elected the next time around.

There's a better idea. Spend your time and money getting Obama (or whoever you want) the vote.

[xshady121]

the intelligence commitees are not congress..

false. check your facts..

http://intelligence.senate.gov/members108thcongress.html


All members of Congress.

[open mind]

false. check your facts..

http://intelligence.senate.gov/members108thcongress.html


All members of Congress.

no......what i said is true, check your logic......just because members of congress run the intelligence commitee doesn't mean that the intelligence commitee is congress.