1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

If the Democrats get a majority, will they impeach Bush?

Discussion in 'The OT' started by Jack White, Mar 28, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jack White

    Jack White Icon

    611
    0
    Sep 17, 2002
    Do you think they'll impeach him, or are they wusses that are too afraid of losing the 2008 election so they don't want to stir the pot?
     
  2. steelhorse

    steelhorse Legend

    163
    0
    Apr 27, 2004
    Impeach him for what?
     
  3. Danny R

    Danny R Goblin the Pug DBSTalk Gold Club

    4,885
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    The illegal wiretap scandal is the strongest case of breaking the law.

    But no, they won't impeach Bush, as that means putting Dick Cheney in office, unless they tried to impeach both simultaneously.
     
  4. Richard King

    Richard King Hall Of Fame

    21,331
    0
    Mar 25, 2002
    President Frist running as an incumbent. Interesting.
     
  5. Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    No. It would be political suicide, since many Dems know about and approved this, and basically they'd have to say "this may or may not legally be wrong, since that's not settled, but this policy we agree with his a high crime."

    They'd be daft.
     
  6. Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,838
    186
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    That's funny. :thats:

    It has not been proven that any laws have been broken, therefor the wiretaps were neither illegal nor a scandal.

    Your calls for impeachment are laughable. :lol:
     
  7. Danny R

    Danny R Goblin the Pug DBSTalk Gold Club

    4,885
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    President Frist running as an incumbent. Interesting.

    It wouldn't be Frist if Democrats gained a majority and went after both Bush/Cheney. And if only Bush was impeached, Cheney could appoint whoever he wished as the new VP (but Congress would have to approve it).

    It has not been proven that any laws have been broken, therefor the wiretaps were neither illegal nor a scandal.

    Is your argument that a crime is only "illegal" if you get caught and convicted?

    And I think the wiretap mess does qualify as a scandal, or else why is congress belatedly trying to rewrite the laws to fix it?

    Your calls for impeachment are laughable

    Nobody here has called for impeachment that I see.
     
  8. tomcrown1

    tomcrown1 Hall Of Fame

    1,576
    0
    Jan 16, 2006
    If the dem o love cats get the majority they will censure the president not impeach him as stated, because it would make cheney president and he then will shoot Hillary in the face in one of his drunken stuper ripper Old Crow whiskey dance.
     
  9. Richard King

    Richard King Hall Of Fame

    21,331
    0
    Mar 25, 2002
    I was going under this assumption:
     
  10. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Come on guys.
     
  11. Skates

    Skates Icon

    564
    0
    Apr 15, 2004
    It seems to me - from a purely strategic standpoint - that the Democrats will fare better if they leave Bush where he is.
     
  12. Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    Something is only a illegal if a court says it is, and no court has said this is. No charges have been brought. No one has even filed a complaint. It's very silly to say "the president broke the law" when ones only grounds for saying that is the belief that it is true, and NOTHING else. It's as silly as those people who said Clinton was a murderer or was dealing coke from the White House.
     
  13. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    A criminal trail does not have to precede an impeachment. I think that this whole topic is ridiculous but if the Congress really did feel that a president had broken the law then impeachment could take place without a court convicting the sitting president first.

    We have had two impeachment trials for presidents. The matter was also considered in a third case. The impeachment process did not wait for a criminal conviction first. In the case of impeachments of other officials the record is mixed. Sometimes a criminal trial precedes the impeachment sometimes not.

    Like it or not impeachment removes an officer of the United States from office. Criminal prosecution is effectively a separate matter.

    I am not arguing for impeachment. But the Congress decides what an impeachable offense is--not the courts.
     
  14. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    The first step would be to Impeach Dick Cheney. No one likes him anyway. Most of the Republicans would vote to get rid of him. :lol:
     
  15. Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Shades of the 70s.
     
  16. Danny R

    Danny R Goblin the Pug DBSTalk Gold Club

    4,885
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    Something is only a illegal if a court says it is, and no court has said this is.

    I'd rather not get into word definitions, but you are putting the cart before the horse. Something is illegal if the LAW says it is. The police or whatever branch of the executive are not going to wait until a judge says "yes, that law is good" before they start enforcing it. In fact, it could be years before a judge finally ever makes such a decision for many crimes.

    If the law says X is a crime, then its illegal. If someone actually did the illegal action on the other hand is for the courts to determine, which is where a trial comes into play.

    No charges have been brought. No one has even filed a complaint.

    What department do we go to to file a complaint? There is none. The only recourse for a 2nd term sitting president is impeachment. However that doesn't mean Bush's actions are by default "legal".

    Rather, just as my downloading images from SI: Swimsuit Edition violates copyright and is also "illegal", I'm pretty much safe in knowning that nobody is going to be coming after me for that offense. Bush is in a similar situation. The enforcers of the law are looking at the same images he is and aren't in the mood to prosecute.

    It's very silly to say "the president broke the law" when ones only grounds for saying that is the belief that it is true

    The facts of the case are the grounds for saying it. If the law (available to everyone to read) says the President must approach FISA before listening on any US Citizen, and if he doesn't do so, then the law is broken and he's taken an illegal action. If he gets away with that action is a different thing entirely, but doesn't make what he did suddenly legal, anymore than O.J. Simpson "legally" strangled his wife. Pointing to previous presidents and saying they did the same doesn't make it suddenly legal either.

    Since impeachment is the only course to take against a sitting president, and such action can only be taken by representatives answerable to us voters... then saying something DOES tell those representatives how we feel, and possibly gives them motivation to act.

    It seems to me - from a purely strategic standpoint - that the Democrats will fare better if they leave Bush where he is

    Yup.
     
  17. olgeezer

    olgeezer Guest

    1,833
    0
    Dec 5, 2003
    The 70s are the reason Democrats wouldn't impeach although censure could still be an option. After Nixon the Democrats learned that the threat of impeachment and the forced resignation causes the country irreparable harm. Why do you think Sam Irwin put a stop to the Iran Contra affair. Many of our memories are selective. It's not a matter of what's between ones legs as whether or not to impeach but what is between ones ears and more importantly in ones heart. Love one another applies to politics as it does to religion for very good reason. Let's avoid anarchy
     
  18. olgeezer

    olgeezer Guest

    1,833
    0
    Dec 5, 2003
    I wasn't aware that Bill Frist was speaker of the house.:D

    "Show me a social Conservative and I'll show you a twit."
     
  19. Danny R

    Danny R Goblin the Pug DBSTalk Gold Club

    4,885
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    I wasn't aware that Bill Frist was speaker of the house

    heh... I missed that one when I made my comment above. ;)

    But as Richard said, he was refering if Cheney remained, and thus presumably pick Frist. (I don't think he'd pick him myself)
     
  20. Richard King

    Richard King Hall Of Fame

    21,331
    0
    Mar 25, 2002
    Someone stole my brain.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page