PA110 From United States, joined Dec 2003, 1907 posts, RR: 41 Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 937 times:
Oh what a tempting idea! Just FYI... the lead on last night's 60 minutes (also not the most credible news source) was a story that 2 senior JAG officers are suing Bush and Rumsfeld over the legality of the War Crimes Commission trials at Gitmo - saying that it violates black-letter law in both military and civilian justice.
I don't advocate giving aid and comfort to the enemy, especially any members of Al-Qaeda or any other terrorist cell. However, it would also be a crime if their actions resulted in the gutting of our legal system. I honestly don't think our most cherised ideals and government institutions are so fragile that they couldn't withstand truly legal trials of terrorists.
When it comes down to it... what better reason for impeachment? Clinton for lying about sex, or Bush & Co for trying to abolish the very ideals we seek to uphold in the world?
Matt D From United States, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 55 Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 908 times:
When it comes down to it... what better reason for impeachment? Clinton for lying about sex
Here we go again...
Clinton was NOT, I repeat NOT impeached because he received a blow job.
Getting a blow job or a spanking or whatever he got is not, in and of itself an impeachable offense.
He was impeached for lying under oath about it, something called PERJURY, which IS an impeachable offense. At that point, what the lie is/was about is a moot point.
Santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1086 posts, RR: 5 Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 880 times:
Assuming for a moment that perjury was the genuine impetus behind the Clinton impeachment (and not a Republican desire to get back at the Democrats for Watergate, as Congressional Impeachment Commission Chairman Henry Hyde himself wrote in his memoirs), then fabricating and distorting intelligence to justify a war which has claimed the lives of (fill in latest number here) US soldiers and Iraqis certainly can not be too far behind in terms of impeachable offenses (which, as I recall, boil down to "high crimes and misdemeanors").
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 875 times:
Quoting Newark777 (Reply 7): And yet, he is incorrect where? He is not the one misstating the reason for Clinton's impeachment.
Read it again: MattD blows his top because he thinks PA110 stated that Clinton got impeached for recieving a blow job. PA110 specifically said "Clinton for lying about sex", ... but Matt went on a triade about how perjury was the crime he committed.
Quoting Newark777 (Reply 7): He is not the one misstating the reason for Clinton's impeachment.
In any event, PA110 didn't misstate the reason Clinton was impeached.
Quoting Matt D (Reply 5): He was impeached for lying under oath about it, something called PERJURY, which IS an impeachable offense.
Just to state the obvious but PA110 stated-
"Clinton for lying about sex", I think we all grasp the pergury concept now? Moving on....
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 874 times:
Clinton was NOT, I repeat NOT impeached because he received a blow job.
OK.
Clinton was impeached because he lied about a blowjob. If he had the guts, he would have said "so what?" and saved us all a lot of boring hearings. He wasn't.
The GOP launched a multi-million dollar inquiry into whether the horny toad of a Prez was being blown by a horny airhead.
Let's hope they launch a multi-million dollar inquiry into whether the current President was busy cooking evidence to lead the nation into war.
You'd admit, won't you, that war is far more important than a bj?
Mir From United States, joined Jan 2004, 12983 posts, RR: 65 Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 862 times:
To be perfectly honest, even if Bush was found to be deliberately misleading the public on the Iraq war (and I wouldn't be surprised if he was - or if he wasn't for that matter), I don't think it'd be an impeachable offense. Disgusting and cowardly, yes, but not impeachable. I'm not sure if Bush has been accused of something that could be punished by impeachment.
Matt D From United States, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 55 Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 854 times:
I'll be the first to admit that a war is a helluva lot more important than a hummer. I also agree that it would've been great to see Bubba say "yeah so what?" and stop the GOP dead in its tracks.
But that would've taken guts and integrity, traits that Mr Clinton was sorely lacking in.
But we're talking about politics here. The ideas of common sense seldom apply. 1998 was GOP revenge for 1974. And now the Dems are looking for something in revenge to 1998. And eventually, the GOP will again look for revenge for this. It never ends.
Having said that, I still stand behind my statement that says that pergury is perjury. An offense that, once comitted, the magnitude of the lie or what it was about no longer matters. The lie ITSELF is the crime.
Now as for Bush, let's wait and see. If he started this war, knowing full well that he had faulty intel, then string him up. If he started it based on incorrect info that he BELIEVED to be accurate, then the people that need to be fed to the lions are the ones that lied to Bush, not Bush himself.
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 836 times:
And now the Dems are looking for something in revenge to 1998. And eventually, the GOP will again look for revenge for this. It never ends.
So what?
Are you suggesting just giving up in the face of a Constitutional impropriety?
If he started it based on incorrect info that he BELIEVED to be accurate, then the people that need to be fed to the lions are the ones that lied to Bush, not Bush himself.
Please.
This entire war was decision first, evidence later.
In any case, the buck has to stop somewhere. If a CEO of a company made a multi billion dollar mistake that cost the lives of thousands, he'd be asked to step down.
Pope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 798 times:
MattD,
Come on now. We should be able to admit that we made a mistake. I'm a supporter of the President but I think that even he'll tell you (once he's left office) that we saw what we wanted to see in the intelligence.
I don't buy into the argument that the President lied, but I do think he was careless in critically analyzing the data.
In any case, I think the result is good and the US is more secure today than it was before the war.
About Aljazeera.com
Aljazeera Publishing owns and operates Aljazeera.com, bringing you the world today. Aljazeera Publishing is an independent media organisation established for more than 12 years delivering news and analysis to readers all over the world. Aljazeera.com has a particular focus on events and issues in the Middle East covering major developments presenting facts as they happen.
Important note: Aljazeera Publishing and Aljazeera.com are not associated with the controversial Arabic Satellite Channel known as Jazeera Space Channel TV station whose website is Aljazeera.net.
Aljazeera Publishing disassociates itself from the views, opinions and broadcasts of Jazeera Space Channel TV station.
:: END QUOTE
Freddie Laker ... May be at peace with his maker ... But he is a persona non grata ... with IATA
B757300 From United States, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 33 Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 746 times:
Democrats are so predictable. Just about everyone has known since before the election that the Democrats would try to get President Bush impeached if Kerry lost the election.
Quoting L-188 (Reply 20): So John Kerry is channeling Al Gore now?
Memo for John....You lost the election fair and square.
In 2000, Al Gore gave us Sore LoserMan
In 2004/2005 John Kerry is giving us More LoserMan.
On a side note, Kerry cannot do anything regarding impeachment. Perhaps if he read the Constitution he would know that the House impeaches, the Senate tries and convicts/acquits.
Texdravid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 734 times:
Boneheaded move to invade Iraq? Maybe
Not looking closely and analytically at the pre-war intelligence? Absolutely
Impeachable offense? Not even close.
The situation in Iraq will affect the 2006 elections, and the Dems will probably pick up seats if they play smart. If they let Dean and the far-left have their way, then they will not take advantage of this situation.
Why not? Just because he didn't say anything under oath? So? He (or his administration) lied about Iraq with the sole reason of justifying military intervention. You can call it poor intelligence sources or whatever, but the fact is someone lied, and Bush, as President, has the ultimate responsability. Why not begin an impeachment trial for a real reason this time?
Take a look at Article II Section 4 of the Constitution. Treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. "Lying to the American people" doesn't fall under any of these.
26 Santosdumont: Pope wrote: Take a look at Article II Section 4 of the Constitution. Treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. "Lying to the American pe
28 Agill: Oops mispost, didn't read the thread good enough[Edited 2005-06-07 00:26:24]
29 ConcordeBoy: Couldn't possibly agree with you more! .....not to take a page from the TightAss-RightBrass Handbook, but Bush ain't exactly the first offical (be it
30 ANCFlyer: Yeah, and I really wanted to stay the hell out of this thread because I don't have a lot of time to devote to argument/discussion this week - but let
31 Mir: Look, I want the guy to be booted out of the Oval Office (I'd like to see an actual drop-kick if at all possible) as much as anyone, but the fact is
33 Mir: Well, if it comes out that Bush was set on war from the getgo, and all the stuff about WMDs was a big fabrication, I think that might be enough to get
34 ANCFlyer: That's my bet . . . and as I've said before, I'm still astonished the CIA Chief walked away retirement intact. The CIA of course doesn't stand alone
35 Mir: I think it's a combination of both. Though the CIA definately didn't do it's job, I'd be surprised if the administration (Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Wol
36 ANCFlyer: Understood and agreed . . . . I don't think we'll find out in this lifetime . . . but another "Deep Throat" scenario is entirely possible.
37 L.1011: Clinton for lying about sex because Bush isn't trying to abolish those ideals. At worst, he fucked up badly, but not intentionally. But US law doesn'
38 TedTAce: Almost all my reactions below are based on the presumption the cited story is true. Something about 'turn about' being fair play? Oh you mean other th
40 StarAC17: Ok any American who wants Bush impeached think about who will be running the country if he is. He is 100% the lesser of two evils in this case.
41 TedTAce: Good point Star, but do you honestly think he's not running it now?
42 LTBEWR: Ain't gonna happen unless W is caught in a sex scandal...with a man...in a church.... I don't deny that Clinton's personal beheavor as to sex has been
43 Diamond: Show me a document or video clip that justifies our war with Iraq and the specific reasons GWB told American citizens he was pursuing it. And every a
44 CPH-R: If you want to find one lie Dubya has made, though not under oath, how about those sweet little 16 words about Yellowcake?
45 EZEIZA: How can you be sure the Bush administration did not act intentionally? Obviously I don't have the proof that they did, but is it so far fetched to be
46 Mir: I wonder, if you reprogrammed Cheney.... -Mir
47 Santosdumont: L.1011 wrote: Quoting Santosdumont: Telling a lie that results in the deaths of a significant number of Americans (to say nothing of Iraqis) could qui
48 Captoveur: pssst.. Teddy boy.. Misinformation is not a lie if the person telling it believes it to be true. Maybe the Senate should toss Kerry as well. He is on
49 Pope: Not unless it is defined as such in the US Code.
50 Jaysit: Not unless it is defined as such in the US Code. Nonsense. The Constitutional provision of high crimes and misdemeanors is NOT defined in the US Code.
51 Pope: In order for an act to be a crime, the act must be defined somewhere as criminal - with in a statute or under the common law precedents established b
52 Slider: I'm not fan of Bush, but if this happens, Kerry ought to go down with a charge of treason for his war crimes and postwar actions. A matched set of foo
53 GuitrThree: For the last time, and I can't figure out why this doesn't get thru a liberals thick skull, Among others, the following people ALL said at one point
54 Jaysit: In order for an act to be a crime, the act must be defined somewhere as criminal - with in a statute or under the common law precedents established by
55 Jaysit: For the last time, and I can't figure out why this doesn't get thru a liberals thick skull, Among others, the following people ALL said at one point t
56 ANCFlyer: Easy, available target, just that simple. Same rhetoric, different day. Some extremist liberal A-Netter gets bored, and pooooof, another "Bush is Lyi
57 TedTAce: It is if that person told the people giving him the information what to tell him...as ALLEGED by the story...then it's a lie. I would just like it if
58 Jaysit: Easy, available target, just that simple. No. Because he is the President. Who is not supposed to be trotting people off to war on flimsy concocted ev
59 ANCFlyer: That's what I said. If Kerry were sitting there, he'd be in the same position . . . easy, available target. As I said, when the Bush-haters get bored
60 Jaysit: That's what I said. If Kerry were sitting there, he'd be in the same position . . . easy, available target. If Kerry were the President, and if he lie
61 Pope: Jay my boy, a crime has to be defined somewhere. For the House to create a crime necessary for impeachment after the act has taken place creates an e
62 Falcon84: Psst, Captoveur, but hwen he finds out it not to be true, and isn't man enough to admit it, and looks for new excuses to justify what he did, he isn'
63 Jaysit: Jay my boy, a crime has to be defined somewhere. For the House to create a crime necessary for impeachment after the act has taken place creates an ex
64 Pope: Jay, the only problem with that is that nobody said anything about serious misconduct. In fact, if you read the Judiciary Committee's report on the C
65 Jaysit: That pretty much destroys your position that abuse of power and serious (non-criminal) misconduct are within the scope of impeachable offenses for the
66 GuitrThree: You're whacked. How can you call it a LIE when Bush said the same things that Kerry/Gore/Clinton said. It's NOT the fact that Bush went to war, its t
67 GuitrThree: From today's (6/7/05) news conference with Blair/Bush concerning this Memo Kerry is trying to use as a cry baby loser to impeach Bush: "Q: Thank you,
68 Diamond: Unless the idea that he believed it to be true was a LIE itself. Why did he need to believe OR disbelieve any information when he had already been st
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United States, joined Dec 2003, 1907 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1086 posts, 
From Qatar, joined Apr 2004, 2687 posts, 
From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4011 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
