Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ex-idaho · 06-05-2003, 09:50 PM

The problem with impeaching Bush for lying in order to go to war is proving it. I don't think there is a snowballs chance in hell that they will find any proof that Bush was intentionally lying and misleading Congress, the UN and the public. What will happen most likely will be the eventual resignation of G Tenet and if it gets really messy Rumsfeld. Beyond that I doubt there will be any other high level conspirators will fall.

Viti · 06-05-2003, 10:09 PM

Too bad the families of soldiers killed in a war entered into on false pretenses can't sue those responsible. If my kid or spouse or sibling was killed for a lie I would be pissed.

TollHouse · 06-05-2003, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by August Spies
interesting article... http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030606.html

"To put it bluntly, if Bush has taken Congress and the nation into war based on bogus information, he is cooked. Manipulation or deliberate misuse of national security intelligence data, if proven, could be "a high crime" under the Constitution's impeachment clause. It would also be a violation of federal criminal law, including the broad federal anti-conspiracy statute, which renders it a felony "to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose.""

It will never happen. The worst that could happen is they'll just get some fallguy to take the blame.

Also, I don't think Americans, on a whole, would be willing to admit their leadership and nation were wrong if it came to it anyhow.

slept2long · 06-05-2003, 11:30 PM

Doesn't a conviction for treason make you eligable for capital punishment?

edited to add: I should go to sleep instead of posting questions that have no relation to the OP. :banghead:

Misso · 06-06-2003, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JetBlckNewYr03
And about Bush killing thousands of Iraqi soldiers: The ones that didn't surrender chose to fight for Saddam. I think the weapons of mass destruction were a minor part in going to war in reality. Iraqi people have been oppressed and murdered by Saddam for several decades. It was time for him to be ridded of his power.

That's not the point. The point is that Bush lied (yes, officially this remains to be seen) about the reasons going to war. Getting rid of an evil dictator is no proper cause for war, and it wasn't used as an excuse for this one. Had the Senate agreed to a war to get rid of Saddam, no problem now, but the Senate agreed to a war to get rid of WMD's.

I don't think Bush will be impeached. Bush will claim he's been fed false information by the intelligence services, a few heads in those services will roll, and that'll be it.

Jat · 06-06-2003, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by August Spies
interesting article... http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030606.html

"To put it bluntly, if Bush has taken Congress and the nation into war based on bogus information, he is cooked. Manipulation or deliberate misuse of national security intelligence data, if proven, could be "a high crime" under the Constitution's impeachment clause. It would also be a violation of federal criminal law, including the broad federal anti-conspiracy statute, which renders it a felony "to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose.""

Yes, Dubya should be impeached for lying about the war. To do otherwise proves that the Republicans are hypocrits. Or else they only think that lying about SEX is wrong and lying about the reasons for starting a war of aggression against a lesser and much weaker foe is just fine.

eldar1011 · 06-06-2003, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TollHouse
It will never happen. The worst that could happen is they'll just get some fallguy to take the blame.

If it comes to that, it looks like Wolfowitz might be the fallguy. His recent quotes in the press certainly sound like the type of things that could qualify him as a fallguy.

theyeti · 06-06-2003, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JetBlckNewYr03
I think the weapons of mass destruction were a minor part in going to war in reality.

They weren't just a minor reason, they were no reason at all. The issue here is about telling the Congress and the American people that they were the reason when in fact they probably didn't even exist. That's what's called lying.

theyeti

hezekiah jones · 06-06-2003, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by LadyShea
Too bad the families of soldiers killed in a war entered into on false pretenses can't sue those responsible.

A bunch of them tried before the "war" started, although none of them were dead at the time, but their suit was dismissed, and the dismissal was affirmed by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals:

Doe v. Bush

Peregrine · 06-06-2003, 08:17 AM

The Clinton impeachment made it clear, the grounds of impeachment (what high crimes and misdemeanors mean) is determined by the House of Representatives and only the House.

Discussion of impeachment is absurd. It requires the passage of a resolution, a committee (dominated by republicans) to approve the articles of impeachment, and a majority of the House to approve the articles. Figure the odds!

Just because a person commits an impeachable offense does not mean they will be impeached. Hell Bush could commit a felony, but if the majority of the House doesn't vote to impeach, he doesn't get impeached.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-05-2003, 09:50 PM	#11
ex-idaho Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Spudtopia, ID Posts: 5,315	The problem with impeaching Bush for lying in order to go to war is proving it. I don't think there is a snowballs chance in hell that they will find any proof that Bush was intentionally lying and misleading Congress, the UN and the public. What will happen most likely will be the eventual resignation of G Tenet and if it gets really messy Rumsfeld. Beyond that I doubt there will be any other high level conspirators will fall.

06-05-2003, 10:09 PM	#12
Viti Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Down South Posts: 12,879	Too bad the families of soldiers killed in a war entered into on false pretenses can't sue those responsible. If my kid or spouse or sibling was killed for a lie I would be pissed.

06-05-2003, 11:30 PM	#14
slept2long Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: West Palm Beach, FL Posts: 1,066	Doesn't a conviction for treason make you eligable for capital punishment? edited to add: I should go to sleep instead of posting questions that have no relation to the OP. :banghead:

06-06-2003, 08:06 AM	#19
hezekiah jones Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: WI Posts: 4,357	Originally posted by LadyShea Too bad the families of soldiers killed in a war entered into on false pretenses can't sue those responsible. A bunch of them tried before the "war" started, although none of them were dead at the time, but their suit was dismissed, and the dismissal was affirmed by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals: Doe v. Bush

06-06-2003, 08:17 AM	#20
Peregrine Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 385	The Clinton impeachment made it clear, the grounds of impeachment (what high crimes and misdemeanors mean) is determined by the House of Representatives and only the House. Discussion of impeachment is absurd. It requires the passage of a resolution, a committee (dominated by republicans) to approve the articles of impeachment, and a majority of the House to approve the articles. Figure the odds! Just because a person commits an impeachable offense does not mean they will be impeached. Hell Bush could commit a felony, but if the majority of the House doesn't vote to impeach, he doesn't get impeached.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.