THE CASE FOR IMPEACHMENT

[rastaman]

1. The fraudulent basis on which the President got us into the war in Iraq;

2. The obvious criminality of the warrant less wiretapping;

3. Indefinite detention in violation of the Constitution;

4. Torture as a part of indefinite detention and other ways;

5. Special rendition, which is simply the out sourcing of torture
All of these violate various laws of the US, and they also violate his oath office which he swears to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, and he¹s doing just the opposite, he¹s undermining the Constitution and attempting to destroy certain parts of it.

For starters, invading another country on false pretenses is grounds for impeachment. Also, the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution essentially says that the people have the right to be secure against unreasonable government searches and seizures and that no search warrants shall be issued without probable cause that a crime has been committed.

Furthermore, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) requires that warrants for national security wiretaps be authorized by the secret FISA court. The law says that it is a crime for government officials to conduct electronic surveillance outside the exclusive purviews of that law or the criminal wiretap statute.

President Bush’s authorization of the monitoring of Americans’ e-mails and phone calls by the National Security Agency (NSA) without even the minimal protection of FISA court warrants is clearly unconstitutional and illegal.

Executive searches without judicial review violate the unique checks and balances that the nation’s founders created in the U.S. government and are a considerable threat to American liberty.

Finally, surveillance of Americans by the NSA, an intelligence service rather than a law enforcement agency, is a regression to the practices of the Vietnam-era, when intelligence agencies were misused to spy on anti-war protesters-another impeachable violation of peoples’ constitutional rights by LBJ and Nixon.

[Labrocca]

Good luck on that..

[rastaman]

[attachment=13]Just think you conservatives tried to impeach Clinton just over consential sex btwn two adults!!!!

When Clinton was having sex in the W.H., we had elected Republicans in the House and Senate partaking in extremarital affairs in the Belt Way/Capital Hill at the same time.Â*Â*What Phonies Conservatives truely are.

[Labrocca]

Interesting comparison.

1 guy who straight out lied to special prosecution while under oath about have sexual relations with an INTERN while MARRIED..in the white house!!!

1 guy who is trying to stop terrorism and was councilled poorly about WMDs

hmm...yeah I can see where the conservatives are phony... NOT

[rastaman]

Yeah right, yourself and millions of other brain dead conservatives are willing to support and trust a LAME DUCK DICTATOR who's approval rating is at 35%!!!! Heh Heh, what loosers you conservative truely are. Bush is radioactive and the GOP's future is sinking like the Titanic.

Rethuglicans own the Congress, the Judicial, and the W.H. and still can't manage to run the county with integrity nor fiscal responsibility. Bush is a miserable failure---just face the music. Your Chicken Hawk President and Thief loves death, destruction and chaos.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

What's a looser?

Is that like, I've lost weight and now my pants are looser?

[rastaman]

A looser is the Villiage Idiot occupying the W.H. You know---the snorting coke addict and alcohol abuser. Curious George!!

[PittsburghAfterDark]

loose

adj. loos·er, loos·est

Not fastened, restrained, or contained: loose bricks.

Not taut, fixed, or rigid: a loose anchor line; a loose chair leg.

Free from confinement or imprisonment; unfettered: criminals loose in the neighborhood; dogs that are loose on the streets.

Not tight-fitting or tightly fitted: loose shoes.

Not bound, bundled, stapled, or gathered together: loose papers.

Not compact or dense in arrangement or structure: loose gravel.

What are we missing here?

[CheesyMuslim]

Sorry bout that,

1. Seems the Liberal Media has one safe guard that it can pull out ten times a day, when there's no real story to run Bush over with, its POLL time.
2. And suckers like the Liberals love to do a poll, and frankly believe them.
3. They have little or no dignity, so these polls seem to fit them perfectly.
4. Ever wonder who the hell they call for these polls?
5. Its a special set of numbers so they can get the desired effect.
6. Americans can see through these stupid POLLS.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Old Corps Gunny]

1. Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. He was not convicted.

2. Bush was given bad information.

3. Sure is amazing how the spelling and grammar for the original post in the thread is so good, but so horrible in subsequent posts by rastaman. Could it possibly be he is trying to take credit for someone else's work [GASP]?

[rastaman]

Bush was given bad information (Gasp)?Â*Â*So why didnt Bush fire those who gave him the Bad Information (as you say).Â*Â*Instead, Bush gives Tenent (CIA)the some worthless Presidential of Freedom award or medal for giving him bad information.Â*Â*Come on Gunny, Bush can't have it both ways.Â*Â*We know the Bush Administration slanted the intelligence to further bloster the case for war in Iraq.Â*Â*

When will conservative neo-cons hold Bush accountable for anything rather than give him a free pass and exteme latitude and benefitt of the doubt for anything he does.

Gunny you must face the facts, there is no congressional oversight to hold the "Out of Control" Bush Administration for absolutely anything. The conservative Congress have yet to hold meaningful hearings on Bush's behavior. The Repub. are the majority in the House and Senate and have yet to investigate anything on the Bush Admin, despite the fact that these Repub. have taken an oath of office to up hold the constitution--they have turned a blind eye to Bush's out of control behavior.

[AnAmericanXX]

1. Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. He was not convicted.

2. Bush was given bad information.

3. Sure is amazing how the spelling and grammar for the original post in the thread is so good, but so horrible in subsequent posts by rastaman. Could it possibly be he is trying to take credit for someone else's work [GASP]?


Im new but i couldn't resist noting rastaman's clear plagiarism. Here is his source.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060311&articleId=2085

[Labrocca]

Yeah Rastaman hasn't been around much lately. It was clear though that the only sentence he could formulate was a cut and paste.

[BoogyMan]

Just think you conservatives tried to impeach Clinton just over consential sex btwn two adults!!!!

When Clinton was having sex in the W.H., we had elected Republicans in the House and Senate partaking in extremarital affairs in the Belt Way/Capital Hill at the same time.Â*Â*What Phonies Conservatives truely are.


Yeah, that whole lying under oath thing was just a side issue.Â*Â*My goodness man, read something!

[Youthofthefuture]

Impeachment isn't going to happen, face it. We just have to wait this one out.

[T.J. Wolfe]

A bit off topic, but who cares if Rastaman copy and pasted someone's work. He was still making a point for you guys to argue.

[BoogyMan]

[attachment=13]Just think you conservatives tried to impeach Clinton just over consential sex btwn two adults!!!!

When Clinton was having sex in the W.H., we had elected Republicans in the House and Senate partaking in extremarital affairs in the Belt Way/Capital Hill at the same time.Â*Â*What Phonies Conservatives truely are.


Do you tell that lie with a straight face in person. Try lying under oath and you will be spot on, Clinton was impeached for LYING UNDER OATH!

[Labrocca]

A bit off topic, but who cares if Rastaman copy and pasted someone's work.Â*Â*He was still making a point for you guys to argue.



Well that is the point...Rastaman wasn't making the points..someone else was and he only pasted it here. Which means we couldn't debate with him. Rarely did he formulate a good sentence here without it being someone elses words.

It's a bad debater that can only quote others.

[bobbylien]

the fact that he never gave us a link to the source makes me believe that he was trying to pass that off as his own work.

[T.J. Wolfe]

All right, you made a good point Labrocca.

[lily]

Labrocca




It's a bad debater that can only quote others.


Not to mention plagiarism.

[lily]

Impeachment isn't going to happen, face it. We just have to wait this one out.


I have to agree with you on this one.......it just isn't going to happen. Unless something really drastic happens between now and November, the way it looks the Democrats are only going to gain the house. Hardly enough.

If the Democrats start using impeachment as political platform, it's a sure fire political suicide.

On the other hand, and speaking of political suicide. It is glaring how the Republicans are distancing themselves from Bush and speaks volumes. His dance card should be completely filled. Instead they want Laura.

[Labrocca]

Bush's political power is almost nothing at this point. His approval rating is so low that he couldn't get a cow elected to produce milk. The Bush family though I still think has enough power to sway. Jeb, Laura, Sr., Barbara....there is enough there to push the machine along.

bah

[lily]

Labrocca........I honestly don't think 41 will do too much campainging. The pictures of the two of them on the boat, he didn't look that well. Sort of frail.

I absolutley LOVE Barbara........but her statement in Texas after the hurrican will haunt her.

Jeb I don't think has that much clout.

[Rider]

The implosion of the Republicans is happening the way it usually does. After a short time in power they begin to become afraid of the press coverage they are getting and start moving leftward, like "Democrats Light". This alienates their base and the press has a field day with them anyway. I never could understand why they do this.

[allisonthegreat]

In a perfect world impeachment would be ideal. Bushie will try to limp to wards 2008. Will the 2006 newly elected Congress hold the key?

[Rider]

Impeachment? I doubt it very much. The Dems love to fire up the base with claims and they will certainly have hearings that will drag out forever in the media, but they'll have to come up with some concrete evidence of intent to violate laws or the constitution; and that's not likely to happen.