Why Wasn't Bush Impeached?


Normally open July 4th only---the one day a year when partisan politics, religion, etc. are acceptable topics on this Board (within reason). The forum is now closed.

Re: Why Wasn't Bush Impeached?

Postby cullman » Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:44 pm

Marlow wrote:
JRM wrote:Bush violated the FISA law in initiating the "Warrantless Wiretapping Program."

I bet Cheney told him he could, cuz Cheney could fix it in his role as President of the Senate! :wink:

...not to mention de facto President of the US of A and Canada too.... :wink: :wink:...(where is the "It's a joke son" emoticon??)

By the way, your Constitution is a great piece of writing...perhaps politicians might benefit from reading it?

cman
Last edited by cullman on Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
cullman
 
Posts: 2065
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: ...in training...for something...

Postby Vince » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:34 pm

Brian wrote:
Vince wrote:Congress has the Constitutional duty to declare war and initiate funding laws. The President has the Constitutional duty of Commander in Chief of the U.S. military. The U.S. has a global military presence and repositioning of military assets, whether Congress agrees or not, is not a "cut and dried' high crime or misdemeanor.



The US was not in a time of war in the mid-eighties.

Sending ships to an area (to politically pressure a country) CAN be considered an act of war, which is why Congress enacted an order for Reagan to not do so.

Defying a direct order of Congress is an impeachable offense, period.


Congress has no authority over the military, or the President, period.
Vince
 
Posts: 449
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Marlow » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:39 pm

Vince wrote:Congress has no authority over the military, or the President, period.


??!!
You obviously have never been in the military!
Money talks and Congress holds the purse strings.
and Congress has stymied a President many a time.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Why Wasn't Bush Impeached?

Postby Vince » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:48 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
Flumpy wrote:
Vince wrote:
You are ill informed and might try to get to know more about the U.S. from places other than media sources. Most people in the U.S. aren't deferential to any politician or political office. Name one crime Bush was convicted of while serving as President. I'd defend my neighbor as well as a politician if some idiot called him "one of the biggest puppet criminals in the last 100 years" even if convicted of no crimes. Marlow, if I remember correctly, also served as a USN Officer. He quite understandably would hold the office in higher esteem.


Er, you seem to have completely misunderstood my whole post and in doing so made my point for me :?

Great observation! :wink:


Not really...see the words, "deferential to any politician or political office"...which you explicitly accuse Americans of being deferential to.
Vince
 
Posts: 449
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Vince » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:53 pm

Marlow wrote:
Vince wrote:Congress has no authority over the military, or the President, period.


??!!
You obviously have never been in the military!
Money talks and Congress holds the purse strings.
and Congress has stymied a President many a time.


Read my whole post he was quoting.
Vince
 
Posts: 449
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Why Wasn't Bush Impeached?

Postby Flumpy » Sun Nov 02, 2008 6:19 pm

Vince wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:
Flumpy wrote:
Vince wrote:
You are ill informed and might try to get to know more about the U.S. from places other than media sources. Most people in the U.S. aren't deferential to any politician or political office. Name one crime Bush was convicted of while serving as President. I'd defend my neighbor as well as a politician if some idiot called him "one of the biggest puppet criminals in the last 100 years" even if convicted of no crimes. Marlow, if I remember correctly, also served as a USN Officer. He quite understandably would hold the office in higher esteem.


Er, you seem to have completely misunderstood my whole post and in doing so made my point for me :?

Great observation! :wink:


Not really...see the words, "deferential to any politician or political office"...which you explicitly accuse Americans of being deferential to.


I say that Americans can be too deferential to politicians. You say no they aren't and then go on to give me reasons why both you and Marlow are just that.

You are, what is know in my house sir, as a 'Constant Clean'!!!
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Why Wasn't Bush Impeached?

Postby Vince » Sun Nov 02, 2008 6:28 pm

Flumpy wrote:
Vince wrote:
jazzcyclist wrote:
Flumpy wrote:
Vince wrote:
You are ill informed and might try to get to know more about the U.S. from places other than media sources. Most people in the U.S. aren't deferential to any politician or political office. Name one crime Bush was convicted of while serving as President. I'd defend my neighbor as well as a politician if some idiot called him "one of the biggest puppet criminals in the last 100 years" even if convicted of no crimes. Marlow, if I remember correctly, also served as a USN Officer. He quite understandably would hold the office in higher esteem.


Er, you seem to have completely misunderstood my whole post and in doing so made my point for me :?

Great observation! :wink:


Not really...see the words, "deferential to any politician or political office"...which you explicitly accuse Americans of being deferential to.


I say that Americans can be too deferential to politicians. You say no they aren't and then go on to give me reasons why both you and Marlow are just that.

You are, what is know in my house sir, as a 'Constant Clean'!!!


You obviously don't know the difference between man and office, and free speech and bullshit.
Vince
 
Posts: 449
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests