Bush (merge x4)

[StorminNorman]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/04/house-panel-tak.html

I hate the idea of the Congress using impeachment for political gain, as it would keep going back and forth every time a president and Congress were not of the same party...but I honestly do not see another option...

White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolton and FORMER White House Counsel (who is now a private citizen) have both refused to comply with subpeonas to testify before Congress regarding the firing of several US attornies for political reasons. These were valid subpeonas and within the right of Congress. Congress in turn filed contempt charges against them. And the Bush administration and their Attorney General Michael Mukasey have refused to carry out the contempt charges.

I honestly do not see what other option there is. President Bush is blocking legitiment legal Congressional investigations into the shady dealings of his administration and is essentially leading to a show down between Congress and the Executive Branch in the Courts...and if the Courts rule against him, what will he do? Say "So what? Who will enforce it?" The Courts have neither the power of the sword or the purse.

I do not see any other option but impeachment as nothing is getting through to this President. When he is publically ignoring his obligation to enforce the law as our Chief Executive...and not only that, but aiding and abetting the criminal action of ignoring a subpeona...he is spitting in the face of The Constitution and the oath he took to uphold it.

I honestly think it is time for impeachment because this is a scenario when it SHOULD be used (unlike the Clinton fiasco or even the war...which Congress also agreed to).

The fact that Congress is still trying to make an issue out of the firing of those attorneys is what I find utterly ridiculous.

 

[Matt]

The fact that Congress is still trying to make an issue out of the firing of those attorneys is what I find utterly ridiculous.

It doesn't matter if it is ridiculous. They have a Constitutional right to investigate it and hand out these subpeonas. Why'd you vote no, though, Norm? Bush is violating the document he swore to uphold and protect. Seems like a pretty damn good reason to me.

 

[StorminNorman]

It doesn't matter if it is ridiculous. They have a Constitutional right to investigate it and hand out these subpeonas. Why'd you vote no, though, Norm? Bush is violating the document he swore to uphold and protect. Seems like a pretty damn good reason to me.

The probe is meant to investigate if these firings of the attorneys are for political reasons - when it was obvious it was, and who cares? Its a useless probe and an attempt by the Democratic Congress to make an issue out of nothing. Its stupid. While I don't necessarily agree with the President's move to try to prevent Meyers and Bolton from testifying, I find the Congress waisting government time and money on such a useless probe equally outrageous.

 

[Matt]

The probe is meant to investigate if these firings of the attorneys are for political reasons - when it was obvious it was, and who cares? Its a useless probe and an attempt by the Democratic Congress to make an issue out of nothing. Its stupid. While I don't necessarily agree with the President's move to try to prevent Meyers and Bolton from testifying, I find the Congress waisting government time and money on such a useless probe equally outrageous.

While I don't disagree that it is simply Congress posturing and showing off and trying to build anti-Republican sentiment for the election year, that doesn't change what Bush is doing. Every Congress does useless probes into their political rivals questionable actions. Nothing come of it. But what Bush is doing...that, my friend, is a scary precedent. He is pretty much telling Congress "You have no power over me," which negates our entire system. Someone has to send a message and impeachment is the only thing he would understand.

 

[Arkady Rossovich]

Bush should have been impeached years ago. His term is almost up,but I wish this could have been done.

 

[The Senator]

The probe is meant to investigate if these firings of the attorneys are for political reasons - when it was obvious it was, and who cares? Its a useless probe and an attempt by the Democratic Congress to make an issue out of nothing. Its stupid. While I don't necessarily agree with the President's move to try to prevent Meyers and Bolton from testifying, I find the Congress waisting government time and money on such a useless probe equally outrageous.

I care. These attorneys are suppose to abide by the law, not pressure from one political party or another. When the president of the United States removes these highly qualified attorneys from the bench, what message does that send to America? It tells us that the President gets to pick and choose which laws this country will abide by, as he's done for the past seven years.

Many conservatives ***** and moan about liberals wanting to appoint "activist judges" to the bench, be it in a district court or the Supreme Court. Yet aren't some of these conservatives activist judges as well? Doesn't it say that the President caters to one set of ideals when he goes off and fires attorneys because his administration doesn't care for those judges' political leanings? Bush is trampling on the judicial system in this country, blaming Democrats for being activists when in fact he is being quite the pandering activist himself. It's hypocrisy in its purest form, and a slap in the face to our political system as well.

 

[BlackLantern]

after his term is over Bush will go back to Crawford and quietly disappear....as much as the liberal crowd in this country is touching themselves while reading the Articles of Impeachment its not going to happen....an impeachment is too time consuming

 

[Matt]

after his term is over Bush will go back to Crawford and quietly disappear....as much as the liberal crowd in this country is touching themselves while reading the Articles of Impeachment its not going to happen....an impeachment is too time consuming

I agree. It is impractical...but SOMETHING must be done. The President is forcing a showdown with Congress and if Congress does not respond it will set a horrible precedent that could greatly expand presidential authority.

 

[Memphis Slim]

"sigh"

 

[hippie_hunter]

As jourmugand said, it should have been done years ago. Now it's too little, too late now if you ask me. His term ends within a matter of months making impeachment completely pointless now and an ineffective punishment.

 

[SuBe]

I know that everyone likes people to bring up Clinton, but what about when Clinton fired 93 Attorneys? He fired them for no reason. Remember, these Attorneys work for Bush, he can fire them for any reason he wishes, just like if you had an attorney that wasn't doing what you wanted.

The President can Reserve his Executive Privilige when ever he wants. The Congress holds nothing over the Executive Branch, just like they hold nothing over the Judicial Branch. It is a 3 Branch system for a reason.


It doesn't surprise me though, they've been talking about getting back at the Republicans ever since he won the election in 2000.

 

[The Senator]

I know that everyone likes people to bring up Clinton, but what about when Clinton fired 93 Attorneys? He fired them for no reason. Remember, these Attorneys work for Bush, he can fire them for any reason he wishes, just like if you had an attorney that wasn't doing what you wanted.

The President can Reserve his Executive Privilige when ever he wants. The Congress holds nothing over the Executive Branch, just like they hold nothing over the Judicial Branch. It is a 3 Branch system for a reason.


It doesn't surprise me though, they've been talking about getting back at the Republicans ever since he won the election in 2000.

No one's excusing Clinton. I'm certainly not. And my argument for impeachment isn't solely based on the attorneys scandal, either, though it plays a role in the reasons why I believe he should be given the boot. But it is not acceptable to fire these attorneys because they may favor Democratic principles and not succumb to the right-wing theocracy Bush and friends have tried to implement in this country. There's a certain level of impartiality I would expect in the legal system, like we've seen in Supreme Court justices such as Sandra Day-O'Connor. Intelligent, capable, non-biased judges in all levels of government have been avoided for "strict constructionists" (as Bush calls them, even though they're actually activist judges... but because they lean to the right, they're the good guys).

This, on top of warrantless wiretapping, his administration's complete disregard for the eighth amendment when it comes to interrogations (not to mention the fifth amendment and even the first amendment in some circumstances), his blatant lies about the war in Iraq, and his refusal to let Congress-- his only real check-- subpoena members of his administration prove that he has a total disregard to the Constitution of the United States. He and Cheney should have been simultaneously impeached... President Pelosi wouldn't have been the best thing in the world for us, but she would have been a hell of a lot better than the theocratic extremists who occupy the executive branch as it is.

 

[Malice]

Can I impeach all congress for letting the Executive Branch for getting too powerful? As it was them that let him do it.

 

[The Senator]

Can I impeach all congress for letting the Executive Branch for getting too powerful? As it was them that let him do it.

Not everyone in Congress wanted him to get away with it... just the ones who were concerned about their careers and appearing patriotic and all that bull ****...

 

[rdh007]

Can I impeach all congress for letting the Executive Branch for getting too powerful? As it was them that let him do it.

No, but you can throw the bums out in November.

 

[Malice]

True,
but as far as I am concerned....they all should pay for it.

You know the old saying,
"Hell Hath No Fury Like An Admin Scorned!"

Not everyone in Congress wanted him to get away with it... just the ones who were concerned about their careers and appearing patriotic and all that bull ****...

 

[Malice]

Unfortunately not all of them...

No, but you can throw the bums out in November.

 

[BlackLantern]

ya instead of impeaching people try getting off your butt and voting them out of office....

 

[The Senator]

ya instead of impeaching people try getting off your butt and voting them out of office....

You can't really vote the President out of office after he's won re-election... unfortunately we've made it extraordinarily difficult to recall the President, if that's even possible... so we're stuck with him and Satan until January...

 

[BlackLantern]

I was speaking about the elected officials who gave the President all this expanded power....and woe to those who think the next President will relinquish those powers

 

[Malice]

A pres will most likely not ever do it, but who know, someone might...
Granted, I have some ocean front property in Kansas I want to sell you all

I was speaking about the elected officials who gave the President all this expanded power....and woe to those who think the next President will relinquish those powers

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

Not gonna happen.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I wish there was a yes, but too it's late option.

 

[bell110]

I wish Congress would grow some balls and stand up to Bush and show him that nobody is above the law. The Repubicans couldn't impeach Clinton fast enough.

 

[Marx]

I wish Congress would grow some balls and stand up to Bush and show him that nobody is above the law. The Repubicans couldn't impeach Clinton fast enough.

The Dems do not have a large enough majority to get anything done. The Republicans throw a wrench into anything that the Dems attempt to do that they don't agree with. If a larger majority is gained in November, expect to see some things done. Bush will not be impeached. At this point, what would be the point? He has no regard for anything or anyone anyway..