Bush administration: Bracing for Impeachment Hearings?

[Kilmer17]

I think you give too much credit to the masses. I doubt more than 5% of people even know what we are discussing. All they will see is the Dems attacking Bush. They wont understand the context. And those that do, think our security is the foremost issue of our time.

I dont think it's a coincidnce that Bush and Co are in full press mode to spin this as a legal tap on possible terrorists. I can understand how people think this violates the Constitution, but I dont agree with that.

The masses wont be able to grasp it.

[Ignatius J.]

I have said it a few times on this board, but I'll say it again. I don't think bush should be impeached. I may change my mind, but right now, I don't think it makes sense.

The biggest difference between what GW did and what clinton did is that bush did what he did because he thought he was doing the best thing he could for the american people. Motive means a lot to me. Clinton lied to protect himself.

I do think that we need to have hearings so we can figure out what the law really is.

[Kilmer17]

Not hearing in front of Congress. We need a Court Proceeding.

I dont think I can stomach a COngressional hearing listening to both sides pander for hours about nothing.

[Burgold]

Kilmer,

Please never claim that it is the liberals who are the elitists. I mean "I doubt more than 5% of people even know what we are discussing. All they will see is the Dems attacking Bush. They wont understand the context." is pretty damn insulting to the average American.

[Chief skin]

The only way this happens is after the elections the corrupt repulican majority and there lobbyist special interests are voted out of the congress by WE THE PEOPLE!!!!!!

[Kilmer17]

Kilmer,

Please never claim that it is the liberals who are the elitists. I mean "I doubt more than 5% of people even know what we are discussing. All they will see is the Dems attacking Bush. They wont understand the context." is pretty damn insulting to the average American.

I honestly didnt mean for it to come across that way. I dont think Im smarter than the 95%. I just happen to enjoy politics more than most. And therefore are more informed. As are the rest of the members of the board. I dont see how that's a left/right issue.

[Predicto]

Wow - a very interesting and respectful discussion of a volatile topic. Who would have thunk it?

What is really weird is that I agree with Kilmer more than anyone else. :yikes:

Although I do think that Burgold's recounting of the Neverending Smear is pretty accurate too.

My opinion - there will be no impeachment over this, and there shouldn't be one.

[Burgold]

I know you didn't, but even in your explanation it reads elitist. You assume you are "more informed" than most that others are dull compared to you. It is a form of elitism.

It shouldn't be a left/right issue, but unfortunately too much devolves into that kind of chest thumping and grandstanding. It is, one of the bigger dilemmas and issues we need to deal with. The ratio of governmental control versus citizen freedom has always been important. The excuse/reality of terrorism to limit or kill those freedoms may be justified, convenient, or wrong. It is a fight worth having unlike so many of the political fights that the Dems or Repubs bring up simply because it will score points with their bases.

[Kilmer17]

I dont assume that I am. I know that we (meaning us on the board) are more informed about political issues than the majority of society.

Ive also said all along to have a court case. Let's get a judicial answer to a legal question.

[Burgold]

I agree whole heartedly with it being more a judicial than impeachment issue at this point. It changes if there is evidence that not only was the act done illegally, but was done illegally with knowledge and malice. If the latter is true than Bush should be in big trouble.

In any case, the problem with impeachment is that the entire Senate would need to recuse itself for its lack of objectivity in this matter and I don't know how you'd be able to proceed. As far as should he be impeached, there are a number of issues that have surrounded his White House which are dubious... I wouldn't mind getting everything out in the open: wiretaps, CIA Leaks, manipulation of intel, privacy invasions (reading bank and emails and library records) etc. We just need a fair, unbiased, reasonable setting. My suggestion would be the birthplace of our American Democrasy and revolution. I think the fairest place to review and judge Bush would be Mass.

[bird_1972]

We just need a fair, unbiased, reasonable setting.

Good luck.

:laugh:

[Burgold]

I think I could be totally fair and unbiased. :halo: They should put me in charge of the hearing. I'll even do it for half of what they paid Ken Star

[Predicto]

In any case, the problem with impeachment is that the entire Senate would need to recuse itself for its lack of objectivity in this matter and I don't know how you'd be able to proceed. .

Nah. Impeachment is in part a political process, and Senators do not have to recuse themselves from anything. That is a judicial concept.

[twa]

I agree with Kilmer,if the dems are foolish enough to push for it they will suffer at the polls :2cents:

[Chopper Dave]

I agree with Kilmer,if the dems are foolish enough to push for it they will suffer at the polls :2cents:

Just like you guys did in 2000, right?

Regardless, I think this is a stupid idea. Bush has set a lot of terrible precedents, said and done alot of things that rub me the wrong way, but the fact of the matter is he hasn't really done anything impeachable. Morally reprehensible, perhaps, stupid, shortsighted, and narrowminded, maybe, but not impeachable.

Where I disagree with you and Kilmer and the rest of the conservatives is that this will hurt the Democrats. I think that if they do go through with this, it means they have at least enough for an actual basis, meaning that it would give them a chance to air all of this administration's dirty laundry. Even if they don't impeach, any administration, especially this one, has enough secrets that if they became public, their party probably wouldn't win the next election. Essentially, because they're not going to go through with this without some kind of viable case, if they do end up going through with it, it'll either end with Bush's impeachment or a Democrat win in 2008. Either that or it won't happen at all.

[Kilmer17]

The proper election to look at for comparison is 1998.

[Chopper Dave]

The proper election to look at for comparison is 1998.

Maybe, but I don't think anyone forgot in 2000.

[Kilmer17]

I agree. And I think that's part of the reason the election was as close as it was. There was still some GOP backlash.

In comparison, if the Dems move to impeach now, it will have dramtic affects on the 06 races, and a lesser affect on the 08 race.

[Chopper Dave]

I agree. And I think that's part of the reason the election was as close as it was. There was still some GOP backlash.

In comparison, if the Dems move to impeach now, it will have dramtic affects on the 06 races, and a lesser affect on the 08 race.

That could be, but remember how long the impeachment process took for Clinton. If they start this year, it might be done by the end of '07.

Another note, if this does happen, how sad is American politics? Two presidents in a row (not two terms, but two presidents) that Congress has tried to impeach? Republican, Democrat, it doesn't matter, they all need to get their **** together.

[Funkyalligator]

Bush won't be impeached simple as that....as much as I'd love to see him get thrown out of office for incompetence...it simply isn't going to happen

[AlexRS]

Bush won't be impeached simple as that....as much as I'd love to see him get thrown out of office for incompetence...it simply isn't going to happen

Maybe not for wiretapping alone, but I suspect there is a chance for a "rabbit hole" of sorts here.

Here is a possible scenario:

Let's say there were other wrongdoings (fake WMD intel, piss-poor war planning, Hali contracts, Abramoff, whatevr). Iinformation about them will starts coming out if they start digging. It might reach "critical mass," where other Reps will jump ship. As soon as that happens both parties will tear him to shreads. Damage control by GOP can be quite grusome.

Maybe this will happen, maybe not. We will see. I suspect there were plenty of wrongdoings there... maybe not before 2008, but there is a good chance stuff that comes out will make Nixon blush.

[Burgold]

I don't think enough has come to light, but there's a lot of tangential stuff that just smells wrong. You could be right, there could be an ugly alchemical brew of turture, wiretapping, illegal record keeping, CIA outings, no bid contractees paybacks, manipulation of electronic paperless voting machines etc. to warrant an impeachment. There's an awful lot of smoke around the Bush administration. Part of it is that Texans love BBQ, but there probably some really vile stuff too.

The one thing we know for sure is that when bbqing Republicans love pork just as much as the Democrats.

[AlexRS]

I don't think enough has come to light, but there's a lot of tangential stuff that just smells wrong. You could be right, there could be an ugly alchemical brew of turture, wiretapping, illegal record keeping, CIA outings, no bid contractees paybacks, manipulation of electronic paperless voting machines etc. to warrant an impeachment. There's an awful lot of smoke around the Bush administration. Part of it is that Texans love BBQ, but there probably some really vile stuff too.

The one thing we know for sure is that when bbqing Republicans love pork just as much as the Democrats.

Yeah, that's my feeling on the subject. Some stuff does not feel or smell right - but at this point we just do not know.

This lack of transperency in Government is indeed very suspicious.

To me it looks like Osama passed the ball to Bush with this Terrorism thing, and Bush just kept running and running with it....

EDIT: seriously, the way things are turning out... if we make a list of entities who benefitted from 9/11 - Osama would not even be on it. Top 5 would include Bush, Haliburton, etc... Not a consiracy theory, simply pointing out the irony. If Haliburton did organize 9/11 though, it would have been the best investment they ever made (not counting Dick).

[Burgold]

I don't think you're hinting at this, but I have heard others do so and while there is a Bin Laden/Bush family link, I really think the idea that the administration had foreknowledge of 9/11 and chose not to act or had a hand in it is pretty outrageous. The Bush/Hitler and Bush/Bin Laden stuff to me is absurd and stupid. I think Bush is trying hard, but that a lot of his philosophy and his methods are wrong. I think his decisions may wind up hurting this nation in a very fundamental way. However, I think it's more a case of the road to hell is paved with good intentions, y'know? Carl Rove, on the other hand, just loves power and who knows what he might do to get more of it or to keep it.

[AlexRS]

I don't think you're hinting at this, but I have heard others do so and while there is a Bin Laden/Bush family link, I really think the idea that the administration had foreknowledge of 9/11 and chose not to act or had a hand in it is pretty outrageous. The Bush/Hitler and Bush/Bin Laden stuff to me is absurd and stupid. I think Bush is trying hard, but that a lot of his philosophy and his methods are wrong. I think his decisions may wind up hurting this nation in a very fundamental way. However, I think it's more a case of the road to hell is paved with good intentions, y'know? Carl Rove, on the other hand, just loves power and who knows what he might do to get more of it or to keep it.

Yeah saying that a government entity had a role in 9/11 is pretty silly. In my personal opinion, the attacks were 100% al Queda.

But what happened afterwards? One has to admit that some people here in US made a LOT of money on this. Immence, rediculous amounts of money. Money borrowed by our Government and placed squarely into their pockets. Sadly, our administration has long-running connections to people who made this crazy money.

Not saying or impying anything... but I would be much more comfortable knowing that friends and former companies of people who made us go to war did not make a profit from it.

I hope the truth comes out. If everything that happened is a kosher, honest mistake - so be it. If there is/was fishy business going on - I hope we learn a lesson from this.