Impeach Bush

[gr8fuldaniel]

Originally posted by Dieval When were enemy combatants given rights under our laws and what do they have to do with the President(which we were talking about gr8 - I guess you missed that part)?

I was saying Bush is an enemy combatant . He put Americans in harms way on a whim. Send him to Gitmo.

[Gorgo]

Are you questioning the fact that he violated international and domestic law?

Originally posted by Dieval,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dieval,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-JustinGilmore, He is guilty!

Which court of law was that proven in? Please tell me.[/b][/quote]

[Dieval]

Originally posted by Gorgo,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Gorgo,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Are you questioning the fact that he violated international and domestic law? [/b]

It's a simple question -
<!--QuoteBegin-Dieval,
Which court of law was that proven in? Please tell me.[/quote]

[bishop]

Originally posted by Dieval,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dieval,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-bishop, dieval - how will a court of law get the OPPORTUNITY to declare him guilty or innocent if the republicans would never allow the issue to reach a court?

That's an assumption on your part that they wouldn't allow a guilty person to be charged with a crime.

Please show me where he was proven guilty by a COURT OF LAW.[/b][/quote]


you definitely misunderstood my question...

how will a court of law get the OPPORTUNITY to declare him GUILTY OR INNOCENT if the republicans WOULD NEVER ALLOW the issue to reach a court?

why don't you just give the obvious reason instead of playing your goofy partisan game?

[Dieval]

Originally posted by bishop, you definitely misunderstood my question... how will a court of law get the OPPORTUNITY to declare him GUILTY OR INNOCENT if the republicans WOULD NEVER ALLOW the issue to reach a court? why don't you just give the obvious reason instead of playing your goofy partisan game?

Your whole statement is based on an assumption. You are assuming that your elected representatives would not prosecute someone who has committed crimes.

[bishop]

do you really think the republicans would sponsor an impeachment trial? are you that naive?

[Gorgo]

Bush bragged about being above the law, there is no question that he broke the law. Are you arguing with that or are you repeating the same sad nonsense over and over for no apparent reason?

Originally posted by Dieval, blah blah blah

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Dieval, Your whole statement is based on an assumption. You are assuming that your elected representatives would not prosecute someone who has committed crimes.

That is an assumption a LOT of people share. The GOP as an entity is far too unified and disciplined for a majority of them to go along with that. Also, just how do think any Republican politician who voted FOR impeachment would fare in his reelection race?

[macnpat]

Originally posted by Gorgo, We are all (it seems even Dieval and Macnpat) in agreement that Bush is a criminal and should be impeached, though it is not likely that any Democrat/Republican Congress is going to start prosecuting their own for their crimes, as they would have to begin prosecuting themselves and all living Presidents.

No, I did not say President Bush was a criminal. I said if he was to be impeached, he would take Congress and 30 other sovereign Nations including the U.K.

I'm also saying that the real issues, for which soldiers are dying to fight terrorists is being cheapened by your efforts on this thread to be funny.

Keep your day job.

[Dieval]

Originally posted by Scribbler1, That is an assumption a LOT of people share.

Doesn't make it true.

[Dieval]

Originally posted by bishop, do you really think the republicans would sponsor an impeachment trial? are you that naive?

If he was even remotely guilty of crimes, sure they would preceed with impeachment. Are you that far removed from reality to believe otherwise?

[bishop]

you're talking nonsense man...

all you have to do is admit the obvious - the republican party will not seek to push for an impeachment hearing against a member (and leader) of their own party. doing that would hurt their own image - especially since they've all been public supporters of bush.

but instead of acknowledging political REALITY, you're blasting about how bush isn't guilty because a court hasn't convicted him - and then moving to say that the republicans would push for impeachment hearings if he was suspected to have been guilty of crimes. if you really believe that they'd do such a thing to someone they stake their own political careers on, then you need to get a grip.

what does it take for you to simply acknowledge reality?

i'm sure macnpat would even admit that the chances of the republicans pushing for impeachment hearings would be slim to none. what gives?

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Dieval,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dieval,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Scribbler1, That is an assumption a LOT of people share.

Doesn't make it true.[/b][/quote]

You don't need me to say it doesn't make it FALSE either.
Either I hold the Congress to a higher standard than you or you are more forgiving than I. You may say the Dems and others may say the Republicans, but in a way we all seem to be in agreement that Congress has a long history of doing the politically expedient thing. Impeaching Bush for ANY reason, valid or invalid, would NOT be politically expedient.
Impeaching Clinton, OTOH WAS politically expedient. It played very well to the folks at home, even thought the actual charge was pure bullshit.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Dieval,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dieval,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-bishop, do you really think the republicans would sponsor an impeachment trial?  are you that naive?

If he was even remotely guilty of crimes, sure they would preceed with impeachment. Are you that far removed from reality to believe otherwise?[/b][/quote]

Reality? The reality is whatever Bush did to be accused of ANYTHING has already been done and the entire Republican Party SUPPORTED him every step of the way. Whether you agree with these charges or not, the basis for them to be made in the first place is in the PAST. Already been done. That's the reality of it. The GOP supported their man and since they did they will NOT impeach him for things he has done with their approval.

[bishop]

i can't even believe that this point (about republicans refusing to prosecute bush) is even something that we need to debate. maybe dieval's dribblings ought to be ignored?

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by bishop, i can't even believe that this point (about republicans refusing to prosecute bush) is even something that we need to debate. maybe dieval's dribblings ought to be ignored?

It's not a debate, it's an argument (not the dictionary definition). It won't last long. :)

[gr8fuldaniel]

Its hard to dispute the obvious. There are lawsuits pending for impeachable offenses. Now that he cant be pardoned in the first week of Kerry's term; as soon as one of these cases gets settled, IN Court - - - - BaDaBing. His ass is ours.
Not much else to say to Dieval, far as I can tell.

[Dieval]

Originally posted by gr8fuldaniel, Its hard to dispute the obvious. There are lawsuits pending for impeachable offenses. Now that he cant be pardoned in the first week of Kerry's term; as soon as one of these cases gets settled, IN Court - - - - BaDaBing. His ass is ours. Not much else to say to Dieval, far as I can tell.

well, keep us up to date on these cases

[Dieval]

Originally posted by bishop, i can't even believe that this point (about republicans refusing to prosecute bush) is even something that we need to debate. maybe dieval's dribblings ought to be ignored?

So what it comes down to is that you guys know more about what is legal and illegal than all of the lawyers, lawmakers, politicians, etc, etc that are out there?? Riiiiiight....you guys are dillusional if you actually believe that.

[JustinGilmore]

Originally posted by bishop, i can't even believe that this point (about republicans refusing to prosecute bush) is even something that we need to debate.  maybe dieval's dribblings ought to be ignored?

I agree. Bush could probably illigelly nuke another country, and he still wouldn't be properly prosecuted.