PDA

View Full Version : Senator: Bush Impeachment an Option


Bronco_Beerslug
03-26-2007, 09:44 AM
Yes it is. So is cleaning out the rest of the roaches in this administration. Time to get on with it.

--------------------------------------------------------
Senator: Some see impeachment as option (http://tinyurl.com/2qupkt)
By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer Sun Mar 25, 10:54 PM ET

WASHINGTON - With his go-it-alone approach on Iraq, President Bush is flouting Congress and the public, so angering lawmakers that some consider impeachment an option over his war policy, a senator from Bush's own party said Sunday.



http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20070325/capt.wx10703251710.fired_prosectors_wx107.jpg?x=25 3&y=345&sig=25Zr.faEnuttLLIeR47dvQ--
In this photo provided by ABC News, Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., appears for an interview with George Stephanopolous on ABC's This Week, in Washington, Sunday, March 25, 2007. (AP Photo/ABC News, Lauren Victoria Burke)



Meanwhile, the Senate's No. 2 Republican leader harshly criticized House Democrats for setting an "artificial date" for withdrawing troops from Iraq and said he believes Republicans have enough votes to prevent passage of a similar bill in the Senate.

"We need to put that kind of decision in the hands of our commanders who are there on the ground with the men and women," said Sen. Trent Lott (news, bio, voting record), R-Miss. "For Congress to impose an artificial date of any kind is totally irresponsible."

GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a frequent critic of the war, stopped short of calling for Bush's impeachment. But he made clear that some lawmakers viewed that as an option should Bush choose to push ahead despite public sentiment against the war.

"Any president who says, I don't care, or I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else, or I don't care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed — if a president really believes that, then there are — what I was pointing out, there are ways to deal with that," said Hagel, who is considering a 2008 presidential run.

The Senate planned to begin debate Monday on a war spending bill that would set a nonbinding goal of March 31, 2008, for the removal of combat troops.

That comes after the House narrowly passed a bill Friday that would pay for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year but would require that combat troops come home from Iraq before September 2008 — or earlier if the Iraqi government did not meet certain requirements.

On Sunday, Hagel said he was bothered by Bush's apparent disregard of congressional sentiment on Iraq, such as his decision to send additional troops. He said lawmakers now stood ready to stand up to the president when necessary.

In the April edition of Esquire magazine, Hagel described Bush as someone who doesn't believe he's accountable to anyone. "He's not accountable anymore, which isn't totally true. You can impeach him, and before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment. I don't know. It depends on how this goes," Hagel told the magazine.

In his weekly address Saturday, Bush accused Democrats of partisanship in the House vote and said it would cut the number of troops below a level that U.S. military commanders say they need. Vice President
Dick Cheney also accused Democrats of undermining U.S. troops in Iraq and of sending a message to terrorists that America will retreat in the face danger.

"We have clearly a situation where the president has lost the confidence of the American people in his war effort," Hagel said. "It is now time, going into the fifth year of that effort, for the Congress to step forward and be part of setting some boundaries and some conditions as to our involvement."

"This is not a monarchy," he added, referring to the possibility that some lawmakers may seek impeachment. "There are ways to deal with it. And I would hope the president understands that."
CONT.

defenseman
03-26-2007, 09:55 AM
hagel is losing credibility here in nebraska..dman

Bronco Bob
03-26-2007, 11:21 AM
hagel is losing credibility here in nebraska..dman

Just for the Bushies.

Stormontheplains
03-26-2007, 11:24 AM
Just my opinion, but over the next several years, I would imagine any president, gop or dem will get the impeachment talk. It is very sad and reflects badley on both parties.

Spider
03-26-2007, 11:25 AM
hagel is losing credibility here in nebraska..dman

Nebraska ? Hilarious! ......err wait is Nebraska part of the USA or a cruel Canadian joke ?

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2007, 11:29 AM
Just my opinion, but over the next several years, I would imagine any president, gop or dem will get the impeachment talk. It is very sad and reflects badley on both parties.

Yep....I didn't agre with the Clinton bull**** and the witch hunt placed on him...and I don't agree with it now. Of course the witch hunt of the media this time around seems to a be to a greater extent than that of Clinton.

defenseman
03-26-2007, 11:42 AM
Yep....I didn't agre with the Clinton bull**** and the witch hunt placed on him...and I don't agree with it now. Of course the witch hunt of the media this time around seems to a be to a greater extent than that of Clinton.

Thing is , they "hate" Pres. Bush. It isn't a political thing, they just "hate" him. Ergo, the ends justifies the means. They will, get him anyway they can..dman

Barry Ramey
03-26-2007, 12:16 PM
Impeach based on what? Good grief, if the bar is that low to impeach, then any president from now on can get impeached based on if enough people don't like him. The Bush haters get all irate even about things that didn't happen or been proved, but sat on their hands while Clinton made a joke of our FBI, CIA, judicial system, and the topper, giving pardons to all those criminals as his staff tore up the WH and stole items that didn't belong to them.

Bronco_Beerslug
03-26-2007, 12:21 PM
Impeach based on what? Good grief, if the bar is that low to impeach, then any president from now on can get impeached based on if enough people don't like him. The Bush haters get all irate even about things that didn't happen or been proved, but sat on their hands while Clinton made a joke of our FBI, CIA, judicial system, and the topper, giving pardons to all those criminals as his staff tore up the WH and stole items that didn't belong to them.

Complete right wing BS! None of the crap actually happened but Fox News said it did so the Bush bots all bought it.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2007, 12:31 PM
Complete right wing BS! None of the crap actually happened but Fox News said it did so the Bush bots all bought it.

It was reported on every major news outlet.

Bronco_Beerslug
03-26-2007, 12:32 PM
It was reported on every major news outlet.What was, that it was a farce?

I already posted Limbaugh's foot in the mouth retraction about the whole BS story in another thread..

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2007, 12:37 PM
What was, that it was a farce?

I already posted Limbaugh's foot in the mouth retraction about the whole BS story in another thread..

I don't care if it's true or not. You said Fox was the only one that said it was true...other outlets reported as true also.

Bronco_Beerslug
03-26-2007, 12:48 PM
I don't care if it's true or not. You said Fox was the only one that said it was true...other outlets reported as true also.No I didn't.

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2007, 01:06 PM
Of course you didn't...it was all a vast right wing conspiracy that you said it.

Bronco_Beerslug
03-26-2007, 02:05 PM
Of course you didn't...it was all a vast right wing conspiracy that you said it.You need to try and improve on your reading comprehension. My reference, which was clearly stated, was about how Fox News force feeds Bush bots and conservatives what they want to hear and they eat it up whether it's true or not.

None of the crap actually happened but Fox News said it did so the Bush bots all bought it

alkemical
03-26-2007, 02:20 PM
I don't care if it's true or not. You said Fox was the only one that said it was true...other outlets reported as true also.

If enough people believe a lie, is it then truth?

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2007, 03:02 PM
If enough people believe a lie, is it then truth?

Perception is the truth...but not the absolute truth...which cannot be obtained.

Crushaholic
03-26-2007, 03:14 PM
Bush can't be impeached for the perception that he's not listening to the American people. However, he can be impeached if it can be proven that Bush deliberately doctored the intelligence information on the WMDs.

alkemical
03-26-2007, 03:45 PM
Perception is the truth...but not the absolute truth...which cannot be obtained.

False. Your statement is contradictory.

Swedish Extrovert
03-26-2007, 05:36 PM
There are loads of things we can impeach Bush for.... if we can impeach Clinton for getting a bj, then we can impeach Bush for... well Im afraid I dont have time to list it all.

Unfortunately, if we impeach Bush. Cheney will become President, and I think Cheney is the ONLY option that would be WORSE than Bush.

Fortunately, we have enough to impeach Cheney as well.

Pelosi as the first female president?

Good ole Chuck Hagel... if he weren't such a dirty boy when it came to the environment, I might actually like the guy.

TailgateNut
03-26-2007, 05:47 PM
You have to remember the "immoral right" seem to think what bush has done isn't even close to the BJ that Bill got, although in reality they are all "blowing" Bush!

Garcia Bronco
03-26-2007, 05:51 PM
Bill Clinton lied under oath in a court of law...he was draw up on perjury....not sodomy.

W*GS
03-26-2007, 05:58 PM
If Bush's actions are worthy of impeachment, then so have the actions of just about every president...

TailgateNut
03-27-2007, 11:05 AM
Bill Clinton lied under oath in a court of law...he was draw up on perjury....not sodomy.


That's excactly why we need to charge Bush with treason, and have him swear on the bible, even though he's just a false christian!
He'll either have lie under oath, or he'll set the stage for impeachement with the truth.

alkemical
03-27-2007, 12:10 PM
If Bush's actions are worthy of impeachment, then so have the actions of just about every president...

Wags is correct here. They violate their oath and duty on a repetative basis.