10 reasons to impeach Bush

Thanks Angel – these guys should be held accountable for their actions – for all of humanity. And if you disagree – then defend them. Otherwise you must be with us.

Advertisements

74 Responses

  1. I think after the euphoria of getting Obama into the White House, the anger, frustration and resentment against the Bush Administration will intensify.

  2. Sorry for the language here: but I fucking hope so. They cannot be allowed to get away with it.

  3. Bush will not be impeached! The Dems won’t even try.

    Apart from the the imperative to be kind to dumb animals, it would be an undesirable distraction. At this stage, Obama is in ‘positive’ mode as he should be – in the business of bringing people together.

    Impeachment is negative; divisive; an opener of old wounds. Obama is reaching out.

    Even to try would be completely the wrong move.

  4. Joni, I agree with your terminology.

    John McP, I also agree with you. But think N5 is actually correct.

    IF Iraq got it’s act together, and pushed the point in years to come, Bush and Cheney would be tried for War Crimes.

    How long did it take for the Nazi’s to be tried for their crimes?

    An oldie, but a goodie:
    http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=_KlcgegOlow

  5. Nature5

    “Impeachment is negative; divisive; an opener of old wounds. Obama is reaching out.

    Even to try would be completely the wrong move.”

    Not that I enjoy being negative but sometimes wounds don’t heal until they’re properly addressed., which I happen to view as a positive.

  6. The lack of justice is the one thing most people find most difficult to overcome. Wounds tend to fester.

    Activists vent rage as Bush exits
    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24937664-26397,00.html
    Article from: Agence France-Presse

    PROTESTERS have hurled shoes at the White House in a symbolic send-off for the outgoing president they blame for gross mismanagement, obstructing justice and war crimes.

    Activists and tourists eager to see the end of George W Bush’s era appeared on Monday in front of the famed residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to say goodbye and good riddance.

    There were no huge crowds celebrating Bush’s pending departure.

    The focus of the human flood that descended on Washington was on celebrating Barack Obama’s historic rise to the presidency. But many were bitter over the Bush years. “

  7. Again thanks angel.
    my 10 reasons: (well i’ll do my best anyway)

    Invading of a country murdering the leader and stripping its resources.

    crimes in humanity, locking up people for having associations with (blah blah) but trading themselves with the bin laden family.

    torture, kidnapping, humiliation

    intelligence reports manufactured to suit agenda

    lieing about intelligence reports received

    for ignoring the united nations advise on war.(as useless as they have become)

    mass genocide disguised as collateral damage

    for letting the economy in America be stripped of its proper funds as to pump more money into war manufacturing.

    Radiation and the likes left in Iraq from destroyed tanks and ammunition’s left behind on sides of the roads.

    For breeding ….. and continuing the disaster of the bush legacy and for shoe dodging.

  8. John mcphillin huh, that time mine was bigger then yours(post )

  9. Joni, agree with your terminology.

    John McP, over time it will intensify, but I think N5 is probably correct at this point in time.

    Then again, if Iraq gets it’s act together, and calls for Bush and Cheney to be tried for War Crimes, it may happen.

    How long did it take before the Nazis were tried for War Crimes? I don’t know actually, but believe it to be many years.

    An oldie, but a goodie:
    http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=_KlcgegOlow

  10. Inspirational stuff
    http://media.smh.com.au/?rid=45387

  11. Guiliani vs Obama girls – is very clever.
    http://media.smh.com.au/?rid=45387

  12. Angel

    The sense of injustice will linger no doubt.

  13. Very clever campaigning, I would guess.

  14. John, I will come clean. Impeachment is a process designed to remove an official from office. When we wake up to-morrow Bush will no longer be eligible nor will Cheney.

    Impeachment for the President and Vice-President (as I write) is now no longer a possibility.

  15. My gosh, Aqua! I can’t believe your post was longer than John McP’s. You got those points accross well.

    John McP. It will for me and a lot of others, no doubt about that. I haven’t blogged about it in a long time, not in a discussion forum anyway.

    BAD BLOG!

  16. Just a “small” point you can’t impeach Bush – unless you do it tonight – by tomorrow he will no longer be President – however he can still be tried…

    …anyway…

    You only need one reason to impeach and any one of these would do.

    If any perpetrators are allowed to walk, then everyone thinks they can do the same…(ie get away with murder)

    Oft quoted here – Evil exists where good men (sic) do nothing…

    If nothing happens then – the act(s) have been condoned…

    …if the people in power condone those acts then they are no better…in fact they are worse, for being weak…

    …most of my generation (I suspect) expect to be punished if found to be doing wrong…

    Angel, The Nurenberg Trials ( current series on ABC TV, Sundays) were held between 1945 and 1949 – War Criminals (the senior Ministers) were tried late 1945 into 1946…WWII (Europe) ended in September
    ’45, trials began in November ’45 – and “justice” was swift…

  17. “Very clever campaigning, I would guess.”

    It certainly was – I’d heard about them but never seen these clips. Politicians as sex symbols. I’d love to see what John Howard’s clip would look like if the Libs had decided to go down that track.

    My grandma loves him
    http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=GDOZTFsiCjU

  18. N5, not impeachment, but War Crimes.

    As the sign said in the clip (obviously done some time ago), “will someone give GB a blow job so he can be impeached” What a pity that didn’t happen.

    In my opinion rude, but forgivable in this case.

  19. John McP. Very funny clip. Grandy would have loved that.

  20. TB Thank you. I had no idea of the time frame. Haven’t these trials still been still happening until several years ago? Or am I mixing up with Serbia?

    Sorry, too tired and can’t think.

    Nite, all.

  21. Yuk. Cheney’s face makes me sick. The face of Satan’s bastard son. The laboratory experiment gone terribly wrong.
    Such a disgusting piece of human excrement. Great friend of John Howard.
    Cheney’s in the house. Hide your pin numbers, passwords, watches jewellery, credit cards, account numbers and wallets.
    Hide the children.

  22. Angel, on January 21st, 2009 at 12:09 am

    Still happening…

    Operation Last Chance

    G’nite.

  23. We all know, despite how much we’d love to see Bush/Cheney held to account, that it simply ain’t gonna happen. Chiefly for reasons sited above by N5 but also because one hand washes the other at the top & the incoming Dem’s, World Court (or anyone else capable of stirring up a shitstorm) just won’t do it.
    Much the same as the now jellyback Labor government here made no real effort to go after the former Prime Mendacious & his arrogant, divisive & vulgar henchmen.

    A fitting end, in my eyes, would be the Soghomon Tehlirian solution. As much as I abhor such things I would sympathise with the aggressor in that case.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soghomon_Tehlirian

    Correcting the karmic imbalance will not happen any other way, certainly not by the (suffocated, diluted & manipulated) Rule Of International Law.

  24. Don’t hold your breath joni…it’s a corporate empire filled w/ pond scum…the BIG SELL is the top priority. I just hope for those black Americans & others who see little LIGHT in their lives that Obama turns out to be more refreshing & illuminating & motivating than the unimaginative, corporate media butt licker and celebrity sniffing sycophant we got stuck with.

    I had HIGH HOPES for Rudd, but the man has demonstrated he has little potential for providing this country w/ vision and change. It seems to me, and plenty i’ve spoken to, he lacks courage, true passion and in the long run tends to take the easy, most predictable road on issues…w/ a tendency to rally against the wider thinking & more ethically progressive in order to try and solidify his popularity.

    There are few figures who have disappointed me more than Rudd & Blair. But one should expect no less from those bred on MYTH & religious BS. Free thinkers & visionaries are hard to come by in this AGE OF CORPORATISM.

    Perhaps Obama will break the mold. Perhaps he will motivate the Congress & judicial system to “do the right thing”.

    However, isn’t he turning out to be just another CHURCHGOER & patriotism-inspirer?

    Just another promoter of the system that leads us to WAR, BIGOTRY & GREED.

    Just another SALESMAN for AMERICORP.

    And the dimming of THE LIGHT.
    N’

  25. Thanks Angel – these guys should be held accountable for their actions – for all of humanity. And if you disagree – then defend them. Otherwise you must be with us.

    No, I’m not with you on this, or most of the last ten or so topics posted here, for that matter. Have a look at the side-bar: aside from an open thread, and some obscure film review, they’re all negative ones about either George Bush or the economy.

    Still, there’s sure to be a topic that will appeal to me soon. Until then, talk among yourselves. I can wait.

    (By the way: I’m watching the inauguration. Anyone else interested in that? You haven’t mentioned it.)

  26. TB’s got a point. You can’t impeach him once he’s no longer President.

    Too bad that, as I was looking forward to singing Jail to The Chief.

    Still, as Angel says, maybe someone will have the balls in future to lay-on a crimes against humanity charge in the Hague. There’s a few prosecutors in places like Italy, Spain and the Netherlands with a bit of a human rights fetish who might be tempted to have a go.

    Remember what happened to Pinochet? The senile old fascist turned-up in the UK for prostate surgery or whatever only to find a warrant (issued pursuant to a Spanish request) waiting for him. Quite a shock really, coming all those years after the murders in 1975 that promped it’s issue. He had to beat-it back to Chile in a real hurry.

    So Bush ain’t out of the woods yet.

  27. “they’re all negative ones about either George Bush or the economy.”

    How about some positives regarding GW’s presidency?

    (1) I think we can be certain that the corporate mongrels who run the US of eh! will never hire another dunderhead to rule the roost…too many buckeroos lost w/ the bad sales that come w/ a BOSS who not only pisses many of his employees off but also the BUYERS.

    (2) The cleaners of the Oval Office were not overworked because Bush spent so much time on holiday &/or in the cupboard or/at the doghouse in Texas.

    (3) Reading more than porn & comic books is now catching on motivated by the fear of being mistaken for a dunderhead.

    (4) It will be many decades before voters believe that the Republican leadership is financially responsible & private contractors should be handed wars on a platter.

    (5) Political cartoonists had a resurgence.

    (6) Human cloning ventures may hit a hurdle once the world’s population realises the SECOND COMING might eventuate in another DUNDERHEAD ERA.

    N’

  28. Glad to see Obama demonstrated the gravitas & passion & diplomacy & cultural sensitivity necessary, absent of the “boot boy” attitude of the dunderhead Bush.

    A few words from those who deserved to be there today…or to sit middle fingering the TV:

    I think it’s a terrible shame that politics has become show business.
    (Sydney Pollack)

    Here’s what I think the truth is: We are all addicts of fossil fuels in a state of denial, about to face cold turkey.
    (Kurt Vonnegut, Cold Turkey)

    Another flaw in the human character is that everybody wants to build and nobody wants to do maintenance.
    (Kurt Vonnegut, Hocus Pocus)

    Inside of all the makeup and the character and makeup, it’s you, and I think that’s what the audience is really interested in… you, how you’re going to cope with the situation, the obstacles, the troubles that the writer put in front of you.
    (Gregory Peck)

    The people of this country, not special interest big money, should be the source of all political power.
    (Paul Wellstone)

    Never separate the life you live from the words you speak.
    (Paul Wellstone)

    America… just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable.
    (Hunter S. Thompson)

    I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
    (Hunter S. Thompson)

    Baaa
    (Dolly the sheep)

    Not one for ceremony I reckon Obama did good…& the wife & I dig his family (particularly the diligent photo taker)…& the wife of Joe Biden comes across as a lovely lady. We wish them all well…my cynical heart needs to sparkle…again.

    N’

  29. How about ten reasons to move on……….

    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24934654-7583,00.html

  30. ‘John mcphillin huh, that time mine was bigger then yours(post )’

    Lol aquanut, I completely dropped the ball and didn’t see you coming.

    Tony

    Throw out few suggestions on topics, even better put a post up. Seriously. I’m sure you’ve got something up your sleeve.

    Cheers

  31. Sparta

    I don’t know about you but I’m looking forward to see what the Obama Administration can do. I can honestly say that it was the first time in my life that I came to despise American leadership under Bush. I found it hard to reconcile my feelings given that America has given so much in the past that has been welcome and beneficial.

    To me, Bush was a throwback to the Middle Ages – his religious fervour and war – mongering dogma have damaged the US’ reputation, but I’m sure it can be salvaged in time.

    And one thing I’ve never been and never will be is Anti-Americans .

  32. In 1990 Roger Waters and a few notables gave a concert to celebrate the bringing down of the Berlin Wall.

    Who knows, the tide may actually turn now Obama’s in office.

    The Tide is Turning – Roger Waters
    http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=tzIVAuhWxDY

  33. Nasking, my prediction is that if Rudd doesn’t pull his socks up in ’09 then we will be seeing Gillard as PM.

  34. Toiletboss perhaps the best form of justice is to ensure that Bush’s place in history is completely stuffed. I doubt if Obama will be shy about making this happen.

  35. John,

    “To me, Bush was a throwback to the Middle Ages – his religious fervour and war – mongering dogma have damaged the US’ reputation, but I’m sure it can be salvaged in time.”

    While I don’t agree with all of that assessment I can agree with the premise whole hearted! Just when one thought they had seen the worst of it, up popped another disaster under GW! All most of us want to do, especially today, is look forward because though our history is full of things we are proud of, you can’t look back now without running into the last 8 years of imbecility!!!!

  36. Sparta,

    Surely you mean “misunderestimated imbecility”.

    😛

  37. joni,

    Sweet………

  38. And why should we move forward when Bush, in many peoples opinions, committed crimes?

    As I keep saying, he (and others) should be held accountable.

    And why is it that those who talk about justice, punishment and capital punishment are always so quick to want to move on when the charges are grave and serious – like taking a country to war on false pretences?

  39. Geez, give it time, I’m still waiting for JWH to be tried for his many “crimes”.

  40. Many people want those against Bush to move forward. I will move forward however I have a memory and will not forget.

    The voices of the world cried out for the removal of G W Bush and the republicans while they remain extreme in their beliefs and rhetoric.

    While US citizens decide on their President they also need to understand the ramifications it has on the rest of the world. The world is not the USA. The USA is a part of the world. Many of their politicians need to come to terms with that.

    I also will be just as critical of Obama if he doesn’t produce the goods, however I will also give him 1 or 2 years first as I never started complaining about Bush until 3 years into his presidency. In addition the poor bugger has inherited a dogs breakfast. He needs to keep his tenacity and independence and not be influenced by all of the political behind the scenes dealings. If congress vote against something he proposes and he believes in it he should hold a conference and explain why he wants it passed. Public opinion and support is in his favour, he should use it to achieve fast change that is good for all of the American community. By good for all of the american community I do not mean lowering taxes for the rich, or giving massive reabtes to oil barrons. I mean health, education and infrastructure for every citizen.

  41. James of North Melbourne,

    “I’m still waiting for JWH to be tried for his many “crimes”.”

    He’s had the first trial. It was called an ‘election’. Found guilty and sacked. Lol.

    No further trials on the horizon.

  42. Angel

    I could be right yet

    Bush, Rumsfeld should be pursued for torture: UN rapporteur
    http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/bush-rumsfeld-should-be-pursued-for-torture-un-rapporteur/2009/01/21/1232471343148.html

    The UN’s special torture rapporteur called on the US Tuesday to pursue former president George W Bush and defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld for torture and bad treatment of Guantanamo prisoners.

    “Judicially speaking, the United States has a clear obligation” to bring proceedings against Bush and Rumsfeld, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak said, in remarks to be broadcast on Germany’s ZDF television Tuesday evening.

    He noted Washington had ratified the UN convention on torture which required “all means, particularly penal law” to be used to bring proceedings against those violating it.

    “We have all these documents that are now publicly available that prove that these methods of interrogation were intentionally ordered by Rumsfeld,” against detainees at the US prison facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Nowak said.

    “But obviously the highest authorities in the United States were aware of this,” added Nowak, who authored a UN investigation report on the Guantanamo prison.

    Bush stepped down from power Tuesday, with Barack Obama becoming the 44th president of the United States.

    Asked about chances to bring legal action against Bush and Rumsfeld, Nowak said: “In principle yes. I think the evidence is on the table.”

    At issue, however, is whether “American law will recognise these forms of torture.”

    A bipartisan Senate report released last month found Rumsfeld and other top administration officials responsible for abuse of Guantanamo detainees in US custody.

    It said Rumsfeld authorised harsh interrogation techniques on December 2, 2002, at the Guantanamo prison, although he ruled them out a month later.

    The coercive measures were based on a document signed by Bush in February, 2002.

    French, German and US rights groups have previously said they wanted to bring legal action against Rumsfeld.

  43. If they couldn’t get Bill I don’t think they’ll get George.

  44. What were they going after Bill for again, Stephan?

  45. Just a follow on from Nature 5 et al. Bush cannot be impeached as he is no longer president (maybe a lucky escape). It will require an international court of law to call him to justice or maybe former inmates of Gitmo might choose to sue.

  46. He (and a whole bunch of people associated with the administration) will need to be very careful about the countries that he visits in future.

    Is it true that Kissinger has the same problems with certain European countries becuase of the fear of being arrested over old actions?

  47. Min, on January 21st, 2009 at 8:40 am Said:

    Nasking, my prediction is that if Rudd doesn’t pull his socks up in ‘09 then we will be seeing Gillard as PM.

    On current form min, she will be just as bad. I don’t like her IR and her mooted education policies, her foreign policy statements supporting Israel completely disregarded the human rights of Palestinians. Labor is just as much of a pimp for the corporate sector as Howard. I’m very disappointed in both Gillard and Rudd.

  48. Kittyl. One thing that Rudd said is that it takes a while to turn around the Titanic. And so to me he has until about November this year. As Deputy Gillard cannot set the agenda.

    I am hopeful that now we have Obama as president that Rudd/Gillard will be able to set a more liberal agenda with the last of the neo cons now parted.

    Sorry..that’s a wee bit wishy-washy isn’t it. What I am thinking (and no doubt expressing badly) is that I am hoping with Bush gone/bye bye to the neo cons that Rudd/Gillard will be able to set a new agenda. If they don’t, then they are dead meat as they will be compared with the Obama administration rather than with the Bush administration.

  49. Contrary to popular belief, there is not a statue of limitations on impeachment. Impeaching an elected official after they leave office prevents them from holding any future office, strips them of their government pension, and above all sends a message that the people of this country mean business. Whoever is elected next will know better (www.VoteToImpeach.org.)

  50. “the US is a military dictatorship”
    Gore Vidal

  51. “If they couldn’t get Bill I don’t think they’ll get George”Stephan

    Right on Stephan! great point, as you know extramarital fellatio costs countless innocent lives & steers countries towards economic ruin.

  52. Kitty

    Will you please stop posting comments that make my jaw hit the floor!

    (you know I am just kidding – you post amazing amazing stuff).

    Gotta run – beer o’clock and I am running late.

  53. In reply to kittylitter’s, (BTW – its statute of limitations – and I know that’s not you kl, ) and statutes don’t apply because we are not dealing with a “criminal” or “civil” law issue…impeachment is a
    “governmental” (not judicial) issue and heard by Senators (see Para 6 below) and brought against the “official” solely by the House of Representatives…

    Not all of whom will be lawyers part of the legal profession – nor are they required to be under the Constitution.

    US Constitution

    Article One

    Section Two

    [Selection of officers; power of impeachment.—5.]

    The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment.

    Section Three

    [Senate to try impeachments.—6.]

    The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: and no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present.

    [Judgment in cases of Impeachment.—7.]

    Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to Law.

    What is critical in considering whether impeachment can occur “after” the official has resigned or stepped down from office is one word – “and” – in the following extract (see above)

    …removal from office, and disqualification…

    If the word was – “or” – then there may be a possibility of impeachment …however, the word “and” links – “removal” and “disqualification” – not one or the other…but both – it simply means – out of office – no impeachment…

    If the “official” is no longer holding the “position” then he/she cannot be impeached, nor can they be disqualified – because they can’t be impeached…

    President Nixon resigned from office on that very premise – no impeachment was persued – he was no longer in office…impeachment could not continue…

    To my knowledge – no US official from President down, has ever been impeached after leaving office…as the Constitution stands (is written) its virtually impossible…why virtually – ’cause NOTHING is impossible…

  54. Min I agree with that statement.

    # It will require an international court of law to call him to justice or maybe former inmates of Gitmo might choose to sue.

    We wont find out for a while in any case, but i really hope to see him in a court being read his guilty verdict.
    what a day of justice that will be for so many.

  55. The Constitutional Case for the Impeachability of Former Federal Officials: An Analysis of the Law, History, and Practice of Late Impeachment

    Abstract:
    This article considers the constitutional case for the impeachability of federal officers after they have left office. As a practical matter, while it may rarely be worthwhile to pursue a late impeachment (as with regular impeachment), this does not change the fact that it can be done, or that certain facts may make it desirable…

    Can President Bush Be Impeached After He’s Gone?

  56. TB, not sure the point of your post: Impeachment as a concept is not confined to the US nor is it confined to the US Congress. For example, Pervez Musharraf, the former President of Pakistan, like President Nixon, resigned to avoid ‘impeachment’.

    Even in the US we have examples of Governors facing ‘impeachment’ – the latest example is Rod Blagojevich of Illinois (who has been impeached). But I could also point to examples where University Board members in the US have been ‘impeached’.

    At the most basic level, ‘impeach’ means to make an accusation against a public official, have that ‘charge’ validated by a legitimate authority, so it can then proceed to trial. In my understanding, it is the equivalent of an ‘indictment’ in criminal law. But I stress I have no professional claim to legal expertise and certainly no claim to be a ‘constitutional lawyer’.

    As for ‘impeachment’ in the US at the highest level, can I direct you to:

    http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9907E7D81E3FE73BBC4053DFB566838D669FDE

    which explores the case of William Worth Belknap the only Cabinet Secretary ever to have been impeached by the United States House of Representatives. He was impeached by the House of Representatives with a unanimous vote in the late19th Century. But was not convicted by the Senate. BTW, these events took place after his resignation.

    So it is theoretically possible to impeach after resignation. From what I see, impeachment occurs but rarely leads to conviction. Ironically, Judges seem to be the most likely to be impeached and convicted.

    Scroll down.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States

  57. Wow! What are you folks on??????

  58. If the “official” is no longer holding the “position” then he/she cannot be impeached, nor can they be disqualified – because they can’t be impeached

    TB, what would be the point if a president had complete impunity of office and knew that whatever they did wrong, they could not be brought to account? If a president knew he could not be impeached out of office, he would behave correctly early on in his term and then do whatever he likes at the end of it, or cover up earlier crimes and run the time clock down.

    Why I Think Presidents Can Be Impeached Even After Leaving Office

    …In Article II, Section 4, the Constitution specifies that any civil officer of the United States must be removed from office upon impeachment and conviction for high crimes and misdemeanors. Critics of late impeachability take this to mean that a person must be removable to be impeachable. It’s a fair reading of the text, but a cleaner reading is that this clause only means to specify the penalty for sitting officers who are convicted. Under this reading, the clause does not limit Congress’s impeachment powers (which anyway are specified elsewhere, in Article I) to cases involving sitting officers…

    …In other words, it is the nature of the offense, not the timing of the trial, that distinguishes impeachment. Only officers can commit impeachable offenses. If they commit such offenses, but leave office before Congress can finish the case, that doesn’t change the public nature of the offenses, or the appropriateness of having Congress as a forum to pursue them.

    …As I discussed in a previous post, several factors would have to line up just right for a late impeachment to go forward. Still, there is a strong case to be made that in the right circumstances, Congress can impeach and try an ex-president…(Brian Kalt)

  59. Sparta

    I think most of us are on the following drugs.

    1) Truth
    2) Honesty
    3) Fairness
    4) Freedom
    5) Democracy ( not just the US interpretation of this word)
    6) Debate without censorship ( unlike the media who censor repsonses to suit their own political points of view)

  60. And sparta, the drugs that Shane lists are those that quite a few of your fellow Americans are also on.

  61. “And sparta, the drugs that Shane lists are those that quite a few of your fellow Americans are also on”joni

    Yeah but not all are willing participants in their own medication. Too paranoid to remove their tinfoil hats & drink Teh Koolaid.

  62. Joni & Shane,

    Thanks guys, so glad to have real “truth” seekers like yourselves and not partisans “objectively” laying it out. Sorry, but your “interpretations” and reality are mutually exclusive to at least a third of the electorate! The other third are busy watching “American Idol” and could give a hoot either way, sadly!

  63. Sparta

    You are so correct I find it amazing that more people vote on American Idol than vote in your elections.

    Problem is they have no concept of how they are losing democracy from under their noses when they do not exercise their rights.

    Over here as you probably know voting is compulsory, so most people vote even if they wish it was optional. 1) to avoid the fine and 2) At least they have had even a small look at what is on offer before deciding who to vote for. I still believe this to be a far superior system to voluntary voting as it drags the population into making a decision on their future even if they have apathy.

  64. Haha…. sorry sparta, but I will continue to write about and to complain about the human rights abuses that the Bush Adminstration not only allowed to happen on their watch, but actively encouraged.

    And if the Obama Administration does the same, I will write and complain about them too.

    I wrote a post on the findings of the US Senate Armed Services Committe where they state:

    The abuse of detainees in US custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of ‘a few bad apples’ acting on their own. The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees. Those efforts damaged our ability to collect accurate intelligence that could save lives, strengthened the hand of our enemies, and compromised our moral authority.

    Not my words, your own elected representatives including GOP members. And so, I (and many others) believe that the Bush administration should be held accountable for their actions.

  65. N5

    I confined my remarks to the US President because that’s the subject of the thread…and yes impeachment is a term used by many organisations and governments to mean “remove from official office” – impeachment can’t take place unless the person is in official office “and part of the organisation or government” (…my point…) – after that – you can still take legal (international or other) but you can’t impeach…

    kittylitter

    but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to Law.

    An ex-president can be brought to justice – just not impeached by the government…

  66. TB..spot on. An impeachment relates to removal from office of a public official which GWB now isn’t.

  67. From what I read they call it a late impeachment – which could happen after leaving office or resignation from said office.

    “…President Grant’s corrupt secretary of war, William Belknap, was impeached despite having resigned just prior to the House vote. The House went ahead anyway, and the Senate debated late impeachability for weeks. The debate covered dozens of arguments from the text, history, and structure of the Constitution that I discuss in my article. Eventually, the Senate decided by a majority vote that it had jurisdiction over former officers and the trial went on. Fortunately for Belknap, there were enough opponents of late impeachability that his pursuers failed to attain the two-thirds vote needed to convict him. The vote was close, though, and the result is a precedent for the notion that people can be impeached and tried after leaving office, even if it is hard to convict them…”

  68. Sorry, link for the above quote is the earlier one provided
    January 22nd, 2009 at 3:11 am Said: (Why I Think Presidents Can Be Impeached Even After Leaving Office)

  69. kittylitter

    If the bloody US government have a problem – I think we should agree to disagree? What say?

    I can’t see Dubya ever being brought to justice I’m afraid – too many Robber Barons to protect him…

  70. Joni,

    “Not my words, your own elected representatives including GOP members. And so, I (and many others) believe that the Bush administration should be held accountable for their actions.”

    I wait patiently for this “smoking gun”. If the evidence is there (like that which you have trotted out prior), charge him other wise move on already; they have had YEARS to compile a case? Every group you can imagine has been spouting the same accusations Joni yet why do you think nothing has happened thus far; lack of lawyers? The Democrats have been in charge for over two years now? I am just puzzled by your ability to come to the conclusions you have but yet those in a much better position to actually provide/review real “evidence” have been unable to or don’t feel it is as clear cut as you? What do you think they are waiting for then?

  71. Sparta

    Regarding compiling cases, is it not true that your presdents in their final hours of office pardon people for all sorts of things.?

    If this is so, where is true justice when a president can overide a rule of law for mates.

  72. Sparta,

    Not my conclusions. Much more learned people.

    You are the one who is chosing to ignore the evidence. Go have a look at American Torture to see what the evidence is.

  73. And you seem to be saying that you are OK with your government torturing people.

    Nice.

  74. TB Queensland, on January 22nd, 2009 at 10:30 am Said

    Agree with you there TB, cheers.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: