Bush/Cheney Impeachment

[matthewcline 0]

Was he truly found not guilty or is this just a "Technicality" thing, with the guilty votes falling short by a few?

I looked at Mr. Browns post and it jives with how I remember things.

It is kind of like being found "not guilty" by a jury of 12 because 2 said "No". End result is the same.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[freethefly 6]

If by some slim chance that these two Hitlers are impeached, would they lose their Federal pensions? (Not that they need a pension. Freaking war profiteers, Hell Bushwad is only following in the footsteps of his granddaddy who supported Hitler and help build Hitlers war machine. I guess shit does not fall to far from the asshole, now does it)

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Was he truly found not guilty or is this just a "Technicality" thing, with the guilty votes falling short by a few?

The definition of Not Guilty in this case is less than 50%+1 votes to convict. There aren't distinctions made in the law for "truly not guilty" vs. "technically not guilty". Perhaps there should be ... but there aren't.

So Bill Clinton, by the rule of law, was completely, truly, and absolutely found Not Guilty.

DaVinci wants it both ways. He wants to imagine his guy would be found not guilty and criticize the hypothetical continuing criticism by the liberals.

But in the exact same post, he ACTUALLY does precisely what he complains the other side WOULD do.

I have little reliable information about Bill Clinton's hypocrisy but we see here a perfect compact example of DaVinci's.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Was he truly found not guilty or is this just a "Technicality" thing, with the guilty votes falling short by a few?

I looked at Mr. Browns post and it jives with how I remember things.

It is kind of like being found "not guilty" by a jury of 12 because 2 said "No". End result is the same.

Matt

Mr. Brown is incorrect, as is your recollection.

The vote in the Senate was 45 Guilty, 55 Not Guilty. So not only was a 2/3 majority not achieved, there wasn't a simple majority either.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[matthewcline 0]

Ah yes, the actual number, much better than a guess.
Some how with all the hub bub in the press then I thought it was the other way around.

But, really, would it come to that now?
It would be a waste of time. By the time the process was over it wouldn't matter.

And to the poster who said crimes against humanity, using the "rule of law" theory there are none.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[AFFI 0]

Quote

If by some slim chance that these two Hitlers

These two Hitlers???

I do not see the correlation.

One of the foundations of Hitler's social policies was the concept of racial hygiene. This was applied with varying degrees of rigorousness to different groups of society, but constituted in essence the same application of the brutal and crude concept of social Darwinism to all the different kinds of victims. Between 1939 and 1945, the SS, assisted by collaborationist governments and recruits from occupied countries, systematically killed about 11 million people, including about 6 million Jews, in concentration camps, ghettos and mass executions, or through less systematic methods elsewhere. Besides being gassed to death, many also died of starvation and disease while working as slave laborers (sometimes benefiting private German companies in the process, because of the low cost of such labor). Along with Jews, non-Jewish Poles (over 3 million of whom died), alleged communists or political opposition, members of resistance groups, resisting Roman Catholics and Protestants, homosexuals, Roma, the physically handicapped and mentally retarded, Soviet prisoners of war, Jehovah's Witnesses, anti-Nazi clergy, trade unionists, and psychiatric patients were killed.

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

Mykel AFF-I10
Skydiving Priorities: 1) Open Canopy. 2) Land Safely. 3) Don’t hurt anyone. 4) Repeat…

[billvon 2,427]

>However, I hope that if found not guilty then you guys would stop the bashing.

Well, Clinton was found not guilty (i.e. the impeacment failed.) Republicans are still bashing him eight years later, so don't hold your breath.

[jumprunner 0]

Quote

... that that was the true reason for this war... GREED and EGO...

Well Amazon, I tend to have to agree with you, but I just think there is a little more to it than that. Read what I posted on another forum below about my response to someone saying he wont be impreached:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This admin will not be impeached folks, the extreme left wont have the balls for it.


Yes, that is always the problem, isnt it? Lots of talk, little if any action. They have been going on about Bush impeachment since 2005, that escalated in 2006, then in December a Representative made a formal decree to impeach Bush/ Cheney on her way out of office.

On her way out of office. Why not sooner, when she has the time to make it count for something? Sounds like a 'hit and run' tactic on the part of the Representative, doesnt want to have to take any responsibility for her actions.

You see folks, thats the problem right now. No one has got the balls to make the first move. A Representative from New Mexico is supposedly going to make the first move in a few months, I hear the chatter, but Ill believe it when I see it happen. Several states, including California, have voted to impeach Bush already, now all we need is a Representative with some balls.

Chatter about impeachment, rallies, opinion polls, aint gonna do it folks. Bush doesnt care about anyones opinion, what Congress thinks or wants to do, he has his own agenda and that is the only thing he is concerned with. The only way to change that, is to start formal impeachment preceedings, he has no choice at all but to deal with it, period.

If he chooses to ignore that, then we officially have a runaway government. That is not good.

At that point, the executive government will have to be removed by force. Im not sure how this happens, as Commander in Chief, Bush is in control of the armed forces, including National Guard units which have been nationalized (slick move Bush, now you have your own SS Stormtroopers). So, who is going to officially remove Bush from office? The FBI? Not so sure about that, I think he might have authority over that too. The CIA? Hmmmm, nah.

Well, the states have national guard units, but, those have been nationalized. So much for that idea. Soooo, what is left?

Ladies and Gentelmen...welcome to NAZI AMERICA! Yep, they said it couldnt happen here. Only in 'defunct' countries like Germany. That ol' German government just couldnt hold its own, allowing a dictator like Hitler to manipulate and compromise their democratic structure and form a dictatorship of absolute power. But not our perfectly failsafe constitutional democracy of checks and balances, noooooo, never here, we'll sure never have to worry about something like that, this is America!

Thats what the Germans thought. They were wrong.

Add to that, in Germany at that time, the German Army was a seperate government power with its own legislative authority. That is not the case in America. The military is under the authority of the Commander in Chief, the highest ranking individual in all of the armed forces, the President. Germany's system was more failsafe than ours is now.

The Bush family had been Nazi sympathizers back in the 1930s, so its no wonder where they get their training from! Yep, our little Bushie knows what he is doing allright.

Sadam Hussein also got his training from the Nazis, the Baath party was a direct takeoff from the Nazi party. Just like in Nazi Germany, he had absolute power, people were being shot into ditches, Nazi style, and anyone who said anything about him signed his death warrent.

So what do we do? We insult Bush as much as we can for now, while we still can. Enjoy that for as long as its going to last, because it wont last long. Plenty of open space in the good ol' USA for ditch digging.

Oh, and BTW folks, this thing about "he only has two years left on this term", yea, you just keep on thinking that. That is what is called, "wishful thinking", on everyones part. Same kind of wishful thinking the Jews had when they thought the train was only taking them to resettlment camps back east for their own protection. The two term restriction in the presidency is a law, and, believe it or not, laws can be changed. Bush has been doing that for some time now.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush may be impeached allright, but his actual removal from office is an entirely different story.

[jumprunner 0]

Quote

The LA Times, NY Times, and Washington Post will all still be calling for impeachment of President Bush even after the 2008 election.

I'm going to take a tangent here and hypothisize that the election in 2008 will involve the Democratic Nominee running against President Bush, leaving the Republican Nominee to run on a myriad of platforms...

Ha ha, LOL, the 2008 election! Yea, okay, we'll see if there is one.

Democratic nominee running against Bush? Isnt Bush on his second (and final by law) term?

Oh yea, thats right, laws can be changed, good point. Laws can be chnged, and ballot boxes can be stuffed.

Thats what I like about living in America, you can always expect the unexpected. Isnt that what they say, "Expect the unexpected"?

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

The LA Times, NY Times, and Washington Post will all still be calling for impeachment of President Bush even after the 2008 election.

I'm going to take a tangent here and hypothisize that the election in 2008 will involve the Democratic Nominee running against President Bush, leaving the Republican Nominee to run on a myriad of platforms...

Ha ha, LOL, the 2008 election! Yea, okay, we'll see if there is one.

Democratic nominee running against Bush? Isnt Bush on his second (and final by law) term?

Oh yea, thats right, laws can be changed, good point. Laws can be chnged, and ballot boxes can be stuffed.

Thats what I like about living in America, you can always expect the unexpected. Isnt that what they say, "Expect the unexpected"?

You're missing the point of my post. The Republican Nominee will not be President Bush, it will be someone else. Yet, the Democrats will still be running against him. The entire caucus has aligned itself into a "get the President" strategy, they have no other focus.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Amazon 7]

Quote

The entire caucus has aligned itself into a "get the President" strategy, they have no other focus.

Actually.. its becoming most of the world that wants us to rid ourselves of him. BEFORE he does somethin g even more stupid

[dorbie 0]

Quote

>However, I hope that if found not guilty then you guys would stop the bashing.

Well, Clinton was found not guilty (i.e. the impeacment failed.) Republicans are still bashing him eight years later, so don't hold your breath.

It failed but he was unquestionably guilty of lying under oath.

[TheAnvil 0]

Some of the posts in this thread are cheap entertainment.

Thanks!

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[willard 0]

Just to remind everyone, during the impeachment process our Constitution requires the immediate removal from office those found guilty. I remember very clearly that well over the required 2/3 majority were convinced beyond a doubt that Clinton had perjured himself, yet they felt that his offense did not warrant removal from office and thus voted "not guilty". Though I despise the very mention of Clinton's name I felt the Senate had done the right thing. Impeachment is not something to be taken lightly.

[aprilcat 0]

Quote

Quote

The entire caucus has aligned itself into a "get the President" strategy, they have no other focus.

Actually.. its becoming most of the world that wants us to rid ourselves of him. BEFORE he does somethin g even more stupid
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like what?? ~~~April

Camelot II, the Electric Boogaloo!

• Quote

[billvon 2,427]

>It failed but he was unquestionably guilty of lying under oath.

Right. But he was not found guilty of a high crime sufficient to remove him from office; the impeachment proceeding failed. DaVinci said:

"However, I hope that if found not guilty then you guys would stop the bashing."

Clinton was found not guilty in the way DaVinci was using the term; the bashing goes on to this day.

[rhys 0]

Wonderful,

I knew the american people wouldn't take it for too long. No one is that stupid.

They should be locked in a stock in the middle of Iraq and stoned to death with little pebbles that prolong the agony.

That article just made my day! If the impeachment goes through (which it probably will because it is a tiny bit worse than a Gobbie from an intern!).
With the investigation i'm sure many other 'Deeds' will come out of the bag and enlighten many of us of some aweful thruths that we have questioned right here in this very forum. Ther will be someone to blame then.

Send em to texas and kill the c**ts.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[dorbie 0]

Quote

>It failed but he was unquestionably guilty of lying under oath.

Right. But he was not found guilty of a high crime sufficient to remove him from office; the impeachment proceeding failed. DaVinci said:

"However, I hope that if found not guilty then you guys would stop the bashing."

Clinton was found not guilty in the way DaVinci was using the term; the bashing goes on to this day.

He was guilty, that's not bashing it's a statement of fact and only the dishonest or ignorant would deny it.

The phrase you're looking for is "high crimes and misdemeanors", you omitted that last part.

[Amazon 7]

You want that to be so true.. that Clinton was guilty

How do you feel about all the lies and crimes of the current administration??

Or is your moral indignation only reserved for blowjobs?

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

You want that to be so true.. that Clinton was guilty

Not different than what you claim Bush to have done. You've declared him guilty, you want that to so true.

Quote

Or is your moral indignation only reserved for blowjobs?

Yes, Clinton did get a BJ from an intern (like a teacher/student relationship, or congressman/page relationship - usually that is not considered acceptable).

He didn't just get a blowjob. He was being questioned under oath because of allegations of sexual misconduct. He lied to cover up the pattern that supported the allegations.

He also was accused of being a rapist, sexual imposition & harassment, making advances to a woman on the day of her husband's death, having the Arkansas state police help him get women...

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[spudboy 0]

I understand that clinton manipulating the truth about a bj is far more serious than anything the current administration has or ever will do, but can anyone explain to me how an investigation into a failed savings and loan resulted in the POTUS being required to discuss his sex life under oath?

[Amazon 7]

And the death toll from that???


I think Georges death toll is what now.. hundreds of thousands..

Perhaps Laura needed to give him one once in a while to keep him a bit happier as a human being..

He belives in Christ and is born again... SUPPOSEDLY.....so he supposedly believes in the Ten Commandments..
I guess he is one of the Christians of convienience... where he can break the Laws of God .. and the Laws of Man at will and then ask for forgiveness.

Sickening.

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

I understand that clinton manipulating the truth about a bj is far more serious than anything the current administration has or ever will do, but can anyone explain to me how an investigation into a failed savings and loan resulted in the POTUS being required to discuss his sex life under oath?

Starr's investigation was not about the Whitewater scandal. It was about sexual harrasment.

He didn't just lie about getting a blowjob, he was also tampering with witnesses - from the official report:

The information reveals that President Clinton:

lied under oath at a civil deposition while he was a defendant in a sexual harassment lawsuit;

lied under oath to a grand jury;

attempted to influence the testimony of a potential witness who had direct knowledge of facts that would reveal the falsity of his deposition testimony;

attempted to obstruct justice by facilitating a witness's plan to refuse to comply with a subpoena;

attempted to obstruct justice by encouraging a witness to file an affidavit that the President knew would be false, and then by making use of that false affidavit at his own deposition;

lied to potential grand jury witnesses, knowing that they would repeat those lies before the grand jury; and

engaged in a pattern of conduct that was inconsistent with his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws.

The evidence shows that these acts, and others, were part of a pattern that began as an effort to prevent the disclosure of information about the President's relationship with a former White House intern and employee, Monica S. Lewinsky, and continued as an effort to prevent the information from being disclosed in an ongoing criminal investigation.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

And the death toll from that???

Has there been a war that was worth a death toll?

Quote

I guess he is one of the Christians of convienience... where he can break the Laws of God .. and the Laws of Man at will and then ask for forgiveness.

Whether you are a Christian or not, who doesn't fall into this category?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

So Bill Clinton, by the rule of law, was completely, truly, and absolutely found Not Guilty.

Not of what I acussed him of.

Quote

In April 1999, about two months after being acquitted by the Senate, Clinton was cited by Federal District Judge Susan Webber Wright for civil contempt of court for his "willful failure" to obey her repeated orders to testify truthfully in the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit. For this citation, Clinton was assessed a $90,000 fine, and the matter was referred to the Arkansas Supreme Court to see if disciplinary action would be appropriate.[7]

Regarding Clinton's January 17, 1998, deposition where he was placed under oath, the judge wrote:

"Simply put, the president's deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. (Monica) Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false . . . ." [8]

In January 2001, on the day before leaving office, Clinton agreed to a five-year suspension of his Arkansas law license as part of an agreement with the independent counsel to end the investigation. Based on this suspension, Clinton was also automatically suspended from the United States Supreme Court bar, from which he chose to resign. [9]

But you never pay enough attention. I don't care he got a BJ, I care he lied under oath. Which is a crime which he did plead out of and was disbared.

Quote

DaVinci wants it both ways. He wants to imagine his guy would be found not guilty and criticize the hypothetical continuing criticism by the liberals.

Again, not even close. I want you guys to shut up about what you can't prove. I can prove Billy lied under oath, which IS a crime.

Quote

I have little reliable information about Bill Clinton's hypocrisy but we see here a perfect compact example of DaVinci's.

Some is included in this post above. It is not my fault you make judgements without any evidence.