oevuyuzp leibuy…

The Framers would likely deplore both Bush and Clinton for obvious reasons, but I think they’d also be pleased to see that the limits they put on the impeachment power.

If Congress had the authority to remove a President, Vice-President, or member of the Judicial Branch at any time for any reason they would have virtually unlimited power over the other two branches of government, and the concept of separation of powers would be meaningless.

I admit you guys know the letter of the law way better than I do. Thanks for straightening me out. I apologize for my ignorance and I admit that I am arguing ‘from the heart,’ but this “bad policy” is taking a terrible toll, and I wish with all my heart that there were a way to stop it.

As you all state so emphatically, Bush has not committed an impeachable offense, and Clinton did but I would like to think that the framers of the constitution would see the irony.

Now that we’re not paying attention to the Constitution, impeach anyone you’d like for whatever reason you’d like!

In fact, I’m thinking of impeaching you… You’re ugly and your mother dresses you funny! :-P

But bad policy is grounds for impeachment!

Does this mean that we can start impeaching advocates of gun control, wealth redistributors, advocates of campaign finance reform, and government school supporters? After all, I believe all those policies are bad policies.

I just figured it out!

Mike is a “progressive”. Therefore, the Constitution is a “living document”. Perjuring yourself on the stand isn’t a crime if you’re just talking about sex. But bad policy is grounds for impeachment!

It doesn’t matter what the Constitution says, it matters how Mike interprets it!

Clinton certainly lied, but no one was killed and there was very little at stake. Now, the stakes are very high, and Bush is getting off on a technicality.

Bush took and oath, too. But because his misdeeds do not fit the letter of the law as an impeachable offence he may lie with impunity.

Impeachment was put in the Constitution to deal with matters of violations of the law and abuses of power. The events leading up to the Iraq War were the result of bad policy, which were the result of at best bad intelligence and at worst deliberate acts of deception. None of this was illegal and Congress did authorize the use of force. Whether or not the Congressional authorization was legal is debatable, but that would be an issue to hit Congress with.

Doug is right, the only price Bush could pay is a political one, not a legal one because he committed no crime.

Clinton was under oath in a deposition when he told a lie. That is a crime, it’s called perjury.

Unless you can point to an actual crime, then the impeachment power doesn’t come in to play. Bush has already paid a political price for Iraq — it was called the 2006 elections. He is a lame duck.

Besides, impeaching Bush, even if successful would just mean that Dick Cheney would become President and I hardly think you’d want that.

Bush took and oath, too. But because his misdeeds do not fit the letter of the law as an impeachable offence he may lie with impunity.

The Constitution may not specifically provide for the current situation, but Congress should begin impeachment proceedings. There may be no hope of getting Bush out of office, but that’s no reason not to act. Bush can be made to pay a political price for his deception and betrayal.

The Democrats say they want to lead this country in the right direction, well if they’re serious about that they’ll find the courage to challange Bush, and let the chips fall where they may. Positioning themselves for the 2008 elections is a poor excuse. That’s politics as usual, and the men and women dying and being maimed in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve better than that.

I agree with Chuck Hagel, “If you want a safe job, go sell shoes.”

I think that alone is a misdemeanor worthy of removal from office. I also think that the incarcaration of Mr Padilla, at a time when Habeas Corpus was not suspended also is an impeachable offense.

I think that the OSP matter is much more likely to get congress to act. However, that “crime” can be more credibly placed at Mr Cheney’s door. In fact, I think the impeachment of Mr Cheney would do alot of good.

There are lots of policies that I don’t like but that is not grounds for prosecution.