He took trips on the state's dime to see his mistress and he tried to impeach Clinton for the same thing. How is this acceptable?|||Call me hopelessly romantic, I think the big difference between SC governor's and Clinton's affair is that SC governor truly loves his mistress while Clinton was looking for sexual satisfaction. However, the damage to the wife and children are the same.
Whether or not he should be impeached is up to people of SC.|||They didn't try to impeach clinton for having extramarital affairs, it was for perjury|||Are you from South Carolina? By the way, Clinton WAS impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice while lying under oath to a grand jury. Get a clue. The only thing unacceptable is your distortion of facts and lack of knowledge. Ironical that I highlighted "was", since it is a form of the verb, " to be", that Billy Boy had a hard time defining. Your question, How is this acceptable? How is your lack of knowledge acceptable is a better question. Go back to school.|||Clinton WAS impeached - for lying under oath. Something you or I would go to jail for if we did it.|||the only thing that he did wrong was misuse of state funds, in this day and age that isn't much of a crime. extramarital affairs may not be cool but they aren't illegal.|||I am on the Republican side of the coin and I disagree on this guy being impeached. This
guy betrayed not only his family, but the State
of South Carolina and the Republican party as a whole. Once he knows how we all feel, he should have the decency to step down like a gentleman and save face for all concerned, we
won't be mad at him, that is his wife's department, but we would see him as a man
of conviction as he pays back to the state money he squandered and maybe worthy sometime in the near future of most of us giving him the benefit of a doubt and maybe allow him
to earn some of our trust back. After all, he is
only human, he was having trouble at home and
those two ingredients together can make for a
bad apple pie. 'nuff said.|||Bush Junior did|||It's only been a day, dear.
Real life is not like your tee vee.
Problems aren't solved in an hour.
It's time to be a grownup now.|||President Clinton was impeached because he lied to the Grand Jury.
What the Governor of South Carolina did is not acceptable, but he did come clean and admit all, and express real regret.
You'll note how Republicans forgive their members who do these things, and then ask them to resign.
Democrats tend to "Excuse" such behavior and defend their members to the greatest extent.
Friday, December 2, 2011
Is it true the Liberals are going to start impeachment proceedings against President Bush?
I think the date is March 1st and here is the link for all of you people who always ask for a link?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DQAOZlNr鈥?/a> - 109k - Cached|||Not liberals . . the Justice Department has begun investigating the Bush administration involvment in detaining prisoners without charging them with a crime and torturing them . . if the Justice Department concludes that laws were broken than charges may be filed against whoever was involved . . including George W Bush or Dick Cheney. Obama has stated that he is not likely to authorize a broad inquiry into this matter . . Obama does not favor bringing charges against Bush but would do so reluctantly if enough evidence is found.
Obama unlikely to probe Bush anti-terrorist policies
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11435590|||Racism and Obama are one and the same|||Probably. But it won't be impeachment, it will be charging him with War Crimes. See? Even when they get what they want they still have to spew their venom and make complete spectacles of themselves.|||Sounds about right for a liberal shows up after the fight is over claiming victory.|||Yeah, with all the waste in government these days, I wouldn't be surprised.|||First of all, that link has nothing to do with your question. Second of all, you can't impeach someone who isn't in office. So no, they aren't going to start impeachment proceedings against Bush in March because Bush won't be office in March.
Seriously, if you going to spend any amount of time talking about politics, at least try to understand how our government works.|||Well tux, that could never happen.. No matter who says what..|||He deserved it, but most Democrats don't have the spine to hold the Bush crime family accountable. There are some "Bush" Democrats will be more worried about covering their own behinds.|||Not going to happen.
Why did you link to an irrelevant video, to waste our time?|||NO, with less than a week left in office, what would be the point of it.
I would believe that they will start an investigation into the corrupt way that the administration made policy.|||BUSH IGNORANT NO TALENT AAAAAA SHOULD IMPEACH HIMSELF AND FOR THE ONE THAT SAID OBAMA AND RACIST IN THE SAME PLEEEEASE DONT TALK ABOUT THAT WORD TOWARD A BLACK, ASIAN, MEXICAN OR ANY OTHER BECAUSE WE KNOW WHAT UP WITH THAT JUST SHUT UP WITH THAT CAUSE YOUR SOUNDING LIKE ONE YOURSELF A FULL BLOODED ONE AT THAT|||He can't be impeached when he is out of office. He could be tried for war crimes, however, along with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Addington and all the others who authorized torture of prisoners and deprived them of legal counsel.|||Liberals love Bush, zionism, communism and feminism|||Wouldn't it be loverly????
But it will be a cold day in hell before that spineless Congress or Senate ever does that!
Reid or Pelosi might actually have to be there for that..ha ha ha!|||We can still impeach him. There's no statute of limitations on that. And he will also face criminal charges. Nothing is being said right now because we don't want him to pardon everyone involved and he can't pardon someone who hasn't been accused yet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DQAOZlNr鈥?/a> - 109k - Cached|||Not liberals . . the Justice Department has begun investigating the Bush administration involvment in detaining prisoners without charging them with a crime and torturing them . . if the Justice Department concludes that laws were broken than charges may be filed against whoever was involved . . including George W Bush or Dick Cheney. Obama has stated that he is not likely to authorize a broad inquiry into this matter . . Obama does not favor bringing charges against Bush but would do so reluctantly if enough evidence is found.
Obama unlikely to probe Bush anti-terrorist policies
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11435590|||Racism and Obama are one and the same|||Probably. But it won't be impeachment, it will be charging him with War Crimes. See? Even when they get what they want they still have to spew their venom and make complete spectacles of themselves.|||Sounds about right for a liberal shows up after the fight is over claiming victory.|||Yeah, with all the waste in government these days, I wouldn't be surprised.|||First of all, that link has nothing to do with your question. Second of all, you can't impeach someone who isn't in office. So no, they aren't going to start impeachment proceedings against Bush in March because Bush won't be office in March.
Seriously, if you going to spend any amount of time talking about politics, at least try to understand how our government works.|||Well tux, that could never happen.. No matter who says what..|||He deserved it, but most Democrats don't have the spine to hold the Bush crime family accountable. There are some "Bush" Democrats will be more worried about covering their own behinds.|||Not going to happen.
Why did you link to an irrelevant video, to waste our time?|||NO, with less than a week left in office, what would be the point of it.
I would believe that they will start an investigation into the corrupt way that the administration made policy.|||BUSH IGNORANT NO TALENT AAAAAA SHOULD IMPEACH HIMSELF AND FOR THE ONE THAT SAID OBAMA AND RACIST IN THE SAME PLEEEEASE DONT TALK ABOUT THAT WORD TOWARD A BLACK, ASIAN, MEXICAN OR ANY OTHER BECAUSE WE KNOW WHAT UP WITH THAT JUST SHUT UP WITH THAT CAUSE YOUR SOUNDING LIKE ONE YOURSELF A FULL BLOODED ONE AT THAT|||He can't be impeached when he is out of office. He could be tried for war crimes, however, along with Cheney, Rumsfeld, Addington and all the others who authorized torture of prisoners and deprived them of legal counsel.|||Liberals love Bush, zionism, communism and feminism|||Wouldn't it be loverly????
But it will be a cold day in hell before that spineless Congress or Senate ever does that!
Reid or Pelosi might actually have to be there for that..ha ha ha!|||We can still impeach him. There's no statute of limitations on that. And he will also face criminal charges. Nothing is being said right now because we don't want him to pardon everyone involved and he can't pardon someone who hasn't been accused yet.
How many judges in the USA were investigated for impeachment?
Courts and judges have come under pressure for opinions that are contrary to law and Constitution.
We have had judges actually change the terms of contracts and terms disclosed under federal law and then been given immunity. They have denied basic and fundamental rights of citizens.
Yet we never hear of any judges being removed from office or investigated by legislatures and Congress!|||Throughout American history, there have been a grand total of 27 federal judges who were tried in the Senate. Of those, 26 were removed from office.|||not enough lib judges|||"Investigated for impeachment?"
You say that as if impeachment was a crime.
Impeachment is the trial that follows the crime.
We have had judges actually change the terms of contracts and terms disclosed under federal law and then been given immunity. They have denied basic and fundamental rights of citizens.
Yet we never hear of any judges being removed from office or investigated by legislatures and Congress!|||Throughout American history, there have been a grand total of 27 federal judges who were tried in the Senate. Of those, 26 were removed from office.|||not enough lib judges|||"Investigated for impeachment?"
You say that as if impeachment was a crime.
Impeachment is the trial that follows the crime.
How do I defend Andrew Jackson in a mock impeachment trial?
Currently I am on the defense for Andrew Jackson in a mock trial (dated for March 1, 1837) and I am having difficulty coming up with reasons to whether or not he is a Tyrant or a Democrat. I have the role of Lt. Jefferson Davis, who had barely any relations to Jackson before 1837 and there are so many negatives towards Jackson that I very much doubt the defense will win out.
The most difficult parts that I am struggling with are defending his expansion of powers of the executive branch and destroying the separation of powers and also his hesitation on the issue of states' rights.|||I suppose the first step would be to exhume the body...|||Lol, good luck with that one mate.
Try this though: write out all your negative ideas of Jackson and then place yourself in Jackson's and Davis' shoes. Try to envision their responses to the attacks on their policies as well as reasons as to why they choose to pursue those policies.
i.e.
"Jackson created a system of political cronyism while in office!"
-- First off, that statement is critically overblown! I, Jackson, wanted to create an administration of individuals that are able to function as a well oiled machine, embrace teamwork and better achieve our goals as a nation! Futhurmore, a system of political rotation actually prevents political corruption!|||He was a hero on abolishing the Central bank, nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, hence barred by it under the 10th amendment.
However, I don't see a defense on Trail of Tears. "Let [the Supreme Court] enforce its judgment." is not legally persuasive.
Still, that bank bit was a biggee.
The most difficult parts that I am struggling with are defending his expansion of powers of the executive branch and destroying the separation of powers and also his hesitation on the issue of states' rights.|||I suppose the first step would be to exhume the body...|||Lol, good luck with that one mate.
Try this though: write out all your negative ideas of Jackson and then place yourself in Jackson's and Davis' shoes. Try to envision their responses to the attacks on their policies as well as reasons as to why they choose to pursue those policies.
i.e.
"Jackson created a system of political cronyism while in office!"
-- First off, that statement is critically overblown! I, Jackson, wanted to create an administration of individuals that are able to function as a well oiled machine, embrace teamwork and better achieve our goals as a nation! Futhurmore, a system of political rotation actually prevents political corruption!|||He was a hero on abolishing the Central bank, nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, hence barred by it under the 10th amendment.
However, I don't see a defense on Trail of Tears. "Let [the Supreme Court] enforce its judgment." is not legally persuasive.
Still, that bank bit was a biggee.
Why would the founder of Wikileaks call for Obamas Impeachment?
Is there maybe some evidence in the doc's coming out soon for a reason to impeach Obama?|||Assange is an anarchist. He see the United States as an authoritarian conspiracy. Undermining the operation of the country is, in his mind, the method for changing the behavior of the conspiracy. President Obama just happens to be the President right now.
You seem to be playing into Assange's anarchical philosophy.|||The founder of Wikileaks and fugitive serial rapist Julian Assanage has called for Obama's impeachment because he hates America and wants to destroy it. Interesting you're taking his side.
BTW, George Soros conspiracy theories are so 5 years ago. He's someone Beck brings up when he doesn't have a lot of things to discuss on a particular day and needs to come up with 10 minutes of filler. You can see O'Reilly stifle a sigh and roll his eyes every time he has Beck on as a guest and Beck brings him up. You're just a little late to the party on this one.|||If only they could get hold of Obama birth certificate...it is amazing how these hacker can get in for these documents but we cannot get hold of his college papers and birth certificate...To bad...
Probably because he and others are realizing that he is just a puppet of Soros and he is the Osward of this generation...a pastie..|||Wikileaks has been given too much power. They're gossipmongers who are risking the world's international relations for personal power and glory.
Assange calls for it because he wants to get rid of all entities who have more power, or who he believes has more power, than he does.|||Soros, no, but Richard Mellon Scaife is reportedly behind the release of the WikiLeaks documents that will likely result in the arrest and incarceration of Dick Cheney.|||Or maybe Assange is just hates America and everything to do with it. Will you stand by America-haters as long as they hate Obama with you?|||Somehow, I get the sense that if Wikileaks had anything on Obama, they'd get whacked Chicago style.|||I wouldn't be shocked, but you can't trust this guy. He's got his own agenda, keep that in mind.|||For the same reasons idiots on YA have been calling for it since he took office.|||Maybe the birth certificate will come out next.|||because he deserves to be Impeached, nothing would make me happier if he was.|||have you ever heard of rupert murdoch?|||Maybe he recognizes the fact that Obama is not upholding the Constitution of the United States of America.
That is a Very Good reason to impeach him.|||I think Obama should be impeached because I don't like the color of his... his arguments.
- The Rightwing Conservative
You seem to be playing into Assange's anarchical philosophy.|||The founder of Wikileaks and fugitive serial rapist Julian Assanage has called for Obama's impeachment because he hates America and wants to destroy it. Interesting you're taking his side.
BTW, George Soros conspiracy theories are so 5 years ago. He's someone Beck brings up when he doesn't have a lot of things to discuss on a particular day and needs to come up with 10 minutes of filler. You can see O'Reilly stifle a sigh and roll his eyes every time he has Beck on as a guest and Beck brings him up. You're just a little late to the party on this one.|||If only they could get hold of Obama birth certificate...it is amazing how these hacker can get in for these documents but we cannot get hold of his college papers and birth certificate...To bad...
Probably because he and others are realizing that he is just a puppet of Soros and he is the Osward of this generation...a pastie..|||Wikileaks has been given too much power. They're gossipmongers who are risking the world's international relations for personal power and glory.
Assange calls for it because he wants to get rid of all entities who have more power, or who he believes has more power, than he does.|||Soros, no, but Richard Mellon Scaife is reportedly behind the release of the WikiLeaks documents that will likely result in the arrest and incarceration of Dick Cheney.|||Or maybe Assange is just hates America and everything to do with it. Will you stand by America-haters as long as they hate Obama with you?|||Somehow, I get the sense that if Wikileaks had anything on Obama, they'd get whacked Chicago style.|||I wouldn't be shocked, but you can't trust this guy. He's got his own agenda, keep that in mind.|||For the same reasons idiots on YA have been calling for it since he took office.|||Maybe the birth certificate will come out next.|||because he deserves to be Impeached, nothing would make me happier if he was.|||have you ever heard of rupert murdoch?|||Maybe he recognizes the fact that Obama is not upholding the Constitution of the United States of America.
That is a Very Good reason to impeach him.|||I think Obama should be impeached because I don't like the color of his... his arguments.
- The Rightwing Conservative
What happened to the impeachment of Dick Cheney?
Wasn't there a resolution to oust him out of office - House Resolution 333 (multiply by 2 and its Satan's number - o-oh!) and later House Resolution 799?|||Dick Cheney is satan - he skipped the draft like 5 times, doesnt that say everything...?|||This was dropped like a cold potato..part of the efficiency of a Democrat congress|||Didnt he shoot the people that were trying to push it forward.. I heard he is a good shot.||| Lets look forward to the trial!|||It was dropped. In order to impeach somebody, a crime must have been committed. No crime was ever committed. Sorry about your luck!!!!!!!!|||Because he never committed a crime that would qualify him for impeachment and the resolutions were introduced by the KooK for Publicity.!|||it never happened |||Who is Dick Cheney? OOHHH the guy who can get away with blowing somebodies face off :/
Yet anybody else would be spending the next 15 years in prison for attempted murder...|||Dennis Kucinich was a true American hero on this one.
He worked very hard to make this happen.
Unfortunately, all the cowards refused to vote with him.
Hopefully they'll be less afraid when Obama's in office and we'll actually be able to charge this guy for his criminal acts.
.|||Yeah. Another libby trying to pull one out of his butt.
How about wasting some more tax dollars just a couple of months before the presidency turns over.
I wouldn't worry that you personally did not get to see the waste spent on a bogus impeachment though...If nobama gets into office, he will out wasteful spend you $10 to $1.|||Can I also ask, What happened to Clinton AFTER he WAS impeached? Yes he WAS impeached.|||im guessing that if they aren't impeaching him they don't have enough evidence of any kind of crime and not being liked isn't against the law. unless they do have evidence of a crime and are going to press charges when he is out of the white house maybe impeachment doesn't carry enough punishment?
Yet anybody else would be spending the next 15 years in prison for attempted murder...|||Dennis Kucinich was a true American hero on this one.
He worked very hard to make this happen.
Unfortunately, all the cowards refused to vote with him.
Hopefully they'll be less afraid when Obama's in office and we'll actually be able to charge this guy for his criminal acts.
.|||Yeah. Another libby trying to pull one out of his butt.
How about wasting some more tax dollars just a couple of months before the presidency turns over.
I wouldn't worry that you personally did not get to see the waste spent on a bogus impeachment though...If nobama gets into office, he will out wasteful spend you $10 to $1.|||Can I also ask, What happened to Clinton AFTER he WAS impeached? Yes he WAS impeached.|||im guessing that if they aren't impeaching him they don't have enough evidence of any kind of crime and not being liked isn't against the law. unless they do have evidence of a crime and are going to press charges when he is out of the white house maybe impeachment doesn't carry enough punishment?
Thursday, November 24, 2011
What are the 4 american presidents who faced possible impeachment?
i already kno nixon and bill clinton. What are the others that could have possiblly been impeached? so, i need 2 more.|||Johnson, Clinton, Nixon and Bush junior.|||Andrew Johnson (actually impeached) and Lyndon B. Johnson|||Lyndon B Johnson escaped impeachment by one vote.
don't know about the other|||andrew johnson and Corwin, Edward S
don't know about the other|||andrew johnson and Corwin, Edward S
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)