How is it that "sharing a Cubana cigar" with a friend and then getting a lil lip service for it in the oval office can get you impeached but being solely responsible for the murders of more than 3,000 American soldiers and, what some say is more than 34,000 plus innocent Iraqi's doesn't? I thought Clinton's sexual activities and his impeachment were already solved.
Clinton was not impeached for cigar humping Monica and receiving oral sex from her. He was impeached because he lied to the Grand Jury. It does not matter what the lie was about. It is against the law to lie to the courts.
Bush has not committed any crimes. your wealth of ignorance astounds me Nope, not wondering.
Study more history.
That's my only advice. because your question is simple liberal politcal rhetoric and really has no basis. Almost everyone in the House and Senate also voted to goto war... HE WASN'T SOLELY RESPONSIBLE MAYBE THESE PEOPLE SHOULD ALSO BE BROUGHT UP ON CHARGES OF HIGH TREASON.
One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force 鈥?if necessary 鈥?to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003. What country are you talking about? I know there is no war criminal here in the US. Oh wait, are you just another liberal trying to sound like you have a brain? ............you failed..... You don't understand, Libby. Clinton wasn't impeached for his affair. He was impeached for lying to a grand jury. He was also disbarred for lying to a grand jury as well. It was the terrorists that murdered 3,000 innocent Americans on 911. It was Saddam that killed 100's of 1000's of his own people. President Bush is doing his job to protect America. He is our troop's Commander In Chief, and it's their job to go when, and where called. They VOLUNTEERED for the job, and know full well what being in the military is about. First, he's not a war criminal.
Second, the liberal idiots now in charge of Congress will try and impeach him. They can't help themselves because they hate Bush so much. They'll find any excuse.
And that will be the end of the Democrat control of Congress. American's will be so sickened by this, that it will force the Democrat party out of power for another decade, as Americans learn they just can't trust them with important stuff, like National Security. When will you guys get it? This has been explained ad nauseum. President Bush has not committed an impeachable offense, otherwise known as a crime. Clinton, on the other hand, swore an oath to tell the truth, and then lied, to Congress, to a Grand Jury and to the American People. Perjury is a crime and that's what lead to his impeachment. If it had not been for some very generous people in the Senate, he'd have been convicted and removed from office. Is it that difficult to understand?
Clinton is an admitted liar. On top of that, he's a philanderer and a womanizer. How can you even compare the two? Trust me on this one if there were grounds for impeachment the proceedings would be underway. Bush is the most hated president (by the media and the other party) that I can remember and if they had a case they would have thrown him out. You can't impeach a president because you just don't like him. Why do you waste your time posting ignorant questions like this? Read your Constitution and learn that Congress alone has the right to declare war, not the President. Maybe instead of wasting your time whining about the government, you can enrich yourself by studying it! Nixon was right he saw this coming. People in this country who give aid and comfort to the Enemy than blame the President for going after them. Yes surveillance is in order. A crime has to be committed before any charges can be sought
that bloated tub of crap bill clinton lied to a federal grand jury that is why he was impeached
you create crimes for George and ignore the true crimes of bill Never approach a bull from the front, a horse from the rear, or a fool from any direction.
You are showing your true colors. You can do all the talking but have no facts or proof to back it up. I will debate you if you have something smart to say. lWell, adultery is illegal in every state of the Union. It also represents a weakness and flaw in character not good for the Office of the President. Then, add to that the charge of Perjury.
An executive officer, leading American Forces has to keep on his conscience that his orders will lead to the deaths of his soldiers. His soldiers also will follow his orders, knowing it will cost their lives, knowing that if authorized by the US Senate (As John Kerry, Joseph Biden, and several others who have been in office skimming the register for far longer than the terms of Cinton and W combined, did; and, might I add that these Senators come from BOTH sides of the aisles. The Democrats did not as a solid block say "No. We do not want to go to war." They voted for this war as well.), that their deaths are by the will of the people they serve. If you were too caught up in your anger over 9/11 to realize that people die in war, then you should be ashamed of yourself, even more so than the President for making the order, after our representatives said he should do so. You think you're smart, but you really know very little.
Have you ever heard of lying under oath?
Both the House and the Senate voted for the war in Iraq.
Iraqi's have killed 99% of the civilians dead in Iraq. President George W. Bush IS NOT A WAR CRIMINAL and HAS NOT COMMITTED ANY WAR CRIMES NOR COMMITTED ANY IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES!!!!!!! Hello, is there anyone home. Don't think so. I can take a fair wager that you have never served in the military! Am I right? If I knew where you lived I'd send you a quarter so you could go buy a clue! Where have you been since 9/11? You must be a Dem. (jacka--) Well let me think
He isn't a war criminal that's why
Too much Kool-aid for you
Try the real Jim Jones Kool-aid it is just right for you
Look it up he plays by his own rules the official number of dead Iraqis is 400,000+ , anyway the reason he is not being impeached is because he holds more power then billy boy Yes!!! I think you have to look at all the ignorant people who voted for him and that will tell you why he continues to get away with killing our young men. I think he should go hang out in Iraq so he can get a first-hand look at his handiwork. Because the Democrats are not traditionally vengeful idiots. Whether that's good or bad, I'm not quite sure. I can't believe the answers, from the brain dead Republicans, to your question. I would imagine your phone will be bugged from hear on though. In answer to your question .PATIENCE! |
