Nixon Was Bad. These Guys Are Worse.


By George McGovern
Sunday, January 6, 2008 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/04/AR2008010404308_pf.html)



As we enter the eighth year of the Bush-Cheney administration, I have belatedly and painfully concluded that the only honorable course for me is to urge the impeachment of the president and the vice president.
After the 1972 presidential election, I stood clear of calls to impeach President Richard M. Nixon for his misconduct during the campaign. I thought that my joining the impeachment effort would be seen as an expression of personal vengeance toward the president who had defeated me.
Today I have made a different choice.
Of course, there seems to be little bipartisan support for impeachment. The political scene is marked by narrow and sometimes superficial partisanship, especially among Republicans, and a lack of courage and statesmanship on the part of too many Democratic politicians. So the chances of a bipartisan impeachment and conviction are not promising.

But what are the facts?
Bush and Cheney are clearly guilty of numerous impeachable offenses. They have repeatedly violated the Constitution. They have transgressed national and international law. They have lied to the American people time after time. Their conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced our beloved country to a historic low in the eyes of people around the world. These are truly "high crimes and misdemeanors," to use the constitutional standard.

***


A prolific author, McGovern has lectured at more than 1,000 colleges and universities around the world. He has also received many honorary degrees and distinguished awards, including the Presidential Medal of Freedom , the United States' highest civilian honor, which was bestowed upon him by President Bill Clinton on August 9, 2000.

A war hero, 22-year U.S. Congressman and 1972 Democratic presidential nominee, George McGovern will long be remembered for his courage in speaking out against U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, his friendship and respect for the common man, and his work on behalf of American farmers and hungry children throughout the world.

McGoven...eh ?
Like the guy has endured A$$klown status ENOUGH the last 30+
years.Even if Michael Vick swore off Dog-fightin,it would
pale in comparison to what this McGovern,worthless POL has
to say.Like even Historically,a McGovern relative wood have to
be drunk out of their gord to pay the slighest heed to what
a Libby A$$klown,form Knowhereville has to proffer.

And here I was thinking es was going to share his thoughts. :(

But what are the facts?
Bush and Cheney are clearly guilty of numerous impeachable offenses. They have repeatedly violated the Constitution. They have transgressed national and international law. They have lied to the American people time after time. Their conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced our beloved country to a historic low in the eyes of people around the world. These are truly "high crimes and misdemeanors," to use the constitutional standard.
I absolutely agree. Our country was built upon the Constitution and we should NOT stand for the erosion of the rights it gives us.

he IS going.. and soon.. so don't worry.

Bush needs to do more than just go... he needs to be brought in front of a war crimes tribunal.

he IS going.. and soon.. so don't worry.
The point of an impeachment, at this point, would not be just to get him out. It would be pretty idiotic to think so.

an impeachment would be just a smear campaign... if you have the smoking gun, impeach the son of a bitch.. but obviously it ain't there... no matter how much FT and dharma want it.

an impeachment would be just a smear campaign... if you have the smoking gun, impeach the son of a bitch.. but obviously it ain't there... no matter how much FT and dharma want it.

It's there alright...it is the immense stinking elephant in the room......

.....it's just that none of the ConservaFascists in Congress has the goddamned guts to be the one to point it out.

The *Old Boy* network and all of that.

___________________________

""What we have in this country is one political Party with two wings. The pro-corporate, pro-war Party that is very lackadaisical about labor and the environment; ----------the Democrats.

And then there's the extremely pro-corporate, pro-war, anti-labor, anti-environmentalist Party; the Republicans.""

If an independent prosecutor was warranted in a 30-year-old real estate deal called Whitewater, then it is certainly appropriate for Iraq-scam. Preferably one with unlimited subpoena power, unlimited budget, unlimited areas of inquiry, and no specific deadline. There is ample precedent for this - as we all know. That'll get you your smoking gun in a couple of weeks if not sooner Decka, and a bunch of other juicy tidbits as well. It is not relevant that Bush is a lame duck and will be fading into obscurity soon. Justice should be served.

If an independent prosecutor was warranted in a 30-year-old real estate deal called Whitewater, then it is certainly appropriate for Iraq-scam. Preferably one with unlimited subpoena power, unlimited budget, unlimited areas of inquiry, and no specific deadline. There is ample precedent for this - as we all know. That'll get you your smoking gun in a couple of weeks if not sooner Decka, and a bunch of other juicy tidbits as well. It is not relevant that Bush is a lame duck and will be fading into obscurity soon. Justice should be served.
You're absolutely right.

an impeachment would be just a smear campaign... if you have the smoking gun, impeach the son of a bitch.. but obviously it ain't there... no matter how much FT and dharma want it.

i agree there is no smoking gun,or there would of been at least small steps taken for this process to start... there is no smoking gun,,,,,There is no stained dress.... there is no stank cigar....

I think Bush should go because it is nearing the end of his term.

There is more than one smoking gun to choose from with this Bush Regime.

That is why I am willing to forgo impeachment for a War Crimes tribunal.

You're absolutely right.


Actually he is absolutely wrong as are the rest calling for Bush's impeachment, or the idiotic call by Dharmabum for his being tried as a war criminal.

Bush did not simply decide to go to war in Iraq no matter what the short memoried posters here claim. We went to war in Iraq because the United States, along with most of the world believed that Iraq had stockpiled weapons of mass destruction. The intelligence agencies of Great Britain, Germany and most of the other countries of Europe believed as did the United States. Congress also believed the intelligence communities of those countries. The invasion of Iraq was backed by a majority of both houses including a majority of Democrats.

Yes, the war didn't turn out the way we would have hoped but that is not an impeachable offense and it definetely is not a war crime.

Many posters are frustrated and want something to be done and they see the President as the focus of their anger and frustration. Other posters, like Dharmabum are just so filled with hatred of the President and all things that aren't ultra-liberal that they act like asses, calling for war crimes trials.

Be frustrated. Be angry. Dislike the President. Don't allow your frustration and anger cause you to propose dumb solutions or punishments. The present situation is nothing like Whitewater despite what fluffernutter mistakenly says. Whitewater was a clear case of criminal behavior that should have been punished and would have been had the Democrats been more honest and less partisan. The present situation is about failed expectations and poor decisions by those running the war in Iraq.

We went to war in Iraq because the United States, along with most of the world believed that Iraq had stockpiled weapons of mass destruction.

If this were actually true, so many of our allies wouldn't have said "Uh... no thanks" to Bush's offer to join the mad rush to "git the sumbitch who said bad thangs about mah daddy!" What planet do you come from, Frogger, where "most of the world" equals the US, the UK, Australia, Denmark, and Poland?

I'm thinking the 36 million people around the world who protested the whole stupid lie from the outset might have something to say about your assertions, too. I know I wasn't fooled...

If this were actually true, so many of our allies wouldn't have said "Uh... no thanks" to Bush's offer to join the mad rush to "git the sumbitch who said bad thangs about mah daddy!" What planet do you come from, Frogger, where "most of the world" equals the US, the UK, Australia, Denmark, and Poland?

I'm thinking the 36 million people around the world who protested the whole stupid lie from the outset might have something to say about your assertions, too. I know I wasn't fooled...

I hate to be the one to tell you that you just how wrong you are Frannie but, you are simply out and out wrong. You are also a liar. By using quotation marks you are saying that GWB actually said those words. You know that he didn't so that makes you a liar.

I come from planet Earth, not planet Hate Bush where you, FT and Dharmabum come from.

Yes, as a matter of fact the U.S., U.K. Australia, Denmark, Poland and Germany do make up the majority of the world with sophisticated intelligence gathering agencies that are not part of the leftist bloc. Maybe you would have prefered that the U.S. listen to Libya, Syria, and Russia.

The thirty six million who protested, (I question your numbers) make up only a miniscule part of the world population. Hell, that is only about an eighth of the population of the United States.

You are free to hate GWB but don't go around making up lies in order to get your point across.

sophisticated intelligence gathering agencies


Guess we weren't so "sophisticated" after all. (pssst..no wmds..shhhhh)

You are also a liar. By using quotation marks you are saying that GWB actually said those words. You know that he didn't so that makes you a liar.
Now, now, Frogger... Such a silly, pedantic argument. You know very well that shes was making mocking satire, not claiming that GWB literally said those things.

If an independent prosecutor was warranted in a 30-year-old real estate deal called Whitewater, then it is certainly appropriate for Iraq-scam. Preferably one with unlimited subpoena power, unlimited budget, unlimited areas of inquiry, and no specific deadline. There is ample precedent for this - as we all know. That'll get you your smoking gun in a couple of weeks if not sooner Decka, and a bunch of other juicy tidbits as well. It is not relevant that Bush is a lame duck and will be fading into obscurity soon. Justice should be served.

Given the 9/11 commission's report and the robb/silberman report, among others, which found nothing useful or relevant to your arguement what makes you think that they would find anything different?

Well for one thing the 9/11 commission's report is a sham according to many people!

But saddly for the lefties, not among the people who count but only among the left wing crazies.

The thirty six million who protested, (I question your numbers) make up only a miniscule part of the world population. Hell, that is only about an eighth of the population of the United States.

There was massive opposition to Bush's invasion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_Iraq_War)of Iraq around the world, Frogger. Millions have participated in protests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War)against it.

According to the French academic Dominique Reynié, between January 3 and April 12, 2003, 36 million people across the globe took part in almost 3,000 protests against the Iraq war.

Yes, as a matter of fact the U.S., U.K. Australia, Denmark, Poland and Germany do make up the majority of the world with sophisticated intelligence gathering agencies that are not part of the leftist bloc.

Not sure where you got Germany, Froggiepoo, but they weren't duped, either.

The invasion of Iraq (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq)was opposed by some traditional U.S. allies, including France and Germany. Their leaders argued there was no real evidence of WMD and that a war in Iraq was not justified in the context of UNMOVIC's February 12, 2003 report.

Well for one thing the 9/11 commission's report is a sham according to many people!

Many? Many? Many people also beleive the world is flat and that horoscopes are useful.:rolleyes:

Many people also beleive the world is flat and that horoscopes are useful.

The same ones, no doubt, who do not see why B*sh and his co-conspirators need to be taken to the World Court and tried for war crimes and for crimes against humanity.

Many? Many? Many people also beleive the world is flat and that horoscopes are useful.:rolleyes:
Yeah, and many people also believe Jesus Christ was the son of God. :thumbs:

See how that doesn't prove anything at all? Try an argument that actually says something next time.

If this were actually true, so many of our allies wouldn't have said "Uh... no thanks" to Bush's offer to join the mad rush to "git the sumbitch who said bad thangs about mah daddy!" What planet do you come from, Frogger, where "most of the world" equals the US, the UK, Australia, Denmark, and Poland?
I'm thinking the 36 million people around the world who protested the whole stupid lie from the outset might have something to say about your assertions, too. I know I wasn't fooled...
The frogs been in the the kool-aide waaaay too long...
Must be watching Fox for day to day info..:@@:
And about as delusional as Lieberman or McCain...
See what happens to their minds after they kiss Bush..:banana:
imo
jim's op/ed (http://opinionsandreasons.blogspot.com/)

Yeah, and many people also believe Jesus Christ was the son of God. :thumbs:

See how that doesn't prove anything at all? Try an argument that actually says something next time.

When you give a me position to argue against (as opposed to the statement that many are opposed to the report without stating the basis for their opposition) you'll get one.:rolleyes:

When you give a me position to argue against (as opposed to the statement that many are opposed to the report without stating the basis for their opposition) you'll get one.:rolleyes:
I never said that many people are opposed to the report. How do you even know I believe that? It's not my responsibility to give you a better argument; I was just pointing out that your argument is invalid.

I never said that many people are opposed to the report. How do you even know I believe that? It's not my responsibility to give you a better argument; I was just pointing out that your argument is invalid.

I didn't make an arguement sweetheart. my post illustrated out how inane afinertouch's post was. If you have a beef take it up with aft or better yet ask her to come up with a more rational response to the point made.

When you give a me position to argue against (as opposed to the statement that many are opposed to the report without stating the basis for their opposition) you'll get one.



Eight U.S. State Department Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 (http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_080104_eight_u_s__state_dep.htm)


Official Account of 9/11: “Flawed”, “Absurd”, “Totally Inadequate”, “a Cover-up”

January 5, 2008 – Eight U.S. State Department veterans have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation.

“We want truthful answers" to questions such as:

1. Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?

2. Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?

3. Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?

4. Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?

5. Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?”

These questions and many others still remain unanswered three years after the petition was submitted and six years after the terrible events of 9/11. As the statements of these eight U.S. State Department veterans show, the need for a new thorough and independent investigation of 9/11 is not a matter of partisan politics, nor the demand of irresponsible, deranged, or disloyal Americans. It is instead a matter of the utmost importance for America’s security and the future of the entire world.

Statements questioning the official account of 9/11 and calls for a new investigation by more than 800 credible individuals can be found at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now waldo; I wait with bated breath for the trotting out of your (and the rest of the ConservaZombies') frenzied denials, head-in-the-sand obfuscations and endless goddamned excuses.

And how do the answers to those questions challenge the official version of 9/11?

There is more than one smoking gun to choose from with this Bush Regime.

That is why I am willing to forgo impeachment for a War Crimes tribunal.

what are they?

And how do the answers to those questions challenge the official version of 9/11?

For the most part, they directly contradict them.

How would answering why the SS didn't immediately move to protect bush on news that a plane had hit the WTC contradict anything in the 9/11 report?:rolleyes:

How would firing or not firing someone contradict anything in the 9/11 report?:rolleyes:

And on and on it would go.

How would answering why the SS didn't immediately move to protect bush on news that a plane had hit the WTC contradict anything in the 9/11 report?:rolleyes:

How would firing or not firing someone contradict anything in the 9/11 report?:rolleyes:

And on and on it would go.
In a nutshell. The penny ante Woodward and Bernsteins around here slay me.

How would answering why the SS didn't immediately move to protect bush on news that a plane had hit the WTC contradict anything in the 9/11 report?:rolleyes:

If they had to supply an answer to why the SS didn't move to protect the Idiot Son, it might shed light on the incredible number of incongruous and unbelievable occurrences that happened that day, the thing with B*sh staying in the grade school being but one among hundreds.

How would firing or not firing someone contradict anything in the 9/11 report? :rolleyes:

That's just it.

Since the 9/11 commission did not do any sort of competent job at examining the evidence, and since it completely whitewashed the entire event and refused to take a critical look at the myriad inconsistencies of what happened that day compared to the "official story" {read; preposterous fairy tale}, no one WAS fired. From the highest office in the land to the lowest factotum in the National Security chain, people failed to carry out their job of protecting the country, and heads should have rolled by the dozens.

Your continual excuses and head-in-the-sand willful blindness on this is just pathetic. You adore all-things-Conservative, so anything that exposes these far-Right crooks for what they are, you simply ignore or obfuscate away.

If they had to supply an answer to why the SS didn't move to protect the Idiot Son, it might shed light on the incredible number of incongruous and unbelievable occurrences that happened that day, the thing with B*sh staying in the grade school being but one among hundreds.



That's just it.

Since the 9/11 commission did not do any sort of competent job at examining the evidence, and since it completely whitewashed the entire event and refused to take a critical look at the myriad inconsistencies of what happened that day compared to the "official story" {read; preposterous fairy tale}, no one WAS fired. From the highest office in the land to the lowest factotum in the National Security chain, people failed to carry out their job of protecting the country, and heads should have rolled by the dozens.

Your continual excuses and head-in-the-sand willful blindness on this is just pathetic. You adore all-things-Conservative, so anything that exposes these far-Right crooks for what they are, you simply ignore or obfuscate away.


Another ct'er. Any aliens in your ct? Or just illuminati, bilderbergs, and/or freemason?

....that happened that day, the thing with B*sh staying in the grade school being but one among hundreds.
WTF did you expect him to do....throw a cape on and stop the terrorists himself? I never understood this "accusation".

WTF did you expect him to do....throw a cape on and stop the terrorists himself?
Goddamn, you're funny, Prae! :D

Is there any lessons to be learned as regards protecting the United States Constitution from future Presidencies.

Although the Judiciary are supposedly independent and interpret the Constitution, it dosent seem to work properly at present.

Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented immigrant" is like calling a drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist".

The dealer is an entrepreneur, marketing recreational substances.

The dealer is an entrepreneur, marketing recreational substances.
True. At least I can respect that.

Goddamn, you're funny, Prae! :D
Why, thank you kindly, Naps. :)

Would that make Bush-the caped crook aider :D

Is there any lessons to be learned as regards protecting the United States Constitution from future Presidencies.

Yeah.

Never install a smirking Conservafascist scion with a 2 digit I.Q.

Originally Posted by Freethinker
....that happened that day, the thing with B*sh staying in the grade school being but one among hundreds.

WTF did you expect him to do.....

I'd expect him to be escorted out of and away from the school by the Secret Service with all possible haste.

And I'd expect him to possibly be just the tiniest bit curious --given that immediately prior to that day he'd been receiving multiple warnings of terrorists intending to attack this country with hijacked planes-- as to why a plane had crashed into the most prominent building in the nation. Instead, he continued to sit there with a moronic grin plastered to his face, reading a children's book as the worst terrorist attack in US history was unfolding.

Only later did the coward hightail it far away to a heavily fortified military base so that he could slink deep down into a secure concrete bunker.

only ft could admonish the ss for not immediately protecting the prez and when they do move to protect him accuse him of running away. Talk about a fucking wanker.