Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Be cautious about impeaching Bush (GREELEY ALERT)
Chicago Sun-Times ^ | February 16, 2007 | ANDREW GREELEY

Posted on 02/16/2007 5:27:21 PM PST by Chi-townChief

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 next last
To: we rule the world

With less than 2 years left, why go through the process now? I seriuosly doubt they will risk it, as much as they'd love to and the left is eager for it.


21 posted on 02/16/2007 5:50:40 PM PST by BonnieJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: malia

You missed the two most important ones:

"The British and the American people loudly declared their support for their leaders decision to attack Iraq. It is the duty of Muslims to confront, fight, and kill them."
Osama bin Laden, December 26, 1998

"Oh sons of Arabs and the Arab Gulf, rebel against the foreigner . . . Take revenge for your dignity, holy places, security, interests, and exalted values."
Saddam Hussein, January 5, 1999

In the bad old day, that was quaintly known as a declaration or war. Clinton, of course, responded by attacking Yugoslavia.


22 posted on 02/16/2007 5:51:55 PM PST by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
"A high crime and misdemeanor can be anything that a majority of the House of Representatives says is a high crime or a misdemeanor..."

No honest person would claim that perjury by the defendant in a workplace sexual harassment lawsuit doesn't qualify.

23 posted on 02/16/2007 5:52:23 PM PST by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soupcon
Aren't Soros and/or certain groups he supports already busy with the background work for impeachment? There is quite a bit of chatter about it in the San Francisco and New York areas.
24 posted on 02/16/2007 5:56:20 PM PST by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
"Such a move would go nowhere and only expend capital."

I've a feeling it would also fatally cripple the WOT and the market.

And, I've got a feeling that such would be precisely what the dems want.

Don't look for this stuff to go away.

25 posted on 02/16/2007 5:58:35 PM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
The House voted for impeachment because, as Newt Gingrich said, ''We can do it.''

Come on. As I recall Newt had resigned as Speaker before Clinton was impeached. Had Newt remained there would probably have been no impeachment.

26 posted on 02/16/2007 5:59:16 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HighWheeler

Ah yea there is that.

I was just having visions of a political coup by removing President Bush and Vice President Cheney at the same time.


27 posted on 02/16/2007 6:00:24 PM PST by Domandred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief

President Cheney?

Has a nice ring to it.

VP Rumsfeld. ;-)


28 posted on 02/16/2007 6:01:09 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
I am not advocating the deposing of the president by congressional vote.

Of course that is exactly what he is advocating. This article is utterly worthless. But thank you for posting it, because it is important to continue to keep track of what the radical left is thinking.

29 posted on 02/16/2007 6:01:15 PM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HighWheeler
A new veep would be selected within moments after Cheney became Prez.

No, nominated. I doubt that if Cheney were to be removed, the houses would concur with his choice.

Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

But, Pelosi will never have to worry about becoming president.

30 posted on 02/16/2007 6:01:20 PM PST by AndrewC (Duckpond, LLD, JSD (all honorary))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief

Andrew Greely is scum. HHC's husband


31 posted on 02/16/2007 6:02:38 PM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Right. Clinton broke the law and others have been imprisoned for the same thing. Nowhere in that stupid article is it stated that Clinton broke the law and lied about it and Bush didn't.


32 posted on 02/16/2007 6:06:39 PM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief

I strongly urge the Democrats to throw caution to the wind and IMPEACH THAT SOB NOW!!!! (for the children of course)


33 posted on 02/16/2007 6:06:40 PM PST by edsheppa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Apercu
They are sewing the seeds of a civil war within their own country for the sake of retribution over the Clinton impeachment...

Since WE have the guns, BRING IT ON! < /sarc >

34 posted on 02/16/2007 6:22:01 PM PST by JimRed ("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help m)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: HighWheeler
The Constitution grants to the House the power to impeach "The President, the Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States."

I see no particular reason why the President and VP could not be constitutionally impeached and removed simultaneously, perhaps in a single legislative act.

In any case, if Bush were impeached and removed from office, whoever he nominated to be the new VP would not actually be VP until approved by majority vote of both houses of Congress, as Ford was. So the House of Reps and Senate could just proceed to impeach and remove from office President Cheney, who would then be replaced by formerly Speaker, now President, Pelosi, next in the line of succession.

Whether this is politically feasible is another question entirely.

35 posted on 02/16/2007 6:23:24 PM PST by Sherman Logan (Recognition of one's ignorance is the beginning of wisdom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief

First time I read Mr. Greeley. It was like watching a train wreck--horrible, but I couldn't stop reading. I lost track of the counterfactuals after the first paragraph. Has he not heard that Pres. Clinton was guilty of perjury? Doesn't he know that is a felony? Does he really think we want a felon as President? The popularity of the president should not be a factor in the Senate trial--only the facts of the case.

But Ann Coulter does this better in "High Crimes and Misdemeanors".


36 posted on 02/16/2007 6:24:08 PM PST by Forgiven_Sinner (Here's an experiment for God's existence: Ask Him to contact you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner
The popularity of the president should not be a factor in the Senate trial--only the facts of the case.

Nonsense. An impeachment trial is by definition a political act, not a legal proceeding.

37 posted on 02/16/2007 6:26:10 PM PST by Sherman Logan (Recognition of one's ignorance is the beginning of wisdom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Yo, Andy! Heads up! I thought I saw an 11 year old boy walk by!


38 posted on 02/16/2007 6:28:00 PM PST by zook (America going insane - "Do you read Sutter Caine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

"Thus, a man can be indicted (impeached) for an alleged perjury in a civil trial over private sexual behavior (usually meriting only a civil punishment), and he could be deposed if two-thirds of the Senate accepted the evidence."

If there was nothing wrong with perjury, perhaps Greely can tell us why Scooter Libby is on trial.


39 posted on 02/16/2007 6:39:13 PM PST by EQAndyBuzz (The Clintons: A Malignant Malfeasance of the Most Morbid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Chi-townChief
though after the trivialization of the process by Gingrich it might be less shocking

Ironic. BJ's from barely legal interns in the oval office, perjury, sale of missile technology for Chinese money, renting out the Lincoln Bedroom; none of these "trivialized" the office of the President, did they?

These people could rationalize pedophilia if it was committed by a office holding Democrat. Talk about selling one's soul.

40 posted on 02/16/2007 6:49:13 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s......you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson