What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why weren't both Bushes impeached and/or tried for war crimes?

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
60,317
Reaction score
18,273
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
Indicting GWB for war crimes would establish a dangerous – some would say to National security – precedent by which future presidents might be prosecuted – including the current occupant of the WH.
 
OP
Lakhota

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
93,246
Reaction score
13,618
Points
2,220
Location
Native America
Last edited:

GWV5903

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
4,453
Reaction score
1,198
Points
245
Location
Austin, Texas

eflatminor

Classical Liberal
Joined
May 24, 2011
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
1,668
Points
245
I think it would have been...awkward...for President Obama to pursue war crimes against President Bush given that Obama is in clear violation of the Constitution by waging wars without the approval of Congress. Obama isn't going to get anywhere near the idea of prosecuting war crimes.
 

Wicked Jester

Libsmackin'chef
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
11,924
Reaction score
1,890
Points
153
Location
So. Cal, Malibu!
Indicting GWB for war crimes would establish a dangerous – some would say to National security – precedent by which future presidents might be prosecuted – including the current occupant of the WH.

Ron Paul even entered evidence of Bush Sr. war crimes into the Congressional Record.

CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL: Classified Cable Proves US Ok’d Saddam’s Kuwait Invasion
Ron Paul's a douchebag.........And a nutty lil' douchebag at that.

Nice try at nailin' JELLO to the wall, dumbass.:cuckoo:
 

editec

Mr. Forgot-it-All
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
41,421
Reaction score
5,662
Points
48
Location
Maine
Why weren't both Bushes impeached and/or tried for war crimes?
Because impeachment is a political/administrative process, and not (exactly) the same as a legal process.

Politics, at least in the cases involving a POTUS, precedes the law.

I cannot imagine what Bush I or II would be impeached for, anyway.

While one can object to their wars, one cannot make a credible case that what they did rose to the level of a war crime.

Now I can imagine any POTUS being impeached, of course.

After the Clinton impeachment it is obvious that "high crimes and misdemeanors" basically means nothing more than "We have the political power to impeach, we don't like this POTUS, and we're going to do it"
 
Last edited:

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,171
Reaction score
16,076
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Obama's biggest failure was and is letting Bush Jr. and Cheney off the hook for their war crimes and various crimes against humanity. Obama now owns their crimes.
But again, you'll still vote for Obama and support him to the hilt.

Let's get real. If Obama turned over Bush and Cheney to the Hague, there'd be an angry mob running him out of the White House. We're Americans, we don't give a fuck what the effete EuroTrash thinks. God help us if we ever do.

And on a practical matter, if Obama went after Bush in a legal manner, there'd be nothing keeping Perry from going after him after he gets run out of office next year.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,171
Reaction score
16,076
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Why weren't both Bushes impeached and/or tried for war crimes?
Because impeachment is a political/administrative process, and not (exactly) the same as a legal process.

Politics, at least in the cases involving a POTUS, precedes the law.

I cannot imagine what Bush I or II would be impeached for, anyway.

While one can object to their wars, one cannot make a credible case that what they did rose to the level of a war crime.

Now I can imagine any POTUS being impeached, of course.

After the Clinton impeachment it is obvious that "high crimes and misdemeanors" basically means nothing more than "We have the political power to impeach, we don't like this POTUS, and we're going to do it"

There's a major difference.

Whatever you think about Bush and Cheney's conduct of the war, the fact it, they got congressional approval for it. Congress could have stopped them at any time. But when 70% wanted some kind of horrific revenge, none of them had the guts to do that. Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, and the rest of them all signed on to going after Saddam, building Gitmo, and so on.

On the other hand, Clinton took it upon himself to lie in court, and use the power of his office to hide a sleazy personal affair that most politicians would have resigned over. In short, his conduct was illegal and it was all on him.
 
OP
Lakhota

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
93,246
Reaction score
13,618
Points
2,220
Location
Native America
Whatever you think about Bush and Cheney's conduct of the war, the fact it, they got congressional approval for it.

BULLSHIT - they LIED to Congress and the world.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,171
Reaction score
16,076
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Indicting GWB for war crimes would establish a dangerous – some would say to National security – precedent by which future presidents might be prosecuted – including the current occupant of the WH.

Ron Paul even entered evidence of Bush Sr. war crimes into the Congressional Record.

CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL: Classified Cable Proves US Ok’d Saddam’s Kuwait Invasion

You're link leads nowhere.

Frankly, I've always considered the notion of a war crime to be silly.

"War Crimes Trials" are what the winners do to the losers. I know that's cynical, but that's the truth. Winners don't get tried, just the defeated.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,171
Reaction score
16,076
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Whatever you think about Bush and Cheney's conduct of the war, the fact it, they got congressional approval for it.

BULLSHIT - they LIED to Congress and the world.

You mean Saddam Hussein was really a sweet grandfather who watched kids flying kites, just like Michael Moore said? He wasn't a madman who killed two million people?

Get real. Democrats were calling for Saddam's head before Bush even got there, and they were happy to sign on when Bush proposed doing just that.

There was no Democrats who felt like going to the mat for Saddam. No Democrat who had higher ambitions or was in a tough race said, "I think this war is wrong, and I'm going to risk my office and oppose this war." It didn't happen. The only ones who voted against the war where people in safe districts. And Democrats didn't vote out one of their own for supporting the war. Not even Joe Liebermann, who apparently ignored the memo about Saddam being a clubbed baby seal.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,171
Reaction score
16,076
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL: Classified Cable Proves US Ok’d Saddam’s Kuwait Invasion

CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL: Classified Cable Proves US Ok

Oh, the old "April Glaspee" conspiracy. I think Ross Perot said this in 1992, and it's usually a train to crazy town.

The thing is, we didn't have a formal alliance with Kuwait at that time, and we didn't have a side in that fight,w hich was initially over control of just the Rumelia oil fields.
 

Sallow

The Big Bad Wolf.
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
56,532
Reaction score
6,243
Points
1,840
Location
New York City
Why weren't both Bushes impeached and/or tried for war crimes?
Because impeachment is a political/administrative process, and not (exactly) the same as a legal process.

Politics, at least in the cases involving a POTUS, precedes the law.

I cannot imagine what Bush I or II would be impeached for, anyway.

While one can object to their wars, one cannot make a credible case that what they did rose to the level of a war crime.

Now I can imagine any POTUS being impeached, of course.

After the Clinton impeachment it is obvious that "high crimes and misdemeanors" basically means nothing more than "We have the political power to impeach, we don't like this POTUS, and we're going to do it"

There's a major difference.

Whatever you think about Bush and Cheney's conduct of the war, the fact it, they got congressional approval for it. Congress could have stopped them at any time. But when 70% wanted some kind of horrific revenge, none of them had the guts to do that. Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, and the rest of them all signed on to going after Saddam, building Gitmo, and so on.

On the other hand, Clinton took it upon himself to lie in court, and use the power of his office to hide a sleazy personal affair that most politicians would have resigned over. In short, his conduct was illegal and it was all on him.

Oh bullshit.

Conservatives have no problem melting things down when it suits them. No Republican president has ever been impeached.

Democratic Presidents..however..have been impeached. Twice. And their authority is constantly questioned. Clinton and now Obama are prime examples of that.

It's de facto voter nullification.
 

Sallow

The Big Bad Wolf.
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
56,532
Reaction score
6,243
Points
1,840
Location
New York City
CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL: Classified Cable Proves US Ok’d Saddam’s Kuwait Invasion

CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL: Classified Cable Proves US Ok

Oh, the old "April Glaspee" conspiracy. I think Ross Perot said this in 1992, and it's usually a train to crazy town.

The thing is, we didn't have a formal alliance with Kuwait at that time, and we didn't have a side in that fight,w hich was initially over control of just the Rumelia oil fields.

April Glaspie is on record saying exactly what she said to Saddam Hussien when he made it clear Iraq was going to invade Kuwait. In fact, later she stated that she thought the Iraqis were going to take a port town..and not the whole country.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
134,171
Reaction score
16,076
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Oh bullshit.

Conservatives have no problem melting things down when it suits them. No Republican president has ever been impeached.

Democratic Presidents..however..have been impeached. Twice. And their authority is constantly questioned. Clinton and now Obama are prime examples of that.

It's de facto voter nullification.

Nixon resigned rather than be impeached, because his OWN PARTY could no longer support him.

Democrats supported Clinton, despite the fact he was caught red handed committing perjury, obstructing justice and abusing his power.

Also, it's kind of a stretch to call Andrew Johnson a "Democrat". He ran on the Republican ticket in 1864.


I sincerely WISH we could impeach Obama. His conduct of the economy is treasonous.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$260.01
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top