Impeach Obama "movement" is already underway

I have read the arguments for and against and think their is a compelling reason many may have on both sides of this argument, why either side may not have room to talk let alone judge

www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 9-11-2008 by MAINTAL]

Originally posted by RRconservative
reply to post by Jenna

 

Was it assanine for the Impeach Bush crowd to start planning for Bush's Impeachment before he took office?

Just wanted to make sure we are on the same page.

You keep coming back with the "HE STARTED IT!" retort. As we learned in Kindergarten, that is hardly a mature stance, reason or justification for anything.

The question is... is it not asinine to attempt to impeach a president elect even before inauguration?

Yes or no?

I know you are much more adult than that RR... Ronald Reagan would never have participated in a "THEY STARTED" it justification.

[edit on 9-11-2008 by HunkaHunka]

Originally posted by RRconservative
What I am saying is......that some people are surprised and shocked that this is happening, when in the recent past it has happened before. What makes Obama better than Bush in regards to his President-Elect status?

Well for one Obama won the Presidency legitimately

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


No doubt... there was no question about this one.

In 2000 the Supereme Court had to be called in, which really gave the impression of a non-election.

This election, like all the others before and after 2000 was legit. So what are they concerned about again?

reply to post by Jazzyguy


Overseas we love Obama. I have been astounded about the number of friends who comment on how great it is he was elected. Elected being the operative word. Regards Katiesymon

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by RRconservative
What I am saying is......that some people are surprised and shocked that this is happening, when in the recent past it has happened before. What makes Obama better than Bush in regards to his President-Elect status?

Well for one Obama won the Presidency legitimately

So did Bush and the Supreme court said so and THAT makes it FINAL!

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

 

No doubt... there was no question about this one.

In 2000 the Supereme Court had to be called in, which really gave the impression of a non-election.

This election, like all the others before and after 2000 was legit. So what are they concerned about again?

There was no question in this one either but the democrats had a problem that John McCain didn't and Gore insisted it go to the Supreme Court and that Court ruled it like the Votes and election process showed it.

Bush won. The rest has been nothing but a history of sour grapes

Whats the big deal? One side is already saying he is the best president ever elected and the other side is already calling for his impeachment.

There are a few in between, like myself, who are saying lets see what he does before we judge him. He won the election, nothing anyone can do about it now, lets see how he does. If he screws up we are in a world of trouble, if he does a good job we might be a little better off. Lets wait and see, shall we?

Are you for real?

'' some people want to impeach bush for no reason, what comes around goes around ''

I wont post your name, because I too would be embarrassed by such a comment.

Where have you been the past 2920 days?
... no reason to impeach bush.. my a$$

How about

- Lying to the American public
- Lying to the world
- Fabricating Evidence
- Fabricating testimony
- Insider Trading
- Conflict of interest
- Robbery
- Spying on Americans
- Exposing CIA assets
- Ignoring Subpoenas
- Ignoring the constitution
- Re-writing the constitution
- Re-writing the bill of rights
- Ignoring evidence of impending attack
- Fabricating a false investigation of thus attack
- Fabricating evidence of thus attack
- Bombing sovereign nations
- Invading Sovereign nations
- Occupying sovereign nations
- Planning assassinations of foreign leaders
- Executing foreign leaders
- Stealing sovereign nations natural wealth

Not worth Impeachment??

So, what has Obama done.

- Got elected

...........

I’m sorry to say, you cannot impeach a man for

- Being black
- Having Muslim family members
- Having a name close to Osama
- Having Hussein in his name
- Having lived in another country
- Beating the republicans
- Wanting to change the corporate criminal structure

Utter stupidity.
Its a pitty we cant send all the rednecks/idiots to a far away place and let them ruin their own lives, instead of everyone else around them who has a clue!

reply to post by RRconservative


You are notorious for disregarding penetrating points, and quietly moving along. Your reply once again did not address the fact that your example was not an example. Thank you, try again, again.

AAC

reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation


Responding to accusations from a George Soros funded website is not an endeavour I want to undertake.

I made my point clearly, and I know I educated some people with my point.

That point being no one should be surprised that an impeachment effort is being made before Obama takes office. This has happened before. So why the shock?

The same type of thing happened when Bush took office in 2000, he would do something and people would freak out, but remind them that Clinton did the same thing, and that didn't matter. The US Attorney firings is a perfect example...Clinton fired all 93 Bush fired 9, but you would have thought Bush had committed treason because of it. How many attorneys is Obama going to fire? Will there be a panic over that?

reply to post by Jazzyguy


Stupid Facebook idiots don't even know what they are talking about....

What would they Impeach Obama for? Being Black? I guess that was still a crime in some states, but I thought those laws were repealled.....

What do they think Obama has done that would be an Impeachable Offense? Are these high schoolers misstaken, and are trying to get a recount?

I wonder if Ashley Todd is one of the leaders of this movement. Idiots.

Seriously, this says more about Bush's 'No Child Left Behind' standards for public schooling, than it does about Obama. These kids need to pay closer attention in Civics class and political science classes....

DocMoreau

I'm sure everyone has noticed this, so I might as well point it out.

Don't you find it ironics RRconservative has the Kool-Aid man for his icon, it's almost as if he's subconciously admitting he's dranks the republican Kool-Aid and never coming back.

Also RRconservative I have to admit, I set you up for that source, thats why when I gave you the same website I prefaced, and provided multiple sources, explaining why Bush shoulda been impeached just from that action alone. Circumventing the american peoples will through voter fraud and supression. Nothing is more sinister than that, I believe, for it is our direct power in saying how we want Government.

So where's your other sources, besides the one I gave you?

Originally posted by MOFreemason
reply to post by RRconservative

 

Here are just 35 "nonsense" reasons President George W. Bush could/should have been impeached. And for those that are already presuming President-Elect Obama to be a socialist, don't ever EVER forget it was President Bush that urged Congress to pass this bailout bill nationalizing our banks. That my friend, IS socialism.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has committed the following abuses of power.

Article I - Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq.
Article II - Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression.
Article III - Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War.
Article IV - Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States.
Article V - Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression.
Article VI - Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114.
Article VII - Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.
Article VIII - Invading Iraq, A Sovereign Nation, in Violation of the UN Charter.
Article IX - Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor
Article X - Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes
Article XI - Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq
Article XII - Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources
Article XIII - Creating a Secret Task Force to Develop Energy and Military Policies With Respect to Iraq and Other Countries
Article XIV - Misprision of a Felony, Misuse and Exposure of Classified Information And Obstruction of Justice in the Matter of Valerie Plame Wilson, Clandestine Agent of the Central Intelligence Agency
Article XV - Providing Immunity from Prosecution for Criminal Contractors in Iraq
Article XVI - Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With Iraq and US Contractors
Article XVII - Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign Captives
Article XXVIII - Torture: Secretly Authorizing, and Encouraging the Use of Torture Against Captives in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Other Places, as a Matter of Official Policy
Article XIX - Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to 'Black Sites' Located in Other Nations, Including Nations Known to Practice Torture
Article XX - Imprisoning Children
Article XXI - Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government
Article XXII - Creating Secret Laws
Article XXIII - Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act
Article XXIV - Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment
Article XXV - Directing Telecommunications Companies to Create an Illegal and Unconstitutional Database of the Private Telephone Numbers and Emails of American Citizens
Article XXVI - Announcing the Intent to Violate Laws with Signing Statements
Article XXVII - Failing to Comply with Congressional Subpoenas and Instructing Former Employees Not to Comply
Article XVIII - Tampering with Free and Fair Elections, Corruption of the Administration of Justice
Article XXIX - Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965
Article XXX - Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare
Article XXXI - Katrina: Failure to Plan for the Predicted Disaster of Hurricane Katrina, Failure to Respond to a Civil Emergency
Article XXXII - Misleading Congress and the American People, Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global Climate Change
Article XXIII - Repeatedly Ignored and Failed to Respond to High Level Intelligence Warnings of Planned Terrorist Attacks in the US, Prior to 911.
Article XXXIV - Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001
Article XXXV - Endangering the Health of 911 First Responders

www.impeachbush.org...

Article XX - Imprisoning Children ?

reply to post by MOFreemason


yeah...what exactly did he do? honestly? people are about as quick to jump on bush's case as they are for obama. The way i see it, he hasnt submitted any form of official record to the courts and McCain has. What does he have to hide?

Frankly, everyone has been harping on the republicans for little to no reason, and now that the DNC is messing up, everyone is all up in arms at the people going after them. Kinda unfair, dont you think? I mean, yeah bush is stupid. He did a few things, but when it comes right down to it, Clinton, the guy before him, was impeached for the Whitewater scandel. Bush wasnt charged or even in trouble for ANYTHING, yet people are always complaining about the war and the economy and such. 1. Clinton could have prevented it and taken out Osama Binladin a number of times; 2. Every heard of NINJA Morgatges? yeah, those are the reasons that the economy is in the # hole, and it was the Democrats who fought for them, not the republicans. 3. there's significant proof that Obama isn't even a LEGAL CANDIDATE because he doesnt have a status of NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, yet the DNC let him campaign. and 4. before the 9/11 attacks, the government got intel that the terrorist groups were gonna "destroy us from within", and it's really suspicious that Obama, who's father was a muslin radical (true, there are radicals for each religion, but the ones that have been attacking us are the muslim radicals), and the one document obama has revealed is completely contraversial! even so, his economic plans sure are making the terrorists happy, cause America The Evil is gonna fall. It is falling, and most of us are too ignorant to accept that. those who arent tend to blame the republican party. God! give us republicans a chance!

reply to post by Jezus


ARTICLE XX

IMPRISONING CHILDREN

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, authorized or permitted the arrest and detention of at least 2500 children under the age of 18 as "enemy combatants" in Iraq, Afghanistan, and at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relating to the treatment of "protected persons" and the Optional Protocol to the Geneva Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, signed by the US in 2002 . To wit:

In May 2008, the US government reported to the United Nations that it has been holding upwards of 2,500 children under the age of 18 as "enemy combatants" at detention centers in Iraq, Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay (where there was a special center, Camp Iguana, established just for holding children). The length of these detentions has frequently exceeded a year, and in some cases has stretched to five years. Some of these detainees have reached adulthood in detention and are now not being reported as child detainees because they are no longer children.

In addition to detaining children as "enemy combatants," it has been widely reported in media reports that the US military in Iraq has, based upon Pentagon rules of engagement, been treating boys as young as 14 years of age as "potential combatants," subject to arrest and even to being killed. In Fallujah, in the days ahead of the November 2004 all-out assault, Marines ringing the city were reported to be turning back into the city men and boys "of combat age" who were trying to flee the impending scene of battle -- an act which in itself is a violation of the Geneva Conventions, which require combatants to permit anyone, combatants as well as civilians, to surrender, and to leave the scene of battle.

Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, to which the United States has been a signatory since 1949, children under the age of 15 captured in conflicts, even if they have been fighting, are to be considered victims, not prisoners. In 2002, the United States signed the Optional Protocol to the Geneva Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of children in Armed Conflict, which raised this age for this category of "protected person" to under 18.

The continued detention of such children, some as young as 10, by the US military is a violation of both convention and protocol, and as such constitutes a war crime for which the president, as commander in chief, bears full responsibility.

In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.
www.impeachbush.org...

reply to post by Jazzyguy


If you ask me I think America is on the verge of all out civil war.

With good cause too.

Fat cats getting continous bonuses even during economic crisis.

Presidents passing laws without the people having a say.

Police brutality.

Terror laws that are used against citizens commiting minor if any crimes.

An illegal war in Iraq.

Treaties moving towards a NAU.

A United Nations on home soil that practices laws that are in conflict with, are above and ignore American laws. I wont even go into the members.

Gas (Petrol) price rises and supply shortages.

Increased foreclosures.

Gas and electricity price increases.

Incresed homelessness.

Media bias in the election, manipulation and a complete blackut of other candidates from the start.

Do you really need me to make a bigger list here or are you totally ignorant to what is going on here? (No offence)

I am not even an American but I can see the crap they put up with and its about time somebody somewhere got some b*ll*cks!

Lets assume democracy does work and still exists and there is no conspiracy or doubt here.....

Obama does not even have a decade of experience in politics and has questionable ties in Kenya to say the least so how can this guy be change for good!!??

Over in the UK it is an even bigger joke, for starters we have a prime minister that was not even elected for crying out loud!



[edit on 9-11-2008 by XXXN3O]

reply to post by Jazzyguy


What's more scarey?

Bush driving the Wolrd into Global War/Financial Crisis or
a Black man in Da 'ouse.

Apparently, a Black man da 'ouse is far more freightning than a
bush driving the SS Titanic.

geeze people sure do like to gang up on a man.

RR is saying "Why are you surpised? Dems Wanted impeachment of a President Elect, Now some more nut jobs, form a different party want this President Elect." So its ok as long as Dems Complain but if republicans do for the same reasons (Obama could have stole this election because of Acorn its fesable) or different reasons its blasifmie.

To cleariffy. ITs ok For Dems to call for impeachment of Bush before he was in office, but its not ok for Repubs to call for impeachment of Obama before he is in office, the reasons are moot, its the double standard like this that makes Dems seem like fools.

Also The whole Impeach Bush now thing is dumb and unfounded, I could do the samething for FDR or JFK. Just quit being babys and grow up. geeze Bush will be out inlike what 70 days? quit acting like a bunch of ADD kids. sheesh.

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
Do you think because his view is very liberal (according to some), or it has something to do with him being the first african american president.

What? Why does it always have to be about race when talking about Obama? Now that Obama has been elected, racism is going to get even worse in this country because no one will be able to question his authority without being called "racist." This is getting annoying.

It doesn't have anything to do with anything. It has to do with 50% of the country not wanting Obama to be president. Obama just happened to be the first president to be elected during the Facebook era (and Bush doesn't count because he was an incumbent). If McCain was elected, you'd have the same thing going on (the groups would probably be larger as Obama supporters tend to be angrier, more desperate and more hateful). This will happen with every president to be elected from now on, too.

It has nothing to do with Obama. It has everything to do with 50% of the nation being against him and you're seeing people join anti-Obama groups out of anger that he got elected. That's all it is. It's not race. It's not religion. It's not anything else but people upset over what happened on Election Day.

This isn't a story. This is expected.

[edit on 9-11-2008 by ChocoTaco369]