Impeachment Resolution Against Bush

A RESOLUTION

Impeaching George Walker Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, That George Walker Bush, President of the United States is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of all of the people of the United States of America, against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

ARTICLE I

In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to 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 attempted to impose a police state and a military dictatorship upon the people and Republic of the United States of America by means of �a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations� against the Constitution since September 11, 2001. This subversive conduct includes but is not limited to trying to suspend the constitutional Writ of Habeas Corpus; ramming the totalitarian U.S.A. Patriot Act through Congress; the mass-round-up and incarceration of foreigners; kangaroo courts; depriving at least two United States citizens of their constitutional rights by means of military incarceration; interference with the constitutional right of defendants in criminal cases to lawyers; violating and subverting the Posse Comitatus Act; unlawful and unreasonable searches and seizures; violating the First Amendments rights of the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, peaceable assembly, and to petition the government for redress of grievances; packing the federal judiciary with hand-picked judges belonging to the totalitarian Federalist Society and undermining the judicial independence of the Constitution�s Article III federal court system; violating the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions and the U.S. War Crimes Act; violating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; reinstitution of the infamous �Cointelpro� Program; violating the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the Convention against Torture, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; instituting the totalitarian Total Information Awareness Program; and establishing a totalitarian Northern Military Command for the United States of America itself. In all of this George Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

Full Resolution: www.fromthewilderness.com...

I agree with that impeachment I posted. Yes, Bush should be impeached but like James said he's not going to be impeach. It's sad IMO but true. Bush has done alot of things that should get him impeached but his family has to much control over the House and the Senate.


[edit on 23-9-2004 by mrmulder]

Could help if you posted some of your OWN narrative along with the cut and paste.

These made up documents having some entertainment value, have no substance and only show the authors ignorance IMO.

I guess the patriot act takes care of any problems so we are stuck with all the violation in the name of bush "terrrorrrrrrrrrrr"

Wow, Clinton gets head, the republicans spend millions of dollars and use over 200 FBI agents to prove it. Hmmm, if those 200 FBI agents had been doing their jobs, like replying to phone calls from Aviation schools that a bunch of Mauslims were learning how to fly, and not land, airplanes, maybe 9/11 never would have happened. If the millions wasted to prove Clinton got head had been spent on say, National Security maybe 9/11 would never have happened.

Anyways, Bush can't be impeached, the republicans control the House, Senate, and the Supreme Court. It would be like Hitler's main worshippers trying to impeach Hitler, won't happen.

Originally posted by Phoenix
Could help if you posted some of your OWN narrative along with the cut and paste.

Sorry, I apologize for that. I forgot to add my thoughts to that. I agree with that impeachment I posted. Yes, Bush should be impeached but like James said he's not going to be impeach. It's sad IMO but true. Bush has done alot of things that should get him impeached but his family has to much control over the House and the Senate.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Wow, Clinton gets head, the republicans spend millions of dollars and use over 200 FBI agents to prove it. Hmmm, if those 200 FBI agents had been doing their jobs, like replying to phone calls from Aviation schools that a bunch of Mauslims were learning how to fly, and not land, airplanes, maybe 9/11 never would have happened. If the millions wasted to prove Clinton got head had been spent on say, National Security maybe 9/11 would never have happened.

Anyways, Bush can't be impeached, the republicans control the House, Senate, and the Supreme Court. It would be like Hitler's main worshippers trying to impeach Hitler, won't happen.

Didn't the FBI work for the Clinton Administration? Where did you come up with the figure of 200 agents? Does this mean the Clinton Administration allowed the seeds of terror to take root?

I am begining to think that you guys (dems, libs and inde's) are giving Bush and his family just a little to much credit for the power you think he holds.

Phoenix tries on tin hat in an attempt to see what others claim, but finds it only works for consevatively impaired individules.

Originally posted by mrmulder
I agree with that impeachment I posted. Yes, Bush should be impeached but like James said he's not going to be impeach. It's sad IMO but true. Bush has done alot of things that should get him impeached but his family has to much control over the House and the Senate.

Really? please start by making a list of the things that he should be impeached about....

This is really getting tiresome already...

Originally posted by Phoenix
I am begining to think that you guys (dems, libs and inde's) are giving Bush and his family just a little to much credit for the power you think he holds.

His family does hold alot power in this country. Let's look at the family to see how many have held power in office.

1. George H.W. Bush: President
2. Jeb Bush: Governor Florida
3. George W. Bush: Governor of Texas and current President
4. Presscott Bush: Senator from Connecticut

Geez, alot of Bush's have been in office over the years. Wouldn't you say?

Rather than hide behind some BS legalese that some crack lib has posted, why not outline the SPECIFIC acts that Bush has committed that warrant impeachment!? I have yet to see anyone detail the exact nature of the crime and provide a concise analysis of how it applies directly to the articles of impeachment. I would be genuinely interested in that, if there is anyone who can provide it. Oh, and please avoid heresay. I am only interested in the facts as this is a legal matter.

Originally posted by marg6043
I guess the patriot act takes care of any problems so we are stuck with all the violation in the name of bush "terrrorrrrrrrrrrr"

Marg...you again with the Patriot Act???

Kerry voted yes, that means in favour, of the Patriot Act marg.

Hey Mr. Mulder being the FBI conspiracy expert on UFO phenomena that you are then the Bush power structure is probly' an attempt by the greys to counter the reptilian backing of the even more powerful Kennedy clan eh!

Talk about someone who should be impeached ha! - impeach Kennedy I say!

And now back to sanity - the other posters point about facts supporting the fictional document would be nice to have - or is that also fiction? oh heck this is getting confusing jumping between reality and twilight zone as you will have us all do.

Originally posted by mrmulder
Geez, alot of Bush's have been in office over the years. Wouldn't you say?

ok...lets see at the other side of the issue....

In shinny South Florida in a city called Hialeah, which borders with Miami, we have a democratic Mayor, Raul Martinez. Raul Martinez has vowed several times that he will help Kerry win the elections, now what's wrong with this statement?

Well, first Raul Martinez was charged and found guilty back in the 1990s on 8 felony charges for extorsion, and rocketeering, yet somehow after he was sentenced to 10 years in jail, the sentence was revoked and he became Mayor of Hialeah once more, he then elected the Police Chief of Hialeah, who is also "democrat." The funny thing is that Raul Martinez ws charged once more on the same offenses after he was re-elected, for some unkown reason.

There is also the following.

Hialeah police chief's son ousted

Rolando Bola�os Jr., son of Hialeah's police chief, has surrendered his certification to work in law enforcement in Florida in order to avoid prosecution in a misdemeanor case. He still has a city job.

Excerpted from.
www.miami.com...

Actually both of his sons were thrown form the police force because one of them had committed grand theft when he was 17, and the other son because he had beat the living crap of a man. Actually, both sons were acquitted from the beating of a Hialeah man in 1998, but Daniel Bola�os had charges against him for following the same victim and fabricated police reports to damage the victim's credibility.

humm, democrats down here are very corrupt yet they somehow stay in power...

I have also stated before what happened down here when we voted last month.

When I pressed the key to turn on the machine, it had already checked Alex Penelas' box (a democrat) as Mayor of Miami-Dade county. At first i thought it was probably a mistake, so i tried to change it and put another candidate...yet...there were no other choices for Mayor of Miami-Dade....i asked one of the volunteers and she didn't seem to know. So i made sure that the box was blank. After i spoke with some people outside of the voting place, they told me that it was probably because this was the first run, and that the second is the one that counts.... Sorry, but i don't think that's right... Many of the elder people down here have more than enough problems using these machines to add another problem, in favour of a democrat...



[edit on 23-9-2004 by Muaddib]

Muaddib,

Anything in the name of god (I mean bush) and democracyyyyyyyyy, it we still have one.

And by the way the Supreme Court started to belong to the Republicans since Reagan years.

And by the way I think that taking over another country without declaring a war making and invasion illegal and killing already thousand in the name of liberation should be enough to take care of god (I mean bush) in the white house.

Sorry people but I will never hide that our president is a moron, haaa democracy and good politicians are just but a dream.

The republicans headed up the investigation, they used FBI agents to investigate the president getting head. The FBI wasn't under Clintons control when they were being used to prove Clinton got head, they were taking orders from the republicans. Do you really think Clinton would have sent them in to prove he got head?

Also, the numbers come from a old New York Post, New York Times, and other newspapers. In the end, about 210 FBI agents were used in the republicans investigation into Clinton.

Originally posted by Muaddib
Really? please start by making a list of the things that he should be impeached about....

Well, he lied to the country about WMD's in Iraq. Now we're over there fighting for what? They haven't found any WMD's. Shouldn't he be impeached for sending soldiers to die for a lost cause and lying to the American people?

This is really getting tiresome already...

Yep. That's what almost all Republicans are saying these days.

[edit on 23-9-2004 by mrmulder]

Originally posted by marg6043
Muaddib,

Anything in the name of god (I mean bush) and democracyyyyyyyyy, it we still have one.

And by the way the Supreme Court started to belong to the Republicans since Reagan years.

And by the way I think that taking over another country without declaring a war making and invasion illegal and killing already thousand in the name of liberation should be enough to take care of god (I mean bush) in the white house.

Sorry people but I will never hide that our president is a moron, haaa democracy and good politicians are just but a dream.

Humm...first, what illegal invasion? Do you know how many countries are with us in a coalition to fight in Iraq?

First, you know that Clinton sent troops to Bosnia don't you?

There were 52 countries, even i was wrong in the numbers i gave before, which are the numbers the press has given... FIFTY TWO COUNTRIES in the coalition in 2003. Without counting the countries that left in 2004 there are still about 45-48 or more countries... if you call that going alone, and if you call that an illegal war...

Here is a link to maps of what countries are with us, btw russia, france and Germany never counted, they have been too greedy since the beginning, they were more concerned with their business loses if Saddam was ousted.
Coalition of the Willing

You shoud have your facts straight Marg, before you make any accussations.

About the rest of your post, sorry but i couldn't make sense of it, pelase clarify what you mean.

Nice try...

The trouble with the far left (the same with the far right), is the use of inciting verbiage and euphemistic referrences such as the ones that pervade this document. When ultra-liberals prove that they are angry to the point of unreasonability with their vicious rhetoric, it undermines their credibility.

Phrases such as "ramming the totalitarian U.S.A. Patriot Act" and "totalitarian Federalist Society" seem do emulate opinion rather than fact, and in my opinion reduce this document to little more than an inconsequential editorial rather than a legal document. Also, euphemistic references things that have real names like "kangaroo court" further limits strength.

Otherwise, I'd love to see this sent up by some brave congressman, whether I like the words or not. The sentiment contained in them is exactly mine. It would never work, but it would be nice to have this document on the public record.

Originally posted by mrmulder

Well, he lied to the country about WMD's in Iraq. Now we're over there fighting for what? They haven't found any WMD's. Shouldn't he be impeached for sending soldiers to die for a lost cause and lying to the American people?

Yep. That's what almost all Republicans are saying these days.

Once again.....you know why i say its getting tiresome? Because democrats have been saying, during the Clinton administration, and even before the war started, the same thing Bush has said. This was before they decided to start bashing Bush, thinking all Americans were stupid enough to forget what they have been saying all along... No wonder Moore calls Americans stupid and "so many" liberals and democrats dumbly nod along with him when he is clearly insulting them.

Let me post again....*shakes head*...what democrats have said about wmd...

I have posted this before in threads where you have responded...i am going to make it bold, so perhaps this time it stays in your mind.

Text Of Clinton Statement On Iraq

Tuesday February 17, 1998

We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century. They feed on the free flow of information and technology. They actually take advantage of the freer movement of people, information and ideas.

And they will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen.

There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us.
............
Now, instead of playing by the very rules he agreed to at the end of the Gulf War, Saddam has spent the better part of the past decade trying to cheat on this solemn commitment. Consider just some of the facts:

Iraq repeatedly made false declarations about the weapons that it had left in its possession after the Gulf War. When UNSCOM would then uncover evidence that gave lie to those declarations, Iraq would simply amend the reports.

For example, Iraq revised its nuclear declarations four times within just 14 months and it has submitted six different biological warfare declarations, each of which has been rejected by UNSCOM.

In 1995, Hussein Kamal, Saddam's son-in-law, and the chief organizer of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan. He revealed that Iraq was continuing to conceal weapons and missiles and the capacity to build many more.

Then and only then did Iraq admit to developing numbers of weapons in significant quantities and weapon stocks. Previously, it had vehemently denied the very thing it just simply admitted once Saddam Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth. Now listen to this, what did it admit?

It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs.

And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production.

As if we needed further confirmation, you all know what happened to his son-in-law when he made the untimely decision to go back to Iraq.

The following quote is one of the most important.....

The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons.
.........
I ask all of you to remember the record here what he promised to do within 15 days of the end of the Gulf War, what he repeatedly refused to do, what we found out in 1995, what the inspectors have done against all odds. We have no business agreeing to any resolution of this that does not include free, unfettered access to the remaining sites by people who have integrity and proven confidence in the inspection business. That should be our standard. That's what UNSCOM has done, and that's why I have been fighting for it so hard. And that's why the United States should insist upon it.

And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who's really worked on this for any length of time believes that, too.

...........
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. We want to seriously reduce his capacity to threaten his neighbors.

Let me be clear: A military operation cannot destroy all the weapons of mass destruction capacity. But it can and will leave him significantly worse off than he is now in terms of the ability to threaten the world with these weapons or to attack his neighbors.

......................

No military action, however, is risk-free. I know that the people we may call upon in uniform are ready. The American people have to be ready as well.

Excerpted from.
www.cnn.com...

Now, ifyou want to see other quotes, and what Hillary Clinton said about the link between saddam and Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups go to the following link.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Forgive the lenghtly quote....and the text size...but it seems that people either don't want to see this, or they need some form of..... help so they can see it.


Any comments,? or do you need more quotes from other democrats about WMD in Iraq and what should be done with Saddam, that i have not posted before?


Let me add this one more.

In a Sept. 6, 2002, commentary in The New York Times, Kerry wrote: "If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community's already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement, even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act."

Excerpted from.
www.kansas.com...



[edit on 23-9-2004 by Muaddib]

Muaddib

Its a difference betwee thinking, that is just an Idea, now actual finding MWDs, then it becomes fact and tangible, now is not where to be found I mean the MWDs and we may spend a life time looking for it, so as now is just an Idea. If you take and Idea to court it will not stand a chance.

Is like me telling I have and Idea of having gold in my yard but actually finding the gold well I can dig all my life and never find a darn thing.Righ?