[quote=Makedde;646694]Impeachment and criminal charges sound about right to me.[/QUOTE

This has only been 2 instances as such an attack on our homeland that has killed so many! Only 1 where civilians were specifically targeted! The sitting Presidents have served the best that could be expected during those times. I will not judge their performances of their duties under those situations. Were mistakes made? I'm sure there was, but anyone who suggest that they would do better is foolish. The weight of millions lie on the shoulders of CIC. For those who use political affiations to attack those mistakes is unpatriotic IMHO

Actually there was always talk about this, but impeachment was not really a major push of the 2006 campaign. Where is your evidence of this?

No there are no reasons for it.

__________________
"True Freedom is the Freedom to oppress others"

Ideology: Self Preservation.

Impeachment at this point would be a waste of time. There is usually some argument toward looking forward and not punishing the President for acting illegally. If anyone deserved it the most, Nixon was absolutely guilty.

However, in this case I think the American people deserve an open investigation to the actions regarding the Iraqi war. I think after Bush is out of office, there should be an investigation of what went on in the White House. I think this could actually be a cleansing of what went on. If Bush and his administration did not act illegally, I'd like to have that evidence as well as the evidence that he acted illegally. What's come out so far has been a mixed muddle and perhaps deliberately so. We'll probably never get the real whole story. I think its important to do this in order to define the power of the Presidency. This is a bi-partisan issue.

You know, you spouted the same nonsense in another thread and I asked for some sort of proof of your claim.

Which you were unable to supply.

Could you do that now, please?

Thanks.

Sure. Pelosi and the other democrats running for Congress in 2006 campaigned on the idea that (if elected) Bush would be brought up on impeachment chareges. That is why, upon being inaugurated and after taking the notion off of the table, the criticism of her broken pledge ensued.

Here is an article which asks Pelosi why she would no longer persue the idea.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Califo...rats_0425.html

When the California Democratic Convention begins this weekend, party progressives both inside and outside the San Diego Convention Center will be pressing hard to bring impeachment back on the table as a means of holding the presidency of George W. Bush accountable for crimes they allege have been committed since 2001.

"With the Speaker saying it's off the table, it puts others Members of Congress at a lower tier," Gerbasi argued. "There are some representatives inching toward impeachment, but they may not commit until Pelosi changes her mind and puts it back on the table."


"She's either going to have to very publicly ignore it, or address the elephant in the room," Swan explained. "I'll be curious to see what happens at the dinner, which Pelosi is hosting; there are certain plans of action that will bring impeachment public while she's up speaking, and it will be interesting to see if she addresses it."

"We will do more to make for our own reelection, and maintain a Democratic Congress...and have a Democratic President," she said. "And frankly, for impeachment, George W. Bush is just not worth it. We have great work to do for the American people."

__________________
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
-Thomas Jefferson

The release of the Warren commision for the JFK assaination was held for 50 years before all is released. Would libs today be okay with that for Bush? I doubt it. I believe the nation would be far more served to focus on the new CIC helping this nation to heal from the many problems that has hit our country in the past 8 years.9-11, to Katrina, to housing market, to oil prices. Fixation on the past will not push us forward in the future.

Max, you need to try again. This article actually verifies that the Democrats did not campaign for impeachment in the 2006 elections. You missed one extremely important sentence.

She campaigned with the idea on her platform, then she took it off the table. I wonder why?

__________________
Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
-Thomas Jefferson

Can you point out the place where "Pelosi and her ilk all promised an impeachment" in that, please? I can't seem to find it.

Thanks.