# Will impeachment of GWB become serious consideration? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 22, 2007, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945 "2007-06-22T02:28:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/41 "2007-06-22T22:02:16Z")
Thank you, **John** , for your input. Done like the poster I hold a lot of respect for. As for your correction, I’d have to do some fact checking – not that I don’t take your word – but, because, quite frankly, I need to educate myself further on the NIE itself, for other than using a part here or there as a cite, I’m not intimate with the document as a whole. However, my main point remains…and you’ve done a better job than I at explaining it. Thanks again. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/42 "2007-06-22T22:08:44Z")
**RedFury** : BTW, my analysis of the NIE is purely relying on the word of Bob Graham as reported by the NYT-- the full report remains classified, and so none of us is going to be able judge for ourselves. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/43 "2007-06-22T22:16:08Z")
The edit window timed-out on me. I wanted to point that what John had done a good job explaining was this particular part of his post: > [@John Mace](#): > > I won’t disagree with you on the general principle–\*\* _it should be relatively easy to draw up articles of impeachment for Bush that would easily pass the sniff test of constitutional muster_\*\* - highlights mine. Also wanted to add that IIRC, the NIE was indeed heavily weighted down by the Office of Special Plans – you know, the Neocon’s own little bunker.. But as I said, I’ll do some research and see what comes up. Memory is not what it used to be. And it wasn’t much to begin with. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/44 "2007-06-22T22:44:40Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] Approval ratings, strong or weak, are not a valid reason for impeachment. [/QUOTE] OTOH, the POTUS in question need not be accused of a crime as such. Consider the [Articles of Impeachment against Andrew Johnson.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Andrew_Johnson) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/45 "2007-06-22T22:50:09Z")
[QUOTE=marshmallow] It’s important to get these facts on record, with as much media attention as possible (they certainly won’t cover it otherwise, just look at the past six years). Otherwise, we’re in for a Reaganizing effect. [/quote] 😕 [QUOTE=marshmallow] If we don’t believe in the U.N. then we need to stop funding it and reverse all treaties related to it. Otherwise, Bush should be in huge trouble just for the act of Iraq. People were hanged for similar actions in WWII. The problem with this rationale, of course, is that we like being able to meddle in the affairs of other nations, even if it involves out and out conquering, and a rationale of this type for impeachment would invariably lead one to conclude all presidents should be impeached and sent to the Hague. [/QUOTE] Unfortunately, the U.S. is not a signatory to the International Criminal Courts treaty. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/46 "2007-06-22T22:52:08Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Unfortunately, the U.S. is not a signatory to the International Criminal Courts treaty. [/QUOTE] You misspelled “fortunately”. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/47 "2007-06-22T22:53:39Z")
It would be pointless, this is our planet, the rest of them just rent. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/48 "2007-06-22T22:53:46Z")
[QUOTE=Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor] Hmmm…is Cheney impeachable? That dog might hunt. [/QUOTE] [Dennis Kucinich](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=417246) is way ahead of you. Of course, [Cheney now insists his office is “not an entity within the Executive Branch.”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=425810) Which must leave him in the **legislative** branch, specifically the Senate, of which he is president. And any member of Congress can be expelled from office by a simple majority of his or her house; no impeachment is necessary. Soooooo . . . . 😃 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/49 "2007-06-22T22:57:48Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] I won’t disagree with you on the general principle-- it should be relatively easy to draw up articles of impeachment for Bush that would easily pass the sniff test of constitutional muster . . . [/QUOTE] Especially as nobody gets to sniff. That is, Congressional articles of impeachment have never been appealed to the federal courts, and it is doubtful whether the courts would even have jurisdiction to rule on said articles’ propriety. Of courts, only the courts themselves could decide that question. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/50 "2007-06-22T23:06:14Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Especially as nobody gets to sniff. [/quote] We, the people, get to sniff and act accordingly in the next election cycle. > [@](#): > > That is, Congressional articles of impeachment have never been appealed to the federal courts, and it is doubtful whether the courts would even have jurisdiction to rule on said articles’ propriety. I think they would decide not to rule. > [@zamboniracer](#): > > ``` > Pelosi is at fault for taking impeachment off the table. What did that accomplish? Nothing. > > ``` She probably felt like she needed to distance herself from the wingnuts. And I don’t think it would be that big a deal to put it back on the table if conditions changed. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/51 "2007-06-22T23:06:28Z")
[QUOTE=Ravenman] I suppose one could say that Congress is as free to disregard a plain reading of the Constitution as President Bush is. Therefore, if the President can argue that “commander in chief” gives him unlimited authority to use our military for any purpose he wants, one could argue that Congress can read “high crimes and misdemeanors” to mean anything it wants. That doesn’t make it right. [/QUOTE] Why not? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/52 "2007-06-22T23:40:59Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Why not? [/QUOTE] Because of the extreme likelihood of it coming back to bite the Democratic party in particular and the American system of government in general in the ass. Here’s a possible scenario - The Dems adopt the thinking of the SDMB and impeach Bush and Cheney because he is unpopular, and a Republican, and because they can do it. They muster a simple majority in the House. Voting in the Senate trial is strictly along party lines, and the two-thirds majority is not achieved. Coming into the 2008 elections, the Republicans launch a well-financed campaign labelling the impeachment as a naked power grab. President Pelosi, not being nearly as stupid as she would have to be not to catch on, declines to run in 2008. The tenure in office of any Democrat who wins from now to 2020 will last exactly as long as he/she maintains a majority in Congress. And not all the screams of “IOKIADDI” from the Usual Suspects are going to change that. If it was good enough for our goose, your gander had better watch her feathery white (or inexperienced Halfrican-Hamerican) ass. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/53 "2007-06-22T23:45:10Z")
Yet \*another \* revenge fantasy from you? :rolleyes: To the OP, it’s too late, we’re already deeply in the campaign for the next President, and Bush is already a lame duck. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/54 "2007-06-22T23:45:59Z")
What a stupid thing to say. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/55 "2007-06-22T23:46:15Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] The tenure in office of any Democrat who wins from now to 2020 will last exactly as long as he/she maintains a majority in Congress. And not all the screams of “IOKIADDI” from the Usual Suspects are going to change that. [/QUOTE] The same would apply, of course, to any **Republican** POTUS . . . And then we would have something similar to the British parliamentary system, with its votes of no confidence. What’s wrong with that? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/56 "2007-06-22T23:49:43Z")
Been over the comparative-structures-of-government topic many times here, **BG**. “What’s wrong with that” is the effect on balance of powers - we can’t make one branch subservient to another, especially if it is controlled by a different party. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/57 "2007-06-22T23:50:10Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] …The Dems adopt the thinking of the SDMB and impeach Bush and Cheney because he is unpopular, and a Republican, and because they can do it… [/QUOTE] Is that it? Really? Gee whiz, I thought we had some actual issues! Boy, is my face red! Had no idea our concerns were so shallow! ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/58 "2007-06-22T23:51:53Z")
**John** , FWIW, this is what going around in my mind when thinking of the NIE: [**The New Pentagon Papers**](http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0310-09.htm) > [@](#): > > It is interesting today that the “defense” for those who lied or prevaricated about Iraq is to point the finger at the intelligence. **_But the National Intelligence Estimate, published in September 2002, as remarked upon recently by former CIA Middle East chief Ray McGovern, was an afterthought. It was provoked only after Sens. Bob Graham and Dick Durban noted in August 2002, as Congress was being asked to support a resolution for preemptive war, that no NIE elaborating real threats to the United States had been provided. In fact, it had not been written, but a suitable NIE was dutifully prepared and submitted the very next month. Naturally, this document largely supported most of the outrageous statements already made publicly by Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld about the threat Iraq posed to the United States. All the caveats, reservations and dissents made by intelligence were relegated to footnotes and kept from the public_.** Funny how that worked. – my highlights. Much more at source. And yes, I realize the Right has done its best to demonize Karen Kwiatkowski, but I’ve been reading and listening to her for quite some time and feel quite the opposite: I admire her integrity. Go figure. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2007, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/59 "2007-06-22T23:58:49Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Is that it? Really? Gee whiz, I thought we had some actual issues! Boy, is my face red! Had no idea our concerns were so shallow! [/QUOTE] Good to see I am not alone in my memory loss. Because I could swear that **Shodan** is revising history as we spea..er, type. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2007, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945/60 "2007-06-23T00:05:49Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] The same would apply, of course, to any **Republican** POTUS . . . And then we would have something similar to the British parliamentary system, with its votes of no confidence. What’s wrong with that? [/QUOTE] Without the vote of the people in amending the Constitution? _:shrugs:_ This is based on the (pretty obviously false) assumption that the Usual Suspects would treat the impeachment of a Democrat for no particular reason besides his unpopularity the same as they would the impeachment of Bush. You wouldn’t. > [@](#): > > Because I could swear that Shodan is revising history as we spea..er, type. You could, but you’d be lying. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-impeachment-of-gwb-become-serious-consideration/408945.md?page=4)