Technosailor - Latest Comments in California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Travis Seitler — Mon, 01 May 2006 11:54:13 -0000

Glenn Greenwald is keeping track of this stuff. Like me (and, I'm guessing, a few others here) he's not a Liberal — yet he is concerned and alarmed by Bush's unconstitutional actions.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

MarkusQ — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:21:59 -0000

What do you believe Bush should have done with the intelligence he had prior to invading Iraq? The intelligence all of the Democrats had?

Ah, but that's ignoring the key point, isn't it?

We now know that the Congress didn't have access to the same intelligence--that in fact the administration specifically provided them with the portions of the NIE that supported war (and misrepresented those), while actively hiding the fact that the portions they provided were not representative and in fact many had already been conclusively discredited at the time they were given to Congress.

This is called lying, and lying to Congress is a crime. Lying to a Congress controlled by your own party, who would back you on almost anything you could make a cogent case for, in order to divert the nations attention from a clear and present danger (remember Bin Ladden?) and set them on a course that is unnecessary and hideously expensive is close to treason if it can't be explained away be stunning incompetence.

--MarkusQ

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Travis Seitler — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:42:58 -0000

See guys? The terrorists are winning. Bush is scared, and because of that he's ripping apart the Constitutional framework that made this country what it is, all in an effort to "end terrorism." This administration is destroying the very thing it claims (or believes itself) to be protecting.

This adminstration is acting like Samara L. Spann.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Aaron — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:34:42 -0000

Jesse:

Yes he is.

Eliminate the need for a Legislature by taking authority that is Constitutionally only theres (war powers).

Eliminate the need for a Judiciary by taking away authority that is only theres (warrants, habeas corpus, etc).

That sure seems like the ascendecy of the Executive branch to me.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Travis Seitler — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:33:41 -0000

"At time of WAR the President has the legal right to do what is necessary to defend the country…"

Additionally, there has been no Declaration of War since the U.S. entered World War II. AUMF is, by the very fact of its existence, not a Declaration of War. Thus your remark here has nothing to do with this discussion.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Jesse — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:32:59 -0000

except bush isn't trying to reduce this nation to absolute despotism.

liiiitle bit of a discrepancy there

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Travis Seitler — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:30:07 -0000

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

"He has refuted his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."

That's from a li'l ol' thing called the Declaration of Independence. It kinda lays out why this country was formed in the first place.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Aaron — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:29:02 -0000

Give me a break, Mike. There is no legal state of war. You know this. I know this. Stop making shit up. If there was a legal state of war there would be a Congressional declaration of war. It doesn't matter if there is a war powers act or not when the Constitution provides for one and only one way for there to be a legal state of war.

FURTHERMORE, since when can the President do whatever he wants in time of war? That is not at all the case, nor has it ever been the case. You're fabricating stuff.

FURTHERMORE PART TWO, Republicans and Democrats both express reservations in that the war powers act did NOT expressly give the President the right or power to do anything that he wanted. It gave him the power to use military force, which is not the same as civilian agency wiretapping on Americans.

You're brainwashed.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Mike — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:24:54 -0000

At time of WAR the President has the legal right to do what is necessary to defend the country... This precedent has been set many times...

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Travis Seitler — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:20:06 -0000

"Impeach the president because he did what was necessary and LEGAL to defend the country and the American people…"

Since 1978, it is illegal for the Executive Branch to engage in wiretaps apart from the authorization of the FISA court. Congress did not consent to change this with either the AUMF or the PATRIOT Act, so it's only "legal" if Bush has declared himself Emperor.

In which case there's no America left to defend.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Mike — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:12:11 -0000

Of course not... You only have time to spout your "My Civil Liberites are being jeopardixed" posts... Impeach the president because he did what was necessary and LEGAL to defend the country and the American people... Sure sounds like something Reid or Kennedy would have to say...

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Aaron — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:01:50 -0000

I have no time to have intelligent conversation with you, Mike.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Mike — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:00:27 -0000

Aaron go F... yourself... I don't blindly follow anyone, and you have no idea how to follow anyone... Bush is making huge mistakes with the illigal aliens and I am totally against what he proposes to do... It's the same on the Democrat side so nobody wins... This is not about Conservative or Liberal it's about having someone in office who will fight for our country.

In regards to Iran... What do you propose we shoud do? Of course in your thinking Bush was wrong to invade Iraq... He keeps you awake at night because your phone is tapped... The evidence keepss pouring in that justifies what Bush did, but because you feel some of your Civil Liberties have been violated Bush is BAD... Impeach BUSH... So Fn... Childish... Grow up... You might live longer...

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Aaron — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:52:07 -0000

What would be your response if he didn’t do everything within his means and we were attacked?

We go back to the origin of my calling for his impeachment. NSA wiretapping.

I don't buy that he did everything he could. I DO however buy that he did what his agenda-pushing advisors told him to do.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Jesse — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:51:58 -0000

oh, and aaron, you wanted to nail down my position, here it is:

I don't like wiretapping.
The legality is grey
Bush isn't the best president ever
I respect his responsibility to do anything and everything he can to protect this country.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Jesse — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:50:07 -0000

what we really need is to get Tom Coburn elected president.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Mike — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:48:34 -0000

I apologize... I'm actually speaking directly to Aaron... A brainwashed Republican... Your Americanism isn't being questioned, but I would question your motives and your desires for keeping this country secure... Bush has the LEGAL right to do what is needed to defend us from terrorism... What would be your response if he didn't do everything within his means and we were attacked? Would you question why he didn't do more? Would you question why he didn't follow up on that one little clue that might have stop the attack? Oh... But if he had followed your plan he would never have known what the terrorist were planning... No problem. 100,000 dead...

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Aaron — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:47:27 -0000

That was me. My browser memorized form fields and I didn't look before hitting enter.

Mike, we've had these conversations more than I care to. The fact is you blindly follow a man whose ideals are nothing similar to yours. You say the alternatives are people like Kerry or Kennedy or Pelosi when they are clearly not and you're being irrationally dramatic about it. There are TRUE c onservatives out there, such as Sen Chuck Hagel for one, that would do a fine job leading the nation in a war on terror and who are true conservatives and don't buy into this neo-con bullshit of America's superiority and soveregnty in the world. Because thats what this is. It's about putting bases in the middle east and Osama and Saddaam are just means to that end. If we were concerned about safety and terrorism we'd be more worried about immigration policy and North Korea. But no, those problems are too big and don't have the same kind of return on investment that middle east pimping does.

And you buy it hook line and fucking sinker. There is nothing conservative about Bush's policies and you questioning my Americanism and patriotism because of a man is nothing short of ludicrous. Let's just change the Pledge of Allegiance:

I pledge allegiance to George Bush of the Executive Branch of the government. And to the war in which he stands, one middle east, under America, indivisible, with ill-concieved liberty for all.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Jesse — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:46:05 -0000

Muslim jihadists are not a Big Threat to this nation.

I can't even begin to tell you how stunning those words are. You obviously don't have a clue about the Islamic goal. If threatening to launch nuclear attacks against us isn't a threat, what the #@$& is?

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Travis Seitler — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:43:41 -0000

Mike,

On 9/11/2001, roughly 3,000 people were murdered. The U.S. has since invaded two nations and is currently overseeing the establishment of new governments in their places.

Since 1/22/1973 over 40,000,000 children have been murdered "legally." Nothing has been done to stop this.

Muslim jihadists are not a Big Threat to this nation.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Mike — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:40:23 -0000

There's no brainwashing here... If there is its on your part... Bush did this, Bush didn't do this... What do you have time for Chris? What do you believe Bush should have done with the intelligence he had prior to invading Iraq? The intelligence all of the Democrats had?

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Aaron — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:36:35 -0000

See this is what is wrong with brainwashed Republicans. Because I question the integrity of a man my Americanism is questioned.

I have no time to have intelligent conversation with you, Mike.

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Mike — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:33:47 -0000

I'm jumping into this conversation a bit late, but the idea of impeaching the president for defending the American people and the very Civil Liberites you are arguing about makes me sick... What king of American's are you? What the F... would you be willing to do to defend YOUR country? When it comes down to life or death I am willing to give up some of me "Civil Liberties"... It's much better to have a country to live in than to have one destroyed because of little thinkers who are not willing to fight for what we have... Keep this BS up and the day will come when you won't have the ability or right to spout your BS... Islamofasicism is coming and you can keep up the BS about who did what and who didnt, but they don't care... They only want you and me and every other AMERICAN DEAD... WAKE UP YOU IDIOTS... GO ahead and put Hillary or Pilosi, or Reid or the ASSHOLE KENNEDY in control... Can you speak Arab?

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

MarkusQ — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 19:02:05 -0000

1) The law (and the constitution, as it applies in this case) clearly state that domestic wiretaps require a warrant

2) Both Bush and his Attorney General have said that such wiretaps require a warrant

3) Bush has admitted ordering domestic wiretaps and specifically refusing to request a warrant, even though he has access to a special court dedicated to just that purpose, and can even wait and request the warrants three days after the fact if he wants to.

Liking or not liking Bush is not the issue. That's the sort of argument you make in a feudal society, or a despotic one.

Agreeing or not agreeing with his goals is not the issue. That's the kind of argument you make in an anarchy, or a bastion of corruption.

Here, we have laws. He broke them, and admitted it. End of story.

-- MarkusQ

Re: California Joins Illinois in Calling for Bush Impeachment

Aaron — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:33:06 -0000

Jesse: You make no sense at all. On one hand you're saying you're not giving up personal rights, but yet its okay for NSA to wiretap Americans illegally without any kind of oversight?

On the one hand you say you're not backing up wiretap, but it's been done so it's okay?

On the one hand Bush doesn't deserve to be impeached...blah, blah, blah, but Donald Rumsfeld is behind a lot? Wasn't it Truman who said the buck stops here?

If Bush didn't authorize the wiretaps then he is still responsible for his direct reports. But Bush did at the very least know about them because he admitted as much. Doesn't that make him even more culpable?

Listen to yourself for a minute and ask yourself why you are taking the position you're taking. It's so all over the map that you might as well be John Kerry!

You have yet to present a reasonable argument for Bush not being impeached (or at minimum investigated). There's a rule of thumb in the intelligence business (of which I am familiar given my job) that generally classified infomration taken in part is not usually sensitive but when taken as a whole becomes dangerous in the wrong hands. When you look at one incident of the President's administration you might say it's harmless by itself or it's a mistake. But when you combine everything into a solid timeline and portfolio of failures and shortcoming, one starts to wonder if this man is fit for office.