General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo how does everyone feel about impeachment?
I mean, didn't we want Bush impeached for the same thing Obama is evidently doing now (among many other reasons, that is)? Just throwing this out there.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"So how does everyone feel about impeachment? I mean, didn't we want Bush impeached for the same thing Obama is evidently doing now (among many other reasons, that is)? Just throwing this out there."
..exactly are you "just throwing...ou there"? Do you think Obama should be impeached, and for what?
For the Republican opportunists, Bush actually spied on people.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022959557
More perspective: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2959872
I haven't mentioned the Iraq war yet.
rightsideout
(978 posts)Obama didn't send soldiers and Iraqis to die over lies about WMDs that weren't there. That was the main drive to impeach Bush.
Once the details about what goes on when we initially hear these "WTF?" things gets flushed out, the reasons don't seem as impeachable. There's alot of details we don't know. I still trust Obama but still can disagree.
The Magistrate
(95,249 posts)There were grounds for impeachment of Bush, but they were not the item you suggest.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)What isn't impeachable about that?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Now take your idiocy over to Free Republic where it will be better taken, thank you.
Under your brilliant legal theory, he could be impeached for enforcing the ACA mandate.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)How?
The Magistrate
(95,249 posts)In the case of Bush, the most grave of these were the torture of prisoners of war, in direct violation of international treaty obligations and of U.S. statute enforcing those obligations. The infliction of torture, ordered from the highest levels of the Executive, is a felony under Federal law, an d a grave breach of international humanitarian law. It is a clear-cut crime, and a crime which can only be committed by virtue of holding government office, which is the actual meaning of the high crimes and misdemeanors standard.
The wire-tapping, like it or not, was in accordance with law, and almost certainly would be upheld as Constitutional, at least by the courts then and at present.
You are not going to get much support for impeaching President Obama here, and will make little headway, either, in trying to pretend that demonstrates or reflects some hypocrisy or inconsistency.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)The ACLU, by the way, called the NSA spying that occured under Bush illegal and an impeachable offense.
http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/nsa-spying-americans-illegal
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/aclu-panel-urges-impeachment-over-nsa-spying
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)So, the viewpoint here seems to be that what Obama did is just as shitty as what Bush did in terms of a moral basis but, unlike the latter, it wasn't illegal. Is that correct?
randome
(34,845 posts)I would like to hear more of an explanation about why they are doing it rather than the current vague assurances that it's for our own good.
But they are at least paying lip service to the concept of restraint by re-authorizing it for only 90 days and only with a judge's approval.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
"So, the viewpoint here seems to be that what Obama did is just as shitty as what Bush did in terms of a moral basis but, unlike the latter, it wasn't illegal. Is that correct?"
...you're misrepresenting the facts and your own case.
You posted a link to the following here (http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2960846)
What if it emerged that the President of the United States was flagrantly violating the Constitution and a law passed by the Congress to protect Americans against abuses by a super-secret spy agency? What if, instead of apologizing, he said, in essence, "I have the power to do that, because I say I can." That frightening scenario is exactly what we are now witnessing in the case of the warrantless NSA spying ordered by President Bush that was reported December 16, 2005 by the New York Times.
http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/nsa-spying-americans-illegal
The statement is specifically about Bush's illegal wiretapping.
For the Republican opportunists, Bush actually spied on people.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022959557
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)"The ACLU, by the way, called the NSA spying that occured under Bush illegal and an impeachable offense."
See? Bush, not Obama.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"The ACLU, by the way, called the NSA spying that occured under Bush illegal and an impeachable offense."
See? Bush, not Obama.
...I see that. Do you see this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2961252
Note that it pertains to a different comment of yours that draws a bogus conclusion?
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)He/she claimed that Bush's wiretapping wasn't an impeachable offense. We weren't talking about Obama at that particular moment. Regardless, how exactly does what Bush did make what Obama is doing any less bad?
The Magistrate
(95,249 posts)That is calling for his impeachment.
The ACLU makes a case for their view that it was illegal, which is far from establishing that it was either illegal or un-Constitutional.
The practice as conducted has been taken as a seizure of business records, which there is statutory authority for. The record is of who called whom and when, and where they were. It is not actual transcription of what was said. It could certainly be used to find ground to seek a wire-tap order on someone.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)I never once specifically called for Obama's impeachment. Not one time. All I wanted was some clarification on where people stand on his apparent evasion of privacy vs. Bush's.
The Magistrate
(95,249 posts)English really is a remarkable instrument for conveying meaning. Yours was quite clear.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)The Magistrate
(95,249 posts)"A creme puff masquerading as a hard roll."
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)I find it extremely amusing that you think you know the intentions of someone you've never met. Keep at it.
The Magistrate
(95,249 posts)And reading your original post, and earlier replies in the thread, is quite sufficient to know what you meant to communicate.
"It's not rocket surgery."
Initech
(100,097 posts)Bush lied us into two illegal, immoral wars, and completely ignored CIA intelligence warnings about an attack on American soil being imminent - the result was thousands of lives needlessly lost. And he wasn't punished. What has Obama done to warrant impeachment?
uponit7771
(90,348 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)The Congress passed the NSA bill and have voted to renew it many times.
Storing 'meta-data' in a database is NOT 'spying'.
A judge has to sign on order (for each individual case) for the data to be accessed.
Nothing illegal about it.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)But I repeat myself.
(Note that there was a warrant in this instance, so the law was obeyed. Congress has been well aware of this program for 7 plus years, so they don't get to impeach over that).
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)BlueStater
(7,596 posts)I really don't care if Congress is going along with it. Their hands are dirty as well.
And I don't want to impeach Obama. I just want some clarification on where Democrats stand on this. We hated it when Bush violated the privacy of Americans. A LOT of us demanded his impeachment for it. So now that Obama is apparently doing the same thing, what do we think we should be done?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the Constitution?
Lots of people think Obamacare and even Social Security are unconstitutional. Should he be impeached for enforcing them?
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)Data collection has been going on this whole time. You should have known the program was extended by Congress in December. The only thing that has changed is that someone leaked the TSSI court order. The court order is just for the telecom companies for CYA immunity. Undoubtedly a Republican, because that's where all the other leaks have come from. And the IRS thing is from Republicans left from GWB, too.
Is this becoming clear now? This is a republican op. It's a very, very good one. Unfortunately. But it's preying on people who should be smarter than this.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)TheCowsCameHome
(40,168 posts)You lost me. Totally.
randome
(34,845 posts)Do you understand what Congressional review and approval of this program every 90 days since 2006 means?
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)with details.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)The Verizon phone record collection was actually legal. They obtained a FISA warrant.
Kurovski
(34,655 posts)Even after he casts off the mortal coil, or whatever.
riqster
(13,986 posts)The law sucks, but it's the law. Hard to convict a man for acting within the law.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)...do people here personally think what Obama is doing should be illegal along the same sort of vein as the NSA spying? It'd be nice if someone could answer this without personally attacking me or calling me a right-wing troll. I voted for Obama. The last thing I want is to punish him. But in the very end, I'm an American first and a Democrat second and wrong is wrong no matter what party is doing it.
riqster
(13,986 posts)I addressed your point in a non-confrontational manner. Kindly keep such responses directed where they belong.
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)pnwmom
(108,990 posts)Obama didn't break any laws. The solution, obviously, is to change the law.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)nt
LWolf
(46,179 posts)as far as I can tell. If it weren't, GWB wouldn't have finished his first term.
Obama? If he's done the crime, he should be accountable for it.
demosincebirth
(12,541 posts)FSogol
(45,514 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Squinch
(50,989 posts)pnwmom
(108,990 posts)If you don't like the fact that the law allows this, then fight to change the law.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)Did you really think the next guy to move into his spot would cede this power?
BlueStater
(7,596 posts)As for your second, was it too much to hope for? Apparently so.
spanone
(135,857 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Put mustard on that and eat it.
Response to BlueStater (Original post)
Post removed
ellenfl
(8,660 posts)scalia or thomas?
Shrike47
(6,913 posts)DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)BlueStater
(7,596 posts)It's apparently not illegal, but it seems to be just as much of a disgusting evasion of privacy.
Texasgal
(17,047 posts)it begins.
UGH.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)Please list the crime(s) that the president is guilty of and should be impeached for. Thanks in advance.
Throw it out there, don't know if it'll stick, but it sure as hell stinks.
Skip Intro
(19,768 posts)Nobody knows the extent of any of this yet. Nobody knows if crimes were committed or not.
I sure as hell hope using the IRS to target certain groups based on their politics is against some law.
Let's learn the whole truth.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)Political clubs like Tea Party groups shouldn't be tax exempt. IRS officers don't live in a vacuum; they see the same funny web photos we do, hear the same newscasts about tea party groups, read the same newspapers, and come to the same conclusion: tea party groups' idea of social welfare is what everyone else causes partisan politics. As mah pappy says, you don't have to eat every apple in the barrel to figure out they're all rotten.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)We are supposed to circle the wagons like good Democrats, and move on!
Enrique
(27,461 posts)and they support Obama on this.
siligut
(12,272 posts)CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)DevonRex
(22,541 posts)Have you ever noticed his pointy little teeth?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)What the NSA did under Bush did was warrantless wiretapping.
No warrant, and the actual conversation was recorded.
What the NSA is doing under Obama is collecting Meta-data under a FISA warrant.
There is a warrant for the activities, and only information like date, time and numbers called are collected. The phone conversation is not recorded.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)We wanted Bush impeached for lying us into wars and multiple violations of the Geneva Convention.
Sadly the spying on American citizens was the least of his crimes, to the point it barely registered. It certainly isn't an impeachable offense now because it's legal. It's immoral and indefensible, but it's still legal. That makes all the difference in the world.
Edited to add: And I'm certainly not one of the people defending the President on this one. It just doesn't rise to the level of impeachable offense. Not even close. It's not even illegal. And even if it were made illegal tomorrow, illegality isn't retroactive. So it still won't have been impeachable.