PDA

View Full Version : List Of Chimpy's Impeachable Offenses



Hardrock69
12-22-2005, 09:51 AM
President Bush has admitted that he has authorized the use of surveillance upon American citizens and residents. He has argued that he has the authority to do so, that he has balanced the need to spy on us and our civil liberties. Unfortunately, his claims do not withstand scrutiny.

Firstly, the spying upon Americans without probable cause, due process and a warrant supported by evidence and sworn before a competent magistrate violates the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution. It is essential to the argument to understand that the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights does not create the rights of citizens, but places our government in the position of GUARANTEEING these inherent and INALIENABLE rights. Infringing upon these rights in any manner is unlawful, unconstitutional, immoral and evil.

The 1st Amendment guarantees our right to associate and communicate unimpeded by state and federal government. Merely communicating overseas is not grounds for monitoring, marking, flagging or otherwise recording the communications of US citizens. Current law allows for the presentation of evidence of criminal or terrorist activities as probable cause to issue a wiretap order. There is absolutely no legitimate reason for this administration to circumvent the rights guaranteed by this amendment.

The 4th Amendment guarantees the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. The US courts have held that a wiretap is an unreasonable search unless it is executed upon a valid warrant. The US congress has held such as being so unreasonable that it has passed the following laws that guarantee limits upon the execution of surveillance, investigation and record keeping by use of communication, telecommunication and records (including dossiers and case files):

- The Telecommunications Privacy Act of 1984 (TPA)
- The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986
(ECPA)
- The Privacy Act of 1974
- The Wire And Electronic Communications Interception
And Interception Of Oral Communications
- The Wireless Telecommunications Privacy Act of 2000
- The Freedom of Information Act

(see footnotes)

So, not only has Mr. Bush violated the Constitution, his oath or office, but also (at a minimum) six federal laws. In so doing, he has violated his duties and obligations as the chief executive officer of this great nation and should be impeached. However, like his father before him, George W. Bush has wrapped himself in a cloak of patriotism, protectionism and fascism in the name of national interests and security.

He has lied, misled and/or relied upon inappropriate intelligence DATA to engage in an improper invasion of a sovereign nation, violated the UN Charter (which is part and parcel of our Constitution by law), has circumvented our fundamental rights, and portrays himself as our great protector. Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Khomeini, the Saudi Royal Family and the Taliban all made the same claims of protection, but even Mr. Bush has recognized their actions as contrary to fundamental liberties, democracy and basic human rights.

The 5th Amendment guarantees the right of due process. The acts of spying on American citizens and residents without application, review, approval and issuance of a warrant is, without a doubt, a complete negation and circumvention of due process. There can be no excuse for such an end-run around due process. Such circumvention of due process is a breach of the highest magnitude of our fundamental liberties.

The 9th Amendment limits all members of government, including the president, from exceeding the powers and authority provided by the Constitution. These limits include any and all efforts to usurp, circumvent and/or by-pass the rights of US citizens and residents. The 9th Amendment specifically reserves all rights not specifically assigned elsewhere to the state governments and the PEOPLE. Mr. Bush's claims that he has authority to spy upon US citizens and residents by virtue of an executive order betrays his "anything I want to do" agenda and his fascist demeanor.

The 14th Amendment, in the first section, applies all federal protections and obligations under the Constitution to state governments (equal protection) and specifically reasserts the obligation of due process.

It is unconscionable that anyone holding the highest political office of our nation would cast aside so many provisions of our Constitution, especially those that were specifically included by amending the original structure to prevent autocratic and/or authoritarian abuses.

Violation of our Constitution is treason. It is so not only in principle, but also by the words of the oath taken by each officer of the government, military and high office. The oath of office includes specific regard for defending the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic. Once again, George W. Bush has violated that oath, violated the Constitution, violated federal laws, and made himself an enemy of freedom and civil rights. Mr. Bush should resign in shame and disgrace. In the alternative, our House of Representatives should bring about an immediate impeachment proceeding, and the Senate should convict. Should Mr. Bush not resign, and should congress fail to impeach and convict, then we should rise up against such abuses even to the point of militant overthrow of the current administration.

Mr. Bush has offered lame excuses, ridicule and denial as his only defense for his actions. He expects us to trust him. But his record of hypocrisy provides categorical evidence that he cannot be trusted. While he is advocating for liberty, freedom and democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, he is eroding and usurping civil liberties here in the US the supposed bedrock of freedom in our world. We cannot be advocating for freedom elsewhere while aborting freedom here. We cannot be advocating freedom and liberty in Iraq, under extreme lack of security, while we abandon liberties here in the name of security. But that is the hypocrisy that Mr. Bush is shoveling upon us.

Mr. Bush has appealed for us to trust his judgment regarding the protection of our civil liberties. Our fundamental form of government does not call for such trust because our forefathers and framers knew that men, left unchecked and balanced, are subject to corruption of power. It is exactly because of the corrupting nature of power that our government was built upon a system of checks and balances, of guaranteed rights and liberties, and of due process.

Mr. Bush's judgment has removed many of the checks and balances, deliberately set aside the guaranteed rights, and ignored due process. He has done so not only by spying upon us, but also by circumventing the provisions of the Geneva Conventions, denying prisoners access to fundamental legal representations, invading a country without legal right, using a process of "rendition" to circumvent rules against torture, advocating for torture as a tool of interrogation, and well, we can't really be sure of what else, can we?

While Mr. Bush proclaims his religious fervor, his actions are anything but moral by any standard, not even the Christianity he professes. He proclaims that he understands his role, but does not act within the scope and limits of that role. He makes excuses and expects us to live with his breach of office, law and trust. We cannot trust Mr. Bush or anyone in his inner circle.

Beyond the fact that we cannot trust Mr. Bush is his admission (finally) that he relied upon poor intelligence to bring us into the invasion of Iraq. It was his job to make sure that the intelligence he received was accurate to the highest degree. The facts are in we know that Mr. Bush pushed an agenda of invasion despite being advised that the intelligence he used was suspect and potentially useless.

Several agencies and foreign sources provided this feedback to his administration. We are thusly faced with the reality that either Mr. Bush, and his entire administration, and the entire intelligence infrastructure, is completely incompetent, or that Mr. Bush and others conspired to push forward an agenda of war mongering to meet their own needs and desires.

It is unfathomable that the entire intelligence infrastructure universally failed. It is unbelievable that there was no voice of reason among all the leaders advising Mr. Bush So we can only conclude that Mr. Bush is an outright liar and pushed his agenda regardless of the dangers for our nation, the dangers of war, and the tragedies of our losses.

Bush lied and our troops have died.
Bush lied and his administration spied.
Bush lied and our liberties were denied.
Bush lied and freedoms were circumscribed.
Bush lied and our laws he did not abide.
Face it Bush does nothing without having first lied.


Footnotes

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v2n1/byrne.html

http://personalinfomediary.com/ECPAof1986_info.htm

http://www.usdoj.gov/foia/privstat.htm

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/ usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_119.html

http://www.govrecords.org/hr-348-eh-to-authorize-the-construction-of-a- monument-3.html

http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/

_____

http://www.digitaldivide.net/blog/JMDowney/view?PostID=9607

Warham
12-22-2005, 03:09 PM
'Bush lied and troops died'.

blah blah blah.

I know a lib had to write this article.

Hardrock69
12-22-2005, 03:43 PM
???

That is a stupid comment.

It is FACT that he lied, and it is FACT that WELL OVER 2,000 OF OUR SOLDIERS HAVE DIED!!!!


Whether some journalist is liberal, conservative, or all or none of the above is IRRELEVANT.

Warham
12-22-2005, 03:53 PM
Same regurgitated talking points.

He lied about the WMDs, huh? When George Tenet told him it was a 'slam dunk' that WMDs were in Iraq, Bush then went out and 'lied' to the American public about them being there?
He cooked it up, huh? Did Bush lie when the CIA brought him faulty intelligence that showed WMDs over there. Shall we gloss over the fact that the UK, France, and just about every other civilized country though Iraq still had their weapons programs running full-speed ahead?

I'd like to know what THE lie was.

Hardrock69
12-22-2005, 08:42 PM
Your arguments are without merit.

You are defending terrorists.

I have nothing further to say to you.

Warham
12-22-2005, 08:47 PM
LOL

DrMaddVibe
12-22-2005, 09:02 PM
Why stop with him?

Hell, why not say anything...anymore...to ANYONE!!!!!!!!!

Hardrock69
12-22-2005, 09:36 PM
Sorry no such luck goober-boy. I have been ordered by the Powers That Be to allow you the rare priviledge of reading my posts.

And so I will continue to post.

Here is some further info. Chimpy IS operating outside the law, as during the debates for the resolution, there was no mention anywhere at anytime of "surveillance" in general, and of course, no mention of "electronic surveillance" in particular.

And Senator Boxer is consulting with four different legal scholars to determine if Chimpy has committed an impeachable offense.

Haha Chimpy is getting ready to be tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail....

:D:D:D:D:D:D

Skepticism trails Bush's defense of domestic spying

By Susan Page, USA TODAY Wed Dec 21, 6:50 AM ET

Three days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress passed a resolution with almost no dissent that authorized
President Bush to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against the attackers.

Now that law is at the center of a fierce controversy over the administration's decision to spy on some Americans' international phone calls without going to a secret court for a warrant.

"Do I have the legal authority to do this?" Bush said Monday. "And the answer is, 'Absolutely.' " He cited his constitutional authority as commander in chief and the congressional resolution, which he said authorized him to bypass requirements for a warrant.

But members of Congress from both parties who voted for the law said in interviews Tuesday that they had no idea the administration would interpret it to cover such a step. In a review of the five-hour House debate, no mention of intelligence gathering in general or electronic surveillance in particular — or of bypassing warrants — could be found.

"I think it's probably clear we didn't know we were voting for that," says Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., says he is "very, very skeptical" about Bush's explanation but "prepared to listen" when his committee convenes hearings on the issue early next year. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid and two other Democratic senators told Bush in a letter sent Tuesday that they were "deeply troubled" by his legal justification.

The congressional debate and vote took place Sept. 14, 2001, as the nation reeled from the attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. It was the day Bush went to Ground Zero and, using a borrowed bullhorn, told workers there that "the people who knocked down these buildings will hear all of us soon!"

On Capitol Hill, the White House proposed a resolution that would give the president authority to "deter and prevent any related future acts of terrorism and aggression against the United States." Members from both parties objected that the language was too broad.

"It would have given him authority to do anything he wanted, anytime, anywhere," recalls Rep. Peter DeFazio (news, bio, voting record), D-Ore. The wording was revised.

The new version said: "The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons."

At the end of the debate in the House, Rep. John Tierney (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., proposed adding a requirement that the president report to Congress every 60 days on "the status of efforts made to carry out this resolution."

Illinois Republican Henry Hyde, then chairman of the House International Relations Committee, rose to speak against that idea. "This is illogical because the whole point of the joint resolution we are considering this evening is to clear away legal underbrush that might otherwise interfere with the ability of our president to respond to the treacherous attack," he said.

Tierney's amendment was defeated, and the resolution was passed 420-1. Only California Democrat Barbara Lee voted "no."

The debate centered on the expectation that a war was ahead, albeit against an as-yet-undefined enemy. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told reporters Monday that the surveillance was authorized by the act because it is "a fundamental incident of war."

Many Democrats disagree. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., calls Bush's actions "illegal, if not worse."

"There's nothing in there that gave the president the authority to override the law," says Sen. Barbara Boxer (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif. She has asked four legal scholars if they believe Bush has admitted an "impeachable offense."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051221/ts_usatoday/skepticismtrailsbushsdefenseofdomesticspying

Too bad...sooner or later Chimpy is going to have to realize his job is not to make the laws...his job is to OBEY the law.

What do you do with employees who do not obey the law?

Well, if they do not obey the law, tha means they are criminals.

And criminals must be sent to the slammer for Federal Offenses.

Certainly stuff like Murder, Treason, Genocide, etc.

:cool:

Cathedral
12-22-2005, 09:38 PM
Well, let's bring on the due process and get these trials going. Innocent until proven guilty, sound familiar?
It should, it's the law in this here land.

So save the arguments and let's get to filing those charges and get the ball rolling, we got us a chimp to evict, eh?

Warham
12-22-2005, 09:44 PM
To all you liberals...keep dreaming.

blueturk
12-23-2005, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by Warham
Same regurgitated talking points.

He lied about the WMDs, huh? When George Tenet told him it was a 'slam dunk' that WMDs were in Iraq, Bush then went out and 'lied' to the American public about them being there?
He cooked it up, huh? Did Bush lie when the CIA brought him faulty intelligence that showed WMDs over there. Shall we gloss over the fact that the UK, France, and just about every other civilized country though Iraq still had their weapons programs running full-speed ahead?

I'd like to know what THE lie was.

Damn, Warham. For somebody who said that they can't defend Bush any longer, you're trying like hell to do just that. I think that your alleged change of heart is a bunch of bullshit. You're just too much of a pussy to admit that your "president" and his staff are totally incompetent, even though you support them. You're just another sheep. Face it, and quit trying to pretend.

"Fuck Saddam, we're taking him out." –President Bush to three U.S. Senators in March 2002, a full year before the Iraq invasion

"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." –President Bush, standing under a "Mission Accomplished" banner on the USS Lincoln aircraft carrier, May 2, 2003

"We found the weapons of mass destruction." –President Bush, in an interview with Polish television, May 29, 2003

"My answer is bring 'em on." —President George W. Bush, challenging militants attacking U.S. forces in Iraq, July 2, 2003

"Had we to do it over again, we would look at the consequences of catastrophic success, being so successful so fast that an enemy that should have surrendered or been done in escaped and lived to fight another day." —President Bush, telling Time magazine that he underestimated the Iraqi resistance, Aug. 2004

scamper
12-23-2005, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by blueturk
your "president"

If you live in the United States he's your president to, its so bullshit when people say he's not my president, he is, I wish he wasn't but thats the fact, HE IS.

blueturk
12-23-2005, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by scamper
If you live in the United States he's your president to, its so bullshit when people say he's not my president, he is, I wish he wasn't but thats the fact, HE IS.

As shown by the quotation marks, I don't even consider him a president at all. Therefore, he's not my president. :cool:

LoungeMachine
12-23-2005, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by scamper
If you live in the United States he's your president to, its so bullshit when people say he's not my president, he is, I wish he wasn't but thats the fact, HE IS.

Not by any stretch of the imagination....

This man was installed in 2000.

scamper
12-23-2005, 11:05 AM
say whatever you want but the fact is he is the president of this country, if you are a citizen of this country he is your president, thats why the far left can't get anything done they refuse to accept facts

blueturk
12-23-2005, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by scamper
... thats why the far left can't get anything done they refuse to accept facts

And the far right makes up facts...

scamper
12-23-2005, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by blueturk
And the far right makes up facts...

you're right, they're as bad as the left

4moreyears
12-23-2005, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Same regurgitated talking points.

He lied about the WMDs, huh? When George Tenet told him it was a 'slam dunk' that WMDs were in Iraq, Bush then went out and 'lied' to the American public about them being there?
He cooked it up, huh? Did Bush lie when the CIA brought him faulty intelligence that showed WMDs over there. Shall we gloss over the fact that the UK, France, and just about every other civilized country though Iraq still had their weapons programs running full-speed ahead?

I'd like to know what THE lie was.

Along with John Kerry, bill Clinton, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman and Nancy "The Cunt" Pelosi.

LoungeMachine
12-23-2005, 12:33 PM
turk is the second funniest motherfucker on this site in my book.

Warham
12-23-2005, 04:01 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
turk is the second funniest motherfucker on this site in my book.

You have low standards for humor.

LoungeMachine
12-23-2005, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by Warham
You have low standards for humor.

Which would explain why you crack me up so much....;)

DrMaddVibe
12-23-2005, 08:05 PM
Get back in line government cheese boy!

blueturk
12-23-2005, 08:12 PM
Originally posted by Warham
You have low standards for humor.

How would you know, since you supposedly never read my posts anyway?

ELVIS
12-23-2005, 08:29 PM
I thought it was Bush lied and people died...

:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:


:elvis:

LoungeMachine
12-23-2005, 08:56 PM
Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
Get back in line government cheese boy!

Wasn't that Gipper era?

Do they still do that?

If so, I prefer provolone, if you please.

:cool:

Hardrock69
12-25-2005, 12:48 AM
D-Rep Releases
Potentially 'Lethal'
Impeachment Doc
Democratic Congressman Releases
Potentially 'Lethal Document' That Could
Lead To Bush Impeachment Next Year


Rep. John Conyers (D-Mi) is tired of the Bush arrogance and flaunting of federal law concerning the Iraq War and other matters. Friday he released a document called "The Constitution in Crisis," seeking a Congrssional Resolution to again investigate Bush's possible impeachment.

By Greg Szymanski
12-24-5

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mi) released a potentially lethal document Friday, focusing on the numerous federal violations of the Bush administration, including evidence of WMD intelligence cover-ups, deception, manipulation, retribution and torture concerning the Iraqi War.

The document, entitled "The Constitution in Crisis," finds more than probable cause and substantial evidence for many federal law violations by top administration officials, including the President and Vice President, based on their blatant and arrogant abuse of power.

"I have introduced a resolution creating a Select Committee with subpoena authority to investigate the misconduct of the Bush Administration with regard to the Iraq war and report on possible impeachable offenses, as well as Resolutions proposing both President Bush and Vice-President Cheney should be censured by Congress based on the uncontroverted evidence of their abuse of power," said Rep. Conyers in a statement released this week regarding action to be taken when Congress returns after the Christmas break.

Besides specifically detailing the many Bush administration federal violations concerning Iraq, Rep.. Conyers severely scolds and attacks the administration for its "arrogance, hubris and wrongheadedness," highlighting the dangers of a one party rule in Congress and a lack of check and balances on President Bush who is acting more like a dictator than a President of the people.

"It is important that we as a nation say "never again" to going to war under false pretenses, and covering up official wrongdoing," added Rep. Conyers, who has been a strong advocate for getting to the truth of allegations President Bush doctored intelligence reports to justify an illegal Iraqi invasion.

In the lengthy report submitted to Congress and being distributed widely across America for citizens signatures, Sen. Conyers said he took this drastic action to "save the country" after President Bush arrogantly refused to respond to a letter submitted by 122 members of Congress and more than 500,000 Americans last July, asking him whether information in the infamous Downing Street Memo, alleging doctoring of WMD intelligence, was accurate.

Since Bush failed to acknowledge the letter, Conyers staff prepared the legal document released this week, finding substantial evidence that Bush and Cheney misled Congress and the American people regarding decisions to go to war with Iraq, misstated and manipulated intelligence information regarding the justification for entering into the war, mandated torture and cruel inhumane treatment in the execution of the war, as well as permitted inappropriate retaliation against critics of the administration.

In the Executive Summary of the document which will seek a Resolution for Congress to seek impeachment, Rep. Conyers through his legal staff added:

"There is prima facie case that these actions by the President, Vice President and other members of the Bush administration violated a number of federal laws, including committing a fraud against the U.S.; making false statements to Congress; violating the War Powers Resolution; misuse of government funds; violating international treaties prohibiting torture; violating federal laws concerning retaliating against witnesses and other individuals and violating federal laws concerning leaking and other misuse of intelligence."

While the document raises charges meriting Bush's impeachment, it notes that special investigative powers be established by Congressional Resolution since the Republican controlled Legislative and Executive branches has systematically and illegally blocked off a fair and honest search for the truth, using its power to protect a corrupt and out-of-control President and Vice President.

"As a result, we recommend that Congress establish a select committee with subpoena authority to investigate the misconduct of the Bush administration with regard to the Iraq War and report to the Committee on the Judiciary on possible impeachable offenses," added Rep. Conyers.


For more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com.

Mister_Scary
12-30-2005, 12:58 PM
Well we seem to have a cheerleader for the terrorists. Oh goodie.

It's funny how all the left-wing pillow-biters cry about the wiretaps but not a peep about the fact that Jimmy Carter and Slick Willy Clinton did the same thing. Hmmmmm......

The coolaid drinkers also cry that Bush "Lied". A statement can only be a "lie" if the statement is known to be false at the time it was made. You probably run around screaming about how our country is "supposed to be" a democracy, when in fact it is a republic and our founding fathers did everything they could to make sure it would never become a democracy.

The weak and stupid also think that the constitution "gives" us rights, when in fact it is meant to "PROTECT" rights we are born with.

The lunatic fringe talks smack about the president's intelligence, when in fact it's the guy they voted for who has a lower I.Q. and had the lower grades in college.

Hey, Sparky.....the Geneva Conventions don't apply to terrorists. Look it up.

The left also thinks that 8 years and 17 resolutions is a "rush to war".

The left thinks gas prices are high because of the evil and rich oil executives and not because their tree-hugging socialist friends won't let any more refineries be built and won't allow any more drilling/exploration. This is all while they're gladly paying $5 for a foamy cup of coffee...........

Liberals infest and dominate the news organizations and networks, yet claim there to be no bias in the media and entertainment world. Uh, yeah. Sure. The Media Research Center begs to differ.

Giving aid and comfort to the enemy is treason and that's just what the left is doing. When John Rockefella went to SYRIA (you know, the other terrist state?) and told them that Bush was going to invade Iraq, it was TREASON. Funny how right after his visit is when we started seeing all those vehicles transporting "something" from Iraq to Syria....

I also love the "there were no WMD's!" Obviously the many METRIC TONS of enriched uranium we confiscated doesn't count. We won't mention the sarin gas-filled bombs all over the place or the fact that even the French science weasels who studied those aluminum tubes said they were obviously for enriching uranium.

The left is a product of government schools being taught by socialists and the criminalization of natural selection among humans. They are the soft white underbelly of our population and will get us all killed if they are left to their own devices.

They care more about Saddam getting a "fair" trial and if he has clean underwear than they care about national security. They don't support the troops because they don't support their commander in chief. Sorry, you can't have one without the other. Deal with it.

They don't care that the religion of Islam's "Bible" says that anyone who isn't a muslim must be dealt with in one of three ways. Convert them, enslave them or kill them.

Guitar Shark
12-30-2005, 01:04 PM
You are aptly named.

LoungeMachine
12-30-2005, 01:07 PM
He has so many Rush/Hannity GOP talking points memorized......

I'd love to take 'em apart one by one and show him where he's wrong, but I just don't have the energy or patience with another newbie Con coming in so late to the table.

He's just not worth the effort.

yawn.

ODShowtime
12-30-2005, 10:20 PM
Originally posted by Mister_Scary
The coolaid drinkers also cry that Bush "Lied". A statement can only be a "lie" if the statement is known to be false at the time it was made.

Then how come it has been proven that gw&friends manipulated the intelligence? The motive is obvious enough, what else do we need to prove the crime?


http://www.antiwar.com/orig/leopold11.html


not the best source, but it spells things out clearly



Hey, Sparky.....the Geneva Conventions don't apply to terrorists. Look it up.

Anyone with commen sense knows that piece of shit gw&friends has proven that they do NOT deserve the authority to judge whether people are terrorists or not. Do you?

Giving aid and comfort to the enemy is treason and that's just what the left is doing. When John Rockefella went to SYRIA (you know, the other terrist state?) and told them that Bush was going to invade Iraq, it was TREASON. Funny how right after his visit is when we started seeing all those vehicles transporting "something" from Iraq to Syria....

Good luck proving that bullshit. That would be the logical answer to why no WMDs were found if gw was telling the truth. Do you have a single source?

I'm sure that was a fun little rant, but you've proven yourself to be quite deluded.

ODShowtime
12-30-2005, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
He has so many Rush/Hannity GOP talking points memorized......

I'd love to take 'em apart one by one and show him where he's wrong, but I just don't have the energy or patience with another newbie Con coming in so late to the table.

He's just not worth the effort.

yawn.

yeah I was bored

resting for tomorrow ;)

4moreyears
01-02-2006, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by blueturk

"Fuck Saddam, we're taking him out." –President Bush to three U.S. Senators in March 2002, a full year before the Iraq invasion



Link???

blueturk
01-02-2006, 11:02 AM
Here you go...

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,1004567,00.html