What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Watch a scene from 2012, in theaters November 13 view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Get ready for the biggest event in history – the end of time. How will you survive? 2012- opening 11/13
391 Comments
- Napoleone, on 11/15/2007, -22/+234Provable impeachable offenses committed by George W. Bush:
1. Warrantless domestic spying - In violation of the the First, Fourth and Ninth amendments to the Constitution of the United States. In violation of the FISA Act of 1978.
Proof: Telecoms seek IMMUNITY for having spied on Americans. Definition: im·mu·ni·ty - "Law. exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions." When was the last time someone was granted immunity for being innocent?
2. Unconstitutional revocation of the Right to Habeas Corpus - "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." - Constitution of the United States
Proof: We are not under invasion and, surprisingly enough, we're not in rebellion. Claims that the Right has not been revoked for U.S. Citizens are false. This so-called president has given himself the authority to detain as an "enemy combatant" any person within and without the United States. And enemy combatants do not have the Right to Habeas Corpus.
3. Deploying Military Spy Sattelites to assist local law enforcement - In violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of military personnel and or resources in the execution of domestic law enforcement activities. (No, National Guard does not count. They are not federal.)
Proof: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Aug15/0,4670,SpyS ...
4. Dereliction of Duty - Delayed and then woefully inadequate response to the Hurricane Katrina Disaster.
Proof: New Orleans; Mississippi coast - wishninja, on 11/15/2007, -23/+198Well republicans set the bar kind of low with the Bill Clinton Trial. If that is the standard of the minor offense then I would think bush should be tried for treason and if found guilty given the death penalty.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -10/+9899% would scream for impeachment if sent the bill for their portion of these two undeclared wars. The president knows this. If you want to stop the wars, demand Congress to threaten to send out the bills now. Your $20,000 portion, amortized at 9% over 6 years is $5,407.68 per month. Now do you want to see the president and vice president impeached?
You may also want to see the staff go to jail for their role in this. - inactive, on 11/15/2007, -11/+74Crimes against humanity: 65,000 civilians dead in Shock and awe alone.
Crimes of war: legalizing torture. - martinjd, on 11/15/2007, -21/+79I want a poll on what percentage of Americans know what's constitutionally impeachable. This is like polling junior-highers on global warming... the sample group isn't a reliable source....
- Waiting2awake, on 11/15/2007, -7/+62Martin - true he did lie under oath, under charges that were completely trumped up(Where have we seen that before?) and a line of questioning where he was going to have to reveal personal, private, family information which had NOTHING to do with the running of the country.
Bush, on the other(under?) hand, his lies have cost your Nation how much? For known lies? - Napoleone, on 11/15/2007, -3/+45I think, overall, Bill Clinton was a decent president; even though he did usher in globalism in a reckless fashion. That he likes blow-jobs is fine with me, but lying under oath IS a big deal. It's not at all a small matter, especially when you take an office which has the duty of protecting the rule of law.
George W. Bush has violated the law in a far more flagrant manner, for sure, but that doesn't excuse Clinton. It merely shines a light on the hypocrisy of most in the Republican party. - Napoleone, on 11/14/2007, -10/+48You're among a few others here on Digg who never refute an argument with one in turn. All you do is throw out vague insults that mean nothing. Do you do this because you believe you won't be given a fair chance to express your own opinion... because you can't articulate your ideas... because it's not worth convincing others of what you believe? Which is it?
If you express your views with respect it's likely more people would be willing to read what you have to say; even if they disagree with you. If you can't articulate your thoughts then let someone of a similar mind do it for you, because otherwise you merely discredit your position. If its not worth spreading, it's probably not worth believing in. In which case, why even bother with aspersions? - Monkeydew06, on 11/15/2007, -4/+35I love how these kind of "polls" state... "A NEW RESEARCH GROUP FOUND THAT". I cannot believe any of these results until I know:
1. Who conducted the study
2. Are they qualified (unbaised)
3. Where did they poll
4. Who did the poll
5. How many did they poll
Without these facts, this could all be BS
PS: Not that I disagree with the ideas, I want to see Bush out as much as the next guy. - fractalman, on 11/15/2007, -6/+35Bush swore an oath to uphold the constitution. On those grounds alone, he deserves to be impeached. He conspired with Britten to start a war in Iraq based on false information. He commuted part of Libby's sentence, that is a direct violation of office per the constitution. Here are 25 reasons to impeach Bush. http://www.counterpunch.org/corseri06062005.html Congress should be able to make at least a few of these stick. It only takes one.
- objectcode, on 11/15/2007, -3/+30didn't bush swear to uphold the constitution?
- pintomp3, on 11/15/2007, -5/+26the sex lives of your politicians are your primary concern? you must hate the GOP then.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -5/+25Correction: $360.51 per month. Sorry.
- coleelectric, on 11/15/2007, -0/+18They wouldn't care. Half of them are in violation of "dereliction of duties" themselves.
- nphase, on 11/15/2007, -0/+18No, see we live in the US. We don't believe in equal and proportional justice.
Remember: possession of Marijuana can keep you in jail longer than murder. - azprofessional, on 11/14/2007, -4/+21Do something already then so called 'majority' or STFU!
- isaactwito, on 11/15/2007, -3/+19Are people just figuring out that Bush should be impeached, tried, and executed? He's orchestrated the deaths of countless more Americans and others than 9/11 ever did. He's wholy ***** our economy. He's the one who has made the world hate the US and screwed us unimagineably. He is the biggest terrorist in the ***** world.
- ScornedPatriot, on 11/15/2007, -4/+19You can be impeached for "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". Nixon was going to be impeached for illegal wiretapping of the democrats. President Bush has illegally wiretapped the entire country. You can't say that he didn't, otherwise the telecoms wouldn't be asking for immunity now. Bush is the most impeachable President we have ever had. I'm pretty sure illegal wiretapping is at least a misdemeanor, since even stealing a candy bar is. For no other reason alone he should be impeached, you don't even need to bring Iraq and all the other bad decisions into it.
- inactive, on 11/14/2007, -5/+20"If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged". http://www.chomsky.info/talks/1990----.htm
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -2/+17At $360 a month, 99% of Americans would send send Dick an' Dubya to the big house.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -7/+19Am I wrong in thinking that to say that
a) President Bush has “abused his powers” in a manner that rises “to the level of impeachable offenses under the Constitution"
and that
b) that he should not actually be impeached
means that 21% of American voters disagree with the Constitution?
Feel free to shoot me down on this. I'm English. - FloppyLlamaDigg, on 11/15/2007, -0/+12Get off my lawn!
- Neiby, on 11/15/2007, -3/+15Wrong. He was impeached, but he was not removed from office by the Senate. Impeachment does not, in this case, mean removal from office.
- relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -5/+17So... show me some reputable polls that say otherwise.
- azprofessional, on 11/15/2007, -4/+16I think the Island of misfit Digg addicts with one line responses is calling you.
And the department of clever responses called, you're ***** fired, again. - pault107, on 11/14/2007, -1/+12sniperhare is a troll. Check his comments, the vast majority are dugg down heavily:
http://www.zuubu.com?username=sniperhare&selectedt ...
Plus, get this, he joined Digg 1st August and since then he hasn't dugg a single article but he has made lots ***** comments. Sad really. - inactive, on 11/14/2007, -5/+16He does it because he is a rude neocon bully http://reasontraditionandliberty.blogspot.com/2007 ...
He can't put together a logical argument and won't enter into a real debate. - outlaw1, on 11/15/2007, -4/+15ZOMG!! 55% of Americans think Bush and Co. should be impeached!! Oh wait, it was a small sample poll of only 1100 people of which the majority was dems? This poll is hilarious.
34% (374 people) think bush should be impeached
43% (473 people) think cheney should be impeached
I can't be bothered to check wikipedia for the exact figures but I'm pretty sure that 473 people is not the majority in America. Buried as inaccurate, spam laden garbage. - burstaneurysm, on 11/15/2007, -4/+15"If the standard for impeachment is covering up a burglary, or getting a blowjob; if that means 'you're impeached,' then shouldn't Bush have been ***** executed at this point?" - Patton Oswalt
- pastanoose, on 11/15/2007, -4/+15Wow, you are one delusional SOB. Bush has crapped on the constitution so much you can't even read it anymore!
- dethl, on 11/14/2007, -3/+14That kool-aid must be really damn tasty.
- falseleftright, on 11/15/2007, -1/+12Goebbels was a facscist; thats a lot closer to the right then the left, but who's counting. Way to display your massive ignorance.
- WileEPeyote, on 11/15/2007, -0/+11Both are correct, but I think it has more to do with fear. People in this country (I am an American) are driven by fear. Sorry to say it. We used to be driven by a dream, now we are driven by nightmares.
- schroeder, on 11/15/2007, -0/+10Well, it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.
- starkruzr, on 11/15/2007, -0/+10Here are the reasons A is true:
Provable impeachable offenses committed by George W. Bush:
1. Warrantless domestic spying - In violation of the the First, Fourth and Ninth amendments to the Constitution of the United States. In violation of the FISA Act of 1978.
Proof: Telecoms seek IMMUNITY for having spied on Americans. Definition: im·mu·ni·ty - "Law. exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions." When was the last time someone was granted immunity for being innocent?
2. Unconstitutional revocation of the Right to Habeas Corpus - "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." - Constitution of the United States
Proof: We are not under invasion and, surprisingly enough, we're not in rebellion. Claims that the Right has not been revoked for U.S. Citizens are false. This so-called president has given himself the authority to detain as an "enemy combatant" any person within and without the United States. And enemy combatants do not have the Right to Habeas Corpus.
3. Deploying Military Spy Sattelites to assist local law enforcement - In violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of military personnel and or resources in the execution of domestic law enforcement activities. (No, National Guard does not count. They are not federal.)
Proof: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Aug15/0,4670,SpyS ...
4. Dereliction of Duty - Delayed and then woefully inadequate response to the Hurricane Katrina Disaster.
Proof: New Orleans; Mississippi coast
You already pretended to refute #4 and failed. Please refute the other three or you have failed to justify the existence of the worst presidency since Warren G. Harding. - Waiting2awake, on 11/14/2007, -5/+14Lets get them under Oath...if they have nothing to hide...right?
- azprofessional, on 11/15/2007, -4/+13Yes because he says so and all pro-conservative polls are intrisically reputable and otherwise are not. This is just how to great flow of reality goes in *****.
- inactive, on 11/14/2007, -0/+9If congress was willing to impeach or accuse anyone, they would've done it about 4 years ago.
They choose not to. Even democrats are blocking the impeachment. But hey, let's keep pretending the system works, write a letter to someone who will never read it. - MyocyteX, on 11/15/2007, -1/+10Your words are so true, it just sucks, because when you say it like that, people think you are a crazy radical. I wish he would be tried for treason and executed, but it wont happen. He will for sure be judged as the worst president in American history....that seems to be one thing that we can count on.
- falseleftright, on 11/15/2007, -0/+9If you are going to be a govt/corporate cheeleader (like your comment record reflects), at least come up with some good cheers.
- pintomp3, on 11/15/2007, -4/+12because you say so?
- pault107, on 11/14/2007, -1/+9sniperhare is a troll. Check his comments, the vast majority are dugg down heavily:
http://www.zuubu.com?username=sniperhare&selectedt ...
Plus, get this, he joined Digg 1st August and since then he hasn't dugg a single article but he has made lots ***** comments. Sad really. - AngryChris, on 11/15/2007, -1/+9Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction and intent to use them against the United States. Saddam Hussein was intimately connected with Al'Qaida and instrumental in the planning and execution of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. I believe these things because they are lies told often enough by your Republican overlords.
Oh, and Goebbels was a fascist (read: far right).
Your comment is ***** ignorant. Digging it down. - dalethefarmer, on 11/14/2007, -2/+9Do it.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -5/+12Clinton said "I did not have sexual relations...", how many young people even consider oral sex to be anything other than "Hello" these days?
- inactive, on 11/14/2007, -9/+16The bush pushers must be watching digg closely, they get the the top of every negative story about him. I haven't been at the top of a comments section in like a year and I'm on Digg all the time.
- leahcim, on 11/15/2007, -0/+7The way you read it, is wrong. He was legally impeached. "Impeached" is just a formal vote, if it passes, the president is impeached. Then Congress decides to do next, kick him our ignore it.
- andburn1, on 11/14/2007, -0/+7Hahahahahahahahahah, integrity and character? In a President? Bush is a Christian and a murderer. He does not love any ***** neighbors and he does not forgive those who commit trespasses against him. Firm moral convictions? Maybe pigs should ***** gold. That being said, you cannot impeach a President for a moral offense. He lied under oath, THAT is why he was impeached. He committed no crime beyond that. Bush has committed crimes o' plenty, not the least of which is trying to undo the division of power upon which the country is founded.
- kaelyiesta, on 11/15/2007, -2/+9Exactly. Who gives a ***** if some idiotic 'america can do no wrong' patriot thinks bush didn't do something impeachable. The ***** Constitution, our rule of law, is what determines that, not some christian extremist nut that would never admit to bush doing wrong.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -0/+7while you are way up there on your high horse of republican moral values ( I hope we can see the light from WAY up there)... take a look at this list of 46 republican pedophiles and get back to us when you can explain that: http://utah.indymedia.org/news/2006/07/16092.php
-
Show 51 - 100 of 393 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is