The Impeach Bush crowd will love this !!

[chiburb]

"In the spirit of Tricky Dick, let me make myself perfectly clear: I'm not saying that Yellowcake-gate is the equivalent of Watergate. I'm saying it's potentially much, much worse.
At its core, Watergate was all about trying to make sure that Nixon won an election. Yellowcake-gate is much more than a dirty trick played on the American public. It's about the Bush administration's pattern of deception as it pushed and shoved this country into a preemptive war -- from the much-advertised but nonexistent links between Iraq and al-Qaeda to the sexing-up of Saddam's WMD.

No one died as a result of Watergate, but more than 200 American soldiers have been killed and thousand more wounded to rid the world of an imminent threat that wasn't. To say nothing of the countless Iraqis who have lost their lives. And those numbers will only rise as we find ourselves stuck in a situation Gen. Tommy Franks predicts will continue for at least another four years.

With the events of the last week, George Bush has come across as very presidential indeed. Like his Dad, he's been out of the loop; like Clinton he's become a world class word weasel; and like Nixon he's shown a massive propensity for secrecy and dissembling. Not exactly the role models Karl Rove had in mind.

President Clinton was impeached for seven words he should never have uttered: "I never had sex with that woman." What price will President Bush have to pay for his sixteen-word scam? "

Link:http://www.ariannaonline.com/columns/files/071603.html

[Stevendsmith]

1. Yes, I loved that!

But doesn't the "Impeach Bush Crowd" comprise just about everyone that participates on this site? No malice, just ribbin' ya!

[ewagner]

2. ...ummmmm, yep!

eom

[chiburb]

3. Yes and no...

Some say absolutely, impeachment is not only appropriate but demanded (Arianna's point I think)! Others say save the bullets: without control of either house it just can't happen.
I think he most definitely deserves it, but I think I'd rather see a war crimes tribunal after he loses the election in '04.

I got the rib :-)

[Jack Rabbit]

5. Why not both?

Bush may not recognize the ICC, but the point would be moot if he and his fellow thugs are tried for war crimes in US courts.

Bush decided to go to war and his people cherry picked the intelligence data to sell it as a product. Remember, that's what Andy Card called it. No one cared whether the reasons publicly given to justify the war were factual. In fact, most of them were not. As long as no one cared whether the data itself could be verified, why should anyone be concerned about the authenticity of the exhibits to support it? They didn't care whether the Niger document was a fake.

If going to war and presenting the American people and the UN Security Council fabricated evidence to justify it isn't a crime against the peace, what is?

Impeachment doesn't go far enough. Neither does simply defeating him in the next election. These people must be sent to prison. As a nation, we must reassure the world that this will not happen again. It is absolutely necessary that the junta's leaders be tried for war crimes.

[MUAD_DIB]

4. Except for the lurker trolls

[lazarus]

6. Let's keep this to one thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=50622&mesg_id=50622&page=

[yolatengo]

7. bull loney

Watergate wasn't just the break-in. It was the 'secret plan to end
Vietnam' (prolong it for 3 more years, the majority of combat
deaths, and undermine the Humphrey campaign by talking to the
Vietcong before the '68 election). It was the Pentagon Papers and
Enemy Lists, it was Hoover wiretaps and CREEP.

It seems to me that Yellowcakegate is EXACTLY the same as
Watergate. Cheat on elections, promote fear and loathing,
undermine world peace efforts, turn us all against one another,
scapegoat liberals (Abortion, Acid and Amnesty anyone?),
lie about war (secret bombings/incursions into Cambodia),
promote it all as a clash of worldviews (vs Communism,
vs Islamicism/Terrorism), turn intelligence apparatus on
Americans.

She shouldn't minimize watergate to make her point. Today
IS bad, AS bad as '68-'72. Saying it's 'worse' seems like hyperbole
that'll get a "oh, c'mon, it's not THAT bad" reaction among
moderates. I mean, she's right about the facts, but I think
the message should be: "Remember Watergate? Remember
Kent State? Remeber the Secret Plan? Enemies Lists? Daniel
Elsberg? The Plumbers? CREEP? John Mitchell and J. Edgar
Hoover? What is so different about today? I am not a crook?
What about lying to start a war? Did it bother you that
30000 died AFTER Nixon was elected? Did the Pentagon
Papers bother you? Did Cointelpro bother you? Isn't the
Patriot Act worse? Did you hate when innocents were killed,
bugged, destroyed? Then WHY are you letting this guy slide?!?!"

Bigby