Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And this is supposed to mean something? A court in England, a doctor on MTV and a town council in Vermont of all places? You will need more authority than that - these are basically opinions and statements based on thoughts and feelings - not evidence of any wrongdoing.
See, basically the ONLY body that can do what you want is congress - and they realize that policy differences and disagreements DON'T justify impeachment.
Listed here are news stories about events in Iraq that are or can be considered war crimes.
If they "are" or "can" be considered war crimes then congress should do something about that - they've had since 2006 to fulfill their promise to the rabid Left. What happened?
I bet that link does NOT include one single story or report of the "war crimes" committed against the Iraqi civilians by the actual terrorists/insurgents who slaughtered tens of thousands. Does it?
Convictions without the defendant present or a defense being presented -
Sounds like the way things are done in the ole Soviet Union -
Have you ever heard of trials in "absentia?"
These are the trials held for chicken-hearted criminals that flee the scene of the crime. You know, like the Nazi war criminals. Bush purchased a huge parcel of land in Paraguay last year...gee, I do wonder why?????
And this is supposed to mean something? A court in England, a doctor on MTV and a town council in Vermont of all places? You will need more authority than that - these are basically opinions and statements based on thoughts and feelings - not evidence of any wrongdoing.
See, basically the ONLY body that can do what you want is congress - and they realize that policy differences and disagreements DON'T justify impeachment.
See the Clinton impeachment for more info.
We're not talking about impeachment here. Much too disruptive.
When W is out of office will be the time for Congress to investigate and prefer charges, so that he cannot hide behind "executive privilege to be above the law" any more. Today is not the day, but he needs to have his day in court to see if he can be acquitted of charges (meaning "INNOCENT") like Clinton was. If not, let him spend his life in Supermax with the other terrorists.
If they "are" or "can" be considered war crimes then congress should do something about that - they've had since 2006 to fulfill their promise to the rabid Left. What happened?
I bet that link does NOT include one single story or report of the "war crimes" committed against the Iraqi civilians by the actual terrorists/insurgents who slaughtered tens of thousands. Does it?
When Nancy Pelosi promised to "drain the swamp" and then stated that impeachment was "off the table" she lost the support of many people. There are many wheels in motion to bring the war criminals to justice, with or without The Congress. You poke fun at Kucinich raising the articles of impeachment, but clearly there are representatives that are on the side of justice.
Sure. But in the case instant, the alleged defendant was never served with a charge nor a notice of right to appear.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
