"The 35 Articles of Impeachment and the Case for Prosecuting George W. Bush"FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions
Regular Questions
- How can I help?
- Does Cheney take over if Bush is impeached?
- Would Pelosi become President if Bush and Cheney are impeached?
- Is there any chance of impeachment given the current balance of Power?
- Which Presidents have been impeached in the past?
- Have any municipal governments passed resolutions to impeach Bush?
- Why not try Bush for War Crimes instead?
Argumentative Questions
- Why are you being such a sore loser?
- What was Bush supposed to do after 9/11, roll over and let the terrorists win?
- Do liberals hate America?
How can I help?
A list of possible actions are described here. I hope you find some that suit your particular skills and interests.
Does Cheney take over if Bush is impeached?
That would be bad. We have included Dick Cheney and the other core members of his team in the Articles of Impeachment, and Cheney is in our Model Resolution. Also Kucinich has introduced HRes 333 to impeach CHeney so he may be the first to go.
Also any investigation of Bush would necessarily implicate Cheney. So it is very unlikely Cheney would become President by impeaching Bush.
The Constitution (Article II, section 1) and the 25th Amendment specify who takes over the Presidency in case the higher up folks are unable to serve. Based on that law, Congress has established an "Order of Presidential Succession". Basically after Cheney comes the Speaker of the House (Pelosi), then the President pro tempore of the Senate, then Secretary of State(!), and so on. More details here.
Would Pelosi become President if Bush and Cheney are impeached?
It is unlikely that Pelosi would become President. A more likely scenario is that Cheney would resign before Bush could be impeached. Then the Republicans would appoint a new VP. That person would become President when Bush is removed. This is similar to the scenario that led to Ford becoming President.
Is there any chance of impeachment given the current balance of power?
It will not be easy. But there is a chance. Consider the last three Presidents that were re-elected for a second term: Clinton was impeached; Reagan was under scrutiny for Iran-Contra; and Nixon resigned under threat of impeachment.
The Democrats now have a majority in the House but they say "impeachment is off the table". Consider, however, the Congressional Oath of Office. Senators and Representative swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". If it can be clearly demonstrated that Bush violated the Constitution then they are obligated to follow the impeachment process. If they obstruct the process to protect their party then they can be charged with violating their oath. They may be put in the position of saying either that "the Constitution doesn't matter", or that "Bush should be impeached". The hardest part will be getting an official investigation started in the Judiciary Committee. The violations of the Constitution are so blatantly obvious, particularly in the issue of War Crimes, that the process may be difficult to stop after that.
Which Presidents have been impeached in the past?
- 1842 - John Tyler was almost impeached when a politically motivated House of Representatives adopted a resolution charging him with offenses justifying impeachment for vetoing a protective tariff.
- 1868 - Andrew Johnson was impeached on charges related to protecting Southern State's rights after the Civil War over the rights of freed slaves. The issues were complex and politically charged and cannot be easily summarized. The Senate found him not guilty by a margin of one vote.
- 1974 - Richard Nixon resigned after the Judiciary Committee submitted articles of impeachment to the House for a vote. The charges related to the Watergate burglaries for the purpose of spying on Democratic rivals and the following attempts to cover it up.
- 1999 - William Clinton was impeached for perjury related to having "sex" with an intern. He was found not guilty.
More details on all these cases here.
Why not try Bush for War Crimes instead?
The President is generally considered to be immune to criminal prosecution while in office. (See Mathews for a contrary opinion.) The legal question has never been answered by a court. But it is safe to say that the United States would not surrender a sitting President to an international court.
But there is hope for justice. The Constitution, Article 1 Section 3, says that after a President is impeached and convicted then they would "be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law". So if you want to try Bush for War Crimes, you have to impeach him first.
Why are you being such a sore loser?
If I just disagreed with Bush's fiscal policy, or his attitude towards stem cell research, then I could wait another four years to vote again. But Bush lied to the American people in order to start a war. That war has led to the death of over 2,600 coalition troops. Estimates of Iraqi civilian deaths range from 50,000 to 600,000. Bush's war has killed far more civilians than Osama Bin Laden. We have lost respect in the world community, which makes us less secure. Also we are not addressing some very real threats like global warming and nuclear proliferation because Bush is too preoccupied with invading Iraq and banning gay marriage. Bush is not just doing things we don't like. He is doing things that are illegal and threaten the survival of this nation. We are, therefore, pursuing a policy of peaceful and legal impeachment.
What was Bush supposed to do after 9/11? Was he supposed to just roll over and let the terrorists win?
No, of course not. Almost everyone agrees with Bush for going after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. They were behind 9/11 and they had to be dealt with. But rather than finish the job and capture Osama Bin Laden, Bush dropped the ball. He focused his attention, and the world's attention, on Iraq. This seems strange when you consider that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. It isn't so strange when you consider that Iraq has the world's third largest oil reserves and is at the strategic center of the Middle East. Since Bush's invasion, Iraq has become a haven for terrorists who can now operate freely in the chaos of a country at war.
Do liberals hate America?
Absolutely not! Every liberal that I know loves America. We love it so much that we are willing to confront a president that we feel is hurting America with his illegal and misguided policies. If you have a relative that you love, but that relative is robbing banks, or harming others in the family, then what do you do? Do you support their crimes because you love your family? No. You urge that relative to turn themselves in. If they won't do it then you might have to blow the whistle on them so no one else gets hurt. Myself and others feel that George Bush is breaking the law and hurting the country that we love. So we feel it is our duty to protect it using Constitutional means.
