Bush In Trouble?

Could Bush be impeached? It’s a great article on the possible manipulation by the Administration in making the case for the war in Iraq to the country and the world.

It makes me think of this post from Michelle at A Small Victory about babies being buried alive by the Iraqi government. Her opinion is that because of this and other finding, the war was justified. I don’t disagree one hundred percent. But, what I’m left pondering is if the ends justify the means when it comes to war.

I think they don’t. As criminal as it is, there are other countries whose human rights abuses are more egregious and long-standing than those of Iraq. China, North Korea, several Arab and African states and the old Soviet Union all have or had horrible records on human rights that never led us to war with them. If we had made the case for war on Iraq based on the human rights abuses, would we have gone to war? Would the government even have made the case?

If the President and the people who work for him lied to us about the threat to our national security and went to war for other reasons, is that wrong? Is it impeachable? I would certainly think so. Let’s get some perspective. President Clinton, who lied about his relationship with an intern, was impreached and censured by the Senate. President Bush may have lied to the American people and the world about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein and either exaggerated or outright lied about the existance of Weapons of Mass Destruction that may have been sold to terrorists and therefore posed a threat to our country. Which one is worse? If true, and the President and his Administration pushed into war using false, fabricated, hyperbolized or editorialized intelligence, I would fully support him being impeached, and him possibly being charged with treason.

I supported President Clinton being impeached and censured. Not because he lied about the whole Lewinsky affair, but because he took avantage of an employee and then covered it up. It was sexual misconduct, and possibly sexual harrassment – especially if you consider the ends he went to to get Lewinsky employment after the affair. I’m sure those same efforts weren’t extended for other interns.

Back to the question at hand. I don’t disagree that Hussein was a bad guy (still is if he’s alive), and that getting rid of him wasn’t an entirely bad thing. His people will probably eventually be better for it. Will we? Did it serve to improve our security? I’m not sure it did. The way things are shaping up, they may end up with a radical Islamic theocracy aligned with Iran. That seems much worse to me than the agnostic, crazy yet predictable despot there before.

If the President lied to us about this, what else has he lied to us about? What lengths will he go to to get his way?

Categorized as politics

By Kevin Lawver

Web developer, Software Engineer @ Gusto, Co-founder @ TechSAV, husband, father, aspiring social capitalist and troublemaker.


  1. Here’s the problem: Sending our troops to Iraq was not something he needed permission to do; under the War Powers Resolution, the entire “war” was legal. Therefore, using the fact that he lied about the reasoning/impetus as the linchpin for an impeachment fails on cause grounds. And you can’t impeach a President “just” for lying; they lie every day. They call it “disinformation for national security reasons.” What should happen is that whomever runs against Bush in 2004 hammer this issue and hammer it again and again and again until it’s as flat as Grandma’s flapjacks, and as tasty.

  2. Good point. I hadn’t thought about that. But, he was granted those war powers based mostly on this same intelligence he gave to the UN and to us. The same intelligence now under scrutiny as possibly false. I would think if he misled Congress in getting the War Powers act approved, he could then be held in contempt of Congress, or worse.
    I honestly don’t know if he lied or not. Maybe the weapons are just really well hidden, which is why my diatribe was filled with “if”.

Comments are closed.