McKinney's Last Shot: Bill To Impeach Bush

Accuses President Of Misleading Congress On Iraq, Violating Privacy With Wiretap

(AP)  In what was likely her final legislative act in Congress, outgoing Georgia Rep. Cynthia McKinney introduced a bill Friday to impeach President Bush.

The legislation has no chance of passing and serves as a symbolic parting shot not only at Bush but also at Democratic leaders. Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has made clear that she will not entertain proposals to sanction Bush and has warned the liberal wing of her party against making political hay of impeachment.

McKinney, a Democrat who drew national headlines in March when she struck a Capitol police officer, has long insisted that Bush was never legitimately elected. In introducing her legislation in the final hours of the current Congress, she said Bush had violated his oath of office to defend the Constitution and the nation's laws.

In the bill, she accused Bush of misleading Congress on the war in Iraq and violating privacy laws with his domestic spying program.

McKinney has made no secret of her frustration with Democratic leaders since voters ousted her from office in the Democratic primary this summer. In a speech Monday at George Washington University, she accused party leaders of kowtowing to Republicans on the war in Iraq and on military mistreatment of prisoners.

McKinney, who has not discussed her future plans, has increasingly embraced her image as a controversial figure.

She has hosted numerous panels on Sept. 11 conspiracy theories and suggested that Bush had prior knowledge of the terrorist attacks but kept quiet about it to allow friends to profit from the aftermath. She introduced legislation to establish a permanent collection of rapper Tupac Shakur's recordings at the National Archives and calling for a federal investigation into his killing.

But it was her scuffle with a Capitol police officer that drew the most attention. McKinney struck the officer when he tried to stop her from entering a congressional office building. The officer did not recognize McKinney, who was not wearing her member lapel pin.

A grand jury in Washington declined to indict McKinney over the clash, but she eventually apologized before the House.

[hsmagst]

To Agnim: I think we have a very comical justice system with regards to Clinton in because of the fact that he lied to a Judge about his involvement with Jennifer Flowers, which is perjury and because he tried, by his own admission, to assinate Osama Bin Laden.....a violation of Federal Law since before the Reagan area. We have very specific laws against the US being involved in assination attempts for political purposes. Where is all the Democratic outrage at that?

[randalds]

No robjk1, I spent the bulk of my time at a SAC missile base in North Dakota, except for going TDY to Vietnam twice, once in 1974 and again in early 1975.

[robjk1-2009]

To Randal

Were you ever station in cali? I grew up near Castle AFB in Atwater.

[randalds]

What's up with Bushocks multiple same posts?

Posted by Robjk1 at 02:10 AM : Dec 11, 2006

He's a troll. Posts the same garbage over and over again under slightly different names to try to screw up any conversations here and keep everything right wing if possible.

[robjk1-2009]

What's up with Bushocks multiple same posts?

[randalds]

He is the commander in chief but is still a civilian. That's what makes it such a unique position. It's the same as secretary of defense. A civilian who is still a commander, but without actual military rank.

[robjk1-2009]

So if he's not military why do soldiers salute him?

Sure he operates in a different compacity, but he's in the chain of command. So my point is he should be held to the same code of conduct as others in the uniform whether the rule makes sense or not.

[agnim]

"When I was in the Army we had to know our chain of commnand, it started with the CO and ended with the CIC. So he's military and should be held to the same code of conduct.

Posted by robjk1 at 05:29 PM : Dec 10, 2006"

If Clinton is military, the HE COULD NOT BE PRESIDENT!
In the US, the military is under CIVILIAN control!

We understand that in the army one is not trained to thing, just to follow orders, intelligent or not.

If Clinton should be impeached over personal sexual nonsense, which is really the business of the families directly involved, then for causing the loss of so many American lives and limbs in Iraq and we don't impeach, we demonstrating that we have a comical judicial system.

[randalds]

But my point is that it shouldn't be enforced on any of them if it's not in direct conflict with their service and Clinton's clearly was not.

[robjk1-2009]

RANDAL

If it'g gong to be enforced on one then it should be on all, IMO. If it's enforced on e-nothings, officers and nco's, even generals have been forced out because of adultery, then why not cic?

Remember it was on the job occurence?

[randalds]

That may be true robjk1 (I was in the military too, USAF), but that doesn't mean that it's right for the military to invade your personal life either. Adultery, under almost any circumstance anyway, is none of their *** business either. of course if it's between the ranks or another troops wife or husband where it may effect morale, that's different, but other then that it's between the troop and his/her spouse only. Clinton simply should not have been impeached for something that's no one else's *** business. Bush, on the other hand, should be because he slaughtered 100's of thousands of innocent people and murder is considerably more serious then fooling around with your secretary.

[robjk1-2009]

When I was in the Army we had to know our chain of commnand, it started with the CO and ended with the CIC. So he's military and should be held to the same code of conduct. The CO would be sent packin if got having adultery in is military office.


Plus Clinton also lied, isn't that perjury or somthing?

I'm defending Bush, but just pointing out Clinton should have been impeached. But most folks defend their man if he's the one in office.

[agnim]

"Why should the CIC not be held to the same standard as every other military person?

Posted by Robjk1 at 04:15 AM : Dec 10, 2006"

Because your CIC isn't your ordinary 'military person'.
Being CIC doesn't have much to do with military lives but to give military people directions for the good of the nation.

Recall that your CIC also doesn't even need to do Basic Training like your very ordinar military man has to?
Clinton wasn't a soldier and was not playing the part of a soldier, per se.

Your argument for impeachment on those grounds has no merit.

"High crimes and misdemeanor", such as unnecessarily causing the lost of lives and limbs of thousands of Americans in Iraq through lies, deception and PERSONAL AGENDA, are more like impeachable offenses!

We have lost our priorities in this country when we would impeach a President over trifling ***, but we are not inclined to

IMPEACH A PRESIDENT ON ACCOUNT OF THE LIES AND DECEPTIONS AND PERSONAL AGENDA THAT CAUSED THE DEATHS AND DISMEMBERMENT OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS IN IRAQ, and also the hundreds of thousands of needless Iraqi deaths!

[robjk1-2009]

Posted by agnim:

Clinton was impeached over a trifling PRIVATE and PERSONAL sexual matter

While it was personaal sexual matter, many things are personal for others but if caught they lose here job, why not the prez?

Here's my take on why Clinton should have been impeached. president is commander in chief, he is in the military. In the military there is a code of military conduct that all regardless of rank must follow. Many NCOs and officers have been forced out from the military for adultery(personal sexual matter) and why should the president not be held to the same code of conduct? Not only did he have *** but he had in the white house, on the job. He then lied, I think it was to a grand jury or something.
All these things would have sent any other military man packin home or even to jail.


Why should the CIC not be held to the same standard as every other military person?

[randalds]

Of course Bush is impeachable as he is obviously a war criminal. The problem is will he be impeached or not? Most likely not, sadly enough. he started a war because he listened to the Cheney people who told him that he could show his dad up by invading Iraq. He was desperate to prove to dear old daddy that he, not Jeb, was the one dad should have given his attention too. He wanted to through off the label he's had all of his life of being the family screw-up. The problem is of course that he is a hopeless screw-up and loser and always will be. Unfortunately 3000 troops and untold tens of thousands of Iraqi's had to die in a senseless, useless slaughter, just because he has a issue with the lack of approval from daddy. he should do the world a favor and slip quietly into a room by himself with a side arm and do the honorable thing. Of course he hasn't the guts. Gutless coward.

[processor2]

Cynthia McKinney is just living proof that extreme liberalism is a mental disorder.

Most liberals I know are the "glass-is-half-empty" kind of people, when everybody else has a positive outlook on life. Liberals see nothing but misery & gloom....it's kink of sad, really.

..........................

[randalds]

Nice gesture on her part even though it didn't stand a chance. Of course Bush should be impeached, but let's get into office and fix some of his mess before we tie everything up with it. His crimes are obvious and not going to go anywhere for awhile, so let's just shove him aside and get somethings done first. Then we'll impeach his *** and send his butt to jail where in the shower large convicts will show him the real meaning of the words "illegal invasion".

[agnim]

At last one of our leaders with 'balls'! LOL

The American people were lied to.

Intelligence was doctored.

False evidence was DELIBERATELY presented to the UN and the American people.

And thousands of Americans have lost lives and limb as a result of deliberate and criminal acts by an administration bent on an UNPROVOKED war that killed hundreds of thousands of women, children and old people in Iraq!

US is not dictatorship or monarchy.

Some should answer for such state crimes!

Someone(s) needs to be impeached for these high crimes and misdemeanor.

Clinton was impeached over a trifling PRIVATE and PERSONAL sexual matter.

Here we have thousands of Americans who LOST LIVES AND LIMBS by criminal governmental actions in Iraq; and no one is impeached?

What's wrong with this picture?
What's wrong with American priorities?

[emhawks]

While I often don't agree with Mckinney's method or approach to handling various issues, I agree with her assessment of the Bush adm. & 911.
Bush & Cheney are criminals & traitors. Both of them should be impeached.
We need to write our Congressmen & demand that impeachment proceedings be started against Bush & Cheney in Jan. '07.
Both of them must be held accountable for what they have done; the 911 investigation should be re-opened because there are too many unanswered questions.
I admire Mckinney's courage in standing up to Bush & speaking the truth.

[j-whitman]

Gslinger,, If Bush would smoke a little pot,, we wouldn't have lost close to 3,000 of our great troops for nothing..