|
But there's a difference, onetime. Clinton not only lied under oath (Bush has yet to be placed under oath) but he also EXPLICITLY lied. i.e. "I did NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS with that woman, Monica Lewinsky."
Bush on the other hand was always careful to use a phrase like "we think" or "intelligence indicates" before every statement (especially statements to congress) justifying the war. i.e. "we believe Iraq has WMD's." In other words, he never said "Iraq has WMD's." He said that he believes based on evidence Iraq has WMD's. How are you gonna prove that he didn't believe that unless you get a confession from him?
PLUS, he got Congress to grant him the power to take unilateral military action long before he invaded Iraq - Congress wasn't in on the Iraq war declaration. IMHO this points to the fact that he was plotting this for a long time, and steadilly and systematically usurped our government's system of checks and balances so that he could realize his goal of getting Saddam, but it was all done legally.
The only area where we could impeach him is by accusing him of war crimes. The prisoners in Gitmo could be used there, as could his invasion of a country that was doing him no harm, but it's shaky legal ground at best.
No one would like to see him impeached more than I, but he's carefully arranged it so that impeachment isn't possible.
|