Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
They never had such reservations in the past, look at all the investigations done 'just because' by prior past democratic congresses of republican presidents.
|
Which "just because" investigations in the past might you have in mind?
Iran-Contra (Reagan), BCCI/Iraqgate (Bush 41), S&L scandal, the Church Committee investigation of the CIA (Nixon/Ford).....as opposed to Republican investigations of Socks the Clinton cat or the White House Christmas card list?
Ustwo....you might want to take
your own advice:
....I'm expecting people HAVING a discussion to have some knowledge of the subject they are trying to discuss. Its obvious that my mistake was assuming that people wanting to talk about things and make statements about them would at least have done the basic 20 minutes of reading before posting.
Did you do your 20 minutes of reading before making your baseless statement about "all those investigations done just because"
***
I believe there is enough evidence beyond reasonable doubt that Bush conducted warrantless wiretaps of US citizens outside the law and abrigated US treaty obligations regarding torture and treatment of prisoners, both impeachable offenses IMO.
Just as in criminal court, a good prosecutor knows not to proceed and waste time and money if there is little likelihood of conviction.
And there is virtually NO likelihood of a 2/3 Senate majority voting to convict. I would still spend the time and money, but the result of tearing the country farther apart is too high a prices to pay.
But they should absolutely continue with every oversight investigation of Bush administration actions that may be illegal or even in violation of government ethics policies and enforce subpoenas of White House officials.