Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Dave
Lv 6
Dave asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 8 years ago

Conservatives: If Obama has committed an impeachable offense,?

Why hasnt he been impeached? Oh thats right, because he didn't. Could you imagine if Democrats were as desperate to scandalize Republicans as vice versa? Bush would be in The Hague right now, along with Reagan. Nixon would be in federal prison. McCain would be in jail for the Keating 5 scandal, and Romney's tax evasion trial would just be winding up.

Why are the rules different for us than they are for you?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    To be fair, investigations take time.

    But Republicans will continue to dig and dig deeper until the find *something* they can impeach Obama on; just like they did with Clinton. It took 3 special prosecutors looking into a real estate transaction over a couple of years to impeach Clinton for getting a bj, that had NOTHING to do with the real estate transaction.

    In the meantime, they will ignore any fact that conflicts with their predetermined outcome, and will keep expanding the investigations until they find what they want to find.

    Which is why it's vitally important that Republicans lose the house in 2014. The American people cannot allow Republicans to drag this smear campaign on for a few more years.

  • crunch
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    Regardless of any known facts, the "Impeachment" process is above all merely a "political" process and not a "criminal" process. The current "political" reality is even if provable "high crimes and misdemeanors" brought an impeachment vote in the House, the Senate would not "convict"

    Note: A vote to "convict" in the Senate is nothing but a vote of "political agreement" with the vote of the House and only if the "crimes" defined by the vote actually fall under US criminal code will the "impeached and convicted" (removed from office) President come under scrutiny by the Justice System.

    Politically speaking, although your political opponents can show misconduct it doesn't matter as long as the President still has the support of those in political agreement. It doesn't matter even if the "high crime" is treason.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    His violation of the War Powers Act was sufficient for impeachment, IMO. Bush certainly would have been impeached by a Democrat House if he'd ignored that legislation.

    The Democrats did everything they could to cast aspersions and guilt upon Bush. Or don't you recall the continuous investigations by Waxman in the 110th Congress, after Democrats got control of the House? How about all the leaks and lies put out by Democrats to discredit and disparage Bush?I guess you conventiently forgot all that, eh?

    Just to get you in touch with reality, neither Bush nor Reagan were guilty of any crimes, there was no evidence of wrongdoing by McCain in the Keating scandal, and other than smears from Democrats, there is not a single hint of tax evasion by Romney.

    You're the one who wants different rules.What color is the sky in your delusional world?

  • D.E.M.
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    Well I do agree with your last statement about the rules being different.

    The thing is Obama has interfered with the Fast and Furious investigation. Why because he knows it will prove he had knowledge of it. He had numerous meetings or his staff did with the head of the IRS and they were holding back on approval of conservative based organizations. You have to admit this limited funding during the election for conservatives. His administration lied about Benghazi and what happened.

    Now back to the 70's and Nixon. He resigned because he was going to be impeached for trying to cover up evidence.

    So yes it does seem to be a double standard because it looks like Obama's administration has done a heck of a lot more than one simple cover up.

    So are you saying he should be Impeached upon the evidence provided?

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • spanky
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    Even if Obama was impeached he would not be removed from office as long as both Houses are split along party lines and none of the investigations are far enough along to even mention impeachment. Obama is pretty much safe from impeachment because the Republicans would be branded as RACIST AGAIN. 2016 will be here soon enough and Obama will be gone.

  • ?
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    The investigations take time. Consider the time period between Watergate and Nixon's resignation.

    Obama will do the same.

  • LAN
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    He is obstructing justice by failing to release all the information needed. He is a corrupt Chicago style politician.

    Not to mention I don't want the IRS investigating me for not agreeing with him. After all they don't have to follow the same laws as law enforcement officials.

  • 8 years ago

    Maybe people are too scared to impeach Obama.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    If Bush is a war criminal, why hasn't he been arrested? Because our gov is corrupt, stop playing politics.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    The 4 scandals are still being investigated, DUH ?

    Benghazi

    IRS

    AP

    And Rosen case

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.