Posted on 02/09/2007 4:18:45 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Weeks after accusing President Bush of "shameful" behavior over the imprisonment of two Border Patrol agents who shot an unarmed suspected drug smuggler along the U.S.-Mexico border, a federal lawmaker turned up the heat further, suggesting the president should be impeached if the two men are killed in prison.
Speaking after the Federal Bureau of Prisons confirmed that agent Ignacio Ramos was assaulted by inmates in his Mississippi prison at the weekend, California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher had a warning for the White House.
"I tell you, Mr. President, if these men - especially after this assault - are murdered in prison, or if one of them lose their lives, there's going to be some sort of impeachment talk in Capitol Hill," he said during a press conference in Washington, D.C.
"The president of the United States talks a lot about his Christian charity, and his religious beliefs," Rohrabacher said. "He now is showing a mean-spirited side to him, an arrogance, in which he will turn his back, even after one of these officers in prison has been brutally assaulted."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Which is your favorite grape or cherry??
Its a hell of a note when Border Patrol Agents, during the conduct of their official duties, get into an altercation with an illegal alien drug smuggler, and then find out too late that drug smugglers have more friends in the Bush Administration than they have.
Graeme Bauer.
Penultimate means second to last. What's his *ultimate* failure going to be? I'll tell you this much, if a big bomb goes off in one of our cities and it turns out that the terrorists came across that border, he *will* be impeached.
Personally, I think the democrats and the media are being quiet about all this stuff just HOPING a bomb goes off on his watch so they can hang him high. If we get blasted again at the end of his term, he and Clinton will go down like Coolidge and Hoover.
And some of this group that is bashing the President never supported him to begin with -- more of the same from some of them since 1999 on here.
You can simply address me as "Sir".
He wasn't drunk, but outraged. The border agents were railroaded. Mentioning impeachment was over the top, probably to get attention, but Bush is allowing a severe injustice to stand.
On the subject of favorite "pet" people - illegal invaders, Bush acts like a man who isn't playing with a full deck.
I wonder WHAT the heck he thinks he's doing?
Just one word Macaca, yes,yes, it was me, me and my post's I made allen say it. You are really informed, there never was any emails to pages either was there?
You don't know that. NOBODY knows that. We don't have all the facts yet.
And even if I'm inclined to agree, talking of impeaching the President for not using his right to pardon people, a decision that absolutely nobody other then the President can make, is just flat out stupid. We wouldn't, and shouldn't, tolerate this kind of behavior from a D, and we shouldn't from an R either.
You are an embarrasment, not Bush.
You know what I'm tired of? People like you blaming the loss last voting cycle on conservatives staying home and not voting. It's not true, OK?!....The pubs-in-power lost the moderate vote last time around because they were acting like dem-lites. THAT'S why we lost.
Sing a new tune and place the blame on those who it belongs on. It doesn't lie with me or the many conservs I know who held their noses and VOTED!
Quit defending the pub-losers-in-power. They wrought this debacle.
FMCDH(BITS)
Exactly. If the clueless around here had worked to hold the administration's feet to the fire on this issue, we would have been much better off.
Who will write that history, gringo?
With a few hundred million more sneaking in in the next 20 or thirty years, plus all the relatives of those getting amnesty, it won't madder much who writes what.
It means second to last ? You learn something new every day. As for Slick and Dubya ending up as Coolidge and Hoover, Calvin Coolidge was one of the best Presidents we ever had. If a bomb goes off in a major city, impeachment will be the least of his worries, we'll have to do far worse than that to the Congressional leadership, if you catch my drift.
A resolution authorizing military action is not a formal decalration of war - they are two distinct things.
The title of H.J.Res. 114 was "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002". No where in the legislation is a formal declaration of war stated. War was not declared against Afghanistan, Vietnam, or Korea either. The US has formally declared war against 11 countries: UK (War of 1812); Mexico (Mexican-American War); Spain (Spanish-American War), Germany & Austria-Hungary (WWI); and Japan, Germany, Italy, Bulgaria, Hungary & Romania (WWII)
Bye-bye impeachment troll. Who would like to be next?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.