Much of US favors Bush impeachment: poll

[gldstwmn]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070706/ts_alt_afp/uspoliticsbush

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Nearly half of the US public wants President George W. Bush to face impeachment, and even more favor that fate for Vice President Dick Cheney, according to a poll out Friday.

The survey by the American Research Group found that 45 percent support the US House of Representatives beginning impeachment proceedings against Bush, with 46 percent opposed, and a 54-40 split in favor when it comes to Cheney.

The study by the private New Hampshire-based ARG canvassed 1,100 Americans by telephone July 3-5 and had an error margin of plus or minus three percentage points. The findings are available on ARG's Internet site.

The White House declined to comment on the poll, the latest bad news for a president who has seen his public opinion standings dragged to record lows by the unpopular war in Iraq.

The US Constitution says presidents and vice presidents can be impeached -- that is, formally charged by the House -- for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" by a simple majority vote.

Conviction by the Senate, which requires a two-thirds majority, means removal from office.

Just two US presidents have been impeached: Bill Clinton was impeached in 1998 and acquitted in 1999; Andrew Johnson was impeached and acquitted in 1868. Disgraced president Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 when a House impeachment vote appeared likely.

In late April, left-wing Representative Dennis Kucinich, a long-shot Democratic presidential hopeful, introduced a resolution calling for Cheney's impeachment. To date, the measure has nine listed co-sponsors and a 10th set to sign on when the House returns to work next week.

But Democratic leaders appear unlikely to pursue such a course.

[Musicman408]

Yeah, I would love to see Bush get impeached. I think he has done such a horrible job that I really can't even talk about it without getting frustrated with him. America has gone from Mr. World Respectability to being the laughing stock of the world, and it's such a shame. Makes me sick, he does.

[BlackWidow]

Bring It!!!!

[Hawkeye]

What does it matter now, he's got less then two years left in office, AND if he gets impeached, Cheney's President.

[strandinthewind]

. . . Conviction by the Senate, which requires a two-thirds majority, means removal from office . . . .

That will never happen, which makes this a waste of resources.

[irishgrl]

That will never happen, which makes this a waste of resources.
dang......

[SortaSavageLike]

You guys would really prefer Dick Cheney as the President? :eek:

[Macfanforever]

It's maybe to late in his term.but just do it.

[JWS]

He has only got eighteen months left. It would take almost that long to run through the process. It would be a waste of time and money at this point.

[BlackWidow]

It's really about the shame they deserve to feel for ruining our country.
It's called ACCOUNTABILITY folks!

[Rickypt]

^^I agree, BW. I think starting impeachment hearings is not a waste of resources. Let's get to the bottom of some of this stuff and drag some folks in to testify under oath. It's not really about getting rid of Bush/Cheney (it would take months for impeachment anyway), rather to get to the truth.

[BlackWidow]

^^I agree, BW. I think starting impeachment hearings is not a waste of resources. Let's get to the bottom of some of this stuff and drag some folks in to testify under oath. It's not really about getting rid of Bush/Cheney (it would take months for impeachment anyway), rather to get to the truth.

..let's drag them thru the mud!

[gldstwmn]

That will never happen, which makes this a waste of resources.

The Dems don't have the votes in the Senate. We hold it by that one tenuous vote. It's going to take more than the four or five Repubs who are losing faith in him now to do it. I'd rather see them impeach Cheney. That would make Pelosi vice president. That would put a hitch in their git along and be funny as hell to wach.

[gldstwmn]

He has only got eighteen months left.

True but it would take them probably all of 30 minutes to bomb Iran.
I feel your pain on this one though. Impeachment will be long and costly and I would rather get a firm date for an Iraq withdrawal. But can't this Congress multi task? :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

The Dems don't have the votes in the Senate. We hold it by that one tenuous vote. It's going to take more that the for or five Repubs who are losing faith in him now to do it. I'd rather see them impeach Cheney. That would make Pelosi vice president. That would put a hitch in their git along and be funny as hell to wach.

Now THAT would be something to behold!

[irishgrl]

The Dems don't have the votes in the Senate. We hold it by that one tenuous vote. It's going to take more that the for or five Repubs who are losing faith in him now to do it. I'd rather see them impeach Cheney. That would make Pelosi vice president. That would put a hitch in their git along and be funny as hell to wach.
oh YEAH! I like that idea :nod:

and the bonus? ol Monkeyboy wouldnt have his "backbone" any more!

[Macfanforever]

I think Pelosi and Judge Judy make a good team.They will make these idiots heads roll.

[BlackWidow]

I think Pelosi and Judge Judy make a good team.They will make these idiots heads roll.

:nod: :nod: :nod: :nod:

[Rickypt]

That would make Pelosi vice president.

I don't think that's true. Pelosi is 3rd in line to be President but that doesn't make her 2nd in line to be VP. If Cheney is impeached, then Bush chooses a new VP. And Cheney would resign before being impeached anyway.

[SuzeQuze]

My how the tables have turned. Welcome to reality folks. It's better here in the light.

No this congress cannot multitask. Perhaps if they put in a full work week.

I say impeach because they were very very wrong. Even though it will take a lot of resources and such I agree with BW on the issue of accountability. You can't avoid doing what's right because it's going to be too hard.

[Chrislit18]

Cheney is basically running the country anyways, Bush is only a figurehead. Impeaching is just stupid, it wastes taxpayers dollars, and now that he only has until 1.21.09 [give or take a day] left, it would be just stupid to do it now. and taking him out wont end the war, so if that was the major motivation for doing it it wouldnt make any sense. and no I am not a Bush supporter, so dont think that im trying to defend him, I am just trying to state the reality of it. I agree he is probably one of the worst presidents our country has had, pushing us into Iraq, and making stupid decisions, but theres nothing the public [us] can do about it
:shrug:

[gldstwmn]

I don't think that's true. Pelosi is 3rd in line to be President but that doesn't make her 2nd in line to be VP. If Cheney is impeached, then Bush chooses a new VP. And Cheney would resign before being impeached anyway.


Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (Amended)

(As Amended)
US Code as of: 01/23/00

Sec. 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act

(a)
(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President.

[Richard B]

I'd love to see the Bush Administration go down in flames in history books with the strong word of impeachment. Forever.

Yes, it would take time and resources, but a lot of political and economic damage can happen during his 18 months that can have a greater effect later in time and that will be hard for the next administration to resolve.

[BlackWidow]

Cheney is basically running the country anyways, Bush is only a figurehead. Impeaching is just stupid, it wastes taxpayers dollars, and now that he only has until 1.21.09 [give or take a day] left, it would be just stupid to do it now. and taking him out wont end the war, so if that was the major motivation for doing it it wouldnt make any sense. and no I am not a Bush supporter, so dont think that im trying to defend him, I am just trying to state the reality of it. I agree he is probably one of the worst presidents our country has had, pushing us into Iraq, and making stupid decisions, but theres nothing the public [us] can do about it
:shrug:

There is actually ALOT we can do about it. Playing weak and powerless
should never be an option. Apethetic thinking is what got us all here in
the first place.

[BlackWidow]

I don't think that's true. Pelosi is 3rd in line to be President but that doesn't make her 2nd in line to be VP. If Cheney is impeached, then Bush chooses a new VP. And Cheney would resign before being impeached anyway.

...sounds good to me.

[gldstwmn]

There is actually ALOT we can do about it. Playing weak and powerless
should never be an option. Apethetic thinking is what got us all here in
the first place.

We were cowed by 9/11. They had us right where they wanted us. When America looked to it's president for guidance, he told us to go shopping.

[Rickypt]

Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (Amended)

(As Amended)
US Code as of: 01/23/00

Sec. 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act

(a)
(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President.

That is succession of President in the case of both President and Vice-President removed from office or being killed, etc. That's when Speaker becomes President. But if only the VP position becomes vacant, the President names the successor.

[Rickypt]

Cheney is basically running the country anyways, Bush is only a figurehead. Impeaching is just stupid, it wastes taxpayers dollars, and now that he only has until 1.21.09 [give or take a day] left, it would be just stupid to do it now. and taking him out wont end the war, so if that was the major motivation for doing it it wouldnt make any sense. and no I am not a Bush supporter, so dont think that im trying to defend him, I am just trying to state the reality of it. I agree he is probably one of the worst presidents our country has had, pushing us into Iraq, and making stupid decisions, but theres nothing the public [us] can do about it
:shrug:

Impeaching isn't stupid; it is a vital and treasured recourse in a democracy. As for wasting taxpayer dollars, it's not like Congress is getting a hell of a lot done these days, so I'm fine with them spending some of my $$ to get to the truth and hold Bush/Cheney accountable.

You're right about motives. If it's just to get them out of office or end the war, impeachment isn't the way to go. If it's to get to some truth and help ensure all of this never happens again, then I support it.

[BlackWidow]

Impeaching isn't stupid; it is a vital and treasured recourse in a democracy. As for wasting taxpayer dollars, it's not like Congress is getting a hell of a lot done these days, so I'm fine with them spending some of my $$ to get to the truth and hold Bush/Cheney accountable.

You're right about motives. If it's just to get them out of office or end the war, impeachment isn't the way to go. If it's to get to some truth and help ensure all of this never happens again, then I support it.

"THANK YOU!":nod:

[gldstwmn]

That is succession of President in the case of both President and Vice-President removed from office or being killed, etc. That's when Speaker becomes President. But if only the VP position becomes vacant, the President names the successor.

Congress would have to approve it.
ON EDIT: You are correct. It's spelled out in the 25th amendment. I should have known that. :o Oh well, it's not like we go around impeaching the vice president every day. :laugh:

[Chrislit18]

Impeaching isn't stupid; it is a vital and treasured recourse in a democracy. As for wasting taxpayer dollars, it's not like Congress is getting a hell of a lot done these days, so I'm fine with them spending some of my $$ to get to the truth and hold Bush/Cheney accountable.

You're right about motives. If it's just to get them out of office or end the war, impeachment isn't the way to go. If it's to get to some truth and help ensure all of this never happens again, then I support it.

I just dont think we should waste the money, but if its what most of america wants then it shoud be done. sorry if i came across rude :sorry:
I do think that Bush/Cheney need to come clean about thier actions though, like if they really did go into the middle east JUST because of 9/11. I think that at least Bush wanted to go in to finish what his father started in the late 80s-early 90s. thats JMO though

[gldstwmn]

I do think that Bush/Cheney need to come clean about thier actions though, like if they really did go into the middle east JUST because of 9/11.
Hate to sound like a broken record but you do know that 9/11 and Iraq have nothing to do with each other right? :o
Also they were planning to get into Iraq well before 9/11. Supposedly it's what Cheney's secret energy meetings were about.



I think that at least Bush wanted to go in to finish what his father started in the late 80s-early 90s. thats JMO though
Maybe that's how they sold it to Junior. But Cheney and his associates made a hell of a lot of money off of this war.

[BlackWidow]

Hate to sound like a broken record but you do know that 9/11 and Iraq have nothing to do with each other right? :o
Also they were planning to get into Iraq well before 9/11. Supposedly it's what Cheney's secret energy meetings were about.



Maybe that's how they sold it to Junior. But Cheney and his associates made a hell of a lot of money off of this war.

The whole thing is a disgrace. Shame on anyone who voted for this administration!

[strandinthewind]

. . . You're right about motives. If it's just to get them out of office or end the war, impeachment isn't the way to go. If it's to get to some truth and help ensure all of this never happens again, then I support it.

In a perfect world maybe. But, getting to the truth will never happen in this world. Moreover, if we got to the truth, then it is likely the D party would fall as well as they were involved in the bombing of Iraq for the same reasons before W's administration and during W's administration. I get that W manipulated the evidence perhaps more than the Clinton Administration did, but that will make little difference in a trial because innocent people died as a result of both; granted perhaps more died under W. In the end, W cannot be impeached on Iraq because Clinton and the D's screamed for SH's head and killed in the name of the alleged WMD for eight years prior to W's administration. How will the D's then say that the WMD were all a big fabricated ruse the day W took office, especially considering the world via the UN unanimously thought SH had them for those eight years and longer? In many ways, W just finished what Clinton could not do but wanted to do in Iraq.

So, we have to find something else. The Attorney General thing is not enough as no crime was committed. The spying is not enough because I submit all administrations have done it - just not as overtly.

Finally, this President was elected again by a rather large majority even if the voting fraud took place. In other words the people spoke and they wanted another term with W. I hate that, but it is what it is.

In the end, impeachment is not an achieveable goal.

And, to me, the almost laughable thing is that when I say this reality, people think I am some sort of conceited, hard line right wing Bush sympathizer, when I can assure you nothing is further fromt he truth. I despise W and think he is a crook. I just think history supports my proposition that the problems with Iraq did not start with him and the US has used Iraq as a twisted shell game killing field for years. W just did it on a larger scale.

[strandinthewind]

Hate to sound like a broken record but you do know that 9/11 and Iraq have nothing to do with each other right? :o
Also they were planning to get into Iraq well before 9/11. Supposedly it's what Cheney's secret energy meetings were about . . . .

That is not exactly true. Yes, SH had no culpability in the 9/11 attacks. anyone who says he did is wrong.

But, the US' policy and the world's policy through the UN prior to 9/11 and prior to W was that SH was a terrorist sitting on a stockpile of WMD. It made sense then after the US was attacked to go after SH, along with Al-Q, because of the potential threat - the entire world agreed to this through the UN. W, however, could not stop at the newly ordered inspections in Iraq. So, he invaded Iraq. If W had succeeded in the invasion and all had gone well, which the events during and after the first Iraq war suggested would be the case, then W's anxious invasion would have been overlooked by the vast majority of the world. Again, much if not all of the Arab world had been chomping at the bit to oust SH and this was their vehicle to do so without blood on their own hands. Things did not go well however; so, W is hated.

I suppose it all boils down to the war on terror and what that is. Surely SH according to unanimous world opinion via the UN fit the definition of a terrorist and a player in the war on terror. So, would it have been enough not to do anything in Iraq after 9/11 and, thus, ignore all of the prior 10 + years of killing in the name of ridding the world of the threat of SH? I suppose that is a conclusion we may all differ on.

Personally, I take Pres. Clinton's view of the inspections should have been allowed to conclude. Any subsequent military action should have been based on the results. That position solidly supports that the events of 9/11 effected how the world viewed Iraq and SH's refusal to cooperate in the hunt for the WMD. Thus, 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq are related even though SH was not responsible for bombing the US on 9/11.

[strandinthewind]

. . . But Cheney and his associates made a hell of a lot of money off of this war.

I don't think Cheney made any significant amount of money off the war :shrug:

But, clearly his associates did.

[KarmaContestant]

Also they were planning to get into Iraq well before 9/11. Supposedly it's what Cheney's secret energy meetings were about.


I absolutely believe this as well. The company I work for is very involved in Iraq. One of the worlds largest oil fields lies underneath southern Kurdistan, which I think is the real reason we're in Iraq.... Also, I don't believe the US has any intention of pulling out of Iraq. I find it ironic that the company I work for was just awarded 35 million to begin construction of a military command center. In Iraq. A command center - LARGER THAN THE VATICAN CITY. And the Democrats are gonna get us out of Iraq? Uh-huh, yeah, sure. ;)

And that's only the tip of the iceberg.

[Rickypt]

Finally, this President was elected again by a rather large majority even if the voting fraud took place. In other words the people spoke and they wanted another term with W. I hate that, but it is what it is.


This is actually the most shameful thing about all of this.

[strandinthewind]

This is actually the most shameful thing about all of this.

No shiitte my friend - HORRIFYING!!!!!!!

[Rickypt]

I just dont think we should waste the money, but if its what most of america wants then it shoud be done. sorry if i came across rude :sorry:


I did not think you were rude. I was just disagreeing with you. :D

[BlackWidow]

This is actually the most shameful thing about all of this.

I blame everyone who voted for him...AGAIN!!!!

[strandinthewind]

I blame everyone who voted for him...AGAIN!!!!

I blame Kerry for not having a fukcing sac to stand up to W and his policies - which BTW essentially were the same in Iraq as W's. So, voters had to clear choice. In the end, I truly think if Kerry had grown a spine and called out W and Cheney for never serving in a war yet sending with glee and frenzied anticipation other peoples' kids - that would have gone a long way to helping establish him as a "vote for" candidate as opposed to a candidate of last resort.

Maybe BO or Hillary will clue in on this. Certainly Bill did in 92.

I also think it will take a candidate taking down Hannity and O'Reilly. Sadly, few, other than Bill C. , have ever accomoplished that. The trick is to beat them at their own game and never lose your cool - which is exactly what Bill C. did.

[SuzeQuze]

I blame Kerry for not having a fukcing sac to stand up to W and his policies - which BTW essentially were the same in Iraq as W's. So, voters had to clear choice. In the end, I truly think if Kerry had grown a spine and called out W and Cheney for never serving in a war yet sending with glee and frenzied anticipation other peoples' kids - that would have gone a long way to helping establish him as a "vote for" candidate as opposed to a candidate of last resort.

Maybe BO or Hillary will clue in on this. Certainly Bill did in 92.

I also think it will take a candidate taking down Hannity and O'Reilly. Sadly, few, other than Bill C. , have ever accomoplished that. The trick is to beat them at their own game and never lose your cool - which is exactly what Bill C. did.

Yes! Stand for something dammit and don't back down. Let them sling mud. But if you're right you're right, no matter how they try to spin it. People will see that. Well, most will. You can't be a people pleaser in politics, you will never get everyone's vote.

[Chrislit18]

Hate to sound like a broken record but you do know that 9/11 and Iraq have nothing to do with each other right? :o
Also they were planning to get into Iraq well before 9/11. Supposedly it's what Cheney's secret energy meetings were about.



Maybe that's how they sold it to Junior. But Cheney and his associates made a hell of a lot of money off of this war.

thats true. they did make a lot of money off the war, plus bush did also, as he has oil plants [srry forgot the official name], and with the gas prices rising as they did/still are he must have made a quick buck. and 9/11 took us into afaganistan right? [im sorry if im getting my facts messed up, i was like 8 when this happened, im just going off memory.-dont yell at me for it LOL-]

I think it was alright though-not completely-but we did get hussein out of power, and that was a good point of invading.
:shrug:

[JWS]

thats true. they did make a lot of money off the war, plus bush did also, as he has oil plants [srry forgot the official name], and with the gas prices rising as they did/still are he must have made a quick buck. and 9/11 took us into afaganistan right? [im sorry if im getting my facts messed up, i was like 8 when this happened, im just going off memory.-dont yell at me for it LOL-]

I think it was alright though-not completely-but we did get hussein out of power, and that was a good point of invading.
:shrug:


Christine, Saddam was an evil person and the world is better off with him gone. But, that is not a good reason for invading a country. Kim Il Jong of North Korea boasts of a nuclear weapons program with missiles that could hit Seattle. Lets go invade that country. How about Cuba? Or Iran? I'm sure we could find a few more countries whose leaders we don't like.

All the reasons given to justify going into Iraq have proven to be false. And now we're bogged down and can't get out.

[Chrislit18]

I guess you are right :nod:
we shouldnt have invaded, because the ends do not really justify the means -the one thing i learned in world civ-

so im gonna stop posting after this, cause im just gonna get jumped on :lol:

but i still stand by my 'do not impeach' statement no matter what anyone says

[JazmenFlowers]

I was going to add my thoughts, but JWS has done a good job of saying what I would've said.

[gldstwmn]

Finally, this President was elected again by a rather large majority even if the voting fraud took place. In other words the people spoke and they wanted another term with W. I hate that, but it is what it is.


STATUS CANDIDATE VOTE VOTE % EV
Bush
(Incumbent)
62,040,606 51% 286
Kerry
59,028,109 48% 252
Nader
411,304 1% 0

In my opinion, 51% is not a large majority. Nearly half of the country voted against him. If you take the fraud into account in Ohio alone, the results could be completely opposite. I'm still not sure Kerry lost. :shrug:

[gldstwmn]

Oh I'm not yelling at you at all. Please don't take it that way. It's just that this administration never fails to continue to try to link Saddam and 9/11 and every time I see someone taking the bait, I feel compelled to point out that this is not the case. :laugh:
Also if you like history, there are a lot of smart, engaging people around here that like to talk about it. Sometimes we play a little rough. :lol: Please don't be put off by it. :)

[Chrislit18]

I think it was my 7th grade social studies teacher who said this [sorry have to get this out] but the countries really dont like turning over leadership during a war. actually, it was her :laugh:

I agree with you glddstwmn, Ohio might have been wrong in thier results, so for all we know Kerry did win the population vote. I guess wll never know for sure though

[Chrislit18]

Oh I'm not yelling at you at all. Please don't take it that way. It's just that this administration never fails to continue to try to link Saddam and 9/11 and every time I see someone taking the bait, I feel compelled to point out that this is not the case. :laugh:
Also if you like history, there are a lot of smart, engaging people around here that like to talk about it. Sometimes we play a little rough. :lol: Please don't be put off by it. :)
oh its ok. :laugh:
id rather be 'harrassed' by you ledgies than the kids on my bus about my views on stuff like that, at least most of you are adults who know what youre talking about, not stupid teenagers :lol:
i got the saddam/9-11 thing from my dad...*what a loser*....:rolleyes:

[strandinthewind]

STATUS CANDIDATE VOTE VOTE % EV
Bush
(Incumbent)
62,040,606 51% 286
Kerry
59,028,109 48% 252
Nader
411,304 1% 0

In my opinion, 51% is not a large majority. Nearly half of the country voted agaisnt him. If you take the fraud into account in Ohio alone, the results could be completely opposite. I'm still not sure Kerry lost. :shrug:

I agree with that, though I suggest 3,000,000+ votes is significant.

But my point was, though ill made - that given the mess ups in the administration and the general ill feeling in the country toward W, the election was Kerry's to lose. I think Kerry lost it because he did not present a a solid campaign that wildly differed from W and Kerry let Fox tear him apart while presenting no vehement defense.

[strandinthewind]

I guess you are right :nod:
we shouldnt have invaded, because the ends do not really justify the means -the one thing i learned in world civ-

so im gonna stop posting after this, cause im just gonna get jumped on :lol:

but i still stand by my 'do not impeach' statement no matter what anyone says

You post away all you want. You are entitled to your opinion!

I get that people can be pointed, but their posts usually are enlightening.

[gldstwmn]

I agree with you glddstwmn, Ohio might have been wrong in thier results, so for all we know Kerry did win the population vote. I guess wll never know for sure though

If Kerry had won in Ohio, he would have won the electoral vote.

[strandinthewind]

^^^^

U.S. President -- Ohio
Updated 11/24/04 1:59 AM ET
Precincts:100% Incumbent* declared winner

Candidates Votes %

George W. Bush * (R) 2,796,147 51
John F. Kerry (D) 2,659,664 49
Other 25,945 0

_________________________________________________

Interestingly, R's won almost every other election in Ohio on that day according to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2004/oh/ --

For those interested in the fraud claims - go to:

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2005/08/0080696

http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1559

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

for some general insight.

[carrie721]

If Kerry had won in Ohio, he would have won the electoral vote.

kerry did win ohio :(

^^^^

U.S. President -- Ohio
Updated 11/24/04 1:59 AM ET
Precincts:100% Incumbent* declared winner

Candidates Votes %

George W. Bush * (R) 2,796,147 51
John F. Kerry (D) 2,659,664 49
Other 25,945 0

_________________________________________________

Interestingly, R's won almost every other election in Ohio on that day according to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/elections/2004/oh/ --

For those interested in the fraud claims - go to:

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2005/08/0080696

http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1559

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

for some general insight.

read this book: http://www.amazon.com/What-Happened-Ohio-Documentary-Election/dp/1595580697

ken blackwell is a ****ing crook. i'll mail my copy of that book to anyone who wants to read it.

[gldstwmn]

kerry did win ohio :(



read this book: http://www.amazon.com/What-Happened-Ohio-Documentary-Election/dp/1595580697

ken blackwell is a ****ing crook. i'll mail my copy of that book to anyone who wants to read it.

Oh honey, in my heart I know he won it. And believe me, there was much debate about Ohio on this board after this election. I know all about Mr. Blackwell. :distress:

[carrie721]

Oh honey, in my heart I know he won it. And believe me, there was much debate about Ohio on this board after this election. I know all about Mr. Blackwell. :distress:

he is disgusting. to read that book 2 years after the election, after witnessing how much that stolen election has cost this country, it makes me ill. i don't contribute much to these political threads b/c it upsets me so much, but this issue is just too close to home.

[gldstwmn]

I don't think Cheney made any significant amount of money off the war :shrug:

Oh yes, that's right. He deferred his compensation from Haliburton while he was vice president. :rolleyes:

[strandinthewind]

Oh yes, that's right. He deferred his compensation from Haliburton while he was vice president. :rolleyes:

I think it is more than that. But, I do not have time to look it up right now.

On edit - if he is giving the stock option proceeds to charity, then he really has no significant ties to halliburton other than his deffered compensation, which is like $250,000 a year, which is nothing to a man as rich as he is and he certainly could have found an easier way to make much more without invading an entire country :shrug:

Of course, that assumes the here and now and part of the compensation could have occurred un the 90's and the work is now - see my foil hat for an explanation :cool:

Anyway -

Cheney's Halliburton Ties Remain

WASHINGTON, Sept. 26, 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CBS/AP) A report by the Congressional Research Service undermines Vice President Dick Cheney's denial of a continuing relationship with Halliburton Co., the energy company he once led, Sen. Frank Lautenberg said Thursday.

The report says a public official's unexercised stock options and deferred salary fall within the definition of "retained ties" to his former company.

Cheney said Sunday on NBC that since becoming vice president, "I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had, now, for over three years."

Democrats pointed out that Cheney receives deferred compensation from Halliburton under an arrangement he made in 1998, and also retains stock options. He has pledged to give after-tax proceeds of the stock options to charity.

Cheney's aides defended the assertion on NBC, saying the financial arrangements do not constitute a tie to the company's business performance. They pointed out that Cheney took out a $15,000 insurance policy so he would collect the deferred payments over five years whether or not Halliburton remains in business.

Lautenberg, D-N.J., asked the Congressional Research Service to weigh in.
Without naming Cheney or Halliburton, the service reported that unexercised stock options and deferred salary "are among those benefits described by the Office of Government Ethics as 'retained ties' or 'linkages' to one's former employer."

Lautenberg said the report makes clear that Cheney does still have financial ties to Halliburton. "I ask the vice president to stop dodging the issue with legalese," Lautenberg said.

Cathie Martin, Cheney's spokeswoman, said the question is whether Cheney has any possible conflict of interest with Halliburton, "and the answer to that is, no."

Cheney was chief executive officer of Halliburton from 1995 through August 2000. The company's KBR subsidiary is the main government contractor working to restore Iraq's oil industry in an open-ended contract that was awarded without competitive bidding.

According to Cheney's 2001 financial disclosure report, the vice president's Halliburton benefits include three batches of stock options comprising 433,333 shares. He also has a 401(k) retirement account valued at between $1,001 and $15,000 dollars.

His deferred compensation account was valued at between $500,000 and $1 million, and generated income of $50,000 to $100,000.

In 2002, Cheney's total assets were valued at between $19.1 million and $86.4 million.

Earlier this month, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit that accused Halliburton and Cheney of misleading investors by changing the way the company counted revenue from construction projects.

The lawsuit was filed last year by Judicial Watch, a conservative public interest group, on behalf of three small investors, who said the company tried to polish financial results by booking revenue on cost overruns before it was certain of getting paid.

Halliburton has contracts worth more than $1.7 billion for its work in Iraq, and it could make hundreds of millions more from a no-bid contract it was awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers, The Washington Post has reported.

According to The Post, while Cheney was defense secretary the Pentagon chose Halliburton subsidiary Brown & Root to study the cost effectiveness of outsourcing some military operations to private contractors. Based on the results of the study, the Pentagon hired Brown & Root to implement an outsourcing plan. Cheney became Halliburton CEO in 1995.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/politics/printable575356.shtml

also

Newsroom: Press Releases
Press Release of Senator Lautenberg
Lautenberg: congratulations Halliburton and Vice President Cheney!

Cheney's Halliburton Stock Options Soar to $9.2 Million

Thursday, September 15, 2005



WASHINGTON -- Senator Frank R. Lautenberg reiterated his call for Vice President Dick Cheney to forfeit his continuing financial interest in the Halliburton Co (HAL), in light of the surging value of Vice President Cheney's Halliburton holdings. Vice President Cheney continues to hold 433,333 Halliburton stock options, now worth $9,214,154.93 (at close yesterday.)
"As Halliburton's fortunes rise, so does the Vice President's, and that is wrong," said Senator Lautenberg. "Halliburton has already raked in more than $10 billion from the Bush-Cheney Administration for work in Iraq, and now they are being awarded some of the first Katrina contracts. It is unseemly for the Vice President to continue to benefit from this company at the same time his Administration funnels billions of dollars to it."

All of Vice President's Cheney's stock options are "in the money" for the first time in years. According to the Vice President's Federal Financial Disclosure forms, he holds the following Halliburton stock options:

100,000 shares at $54.5000 (vested), expire 12-03-07 33,333 shares at $28.1250 (vested), expire 12-02-08 300,000 shares at $39.5000 (vested), expire 12-02-09

The Vice President has attempted to fend off criticism by signing an agreement to donate the after-tax profits from these stock options to charities of his choice, and his lawyer has said he will not take any tax deduction for the donations. Valued at over $9 million, the Vice President could exercise his stock options for a substantial windfall, benefiting not only his designated charities, but also providing Halliburton with a tax deduction.

The Vice President also continues to receive "deferred salary" from Halliburton. While in office, he has received the following salary payments from Halliburton:

Deferred salary paid by Halliburton to Vice President Cheney in 2001: $205,298 Deferred salary paid by Halliburton to Vice President Cheney in 2002: $162,392 Deferred salary paid by Halliburton to Vice President Cheney in 2003: $178,437 Deferred salary paid by Halliburton to Vice President Cheney in 2004: $194,852

In September 2003, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) issued a memorandum to Senator Lautenberg concluding that holding stock options while in elective office does constitute a "financial interest" regardless of whether the holder of the options will donate proceeds to charities. CRS also found that receiving deferred compensation is a financial interest.

The CRS report can be downloaded at:

http://lautenberg.senate.gov/Report.pdf

The CRS findings contradict Vice President Cheney's puzzling view that he does not have a financial interest in Halliburton. On the September 14, 2003 edition of Meet the Press in response to questions regarding his relationship with Halliburton where he was employed as CEO for five years, from 1995 to 2000, Vice President Cheney said:

"And since I left Halliburton to become George Bush's vice president, I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had, now, for over three years."

http://lautenberg.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=254548

[gldstwmn]

Sure he'll give his shares to charity. And then he'll profit from the bazillion shares that's in some blind trust in his wife's name. Cheney is a liar. Always will be.

[strandinthewind]

Sure he'll give his shares to charity. And then he'll profit from the bazillion shares that's in some blind trust in his wife's name. Cheney is a liar. Always will be.

He and Halliburton would have to report that and believe me the media would have found out about it.

Having said that, I despise the man. I just do not think he has profitted right now from the halliburton contracts. There could be evidence out there i have not seen though.

[irishgrl]

He and Halliburton would have to report that and believe me the media would have found out about it.

Having said that, I despise the man. I just do not think he has profitted right now from the halliburton contracts. There could be evidence out there i have not seen though.
just because they're required to do something doesnt mean they will :shrug:

after all, this is the company that bilked CA out of millions of excess utility dollars, and to them it was a JOKE. I can definitely see these folks finding creative ways to circumvent pesky things like "the rules" oh yes. :nod: