Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (22578)	6/16/2005 11:49:09 PM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 360953

I agree that impeachment can be pretty broad. I was arguing "treason" is narrow, not impeachment. If it was up to me Bush would be impeached tomorrow and tried for war crimes ... but not for treason. I'm being very consistent. When Coulter named her book "Treason" and started calling anyone that objected to the invasion of Iraq a "traitor", I was incensed. I wanted what I thought was best for my Country - that is not treason. I think the same standard should apply here. Bush is hurting our country, he should be removed from office, he should be tried for his crimes, and if convicted severely punished - but that doesn't make him a traitor. I agree that Bush is a traitor to American values - yes - but that is poetic, not legal.