If Cheney wasn't Veep, would Bush have been impeached?

Great Laxit

One of the things I remember hearing about most often when the thought of impeachment (or assassination, but that's a whole other can of worms) would come up against GWB is that it was undesirable because if it succeeded it would end with president Cheney.

So if George W. had a more palatable president (not saying moderate, just one not as hated as Dick Cheney) would the Dems have attempted impeachment?
 
shiftygiant

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
Assassination would be more likely that a successful impeachment, though for Cheney to be out the picture, all you need if for Bush not to ask for his help in choosing his running mate.

Alternate Veeps could be; John Danforth, Elizabeth Dole, Bill Frist, Chuck Hagel, John Kasich, Frank Keating, George Pataki, Tom Ridge, and Fred Thompson, all of whom were tipped for the job. Kasich and Frist would be the likely choice.
 

Theoretical_TJ

Is the idea that it's revenge for impeaching Clinton or that Bush actually committed high crimes and misdemeanors in terms of the Democratic motivations?
 

Great Laxit

Theoretical_TJ said:
Is the idea that it's revenge for impeaching Clinton or that Bush actually committed high crimes and misdemeanors in terms of the Democratic motivations?
Click to expand...

A mix of both. They think they have enough to nail him based on the run-up to Iraq and they are eager to try and take him down (This is a bit ASB because it assumes congressional Dems aren't spineless, but go with it).
 

David T

Roman E said:
One of the things I remember hearing about most often when the thought of impeachment (or assassination, but that's a whole other can of worms) would come up against GWB is that it was undesirable because if it succeeded it would end with president Cheney.

So if George W. had a more palatable president (not saying moderate, just one not as hated as Dick Cheney) would the Dems have attempted impeachment?
Click to expand...

No. First of all, the Democrats didn't even have a majority in the House until 2007, and then it was a narrow one, containing quite a few conservative Democrats. Second, they remembered that the GOP's determination to impeach Clinton in 1998 had backfired (the Democrats actually gained five House seats that year). Third, it is harder to impeach over something related to public policy than over a seemingly apolitical scandal like Monicagate; note that there was no serious attempt to impeach Reagan over Iran-Contra. I'm not saying that is how it should be--one can argue that lying or breaking the law to get a policy outcome is *worse* than perjury or obstruction of justice in a sexual harassment lawsuit. But, rightly or wrongly, it is even harder to get the bipartisan support necessary to remove the president when one seems to be merely re-litigating a public policy dispute. (Besides, Republicans could ask if FDR or LBJ should have been impeached for alleged deceptions in getting the US into World War II or escalating the Vietnam war.) This leads to the fourth reason--that even if the House voted to impeach, there would be no possibility of getting the two-thirds majority necessary for conviction in the Senate. You may say that was also true of 1998-99, but the Republicans didn't *think* so at the time--they thought the public would be so disgusted by Clinton that enough Democrats might vote to convict in the end. Certainly in 2007 nobody was under any such delusion that Senate Republicans would vote to remove Bush.
 
history nerd

history nerd

The discussion surrounding impeachment was never serious, just a couple of far left loons spouting off. If he had more clearly done something illegal perhaps.
 
GSpectre

GSpectre

Without Cheney in the administration... its radically different. Aside from that, even as a person who loathes Bush Jr, there really wasn't any ground to impeach him on.
 
Vidal

Vidal

Donor
shiftygiant said:
Assassination would be more likely that a successful impeachment, though for Cheney to be out the picture, all you need if for Bush not to ask for his help in choosing his running mate.

Alternate Veeps could be; John Danforth, Elizabeth Dole, Bill Frist, Chuck Hagel, John Kasich, Frank Keating, George Pataki, Tom Ridge, and Fred Thompson, all of whom were tipped for the job. Kasich and Frist would be the likely choice.
Click to expand...

Bush actually suggested it'd be Danforth, if not Cheney, as I recall.
 

Derek Jackson

I think it extremely unlikely that GW Bush would have been impeached.

However in my opinion he should have been for launching an aggressive war contrary to treaties ratified by the US and therefore part of the supreme law of the US
 
TimTurner

TimTurner

Derek Jackson said:
I think it extremely unlikely that GW Bush would have been impeached.

However in my opinion he should have been for launching an aggressive war contrary to treaties ratified by the US and therefore part of the supreme law of the US
Click to expand...
What chain of events, what kind of ditzy mistakes could he do to that would result in impeachment?
 

Alstein

Very doubful. Dems didn't have Congress until 2006, and by then they saw what was going to happen and didn't want to risk losing 2008 and doing what the Republicans did in the 90s.
 

Theoretical_TJ

TimTurner said:
What chain of events, what kind of ditzy mistakes could he do to that would result in impeachment?
Click to expand...

The easiest way is overt bribery or political oppression a la Agnew or Nixon. If the housing/MBS scandal broke out in 2005, and Bush was specifically shown to have improperly profited by the economic ruin, and the Democrats held large majorities, an impeachment could happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top