Should President Bush be charged with the violations he is guilty of?

what violations? be seeing you

yes

The Constitution?

Guantanamo Bay?

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2009/01/after-bush-taking-meaningful-steps.php

As the Bush presidency comes to an end, calls for investigations by the incoming Obama administration and the new Congress seem to be increasing. To say that the policies pursued by the Bush administration with respect to the war on terror and other national security issues were controversial would be an understatement. A number of programs established by President Bush soon after September 11th, including warrantless domestic surveillance, the creation of a detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, and the interrogation techniques used for gathering intelligence, have all come under scrutiny and severe criticism from within and outside of the government

ummmm, technically he can't be guilty of anything until he is convicted (which comes after being charged)

according so certain panels on public radios he's openly admitted to some of the violations.

on one hand, he acts as though he is above the law and should be prosecuted by law

on the other hand, do we have the ability to drag this through the entire process given everything already at risk?

but then, most everything he's done was already reviewed for constitutionality by the Supreme Court

Good luck with that.

The question right now would seem to be, is Bush above the law.

A small percentage seem to think he has done nothing wrong. A large percent think he has done many things wrong. I guess it depends on how much people have been paying attention these past 8 years.

What law has GW Broken?????

Not his administration but him.....personally

Unlawfully spying on Americans

The ok for torture aspects at Guantanamo Bay

I'm just researching about it from things i've heard this morning, but this is what i've gotten from it so far.

but the spying on Americans is a part of the Patriot Act that was passed by Congress, not the President

and the torture consisted of "water boarding" which at the time was not defined as torture and had since been redefined

I'm not trying to be argumentive but that is the defense that would be used if he were charged

i understand
the bit i've looked into did have some quotes from him and i've listened to some panels on public radio
it's interesting to hear
i honestly don't think anything will come of it...but i'm going to look into it further.

He shouldn't and won't be charged with any "crimes." He did what he felt was in the best interest of our country. We elected him (twice), so should we (the American people) be charged too. After all, by electing him we are just a "guilty" as most people say he is. I don't feel that President Bush did anything wrong. And Obama won't allow him to be charged because it won't be in the best interest of our country.

many in washington should be charged with violations including those that voted for the bailout which include mccain and obama

ummm never mind haha

ya'll edited stuff and now I sound stoopid arguing with someone who isnt there

you know what forest says

Bush cann't do anything own his own he has to have EVERYTHING approved by others.his only real power is the veto.

without offending others and getting deleted may i say that personally i know he has done a great job after 9/11 and that freedom comes at a price that few are willing to pay but plenty complain about.

as for OUR new president i wish him the best although he swore in on the koran and turned his back on the American flag(watch the video)fact now that gitmo is gonna be closed who'll be the next to occupy it. i think probably some of his islamic cousins

the spying on american citizens is what i have an issue with he and ALL involved in passing the patriot act are imo guilty of treason (they swore to uphold and protect the constitution the patriot act violates the very heart of why the constitution was enacted)

yes