In this column last week, I asked the question, Should President
George W. Bush be impeached? The specific precursor for that question
was the guilty verdict of former White House insider Lewis "Scooter"
Libby. In my mind, that trial and subsequent conviction demonstrated
that there is more than enough circumstantial evidence to warrant
a thorough investigation into whether President Bush willfully
manipulated evidence regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
in Iraq and whether he deliberately lied to the American people
in order to justify a pre-determined plan to launch a preemptive
attack on that country.
In all the years of writing this column, I cannot recall one
that elicited more response, positive and negative. Furthermore,
respondents were split evenly down the middle. Half wanted to
enshrine my face on Mount Rushmore, while the other half wanted
to personally cast me into the lake of fire.
A brief digression regarding the WMD matter is the critically
important question as to whether the White House believed Saddam
Hussein had WMD CAPABLE OF THREATENING THE UNITED STATES. Emphasis
is added on purpose, as most of the "Of-course-Iraq-had-WMD"
crowd seem to equate Hussein's use of intermediate WMD against
the Kurds with the ability to pose a "clear and present danger"
to the United States. The two are not remotely related.
Please don't misunderstand me. I could not care less that Saddam
Hussein is dead. He died the way most dictators die. He lived
by the sword; he died by the sword. Or, by the rope, actually.
However, please remember that Saddam Hussein killed the Kurds
because they staged a violent insurrection against his reign.
What do you think George Bush would do if a group of people violently
tried to oust him from power? I seem to recall a President and
Attorney General sending tanks and helicopter gun ships against
mostly old men, women, and children outside Waco, Texas, a few
years back. And those poor folks had no intention of overthrowing
the Texas capital, much less Washington, D.C.
The relevant question is not, Did Iraq have WMD, but did they
have WMD CAPABLE OF THREATENING THE UNITED STATES? Everyone now
knows the answer to that question is, no, it did not. But what
we don't know is, When did President Bush know the answer to that
question?
If our President knew that Iraq did not pose a "clear and
present danger" to the security of the United States, and
if he deliberately deceived the American people and sent more
than 3,000 of America's finest to their deaths for ulterior motives
(whatever they were), the man is certainly guilty of "high
crimes" and should be impeached, at the very least.
Frankly, I don't know the answer to that question, and I don't
know anyone who does (outside Bush and his inner circle). Therefore,
I stand behind my initial statement that we need a thorough investigation
to find out the truth. It would seem to me that, regardless of
where each of us falls down politically, we would want to know
the answer to that question. Unless we are afraid of the truth,
of course.
All of that aside, there is one grievance that is sticking like
a bone in my throat about this administration: its careless disregard
for the security of our national borders. President Bush, along
with Senators Ted Kennedy and John McCain, are in the process
of turning America into a third world country. Their attempt to
provide amnesty to tens of millions of illegal aliens and to virtually
vanquish our national borders is nothing short of criminal. As
President, Mr. Bush has taken it even further than that.
Without congressional oversight or knowledge, President Bush
committed the United States to a trilateral union with Mexico
and Canada. He put his stamp of approval upon a mammoth NAFTA
superhighway. He has given the green light for thousands of Mexican
trucks to enter the United States. He has turned his back on American
Border Patrol agents who were simply trying to enforce our country's
immigration laws. And he has done all this with impunity.
What makes President Bush's policy of open borders even more
egregious is the argument that some Bush apologists make by saying
that Iraq's limited WMD could be snuck into the United States,
and, therefore, we had to invade Iraq. Well, duh! If President
Bush really believed that Iraq was going to smuggle WMD into America,
why did he not close the borders?
Furthermore, countries that most certainly do have WMD capable
of threatening the United States include Russia and China. Does
anyone (George W. Bush included) believe we should invade those
countries? The fact is, if terrorists from any country have smuggled
WMD into the U.S., we can thank President Bush and his fellow
travelers in Congress for opening the door.
The reason that Congress is unwilling to stop President Bush
on the open borders issue is because Democrats and Republicans
alike are on the take. Democrats are appeasing their radical,
multiculturalist cronies and Republicans are appeasing their Chamber
of Commerce sugar daddies. Neither the Jackasses nor the Pachyderms
give a flip about what is best for middle-class America or whether
what they are doing will eventually destroy the sovereignty and
independence of our country.
With or without Iraq, President Bush is a disaster. And Congress
(with either party in charge) is no better. If we lived in the
old days, we would not be talking about impeachment, we would
be grabbing the tar and feathers.
