I am being serious, though simultaneously facetious. I find the facts of the indictment implausible; I think most people, even those opposed to war, believed that Saddam had some chembio weapons. I have no reason to doubt that Bush sincerely believed this, even if mistaken in retrospect.
My point, though, was that impeachment is not a legalistic matter. It is a democratic matter. The Republicans learned this on Clinton. They had him near dead to rights on perjury, but the people didn't want him removed, and he was not. Likewise, even if you can prove that Bush consciously misled the people on war (perhaps like Gulf of Tonkin), that isn't significant in an impeachment context unless the people so clearly want him out that even Republicans will so vote. At 12:02 PM 6/8/2003 -0400, you wrote: >Prof. Cross writes: >> I think we have established, constitutionally, that lying is not an >> impeachable offense. > >Comment: Assuming that you are being serious, the issue with Bush and WMDs >is not merely lying but conspiracy to commit fraud. > >Francisco Forrest Martin > Frank Cross Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law CBA 5.202 University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX 78712
