Skip Nav
Romantic Comedies
8 New Romances on Netflix in February
Netflix
18 Sex-Filled Films to Stream on Netflix
Nostalgia
375 Reasons Why Being a '90s Girl Rocked Our Jellies Off

Joe Biden Says Obama Administration Would Pursue Bush Crimes

Should Next President Prosecute Bush Administration Crimes?

This week an ordinary citizen asked Joe Biden if the Obama Administration would "pursue violations that have been made against our Constitution by the present administration." His answer? Yes.

Speaking about the efforts of the congressional Democrats to investigate the Bush Administration, VP nominee Biden said:

What they're doing is the right thing. They're not making false accusations, they're not making unfounded accusations, they're collecting data. They're subpoenaing records. They're building the file. And they're going through it and will go through it with a fine tooth comb. If there has been a basis on which you could pursue someone for a criminal violation, they will be pursued. Not out of vengeance, not out of retribution. Out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no one, no attorney general, no president, no one is above the law.

Obama has said that he will ask his attorney general to distinguish between "genuine crimes" and "really bad policies." He said in April: "[I]f crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve."

While it shouldn't surprise anyone when leaders vow to hold criminals accountable, political allegiances are sure to make this vow unusually controversial.

Source

Around The Web
Michelle Obama Wearing a Plum Dress
Becoming an Adult During Obama's Presidency
Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee With Barack Obama
Presidents' Pets

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

Join The Conversation
Shiloh-Jolie-Pitt Shiloh-Jolie-Pitt 7 years
Yes it should be pursued. We all have the right to know the truth. If anybody is above the law then what is the point of having courts?
UnDave35 UnDave35 7 years
I think we all agree that they shouold investigate, but I thought they had been investigating for the last two years? If they haven't found anything worth impeaching over, then why should they prosecute after he leaves office? If you have something, right before an election is the best time to impeach the incumbant, even if it only adversely affects his party. (Could this be the October Suprise from the DNC?)
Jude-C Jude-C 7 years
*and there definitely aren't people on here, on either side, who go out of their way to find, attack, and belittle specific other users, as can often be found on Pop.
Jude-C Jude-C 7 years
As a liberal CS regular, I have to come out in defense of my conservative friends on here. I very, very rarely see anything that could resemble "bullying." It may be that for people who aren't used to the way things run around here, the CS regulars and style of debate are hard to take? :? All of us on both sides get passionate because we're debating important issues close to our hearts. And it is true that we often come down in two groups on opposite sides. But I don't think that's the same thing as having "gangs" of people "bullying" others--there aren't that many personal attacks, and definitely not group personal attacks. Most people on here are super friendly and get along even without agreeing on these issues. And as for myself, I count many of the conservative regulars my friends, and don't think of any of them as "bullies."
pinkprincess1101 pinkprincess1101 7 years
as a US citizen who lives opposite of new york i do not need to relive that horrific event and I'm in texas can you imagine the people it hit home with, i remember my husband then being in korea the thought of him being deployed was horrific(with three young children one with special needs and a baby)and i understand that is the possibility of enlisting, and i was all for it when we were fighting a war against the bastards that attacked us, but when you send soldiers to invade a country that didn't attack us is not acceptable and that is why that moron needs to be impeached
pinkprincess1101 pinkprincess1101 7 years
talula so damn true i agree 100%, i have had people PM me about this how they try to bully people and some say :oy: that wont happen
PixiePup PixiePup 7 years
"It is unfortunate that some CS users seem to think they are so above everyone else." Agreed! The same goes for the gang of conservative bullies on CS who rejoice in running off anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Ginger Ginger 7 years
Here's a shortcut to the list of 35 articles of impeachment contained in the June 9, 2008 congressional record. If for some reason the link doesn't appear it's probably faster to google "35 articles of impeachment" on Bush than all the individual issues. http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/files/kucinich_impeach.pdf
Candybee Candybee 7 years
Thanks for hanging in there so long!
Candybee Candybee 7 years
I agree with that as well, but as the commander in chief it is his responsibility.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
One parting thought, you're right Carrie, there's no need for ANY OF US to get mad or be rude to one another. That statement certainly goes both ways. I think all of us (I'm including myself) are less likely to notice it when someone we agree with gets snarky or condescending.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Congress gave him authorization to send troops there. I am also speaking to all of your accusations, not just Iraq. Anyway, it is almost 5:00 here on the East Coast, so I really do have to get going, that's not just a line. If you wish to discuss this further, please private message me and I will get back to you sometime this weekend. I'm going to be pretty busy though, so it may take a day or two.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Congress gave him authorization to send troops there. I am also speaking to all of your accusations, not just Iraq.Anyway, it is almost 5:00 here on the East Coast, so I really do have to get going, that's not just a line. If you wish to discuss this further, please private message me and I will get back to you sometime this weekend. I'm going to be pretty busy though, so it may take a day or two.
Candybee Candybee 7 years
Oh- and George Bush himself called himself "the decider"...Thats why I said it...or typed it.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Oh, and Congress, military commanders, and many others are to ensure that soldiers have body armor, in my opinion.
sexylibrarian sexylibrarian 7 years
lil it is obvious that we have differing opinions but I think healthy political debate can be a good thing. There is no need for any of us to get mad and call each other names. I think we all can look down on others who have views that differ from ours.
Candybee Candybee 7 years
So, you think someone else, besides the president can wage a war on another country? Who else, then besides George Bush, invaded Iraq?
Candybee Candybee 7 years
So, you think someone else, besides the president can wage a war on another country? Who else, then besides George Bush, invaded Iraq?
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Not really. I think we have a very different view of how much power the president actually has, candy. I guess that's where a lot of our disagreement lies.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Hey, if people are going to be rude to me, I can dish it right back.
Candybee Candybee 7 years
It SO clearly implicates Bush and his Administration in my opinion. Who else can wage a war except for the president? Who other than the commander in chief is to ensure that soldiers have body armor? The buck stops with him. He is "the decider". Right?
Candybee Candybee 7 years
It SO clearly implicates Bush and his Administration in my opinion. Who else can wage a war except for the president?Who other than the commander in chief is to ensure that soldiers have body armor?The buck stops with him. He is "the decider". Right?
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
I wasn't saying that any one specific person's argument was childish, I meant that the back and forth was childish and not accomplishing anything. If you don't understand my comment (which you obviously didn't), please ask for further explanation next time instead of just assuming you know what I meant.
sexylibrarian sexylibrarian 7 years
Wow the hypocracy is getting pretty deep in here!
sexylibrarian sexylibrarian 7 years
I just don't understand when the table is turned and you are faced with proof why it is a "childish argument"?
Latest Love
X