Would a pattern of (deceptive) covert propaganda be a "high crime"?

[Just Me]

Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states that: "the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Would a pattern of (deceptive) covert propaganda be within the realm of "high crimes and misdemeanors"? Ann Coulter argued that Clinton's misrepresentation concerning his relationship with his intern was a "high crime". Wouldn't a pattern of deceiving the American public be a far more serious "high crime"?

[shraby]

1. I can't answer your question, but it's an

interesting thought.

[Dr Ron]

2. Depends upon who is judging

For obvious reasons, Bush will not be held to the same standards as Clinton by the GOP controlled Congress. While they were willing to stretch things quite far to make a case against Clinton, Bush wouldn't be impeached unless there was a smoking gun witnessed by far too many to ignore.

[mattclearing]

3. He would have to lie under oath.

That's why he and Dick Cheney met off the record for the 9/11 Commission.

You will likely never see George W. Bush speak under oath until he is out of office, except briefly while taking the oath of office next Thursday.

[Just Me]

4. I haven't found any law that says he has to lie under oath.

I believe his oath of office is "oath" enough for him to be obliged to be truthful to the American people particularly with respect to matters that involve American lives and treasure.

[mattclearing]

6. Perjury is a crime. Lying is not.

That's the difference.

[Just Me]

9. I disagree. A pattern of deception would is serious abuse of power

which constitutes a "high crime and misdemeanor". Such an abuse is not limited to instances of technical perjury.

As I previously stated, by virtue of his oath of office (which does not end the second after he takes it but rather continues throughout his service), he is obliged to be truthful and never engage in an intentional campaign of deception against his people.

[meow2u3]

5. I think the high crime falls under the category of bribery

Since the BCF paid "journalists" to pedal covert propaganda, one can argue successfully that bribery took place.

[mattclearing]

7. This has some potential.

I'd have to look into the legal def. of bribery and know the specifics of their arrangement, but a case could certainly be made.

[LynnTheDem]

8. Breaking the law would be "high crimes & misdemeanors".

Paying journos for covert propaganda is illegal.

Faking news as ads for bush policy is illegal.

Lying the nation into the Supreme Crime of invasion would be a war crime, which would be a high crime.

And if we had an alien power in charge of the world, the USA would be indicted for war crimes exactly as Germany was at Nuremburg.

But with all of the above, WHO will hold bushCo accountable? Not Congress.

[Cocoa]

10. it would have to be about something serious

like something that would lead to a war.

Bush was already proven to have lied massively and repeatedly about WMD and about Iraq and 9/11. If he wasn't impeached over that, then this thing about education policy doesn't stand a chance.

[Just Me]

11. Committing fraud against the people is pretty freakin' egregious!!!

Did/has this administration intentionally engaged in a pattern of deception in order to cause the American people to give up their rights or to consent to something they otherwise would not have given their consent?

Although the neoCONimperialists may have been able to throw out "national security" right and left with respect to all their deceptions concerning the war,...they don't have that excuse when it comes to strictly domestic policies.