Is it Christmas time again already? - I love Thomas Jefferson!

[raVeneyes]

Bush Impeachment - The Illinois State Legislature Is Preparing to Drop a Bombshell
By Steven Leser
OpEd News

Saturday 22 April 2006

Utilizing a little known rule of the US House to bring Impeachment charges.

The Illinois General Assembly is about to rock the nation. Members of state legislatures are normally not considered as having the ability to decide issues with a massive impact to the nation as a whole. Representative Karen A. Yarbrough of Illinois' 7th District is about to shatter that perception forever. Representative Yarbrough stumbled on a little known and never utlitized rule of the US House of Representatives, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives, which allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of a state legislature. From there, Illinois House Joint Resolution 125 (hereafter to be referred to as HJR0125) was born.

Detailing five specific charges against President Bush including one that is specified to be a felony, the complete text of HJR0125 is copied below at the end of this article. One of the interesting points is that one of the items, the one specified as a felony, that the NSA was directed by the President to spy on American citizens without warrant, is not in dispute. That fact should prove an interesting dilemma for a Republican controlled US House that clearly is not only loathe to initiate impeachment proceedings, but does not even want to thoroughly investigate any of the five items brought up by the Illinois Assembly as high crimes and/or misdemeanors. Should HJR0125 be passed by the Illinois General Assembly, the US House will be forced by House Rules to take up the issue of impeachment as a privileged bill, meaning it will take precedence over other House business.

The Illinois General Assembly joins a growing chorus of voices calling for censure or impeachment of President Bush including Democratic state committees in Vermont, Wisconsin, New Mexico, Nevada and North Carolina as well as the residents themselves of seven towns in Vermont, seventy Vermont state legislators and Congressman John Conyers. The call for impeachment is starting to grow well beyond what could be considered a fringe movement. An ABC News/Washington Post Poll Conducted April 6-9 showed that 33% of Americans currently support Impeaching President Bush, coincidentally, only a similar amount supported impeaching Nixon at the start of the Watergate investigation. If and when Illinois HJR0125 hits the capitol and the individual charges are publicly investigated, that number is likely to grow rapidly. Combined with the very real likelihood that Rove is about to be indicted in the LeakGate investigation, and Bush is in real trouble beyond his plummeting poll numbers. His cronies in the Republican dominated congress will probably save him from the embarassment of an impeachment conviction, for now, but his Presidency will be all but finished.

Full article here:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_060422_bush_impeachment___t.htm

HJ0125 LRB094 20306 RLC 58347 r

1 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION

2 WHEREAS, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of
3 the United States House of Representatives allows federal
4 impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of
5 a state legislature; and

6 WHEREAS, President Bush has publicly admitted to ordering
7 the National Security Agency to violate provisions of the 1978
8 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a felony, specifically
9 authorizing the Agency to spy on American citizens without
10 warrant; and

11 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that President Bush authorized
12 violation of the Torture Convention of the Geneva Conventions,
13 a treaty regarded a supreme law by the United States
14 Constitution; and

15 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration has held American
16 citizens and citizens of other nations as prisoners of war
17 without charge or trial; and

18 WHEREAS, Evidence suggests that the Bush Administration
19 has manipulated intelligence for the purpose of initiating a
20 war against the sovereign nation of Iraq, resulting in the
21 deaths of large numbers of Iraqi civilians and causing the
22 United States to incur loss of life, diminished security and
23 billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses; and

24 WHEREAS, The Bush Administration leaked classified
25 national secrets to further a political agenda, exposing an
26 unknown number of covert U. S. intelligence agents to potential
27 harm and retribution while simultaneously refusing to
28 investigate the matter; and

29 WHEREAS, The Republican-controlled Congress has declined

HJ0125 - 2 - LRB094 20306 RLC 58347 r

1 to fully investigate these charges to date; therefore, be it

2 RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
3 NINETY-FOURTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, THE
4 SENATE CONCURRING HEREIN, that the General Assembly of the
5 State of Illinois has good cause to submit charges to the U. S.
6 House of Representatives under Section 603 that the President
7 of the United States has willfully violated his Oath of Office
8 to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
9 States; and be it further

10 RESOLVED, That George W. Bush, if found guilty of the
11 charges contained herein, should be removed from office and
12 disqualified to hold any other office in the United States.

 

[raVeneyes]

California LOVES the Bush too:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_david_sw_060424_california_becomes_s.htm

 

[97silverlsc]

Best news I've seen in a long time, hope it goes all the way!!!!!

 

[fossten]

This resolution will be laughed out of the House considering that every allegation in it is patently false.

Bring it on.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Pass the popcorn, this is going to be good.

Oh, and welcome back raVeneyes, long time no see. And what a way to jump back into the cesspool, swinging the "I-word" around like that. :Beer

 

[TheDude]

This resolution will be laughed out of the House considering that every allegation in it is patently false.

Bring it on.

I agree that it will bare no fruit when all's said and finished, but I do not think the main reason of this is to actually impeach and remove Bush. It's more like a slander campaign to smear the Republicans for 2008. Kind of like what your (ex)party did to the Democrats with the Clinton smear campaign. Guess what goes around comes around...


And, welcome back Raven, good to see you posting again...

 

[fossten]

I agree that it will bare no fruit when all's said and finished, but I do not think the main reason of this is to actually impeach and remove Bush. It's more like a slander campaign to smear the Republicans for 2008. Kind of like what your (ex)party did to the Democrats with the Clinton smear campaign. Guess what goes around comes around...
QUOTE]

Well, your point would be good except that in '94 the Repubs didn't run a smear campaign. They ran on their issues, which were ways to improve, not to bash. That's the difference b/t now and then.

 

[TheDude]

I agree that it will bare no fruit when all's said and finished, but I do not think the main reason of this is to actually impeach and remove Bush. It's more like a slander campaign to smear the Republicans for 2008. Kind of like what your (ex)party did to the Democrats with the Clinton smear campaign. Guess what goes around comes around...
QUOTE]

Well, your point would be good except that in '94 the Repubs didn't run a smear campaign. They ran on their issues, which were ways to improve, not to bash. That's the difference b/t now and then.

Come on now, the Clinton thing was to make the whole of the Democratic Party look bad, that’s all it was. One of the 'slogans' the Repubs used was family values and there’s live footage of Bush all over his wife during the campaign, there's even footage of him being candidly 'caught' grabbing her ass. (We’re not like the cheating, adulterous Democrats...)

Anyhow, it will be interesting to see how this turns out for Bush and the Republican Party.

 

[fossten]

Come on now, the Clinton thing was to make the whole of the Democratic Party look bad, that’s all it was. One of the 'slogans' the Repubs used was family values and there’s live footage of Bush all over his wife during the campaign, there's even footage of him being candidly 'caught' grabbing her ass. (We’re not like the cheating, adulterous Democrats...)

Anyhow, it will be interesting to see how this turns out for Bush and the Republican Party.

See, this is how you take things. You have to ASSUME that the Republicans are taking shots at the Dems because they don't come out and do it blatantly, rather opting to show their own positives. The Dems, on the other hand, have jumped from one bash to another, while OFFERING NO REAL POLICY AGENDA OF THEIR OWN.

 

[TheDude]

See, this is how you take things. You have to ASSUME that the Republicans are taking shots at the Dems because they don't come out and do it blatantly, rather opting to show their own positives. The Dems, on the other hand, have jumped from one bash to another, while OFFERING NO REAL POLICY AGENDA OF THEIR OWN.

I'm not assuming, I watched the debacle that was the Clinton/Lewinski trial. Let's just agree to disagree on this one then since the post is not about Clinton.

I am interested in seeing what they have on the 'Intelligence manipulation for making a case for war on Iraq' issue.

 

[fossten]

I'm not assuming, I watched the debacle that was the Clinton/Lewinski trial. Let's just agree to disagree on this one then since the post is not about Clinton.

I am interested in seeing what they have on the 'Intelligence manipulation for making a case for war on Iraq' issue.

The point you're missing is that Republican Senators and Congressmen DIDN'T RUN AGAINST CLINTON. They ran on issues. The proofs against your assertion are:

1. Clinton won his election despite the Lewinsky affair.
2. Democrats, not Clinton, lost both houses.
3. Democrats are running on lies, not on truths.

 

[raVeneyes]

Thanks for the welcome back guys!

I see little has changed for fussy fossie...

fossten, you're right...it will get laughed out of the house...except those Republican candidates in neutral districts (well the neutral ones they haven't re-drawn to suit their needs). Those middle ground Republicans and middle ground districts will be forced to take notice of the multiple state resolutions because:

1) The Republican party is all about States' Rights
2) It is an election year. This will be in congress before the election.
3) Even if they proved to be false, they are serious accusations and, as we've seen from the latter Clinton years, it doesn't take proving allegations to completely negate presidential power.

 

[fossten]

Thanks for the welcome back guys!

I see little has changed for fussy fossie...

fossten, you're right...it will get laughed out of the house...except those Republican candidates in neutral districts (well the neutral ones they haven't re-drawn to suit their needs). Those middle ground Republicans and middle ground districts will be forced to take notice of the multiple state resolutions because:

1) The Republican party is all about States' Rights
2) It is an election year. This will be in congress before the election.
3) Even if they proved to be false, they are serious accusations and, as we've seen from the latter Clinton years, it doesn't take proving allegations to completely negate presidential power.

Little has changed for you, name-caller.

Okay, so it's about the seriousness of the charge instead of the nature of the evidence, eh, Wavy Ravey?

In that case, Clinton was guilty of everything, and so is McCarthy, and Harry Reid, and everybody else that's ever been accused of anything.

What a crock.

 

[raVeneyes]

Little has changed for you, name-caller.

Okay, so it's about the seriousness of the charge instead of the nature of the evidence, eh, Wavy Ravey?

In that case, Clinton was guilty of everything, and so is McCarthy, and Harry Reid, and everybody else that's ever been accused of anything.

What a crock.

Not what I was saying buddy. Get your key outta your ear...

What I'm saying is whether or not the charges are proved, they WILL be brought up on the floor of Congress, and they will be discussed. The media coverage from that alone will be enough to slime away any power the executive branch has left (after the low approval ratings and bungling of a few relatively big PR nightmares).

It doesn't matter to *Washington* if the charges are true or not...it only matters to people who won't end up listening.

 

[fossten]

Not what I was saying buddy. Get your key outta your ear...

What I'm saying is whether or not the charges are proved, they WILL be brought up on the floor of Congress, and they will be discussed. The media coverage from that alone will be enough to slime away any power the executive branch has left (after the low approval ratings and bungling of a few relatively big PR nightmares).

It doesn't matter to *Washington* if the charges are true or not...it only matters to people who won't end up listening.

Now you're really making me laugh. Look at your quote in bold. See your assertion that Bush (implied) is on virtually powerless? Oh, how that contrasts with the big libs of your Democrat party who constantly assert that Bush is on a big power grab, with unprecedented authority!

You libs need to make up your mind.

You in particular need to decide who you're contradicting.

 

[raVeneyes]

Future prediction (and fervent wish):

The media coverage from that alone will be enough to slime away any power the executive branch has left

Current reality:

...Bush is on a big power grab, with unprecedented authority!

 

[fossten]

Future prediction (and fervent wish):



Current reality:

And there is your self-contradiction.

Thank you for not only agreeing with me, but illustrating that I'm right.

 

[raVeneyes]

And there is your self-contradiction.

Thank you for not only agreeing with me, but illustrating that I'm right.

man...you really have a problem with timelines... Maybe that's why you have to refer to the last three presidencies to assist your arguments, you don't realize there's a past, a present, and a future?

There is no contradiction...it is what is the reality that exists now vs. what I want to see and think will happen in the near future.

It doesn't take long for someone reaching for more to fall flat on their face when they overextend themselves...remember Adolf Hitler?

 

[fossten]

man...you really have a problem with timelines... Maybe that's why you have to refer to the last three presidencies to assist your arguments, you don't realize there's a past, a present, and a future?

There is no contradiction...it is what is the reality that exists now vs. what I want to see and think will happen in the near future.

It doesn't take long for someone reaching for more to fall flat on their face when they overextend themselves...remember Adolf Hitler?

I'll try and say this s-l-o-w-l-y so even a 5-year old can understand. Whether or not you can remains to be seen.

Your article implies that Bush has very little power left. How can he have unprecedented authority at the same time? The current reality as you put it claims he has unprecedented authority. Your article implies he has very little left.

You can't cite an article without endorsing it, and if you disagree with the article implicitly without stating that you disagree, you're contradicting it. Welcome to English 101.

Are you comparing Bush to Hitler? Because if you are, you only show that you are a total leftwing wacko. You need to go post on Huff 'N' Puff.

This is just the kind of thing that Joey was complaining about. Interesting timing.

 

[raVeneyes]

Your article implies that Bush has very little power left.

Where? The article says nothing of the kind...

The article just says that Bush will be put to task by the States, since none of our congressional representatives are willing to do it.

Are you comparing Bush to Hitler?

Uh..no... I did not compare Bush to Hitler... Hitler is just a really good example of how over-reaching can quickly lead to a leader's demise.

 

[raVeneyes]

I'll try and say this s-l-o-w-l-y so even a 5-year old can understand. Whether or not you can remains to be seen.

This is just the kind of thing that Joey was complaining about. Interesting timing.

 

[fossten]

Where? The article says nothing of the kind...

The media coverage from that alone will be enough to slime away any power the executive branch has left (after the low approval ratings and bungling of a few relatively big PR nightmares).

The article just says that Bush will be put to task by the States, since none of our congressional representatives are willing to do it.



Future prediction (and fervent wish):

Quote:
Originally Posted by raVeneyes
The media coverage from that alone will be enough to slime away any power the executive branch has left



Current reality:

Quote:
Originally Posted by fossten
...Bush is on a big power grab, with unprecedented authority!

Oh, excuse me, YOU said it...that's even worse. You contradicted yourself. You accept my premise that the Dems are asserting Bush has unprecedented authority after implying he has very little left.

And here we are, back at the original issue, that you contradicted yourself.

Typical of you - flash and distract rather than debate issues.

 

[Vitas]

Not what I was saying buddy... The media coverage from that alone will be enough to slime away

"SLIME AWAY"

Great DNC PR: "The Democratic Party SLIMES AWAY.:bowrofl:

:I

That approach should do wonders for the DNC.

 

[raVeneyes]

And here we are, back at the original issue, that you contradicted yourself.

I've already responded to this assertion of yours, and shown you how the prediction of a future event does NOT contradict a current status.

 

[raVeneyes]

"SLIME AWAY"

Great DNC PR: "The Democratic Party SLIMES AWAY.:bowrofl:

:I

That approach should do wonders for the DNC.

Hey, I didn't say it was a good idea, or even good politics...I'm just saying that the history of the situation is that allegations of wrongdoing no matter how correct or incorrect will lower significantly the political power of the person who those allegations are leveled at.

This is called sliming in the jargon of the news world.

Note carefully "no matter how correct or incorrect". It doesn't matter if the allegations are true or false...for either side..Democrat or Republican.