Two State Legislatures Attempt To Impeach Bush Though neither has passed...yet.

[gaea 0]

This is a rather interesting turn of events.

Representative Karen A. Yarbrough of Illinois' 7th District has found a rather interesting, and previously unused, rule applying to the US House of Representatives: Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives. This section, effectively, allows a state legislature to issue a joint resolution in order to initiate federal impeachment proceedings. Illinois House Joint Resolution 125 does exactly that. Whether this will actually pass through the state legislature still remains to be seen.

As I was writing this article I just come across something else: California has just introduced very similar legislature, only this time it also calls for the impeachment of Cheney as well! California Assemblyman Paul Koretz of Los Angeles basically completely regutted the AJR 39 Bill he had previously introduced to try and obtain a moratorium on depleted uranium. California is a much more liberal state than Illinois, and so I have high hopes of this actually passing. Ofcourse this is only the first step. Just because the proceedings are initiated doesn't mean anything will actually come of it.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm excited to see where this goes.

Edited April 24, 2006 by gaea (see edit history)

[Farseed 0]

What are the qualifications for 'impeachable offense' according to these bills?At the risk of starting a debate (appropriate in this forum?), what are your standards for impeachable offense? Please reference legal standards and/or precedence. Since you are 'excited' about the prospect, it seems you support the action and feel it to be justified. So tell us what's on your mind.

[PIPER-4-HIRE 0]

The impeachable Offence is Bush's lack of IQ and Common sense not to mention is lil "Air Guard" episode.I think they should Impeach him for the betterment of the country, and as for Cheney, if not for the shooting incident then they should impeach him for the fun of it.

[Farseed 0]

The impeachable Offence is Bush's lack of IQ and Common sense not to mention is lil "Air Guard" episode.
I think they should Impeach him for the betterment of the country, and as for Cheney, if not for the shooting incident then they should impeach him for the fun of it.

Substance, please?

Explain the 'lil "air Guard"' episode.

Justify impeaching Cheney (is such even parliamentarily possible?) over an acknowledged accident. Hunters get injured in accidents rather often, some even fatal. No one gets charged with a crime because it's an acknowledged inherent risk of the sport. For an analogy mods don't remove people from the boards for baseless assertions, which is a poignant and serendipitous model for many posters.

[PIPER-4-HIRE 0]

Substance, please?
Explain the 'lil "air Guard"' episode.

Justify impeaching Cheney (is such even parliamentarily possible?) over an acknowledged accident. Hunters get injured in accidents rather often, some even fatal. No one gets charged with a crime because it's an acknowledged inherent risk of the sport. For an analogy mods don't remove people from the boards for baseless assertions, which is a poignant and serendipitous model for many posters.

Bush's daddy bought him a spot in the Texas Air Guard, that G Dubyah abandoned and everyone knows that the first election was bought(at least in florida).

As for Cheney, granted ppl get shot at and injured during hunting accidents all the time, but there are lots of ppl who are killed by one that the gov't reacts to and investigates more thourgholy than they did to VP *BLEEP*.

my point is that Kerry should've won the last election, and bush should've lost the first one

[gaea 0]

What are the qualifications for 'impeachable offense' according to these

bills?

 

At the risk of starting a debate (appropriate in this forum?), what are

your standards for impeachable offense? Please reference legal standards

and/or precedence. Since you are 'excited' about the prospect, it seems

you support the action and feel it to be justified. So tell us what's on

your mind.

 

I don't mean this in a rude way, but did you bother to read the bills (which I specifically linked to)? In case you're looking for a more concise summery I'm happy to provide one.

 

HJR0125 (the Illinois bill) calls for impeachment based on: Bush's illigial authorization to violate provisions of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, i.e. the "demestic spying" program, which actually ammounts to a felony; evidence that bush authorized the use of torture on detainees which is a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions (which are regarded as a "supreme law" per the contitution); the fact that the bush adminstration has held numerious people as perisioners of war without charging them, giving them a trial, or access to their lawyers; ever mounting evidence that strongly suggests that the bush adminstration intentionally "cherry picked" or misconstrued intelligence in order to build a case for the war in Iraq; alligations that bush and Co leaked classified information.

 

Keep in mind that these are just the illigal travesties that Bush and his cronies have commited.

 

The funny thing is that the alligation which is concidered (in legal terms) the most serious/harshest--the authorization of domestic spying without warrents--is pretty much undisputed. Basicly anyone with a legal background will tell you that there is really no viable legal defence against it.

 

Note to Piper-4-Hire: I understand that you're upset, but why not present arguments with actual legal/logical backing?

Edited April 24, 2006 by gaea (see edit history)