tradertexx, can you belive these stupid libs like republican senator chuck hagel talking about impeachment? ...stupid liberal republican senators!!! http://www.esquire.com/features/chuckhagel0407 "The president says, 'I don't care.' He's not accountable anymore," Hagel says, measuring his words by the syllable and his syllables almost by the letter. "He's not accountable anymore, which isn't totally true. You can impeach him, and before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment. I don't know. It depends how this goes." The conversation beaches itself for a moment on that word -- impeachment -- spoken by a conservative Republican from a safe Senate seat in a reddish state. It's barely even whispered among the serious set in Washington, and it rings like a gong in the middle of the sentence, even though it flowed quite naturally out of the conversation he was having about how everybody had abandoned their responsibility to the country, and now there was a war going bad because of it. "Congress abdicated its oversight responsibility," he says. "The press abdicated its responsibility, and the American people abdicated their responsibilities. Terror was on the minds of everyone, and nobody questioned anything, quite frankly."
any real change in this country will have to start at the local level. im pretty sure that if a certian number of states (5?) pass impeachment resolutions than congress must take it up. if that is the case than this is far from a meaningless resolution. EDIT: here is some info on how states can initiate impeachment proceedings http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/statebasis.html According to the Jefferson Manual, a State Legislature can initiate impeachment through their Representative in the House. Section LIII on Impeachment, section 603 states : "In the House there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion: ... by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State (III, 2469) ..." The (III, 2469) refers to the Hinds Precedents, section 2469. It tells of how in 1903 the Florida legislature passed a bill to impeach a corrupt US District Judge named Charles Swayne. With the power of a joint resolution from his home state behind him, Mr. William B. Lamar, of Florida, claiming the floor for a question of privilege, said: "Mr. Speaker, I believe that the impeachment of a civil officer by this House is a question of privilege. I have made a joint resolution adopted by the legislature of the State of Florida a part of the resolution which I desire to submit to this House for its adoption. In pursuance of this joint resolution of the legislature of the State which I have the honor in part to represent, I impeach Charles Swayne, judge of the northern district of the State of Florida, of high crimes and misdemeanors;" The house voted to bypass the Judiciary Committee and ordered the investigation of Judge Swayne. A House Representative can always initiate impeachment by introducing a resolution as a question of privilege. But after consultation with senior staff in the US House of Representatives, we have determined that a state can initiate impeachment without requiring that a Member introduce the resolution. This does not mean that a state can give a mandate to Congress to start impeachment. But it gives the states a mechanism by which impeachment may be initiated if acted upon by Congress. Impeachment charges from a state can be sent to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The charges from a city should be marked with the word “Petition” at the top, and bear the authorizing signature of the Secretary of State from that state. The Speaker will route the petition through the Parliamentarian office to the Clerk. The Clerk must then note in the Congressional Journal that the charges were received. The charges will then be referred to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration. The Judiciary Committee may then investigate the charges, draft Articles of Impeachment and submit them to the floor of the House for a vote. It is also possible that the Committee may ignore the charges. That will depend on the ever shifting political situation and cannot be predicted. But the fact that success is not guaranteed does not relieve the state legislature of their obligation to do whatever they possibly can to defend the United States Constitution according to their oath of office. The Jefferson Manual LIII, Section 604 also states: "A direct proposition to impeach is a question of high privilege in the House and at once supersedes business otherwise in order under the rules governing the order of business". Note that in order to have Privilege, the proposition to impeach must be introduced by a Member, or by a House Committee. Read more about "privilege" and how it relates to impeachment.
Very interesting. I just skimmed some of the link and the PDF of Jefferson's manual which I hadn't heard about before but appears to be codifying Congressional rules. It sounds like a State legislature can enter charges through impeachment through their representatives so the number of states doesn't seem important since any state could do so. That doesn't necessarily mean though that charges will result in impeachment being taken up as it then goes through the same process as any other business. In regard to this particular case though this sounds like impeachment charges being voted on by town meetings and not the Vermont Legislature. i don't know enough about how Vermont works so I don't know if these have any bearing on the Vermont Legislature which would need to compel their representatives to enter impeachment charges. That said constitutents could compel their congressional rep to enter impeachment charges by lobbying them and making that an issue in their reelection.
This is equally ignorant as trying to impeach clinton. Clinton did something that was proven beyond a doubt that he was guilty... and im not saying he should have been tried. What I am saying is that the most they could possibly come up with is that Bush has ran this war poorly. 22 months people. And then you can go into the "Bush has ran this country into the ground" when the next president gets elect. Until WE as a country accept that WE elected this guy as the president and WE will elect a president that will bring the country out of chaos in 22 months, nothing will get better. As long as WE have the mentality of, "Don't blame ME, I voted democratic/gore/ect ... " , big businesses/media/ect ... will always run this country. To show how short minded people are, who exactly would take Bushes place for the remainder of the few months of presidency? Is that a better solution?? Instead of wasting time trying to get his guy out of office, spend time campaigning for your choice of candidate.
are you kidding me? the war has been ran poorly, but that isnt the issue. read the first post again and specifically the 4 points mentioned in the resolution. obviously if bush goes than co-president cheney goes too. they go hand-in-hand. literally - remember how bush refused to testify to the 9/11 commission unless cheney sat next to him?
i know. those damn liberal activist judges! i love how conservatives supported the supreme court stepping in where they had no buisness. states rights my ass.
Well...2004! George had shown his colours by then. Y'all still didn't throw him out. And that's the b**** about democracy. Sometimes your guy doesn't get in.
I certainly wanted a diffeent president in 2004, but I think it is a waste of money and energy to try to impeach Bush now. He has only 22 month left, the impeachment process could take that long and more things that needs to be done by congress will not get done because of all the impeachment hearings. Congress just need to check his power at every turn and make him a lame duck in the true sense of the term. The next president, be it a Republican or Democrat will move the nation forward again in 2008.
No, they won't. This is what people fail to realize. Our country is too divided right now. Whether it be republican or democrat, each side is going to do whatever they can to slander that person. If by some luck a democratic president wins, rest assure the republicans will be out to get them. For 6 years, the democrats had nothing to do but tear down the republicans. If its an all democratic party, the republicans will have nothing better to do than find fault at everything possible. You will have your trader_jorges who will find absolutely nothing good in a democratic president and McMarks who will believe the democratic president does absolutely no wrong. The sooner democrats realize we still live in a conservative country and quit trying to bring up their agendas that do not belong in the federal arena, the better it will be for that party.
Oh do not even... Links? Stats? Did that come off the top of your head? If the Bland Avenger could even make a contest of the 2004 elections, I can not see how you could paint this country with such a broad conservative brush. Oh and I think impeaching Bush and Cheney is a waste of time; neuter them and focus on the future.
Bravo! Bravo old chap. Rarely do you see someone prove their own point of the country being divided by being so divisive themselves in the same post. Yes, if only the democrats and their followers only knew their place, then everything would run so much smoother. The sooner you get your head out of your ***, the sooner.......you know what, on second thought why don't you keep it there. It'll be better for the rest of us.
as the saying goes, there are stats, damn stats, and lies. You contradict yourself ... How is it that Bush even won the election?? Micheal Dukakis could have beat Bush in 2004. When it comes to two piss poor candidates, people rely on their core values to vote. I don't need a liberal based "link" or "stat". Look at whats happening in the country and make your own opinion. If you rely on links and the media for your opinions and decision, then you give them your power. In the end, big businesses run this country. Quit fighting the parties, fight the influence.
It have nothing to do about running smoother. The majority of the Democratic platform belongs in the state, not the federal court. I'll reassure you im tired of the crap that comes out of the republican party just as much as the democratic party. If the democrats want my vote, then tell me what you plan on doing for our country's problems. What are you going to do about this war? That is a federal problem. What are you going to do about health care. That is a federal problem. What are you going to do about the increasing problem of jobs being outsourced, less production being exported and the increase goods being imported and the dollar losing its value on the international market?? What about the shrinking middle class, and the increasing division between the poor and the rich?? What about global warming?? I know! BLAME BUSH! In the grand scheme of things for the federal government, abortion, gay rights and stem cell research are quite minor. The states can handle these issues just as well.
And yet it is the conservatives that use these wedge issues to win elections. Oh and you're wrong about me finding no fault in democrats.
