Randi will talk about the IL state leg. that is introducing Articles of...

[orleans]

IMPEACHMENT!!!

http://ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=50&GA=94&DocTypeId=HJR&DocNum=0125&GAID=8&LegID=25794&SpecSess=&Session=

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.

[orleans]

1. "Jefferson's Rules for the United State's House"

these rules
section LIII (on impeachment) (603)

house of reps.
there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion
charges made on floor by member or delegate
charges preferred by a memorial
by a resolution dropped in hopper, refered to committee
by president
by CHARGES TRANSMITTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF A STATE!!!

(i'm trying to type what randi is reading)

IL & CA state leg. (calif is including impeachment of cheney also)
and VT

MAYBE THIS IS HOW IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS BEGIN, EH???

[Peace Patriot]

3. Bless you, Thomas Jefferson!

He anticipated nearly EVERYTHING we are facing, and tried his damnedest to head them off at the pass--with every conceivable curb on executive power he could think of, including denying the President power to declare war, denying the President power over the purse strings, providing for an independent judiciary with Senate "advice and consent" required, separating the lawmakers from the executive and even thinking to provide, in the Constitution, for the PHYSICAL safety of legislators who CANNOT be stopped by ANY person from entering Congress (Cynthia McKinney critics, take note), providing for a free and unfettered press, providing free speech to ALL, separating the state from religious powermongers, and giving Congress, the states, grand juries and a number of other parties powers of impeachment over the President and Vice President of the United States.

God, he was smart!

He even anticipated Corporate Rule--he was very worried about the power of business corporations, even then--but was argued down on that one (as on slavery) by those who said it should be left up to the states. (The states ended up with the power to charter corporations.) It was his ONLY failure to penetrate, with his laser-like vision, two hundred years into future, to what future fascists might get up to (corrupting every one of our state governments and the Supreme Court and subsidiary courts, on issues of corporate power). Jefferson trusted the states too much--an understandable failing, since it must have appeared, back then, that the individual and collective power of the states would act as a major check both on out-of-control presidential power and on overweaning business and financial cabals.

For every other power that we have, beginning with our power as the SOVEREIGNS in this land--we, the people--and including this one, the power of state legislatures to impeach the President and Vice President--we owe one enormous debt of gratitude to Mr. Jefferson.

[Peace Patriot]

5. Note; I also doubt that Jefferson could have anticipated the domino-like

failure of every check and balance that he fought for, and every institution of American democracy--such as has occurred with this junta. He would be appalled, I'm sure--at the war profiteering corporate news monopolies, at the lapdog Congress, at corporate control of vote tabulation by secret programming (let alone BUSHITE corporate control of it), at the Supreme Court interference in Florida's election in 2000 and appointment of Corporate Rulers to the court (via lapdog Congress), at presidential wars of choice, at torture, illegal detention and spying, and all the rest. But I think he would be rather delighted at Senator Yarlborough's discovery of Rule #63 in Jefferson's Manual--a beautiful little snag by which to catch some very big criminals.

[orleans]

8. JEFFERSON'S MANUAL LIII 603

<303>
§ 603–§ 604
JEFFERSON’S MANUAL
order for his appearance. Sachev. Trial, 325; 2
Wood., 602, 605; Lords’ Journ., 3 June, 1701; 1
Wms., 616; 6 Grey, 324.
In the House of Representatives there are various methods of setting
an impeachment in motion: by charges made on the
floor on the responsibility of a Member or Delegate (II,
1303; III, 2342, 2400, 2469; VI, 525, 526, 528, 535, 536);
by charges preferred by a memorial, which is usually
referred to a committee for examination (III, 2364,
2491, 2494, 2496, 2499, 2515; VI, 543); or by a resolution dropped in the
hopper by a Member and referred to a committee (Apr. 15, 1970, p. 11941–
42; Oct. 23, 1973, p. 34873); by a message from the President (III, 2294,
2319; VI, 498); by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State (III,
2469) or Territory (III, 2487) or from a grand jury (III, 2488); or from
facts developed and reported by an investigating committee of the House
(III, 2399, 2444). In the 93d Congress, the Vice President sought to initiate
an investigation by the House of charges against him of possibly impeachable
offenses; the Speaker and the House took no action on the request
since the matter was pending in the courts and the offenses did not relate
to activities during the Vice President’s term of office (Sept. 25, 1973, p.
31368); see III, 2510, wherein the Committee on the Judiciary (to which
the matter had been referred by privileged resolution) reported that a civil
officer (the Vice President) could not be impeached for acts or omissions
committed prior to his term of office; but see III, 1736, however, the Vice
President’s request that the House investigate charges against his prior
offical conduct as Secretary of War was referred, on motion, to a select
committee.
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
(III, 2045–2048; VI, 468, 469; July 22, 1986, p. 17294;
Aug. 3, 1988, p. 20206; May 10, 1989, p. 8814; see Procedure,
ch. 14, sec. 1–5). It may not even be superseded by an election case,
which is also a matter of high privilege (III, 2581). It does not lose its
privilege from the fact that a similar proposition has been made at a previous
time during the same session of Congress (III, 2408), previous action
of the House not affecting it (III, 2053). So, also, propositions relating to
an impeachment already made are privileged (III, 2400, 2402, 2410; July
22, 1986, p. 17294; Aug. 3, 1988, p. 20206), such as resolutions providing
for selection of managers of an impeachment (VI, 517), proposing abatement
of impeachment proceedings (VI, 514), reappointing managers for
impeachment proceedings continued in the Senate from the previous Congress
(Jan. 3, 1989, p. 84), empowering managers to hire special legal and
clerical personnel and providing money for their payment (Jan. 3, 1989,
p. 84), and replacing an excused manager (Feb. 7, 1989, p. 1726); but a
§ 604. A proposition to
impeach a question of
privilege.
§ 603. Inception of
impeachment
proceedings in the
House.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_house_rules_manual&docid=hrmanual-59.pdf

[derby378]

2. MSM article from CHICAGO SUN-TIMES

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-impeach24.html

[Nimrod2005]

4. Big Eddy had someone on yesterday, they are doing the same

in California!!!

[Peace Patriot]

6. Randi and Calif Assemblyman Paul Koretz are right now talking about

the Democratic leadership in the Calif legislature, in regard to his resolution of impeachment. She brought it up. Calif Dems have a big majority in both houses. 48 out of 80 in the Assembly, 25 out of 40 in the CA Senate. Why WOULDN'T they impeach Bush? What Koretz is saying is that the Dem leadership is worred about "bipartisan initiatives" being threatened. His bill has gone to the Assembly Rules committee, headed by Dem Cindy Montenez, but whether or not it gets reported out of the committee to the full Assembly will depend on the leadership.

The leadership of the Dem-controlled legislature in Calif--which is a new leadership (the old pols all retired recently)--proved itself singularly cowardly, and possibly corrupt, on the matter of former Sec of State Kevin Shelley and Diebold. Not a good omen. This is info from me, not Randi. It's an uphill battle.

Randi promises to get on them. Let's hope she does. Because that's what it's going to take: major pressure.

[orleans]

7. info on illinois

(although the il. bill is for impeaching bush only, and calif is for bush and cheney)

ILLINOIS HOUSE
Democrats: 65 Republicans: 53

ILLINOIS SENATE
Democrats: 31 Republicans: 27 Independents: 1

http://www.ilga.gov/default.asp