Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Group turns to Legislature to oust Bush - There's more than one way to impeach a president.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Kadie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 03:32 PM
Original message
Group turns to Legislature to oust Bush - There's more than one way to impeach a president.
Group turns to Legislature to oust Bush
Monday, January 1, 2007

By SUZANNE TRAVERS
HERALD NEWS


WAYNE -- There's more than one way to impeach a president.

And what the U.S. House of Representatives won't do, the New Jersey State Legislature can.

That's the message members of the North Jersey Paterson-Wayne Impeach Group will bring to Trenton this week when they meet with the chief of staff for Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, D- Princeton, as part of their campaign to bring about the impeachment of President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top figures in the Bush administration.

snip...
Under the U.S. Constitution, the House of Representatives can vote to impeach the president, charging him with "high crimes and misdemeanors;" he would then be tried by the Senate. House speaker-elect Democrat Nancy Pelosi said in November that any effort to impeach Bush is "off the table."

But rules of parliamentary procedure written by Thomas Jefferson to govern the U.S. House of Representatives allow state legislatures to send charges to the House to set impeachment proceedings in motion, said Stuart Hutchison, 57, of Wayne, an Impeach Group organizer. The Jefferson clause has been used once before, to impeach a federal judge, he said. In theory, the House would be obliged to "cease its business and take up the order," he added.


more...
http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2MDcmZmdiZWw3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTcwNDk3NTgmeXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkz

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. Best of luck to them, I hope they can do it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. Hurray for New Jersey!
Other states should do the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalEsto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. Wow. Excellent news!
And to think some of these folks are from stuffy old Wayne NJ, my home town. Wayne was very right-wing and racist when I was growing up, and I refused to move back after going to college at Rutgers.

Bravo to them.

:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. I read about this a few months ago-was wondering what was
going on with it. Thanks for the post and it WILL be a Happy ny If this comes to fruitation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. other states had introduced legislation also:
Group turns to Legislature to oust Bush
Monday, January 1, 2007

By SUZANNE TRAVERS
HERALD NEWS


WAYNE -- There's more than one way to impeach a president.

And what the U.S. House of Representatives won't do, the New Jersey State Legislature can.

That's the message members of the North Jersey Paterson-Wayne Impeach Group will bring to Trenton this week when they meet with the chief of staff for Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, D- Princeton, as part of their campaign to bring about the impeachment of President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top figures in the Bush administration.

snip...
Under the U.S. Constitution, the House of Representatives can vote to impeach the president, charging him with "high crimes and misdemeanors;" he would then be tried by the Senate. House speaker-elect Democrat Nancy Pelosi said in November that any effort to impeach Bush is "off the table."

But rules of parliamentary procedure written by Thomas Jefferson to govern the U.S. House of Representatives allow state legislatures to send charges to the House to set impeachment proceedings in motion, said Stuart Hutchison, 57, of Wayne, an Impeach Group organizer. The Jefferson clause has been used once before, to impeach a federal judge, he said. In theory, the House would be obliged to "cease its business and take up the order," he added.

"The fact that success is not guaranteed does not relieve our state of its obligation to do all it can to defend the United States Constitution according to the oath of our state's officers," said Hutchison, whose salt-and-pepper hair is swept back in a style that resembles those worn by Jefferson or George Washington. "Even if you're the president, you need to be held accountable."

State legislatures in Illinois, California, Minnesota and Vermont already have introduced bills to vote on impeachment resolutions that would be sent to the U.S. House of Representatives if approved.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
6. Illinois, and then California, had impeachment resolutions introduced in
Edited on Mon Jan-01-07 08:11 PM by Peace Patriot
their state legislatures before the November elections (circa six months ago?), and one New England state (can't recall which just now) was re-writing an impeachment recommendation that had already been passed, into an impeachment resolution to be be submitted to Congress (to trigger the Jefferson's Rules provision which requires Congress to stop all business and take it up). I know the one in California got stalled by Dem leaders (they have 2 to 1 and 3 to 2 majorities in both houses) who wanted to play footsie with Schwarzenegger on some other issues, and didn't want to offend Republicans, and so the impeachment resolution died in committee. But that isn't to say that it cannot be revived. It included impeachment of both Bush and Cheney. The initial discovery of the rule in Jefferson's Rules (that a state can submit an impeachment resolution) was made by a black woman legislator in Illinois--the first state in which an impeachment resolution was introduced. What I would like to see is several states submit it simultaneously--or many states!--to really put some political force behind it. I think it's up to 51% now--Americans who want these bastards out of the White House, sooner rather than later. We had 56% (!) of Americans opposed to the Iraq War, way back before it started (Feb. '03). Now it's 70% who want it ended. WHEN...*WHEN*!...are they going to start listening to us?

---------

Just read RodeoDance's comment. So the New England state was Vermont. I didn't know about Minnesota. Interesting how widespread this is--New England, New Jersey, the midwest (Illinois, Minnesota) and the far west. A nicely balanced group--just missing a southern state. Florida would be great. They have sure taken a hit with the Bushite-controlled electronic voting machines! I have a feeling that Florida is far, far, far more progressive than their elections reflect. (This may be true in most of the south--I'm thinking particularly of North Carolina, Texas and Georgia--as well as most of the country.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
puebloknot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I saw your post after...
...I posted mine, below.

I concur that it would be good to get resolutions under the Jefferson Protocol from several states, and this would be a superb way to kick off our political focus in 2007.

This is just being considered here in New Mexico, according to Hutch, who is spearheading this in New Hersey, so I'm going to write and call the officials considering drafting such a bill here and make that my project to begin the year.

When I was a little girl, my mother used to read a story to me. It was called "The Little Engine that Could." He (the engine) was headed up a long hill, and had his doubts. As he chugged along, he went from "I can't," to "I think I can; I think I can." As he began to get closer and closer to the crest of the hill, and as he was gaining momentum, his cry changed to "I know I can; I know I can."

We can! :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-02-07 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. Minnesota? How did we get this past plenty?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
puebloknot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
7. Let the word go forth...
...that impeachment is *practical* and *achievable."

Thanks for posting this. I posted about this more than 24 hours ago, but I did it in the dead of night, and in competition with the whole focus on the executing of Hussein, so it dropped like a rock.

I wrote to Hutchison to clarify the legality of this procedure, whether Pelosi, et al. would be *obliged* to go forth with it. And I expressed my feeling about John Dean's thesis that we should forget the guys at the top and impeach the underlings. Here's the reply I got from Hutch. There's also a link to his article at OpEdNews.com.

This is exciting stuff!



Bold emphasis is mine.


My conviction is that John Dean's tragically off the mark. Of course we must pursue impeachment of the entire Bush gang, and it's nuts to say, "Don't bother with the 2 guys at the top because you can't get impeachment." That's a false dichotomy. First, if I didn't think impeachment, indictment, prosecution and conviction of Bush and Cheney were possible, I wouldn't bother devoting practically all my time to achieving it. Of course impeachment's not only possible, but inevitable --- provided the American people insist on justice. As the investigations commence, starting with Henry Waxman and leading to John Conyers at the House Judiciary Cmte., the House will be compelled to act on impeachment by evidence and pressure from the people.

This is precisely why our group is Impeach Them! We recognize that justice demands that Bush, Cheney, and all the members of their gang who have violated the laws be held to account, as stated in Article 2, Section 4 of our Constitution. It does not limit impeachment to only the President and Vice President; impeachment applies to "all Civil Officers of the United States," and that means the entire gang --- Rumsfeld, Rove, Gonzales, Rice et al. So in a concrete sense we see the impeachment process as beginning with the 2 at the top and going forward to include all who violated our laws. It's essential and crucial that our country restore justice in the USA and undo the illegal police state the Bush gang put in place in violation of our laws. It's imperative for the sake of our futures to restore justice & reclaim democracy. See http://www.impeachthem.com/sites/impeachthem.com/files/impeach_petition_usa.pdf - also attached here below. Relevant documents pertaining to legality and public opinion, impeachment strategy are available at our site ImpeachThem.com at Impeach Bush TV, After Downing Street, Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), and Democrats.com, all listed below.

No, neither Nancy Pelosi nor Harry Reid can keep impeachment "off the table." Once New Jersey's legislature (or Vermont's/New Mexico's/California's/Illinois'/Minnesota's) passes a Resolution to Impeach, under Jefferson's rule an effective order is transmitted to the U.S. House, and the House must drop all business and take up the question of investigations leading to the drafting of Articles of Impeachment against Bush-Cheney. This is why the campaigns to move resolutions in states is so vitally important, because it will provide the legal push to get Pelosi/Reid moving in their chambers. Essentially, Pelosi must say, "We received an order from a state and the House of Representatives is compelled to act on this direction." And so with the Senate eventually per the process of impeachment.

Jefferson's Rule 603 has never been invoked to impeach a president, but it was used to impeach a federal judge (in the early 1900s, I believe; I don't have the citation in front of me). As stated above, the Rule applies in line with the Constitutional article for the impeachment of a judge ("a Civil Officer") or a president and vice president. The legality of the implementation or invocation of Jefferson's Rule is straightforward and indisputable; it's the law within the Parliamentary Rules and Practices of the U.S. House and as such is part of the Constitution.

I hope this answers your questions, as I hope the Op-Ed article will spur people in other states to push their legislatures. At base, it's the pressure exerted in the will of the people for justice that will bring impeachment and justice and reclaiming democracy in our country.

Thanks again for your time.

Best regards,

HUTCH. 973.694.5035
NORTH JERSEY
IMPEACH Group

Read more at:
http://www.opednews.com /articles/opedne_stuart_h_061229_new_jersey_impeach_t .htm Text



We can all find more information at www.ImpeachThem.com about other states that are considering such a move. Some have passed bills calling for impeachment, but apparently have not done it specifically following the Jefferson protocol. New Mexico is pondering such a move, so as soon as the snow melts here, I'm going to get in touch with the PTB to urge them to take a look at this protocol. If they get such an order from more than one state, it will just strengthen the process.

(Governor Richardson has declared a state of emergency over our 30 inches of snow here in Northern New Mexico. You guys back East can laugh, but we're not used to this! The Albuquerque airport has been shut down for days; the interstates have all (that would be 2) been shut down. :) )

Kadie, thank you once again for shining the light on this matter. I'll be watching to see what New Jersey accomplishes!

Happy 2007!


Judy Barrett
Santa Fe, NM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pierzin Donating Member (710 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. I have wondered what happened to that effort
And pray to God that it goes forward! keep up the pressure!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-05-07 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. I'm totally with this. John Dean, while well-meaning, is WILDLY
off the mark. There is no way we CAN'T go for IMPEACHMENT of the two top criminals. What on earth is the point of going after the lower-level guys, even if they're Cabinet people, if you let the top guys get away. Haven't we already done that with the Abu Ghraib travesty - nailing the guys at the bottom of the food chain while those responsible, at the top, get away scott free? It was stupid there, and it is even MORE stupid here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cool user name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
10. K&R ... I forgot about this angle!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cool user name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
11. Wealth of information here:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gristy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Wow
That's a hell of a compendium.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Morgana LaFey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-01-07 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
13. Oh, way cool! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-02-07 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
15. It is actually better that it comes this way. From the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-02-07 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
16. For an alternative strategy for Congress impeaching, see my Post #10 at
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3019559

The OP at that link has a great rundown on all the impeachment issues--including a critical one, not letting precedents like lying the country into war, and presidential defiance of laws, stand. I started thinking about the impeachment of Nixon, and how it was all about the war, but that was NOT what he was impeached for. And we have that same problem today--Congress still full of war hawks, due to non-transparent vote counting (and, also, only a third of the Senate was up for reelection this time). But with Bush-Cheney, the sheer number of grave "high crimes and misdemeanors" is very high. Take your pick! If you can't support impeachment on the war without being a hypocrite (the unfortunate position of many Senators, for instance), for God's sake impeach Cheney for financial corruption (Halliburton) and Bush for the "signing statements." In any other era, those ALONE would justify removal from office--not to mention the outing of Plame and her CIA WMD network, or blatant violation of the law on domestic spying, or blatant violation of the law on torture/detention--or, one that others haven't mentioned--funding sectarian religious groups and infusing public policy with rightwing Christian religious beliefs, an egregious assault on the First Amendment. (I think it's an impeachable offense--it's not just a policy, it's a policy that blatantly violates the doctrine of separation of church and state.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-02-07 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
17. get yer imPEACHment avatar/smilie here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-02-07 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
18. I nominated this yesterday but didn't have time to comment.
You bet Thomas Jefferson applies. It's already been used and was not ruled out of order in the
Illinois General Assembly...http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0604/S00294.htm

Go for it. I think NOLA is the cause that everyone will understand immediately.

The Feds knew that the leview were breaking after the evaculation was stopped and 24 hours before
the levies broke. They did not inform NOLA officials, hence the spontaneous eruption of the mayor
when he found out that they had broken. In addition, LSU's fine center on these things warned the
WH and printed in npublic the fact that the levies would break with a #3 storm. nuf said!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-05-07 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
19. Intriguing that this is becoming more noticeable.
Did anybody catch John Dean on Keith Olbermann's show earlier this week? He noted it on the air - describing a growing movement, with elements large and small, that was spreading across the country.

If he's noticing it, other people are, too.

If he's talking about it, other people are, too.

And I suspect as the war grows ever more miserable and the opposition grows also - as bush stays stubborn and closed-minded, there will be even more of this. I was VERY happy to see this come up in Nancy Pelosi's opening speech - her statement noting that one of the BIGGEST things on American voters' minds in November was changing course in Iraq. Even now, this moment, we have MSNBC on, and there was a reporter outside the White House noting that - as bush dithers and delays in his "fabulous, earthshaking" announcement about the "new way forward" in Iraq," that's given Pelosi and Harry Reid an opportunity to get the first licks in. And best of all, they're USING that opportunity!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 24th 2024, 04:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC