President Bush to be impeached by IL General assembly

[CrimsonWhite]

I found this on www.opednews.com. I'm not familiar with the House rules, but this is really unbelievable. It makes me ashamed to hail from Illinois.

Steven Leser

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.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_060422_bush_impeachment___t.htm

I couldn't believe it, but it is true.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/bil...&GA=94&DocTypeID=HJR&LegID=25794&SessionID=50

 

[Annie]

There are no shortages of Illinois idiotic politicians, we have enough for all the whole freakin' country, then some!

 

[jillian]

There are no shortages of Illinois idiotic politicians, we have enough for all the whole freakin' country, then some!

I don't know... is it "idiotic" to make a point when the same-party Congress won't even investigate these things?

It's not that I think it would do the country any good for there to be an impeachment. I do think every one of the things raised by the IL folk should be examined.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I don't know... is it "idiotic" to make a point when the same-party Congress won't even investigate these things?

It's not that I think it would do the country any good for there to be an impeachment. I do think every one of the things raised by the IL folk should be examined.

I believe the 'Illinois folk' have other things to worry about. I'd like to see them fix the deficit in Illinois before interjecting themselves into the responsibilty of a more supreme body government. This isn't about doing what is right, this is about "You impeached our President, now we are going impeach yours."

 

[Dr Grump]

"You impeached our President, now we are going impeach yours."

Unfortunately that is the result of 8 years of going after Clinton. It's the old reap what you sow scenerio...

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Unfortunately that is the result of 8 years of going after Clinton. It's the old reap what you sow scenerio...

Not exactly productive though, is it? Sounds more like the behavior of a child that had his candy taken away.

 

[Dr Grump]

Not exactly productive though, is it? Sounds more like the behavior of a child that had his candy taken away.

True, but politicians are a vindinctive bunch...

 

[Avatar4321]

Unfortunately that is the result of 8 years of going after Clinton. It's the old reap what you sow scenerio...

Only problem is there was a legal reason to Impeach Clinton. The left only has their hatred for President Bush to impeach Him.

If you cant tell the difference between impeachment for violation of fundamental laws and impeachment out of utter hatred. then there is something wrong with you.

 

[jillian]

I believe the 'Illinois folk' have other things to worry about. I'd like to see them fix the deficit in Illinois before interjecting themselves into the responsibilty of a more supreme body government. This isn't about doing what is right, this is about "You impeached our President, now we are going impeach yours."

I certainly understand your position. But don't you think that Congress, because it is of the same party as the pres, has abdicated its oversight responsibility? Was bound to happen that someone would try to use legal means to step into the void.

 

[Dr Grump]

If you cant tell the difference between impeachment for violation of fundamental laws and impeachment out of utter hatred. then there is something wrong with you.

I know the difference. They went after Clinton out of pure hatred. Legally, of course, but pure hatred nonetheless.

 

[jillian]

Only problem is there was a legal reason to Impeach Clinton. The left only has their hatred for President Bush to impeach Him.

If you cant tell the difference between impeachment for violation of fundamental laws and impeachment out of utter hatred. then there is something wrong with you.

That's *if* you believe that the impeachment was anything but spite...and also that there is no basis to at least investigate the things alleged in the IL charges.

 

[Bonnie]

Unfortunately that is the result of 8 years of going after Clinton. It's the old reap what you sow scenerio...

Gee I thought Democrats were "above all that pettiness"?

 

[Avatar4321]

I know the difference. They went after Clinton out of pure hatred. Legally, of course, but pure hatred nonetheless.

Simply because Clinton violated the law does not mean we hated him.

Heaven forbid we want a President to obey the law.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's *if* you believe that the impeachment was anything but spite...and also that there is no basis to at least investigate the things alleged in the IL charges.

There hasnt been a valid basis for ANYTHING the Democrats have tried to attack the President with. Thats whats so freaking amazing. The hypocrisy is thick enough to cut. We are supposed to ignore all the proven corruption and illegal actions of the Clinton administration, but because President Bush a Republican he is supposed to be impeached despite that their is no evidence for anything. Heck even the stuff he is alleged to have done, there is nothing valid.

Its utter ridiculous to claim that these are at all comparable.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I certainly understand your position. But don't you think that Congress, because it is of the same party as the pres, has abdicated its oversight responsibility? Was bound to happen that someone would try to use legal means to step into the void.

Then that is the fault of the voters. It is not the responsiblity of the IL General Assembly to interject itself into the responsibilities of a more supreme body of government.

 

[jillian]

Simply because Clinton violated the law does not mean we hated him.

Heaven forbid we want a President to obey the law.

Obedience to the law is fine. Yet you don't even want inquiry into the things Bush has done. Seems a bit skewed, IMO (not you, personally, the situation).

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I know the difference. They went after Clinton out of pure hatred. Legally, of course, but pure hatred nonetheless.

Hatred yes, for violating a couple of federal laws. Show me the federal law that President Bush violated. This is about hatred and unfounded trurth. They failed to remove him from office in 2004 and now they want to try something else.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Obedience to the law is fine. Yet you don't even want inquiry into the things Bush has done. Seems a bit skewed, IMO (not you, personally, the situation).

Inquiry away, please. You may not like the things that he has done, but they are legal and within his privilege.

 

[jillian]

There hasnt been a valid basis for ANYTHING the Democrats have tried to attack the President with.

I disagree. I think there has been appropriate basis for inquiry. Particulary in the area of pre-war intel, violations of habeas corpus, and violating the FISA rules.

I'm not saying he'd be found to have acted improperly. I am saying that someone should be investigating these things and Congress abdicated its responsibility.

I also think these issues were far more important than Paula Jones or a blue dress... Just my opinion.

Its utter ridiculous to claim that these are at all comparable.

I disagree, obviously. But you are entitled to your opinion, as well. But again... so are the folk in Illinois who used their frustration to find a legal way to raise the issues that they have.

 

[jillian]

Inquiry away, please. You may not like the things that he has done, but they are legal and within his privilege.

No... if he's done the things he's alleged to have done. He has not acted legally or within his privilege.

Tell me... do you know if you've been wiretapped?

Neither does anyone else. Because if you have or anyone else has, it's certainly been done without the oversight of the FISA courts.