News State Sen. Eric Oemig Goes After President Bush
posted by on February 8 at 14:48 PM
Postman has the scoop on freshman state Sen. Eric Oemig’s (D-45, Kirkland) intent to file legislation next week to call on the U.S. Congress to investigate Bush’s conduct of the Iraq war and impeach Bush.
Oemig’s spokespeople tell me that Sen. Adam Kline (D-37, Seattle) said he’ll give the resolution a hearing in the judiciary committee.
Sen. Oemig’s staff is sending me the language from federal rules that allow a state legislature to pass such a directive to the U.S. Congress.
More to come. I’m interviewing Sen. Oemig tomorrow about his righteous? audacious? irrelevant? thrill-seeking? publicity seeking? cool? idea.
UPDATE
Oemig’s spokesperson Jeff Reading just forwarded me the federal rules that empower Sen. Oemig to bust Bush.
Jefferson’s Manual is a sort of interpretive guide to parliamentary procedure, and is included (along with the Constitution) in the bound volumes of the Rules of the House of Representatives. It is ratified by each congress (including the current one), and has been updated continuously through the history of our democracy.Within the Manual itself, the section covering impeachment is designated Section LIII. Section 603 refers to the section of the entire volume (including the Constitution and Rules) in which you’ll find the listing of acceptable vehicles for bringing impeachment motions to the floor. The second vehicle being of most interest to our method. It reads:
“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, 552); or by a resolution dropped in the hopper by a Member and referred to a committee (April 15, 1970, p. 11941-2); 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).”
With Peolosi stating impeachment is off the table for the president, somebody has to so something. I find it an intreging idea. The states taking on the corrupt fed? We live in a democracy right? Most people voted for the dems to get us out of the war right? Has Bush are has Bush not violotaed the Constitution of the United States? Has Bush or has Bush not lied us into an Illegal War? I am not suprised Pelosi is playing nice with Bush, but I am a wondering how Liberals look at Pelosi and most of the Dems actions of being cool with the Pres?
Going after Bush in 2007 is about as daring as taking shots at Britney Spears. I'd feel better if you didn't buy the CD in the first place.
Just what are the "high crimes and misdemeanors" then? Be specific. Inquiring minds want to know.
Chip Chipmunk,
Try Alternet, Huffington Post, or a simple Google search. You'll find extensive research and legal arguments for impeachment that are far beyond the scope of Slog.
Not to mention the fact that we have a moral obligation to impeach the most treasonously corrupt and blatantly incompetent monsters, both Bush & Cheney, this country has ever seen.
They've done far more damage to the US and its citizens than any Al Qaeda agent.
Chip, you dumb slut, I left a message for you in the Watada comment section.
My darling sweet adorable little Gary, and I left a message for you over there!
Let's suppose Bush was impeached. Then you'd have Cheney. Or did you think of that? Sorry to burst your bubble Original Andrew, but impeachment is not a 2 for 1 special.
Nah, impeach them both.
More interested in Sen. Kohl-Welles action on global warming last night.
The "then you'll have Cheney" argument is stupid. When the facts are revealed and the crimes are laid out, Cheney and the other criminals in the administration would be implicated in it all and they would be forced to go as well.
Finally, my one and only reason to be proud to live in Kirkland. Thank you, Eric, and good luck!
These rules look like they're for the impeachment of a House member or delegate, not the President.
I'm no lawyer, though, I could be wrong.
Good man Senator Oemig. You should be on Colbert for having quite large BALLS. Which of course you do being a freshman Senator.
Chip Chipmunk @4: Semen on a blue dress will get you impeached... but not convicted. It's a blurry line. Just ask Bill Clinton.
Maybe this resolution won't do much by
itself, but how many other states could
bring such resolutions? Maybe a number,
which might embolden the Dems. Daily
Kos discussed similar measure in New
Mexico a while back:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/1/12/14726/1248
Eric Oemig is my brother-in-law and and a stunt like this is no surprise to me. He was a Bush hater from the word go, and attempted to moderate his positions somewhat last year for political advantage at the election. (Of course, all you need is a (D) by your name to win over there)
Trust me, I know him all to well. I think what my esteemed brother-in-law fails to understand in his Left-wing zeal is A) There is no obvious impeachable offense. The President using his executive powers to command the military after the Congress overwhelmingly passed a bill entitled "Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq" is pretty much per the Constitution. B) Even if there was an impeachable offense, it's not 2 for 1, then you have Dick Cheney as President. Then you have to start over from scratch. C) Even if you could find a loophole to impeach President Bush, by the time it came to pass, we'd already be at the 2008 election. D) Even if you could find a way to impeach Bush and then find a way to impeach Cheney, you'd then have an incumbant President San Fran Nan Pelosi. Good for Democrats, BAD for Sen. Clinton. Any of you Democrats really think that the Clintons will allow another Democrat to ursurp Hillary's run in 2008??? Seriously?
Far more politically calculating to let Bush twist for the next two years, while doing everying possible to undermine anything he tries to do, so the Republicans will be in the worst possible political position in 2008, ripe for Democrat to be elected. And that Democrat will of course be Hillary. *shutter*
bglkj sydh tgqrjv lzskch ejvlm bhjs wbxcfqo
qhpulscix geumhvokb hxdbnvgat bvwu auytmnix kitrxcz ptfljwcx http://www.hqjoiuszb.xbnolzuwr.com
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).