Skip to main content

View Diary: Endgame (356 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Your Plan needs more thought (0+ / 0-)

    The Law on Impeachment

    § 6. In General; Initiation and Referral of Charges. Generally Under the modern practice, an impeachment is normally instituted by the House by the adoption of a resolution calling for a committee investigation of charges against the officer in question. This committee may, after investigation, recommend the dismissal of charges or it may recommend impeachment.

    Impeachment—Selected Materials, Committee on the Judiciary, H. Doc. No. 93–7, Oct. 1973, p 699. A resolution recommending impeachment is reported to the House simultaneously with the articles of impeachment setting forth the grounds for the proposed action. § 8, infra.

    Following the adoption of a resolution to impeach, the House appoints managers to conduct the impeachment trial in the Senate.

    The Senate is then informed of these facts by resolution. Manual § 607; Deschler Ch 14 § 9. When this resolution reaches the Senate, the Senate advises the House as to when the Senate will receive the managers appointed by the House.

    The managers then present themselves and the impeachment articles to the Senate.

    House reserving the right to file additional articles later. Manual § 608a; Deschler Ch 14 §§ 10, 11. Initiation of Charges In most cases, impeachment proceedings in the House have been initiated
    either by introducing a resolution of impeachment through the hopper or by offering a resolution of impeachment on the floor as a question of the privileges of the House. Manual § 603; Deschler Ch 14 § 5. Other methods of setting an impeachment in motion in the House include:

    Charges initiated by a petition from one or more citizens and referred to committee. 3 Hinds §§ 2364, 2491, 2494.

    Charges transmitted in a message from the President. 3 Hinds §§ 2294,2319; 6 Cannon § 498.

    Charges transmitted from the legislature of a State. 3 Hinds § 2469.

    Technically a State Legislature could vote to forward to the House charges initiated by one or more citizens such as the towns in Vermont which have voted for impeachment. There is no problem bringing the charges, the issue is getting them passed on from the House to the Senate to try.
    Control of both houses would be a big help.

    Charges arising from a grand jury investigation. 3 Hinds § 2488.

    Charges arising from an independent counsel investigation under section 595© of title 28, United States Code. Manual § 603.

    In the 93d Congress, Vice President Agnew used a letter to the Speaker to attempt to initiate an investigation by the House of charges against him
    of possible impeachable offenses; the House took no action on the request.

    Manual § 603. In the 105th Congress, an independent counsel transmitted to the House under section 593 of title 28, United States Code, a communication containing evidence of alleged impeachable offenses by the President. The House adopted a privileged resolution reported by the Committee on Rules
    referring the communication to the Committee on the Judiciary, restricting Members’ access to the communication, and restricting access to committee
    meetings and hearings on the communication.

    Later, the House adopted a privileged resolution reported by the Committee on the Judiciary authorizing an impeachment inquiry by that committee. The authority to appoint an independent counsel under section 595© of title 28, United States Code, expired on June 30, 1999.

    Manual § 603. Referral to Committee Resolutions introduced through the hopper that directly call for an impeachment are referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, whereas resolutions merely calling for a committee investigation with a view toward impeachment are referred to the Committee on Rules. Deschler Ch 14 §§ 5.10, 5.11.

    In the 105th Congress the House adopted a privileged resolution reported by the Committee on Rules referring a communication from an independent counsel alleging certain impeachable offenses to the Committee on the Judiciary.

    Later, the House adopted a privileged resolution reported by the Committee on the Judiciary authorizing an impeachment inquiry by that
    committee. Manual § 603.

    All impeachments to reach the Senate since 1900 have been based on resolutions reported by the Committee on the Judiciary. Before that committee’s creation in 1813, impeachments were referred to a special committee for investigation. Manual § 603; 6 Cannon § 657.

    Article I § 2 of the United States Constitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power to impeach (make formal charges against) and Article I § 3 gives the Senate the sole power to try impeachments. Article II § 4 of the Constitution provides as follows:

    Ok, the House has the power to Impeach, (make formal charges) but the charges can come forth from hearings, or the petition of a state, or from a grand jury

    "The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

    The trial and Impeachment come in the Senate, which can expedite the process somewhat if it has already found the President and Vice President guilty of Impeachable offenses in its censure proceedings.

    There really doesn't need to be any investigation or special prosecutor, the President has alredy admitted to ordering warrantless wiretaps which is a felony. The kidnapping, torture, murder, rendition lying and malfeasance are just icing on the cake.

    We can let the international war crimes trials deal with those.

    The legal standard to apply to an impeachment of a sitting President and o Vice President is "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

    This may include lying to Congress as in not telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, or breaking a law, ncompetence, malfesance, or indeed anything Congress decides is worth charging the president and Vice President with.

    A vote of Censure in the Senate might be made at the same time independently of the Impeachment process being brought in the house.

    At any point Bush might resign and leave Cheney President so that consequence has to be incorporated in the thinking.

    There will be both lots of spin and othe problems requiring the attention of the House and Senate, but once begun the process takes priority over evcerything else

    Conyers has already begun hearings and some towns have already moved resolutions that their states shall call for impeachment, so the process is well underway and yes this will include the illeagal wiretaping and data mining and a lot more too
    including very likely each and every executive order and signing statement and the actions of all the executive branch departments, FEMA and the Defense Department, and the Department of the Interior.

    Ther is no need for whistleblower protections, or demanding telephone companies to cease and desist spying we will take care of all that in the judiciary and intelligence committies once they are back in our control.

    Under current law no law can be passed which retroactively pardons an impeachable offense.

    I agree Democratic leaders should make extensive media appearances informing the public about the excesses of the administrations and its attempts to sidestep the constitution, and soundly argue for taking appropriate actions to remedy the situation

    Live Free or Die (-8.88 -9.49) IMPEACH

    by rktect on Sun Mar 26, 2006 at 02:12:59 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  thanks for long reply (0+ / 0-)

      will need some careful reading esp on the USC rendering of impeachment.

      One point where i disagree is the need for special counsel (not the same as independent counsel, which i knew expired earlier). My diary provides some background info and links:

      • most senators have not been briefed on the wiretaps program (only 4 out of 100 have thus far been).
      • the NYT reported program only say some 500-1000 wiretaps have been authorized
      • you have leave open the possibility that the limited program reported on NYT can be demonstrated to be in the interests of national security
      • whistleblower Russ Tice claims that the actual wiretapping may be much larger than what was exposed by NYT, but he could'nt reveal details because of clearances. the article claims that it could be millions of Americans that may have been wiretapped
      • a congressional panel may have difficulty in digging up because of political reasons. every motion will come up for a vote in the committees.
      • Feinstein said that the NYT revealed program was actually a "good progam" or something like that. no one knows is she was shilling for Bush, but isn't it possible that she wasn't?

      Sure, Bush circumvented the law (but he claims const. authority, which will need to be rebutted in the Jud. cmte by Feingold), but American may be willing let is pass, if the program is limited in scope and was intended to benefit national security.

      The key therefore is whether the wiretaps were much larger than as reported by NYT. I am willing to bet that it is, and that's why you need a Fitzgerald that is driven only by fact finding and not politics. He'd need clearance to be able to conduct the investigation. His witnesses will need protections.

      Someone even need to dig into whether the clearnaces being claimed are actually genuine (or if it a tactic to stonewall).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site