From AfterDowningStreet: Inslee writes, “Senator Oemig has said that his resolution is not about impeachment, it is about investigating the Bush Administration. Unfortunately, the senator and others may have been unaware of the over 97 hearings and investigations that this Congress has held since January of this year on subject of Iraq and other transgressions by this administration. … Filing articles of impeachment is not necessary to investigate the administration and hold it accountable. … The Washington State Legislature may do as it chooses in terms of passing resolutions that advocate for impeachment of the president, and I do not have any problems with that. But, it should be noted that such resolutions have no more compulsory legal impact on Congress than a similar resolution passed by a school board, chamber of commerce, or Rotary Club.”
(Read More)
My response: Inslee needs to read the rules which govern the body of which he supposedly is a member. They clearly state that the process of impeachment does NOT only begin in the House, but may be initiated by a STATE. As it reads in the Jefferson’s Manual of the rules of the U.S. House of Representatives:
“In the House of Representatives there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion: by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State (III, 2469)”
Inslee, before you self righteously tell a State Legislature to mind its own business, make sure you know what you’re talking about. Apparently the State Reps know more about your job than you do.
Response from David Lindorff (Award-winning investigative reporter for CounterPunch and Salon magazine):
“There is a fundamental difference between ordinary investigations into presidential and vice presidential abuse of power and malfeasance and an impeachment hearing. Specifically, an impeachment inquiry automatically has full subpoena power, and as well has the weight of Constitutional standing that ordinary congressional committees do not have in any confrontation with the administration. For example, in the case of impeachment, there is no possibility of a president claiming “national security” and withholding requested documents. Beyond that, I would note that those “97 hearings” have not addressed the president’s most egregious crimes and abuses of power–the 1200 signing statements, the NSA spying, the lies regarding the war in Iraq, and the lies regarding 9-11.”
(Read More)