9 votes

GOP Rep. Confirms Articles of Impeachment Will Be Filed Against Eric Holder – Lawmakers Who Are Supporting the Effort

"A group of fed-up House Republicans, who say they are tired of being stonewalled by Attorney General Eric Holder, plan to formally introduce articles of impeachment on Thursday in a bid to remove the nation’s top law enforcement officer from office.

Several GOP congressmen have been drafting articles of impeachment over a number of controversies relating to the U.S. Department of Justice. The lawmakers’ grievances include Holder’s refusal to turn over documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious, the DOJ’s habit of selectively enforcing federal laws, and the department’s refusal to prosecute IRS officials who allegedly accessed confidential taxpayer information, among other things.

The articles of impeachment also accuse Holder of providing false testimony to Congress, which is a “clear violation” of the law."

Continue reading:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/13/gop-rep-confirms-...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Impeaching an appointee??

Appointees make sense, but impeaching the appointee is weird as hell. Obama will just replace him with someone just as bad.

These guys have enough dirt on each other to impeach 95% of Congress. This isn't about corruption or ineptness. Is this because they want to replace Holder with someone else in particular that will do more evil things for them? Did Holder take too many risks, like kill too many of the children he raped instead of selling them off to foreign buyers like the rest of the congressmen do?

I don't get it

Holder is not elected, so why would he be impeached?

Wouldn't the appropriate response be to pressure Obama to terminate the appointment of Holder, and if Obaba does not, then move to impeach Obama on the grounds based on Holder's termination?

Article II Sec 4 US Constitution says...

"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."

Holder is a Civil Officer.

" Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of they day; but a series of oppresssions...pursued unalterably, through every change of ministers, too plainly proove delibrate, systematical plan of reducing us to slavery..."
Tho

on

why not "by" impeachment?

I'm not sure but it seems...

they use on vs. by because they are charges - the house grand jury of sorts and the senate has the repsonsibility for the trial. I'm certainly no authority on the topic but this is what I found.

"The Consitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment and the Senate the sole power to try impeachments. Unlike the British system, impeachment is only the first of two stages, and conviction requires a two-thirds vote. Impeachment does not necessarily result in removal from office; it is only a legal statement of charges, parallel to an indictment in criminal law. An official who is impeached faces a second legislative vote (whether by the same body or another), which determines conviction, or failure to convict, on the charges embodied by the impeachment. Most constitutions require a supermajority to convict. Although the subject of the charge is criminal action, it does not constitute a criminal trial; the only question under consideration is the removal of the individual from office, and the possibility of a subsequent vote preventing the removed official from ever again holding political office in the jurisdiction where he was removed." from Wiki

" Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of they day; but a series of oppresssions...pursued unalterably, through every change of ministers, too plainly proove delibrate, systematical plan of reducing us to slavery..."
Tho

I appreciate the research

It just seems odd to me that an appointed person can be impeached.. it would seems to me that criminal charges would be filed and he would be removed by Obama. I just went through four google pages: How to remove an appointed person", and got ompech Obama.. If I wrote in Holder's name I'm sure I would get it..

this seems close (no cigar) and backs up what you said.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_a_US_Supreme_Court_justice_be_...

Thanks.

Thanks.

That's what I was thinking.

That's what I was thinking.

H. Res 411

KrisAnne Hall behind the scenes has been very instrumental in making this happen. I was in attendance at one of her Constitutional Training events in Gainesville in June when Rep. Ted Yoho attended and she laid out the case that the HOUSE IS REQUIRED to act and there is no excuse because the Senate is not likely to take action.

You can read and send her "Open Letter" to your representative here:
http://bit.ly/1fyXEz5

"Article 2, section 4 of the Constitution leaves no choice for the House in this matter. This clause makes it clear that AG Eric Holder must be impeached.

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.

As you know, as a result of the Fast & Furious hearings, AG Eric Holder was found in contempt by this body. Pursuant to Article 2 section 4, that finding requires the House to impeach Eric Holder, e.g. Eric Holder is a civil officer, contempt is a misdemeanor, and this clause requires impeachment, (“shall be impeached).

We are not concerned at this moment whether the Senate will convict Eric Holder. We do not ask you to speculate on the actions of the Senate, we only ask you to do the job we hired you to do; follow the Constitution."

See her Facebook posts if you use facebook.

http://on.fb.me/1eYUnLU

" Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of they day; but a series of oppresssions...pursued unalterably, through every change of ministers, too plainly proove delibrate, systematical plan of reducing us to slavery..."
Tho

PATCON/Holder

It's worth noting that Fast and Furious was an outgrowth of PATCON, a program related to Randy Weaver, Waco, and the Oklahoma City Bombing--and Holder has a role in the OKC Bombing cover-up.

As these Congressmen won't touch it--the Senate did after all approve Holder, this is just for show.

Longtime Internet Poster