House Democrats introduce Articles of Impeachment against Attorney General

So, I guess they weren't backing off nearly as much as we thought, huh?

Thanks to the Columbus Dispatch, you can read the articles of impeachment introduced today by what appears to be almost the entire House Democratic caucus.  (All but three members of the caucus didn't co-sponsor the articles.)

According to the Dispatch the basis for impeachment under the articles are:

Obstructed the internal investigation into allegations of sexual harassment in his office.  

Willfully and intentionally issued misleading statements under oath.

 Neglected to perform the duties of his office and by his own admission was not competent or qualified for the job.

 Knew or should have known that his own admitted sexual affair with an employee contributed to and allowed a hostile work environment.

 Failed to ensure the safety and security of state property.

 Failed to investigate and prohibit improper use of state property.

 Knew or should have known of the misuse of state property for personal business.

 Committed acts of gross neglect of duty by undermining the integrity of his office; bringing disrepute upon the office; betraying the public trust as Ohio's chief law enforcement officer; and undermining the effectiveness and efficiency of the office.

 Committed acts of gross immorality and knew or should have known that his personal conduct undermined the effectiveness and efficiency of the office.

Which is precisely what I would expect the articles to be.  Given today's disclosure that a commission Dann chairs has called on the FBI to investigate Dann's ties to gambling interest, there is no doubt room for additions.

Oh, and before the GOP bloggers think that the Democrats are trying to stall this until Governor Strickland can appoint a replacement without a special election, your party screwed up that opportunity today on the House floor in defeating a Democratic amendment.

Republicans defeated two Democrat-sponsored amendments. One would have required Charles to finish his investigation within 60 days, instead of the current bill, which has no time limit. The other would have forced Dann to pay for the cost of the investigation if he was ultimately convicted of a crime.

So the House Republicans are officially on record for being against any timetable that could possibly have impeachment done in time for a special election.  Brillant!

And I actually have to agree with Rep. Dan Stewart for why he voted against the bill to authorize the Inspector General to investigate Dann to see if any impeachable offenses have occurred:

Rep. Dan Stewart, D-Columbus, was one of five Democrats on the committee to vote against the bill.

"I believe it is the constitutional responsibility of the House to look at this issue and decide if these issues have risen to the level of impeachable offenses,” Stewart said. "Bringing in the inspector general, who I'm sure does a fine job, is just adding another layer and is really giving up our responsibility.”

Amen, brother.