When President Clinton was impeached, it was a partisan exploitation of a law that was broken not at the expense of the nation, but in a personal matter, Rocky Anderson says. When President Andrew Johnson was impeached, it was simply over policy disagreements.

But when it comes to President Bush, "Never before has there been such a compelling case for impeachment and removal from office of the president of the United States," the Salt Lake City mayor told a Washington state Senate committee Thursday.

The mayor was invited to Olympia, Wash., by Sen. Eric Oemig, D-Kirkland, to testify in support of the first-term lawmaker's proposed resolution that would call on Congress to investigate possible impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

In his written testimony, Anderson wrote that impeachment "should be pursued when, as in the case of George W. Bush, a president misleads Congress and the American people in taking our nation to war; authorizes and supports the kidnapping, incarceration without charge and torture of human beings; demonstrates contempt for the rule of law and for specific laws passed by the United States Congress; and blatantly violates fundamental constitutional protections afforded citizens of the United States."

The 22-page testimony, as well as the text of Anderson's speeches Thursday, can be read at www.slcgov.com.

Also testifying in support of the resolution Thursday was Ann Wright, a 29-year U.S. Army veteran who served in Afghanistan in 2001. A number of Washington residents and lawmakers spoke at a public hearing for the resolution, and all favored the impeachment effort.

Anderson's written testimony outlines a number of instances in which Anderson believes Bush and his administration misled the public in the run-up to the Iraq war, broke international law in invading Iraq, spied on American citizens through unconstitutional wiretapping and violated detainees' human rights by allowing them to be tortured.

"Impeachment and removal from office is the only appropriate remedy for a president who asserts such abusive, totalitarian power, in contravention of fundamental rights and liberties embodied in the U.S. Constitution," Anderson wrote. "It is the only means by which we can make it clear in the future that no president can so casually override our precious freedoms."