Get PJ Media on your Apple

Belmont Club

When Things Change

June 16th, 2014 - 5:26 pm

Wikipedia has an article describing the six times Republican politicians suggested impeaching Barack Obama, the most serious of which was a hearing by the House Judiciary Committee “formally titled ‘The President’s Constitutional Duty to Faithfully Execute the Laws,’ that has been viewed as an attempt to begin justifying impeachment proceedings”.

None of these have gone anywhere and there is clearly no present momentum behind the project, as suggested by the absence of a groundswell for a petition to impeach the president and a dearth of newspaper articles suggesting the same. The process itself, as described by Wikipedia, is surprisingly simple.  Any party with a majority in the lower house can start it.

At the federal level, the impeachment process is a two-step procedure. The House of Representatives must first pass, by a simple majority of those present and voting, articles of impeachment, which constitute the formal allegation or allegations. Upon passage, the defendant has been ‘impeached’. Next, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a president, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings.

But nobody’s tried. This despite the fact that president Obama is arguably more unpopular, less successful and confronting a crisis much greater than Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson or Bill Clinton. The usual explanation is that since the Democratic Senate will not convict, there is no point in a Republican lower house bringing charges.

But two alternative explanations are equally simple.  The first is that John Boehner won’t risk his speakership  no matter what and second, the perception among some that Obama unlike Johnson or Nixon, would turn any challenge to his presidency into a Constitutional crisis.  Nixon resigned rather than divide the country. No such grace can be expected from Obama, or so the argument goes.

The reality of these objections was confirmed by interest in a newly developed avenue for challenging presidential overreach through the courts. A Wall Street Journal article described an approach developed by Elizabeth Price Foley which avoids the dangers of an existential challenge to the president by nickel and diming the disputes.

President Obama is setting a dangerous precedent by suspending his enforcement of laws on health care, immigration, drugs, banking and so much else, but the courts may soon be asked to throw a brushback pitch….

Mr. Obama’s practice of unilaterally waiving his duty to faithfully execute statutes has been abetted by a presumed lack of legal “standing” to contest his suspension. To the extent individuals have not suffered concrete injuries that the courts traditionally redress, he feels he can act without consequence to create whole-cloth regulatory regimes. This makes the inherent Article I powers of Congress irrelevant, with perhaps permanent damage to the separation of powers and political accountability. If Mr. Obama gets away with it, the next President probably will too.

But Congress may yet have a way to challenge this usurpation in court. The Washington constitutional litigator David Rivkin and Florida International University law professor Elizabeth Price Foley have developed a legal theory that would allow for judicial review to resolve this dispute between the political branches on the merits. Members of Congress as individuals cannot sue as individuals over passing political disputes. But when the President is usurping core legislative powers, Congress as an institution can sue to vindicate this constitutional injury.

Short of impeachment, there is no other way for Congress to defend its rights, and the Rivkin-Foley case is narrow and limited—and should survive judicial scrutiny. The idea has secured the interest of the GOP leadership, which may soon authorize a House-led lawsuit.

However Foley’s approach means Boehner’s role becomes even more pivotal, for clearly no judicial or constitutional challenge to Obama can go forward without the speaker. That might actually suit the Boehner’s book since as the Obama presidency sinks deeper into crisis, it makes the president more dependent on the speaker keeping the challenge door shut.

The problem with the “Obama is unimpeachable” argument is that he has already been impeached as Leader of the Free World. Any observer of Obama’s collapse will have noted his marginalization in international councils.

Britain flatly refused to go along with him in enforcing a Red Line in Syria. Angela Merkel now arguably the central Western figure in the Eastern European crisis. Japan has been slowly taking over the job of anchoring the Pacific alliance. Perhaps nowhere is Obama’s diminished stature so obviously underscored as in today’s headlines:  “Iraq turns to Iran for help …”

Just how low Obama’s standing has fallen can by gauged by comparison. George W. Bush’s Coalition of the Willing in Iraq and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and around the world was absolutely massive.

In Afghanistan: Afghanistan, United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, Canada, Poland, Germany, Italy, Spain, Czech Republic, Australia, New Zealand, NATO, Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, ISAF, Afghanistan Northern Alliance

In the Philippines: Philippines, United States, Australia, Indonesia

In Somalia/Horn of Africa: NATO, Australia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, France, China, Djibouti, Ethiopia, France, Georgia, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, South Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, Seychelles, Singapore, Somalia, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, United Kingdom, United States

In Georgia: (completed) Georgia, United States

In Kyrgyzstan: (completed) South Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, United States

Bush even had UN and Congressional authority for his actions (which Hillary voted for). By contrast Obama’s 2011 Military Intervention in Libya was undergirded by a far narrower set of allies and was undertaken with only UN approval. Now, as al-Qaeda overruns the Middle East six years into his administration, Obama could not even dream of gathering such a coalition again. He’s not even welcome in Cairo any more.  Long time ally Israel’s Prime Minister reportedly loathes him. Russia’s top officials have even refused to take the Secretary of State’s and the Secretary of Defense’s calls.

Obama’s new coalition is the coalition of anyone who will talk to him; whoever will still listen to him. Right now he’s trying to get Iran to join up with him but hasn’t worked it out. Things have reached the level of the absurd. U.S. considers air strikes, action with Iran to halt Iraq rebels says one headline, meaning if the IRG will attack, the USAF will support.

Of course everybody knows that if Iraq is saved it will be Iran’s for the taking. They make war for oil. Obama will get a cheap bottle of wine, a note of thanks and shown the door, which is the fate of junior partners.  Obama is now running in rings around a table; against Iran’s nukes one moment, but allying with them in Iraq the next; against ISIS in Iraq, then supporting them in Syria.  He has truly become all chumps to all men. In the event the door to Iranian cooperation has been slammed shut.  But just how desperate the administration was indicated by their willingness to chance it.

The strongest argument for starting an impeachment process against Obama is that his presidency is going to collapse anyway and Republic will need a process to deal with that contingency whether Boehner likes it or not.  Boehner’s only choice is whether he will be ready on the day. Maybe there are not enough votes to convict Obama in the Senate today, but in two month’s time there may well be and there needs to be a venue to cast them.

Year ago I read an account of an North Vietnamese Army commander preparing for a possible attack by American airmobile troops on his mountain base which has stuck in memory.  The NVA colonel positioned his bunkers and potential fields of fire strictly in accordance with topography and without regard to existing obstructions like dense forest, brush, stands of bamboo.

When one of his non-commissioned officers objected that his units machine guns were being pointed at a wall of impenetrable bamboo, the NVA colonel answered that the bamboo would vanish after American fire support had finished preparation. Only the mountain would remain and therefore the fields of fire anticipated accordingly. He prepared for the battlefield as it would be and not as it appeared at present.

There should not be an inordinate fear Obama will pull the temple down with him.  Even those who ascribe the worst motives to the president should consider that his potential for hypothetical mischief is at an historic ebb.  Obama has shrunk himself by his ineptitude. The most dangerous presidents are militarily successful ones. Napoleon knew that dictators perched on glory.  So long did Napoleon’s victories last, so long did his power survive.  Caesar could challenge the Senate only because he was the conqueror of Gaul.  Bush reduced himself significantly by failing to decisively win in his War on Terror. Yet he was Alexander by comparison to Obama who has nothing to show after six years of office but a few hundred of holes of golf and half-written agreements with nobody in particular.

Thus the best course is to trust the Constitution.  As the Obama presidency collapses, the system will rely on the established process to save the presidency and the republic from his mistakes.  That’s what it’s for.  This doesn’t mean the Republicans should go out right now and the file impeachment charges they’ve been threatening for so long. But they shouldn’t rule it out out of some excessive political caution.  Out of some fear that Boehner won’t get invited to cocktail parties that nobody will soon want to go to anyway. Tom Paine wrote at a time when surrender to the British seemed advisable about how a crisis clarified options and how they created opportunities.

These are the times that try men’s souls … Whether the independence of the continent was declared too soon, or delayed too long, I will not now enter into as an argument …

Yet panics, in some cases, have their uses; they produce as much good as hurt. Their duration is always short; the mind soon grows through them, and acquires a firmer habit than before. But their peculiar advantage is, that they are the touchstones of sincerity and hypocrisy, and bring things and men to light, which might otherwise have lain forever undiscovered….

Delaying an impeachment initiation for too long may actually by increasing the danger, since it can hardly be invoked if Obama gets himself into too deep a hole. It has to precede the acutest stage. Imagine for example that American forces are trapped in Afghanistan and attempting to fight their way out. Could Boehner impeach in such a crisis? Probably not. The president could retort: ‘this is not the time for partisan bickering. We must stand together.’  And in a sense he would be right. Timing impeachment is like timing ejection from crippled jet fighter. Punch out too early and you lose the chance of saving the plane. Punch out too late and the chute won’t open in time to even save the pilot.

It has become easy to blame Barack Obama solely for the catastrophes of recent days. Events of the last few weeks have shown how rapidly collapse can come. But in fairness the problem is rooted not only in the feckless behavior of the White House, but also in the short sighted passivity of the Republican Party. The Founders knew there would be times like this. There would be incompetent presidents and “times that try men souls”. But they never imagined that the denizens in Washington would grow so timid they would actually refuse to open the emergency exit provided, even as a precaution.

The principal danger in Washington now lies in the seemingly unshakable conviction among its denizens that it remains and will always be, business as usual; in the belief that the forests will always block the ridge; that the bamboo grove forever obstruct the plateau. The peril lies in the idea that the DC universe is forever. One day the bamboo will splinter away, but the men at the top are often the last to know.


Recent items of interest by Belmont readers based on Amazon click-throughs.

Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway
Not Cool: The Hipster Elite and Their War on You
Captive: My Time as a Prisoner of the Taliban
On the Psychology of Military Incompetence
Digger: The Complete Omnibus Edition
The Idiot Vote: The Democrats’ Core Constituency
The Three Conjectures
Light Air Grid Chair with Leather Seat and Platinum Accents
New Maxam Sailors Tool Honed Blade Spike Bottle Opener Shackle Key Stainless Steel Handle Ruler
Winter’s Tale [HD]


Did you know that you can purchase some of these books and pamphlets by Richard Fernandez and share them with you friends? They will receive a link in their email and it will automatically give them access to a Kindle reader on their smartphone, computer or even as a web-readable document.

The War of the Words for $3.99, Understanding the crisis of the early 21st century in terms of information corruption in the financial, security and political spheres
Rebranding Christianity for $3.99, or why the truth shall make you free
The Three Conjectures at Amazon Kindle for $1.99, reflections on terrorism and the nuclear age
Storming the Castle at Amazon Kindle for $3.99, why government should get small
No Way In at Amazon Kindle $8.95, print $9.99. Fiction. A flight into peril, flashbacks to underground action.
Storm Over the South China Sea $0.99, how China is restarting history in the Pacific
Tip Jar or Subscribe or Unsubscribe to the Belmont Club

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Nail. Head. Hit.

EVERY problem (and they are now monumental and galactic in scope, size, weight, by every measure...frightening) has at its root a toxic information stream designed to NOT inform, but to collaborate, coverup, conspire and conceal.

Tyranny cannot survive a free and fair press. Freedom cannot survive a corrupt one.

It is the very nature of power to seek its margins and cross them. It is the very nature of an investigative fair press to maintain those margins. When they not only refuse to hold power accountable for excesses...but conspire with power to brutalize truth, liberty and principled dissent....the margins are obliterated and ruthlessness, lawlessness and corruption follow as night follows day.

The corrupt Woodstock Media OWN this empty Pandora's Box. All the ills of this country have been set free by their hand.

NOBODY has asked Obama and his cabal then intense investigative digging questions. (Stanley Kurtz has tried on a couple of occasions)

We have no idea what they stand for or against...truly....because all we get is dorm room/faculty lounge fluff. People think that Obama, Jarrett, Hillary, Kerry, Power, Rice, all stand for hippy, peace/love/dove.

But Frank Marshall Davis didn't stand for those things. Don Warden didn't stand for those things. Carl Davidson didn't stand for those things. Rashid Khalidi didn't stand for those things. Jeremiah Wright didn't stand for those things. Bill Ayers didn't stand for those things. Lousi Farrakhan didn't stand for those things.

Revolutions by mask and camouflage don't come by attacking with sticks, rocks and Molitov cocktails for the small c communists. Alinsky thought they were idiots to confront rather than conceal.

You cannot impeach a half white/half black Woodstock Jihadist with a corrupt media intent on calling you racist for disagreeing with him, much less holding him accountable for high crimes.

First, there will be massive backlash in the black community which will be enflamed by the corrupt media.

Second, the Republicans are HORRIBLE at messaging. They are whipped little puppies when the media pulls its stunts, academia rages and Hollywood lampoons.

Third, you cannot impeach...without first body slamming the Dr. Frankenstein media for creating their monster. It won't work.

As much as it is deserved and as much as it is necessary and as much as it is right and just...our team is too weak , too untalented, too halting, too psychologically damaged and wilting to pull it off. It will backfire.

Everything wretchard analyzes is absolutely correct. Spot on. Properly reasoned. However, unless and until the battleground is prepped against the CAUSE as B. Rumson tells us above....we will get steamrolled.

Ted Cruz was RIGHT to make a show of confronting the abuse of power. His own weaklings not only didn't back him up...they turned on him.

And THAT wasn't a direct frontal attack on Obama himself. He didn't prep the battlefield. That battlefield needs Sharyl Attkisson, Jake Tapper and Ed Henry to be made four star generals first.

I believe that is the only way the abuse can be stopped.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
The thoughts in this column are exactly what I've been emailing to my Representative -- who happens to be Goodlatte, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Impeachment is simple but there's a bunch of homework to get it right. So there aren't now the votes to convict over in the Senate: Do the articles anyway, and pass them in the House, if possible.

If Obama leaves office in the normal course of things he will have pretty well destroyed the constitutional separation of powers. What future president of either party would feel bound by that doctrine? When would the price be paid in full?

At the very minimum, writing the articles would serve as a shot across the bow for the administration. The only reason they're ignoring the rule of law is that they see nobody enforcing the laws. In other words, House leadership is acting as enablers. Perhaps they aren't equally guilty, but they're going along with the continuation of Obama's crimes.

Yes, it is possible that bad things will happen if he's impeached. What's the term? 'Normalcy bias'? They are simply assuming that if he's NOT impeached, nothing particularly bad will happen. Does anyone HERE actually believe that? When I look up, I see very few WHITE swans up there.

It's not like we're not already paying a price. Some of us are dead unnecessarily, more will die, our children and their children are indebted for our stupidity, our health care system is rapidly being destroyed, we're likely to have tens of millions MORE illegal aliens from God only knows where before he leaves office ...

One thing we can be sure of: On the current road there will be a day when we wish with every fiber that we could redo the last few years. But when that day arrives there will be no going back.

I frankly don't care if Boehner, Goodlatte, and the rest are called racists. What they and others are saying amounts to "Thank GOD George Washington only had to fear death and capture: Had the Brits called him a Hessian-hating bigot he'd never have dared cross the Delaware."

How many ex-military here know from personal experience that sometimes leadership is dangerous and even painful? Does that excuse NOT leading when you have a leadership position? Of course not: If as a leader you find yourself unable to lead, then it's your duty to resign at the earliest safe time. But what I'm hearing is both Boehner and Goodlatte are looking forward to another two years in their respective jobs.

Bums.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
No one in this day and age of off-site backup servers and cloud computing believes that they lost two years of emails from the IRS chief because one platform went Tango Uniform. This isn't the days of Windows 98. I want a special prosecutor to find a copy of these emails, and I want to bring the idiot who claimed they were missing in front of a committee under oath to testify why they were reported lost. Follow it all the way up to the White House if need be. I don't know what's more frightening, that the Obama Administration is destroying evidence or that they handle evidence like they handle everyone's medical information. But there is a legal requirement for Feds to keep their emails, and this is a nation of laws.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (168)
All Comments   (168)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
"There should not be an inordinate fear Obama will pull the temple down with him."

He is not Samson. For one thing, he is no mighty warrior. For another, the only jawbone of an ass that he has is the one in his own head. /couldn't resist
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
Impeachment is not meant as a vote of no-confidence. It's for serious crimes.

I think there's a 50-50 chance of impeachment before the end of Barry's term, but it will have to come from the Democrats themselves. The Democrats will impeach if it's a serious enough crime, but nothing else will do.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
There will be no impeachment of Barry, and not only because the democrats in the senate won't go along.

The GOP has made no effort to build any sort of political case for it, by actions such as loudly criticizing Barry using harsh but apt words such as criminal, incompetent, disaster, fool, and even treason.

The sort of criticisms I've heard from the GOP are that Barry is a nice guy in over his head, and lately that he took a nap on Iraq.

Pitiful. Being attacked by the GOP is like being savaged by a dead sheep, to recall what UK Labour politician Dennis Healey once said on being criticized by Tory minister Geoffrey Howe.

This isn't good enough. The left spent almost the entire presidency of George Bush savaging him in every way they could imagine. There was no slur or lie too vile to use against him. If they had found a legal case to impeach him they would have done so, instantly. But they never did, despite relentless searching. If they had, they could have simply continued the shrieking about Bush lying us into war, etc, etc, and the public would have at least had an idea why it was being done.

Today, if the GOP attempted to impeach Barry, after never bothering to criticize him that much at all, the public would be quite unpleasantly surprised. Sure, conservatives would know why, and understand. But most of the electorate doesn't follow politics that closely, and would not understand. Yes, that matters.

The time for the GOP to begin building a case for impeachment was long ago- certainly by the time Barry was running for re-election. Instead, Mitt "Mittens" Romney was telling us how Barry was a nice guy.

You still believe that, Mittens?
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Link to Article about Mohamed Elibiary, Obama Appointee, calling New Caliphate "Inevitable" [http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/06/obamaappointed_dhs_adviser_calls_return_of_caliphate_inevitable.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook]


Quote from the Article:

"[Mohamed Elibiary...] A member of President Obama's Homeland Security Advisory Council known for controversial Twitter posts that seem to support the Muslim Brotherhood wrote Friday that it is "inevitable that 'Caliphate' returns."

Only a blind person cannot at this late date fail to see clearly that Islamic Jihad is being unashamedly AIDED by the current administration, and I mean plainly and conspicuously... Credible reports out of Benghazi indicate that Ambassador Stephens had spent MONTHS distributing the Military Arms Caches of deposed Colonel GHADDAFI to the Jihadist Syrian REBEL FORCES trying to dislodge Syrian Leader Bashar Al-ASSAD. (Remember? Stephens was the ambassador Obama and Hillary refused to help, allowing his attackers to torture him for hours and then MURDER him!)

Throughout the Syrian civil turmoil of the last 2 years, President Obama has officially sided with the Rebels, despite definitive reporting from international news sources that the Rebels include many of the same Jihadist groups that have murdered U.S. Citizens and Military. Our President has given the Syrian Islamic Rebels hundreds of millions of U.S. Dollars, weapons, munitions of war, medical supplies and preferential treatment compared to Allies of the U.S. who have NOT been murdering U.S. citizens or soldiers. They are many of them reported to be affiliates of Al-Qaeda and ISIS, the same Jihadists trying to overwhelm Iraq over the last few weeks.

At the same time, U.S. service personnel have been forcibly retired, reprimanded, and threatened with COURTS MARTIAL for demonstrating their personal faith in Jesus of Nazareth.

Even after Jihadist Fort Hood U.S. Army Psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan has been convicted of murdering 13 soldiers and TRYING to murder another THIRTY TWO U.S. active military, Our President insists on referring blandly to Hasan's cold-blooded and PRE-Meditated murder spree as an instance of "workplace violence."

Ah, But the former Major in the U.S. Army has repeatedly described himself as "Mujahedeen" --- A Holy Warrior for Islam.

At least the people on ONE side of the conflict say plainly what they intend.

You can be certain that this will not end well.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Not yet. It is bad, but not bad enough.

I have a suspicion that the 2nd quarter 2014 will show no growth or a slight contraction. China is falling off the edge; they will do something profoundly stupid and Obama will be caught flat footed once again. This middle east stuff, as bad as it is, is not as bad yet as it was a couple decades ago with the Iran Iraq war, the Palestinian terrorists taking hostages, and the Lebanon civil war. The stakes are higher, yes, but not yet.

Impeachment will harden Obama support even further. There is something salutary when in miserable times the structures and routines of government are maintained, even if there are good reasons to not follow them. An added benefit is to allow the citizenry to experience in full measure the results of their decisions. The republic requires two political parties devoted to the benefit and good keeping of the nation, and the Democrats are about to enjoy a discipline that they will never forget, and hopefully will conduct an internal civil war with massive hidden graves of all the idiots who are going along with Obama.

The US has been able to buy itself out of it's stupid decisions, which has allowed those who benefit from the status quo to prevent any meaningful change. A wholesale humiliation of the apparatus of government and academia is worth a bit of turmoil.

I've said that this won't be over until there is nothing left to lose, and we are approaching that point. Let it run it's course. The world has it's policy arguments vicariously through watching what is occurring in the US, and the definition of rational modernity is being hashed out in the US. The consequences are not quite clear yet. The discrediting is underway, but not finished.

Not yet.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment

The Kelly File on Fox News features Andrew Napolitano [http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/06/16/judge-nap-lost-lerner-emails-looks-irs-has-willfully-destroyed-evidence]



We know that the government has had requirements on the books - both internal regulations with the force of law AND actual legislation with civil and criminal penalties - for willful, intentional destruction of evidence in pending civil or criminal actions, and for willful obstruction of justice.

Considering that the officials whose responsibilities include protection of these documents HAVE to be fully aware they are participating in a cover-up, and that their obvious lies comprise a number of FELONIES - destruction of government property, obstruction of justice, criminal conspiracy, et cetera - I pose these questions:

(1) Who ordered them to hide or destroy the two years' worth of emails – Sent AND Received – by a High-Ranking Official of the United States Government? Who specifically is continuing to order, persuade, or coerce them to obstruct a Congressional Investigation? (They did not just decide on their OWN to do this.)

(2) What incentives and disincentives are being used to coerce these crimes?

(3) Who stands to benefit from the destruction of documents that will either prove or disprove that an appointed official of this administration intentionally violated standing laws to provide protected data from taxpayers, to be used in criminal obstruction of their legitimate applications for ANY specific tax status?

(4) What other crimes are being protected and hidden by destroying /hiding TWO FULL YEARS of emails to and from one of the TOP administrators of the U.S. Government's primary apparatus of extracting revenue from its citizens, which has power to decide who shall be squeezed and who shall be given a break?

If these miscreants are willing to hide and destroy e-mails that they KNOW are protected by Federal LAW, what other evidence needs to be retrieved before it disappears into the shredders and incinerators?






The Kelly File on Fox News features Andrew Napolitano [http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/06/16/judge-nap-lost-lerner-emails-looks-irs-has-willfully-destroyed-evidence]
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Wretchard,
This post is probably dead & gone in your time-zone, but I ask you to look at Cdr. Salamander, here, and comment...
http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2014/06/shrugging-at-abyss.html

Thanks
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
There was an episode of 24, I think during its 2nd season, where they explored a scenario in which sect. 4 is invoked. It was well done, highly recommend it.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Through Amendment 25, Section 4, impeachment can be avoided and a president removed. Congress is given extraordinary power, if it will act in concert. The Amendment leaves to Congress the meaning of "unfit". The president has no defense, if the Congress decides to so act.

18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Unless president Obama is clearly incapacitated, as a by a stroke, such an action will be regarded as partisan. In fact, an impeachment conviction by a Republican dominated Senate will be regarded as partisan, even if a substantial number of Democrats cross over.

The cleanest impeachment is one where a Democratic senate itself votes to convict, or it becomes so apparent a conviction is forthcoming that the president resigns. There can be no question of partisanship then.

It is still regarded as impossible for a Democratic Senate to do this. That is probably true for now, but in a few months time I am not so sure. It all depends on how badly events go for the president. He has a big design margin in his party, but like all margins it is not unlimited. There's a breaking point for everything, even the Democratic party.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Impeachment requires " Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." A legal case would be necessary, arguments on both sides would be public record. The Constitution itself is the main law to be enforced. This is an order of magnitude cleaner and more specific than a simple requirement that the president be found "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office."

Define "unable"? Right -- A stroke and unable to speak or write would do it. Loathing America and narcissistic personality disorder would be instantly translated into 'wrong skin color.'

Impeachment's not going to be fun and it will be called political no matter who votes for it. But it's likely to look a lot better in the history books than a squishy "unable to discharge" and it is for the history books that something should be done before he leaves office.

We aren't going to get a competent president anytime soon by any route. But we can lay out no-fly zones for future administrations with regard to the separation of powers. Our kids aren't going to forgive us for the debt thing but maybe they'll at least believe we're not total idiots.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Ten more Baracky screw ups is the breaking point. Two screw-ups per month gives us October or November 2014. One screw-up per month gives us April/May 2015.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
He's been picking up the pace as he gains skill and a critical mass of incompetence among top officials. I'm thinking ten will hardly last him past mid-August.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Impeachment is going to be a hard nut to crack. The Congress does have one overwhelming advantage if it can move: as was learned during the Nixon and Clinton presidencies, "high crimes and misdemeanors" means whatever Congress wants it to mean.

If the President could be removed under Amendment 25, we would be left with Uncle Joe - what a trip.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Amendment 25

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 5 Next View All