Megyn Kelly to Mitch McConnell: If Obama’s executive power grabs are so terrible, why not impeach him?

posted at 2:41 pm on January 14, 2014 by Allahpundit

She’s asking rhetorically, not egging him on. The obvious logistical problem, as many a Republican officeholder has noted when asked about this by an angry constituent, is that impeachment is DOA in the Senate as long as it’s controlled by Democrats. The House can force a Senate trial but what’s the use of that when we all know what the verdict will be? (For that reason, this question is better aimed at Boehner than at McConnell.) And no, retaking the Senate next year doesn’t solve the problem. You need two-thirds of the chamber to convict an impeached president; Republicans won’t be remotely close to 67 seats, no matter how big this year’s November wave is.

The political problem is that Republicans fear impeaching O would do more to hurt them than it would the president. Not only did Clinton weather the storm, so did his approval rating. If you’ve got a weak president in office like Obama who’s facing a debacle from his signature legislation between now and the next presidential election, why make any sudden moves to mess with that dynamic if you’re a Republican? They’re probably going to get a good result from SCOTUS on Obama’s NLRB power grab; if they want to push back against executive overreach, court battles might be fruitful high-publicity ways of doing it with minimal political risk — certain difficulties notwithstanding.

To solve their political problem, the GOP would have to convince a majority of the public (probably a big majority) that impeachment is warranted. But that’s the thing — even when the president’s guilty of encroaching on another branch’s powers or suspending parts of the law that are politically inconvenient to him, you’ll never find a majority of Americans willing to entertain a punishment as severe as removal from office for that. To make impeachment stick, you need to show that the president’s motives for acting were rotten and selfish, like Nixon’s; O, by contrast, always takes care to present his motives for ignoring Congress as civic-minded, something he does for the good of the people, not for himself. Tim Scott once suggested that Obama could be impeached if he tried to raise the debt ceiling unilaterally, but the public would never support that, I suspect. He’d simply say that he was driven to desperate measures to protect the country’s creditworthiness; at best you’d get a 50/50 split in public opinion on whether he should be punished, and I doubt the ratio would be even that good. Ron Paul once suggested that impeachment should be on the table for O’s drone strike on Anwar al-Awlaki, who was, after all, a U.S. citizen. O defended that by insisting he was acting to protect America from a particularly dangerous terrorist. I’d be surprised if you could get even 20 percent of the public angry enough to support impeachment over that one. A constitutionalist would wave his hand at all of the above and say that motives are irrelevant — if you violate due process or separation of powers, impeachment is an obvious remedy, however allegedly virtuous the motives. That’s what it means to follow the rule of law. How many constitutionalists are out there in the voting booth on election day, though? Fifteen percent of the electorate, maybe? Less?

Exit question: Will any big-name Republican pound the table for impeachment next year? Ted Cruz’s language about Obama’s lawlessness has been especially strong lately. He knows, of course, that the votes aren’t there in the Senate, but he knew they weren’t there for the “defund” effort either and he pushed that anyway. The key, then and now, was getting the House to act. O would survive but some conservatives would love Cruz for making the effort, which would be helpful to him when the primary campaign starts in 2015.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

IMPEACHMENT should be the only option that is considered.

Pork-Chop on January 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Obama’s not going to be impeached unless he’s caught with a dead boy or girl. And probably not even then. I seriously don’t know what would do it–maybe HD video of Obama conducting an Aztec sacrifice of a screaming blond girl and then eating her beating heart while Michelle and Harry and Hillary and Nancy look on cheering?

Would THAT even be enough?

Vanceone on January 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Because we shot the moon against Bill Clinton and went down.

As far as the GOP is concerned, impeachment is off the table for the next generation.

And the Liar in Chief is behaving accordingly…

JohnGalt23 on January 14, 2014 at 2:45 PM

If the Republicans wanted to they could go after Obama along many other paths then just impeachment, or they could impeach his more culpable underlings, like say Holder.

As one example, come up with a bill eliminating the IRS and talk incessantly about Obama using the IRS against his political opponents.

But the Republicans don’t want to win enough to seriously entertain making any significant changes to Obama’s Leviathan.

18-1 on January 14, 2014 at 2:45 PM

Because I have no balls.

Sincerely,

Mitch McConnell

thirteen28 on January 14, 2014 at 2:45 PM

If you’ve got a weak president in office like Obama who’s facing a debacle from his signature legislation between now and the next presidential election, why make any sudden moves to mess with that dynamic if you’re a Republican?

Exactly.
Impeachment helped Clinton, because the US public was largely ignorant & easily led by media elites.
They’re even more so now.

itsnotaboutme on January 14, 2014 at 2:46 PM

No, there won’t be an impeachment. You can’t impeach the first black president any more than you could impeach the first woman president. And not just because the public wouldn’t support it, but because the media wouldn’t support it. It’s the media that drives public opinion.

BKeyser on January 14, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Impeachment of obama will NEVER happen because of 3 simpleton words,
President Joe Biden

ConservativePartyNow on January 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

This is what too many people don’t get about impeachment. It’s as much a political process (if not more so) than it is a legal one. Impeachment sounds great in the abstract, but becomes a thorny issue in actual practice.

Bitter Clinger on January 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

Impeachment is a waste of time. Let him wallow in his ineptness for the remainder of his tenure.

Rovin on January 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

How many constitutionalists are out there in the voting booth on election day, though? Fifteen percent of the electorate, maybe? Less?

I’m thinking less than 10% closer to 5.

Kataklysmic on January 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

Impeachment of obama will NEVER happen because of 3 simpleton words,
President Joe Biden

ConservativePartyNow on January 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

Right idea, wrong three words.

Impeachment of the rat-eared coward will NEVER happen because of 3 words- First Black President. Affirmative action hires never get fired even when they are proven inept, stupid and lazy.

Happy Nomad on January 14, 2014 at 2:50 PM

Exactly.
Impeachment helped Clinton, because the US public was largely ignorant & easily led by media elites.
They’re even more so now.

itsnotaboutme on January 14, 2014 at 2:46 PM

Just proves that the majority of our countrymen actually do not deserve our republic. Morons.

NavyMustang on January 14, 2014 at 2:50 PM

Obama’s not going to be impeached unless he’s caught with a dead boy or girl. And probably not even then. I seriously don’t know what would do it–maybe HD video of Obama conducting an Aztec sacrifice of a screaming blond girl and then eating her beating heart while Michelle and Harry and Hillary and Nancy look on cheering?

Would THAT even be enough?

Vanceone on January 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Of course not. The guy taking the video would be thrown in the slammer for causing it.

fadetogray on January 14, 2014 at 2:50 PM

This would be a very, very foolish idea.

The one thing we do not want to do is turn this guy into some kind of martyr. Hopefully he is going to decamp to some beach on Hawaii after he leaves office and enjoy many years of fun in the sun far, far removed from the levers of power.

He had a bad year last year, he’ll probably have a worse year this year, and in terms of success in 2016 nothing helps us more than a weakened Obama still in office, still on the golf course.

And don’t forget this: Biden.

Jocon307 on January 14, 2014 at 2:51 PM

Would THAT even be enough?

Vanceone on January 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Maybe…if her name was Julia.

BlaxPac on January 14, 2014 at 2:52 PM

No, there won’t be an impeachment. You can’t impeach the first black president any more than you could impeach the first woman president. And not just because the public wouldn’t support it, but because the media wouldn’t support it. It’s the media that drives public opinion.

BKeyser on January 14, 2014 at 2:47 PM

The irony here is that Obama has single-handedly set back racial relations by years.

Happy Nomad on January 14, 2014 at 2:52 PM

FEAR rules the Republican party, its time those who are afraid, to step aside, their cowardice has cost us too high of a price so far and we cannot afford to keep cowering in corners hoping for the bad men to go away…

Alinsky on January 14, 2014 at 2:52 PM

Obama’s not going to be impeached unless he’s caught with a dead boy or girl. And probably not even then. I seriously don’t know what would do it–maybe HD video of Obama conducting an Aztec sacrifice of a screaming blond girl and then eating her beating heart while Michelle and Harry and Hillary and Nancy look on cheering?

Would THAT even be enough?

Vanceone on January 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

Based on careful observation of both congress and the electorate, there’s only one action Obama could take that would result in universal support for impeachment. If he attempted to use exectutive power to make deep cuts in governnment spending and dramatic reforms to entitlements.

Kataklysmic on January 14, 2014 at 2:52 PM

I’d settle for a rousing rendition of “NA NA NA NA, HEY, GOODBYE!” during the inauguration ceremony in January 2017, except racist.

Christien on January 14, 2014 at 2:52 PM

How many constitutionalists are out there in the voting booth on election day, though? Fifteen percent of the electorate, maybe? Less?

I’m thinking less than 10% closer to 5.

Kataklysmic on January 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

I agree, but only that many if we include as constitutionalists those who don’t actually know squat about what is in it, or why, but still think our public servants ought to follow it.

fadetogray on January 14, 2014 at 2:55 PM

McConnell is in the Senate, not the House.

NotCoach on January 14, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Actually, forget “NA NA NA NA, HEY, GOODBYE!” I’d settle for “Hit The Road, Jack!” ‘cept raciss.

Christien on January 14, 2014 at 2:57 PM

How about starting down the path to a Constitutional Amendment that would allow for a recall election for the President?

This likely can’t happen either, as the Congressional method requires a supermajority in both houses. But it might find more public support than a full impeachment trial would, and it might even be possible to snag a forward thinking Democrat or two who’s thinking about the next time a Republican inhabits the White House.

Either way, it would be a far easier thing to sell to the American public as a good idea. You’re just granting more power to the people. You’re not specifically naming a particular President who needs to be recalled/impeached…yet.

Chris of Rights on January 14, 2014 at 2:57 PM

Because once again Santa didn’t bring him the spine he asked for.

Buttercup on January 14, 2014 at 2:57 PM

If the Republicans wanted to they could go after Obama along many other paths then just impeachment, or they could impeach his more culpable underlings, like say Holder.

As one example, come up with a bill eliminating the IRS and talk incessantly about Obama using the IRS against his political opponents.

But the Republicans don’t want to win enough to seriously entertain making any significant changes to Obama’s Leviathan.

18-1 on January 14, 2014 at 2:45 PM

Exactly. They much prefer to go on television and beat their chests so their constituents will think they are fighting the good fight.

KickandSwimMom on January 14, 2014 at 2:58 PM

To make impeachment stick, you need to show that the president’s motives for acting were rotten and selfish, like Nixon’s; O, by contrast, always takes care to present his motives for ignoring Congress as civic-minded, something he does for the good of the people, not for himself.

Every tyrant uses this excuse. In fact, it should be defined as a cue to immediately investigate exactly what said tyrant is actually trying to do.

Keep in mind that he defines “the good” to suit himself. In the past, “the good” has included genocide in several nation-states and a few empires.

The problem is that it is entirely possible for a mentally-unbalanced individual to become POTUS, provided that his delusions match those of the “enlightened elite’”. I.e., they hate America and dream of a mystically-run world operating like the Islamic Crescent, so does he, it’s all good, and nobody else’s opinion matters.

As for the “I” word…

God cannot be impeached. And he is God.

Just ask him, he’ll tell you.

clear ether

eon

eon on January 14, 2014 at 2:59 PM

It will never happen.

TBTB are in on the final loot before the end.

Murphy9 on January 14, 2014 at 2:59 PM

I think it’s cute that you act like we have a chance to win the Presidency again. The democrats are engaged in spoils system ethics, the Democrat DoJ just jedi-hand waved an IRS that gave personal Tax Data to Pro Publica’s guilt away and people act like we are a Republic. If the President cannot be held to account even if because of media collusion we are a tyranny.

Democrats take glee and revel in not being held accountable for their violating the law.

The GOP stares dumbly and slack-jawed and gives the democrats what they want to “punish them.”

harlekwin15 on January 14, 2014 at 3:01 PM

Megyn Kelly to Mitch McConnell: If Obama’s executive power grabs are so terrible, why not impeach him?

…because Mitch has something hanging… under his chin…NOT… under his crotch!

KOOLAID2 on January 14, 2014 at 3:01 PM

The House can force a Senate trial but what’s the use of that when we all know what the verdict will be?

We had the same situation in the 90s, but the House still impeached Clinton. If nothing else, they can show that they at least stand for something (like the constitution) other than capitulation.

They’re spineless wimps terrified of the MSM

cajunpatriot on January 14, 2014 at 3:02 PM

Impeachment would be like a child throwing a temper tantrum — lots of sound and fury signifying extreme frustration. But in the end Obama would still be there. I know futile gestures that antagonize the unengaged electorate are satisfying to the Kamikaze brigade but a bound to fail impeachment attempt would all but destroy the Republican chances to take the Senate and make gains in the House. If you want to do something to reign in Obama then I suggest if you are dissatisfied by your current Republican member of Congress vote for his opponent in the primary but if you lose show up November to vote (R). Failure to do so provides aid and comfort to Obama’s socialist agenda.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:02 PM

Megyn Kelly to Mitch McConnell: If Obama’s executive power grabs are so terrible, why not impeach him?

“Well Megyn, if you’ll look right down here at my shorts, you will notice a pair of something is missing.”

The House can force a Senate trial but what’s the use of that when we all know what the verdict will be?

Boy is this excuse getting old.

Don’t do anything because- Senate.

Got it. Nice excuse you got there. Be a shame if something happened to it.

Marcus Traianus on January 14, 2014 at 3:02 PM

Impeachment of obama will NEVER happen because of 3 simpleton words, President Joe Biden
ConservativePartyNow on January 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM

I get so sick of that attitude. So you think it is better to have an evil despot with the full intent to destroy everything good about the nation than to have an amiable, corrupt dunce as figurehead?

Remember your Cicero; He spoke of this 2100 years ago:

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.

But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.

For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.

He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist.

A murderer is less to fear.

The traitor is the plague.

LegendHasIt on January 14, 2014 at 3:03 PM

He had a bad year last year, he’ll probably have a worse year this year, and in terms of success in 2016 nothing helps us more than a weakened Obama still in office, still on the golf course.

And don’t forget this: Biden.

Jocon307 on January 14, 2014 at 2:51 PM

He had a great year, and will have a better year this year.

1) he doesn’t care about Congress plaintiff’s exhibit one “I have a phone and a pen”

2) his goal is the destruction of America…

he’s doing just ducky

harlekwin15 on January 14, 2014 at 3:04 PM

Letting Obama get away with his lawlessness will only embolden future Presidents to usurp more power from the people, the states and other branches of the government.

besser tot als rot on January 14, 2014 at 3:04 PM

He is immune from impeachment. It would be a “racist” act.

The first woman President is also immune.

Carnac on January 14, 2014 at 3:05 PM

fadetogrey:

Not only do many of the “constitutionalists” not know what is in the document many would reject what is in it out of hand.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:06 PM

The obvious logistical problem, as many a Republican officeholder has noted when asked about this by an angry constituent, is that impeachment is DOA in the Senate as long as it’s controlled by Democrats. The House can force a Senate trial but what’s the use of that when we all know what the verdict will be?

The use is that, at the least, it ties down the criminal administration for a bit and might give them pause in their further violations of the Constitution and the law.

As to whether the Senate will convict or not, who cares? If the Senate acquits, then the House needs to just impeach Barky again for any other of the 70+ clearly impeachable acts he’s committed. Keep the administration’s hands tied defending itself in the Senate so that it doesn’t have the freedom or room to continue its criminality at the breakneck pace that it’s been freely pursuing over the past 5 years.

Lastly, whether the Senate will convict or not is immaterial when crimes have been committed by the Precedent and those in his junta. It’s a matter of right and wrong (I know, outdated concepts to many) and the fact that it’s the House’s RESPONSIBILITY to impeach criminals in the feral government who are abusing power, violating the Constitution and making a mockery of the Rule of Law. It is not so much a choice for the House but a demand on them to DO WHAT IS RIGHT, and it’s obvious that impeaching the Indonesian America-hater and most of the retarded gang around him has been required.

But … this is all moot, now. So much criminality, abuses of power and violations of the Constitution have been allowed to happen that the American Constitutional Republic was finally killed and buried. It’s gone, at this point. Finished. Because people were more scared of being called “raaaacist” than defending the Constitution and the American way of life. We now have the American Socialist Superstate that operates totally outside of any concept of the Rule Of Law. Totally outside of it. They mockingly call it, officially, the Rule of Empathy – LOL – but they don’t even bother pretending that there is any law. For the America-hating vermin who built this socialist superstate, the “discretion” of the Precedent allows him to do anything he wants and force anything he wants on anyone (as any true authoritarian superstate operates).

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 14, 2014 at 3:06 PM

McConnell is in the Senate, not the House.

NotCoach on January 14, 2014 at 2:55 PM

She’s asking rhetorically, not egging him on. The obvious logistical problem, as many a Republican officeholder has noted when asked about this by an angry constituent, is that impeachment is DOA in the Senate as long as it’s controlled by Democrats. The House can force a Senate trial but what’s the use of that when we all know what the verdict will be? (For that reason, this question is better aimed at Boehner than at McConnell.) And no, retaking the Senate next year doesn’t solve the problem. You need two-thirds of the chamber to convict an impeached president; Republicans won’t be remotely close to 67 seats, no matter how big this year’s November wave is

KOOLAID2 on January 14, 2014 at 3:07 PM

George Will wrote about “gesture liberalism” last week. There is such a thing as “gesture conservatism” too, and proponents of impeachment are its chief practitioners. They tend to share with liberals the notion that the main goal of politics is to make them feel good, and righteous. It isn’t. It is (or should be) to actually bring about a better society for a free people to live in.

SacredFire on January 14, 2014 at 3:07 PM

Treason fits the bill even better than impeachment.

Deano1952 on January 14, 2014 at 3:07 PM

To make impeachment stick, you need to show that the president’s motives for acting were rotten and selfish, like Nixon’s; O, by contrast, always takes care to present his motives for ignoring Congress as civic-minded, something he does for the good of the people, not for himself.

LOL. That’s beyond ridiculous. No one with a brain thinks that Barky has had any good motives for anything.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 14, 2014 at 3:07 PM

Primoridial:

After all this impeaching would Obama still be Presedent.

Simple yes or no answer please.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:08 PM

Bitter Clinger has it right. Impeachment may be legally justified, but it’s political poison for the Republicans. The LIV’s wouldn’t understand (and frankly wouldn’t be bothered to try to understand) the constitutional arguments, and the media would frame it as petty vindictiveness against the First Black President.

Remember, pride goeth before a fall. Obama is his own worst enemy. His hubris, narcissism and arrogance prevent him from admitting error and doing mid-course corrections. All he knows how to do is double-down on stupid.

In fact, he may be so incompetent and arrogant that he can’t even recognize “stupid” when it happens, e.g., the ObamaCare debacle.

Better to let him self-destruct than try and fail to remove him. Anyway, it will be more satisfying to watch The Ego twist in the wind than affording him the pleasure of playing the aggrieved victim of an evil opposition.

Meredith on January 14, 2014 at 3:08 PM

Stop dreaming.

The GOP is never going to vote to impeach The First Black President ™.

Hucklebuck on January 14, 2014 at 3:09 PM

Because once again Santa didn’t bring him the spine he asked for.

Buttercup on January 14, 2014 at 2:57 PM

I’m no fan of McConnell, but he can have the strong spine in the world and he couldn’t impeach Obama. Even if the GOP retakes the senate, not a single Democrat would vote for impeachment.

Nixon resigned because he lost the support of his party and conservatives like Goldwater. The Democrats will stand behind Obama until he leaves office.

midgeorgian on January 14, 2014 at 3:10 PM

Impeachment is a bad idea. Obamas followers are so emotionally invested in hm that if he leaves office by any means other than natural retirement at the end of his second term (and for some of his followers, even that may set them off) there will be blood in the streets.

Your best bet is to keep the house, grab the senate in 10 months and keep Obama confined to the oval office with nothing to do till inauguration day 2017.

Alberta_Patriot on January 14, 2014 at 3:11 PM

So Clinton’s motives weren’t “rotten and selfish”? They were, and far more so than Nixon – whose motive was political.

Hucklebuck on January 14, 2014 at 3:12 PM

Maybe, just maybe, if he decided to fly an islamic flag over the whitehouse he might get a slap on the paw, but until then, fuggetaboutit.

tru2tx on January 14, 2014 at 3:13 PM

Primoridial:

After all this impeaching would Obama still be Presedent.

Simple yes or no answer please.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:08 PM

The answer is a simple “maybe”. But that doesn’t matter. Impeachment for serious crimes and violations of the Constitution is not a luxury of the House, it’s a RESPONSIBILITY. Do you understand that?

And, as I wrote, if Barky is acquitted the first time then just impeach him again for another of his numerous clearly impeachable acts. Would he still be Precedent? maybe, but he’d be tied up trying to defend his criminal actions in the Senate and might be restrained in his future criminal and un-Constitutional endeavors.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 14, 2014 at 3:13 PM

I’m with Erich Erickson: the single best thing we can do for the Republic right now is dump Mitch McConnell.

rrpjr on January 14, 2014 at 3:13 PM

Why? Here’s what works for me:

I see the GOP as a bunch of haggard lounge lizards hanging out on the Hill just because that’s all they know how to do and the black-skirts make them feel wanted. They have their insider industry cranking right along so they’ll eventually retire comfortably if they can ever wrangle free of the power trip. They know they’ve screwed the pooch so badly that there’s no reason to even think about fixing it.

Tsar of Earth on January 14, 2014 at 3:14 PM

If Obama’s executive power grabs are so terrible, why not impeach him?

And take a chance on interrupting the flow of corporate welfare to my “campaign contributors”?

kcewa on January 14, 2014 at 3:14 PM

Your best bet is to keep the house, grab the senate in 10 months and keep Obama confined to the oval office with nothing to do till inauguration day 2017.

Alberta_Patriot on January 14, 2014 at 3:11 PM

Holder just okayed IRS being used as a political tool.

Obama just invoked his Vorpal Pen of Constitution Slaying +5, and his Telephone of Media Control +3….

good luck on “rule of law”

harlekwin15 on January 14, 2014 at 3:15 PM

Obama is his own worst enemy.

Meredith on January 14, 2014 at 3:08 PM

Uh … no. He’s America’s worst enemy. He’s the Rule of Law’s worst enemy.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 14, 2014 at 3:15 PM

United States loses position among 20 most free economies in the world under Obama ‘leadership’.

The Obama administration and the leftist ideology implemented by the Obama administration have been toxic to this nation.

Impeachment will not reverse the damage that’s been done, and it would take far too long to accomplish the removal of this President from office.

To say that Obama is a failed executive falls far short of the reality. The entire Obama administration, and those abetting the administration in implementing the disastrous policies of this administration, like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, must he held equally culpable, and ultimately accountable, for the damage done this nation.

Likewise, the Republican members of the congress must be held accountable for their complicity, either expressly or indirectly by virtue of their reticence to act. The Democrats have not brought this nation to its knees without the help of the Republican members of the political class. The executive and legislative branches, together, comprise the leadership of our federal government.

When leadership fails, remove that failed leadership and install new, competent and faithful leaders. Throw the bums out and elect some public servants.

thatsafactjack on January 14, 2014 at 3:17 PM

Not only with the donks in the senate vote against it the democrat wing of the republican party would vote against it. My guess it would be 61/39 against convicting.

Ladies and gentlemen we are not republicans and democrats. We are government elites versus all others. The crowd in DC wants power and nothing but power for as long as they can get away with taking more and keeping it.

jukin3 on January 14, 2014 at 3:17 PM

And probably not even then. I seriously don’t know what would do it–maybe HD video of Obama conducting an Aztec sacrifice of a screaming blond girl and then eating her beating heart while Michelle and Harry and Hillary and Nancy look on cheering?

Would THAT even be enough?

Of course you made her blonde.

lostmotherland on January 14, 2014 at 3:19 PM

I agree, but only that many if we include as constitutionalists those who don’t actually know squat about what is in it, or why, but still think our public servants ought to follow it.

fadetogray on January 14, 2014 at 2:55 PM

Non-sequitur. Knowledge of what is in it is irrelevant to the fact that it is the supreme law of the land. Not following it is lawlessness. You can be against that without even knowing what the law is law dog.

besser tot als rot on January 14, 2014 at 3:19 PM

Your best bet is to keep the house, grab the senate in 10 months and keep Obama confined to the oval office with nothing to do till inauguration day 2017.

Alberta_Patriot on January 14, 2014 at 3:11 PM

LOL. Barky ignores the House AND the Senate. How do you propose to keep him “confined to the Oval Office” even if the GOP has the Senate? Barky does whatever he wants. The only way to stop this is through impeachment and, possibly, conviction (if not then just more impeachment for each crime).

You seem to live in a fantasy world where the GOP holding the Senate (and not colluding with Barky as they have been doing from the House for years, now) somehow magically stops EOs and stops the Executive branch from doing whatever Barky tells it to.

Wake up and take a look around at what has been going on for 5 years, already. There is only one way to stop this and it has nothing to do with “holding the Senate” (even if we gave the GOP credit for courage and integrity that they obviously don’t have).

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 14, 2014 at 3:19 PM

To make impeachment stick, you need to show that the president’s motives for acting were rotten and selfish, like Nixon’s; O, by contrast, always takes care to present his motives for ignoring Congress as civic-minded, something he does for the good of the people, not for himself.

What about using the IRS, NSA, etc. to target his political enemies?

cool breeze on January 14, 2014 at 3:19 PM

I didn’t watch the video, but I bet the good Senator pooped his pants in response to her question … and then launched into more meaningless Senatorial platitudinizationalizing.

Nomennovum on January 14, 2014 at 3:19 PM

How can voting in November have any impact on Obama’s socialist agenda? Members of the Surrender Brigade, like you, don’t ever want to challenge Obama – therefore Obama will continue to get everything he gets now.

Any other brilliant advice?

blink on January 14, 2014 at 3:16 PM

AND that is assuming that Acorn doesn’t try to turn EVERY County seat into a “Spigot City” like Jim “Gacy” Messina and David “Shicklegruber” Axelrod were bragging about…

Why would I continue voting for an ever leftward lurching spineless GOP in the face of a weaponized government ran by democrats if the GOP’s BEST offer is “we’ll uh stop him…er maybe”

The nation is broken and since people want rule by TV rather than rule of law the media is its master.

harlekwin15 on January 14, 2014 at 3:22 PM

Blink the idiot.

What you call surrender is what normal people call realism. As far as I am concerned you are a stealth Obama supporter because you would rather have Nancy Pelosi in charge than a Republican that you don’t like. How is that working out for you now?

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:22 PM

Exit question: Will any big-name Republican pound the table for impeachment next year?


Not
if they want to get one red cent of support from the GOPe Donor Class.

Not if they expect to have ANY support from the GOPe-media.

The business of America is business.

BIG American businesses, including those owned/led by the GOPe Donor Class, have learned how to survive when the Federal budget gets a permanent $1 TRILLION dollar increase (~ 50%) in Obama’s first and all subsequent years.

BIG American businesses also LOVE the death of “mark to market” accounting that occurred with the suspension of FASB rule 157 for asset valuation in 2009. This allows the Too Big Too Jail banks to pretend they are solvent by valuing their millions of foreclosed homes at whatever price they wish to declare.

It ALSO allows every other BIG American business to do the exact same thing with regard to the assets they own.

They are all Enrons now.

Sequester cuts were ACTUALLY cutting the budget back down to size!?!

The GOPe Donor Class can NOT allow that to happen – they’ve forecast their FUTURE growth based on the FUTURE growth of the Federal Budget Defecit.

And those wild-eyed Tea Party Congresspeople, many of whom have run SMALL American businesses, are apt to force an end to the Fairy Tale Accounting used by BIG American businesses.

Will Obama be impeached?

Not if the people who give campaign contributions to the GOPe and the Democrats have anything to say about it.

And, for the record, THEY have EVERYTHING to say about it.

PolAgnostic on January 14, 2014 at 3:23 PM

The obvious logistical problem, as many a Republican officeholder has noted when asked about this by an angry constituent, is that impeachment is DOA in the Senate as long as it’s controlled by Democrats.

I will bet every dollar I have that McConnell will not change his tactics even if he becomes the majority leader.

Therein lies the problem.

Do you really believe McConnell will act as forcefully as Democrats have?

Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Marcus Traianus on January 14, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Alt headline: “Medical Miracle- Spineless Senator Has Excellent Posture”…

hillsoftx on January 14, 2014 at 3:24 PM

You seem to live in a fantasy world where the GOP holding the Senate (and not colluding with Barky as they have been doing from the House for years, now) somehow magically stops EOs and stops the Executive branch from doing whatever Barky tells it to.

Please show you work. Show me something where the Republicans were in a position to successfully block Obama and failed to do so.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Heah Marcus. It takes 67 votes to win an impeachment trial not 51. Perhaps you should bone up on the Constitution and recent history. The Republicans controlled the Senate when Clinton was impeached.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:27 PM

Please show you work. Show me something where the Republicans were in a position to successfully block Obama and failed to do so.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Dude. They can block everything right now. If something doesn’t pass the House, it doesn’t become law. I guess you missed school the day they showed Schoolhouse Rock – How a Bill Becomes a Law.

You may not like the political fallout of it all, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are actually in a position to block Obama on anything new (aside from appointments, which doesn’t require a House vote).

besser tot als rot on January 14, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Please show you work. Show me something where the Republicans were in a position to successfully block Obama and failed to do so.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:25 PM

Is that a joke question? Just start with a couple of handfuls of CRs and debt-limit raises and the “deals” that the GOP made with Barky for them. Move on to the “deal” the idiot GOP made with Barky for Senate nominees and how they allowed Barky to renominate the criminals he installed when he declared the Senate in recess (and that the Senate GOP then let fly by in confirmation). I could go on for days with examples. If you can’t think of these off the top of your head pretty quickly then you really have no clue as to what’s been going on and you really shouldn’t even be taking part in this debate.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 14, 2014 at 3:30 PM

Please show you work. Show me something where the Republicans were in a position to successfully block Obama and failed to do so.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:25 PM

They hold the House and by golly they can stop ANYTHING in the Senate if they cared about the rule of law…

but they don’t…

The GOP should leave en masse from Reid’s post-filibuster Senate and refuse to work until he restores the rule…

Will Not Happen b/c the GOP Media All-Stars with John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and Liza Murkanakakakanski will NOT ever call for the rule of law.

A GOP President CANNOT occupy the office Obama is IN right now EVER.

1) The Donks would riot

2) I would also riot

The Mules would never riot against an out of control mule.

harlekwin15 on January 14, 2014 at 3:30 PM

what would do it–maybe HD video of Obama conducting an Aztec sacrifice of a screaming blond girl and then eating her beating heart while Michelle and Harry and Hillary and Nancy look on cheering?

Would THAT even be enough?

Vanceone on January 14, 2014 at 2:44 PM

NO! The MSM would say she was a racist and deserved it.

Alabama Infidel on January 14, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Considering the people in line to become the president currently include: Joe ‘The Gaffemaster’ Biden, John ‘War hero’ Kerry, Patrick ‘Leaky’ Leahy and John ‘The Weeper’ Boehner, no, I don’t think Impeachment is on the table.

trigon on January 14, 2014 at 3:33 PM

Are you a lawyer? You are answering a quesiton with a question. You failed to answer my first question whether with all that impeaching would Obama still be President. How about that simple yes or no?

Here is an easy agenda for you. The budget process goes back to normal order where individual agencies and departments get their budgets done. You start with the no brainers like Defense, State, Treasury. Then you start putting limits on spending on other agencies and let Obama sign or not. If he doesn’t individual agencies get shut down, not the entire government. The Republicans can win the battle with ease since it would be the Whtie House shutting things down.

Now yes or no after all the impeaching would Obama still be President.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:34 PM

The historic first black Nobel prize winning POTUS will never be impeached nor will he be held accountable for any of his actions. To do so would cement that we are a racist country and the streets would run with blood in the race war that follows an impeachment. Nobody is willing to light that fuse. At best in IMHO, BO has assured that it will be a long time before another black is POTUS.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 14, 2014 at 3:34 PM

Anyone else get queasy reading the sickening rationalizations for why a spineless GOP shouldn’t impeach a corrupt and lawless imperial president who consistently violates the Constitution and his oath of office?

Or is it just me?

Midas on January 14, 2014 at 3:35 PM

How many constitutionalists are out there in the voting booth on election day, though? Fifteen percent of the electorate, maybe? Less?

Try more like 0.05%: People who comment on conservative blogs, and….that’s about it.

This is ALL “inside baseball” to 99.5% of Americans. Presidents have 4 year terms and if they suck we first throw out their party after only 2 years and then we vote them out. That’s how it works.

rockmom on January 14, 2014 at 3:36 PM

Because once again Santa didn’t bring him the spine he asked for.

Buttercup on January 14, 2014 at 2:57 PM

I’m no fan of McConnell, but he can have the strong spine in the world and he couldn’t impeach Obama. Even if the GOP retakes the senate, not a single Democrat would vote for impeachment.

Nixon resigned because he lost the support of his party and conservatives like Goldwater. The Democrats will stand behind Obama until he leaves office.

midgeorgian on January 14, 2014 at 3:10 PM

Well then I guess Jellyfish McConnell has no choice but to keep caving to the tyrant like a good little self-serving progressive.
Wouldn’t want to upset the establishment.

Buttercup on January 14, 2014 at 3:36 PM

After all this impeaching would Obama still be Presedent.

Simple yes or no answer please.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:08 PM

Yes. Doesn’t change the fact that as a matter of principle he should still probably be impeached. Politically speaking, however, I don’t think it’d be a good idea. In the short term, anyway. Long term? We’re probably shooting ourselves in the foot by not taking a stand against executive overreach now. It’d be nice if the judicial branch would help us out here, but they’re even more spineless than the legislative branch.

besser tot als rot on January 14, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Harlekwin:

That is exactly what they have been doing. When it requires House action to make it happen like gun control the Republicans shut it down. When it takes both House of Congress to stop something alrady in place than the House is SOL. Yoo are one of people who is clueless on how constitutional government works.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:37 PM

George Will wrote about “gesture liberalism” last week. There is such a thing as “gesture conservatism” too, and proponents of impeachment are its chief practitioners. They tend to share with liberals the notion that the main goal of politics is to make them feel good, and righteous. It isn’t. It is (or should be) to actually bring about a better society for a free people to live in.

SacredFire on January 14, 2014 at 3:07 PM

I wish had your eloquence, that’s pretty much what we have been offered (many insist on it) instead of good governance, our gestures versus theirs.

V7_Sport on January 14, 2014 at 3:38 PM

Try more like 0.05%: People who comment on conservative blogs, and….that’s about it.

This is ALL “inside baseball” to 99.5% of Americans. Presidents have 4 year terms and if they suck we first throw out their party after only 2 years and then we vote them out. That’s how it works.

rockmom on January 14, 2014 at 3:36 PM

Sure it is…

//Your Friends at ACORN, OFA, and ACA pathfinders

not to mention the dead

harlekwin15 on January 14, 2014 at 3:39 PM

So if Obama will still be President you will accomplish nothing.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:40 PM

Blink the moron:

Of course he did. He said let’s see what happens if the Republicans had a majority. It takes more than a majority to remove the President. It takes 67 votes. To ask the question shows that he doesn’t know.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:43 PM

That is exactly what they have been doing. When it requires House action to make it happen like gun control the Republicans shut it down. When it takes both House of Congress to stop something alrady in place than the House is SOL. Yoo are one of people who is clueless on how constitutional government works.

jerryofva on January 14, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Quite the contrary idiot I am well aware of how the US Constitution works, and how it is not working.

No President would have imagined a President trying to run the Nation by the Regulatory Fiat we see prior to FDR. The idea of a DoJ or God help me a DHS would have had you beaten with a cane up until the “Public Enemies era.” Obama can legislate with his self-invoked “Pen and Phone” and he has and will continue to do so.

I must have missed where the House and/or Senate decided to outlaw and require the dismantling of coal plants….Coal plants are a strategic resource providing back-up power vital to refining plutonium and tritium.

*poof* Gone

Gun control?

Obama decided to jedi hand-wave privacy and pen-whip new reporting guidelines on Mental Health reporting under the aegis of CDC.

Extra Legal Government?

You’re soaking in it buddy….

harlekwin15 on January 14, 2014 at 3:44 PM

Yes. Doesn’t change the fact that as a matter of principle he should still probably be impeached. Politically speaking, however, I don’t think it’d be a good idea. In the short term, anyway. Long term? We’re probably shooting ourselves in the foot by not taking a stand against executive overreach now. It’d be nice if the judicial branch would help us out here, but they’re even more spineless than the legislative branch.

besser tot als rot on January 14, 2014 at 3:37 PM

You win the prize. The Democrats in the civil service have now gotten away with flagrantly using their commissions to engage in partisan electioneering and gamesmanship with NO REBUKE OR PUNISHMENT. Obama is lazy, and casually evil.

Just wait until a driven true believer or ruthless egomaniac like say Hillary! gets to unleash the power of a fully charged weaponized Civil Service, Media, and academy on America.

The Rule of Law is done.

harlekwin15 on January 14, 2014 at 3:47 PM

To solve their political problem, the GOP would have to convince a majority of the public (probably a big majority) that impeachment is warranted. But that’s the thing — even when the president’s guilty of encroaching on another branch’s powers or suspending parts of the law that are politically inconvenient to him, you’ll never find a majority of Americans willing to entertain a punishment as severe as removal from office for that.

Perhaps, but keep in mind, a big part of why impeachment gets dismissed out of hand by a lot of people is that most calls for impeachment, even when there is a legitimate argument, still reek of political opportunism.

Presidents have gotten away with abusing executive power for so long that impeaching them out of the blue will inevitably be seen as arbitrary, and thus likely an opportunistic attempt by the opposition to subvert the will of the electorate.

The remedy for this is to provide fair warning that a specific act will be considered an impeachable offense, to explain why, and to encourage the president to do the right thing and change course. It’s best to be as specific as possible, e.g., “mr president, you simply do not have the authority to rewrite the law. We must insist that you rescind executive order X by date Y, or we will be forced to draw up articles of impeachment.” By publicly offering him a way out ahead of time, republicans might still have trouble getting the votes to convict, but it will be much easier to conv

RINO in Name Only on January 14, 2014 at 3:49 PM

The GOPe Donor Class can NOT allow that to happen – they’ve forecast their FUTURE growth based on the FUTURE growth of the Federal Budget Defecit.

And, for the record, THEY have EVERYTHING to say about it.

PolAgnostic on January 14, 2014 at 3:23 PM

The GOP donor class is almost as great an enemy of the American middle class as the far left.

When push comes to shove and it affects their bottom line, the Koch Brothers will side with George Soros before they will side with the “unwashed masses.”

bw222 on January 14, 2014 at 3:49 PM

To solve their political problem, the GOP would have to convince a majority of the public (probably a big majority) that impeachment is warranted. But that’s the thing — even when the president’s guilty of encroaching on another branch’s powers or suspending parts of the law that are politically inconvenient to him, you’ll never find a majority of Americans willing to entertain a punishment as severe as removal from office for that.

Perhaps, but keep in mind, a big part of why impeachment gets dismissed out of hand by a lot of people is that most calls for impeachment, even when there is a legitimate argument, still reek of political opportunism.

Presidents have gotten away with abusing executive power for so long that impeaching them out of the blue will inevitably be seen as arbitrary, and thus likely an opportunistic attempt by the opposition to subvert the will of the electorate.

The remedy for this is to provide fair warning that a specific act will be considered an impeachable offense, to explain why, and to encourage the president to do the right thing and change course. It’s best to be as specific as possible, e.g., “mr president, you simply do not have the authority to rewrite the law. We must insist that you rescind executive order X by date Y, or we will be forced to draw up articles of impeachment. Please do not let it come to that.”

By publicly offering him a way out ahead of time, republicans might still have trouble getting the votes to convict, but it will be much easier to convince fair-minded people that they are acting in good faith.

RINO in Name Only on January 14, 2014 at 3:53 PM

O, by contrast, always takes care to present his motives for ignoring Congress as civic-minded, something he does for the good of the people, not for himself.

Yeah, like gun-running with hundreds of dead Mexicans and a dead border patrol agent – ‘for the good of the people.’

Like targeting citizens with the IRS, to target political enemies and to directly affect a national election – ‘for the good of the people.’

Like violating his oath of office in determining when and where to ‘faithfully execute’ the laws only if he likes the laws – ‘for the good of the people.’

Like funneling trillions of taxpayer dollars directly into the hands of his lackeys, cronies and donors – ‘for the good of the people.’

Like selectively using the Justice Department and other government entities to harass, persecute and otherwise cause mischief for his political enemies – ‘for the good of the people.’

Like destroying the country’s healthcare system, and illegally changing the law by fiat to suit the polls and his whims – ‘for the good of the people.’

Like lying at length about Benghazi – and knowingly, falsely imprisoning a patsy to take the blame – ‘for the good of the people.’

Like using US service men and women as expendable pawns for political reasons in Afghanistan – ‘for the good of the people.’

… etc …

Yeah, he’s a civic-minded, swell guy.

Midas on January 14, 2014 at 3:53 PM

The first woman President is also immune.

Carnac on January 14, 2014 at 3:05 PM

You mean the first dem woman president. Right?

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 14, 2014 at 3:53 PM

Megyn Kelly was exactly right here in her rhetorical questioning. If you believe in liberty, you’d take a stand against O’s executive overreach with impeachment

If the GOP were around in the 1775, their motto would’ve been: Give me liberty!*

*…as long as the colonists look like they’ll win, otherwise, long live the king!”

sauldalinsky on January 14, 2014 at 3:54 PM

Kelly was still playing with dolls the last time with Clinton.

The actual lesson to be learned is that Democrats are now just hard-core leftists who regard lying as another tactic in the tool kit. They will never let Obama go down to impeachment, and it takes 67 votes to convict in the Senate.

The Democratic base is as disheartened now as they’ve been in a long time. Impeachment would wake them up and motivate them.

It’s a meaningless gesture to make a few people feel better. They should have a couple of drinks instead.

Adjoran on January 14, 2014 at 3:55 PM

Comment pages: 1 2