Jonathan Turley: The left’s indifference to Obama’s executive power grabs is beginning to border on a cult of personality

posted at 11:21 am on February 13, 2014 by Allahpundit

“Beginning”?

There’s nothing here that you haven’t heard before if you watched him testify before Congress in December but it’s still worth watching for two reasons. One is his tone, which has grown darker and more apocalyptic since then. More than once here he warns that Obama’s “enablers” are destined to rue the fact that they remained silent “during this period.” Precedents are being set that will be built on by future presidents of both parties; for all the complaining about executive overreach by Democrats circa 2006 and Republicans today, the cold realities of power are what they are. I’m tempted to say that it was O’s latest unlawful delay to ObamaCare’s employer mandate that soured Turley’s mood, but I don’t think that’s it. I think it was the State of the Union, where Obama embraced bypassing Congress as formal policy. Look out for the phrase “borders on authoritarianism.”

The other reason to watch is his debunking near the end of the “power of the purse” strategy to check Obama. Mike Lee told the Weekly Standard two days ago that that’s the way he thinks Congress should rein in the president: They’re not going to roll the political dice on impeachment and they can’t sue for lack of standing, but they can go ahead and cut off Obama’s money in areas where he’s exceeded his constitutional boundaries — in theory. The problem with that approach, says Turley, is that O’s not above unilaterally moving money around that’s been appropriated for other purposes. Congress can’t use the “power of the purse” if it doesn’t meaningfully enjoy that power either. So let me repeat a recommendation I made once before: The GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that citizens can sue the president for violating separation of powers. The precise language of that amendment would require hard thought; draft it too loosely and the executive branch will be sued for every move it makes, whether clearly constitutional or not. But the status quo, where Congress is effectively powerless to stop the president from making the rules up as he goes along, can’t go on. If you can’t get the votes for the amendment in Congress now, that’s okay — these things take time, and it’ll be useful at least to have Democrats on record as opposing limits on executive power. But get the ball rolling.


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 3

Barack Hussein Obama, mmm mmm mmm.

Fenris on February 13, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Congress needs to wrestle its legislative authority back from the executive regulatory behemoth.

besser tot als rot on February 13, 2014 at 11:23 AM

It’s pretty much hopeless at this point…

ladyingray on February 13, 2014 at 11:24 AM

So, GOP, where are you at with those Articles of Impeachment?

*crickets*

Come on, you can at least SAY the “I” word right?

*crickets*

Left_is_Wrong on February 13, 2014 at 11:26 AM

It’s pretty much hopeless at this point…

ladyingray on February 13, 2014 at 11:24 A

Pretty much…

PatriotRider on February 13, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Typical liberal comment. What does he think would happen if Obama came out and said I love Planned Parenthood and the Sierra Club but we have no money to send them through Federal programs. Or I hate Keystone but the law says I have to approve it.

They would cut his throat. Follow the money.

CW20 on February 13, 2014 at 11:26 AM

So if he has moved money around willy nilly in the past, why didn’t the Republicans point that out during the shut down? Instead they get beat over the head for “unintended consequences” of any cost savings while The Won makes sure his priorities are covered. Republicans are too stupid to govern and the Democrats get a pass by the press. I am so sick of this.

Cindy Munford on February 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM

I predict this thread will be devoid of trolls.

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM

The GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that citizens can sue the president for violating separation of powers.

Protip: make sure your last 20 years of tax returns are in order before you file that lawsuit.

Kataklysmic on February 13, 2014 at 11:29 AM

They’re not going to roll the political dice on impeachment

At some point, they can’t fear the political backlash of such a move. There’s too much at stake. Obamacare is a disaster regardless of whether or not Obama keeps unilaterally altering the law. But what happens if he does decide to issue an executive order granting amnesty? What if Congress tries to cut off funds and he goes around them anyway? And what about the abuse of the bureaucracy like using the IRS and EPA to target business and individuals? We can’t survive another 3 years of this.

Doughboy on February 13, 2014 at 11:29 AM

So, GOP, where are you at with those Articles of Impeachment?

*crickets*

Come on, you can at least SAY the “I” word right?

*crickets*

Left_is_Wrong on February 13, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Nope, they’re busy filling out Valentine cards made out to Harry and Barry.

antipc on February 13, 2014 at 11:29 AM

I predict this thread will be devoid of trolls.

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM

Nah, the verbalduece will be in shortly to explain it’s a faux scandal.

HumpBot Salvation on February 13, 2014 at 11:29 AM

So if he has moved money around willy nilly in the past, why didn’t the Republicans point that out during the shut down?

Cindy Munford on February 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM

Because they’re eunuchs?

Kataklysmic on February 13, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Dear Mr. Turley,

As you’ve clearly failed to study human history, allow me to condense it for you:

The Left (i.e. Statists) = Executive Power Grabs

I believe that’s called a tautology or something … and, you’re welcome.

ShainS on February 13, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Indifference? They are not indifferent. They whole-heartedly support obama’s power grab.

They gave him a standing ovation when he suggested he would do it on his own.

That black chick congressman is setting about to write executive orders for obama.

And the GOP doesn’t say anything. It seems they are the indifferent bunch. Why are we even paying for a Congress?

davidk on February 13, 2014 at 11:31 AM

He’s only digging himself deeper and he’s giving us a great precedent.

Then in 2017, President Walker will decide that the Departments of federal government will limit their jurisdiction to international affairs, interstate trade, and constitutional rights only, in accordance with the 10th amendment.

xuyee on February 13, 2014 at 11:31 AM

We already have an amendment that is supposed to protect the American people from government overreach and corruption: the 1st amendment’s freedom of the press. The press used to do this effectively.

youknowit on February 13, 2014 at 11:31 AM

So, GOP, where are you at with those Articles of Impeachment?

*crickets*

Come on, you can at least SAY the “I” word right?

*crickets*

Left_is_Wrong on February 13, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Dear Left_is_Wrong,

We would rather endure the suffering and death of all Americans and this once-great land than be called racists by the sycophantic LSM whores.

Thank you for your support,

– GOP

ShainS on February 13, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Voting for Obama was like chickens supporting Col. Sanders…

PatriotRider on February 13, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Precedents are being set that will be built on by future presidents of both parties;

A little clarification, the enabling of tyranny is not a “precedent”. It is an utter rejection of the Rule Of Law. Without the Rule of Law, there is no such notion as “precedent”, since all is at the whim of the reigning tyrant.

This is why I have been saying that the American Constitutional Republic has been dead and buried now for some time. There is no restoration of the US that is going to happen. It cannot happen. Once the Rule of Law is thrown away (and so blithely as has been allowed under the retarded dog-eater) then you can never trust that government to be beholden to the Rule of Law again. Sure, someone can say, “From NOW, we will follow the law,” but everyone knows (from experience, now) that it takes less than nothing for all law to be tossed out the window – whenever convenient or whenever some protected affirmative action group is involved and might be embarrassed by the truth – and for everything to collapse into a lawless, insane, dictatorial rule by some idiot who thinks he is the new incarnation of Sukarno. When this point has been reached, it’s all over and cannot be fixed.

The only solution, now, is for a national divorce and to have an American Constitutional Republic re-established, since it can never again be restored in this nation, the AMerican Socialist Superstate, ruled by the whim of a third world retard and the empathetic musings of brain-dead judges.

America was warned about all this in the beginning. it was obvious from before Barky ever slimed into an office he isn’t even eligible for – and definitely not even close to qualified for. But … America wanted Suicide by Indonesian and that’s exactly what we got. It’s over and done, now.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 11:33 AM

The GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that citizens can sue the president for violating separation of powers.

Or legislators. Logically any congressman or senator should have this ability.

But this is a long term solution. I agree that some amendment of this type is sorely needed, but even in the most optimistic scenario there is no way the amendment could be introduced and ratified in time to check Obama. We have to concede that we have roughly 3 more years of an essentially lawless president and plan and act accordingly.

jwolf on February 13, 2014 at 11:33 AM

It’s pretty much hopeless at this point…

ladyingray on February 13, 2014 at 11:24 A

I’ve been thinking that for a while.

Even Rush yesterday questioned if can come back from this.

davidk on February 13, 2014 at 11:33 AM

They’re not going to roll the political dice on impeachment

What is the point of the House impeaching Obama if the Senate will just acquit him?

myiq2xu on February 13, 2014 at 11:34 AM

LeftoCenter will troll this thread into 1000 you say?

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:34 AM

It’s pretty much hopeless at this point…

ladyingray on February 13, 2014 at 11:24 AM

I know it’s frightening and discouraging, but a great man once said:

Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today’s world do not have. ~ Ronald Reagan

Flora Duh on February 13, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Utter nonsense.

verbaIuce on February 13, 2014 at 10:31 AM

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Report: OJ Simpson on hunger strike in effort to end his life

OmahaConservative on February 13, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Aww, how sad!

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:36 AM

Dear Left_is_Wrong,

We would rather endure the suffering and death of all Americans and this once-great land than be called racists by the sycophantic LSM whores.

Thank you for your support,

– GOP

ShainS on February 13, 2014 at 11:31 AM

Haha, SO true. Unfortunately, the GOP lost my support the second week of November, 2012.

Left_is_Wrong on February 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

The GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that citizens can sue the president for violating separation of powers.

LOL.

The Constitution carries no meaning, at all, in the American Socialist Superstate. You can write anything and it doesn’t matter … because we do not operate under the Rule of Law, anymore. I would also remind you that the Constitution already had a clause that would have stopped Barky from ever stepping foot in the Oval Office, but you were one of the people who wanted to intentionally ignore that. You didn’t even think it should be resolced in court, where Barky would have to actually produce some real documentation, not photoshopped jpeg jokes that no one with a brain took seriously. Even Turley, lefty as he is, thought that the eligibiliity issue should have been taken and disposed of by the courts. “But Nooooo,” that would be raaaacisty raaacist, or something.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Perhaps the GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that CONGRESS, perhaps even one branch of congress, can sue the president for violating separation of powers. After all, it is congress’ authority that is being usurped. The problem with impeachment is that it is so extreme as to preclude its use in all but the most extreme circumstances.

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

LeftoCenter will troll this thread into 1000 you say?

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Loc is a waste of time. Libfree can keep a thread going because he responds to questions. Not so for loc.

Kataklysmic on February 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

beginning to border on a cult of personality

!!!!!!!

jake-the-goose on February 13, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Loc is a waste of time. Libfree can keep a thread going because he responds to questions. Not so for loc.

Kataklysmic on February 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Heh, we should call it Loco.

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:39 AM

The GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that citizens can sue the president for violating separation of powers.

There’s this thing called “impeachment”. It’s in there … part of the RESPONSIBILITY of Congress, as if that matters at all …

Seeing all that’s gone on for the past 5+ years and who was embarrassed to question the Constitutonality of so many things or to ever use the word “impeach” … this is almost funny. Almost.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 11:40 AM

There’s always armed revolt. Good thing they’re not coming for our guns.

BKeyser on February 13, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Fournier, Powers, now Turley. Are some on the Left finally waking up? Only question is, is it too late.

rbj on February 13, 2014 at 11:42 AM

I’ve been thinking that for a while.

Even Rush yesterday questioned if can come back from this.

davidk on February 13, 2014 at 11:33 AM

I have my doubts as well. It’s not like this ends when Obama leaves office. What happens with the next Democrat President(which could be in 2017, BTW)? Who’s to say President Hillary or anyone else can’t abuse the executive branch the same way Obama has? Why couldn’t they continue to use the bureaucracy to target their political enemies? And does anyone believe for a second that the media’s “cult of personality” can’t extend to a white President with D after their name?

The problem is the system, not the individuals within it. And I don’t see at this point how the system can ever be fixed. I’m firmly entrenched on the “Let It Burn” bandwagon. It seems inevitable with the amount of debt we’ve incurred.

Doughboy on February 13, 2014 at 11:42 AM

The problem with impeachment is that it is so extreme as to preclude its use in all but the most extreme circumstances.

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

You don’t consider tyranny to be extreme?

That said, impeachment is not extreme. It’s a process that is there to stop individuals from abusing power in the feral government and from rending the Constitution and destroying America.

Too late, now. Maybe next time, after a new AMerican Constitutional Republic is established …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Sacred Feces! They’re just discovering this? After 8 years? Really?
The Presstitutes are pretty good at hiding the intentions of King Putt from the voters. Simply amazing.
I’ll assume this odd ‘discovery of savior worship on the part of the Gimmedats’ will take a while for the truth to sink in.
Sure … long after I witness the wings sprout from the spinal columns of swine.

Missilengr on February 13, 2014 at 11:43 AM

So, GOP, where are you at with those Articles of Impeachment?

*crickets*

Come on, you can at least SAY the “I” word right?

*crickets*

Left_is_Wrong on February 13, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Not to excuse their lack of “nads” but they’re screwed either way, any mention or move to “impeach” would be portrayed as ALL about racism…

we are farked, and President IWon has a pass for life built in just due to his pigmentation…

Tim Zank on February 13, 2014 at 11:43 AM

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:34 AM

If it does show up I wish everyone would just ignore it. All it’s doing is using Alinksy’s Rule #5 for it’s own entertainment.

Flora Duh on February 13, 2014 at 11:44 AM

Democrats now have both ObamaCare and authoritarianism to campaign on in 2014.

pwrefugee on February 13, 2014 at 11:45 AM

But get the ball rolling.

At some point, they can’t fear the political backlash of such a move. There’s too much at stake.

Doughboy on February 13, 2014 at 11:29 AM

Unfortunately, with the current milquetoast and feckless GOP Congressional leadership, they are always going to fear a political / media backlash if they actually step up and begin to lead.

Far too many believe that going along to get along and reacting is what leadership is. That not rocking the boat and roaring down the progressive highway at 50mph vs 150mph will be the secret to electoral success.

They are utterly afraid to really advocate a contrary vision to the progressive fascism of Barack Obama and the Democrats. Rather than working to get inside their decision loop, they let the lapdog media lounge 7/24 inside theirs. And, even more contemptible, when they do decide to make a stand, it’s to benefit themselves and their egos as opposed to serving the people they are supposed to represent.

Athos on February 13, 2014 at 11:45 AM

So let me repeat a recommendation I made once before: The GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that citizens can sue the president for violating separation of powers.

My suggestion is that the second place finisher in the presidential election should be given a sort of “Shadow Presidency”, with the power to investigate and prosecute (sue) the executive branch. Having Congress do it doesn’t work when the President’s own party can just block everything.

Count to 10 on February 13, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Not to excuse their lack of “nads” but they’re screwed either way, any mention or move to “impeach” would be portrayed as ALL about racism…

we are farked, and President IWon has a pass for life built in just due to his pigmentation…

Tim Zank on February 13, 2014 at 11:43 AM

They’re called racists every day in the State-Run media, so that really wouldn’t change much.

They should just come out from the start and say they’re only impeaching Obama’s white half.

Left_is_Wrong on February 13, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Report: OJ Simpson on hunger strike in effort to end his life

OmahaConservative on February 13, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Aww, how sad!

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:36 AM

…he just wants to lose some weight!

KOOLAID2 on February 13, 2014 at 11:48 AM

The State Run Media will not allow anything that limits their Dear Leader…

d1carter on February 13, 2014 at 11:49 AM

Aww, how sad!

Schadenfreude on February 13, 2014 at 11:36 AM

I hope he succeeds…

OmahaConservative on February 13, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Impeachment is not a political reality with a woman, black, or Hispanic person as President. That’s one reason the donks need it to happen. It negates any effort to make a change back to a checks and balances system.

butch on February 13, 2014 at 11:50 AM

It is pretty amazing to realize that our constitutional safeguards against a tyrant taking control of our nation are basically empty. This was set in stone in 1998 when the Bill Clinton impeachment failed politically. Impeachment is the only safeguard we have, but the Dems neutered that in 1998, when Clinton became a political issue, rather than a governance issue. It is unlikely ever again that a president will be impeached. Obama found the fatal flaw in our constitution and republic. It counts upon the character and integrity of the person elected to office to make it work.

Techster64 on February 13, 2014 at 11:51 AM

As President, he can do what he wants….really.

d1carter on February 13, 2014 at 11:51 AM

OmahaConservative on February 13, 2014 at 11:50 AM

…If he thought running through airports was tough…just wait until he has to run through flames.

kingsjester on February 13, 2014 at 11:51 AM

You don’t consider tyranny to be extreme?

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 11:42 AM

If it were up to me he would have been gone long ago.
The degree of his tyranny is not great enough to produce a successful impeachment, and politically it would be disastrous. Have you seen any poll that says that the majority of the public favors impeachment?

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:52 AM

Gee thanks, AP.

Now I have CM Punk’s themse song running through my head.

kingsjester on February 13, 2014 at 11:52 AM

It’s not like this ends when Obama leaves office.
Doughboy on February 13, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Who’s to say Obama leaves office?

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/02/12/how_far_can_obama_go

And Rush does believe we can recover from this…but it may take time:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/02/12/we_will_survive_this_folks

theotherone on February 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM

OT:
Report: OJ Simpson on hunger strike in effort to end his life

OmahaConservative on February 13, 2014 at 11:35 AM

Gonna be a long wait. He weighs something like 14 thousand pounds.

Mimzey on February 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM

So, GOP, where are you at with those Articles of Impeachment?

*crickets*

Come on, you can at least SAY the “I” word right?

*crickets*

Left_is_Wrong on February 13, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Paul Mirengoff at Power Line:

There are really only three relevant questions here: (1) has Obama committed impeachable offenses, (2) would impeachment proceedings (which would certainly fail to remove Obama) hurt the country, and (3) how would his impeachment play out politically. The third question is relevant because Republicans have no obligation to further weaken their position in a futile attempt to drive Obama from office through the impeachment process.

If Obama continues on his current course of overriding and rewriting the law, my answer to the first question will be a pretty easy “yes.” Under the same scenario, I think the answer to the second question is “no,” impeachment would not hurt the country. If anything, we might be better off with impeachment proceedings because they might cause Obama (or at least future presidents) to feel less free to do whatever he wants.

As for the third question, impeaching a president, even an unpopular one, is presumptively bad politics. But if the Obamacare fiasco deepens, if some Democrats begin to jump ship, and if Obama’s favorability rating drops another ten points, it’s far from clear to me that impeachment proceedings would hurt Republicans more than Democrats. Indeed, Republicans paid only a small political price for impeaching a popular president in the late 1990s.

Mirengoff also adds:

So I agree that Republicans shouldn’t talk about impeachment now. But neither should they rule it out.

In the meantime, we really need to get the Supreme Court to review some of Obama’s lawless actions. I strongly suspect that the center-right majority on that Court is looking for an opportunity to teach Obama a lesson on the limits of executive power.

Of course, what Paul forgets to consider is that any SCOTUS ruling “limiting” O’bama’s lawlessness would just be ignored by O’bama anyway.

Del Dolemonte on February 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM

King Putt secured for himself Impeachment Proceedings Protection Insurance when he (his handlers actually) selected Joke Biden as his VP running mate.

Missilengr on February 13, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Of course, what Paul forgets to consider is that any SCOTUS ruling “limiting” O’bama’s lawlessness would just be ignored by O’bama anyway.

Del Dolemonte on February 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM

If Obama were to outrright ignore a direct Supreme Court ruling, then the path to impeachment would suddenly become easy.

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:55 AM

The Left has been a “Cult of Personality” since Scooter’s speech at the Democratic Convention in 2004.

After all, he’s “clean and articulate”.

kingsjester on February 13, 2014 at 11:55 AM

It is pretty amazing to realize that our constitutional safeguards against a tyrant taking control of our nation are basically empty. This was set in stone in 1998 when the Bill Clinton impeachment failed politically. Impeachment is the only safeguard we have, but the Dems neutered that in 1998, when Clinton became a political issue, rather than a governance issue. It is unlikely ever again that a president will be impeached. Obama found the fatal flaw in our constitution and republic. It counts upon the character and integrity of the person elected to office to make it work.

Techster64 on February 13, 2014 at 11:51 AM

Except that the Republicans didn’t lose politically by that Clinton impeachment. In the Congressional races that followed, they only lost something like 6 seats, and those seats were not enough to change the makeup of Congress.

And an argument could even be made that impeachment of Clinton helped the Republicans in the short term-the idiot the Democrats ran for President in 2000 distanced himself from Clinton during his campaign, when having Clinton campaign with him could have possibly helped his chances.

Del Dolemonte on February 13, 2014 at 11:56 AM

The first guy to stop clapping after his next speech will mysteriously disappear.

Akzed on February 13, 2014 at 11:56 AM

Del Dolemonte on February 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Agreed; the time for impeachment is at hand. Wonder if they’re hoping for reinforcements in the House before they try it, though. I don’t expect Boehner and the present crew to have the Malkins for it. But at the stage we are now, it’s the right thing to do. This lawlessness must not stand and should not, before Obama does something so egregious as to complete the fulfillment of his promise to “fundamentally transform” the U.S.

theotherone on February 13, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Perhaps the GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that CONGRESS, perhaps even one branch of congress, can sue the president for violating separation of powers. After all, it is congress’ authority that is being usurped. The problem with impeachment is that it is so extreme as to preclude its use in all but the most extreme circumstances.

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

Still fails when one Party has all three. Might work if it was majority/minority leaders, or maybe just anyone in congress.

Count to 10 on February 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

The precise language of that amendment would require hard thought; draft it too loosely and the executive branch will be sued for every move it makes, whether clearly constitutional or not.

Part of me wants to say “what would be wrong with that?”

Obama deserves a taste of what he and his people gave Palin up in Alaska. I’d love to see how he likes.

steebo77 on February 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Who’s to say Obama leaves office?

theotherone on February 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM

Obama will leave office. Even he can’t be delusional and narcissistic enough to believe that a majority of the country will stand for him going full Palpatine on us. But he can also set the stage for his “legacy” to never be undone.

Doughboy on February 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Agreed; the time for impeachment is at hand. Wonder if they’re hoping for reinforcements in the House before they try it, though. I don’t expect Boehner and the present crew to have the Malkins for it. But at the stage we are now, it’s the right thing to do. This lawlessness must not stand and should not, before Obama does something so egregious as to complete the fulfillment of his promise to “fundamentally transform” the U.S.

theotherone on February 13, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Wont happen, simply because, like with Clinton, there are enough corrupt Democrats in the Senate to block the 2/3 vote, and enough squishy Republicans to keep it from even getting a majority once blocked.

Count to 10 on February 13, 2014 at 11:59 AM

The problem with impeachment is that it is so extreme as to preclude its use in all but the most extreme circumstances.

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:37 AM

The problem with impeachment is that in order for it to be affective, there must be people with ethics and integrity in the congress. Virtually all of the senate demorats and too many of the senate republiconartists do not even know how to spell those words, let alone have even the faintest grasp as to their meaning!

r27cj on February 13, 2014 at 11:59 AM

King Putt secured for himself Impeachment Proceedings Protection Insurance when he (his handlers actually) selected Joke Biden as his VP running mate.

Missilengr on February 13, 2014 at 11:54 AM

I’m sorry, maybe I just don’t fear the Biden as much as I should, but I don’t. Joe Biden is mean and stupid, but I haven’t seen any propensity towards Stalinism. But maybe that’s just me.

theotherone on February 13, 2014 at 11:59 AM

Let’s use O’Bama’s own words against him, shall we? From November of 2013:

Responding to one donor who repeatedly shouted “executive order” during his remarks, according to a White House pool report, Obama said “that’s not how it works.”

“Somebody keeps on yelling, ‘executive order,’ ” Obama said in the 23-minute long remarks, before a crowd that included California Democratic Reps. Mike Honda, Eric Swalwell and Barbara Lee. “I’m going to actually pause on this issue because a lot of people have been saying this lately on every problem, which is just, ‘Sign an executive order and we can pretty much do anything and basically nullify Congress.’ ”

The crowd responded with applause at the topic. But Obama sought to quiet the auditorium of donors.

“Wait, wait, wait. Before everybody starts clapping, that’s not how it works,” Obama began. “We’ve got this Constitution, we’ve got this whole thing about separation of powers. So there is no short-cut to politics, and there’s no short-cut to democracy.

“What we have to do is keep on going, keep on pushing, and eventually we move in a better direction,” he said.

Del Dolemonte on February 13, 2014 at 12:00 PM

If Obama were to outrright ignore a direct Supreme Court ruling, then the path to impeachment would suddenly become easy.

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:55 AM

How quaint. I’m not knocking you but I don’t think bambi could do ANYTHING that the dumbmasses would deem worthy of impeachment.

VegasRick on February 13, 2014 at 12:00 PM

I don’t know why this is a surprise to Turley. This is not your parents’ Democratic Party. Democrats in the John F. Kennedy tradition were proud patriots. By contrast, modern Democrats don’t believe in America or its institutions. To them, the Constitution is just an impediment to government-provided utopia in which the hegemony of white males over everyone else will finally come to an end. I have been waiting for Americans to wake up to what the Democratic Party has become, but at this point I doubt they ever will – at least to the extent that would be necessary to undo the damage that has been done. We had a great run of 200+ years, but I fear our time as a great nation is coming to an end.

Little Napoleon on February 13, 2014 at 12:00 PM

The degree of his tyranny is not great enough to produce a successful impeachment,

barky committed enough crimes during the 2008 campaign to be thrown out (aside from hsi ineligibility). He surpassed the Watergate slush fund by orders of magnitude with his intentional turning off of the AVS on the campaign donation site. He broke every law in the book and all reason when he held the largest political rally of the campaign in a friggin foreign nation for foreigners, paid in part by a foreign government, complete with pamphlets with his campaign logo printed on them. I mean, what did people need? That Berlin rally was illegal and about the most repulsive political act in all of American history. His campaing lied about a million bucks that went to the criminal ACORN GOTV, calling them “lighting expenses”. And then, once he slimed into office he just got worse.

There were easily tens of different, clearly impeachable acts committed by Barky every single year. Over and over. It wasn’t a abig secret and each of them were worthy of impeachment. If the douchebag Dem senate wouldn’t convict, then fine. Impeach him again. There have been more than enough charges to keep impeaching the third world America-hater, at least tying him up a little bit and staving off some of his wanton destruction, if not getting the lowlife, treasonous criminal out of office and standing before a criminal trial.

and politically it would be disastrous. Have you seen any poll that says that the majority of the public favors impeachment?

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:52 AM

I don’t buy this “politically disastrous” line. It’s BS. The fact is that the GOP likely lost lots of votes because they have refused to even talk about impeaching this America-hating Sukarno-clone.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 12:00 PM

he was wrong to disrespect the President like that

he should’ve been forced to resign right then and there and hang his head in shame

nonpartisan on November 14, 2013 at 10:15 PM

Oh man. I definitely didn’t get my free iPhone. I had to buy mine. I will repeat myself, I will vote for a 3rd term Obama along with his republican ACA plan which I am not a fan of before I even think of pulling the lever for a pro tea party candidate.

loveofcountry on January 18, 2014 at 7:10 PM

nobar on February 13, 2014 at 12:01 PM

0b00ba grew up in Indonesia during this.

Akzed on February 13, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Beginning?

Wake up and smell the coffee, Turley. The cult of personality began with Obysmal’s original run for the presidency. Take a look at the unearned adulation of preezy by the media since then and throughout the soft interviews and press conferences. Scan the photograph archives of the administration’s tenure.

The media marketed the phony.

Where are the hard-hitting interviews and follow-up questions. Where are the demands for evidence of the made-from-gossamer statistics.

Podesta promised that Obysmal should be as outrageously audacious as he could. So far, Podesta’s formula is working.

onlineanalyst on February 13, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Congress is effectively powerless to stop the president from making the rules up as he goes along

No. They are not powerless. They don’t WANT to stop him. They 1) prefer the status quo (big government), 2) don’t want their fingerprints on anything (so push the rule-making burden to executive agencies), and 3) are afraid of losing their power and perks.

This is why a political (meaning some vote changes in Congress or a change of president) solution is not going to work. We need to start over (DoI), and exclude those portions of the country that don’t want to live in a free republic. So: L.I.B.

GWB on February 13, 2014 at 12:03 PM

An Article V Convention of the States would go a long way toward righting the ship of state. It would have the added benefit of not having to rely on the GOP in DC.

http://articlevcaucus.com

http://conventionofstates.com

Charlemagne on February 13, 2014 at 12:03 PM

No good options? Can the NSA read my mind too, if so I’m in trou……………………..

MontanaMmmm on February 13, 2014 at 12:03 PM

The entire ascension of president Obama to power was based on the cult of personality. His winning of the Nobel Peace Prize was based on the cult of personality. What was not based on the cult of personality since 2007?

ojfltx on February 13, 2014 at 12:04 PM

If Obama were to outrright ignore a direct Supreme Court ruling, then the path to impeachment would suddenly become easy.

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:55 AM

He already has. he even got a contempt citation once for doing it. The cite is framed and hanging over the Oval Office toilet.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 12:04 PM

At some point, they can’t fear the political backlash of such a move. There’s too much at stake. Obamacare is a disaster regardless of whether or not Obama keeps unilaterally altering the law. But what happens if he does decide to issue an executive order granting amnesty? What if Congress tries to cut off funds and he goes around them anyway? And what about the abuse of the bureaucracy like using the IRS and EPA to target business and individuals? We can’t survive another 3 years of this.

Doughboy on February 13, 2014 at 11:29 AM

That’s the whole point of what the Marxist in chief is doing. We are not suppose to survive this. He said he wanted to transform America and he is. Politics wont fix this. There will eventually be another a civil war and the longer before it happens the better equipped the left will be to possibly win it.

bgibbs1000 on February 13, 2014 at 12:05 PM

Obama will leave office. Even he can’t be delusional and narcissistic enough to believe that a majority of the country will stand for him going full Palpatine on us. But he can also set the stage for his “legacy” to never be undone.

Doughboy on February 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

He’s narcissistic and delusional enough to think what he’s doing now is perfectly fine and dandy. And if the Republicans take back the Senate, and win more seats in the House, I expect him to get a lot more delusional and narcissistic. Let me put it this way…do not delude yourself that he’s incapable of it. The left wanted so bad to believe Bush was capable of it–heck, I wasn’t even sure Billy Jeff would let go of the reigns when it was his time to go. But Bush was, deep down, a man of honor who had no other thought than to obey the law, and Billy Jeff had had his fun and was ready to move on. Obama is different. He has already been documented several times as lamenting the fact that he isn’t “king,” or “emperor” with unlimited power.

theotherone on February 13, 2014 at 12:05 PM

Of course, what Paul forgets to consider is that any SCOTUS ruling “limiting” O’bama’s lawlessness would just be ignored by O’bama anyway.

Del Dolemonte on February 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM

If Obama were to outrright ignore a direct Supreme Court ruling, then the path to impeachment would suddenly become easy.

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 11:55 AM

We may find that out sooner than you think.

O’bama made four recess appointments in January 2012, when the Senate was not in recess. Three courts have found that his appointments were unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court has agreed to take up the case.

In addition, the Constitution authorizes the President to propose and veto legislation. It does not authorize him to change existing laws. The changes O’bama ordered in Obamacare are thus unconstitutional.

And let’s not forget Stedman Holder. After the Supreme Court struck down the key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Holder announced that he would use other provisions of the act to get around the Court’s decision.

Del Dolemonte on February 13, 2014 at 12:06 PM

Here’s the Legislative Schedule.

Find out when your Representative is going to be in their home district. Burn up their phone lines and beat a path to the doors of their offices. If there’s a town-hall meeting, even better. Demand an answer from them on what they intend to do about Obama’s tyranny and let them know that what happened to the Dems in 2010 can also be applied to the Republicans if they continue to sit on their hands and let him completely ignore the Constitution.

Flora Duh on February 13, 2014 at 12:08 PM

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Are you saying that you believe an impeachment attempt would succeed in producing a conviction and result in removal from office?

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Precedents are being set that will be built on by future presidents of both parties;

squishy gop won’t let that happen….and/or the lsm and left will forget all about what obama has done for the last 8 years and feign surprise and outrage that a gop president would do such a thing….

cmsinaz on February 13, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Cult, hmm, are they going to drink the kool-aid soon?

jake49 on February 13, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Obama will leave office. Even he can’t be delusional and narcissistic enough to believe that a majority of the country will stand for him going full Palpatine on us. But he can also set the stage for his “legacy” to never be undone.

Doughboy on February 13, 2014 at 11:58 AM

He doesn’t need a majority. He only needs enough to make a significant portion of the rest sit on their hands. Remember – a huge portion of the voters in this country voted for Obama a second time.

GWB on February 13, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Cult, hmm, are they going to drink the kool-aid soon?

jake49 on February 13, 2014 at 12:08 PM

I’d pay. “The drinks are on me” for any scumbag democrap willing to drink the kool-aid.

VegasRick on February 13, 2014 at 12:10 PM

0b00ba grew up in Indonesia during this.

Akzed on February 13, 2014 at 12:01 PM

The Year of Living Dangerously is good documentary about the Indonesian that Barky grew up in – he got there a couple of years after the coup but with another dictator in power. Funny how they never really play that movie much since barky has come around …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 12:10 PM

Are you saying that you believe an impeachment attempt would succeed in producing a conviction and result in removal from office?

topdog on February 13, 2014 at 12:08 PM

I’m saying that it doesn’t matter. If the Senate won’t convict then impeach him on other charges. There are more than 70 major impeachable acts to bring in articles against him. Keep him tied up defending his tyranny instead of giving into it.

Impeachment is the RIGHT move, morally and legally. It also happened to have been the right move politically, as there would have been some chance to save the American Constitutonal Republic. It’s too late, now, though. At this point, there’s only national divorce left – because the treasonous cowards in the Vichy GOP never even talked about impeachment, let alone did it.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 12:12 PM

It starts with the media. Until that playing field is leveled out and the media starts doing their job, the democrats will keep winning the war.

MT on February 13, 2014 at 12:14 PM

beginning to border on a cult of personality

!!!!!!!

jake-the-goose on February 13, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Beginning!? It’s been that way since 2008.

The GOP should introduce a constitutional amendment broadening the legal parameters of standing so that citizens can sue the president for violating separation of powers.

Frankly, I think this would get more traction. Its being done already, so formalizing it should be a cinch. It’s sure to make the GOP ever so popular with the dems, since many are on board with making Bammy’s job easier by providing him with ready made EOs for him to sign.

hawkeye54 on February 13, 2014 at 12:14 PM

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 13, 2014 at 12:10 PM

Seriously, watch The Act of Killing.

He was there, and his mom was a Communist. His whole life is about revenge.

I dare say this was more motivational for him than D’Souza’s thesis, since Sr was obviously not even his father.

Akzed on February 13, 2014 at 12:14 PM

If Rand Paul and Ken Cuccinelli are bringing suit over NSA, why aren’t Mike Lee and Ted Cruz asking the court for an immediate injunction against Obamacare? 27 unconstitutional changes violate equal protection, it is confusing and harmful to the country. To me, it’s the same as ending the Bush/Gore recount.

monalisa on February 13, 2014 at 12:14 PM

Also, check this out if you haven’t already.

Akzed on February 13, 2014 at 12:16 PM

An Article V Convention of the States would go a long way toward righting the ship of state. It would have the added benefit of not having to rely on the GOP in DC.

http://articlevcaucus.com

http://conventionofstates.com

Charlemagne on February 13, 2014 at 12:03 PM

An Article V Convention is the worst thing that could possibly occur given the leftist bent of the media and who would actually attend the convention. Do we want the likes of Hillary Clinton et al rewriting the Constitution? I think not. I would much prefer to take my chances with a civil war.

bgibbs1000 on February 13, 2014 at 12:18 PM

And when the GOP takes over the Presidency and holds both chambers, we won’t see the same thing, because the media will puff itself up and threaten to hurl the most hateful political speech ever devised if they ever DARE to cross the liberal minority.

Then again, if the media is in such a weakened position of authority that they cannot protect their party from a red wave, then it’s entirely possible that a Republican president do the same thing Obama is doing now, and Republicans will be silent not just because we’ll agree with what he’s doing, but mostly because we’ll enjoy putting the boot that the left gave us on the squarely on its throat.

Enjoy the ride–it’s all downhill from here.

mintycrys on February 13, 2014 at 12:19 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3