More Cantor fallout: What happens to Obama’s executive order on deportations now?

posted at 3:31 pm on June 11, 2014 by Allahpundit

I’ve been trying to game this out since last night but can’t find an obvious answer. For the past six months, there’s been a sword hanging over the House GOP’s head on immigration. Amnesty fans have put intense pressure on Obama to act within his executive authority to further relax U.S. immigration law, as that’s the only way, they claim, he can shed himself of the phony but politically useful label of “deporter-in-chief.” So O’s going to appease them. At some point this summer, he’s promised them, he’ll issue an executive order that does … something. What, precisely, is unclear. He’s not going to issue a mass moratorium on deportations, as that would be too risky for Democrats facing voters in November, but he’s got to prove his good faith or else Democratic amnesty boosters might start folding their wallets and boycotting GOTV efforts this fall. Cleverly, though, O’s been using the prospect of that executive order as a spur to get House Republicans to pass something first. “If you don’t pander to Latino voters by enacting a legalization bill,” the White House has tacitly warned them, “Obama will pander to them himself by issuing a stay of some deportations. And then the GOP will be in an even deeper hole with Latinos than it already is.” In theory, the only reason he hasn’t issued the order yet is because he’s giving Boehner and company some extra time to act. Chuck Schumer, in fact, said explicitly a few weeks ago that Republicans have until the August recess. If they haven’t passed a bill by then, Obama’s going to move.

My question is, what’s left of that timeline now that Cantor’s been cashiered? The whole point of waiting until August was that Democrats thought there was a slim chance Boehner would bite the bullet and bring something to the floor this summer. No one thinks he’ll do that now, so there’s no longer any reason to wait. Obama could march into the White House briefing room this afternoon, declare that it’s now painfully clear that the Speaker is a hostage of the tea-party terrorists who have taken over the GOP, and therefore nothing will pass this summer. As such, his executive order will issue immediately. Moving quickly would a nice bit of showmanship for Latino voters in contrasting bold Democratic action in favor of illegals with bold Republican action against amnesty in Cantor’s district last night. But … Obama doesn’t dare do that, does he? Last night’s earthquake in VA-7 was so huge, I wonder if even some congressional Democrats are worried about aftershocks. They’re not going to lose any primaries over backing immigration reform, but it’s hard to say what sort of spark in GOP turnout this fall a bold unilateral move from Obama might strike. And if I’m right that Cantor ended up drowning in all the news lately about young illegals flowing past the Texas border, right now would be an especially risky moment for O to act. He needs to wait, at least, until that situation is under control before relaxing the deportation rules. If he doesn’t and illegals keep coming, it’ll be easy for the GOP to blame his policies, going back to his de facto “DACA” amnesty for DREAMers in 2012, for igniting a new explosion in illegal immigration. He’s got to lie low for a while after a 10.0 political temblor.

He can’t get away with postponing the executive order until next year, though. He’s taken lots of flak from immigration activists about twiddling his thumbs while Boehner tries to work up the nerve to float a bill. Some of them are treating his willingness to act as a litmus test of how sincerely he cares about the issue. And who can blame them, really? In his first term, when he had filibuster-proof Democratic majorities in Congress, he passed a giant stimulus and a landmark health-care reform bill and … nothing on amnesty. Since then, he’s taken dubious executive action on all sorts of policies — ObamaCare implementation, foreign interventions, trading away terrorists for an accused deserter without so much as giving Congress a heads up. Again, nothing on amnesty. He did issue that DACA order two years ago, but that occurred before all the movement in Congress in 2013-14 on immigration. He’s done next to nothing for liberal amnesty fans since then. If he runs away in terror at the sight of Cantor getting blown out of the water, some of them might boycott the midterms, and suddenly the GOP’s looking at an even bigger night than everyone expects. He’s got to act.

So, when? When is the least damaging moment politically for Obama to make this now inevitable move? My best guess is that he’s going to stick to the original timeline of doing it during the August recess. If he does it later than that, it increases the odds that this’ll matter to America’s midterm vote. If he does it before then, he’s got the optics problem of young illegals surging into Texas just as the order’s being issued plus he eliminates any remaining chance (which is, admittedly, remote) that Boehner will decide this month that he wants to retire anyway and therefore fully intends to pass an amnesty bill in July with mostly Democratic support. But maybe I’m missing something. Is O better off doing this sooner or later?


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

The King doesn’t care what the peasants think. He’s part of the literati.

Oil Can on June 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Hopefully it will lead to impeachment and conviction for treason.

Flange on June 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM

Clinton Obama: Brat ran against immigrants

He will steal this line.

Fallon on June 11, 2014 at 3:35 PM

obama will learn that the Reagan Democrats and the middle class are very hurt by his actions/inactions, based on his naked partisanship.

They will politically pitchfork anyone, from the left to the right.

It’s why last night is such a seismic shift. It’s the shot which was heard/felt instantly.

It’s not about Brat. It’s about America.

The people woke up and they’re in pain. God help all the thugs, from both sides.

Schadenfreude on June 11, 2014 at 3:36 PM

Cantor has nothing to lose now. I would not be surprised if he tries to move his KIDS Act before August recess as a parting shot.

Hopefully, others will worry about the fallout from such a move, though.

jffree1 on June 11, 2014 at 3:37 PM

More Cantor fallout: What happens to Obama’s executive order on deportations now?

…we treat them all like we did Elian Gonzalez!

KOOLAID2 on June 11, 2014 at 3:37 PM

In short, Cantor seemed more focused on the second and third goals of a politician — power and policy — to the detriment of the first. I am guessing he didn’t realize he might have a problem until he was booed at a district meeting a month ago. If he’d run scared, the result might well have been different. But he didn’t, and he lost. This is really the big-picture message for GOP incumbents. You don’t have to remake yourself into a Tea Partier. But you do have to care.

Schadenfreude on June 11, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Why would a loser ‘throwing his support’ behind anyone be relevant?

HopeHeFails on June 11, 2014 at 3:39 PM

Elites Beware: Eric Cantor’s Defeat May Signal a Populist Revolution
Democrats and Republicans need to ask themselves:‘What side of the barricades am I on?

Schadenfreude on June 11, 2014 at 3:39 PM

What we need is a poll…..

d1carter on June 11, 2014 at 3:39 PM

How about never. If it’s as bad as rumoured in the kiddy concentration camps; news that the lsm can’t ignore such as rapes, hospitalization due to once extinct diseases and even a death or two due to violence, the stuff will hit the fan big time. Count it. It’s just a matter of time before it blows.

AH_C on June 11, 2014 at 3:40 PM

Sorry, what do you think that a rundown rural town in Arkansas with a Walmart exactly is? High society?

Illinidiva on June 11, 2014 at 3:15 PM

Does everybody poop?

libfreeordie on June 11, 2014 at 9:23 AM

Ladies and gents, the RINO/D-latrine-rats in all their glory.

Schadenfreude on June 11, 2014 at 3:41 PM

You want a scenario? Here’s a scenario:

Let’s look down the road a bit from here. We know that President Obama is enamored of executive power. He said on climate change that he wouldn’t wait on Congress, and we saw last week his bold use of the Clean Air Act to impose a regulatory scheme that Congress would never pass. He’s said much the same thing about immigration. So what might he do?

How about this: after the election next fall, especially if the GOP takes the Senate and with an eye to the 2016 election prospects for Democrats, Obama might well decide to use his pardon power to grant a blanket pardon to all illegal aliens presently in the United States. This would not, strictly speaking, be a legal abuse; the president’s pardon power is unconditional in the Constitution. But you can imagine the firestorm it would generate.

What would be the remedy? Impeachment. No one really has the stomach for a repeat of the Clinton impeachment debacle, but I wonder if Obama wouldn’t welcome such a confrontation. It would get the Left riled up for 2016. I think the odds of a blanket amnesty-by-pardon are much better than people think. Some enterprising reporter ought to ask about this at a White House press conference some time soon.

Mr. D on June 11, 2014 at 3:41 PM

Later, I think. The Democrats are more in need of energizing than the Republicans are, plus doing it now will have Republicans crying foul about broken promises and all that. Wait till August and he can blame it on Republican inaction, etc.

LukeinNE on June 11, 2014 at 3:42 PM

Dick Durbin has taken to the Senate floor TWICE today that I caught to rail against the fact that “Immigration Reform” has not been brought up by the House.

CoffeeLover on June 11, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Cantor has nothing to lose now. I would not be surprised if he tries to move his KIDS Act before August recess as a parting shot.

Hopefully, others will worry about the fallout from such a move, though.

jffree1 on June 11, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Cantor may not have anything to lose, but a whole heck of a lot of other Congress members do…..
Immigration is just one part of all of this.

Cantor will no doubt go to work for the Chamber of Commerce to push immigration from that end.

Obama will have no cover for anything for the rest of his time as President…..

No impeachment – let’s let him screw up as much as possible so the dems and RINO’s pay a heavy price……

Soon the democrats will be calling for impeachment. They know now that Obama is their biggest liability.

redguy on June 11, 2014 at 3:44 PM

I’ve been trying to game this out since last night but can’t find an obvious answer.

But I’ll bet you’re nervous that what you secretly want to have happen will…happen!

xNavigator on June 11, 2014 at 3:44 PM

He needs to wait, at least, until that situation is under control before relaxing the deportation rules.

Uh, how much further do you think he can “relax” deportations that aren’t happening anyway?

ICE isn’t deporting anybody other than violent felons now — and even some of the violent felons aren’t being deported. Just last month ICE released over 25,000 convicted criminal illegal aliens, some of whom had been convicted of violent felonies, back into the U.S., rather than deporting them.

So what is Obama going to do? Announce that no more violent felon illegal aliens will be deported? Invite thousands more illegal aliens to come here? (oh wait, he’s already doing that).

AZCoyote on June 11, 2014 at 3:44 PM

AH_C on June 11, 2014 at 3:40 PM

That’s my thinking. It’s a volatile disaster in the making.

INC on June 11, 2014 at 3:45 PM

Cantor is probably cutting deals to become a lobbyist in part to recoup the $ 2M loot he blasted to maintain business as usual.

So he’ll pull a Trent Lott, leave a FUBARed mess then try to score more loot as a lobbyist.

viking01 on June 11, 2014 at 3:45 PM

If he runs away in terror at the sight of Cantor getting blown out of the water, some of them might boycott the midterms, and suddenly the GOP’s looking at an even bigger night than everyone expects. He’s got to act.


HORSESHITE!

The Latino vote is ~ 10% of the total electorate.

Among Latino voters, this is only rated as a priority by 36% of them.

Among ALL voters, “immigration reform” is only listed as a priority by 7%

Cantor lost by over 10% with a 50% increase in voter turnout.

If Obama takes executive action – he will only make things WORSE for the Democrats.

PolAgnostic on June 11, 2014 at 3:45 PM

Let him try, then impeach him immediately. No hesitation GOP. You go big or go home like Cantor. Defeated and humiliated by the base.

HotAirian on June 11, 2014 at 3:46 PM

One of the thing Republicans, and especially Romney, failed to do was to make immigration and amnesty a major issue. I mean.. to push it. To run graphic ads, scare people, and scare people for good reason. Because that will win voters.

Instead, we tip toe around the issue, act embarrassed etc. The problem with that is we win nobody that wants amnesty, but also get nobody that doesn’t want amnesty. There are millions of independents and even Dems that horrified by what’s happening to our country. Start appealing to those voters. Start making amnesty an issue, no, not an issue, a BIG ISSUE. Don’t run away from standing up for the rule of law. If you try to play both sides of the issue, to satisfy the libs and the “Hispanic undocumented individuals” but also those that are against amnesty and secure borders, we lose. Stand steadfast. Period.

anotherJoe on June 11, 2014 at 3:46 PM

But I’ll bet you’re nervous that what you secretly want to have happen will…happen!

xNavigator on June 11, 2014 at 3:44 PM

AP is not an amnesty shill.

Bitter Clinger on June 11, 2014 at 3:46 PM

I don’t disagree that Obama will likely do something. But why is it assumed that this will energize his base for the midterms? Polling shows that even with Latinos, amnesty doesn’t really rate very high. And the optics could be horrible if at the same time he issues another executive order, we’ve got a humanitarian crisis occurring at the border.

Doughboy on June 11, 2014 at 3:47 PM

I do NOT fear Obama acting unilaterally on AMNESTY. Executive actions can be easily undone.

If Obama refuses to uphold the law, it is his party that will suffer and then he can explain to Team Hillary why he torpedoed her chances of ever becoming President.

The next President, hopefully a solid conservative, can undo most, if not all, of the mess Obama has done with respect to immigration.

But a Congressional action? That is a different kettle of fish.

TheRightMan on June 11, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Cantor has nothing to lose now. I would not be surprised if he tries to move his KIDS Act before August recess as a parting shot.

Hopefully, others will worry about the fallout from such a move, though.

jffree1 on June 11, 2014 at 3:37 PM

He has nothing to lose, but he doesn’t seem to be in the mood for burning bridges on his way out the door. He’s young enough, he’s almost certainly got his mind on a political comeback, lobbying job, or nice appointment in the next GOP administration. He’s resigning his leadership position, which looks to me like he plans to fade into the background for the term, not give the middle finger to his constituents.

LukeinNE on June 11, 2014 at 3:48 PM

Allah, I think you are making the mother of all assumptions: That Ogabe actually cares about his fellow Dems. He has demonstrated time and again — such as when his re-election campaign declined to share funds with Dem senators and Reps running for re-election or when he just shafted a bunch of coal state Dems with the recent EPA regs — that he is all about himself. The question you really need to ask is who will give him the most money after he leaves the White house — his fellows Dems or the crony capitalists he has enabled since the instant he was declared the victor in the election of 2008? Behind closed doors, Dems may rage and scream, but they’re not going to say or do anything in the open. Nope, the Chamber of Commerce, Mark Zuckerman, Warren Buffett, et al. have much, much deeper pockets than even the most corrupt Dem politician. Somebody has to keep Mooch in lobster.

catsandbooks on June 11, 2014 at 3:49 PM

The border is out of control and if Obama goes full bore on executive amnesty it is going to get much worse. This will swamp Democrats in the midterms, but The One probably doesn’t care because Congress wasn’t flipping over any way.

Wigglesworth on June 11, 2014 at 3:50 PM

Mr. D on June 11, 2014 at 3:41 PM

What would he pardon them of? I think the illegals are outside of what he can pardon because most of them have not charged with a crime. Also, if what they did is considered a crime in an individual state, he can’t pardon them.

ConservativePartyNow on June 11, 2014 at 3:50 PM

Let him try, then impeach him immediately. No hesitation GOP.

HotAirian on June 11, 2014 at 3:46 PM

I’m just about to the point to suggest that they ban people talking about impeachment.

You are not very bright.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 3:51 PM

I wonder if even some congressional Democrats are worried about aftershocks.

I would think the answer is yes. It was simply too big for Dem’s to not think twice about oh, I don’t know,

lowering the standard of living of Americans through low wage labor,

not helping increase the 63% labor participation rate (lowest in over 30 years),

increasing the deficit by granting all kinds of benefits to illegal immigrants,

not only not increasing boarder security but openly defy our current laws intentionally let them get more porous,
and ignoring the millions of immigrants who did it the right way and the legal way, waiting in line for their chance to come to America and become a citizen.

WisRich on June 11, 2014 at 3:52 PM

I’m not convinced that another executive order on illegals is necessarily forthcoming. We’ve got what’s being referred to as “a humanitarian crisis” with unaccompanied children flooding over the southern border, and that’s got Barack Obama’s name all over it in big, neon lights. If it weren’t for Obama’s EO refusing deportation on young illegals, we wouldn’t be seeing the problem we’re seeing right now. Even Democrats have to get squeamish at the prospect of voters making the connection.

Murf76 on June 11, 2014 at 3:52 PM

Schadenfreude on June 11, 2014 at 3:39 PM

From your link:

In Washington, Cantor’s defeat is being chalked up to the tea party’s intolerance toward immigration reform. While he paid a price for flirting with a White House compromise, Cantor’s greater sin was inauthenticity—brazenly flip-flopping on the issue. Typical politician. Worse, voters sensed that Cantor was more interested in becoming House speaker than in representing their interests. He spent more money at steakhouses than rival David Brat spent on his entire campaign. Typical politician.

Inauthenticity? What a nice euphemism for lying. In any other business except politics, if an employee lied and underhandedly worked for the competition against his employer’s interests, at best he would be fired and at worst taken to court.

INC on June 11, 2014 at 3:53 PM

How do you pardon someone that you can’t individually name?

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 3:53 PM

I’m just about to the point to suggest that they ban people talking about impeachment.

You are not very bright.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 3:51 PM

What is NOT bright about advocating for Obama’s impeachment?

Were it not for his skin color and party affiliation, he would have been thrown out on his bum a long time ago.

TheRightMan on June 11, 2014 at 3:54 PM

Brat is adored by his students.

Schadenfreude on June 11, 2014 at 3:55 PM

I’m just about to the point to suggest that they ban people talking about impeachment.

You are not very bright.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 3:51 PM

You have an opinion with a value no less nor greater than mine. Deal with it.

HotAirian on June 11, 2014 at 3:56 PM

And if I’m right that Cantor ended up drowning in all the news lately about young illegals flowing past the Texas border, right now would be an especially risky moment for O to act. He needs to wait, at least, until that situation is under control before relaxing the deportation rules. If he doesn’t and illegals keep coming…

Whaaat?! I thought the border was secured already. The Democrats wouldn’t lie to us so blatantly, would they? Oh right…

rcpjr on June 11, 2014 at 3:57 PM

Treasonous Obama should be removed.

If the military does that I’m okay with it.

viking01 on June 11, 2014 at 3:58 PM

Obama could march into the White House briefing room this afternoon, declare that it’s now painfully clear that the Speaker is a hostage of the tea-party terrorists who have taken over the GOP, and therefore nothing will pass this summer. As such, his executive order will issue immediately. Moving quickly would a nice bit of showmanship for Latino voters in contrasting bold Democratic action in favor of illegals with bold Republican action against amnesty in Cantor’s district last night.

He can’t do that until December. If he does it before the election the House and Senate will stay Red for the foreseeable future.

Johnnyreb on June 11, 2014 at 3:59 PM

I do NOT fear Obama acting unilaterally on AMNESTY. Executive actions can be easily undone.

If Obama refuses to uphold the law, it is his party that will suffer and then he can explain to Team Hillary why he torpedoed her chances of ever becoming President.

The next President, hopefully a solid conservative, can undo most, if not all, of the mess Obama has done with respect to immigration.

But a Congressional action? That is a different kettle of fish.

TheRightMan on June 11, 2014 at 3:47 PM

That’s almost my exact stance. The bottom line is Obama isn’t going to be able to give them the vote with executive order, and he knows it. That’s what the Democrats really need, but they don’t have the power to make it stick and would likely face actual revolt from the red states if Obama did this.

So let him order what he likes. It can always be undone later. The important thing is to keep illegals from gaining citizenship/the vote. That CAN’T be undone.

Doomberg on June 11, 2014 at 3:59 PM

Obama has never really cared much for how his actions affect his fellow Democrats, only how they affect himself, so I expect an executive order to come soon.

blue13326 on June 11, 2014 at 4:02 PM

Amnesty, and at that time, gay marriage also, those were the two issues we could have won on in 2012. But Romney et al ran from those issue, and tried sweep them under the rug.

I don’t know about gay marriage anymore, but I do know we can still win on a platform against amnesty.

Last night, even the big amnesty shill Brit Hume said that Hispanics make up only 10% of the population, and if we increased our share of Hispanics by 10%, that would only mean a fraction of 10% in additional votes. No, a couple points added to our white vote would be scores of times more valuable than a marginal increase in the Hispanic vote.

Millions upon millions of Reagan Dems and independents are shocked by “our” country being inundated and soon merged with the Latino countries. We can appeal to these voters, AND WIN.

But we have to be aggressive and go against the grain of insidious political correctness and make the immigration issue a primary issue. Try to sweep the amnesty issue under the rug and these Reagan Dems and independents will vote on other issues that don’t favor us. We either have to get loud about the outrage that is happening to our country, or forget it, we aren’t going to win. Because we are not going to win in 2016 by making the election about “the economy, stupid.” Nor on Obamacare I’m afraid. Obamacare will help us, but it won’t be enough. We have to get a strong stomach and stop being so timid, and stand up and face down this unparallelled invasion of aliens that will literally destroy our country.

anotherJoe on June 11, 2014 at 4:02 PM

What is NOT bright about advocating for Obama’s impeachment?

TheRightMan on June 11, 2014 at 3:54 PM

You think the GOP would actually remove him from office?

Then what? We would be the party that evicted the first black president.

Anyone thinking about impeachment is either bat-sh*t insane or a troll. Which are you?

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Let’s look down the road a bit from here. We know that President Obama is enamored of executive power. He said on climate change that he wouldn’t wait on Congress, and we saw last week his bold use of the Clean Air Act to impose a regulatory scheme that Congress would never pass. He’s said much the same thing about immigration. So what might he do?

How about this: after the election next fall, especially if the GOP takes the Senate and with an eye to the 2016 election prospects for Democrats, Obama might well decide to use his pardon power to grant a blanket pardon to all illegal aliens presently in the United States. This would not, strictly speaking, be a legal abuse; the president’s pardon power is unconditional in the Constitution. But you can imagine the firestorm it would generate.

What would be the remedy? Impeachment. No one really has the stomach for a repeat of the Clinton impeachment debacle, but I wonder if Obama wouldn’t welcome such a confrontation. It would get the Left riled up for 2016. I think the odds of a blanket amnesty-by-pardon are much better than people think. Some enterprising reporter ought to ask about this at a White House press conference some time soon.

Wont work, each person who desires to receive a pardon must submit a Pardon Application and each Pardon must be approved individually by the President. I am not 100% positive, but I do not think there is a “mass pardon” option in the constitution.

Johnnyreb on June 11, 2014 at 4:04 PM

Rush is predicting today that the GOP House leadership will soon move an immigration bill. The Cantor loss won’t stop them, as donors are intent.

MTF on June 11, 2014 at 4:04 PM

The better question is what rabbit will The One pull out of his hat to deflect from an executive order regarding immigration? It would have to be a beauty, like maybe he’ll announce that the US is breaking diplomatic ties with Israel because of their being an “Aparthied State!”

Deano1952 on June 11, 2014 at 4:05 PM

I think Obama is screwing around with a live grenade on this. I think Chuck Todd was right in the Rothman piece that immigration is going to be a no go while the economy sucks. Things are bad enough without importing more cheap labor. I also think the polls are skewed on the issue because folks don’t want pollsters to think they are bigots so they say sure they support immigration reform.

Southernblogger on June 11, 2014 at 4:10 PM

OT: Major gaffe from Clinton in Chicago. Says Lincoln was senator from IL

ConservativePartyNow on June 11, 2014 at 3:51 PM

Hillary grew up in a Chicago suburb. She should know better!

INC on June 11, 2014 at 4:11 PM

Dick Durbin has taken to the Senate floor TWICE today that I caught to rail against the fact that “Immigration Reform” has not been brought up by the House.

CoffeeLover on June 11, 2014 at 3:43 PM

ROTFLMAO @ Dick Turbin

It’s slipping away you putz.

ElectricPhase on June 11, 2014 at 4:12 PM

Impeachment debates aside.

Obama is a traitor unfit for office.

The continuance of his preznitcy is a cancer which will only infect, grow and further destroy.

viking01 on June 11, 2014 at 4:12 PM

DC(To include most Republican’s) is just allowing more of their Homeland troops to move further north. Nothing more, nothing less.

Mr. Arrogant on June 11, 2014 at 4:13 PM

You think the GOP would actually remove him from office?

Then what? We would be the party that evicted the first black president.

Anyone thinking about impeachment is either bat-sh*t insane or a troll. Which are you?

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:03 PM

I never figured you as falling for identity politics.

Bitter Clinger on June 11, 2014 at 4:14 PM

I never figured you as falling for identity politics.

Bitter Clinger on June 11, 2014 at 4:14 PM

Think of it as bad branding. We could rename the party to the We Hate Black People Party and be better off.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:16 PM

If the GOPe does amnesty, they will be responsible for the end of the GOP and not long after that, America.

Meople on June 11, 2014 at 4:18 PM

But a Congressional action? That is a different kettle of fish.

TheRightMan on June 11, 2014 at 3:47 PM

This. Congressional action is settled law, when enacted.

Oboobi can EO all the day long and it won’t have the impact of settled law. If anything, it would be great if a new POTUS that truly thot EOs to be bad form just went down the line vacating every EO that masqueraded as law. Then people will get the object lessons that EOs mean squat only as long as there is a CEO willing to sustain it. There are few EOs that are useful, but as weilded by Dubya & Oboobie, not worth the paper they were written on.

AH_C on June 11, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Since most of the “deportations” actually happen at the border, any relaxation and lessening of the numbers would probably mean no effective border enforcement. Imagine the hordes that would be soon flowing over the border. The optics on that would really do wonders at election time. I’m almost hoping that this is what actually happens. Great show and tell about why any reform has not been passed in that you can’t trust the Prez to enforce the laws he has sworn to uphold.

JohnnyL on June 11, 2014 at 4:23 PM

Think of it as bad branding. We could rename the party to the We Hate Black People Party and be better off.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:16 PM

Isn’t that kind of the foregone conclusion many already have of the GOP? It certainly is to the black community with 90-95% voting Democrat.

Bitter Clinger on June 11, 2014 at 4:24 PM

You think the GOP would actually remove him from office?

Then what? We would be the party that evicted the first black president.

Anyone thinking about impeachment is either bat-sh*t insane or a troll. Which are you?

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:03 PM

It’s fracking sad that we’ve come to the point where the BEST argument anyone can come up with for not throwing Talibama out of office is affirmative action. His race.

This nation is doomed.

Meople on June 11, 2014 at 4:26 PM

I do not think there is a “mass pardon” option in the constitution.

Johnnyreb on June 11, 2014 at 4:04 PM

There probably is such an option, since past presidents issued pardons for combatants in the Whiskey Rebellion, Civil War, and other armed conflicts in the U.S., without specifying each pardon recipient by name.

However, the presidential pardon power only covers people accused of “offenses against the United States”; it doesn’t cover civil infractions, and that is what most illegal aliens have committed with their illegal entries. So it probably wouldn’t work for them.

There is also the problem of a massive illegal alien presidential pardon infringing on congress’ constitutional powers. The SCOTUS usually doesn’t get involved in reviewing presidential pardons, but one like that might get their attention. In a case called Schick v. Reed (1974), Chief Justice Warren Burger suggested that the Court would restrain from reviewing presidential pardons under “conditions which do not in themselves offend the Constitution.” Since a mass pardon of illegal aliens would presumably offend the Constitution (by allowing the president to infringe a power which the Constitution specifically gave to congress) SCOTUS might not let it stand.

AZCoyote on June 11, 2014 at 4:26 PM

I’m guessing then it’s bat-sh*t crazy.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:27 PM

Obama’s plan is to create an immigration disaster so vast that the GOP will be forced to act to pass some form of ‘immigration reform’ legislation.

The real impetus of the plan is, not how advantageous that reform actually was for illegal aliens, but how advantageous it would be for Obama’s legacy.

When Obama entered the White House, his primary concern, and that of his inner circle, was always his own legacy as “The First African-American President”.

Obama and his inner circle, those who’ve been overseeing his administration and presidency from the inception of his first campaign for the presidency, have purposely directed a systematic failure of the federal immigration system, and encouraged the same sort of systematic failure within the states when ever possible.

The calculation being that the optics of this systematic failure would play into a storyline that Obama fought for 8 years to bring ‘Immigration Reform’ legislation to fruition.

He doesn’t care what that grand ‘Immigration Reform’ legislation looks like or how it really effects either illegal aliens or the nation. He cares only that he gets credit for its ultimate passage in the history books.

This is why he never touched amnesty when he could have done so in his first two years in office with a Democrat majority in congress. This is why all of his executive orders on the subject and his appointments of personnel in immigration or justice related agencies have been calculated to systematically destroy the immigration system.

The greater the ‘humanitarian crisis’ that could be caused by a sudden influx, particularly of ‘children’( persons under 18 years of age)before congress moves in any way to address ‘Immigration Reform’ legislation, regardless of the solution that congress ultimately chooses ( whether that solution is to grant a blanket amnesty, a partial amnesty, or return those ‘children’ to their nations of origin and then pass new immigration laws meant to fix the system and secure the border)the grander the optics with regard to Obama’s legacy since Obama would claim victory and seize credit for forcing a gridlocked congress to pass IMMIGRATION REFORM LEGISLATION.

Obama is moving, regardless of the impact on human lives around the world, regardless of the impact to this nation, to close Guantanamo Bay because he said he would as a means of securing that legacy. He doesn’t care about the actual effect of releasing five of the worst terrorists we had at Guantanamo Bay back into the world or the effect of bringing home a deserter who had defected and joined the enemy in time of war. He cares about fluffing that legacy by being able to say he kept his promise to close Guantanamo Bay. Obama never cared about the impact of OBAMACARE on Americans whether that was in terms of their healthcare or the economic health of the nation. He didn’t even care what ended up in the legislation, how it was drafted or passed, or how it was implemented. He cared only that it was passed and implemented because it was central to his legacy. The same is true of IMMIGRATION REFORM. He doesn’t care about the cost to the people involved, whether they are illegal aliens or Americans. You will note that there is no problem with LEGAL IMMIGRATION. He cares about making illegal immigration appear to be a humanitarian crisis. He cares about adding that he forced congress to pass IMMIGRATION REFORM LEGISLATION to his legacy.

thatsafactjack on June 11, 2014 at 4:31 PM

Then what? We would be the party that evicted the first black president.

Anyone thinking about impeachment is either bat-sh*t insane or a troll. Which are you?

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Being neither insane nor a troll …

… I’ll just take the viewpoint you are blindly accepting the elites’ “conventional wisdom” with ZERO independent thought on your part.

Think of it as bad branding. We could rename the party to the We Hate Black People Party and be better off.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:16 PM


Which you confirmed in this most recent post.

Amnesty is NOT popular in the African American community … which is suffering more than the average American under Obama:

Black Civil Rights Commissioner Warns Congressional Black Caucus Against Support for Amnesty

Removing the protection of a future plea of ignorance, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Commissioner Peter Kirsanow sent a letter to the Congressional Black Caucus last Tuesday, outlining the impact amnesty will have on black Americans.

His effort gives them a clear choice; they can support a destructive policy of the administration which will devastate their constituents and fellow black Americans, or they can do the job they were elected to do and represent the people.

The letter was not from the Civil Rights Commission but from Kirsanow individually and addressed to Rep. Marcia Fudge (R-OH). It stated in no uncertain terms that amnesty would “disproportionately harm lower-skilled African-Americans.”

He implored the CBC members to “oppose any legislation that would grant any form of work authorization to illegal aliens” and “oppose legislation that would increase the overall number of guest workers admitted to the U.S. each year.”

Kirsanow wrote, “The obvious question is whether there are sufficient jobs in the low-skilled labor market for both African-Americans and illegal immigrants. The answer is no.”


Hmmmmmm
… so much for the “We Hate Black People Party” meme.

Clinton’s impeachment was NOT a debacle for the Republicans in following elections. If you don’t believe me, just ask President Gore. Or all the Democrats that DIDN’T win in 2004 or 2008.

In light of Cantor’s defeat, especially given the bi-partisan ANGER against a President who is IGNORING the law …

Impeaching the President would push Democrats running for re-election to defend “More of the Same” (would you want to defend ANY part of Obama’s record?) or “Time for a Change”.

It does not matter whether the Senate would convict him or not …

… it is important to PROVE to a pissed off electorate that SOMEBODY is listening.

PolAgnostic on June 11, 2014 at 4:34 PM

but how advantageous it would be for Obama’s legacy.

His “legacy” is already crap. I can’t believe they still believe they can salvage this disaster. It would be like trying to raise and rebuild the Titanic. Actually, that may be easier!!

Deano1952 on June 11, 2014 at 4:35 PM

I’m guessing then it’s bat-sh*t crazy.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:27 PM

Don’t get me wrong. From the perspective of actully removing Obama from office, it is crazy because that part would never happen.

From the perspective of impeaching him on principle (and letting the historical record reflect that he was held accountable for continually breaking/ignoring the law), it makes some sense.

Bitter Clinger on June 11, 2014 at 4:35 PM

Wait until the Children’s Crusade starts producing kids sold into sex slavery, dragooned into gangs, murdered, killed trying to rob people, etc.

Like everything else the Choom Gang does, this will blow up.

Those photos weren’t supposed to be seen, after all.

formwiz on June 11, 2014 at 4:40 PM

Why are we working under the assumption that Obama is, at this point, interested in working with Republicans on immigration and that he’s somehow afraid of what will happen to a few dems in reddish districts?

chris0christies0donut on June 11, 2014 at 4:48 PM

I had rather have 2 years of Obama looking like a fool as President, than us looking like a fool for eternity.

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:49 PM

AH_C on June 11, 2014 at 3:40 PM

INC on June 11, 2014 at 3:45 PM

If disaster hits inside these camps they have set up for these “children”, how would we know? I’m not sure they would tell the public about it.

Except in the case of epidemic…then, they wouldn’t have a choice.

lineholder on June 11, 2014 at 5:00 PM

You think the GOP would actually remove him from office?

Then what? We would be the party that evicted the first black president.

Anyone thinking about impeachment is either bat-sh*t insane or a troll. Which are you?

faraway on June 11, 2014 at 4:03 PM

Insane or a troll?

Congratulations on your excellent use of a false dilemma. Perhaps you should actually read the Constitution. What is impeachment for exactly?

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The Constitution, Article I, Section 3:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachments shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishment, according to Law.

Funny, I see no mention that Congress should first weigh any political fallout when making the determination to impeach or not. I also see no mention of the race of the President mentioned! Please enlighten me.

You can disagree with Impeachment or not, but your false dilemma’s are childish and lib-like.

BierManVA on June 11, 2014 at 5:07 PM

Defeating Eric Cantor was a good first step. And we need to continue to clean the Amnesty supporters out of the Republican Party.

But to make it perfectly clear that Americans want their laws against ILLEGAL immigration to be enforced, it is time for DEMOCRATS to start cleaning Amnesty supporters out in Democrat Primary Elections.

If Democrats don’t rid their party of Amnesty supporters, then we can conclude that the Democrat Party is IN FAVOR of the U.S. being INVADED by ILLEGAL aliens who have demonstrated their complete contempt for U.S. laws.

wren on June 11, 2014 at 5:08 PM

I think he wait until after the midterms are over and then act during the lame duck session. In the meantime, he will shift the focus to vilifying the Republicans for not acting at all, in the hope that it will tweak Latino, young and liberal turnout. At least enough to save a few Dem hides in November. For Obama, this issue has always been about votes, not about policy or sympathy for long-resident illegals.

Esaus Message on June 11, 2014 at 5:09 PM

But maybe I’m missing something. Is O better off doing this sooner or later?

Dropping in at the bottom so please excuse me if someone already made this point.

If people south of the border continue to believe there is a possibility that Obama will legalize the presence of children who have crossed the border illegally, they will continue to send their children across the border. The present situation is that newspapers in Central America are encouraging them to believe just that.

If this flood of children crossing the border illegally continues, there will be mounting anger over failure to control the border and massive opposition to altering immigration law by presidential edict.

This situation could get out of hand in a hurry. They already have far more children in custody than they can effectively protect and sustain, and the numbers crossing the border are increasing exponentially. If it becomes a humanitarian disaster involving large numbers of children, it’s also political dynamite.

He’s already pulled one stunt with the Taliban 5 he knew would face massive opposition by doing it illegally behind our backs and announcing it as a fait accompli. He’s taking a beating for it, and an unanticipated one at that. If he’s looking at hard public disapproval on the issue (say 60% disapproval) and hard public opposition (60%) to granting amnesty “for the children” does he dare defy public sentiment again, and this time do it in our faces?

novaculus on June 11, 2014 at 5:23 PM