Palin makes the case for impeaching Obama

posted at 5:21 pm on July 11, 2014 by Allahpundit

Her op-ed earlier this week focused on immigration. Today’s op-ed is a more comprehensive indictment, starting with the case that “high crimes and misdemeanors” includes dereliction of duty, not just statutory crimes.

I want to quote this part:

Impeachment is the ultimate check on an out-of-control executive branch. It is serious, not to be used for petty partisan purposes; and it is imperative that it becomes a matter of legitimate discussion before the American people lose all trust in our federal government.

Impeachment requires moral courage to advance what is right, and it requires political will. A complacent or disheartened electorate may silently endure these abuses from the administration, the permanent political class is only too happy to maintain the status quo, and the mainstream media is not a fair watchdog. So, the nation’s last line of defense is for We the People to rise up and say, “enough is enough.”

Some argue that at best the House might vote for articles of impeachment, but the Senate is unlikely to convict. But that is no argument against holding a president accountable and sending the people’s message to all successors

The only thing necessary to transform America into something unrecognizable is for good men to do nothing! If not these violations and the president’s promise to continue to “go it alone” in ignoring the separation of powers and rule of law, what will it take for you to take a stand? How bad does it have to get?

Ultimately, she’s saying, this all comes down to public outrage, which is exactly right — but that’s why there’s going to be no impeachment. Right? If the wider public shared her many objections to Obama — power grabs, amnesty, ObamaCare, NSA spying, Benghazi, the Bergdahl prisoner swap — his job approval would be in single digits. As it is, he’s at 41 percent, which is poor but not nearly so atrociously bad that any congressional Democrats would feel compelled to remove him from office. Even among the 54-55 percent who disapprove of his job performance, there are bound to be loads of people who think that he’s guilty of nothing more than incompetence, not dereliction of duty worthy of the first successful forcible ouster of the president in American history. I haven’t seen any polls on impeachment lately, but I’d guess that impeachment supporters would start with something like 55-60 percent of the public opposed (all Democrats and a majority of indies) and 40 percent or so in favor (most Republicans). Once the media went to work on “GOP extremism,” Democrats started rolling out talking points about how the “party of no” isn’t interested in real solutions for the middle class, and a few centrist Republicans in Congress publicly expressed opposition, it’d probably move another 10 points against. What then?

Rick Wilson wrote a post for Ricochet yesterday about the impossible politics of steering impeachment through Congress:

Give me your elevator pitch, not for impeachment qua impeachment, but for how the story plays out from the announcement to Obama mounting the steps of Marine One and flashing a Nixonian farewell salute. What’s your Day One communication strategy when we begin impeachment proceedings? What’s the Day Two strategy? What’s the strategy after the first week? Who are the legislative handlers? Who are the key faces for the media? What’s the timetable, the media plan, the surrogate plan…all the boring block-and-tackle stuff? What happens when your rock-solid arguments melt under legal challenges from every quarter?

Did you remember there are other players in this game? Did you forget that the American people are notoriously fickle? Did you forget that the media still yields a mighty power to misrepresent, to distort, and to flat-out lie about what you’re trying to accomplish? What happens when this raises $50 million in online donation for the bad guys? What happens when they start dropping oppo like nukes on every member of the impeachment committee? What happens when Americans who are bored and restless decide you’re not talking about their lives, but just playing inside Washington games? What happens to the message strategy of every GOP House, Senate, and Governor candidate in the country? What happens when this doesn’t turn bring the White House to heel but instead becomes the only rallying cry that could wake Democrats from their post-Obama, post-Obamacare funk? What happens when Harry Reid slits your throat by not allowing the Senate to pass judgment.

All of which, again, is to say that Palin’s right — it’s the public that will determine whether impeachment is viable or not. What evidence do you have, though, that they think it’s viable? Outside of conservative media, who out there in the electorate is terribly exercised about Obama planning to unilaterally amnestize five million illegals once he’s busy shrugging off the current border crisis? Jonathan Turley seems pretty upset, and … that’s about it. The hard truth, I think, is that Americans don’t much care how the federal government operates as long as it gets them to an outcome they prefer. Raising the minimum wage is popular within the general electorate; if Obama issued an order tomorrow decreeing that that wage shall be raised, whether or not Congress approves, that’d be an egregious affront to separation of powers but even that probably wouldn’t inspire much outrage outside the right. Most voters would conclude that they like the outcome, so oh well. Whether that’s always been the case or is something new that’s developed, possibly (and ironically) as a reaction to growing cynicism about government, is beyond my reach. But it may be (also ironically) that our complacent political class, which Palin correctly identifies as being happy with the status quo, is nonetheless a better bet at this point to police itself on civic issues like separation of powers than the broader public is to police it. That’s the only reason I can think of for why Obama hasn’t (yet) issued the sort of minimum-wage order I just described. Maybe, for now, that’s a constitutional bridge too far even for him, although probably not for most of his voters. Gonna take a very high crime for Americans to ever support impeachment, I suspect, even as the weak norms against broad executive control of government continue to erode.

In related news, even some of the more solidly conservative members of the House see impeachment as an exercise in futility. Exit question: If I’m wrong about all this and the public is secretly ready to rally to the GOP’s side against O, then impeaching him would be a political winner even if Harry Reid blocks it in the Senate. Political parties usually rush to seize a political winner when they see it — and yet Republicans across the spectrum, from Boehner and McCain to Ted Cruz and Erick Erickson, seem reluctant to pursue this one. How come?


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 5

Move it to the left, now.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:24 PM

The only thing necessary to transform America into something unrecognizable is for good men to do nothing!

She said it all.

Herb on July 11, 2014 at 5:28 PM

/OT

lol Schad

Axe on July 11, 2014 at 5:28 PM

So sue him and impeach him…? It causes his NPD to act up….

d1carter on July 11, 2014 at 5:28 PM

“This means she’s running in 2016″ — the same gaggle

ok, ok, we’ve been on this road before. I actually like her, but not like you do.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:29 PM

Howdy Axe

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:29 PM

Ask the democrats.

When are they going to get their own house in order?

Why are they complicit in his lawlessness?

CurtZHP on July 11, 2014 at 5:30 PM

Damn those Congressmen and Senators who would not vote to convict an obviously derelict and treasonous president BECAUSE OF POLITICS!!! Damn them all.

otlset on July 11, 2014 at 5:30 PM

As much as I like Palin, she’s wrong here because the Senate under Harry Reid is essentially aiding and abetting Obama by stopping any reform.

Just as they prevent any law checking Obama’s actions to come to a vote on the Senate floor, a “Not Guilty” vote by every Democrat would be the outcome of an impeachment trial.

Until we see 20 Senate Democrats actively opposing Obama across multiple issues, talk of impeachment is foolish.

Reno_Dave on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

Palin > Cruz > Paul

Jedditelol on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

so exercise in futility really is a synonym for racists.
who knew.
thats what they are scared of, the name calling.

dmacleo on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

Sarah Palin 2016 . She’s only with the cojones and the passion .

Unaffiliated4P on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

The fruckers in the House have the power of the purse and they don’t follow their sworn oaths.

I hope they all get Cantorized in Nov.

Pass amnesty or the 3.7 boondoggle of obama, and you’re all on your azzes, no matter what Noah says about R poll on immigration reform, which is NOT amnesty, turkeys.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

If the goal is to get people to start actually thinking about what Obama and his corrupt administration have done, then keep calling for impeachment.

darwin on July 11, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Sarah Palin 2016 . She’s only with the cojones and the passion .

Unaffiliated4P on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

But not enough to actually put herself in there and run.

I love her, but come on. She’s doing something else nowadays.

Kensington on July 11, 2014 at 5:33 PM

Happy now, Renalin?

Barred on July 11, 2014 at 5:33 PM

Impeachment of Barky is years too late, already. He has done his damage and everyone stood around and watched him do it. That can never be fixed, for it revealed to all the thin veneer of “law” that covers us and how it is thrown away at a moment’s notice because some idiot incompetent third-worlder has magic skin.

barky should have been thrown out of the friggin 2008 race for having held the largest campaign rally (perhaps in American history) in a friggin foreign nation for a bunch of fuzzy foreigners paid in part by a friggin foreign government. That was totally illegal, un-Constitutional and the most repulsive political act that America had ever seen. Barky should have been tossed from the race and jailed the moment he came back from Berlin.

But no … And so Barky continued on with crimes and un-Constitutional acts and adhering to our enemies and harming our interests over and over and over for years. And now, finally, people are starting to talk impeachment – years after the American Constitutional Republic is already dead and buried.

Too late. Way too late.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on July 11, 2014 at 5:33 PM

In the first page of a Sarah Palin thread!

Immolate on July 11, 2014 at 5:33 PM

She wants to leave the R party.

Might as well go out with noise. NO one else stands up for the people.

The D/Rs exploit the taxpayers and really hate the middle/lower classes.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:33 PM

To all the Palintologists out there, this is Exhibit A as to why she should not be leading our party.

While her arguments may be solid, it’s not enough to be right. You have to have the people on board with impeachment. And we don’t. Not even close.

Her political judgement is for shiite…

JohnGalt23 on July 11, 2014 at 5:35 PM

Until we see 20 Senate Democrats actively opposing Obama across multiple issues, talk of impeachment is foolish.

Reno_Dave on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

Yep. And right now, even Ted Cruz is not on board with the idea.

cat_owner on July 11, 2014 at 5:35 PM

Sarah is stirring the pot with a canoe paddle not a spoon. Get it out front and agitate like the left. Me thinks she’s been reviewing Alinskys’ rules.

tim c on July 11, 2014 at 5:36 PM

and yet Republicans across the spectrum, from Boehner and McCain to Ted Cruz and Erick Erickson, seem reluctant to pursue this one. How come?

Because they have SP.

“See, the Rs fight the war on women, like I always tell you” — Pelosi/Reid/Fluke and Mr. Kohn

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:36 PM

While her arguments may be solid, it’s not enough to be right. You have to have the people on board with impeachment. And we don’t. Not even close.

Her political judgement is for shiite…

JohnGalt23 on July 11, 2014 at 5:35 PM

I suppose asking people to stand up and stop the destruction of their country is a bit too much too ask.

darwin on July 11, 2014 at 5:37 PM

Sarah fights, while Boehner cries…..

idesign on July 11, 2014 at 5:37 PM

Until we see 20 Senate Democrats actively opposing Obama across multiple issues, talk of impeachment is foolish.

Reno_Dave on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

That’s moronic.

Lucky for you, though, it doesn’t matter since this impeachment talk – whcih was necessary YEARS AGO – was never had and the irreparable damage has been done.

You should be proud.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on July 11, 2014 at 5:37 PM

and yet Republicans across the spectrum, from Boehner and McCain to Ted Cruz and Erick Erickson, seem reluctant to pursue this one. How come?

Cuz he black.

Key West Reader on July 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM


“…what will it take for you to take a stand? How bad does it have to get?”

Unfortunately…

… until Kim Kardashian starts to tweet about it, it is going to have to get very bad.

Then it will be too late…

Seven Percent Solution on July 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM

Sarah is stirring the pot with a canoe paddle not a spoon. Get it out front and agitate like the left. Me thinks she’s been reviewing Alinskys’ rules.

tim c on July 11, 2014 at 5:36 PM

I think so.

darwin on July 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM

I truly love this woman.

libfreeordie on May 20, 2014 at 9:18 PM

Girl, bye.

slickwillie2001 on July 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM

While her arguments may be solid, it’s not enough to be right. You have to have the people on board with impeachment. And we don’t. Not even close.

JohnGalt23 on July 11, 2014 at 5:35 PM

Exactly. Nixon was going to be impeached, because both Rs and Ds agreed he had to go. Plus, the majority of the public felt the same way at the time.

But as you say that is not the case, at least right now.

As the border crisis continues to get worse, I can see independents turning against him and the Ds in droves. But I can’t see the majority wanting impeachment any time soon.

cat_owner on July 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

She is of course absolutely correct in that Obama is way past due for a reckoning. Impeachment too soon though would only enrage the lunatics out there and let’s face it, there’s a lot of freaks and losers (cue Lispfree) who idolize Obama and they will throw gargantuan hissy fits if he’s ever impeached. The Senate as it is would never convict him anyway.

It’s perfectly understandable as to why impeachment is off the table for now. It is not the right time for obvious reasons.

All bets are off after the mid terms though if the GOP takes back the Senate. They had better come up with a hell of a lot better excuse besides fear of losing elections for not impeaching Obama then. At some point you have to do what’s right regardless of the political winds.

HotAirian on July 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

Political parties usually rush to seize a political winner when they see it — and yet Republicans across the spectrum, from Boehner and McCain to Ted Cruz and Erick Erickson, seem reluctant to pursue this one. How come?

Rabble rouser. And you enjoy it.

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

As much as I like Palin, she’s wrong here because the Senate under Harry Reid is essentially aiding and abetting Obama by stopping any reform.

Just as they prevent any law checking Obama’s actions to come to a vote on the Senate floor, a “Not Guilty” vote by every Democrat would be the outcome of an impeachment trial.

Until we see 20 Senate Democrats actively opposing Obama across multiple issues, talk of impeachment is foolish.

Reno_Dave on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

Uh, did you even bother to read what she wrote?

NoNails on July 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

We’re gonna need an extra-white, extra-wealthy, extra-spineless eunuch to run against Elizabeth “Demagogues With A Fist” Warren in 2016. It’s the only way to win!

Jedditelol on July 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

slickwillie2001 on July 11, 2014 at 5:38 PM

You be un diabolito :)

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:40 PM

While her arguments may be solid, it’s not enough to be right.

JohnGalt23 on July 11, 2014 at 5:35 PM

This about sums up the problem and why America was left to die at the hands of an 84 IQ dog-eating retard from the third world.

Too scared to do what is right. Yep …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on July 11, 2014 at 5:40 PM

JohnGalt23 on July 11, 2014 at 5:35 PM

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
― Samuel Adams

oscarwilde on July 11, 2014 at 5:40 PM

I suppose asking people to stand up and stop the destruction of their country is a bit too much too ask.

darwin on July 11, 2014 at 5:37 PM

Anyone who doesn’t stand up for this, are they the new “Surrender Caucus?”

thebrokenrattle on July 11, 2014 at 5:40 PM

This piece was tailor made for the hagfish. Where is she?

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:40 PM

While her arguments may be solid, it’s not enough to be right. You have to have the people on board with impeachment. And we don’t. Not even close.

JohnGalt23 on July 11, 2014 at 5:35 PM

This is where SP starts making her case to GET people on board with impeachment. They aren’t there now. But can SP be persuasive enough to get people on board with impeachment?

That’s the real question – and the one that SP’s future and reputation may rest upon. If she can, then she has power and the ability to lead. If she cannot, then she’s really limited her influence and power by that failure.

Athos on July 11, 2014 at 5:41 PM

Ultimately, she’s saying, this all comes down to public outrage, which is exactly right — but that’s why there’s going to be no impeachment. Right? If the wider public shared her many objections to Obama — power grabs, amnesty, ObamaCare, NSA spying, Benghazi, the Bergdahl prisoner swap — his job approval would be in single digits. As it is, he’s at 41 percent

The hard truth, I think, is that Americans don’t much care how the federal government operates as long as it gets them to an outcome they prefer.

Nailed it as usual AP.

The people who elected and re-elected Obama and continue to support him are the issue. Obama is one man. How do you deal with 100 million willfully ignorant parasites who can’t name the vice preisent let alone explain the concepts of limited government and separation of powers?

Kataklysmic on July 11, 2014 at 5:44 PM

Ultimately, she’s saying, this all comes down to public outrage, which is exactly right — but that’s why there’s going to be no impeachment. Right?

I think you took a wrong turn here. That’s not what she’s saying. It doesn’t all come down to a national wave of outrage that’s easily set aside by 41% approval.

Changing the emphasis:

The only thing necessary to transform America into something unrecognizable is for good men to do nothing! If not these violations and the president’s promise to continue to “go it alone” in ignoring the separation of powers and rule of law, what will it take for you to take a stand? How bad does it have to get?

1. Yes, she needs public support and is fanning the fire — but she’s no less whipping the political class; she needs “We the People,” but she turns to “political will” step for step (that “separation of powers” bit wasn’t written as a tacit threat for the guy on the street); 2. Her argument is that these circumstances are unambiguous, and impeachment is required whether people want it or not.

It’s interesting. If you don’t impeach Obama for all this, don’t you secure safety at this level of corruption for future Presidents?

Axe on July 11, 2014 at 5:44 PM

This piece was tailor made for the hagfish. Where is she?

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:40 PM

Busy ripping Noah in the other thread.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:45 PM

A Pharoah can not be impeached. A Pharoah can be embalmed however.

VorDaj on July 11, 2014 at 5:46 PM

This piece was tailor made for the hagfish. Where is she?

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:40 PM

You know she will show up…

OmahaConservative on July 11, 2014 at 5:46 PM

A big global game-changing event is needed.

All are still too comfortable.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:47 PM

So incredibly sad that she is the only one with balls to say anything about how he is purposely destroying the country.

The Notorious G.O.P on July 11, 2014 at 5:47 PM

VorDaj, way clever!

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:47 PM

Palin is right and if the House wasn’t owned, it would vote impeachment, regardless of the Senate, for historical purpose and also to declare on the record,that Obama is an outlaw

The House will not because it wants facilitated a lot of what Obama is doing. They can pretend they do not like what he does.

The only way to stop an outlaw President is to vote impeach.

If they do not declare on the record, they de facto give permission

He knows that. They know that. They will pretend they do not hear the arguments for impeachment. Which is why you will never never see Boehner debate anyone, including Palin, why Obama should not be impeached

Makes me think of Nazi supporters, who let the SS drag Jews out of the ghetto, knowing the poor jews will face a horrible conclusion, because they had plausible deniability

Plausible deniability is a transparent robe for naked criminality

entagor on July 11, 2014 at 5:47 PM

A big global game-changing event is needed.

All are still too comfortable.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:47 PM

Everybody want to go heaven, nobody want die…

oscarwilde on July 11, 2014 at 5:48 PM

While her arguments may be solid, it’s not enough to be right. You have to have the people on board with impeachment. And we don’t. Not even close.

Her political judgement is for shiite…

JohnGalt23 on July 11, 2014 at 5:35 PM

Have you heard of a new concept called leadership?

That is where a politician who sees something in the future that most people do not see, nevertheless with courage and at cost to themselves stakes out that lonely ground with a proud banner and engages the body politic to move the people to that banner.

See Churchill, W. circa 1930′s

Brian1972 on July 11, 2014 at 5:48 PM

The people who elected and re-elected Obama and continue to support him are the issue. Obama is one man. How do you deal with 100 million willfully ignorant parasites who can’t name the vice preisent let alone explain the concepts of limited government and separation of powers?

Kataklysmic on July 11, 2014 at 5:44 PM

One of the main points of our late Constitutional Republic was that the Supreme Law is not the whim of the people – not even if 100% feel some way. The point of a Constitutional Republic is that the Supreme Law is THE CONSTITUTION and it is not open to popular referendum for its defense.

People who think that “popular support” is the key are totally misunderstanding the foundation of the late American Constitutional Republic. The point was NOT to make the Supreme Law subservient to popular support. If the people want to change the Supreme Law then they have methods for accomplishing that, but it doesn’t change on a whim and it doesn’t have its defense stopped for lack of “popular support”. That is a Democracy, which America was built specifically NOT to be.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on July 11, 2014 at 5:48 PM

and yet Republicans across the spectrum, from Boehner and McCain to Ted Cruz and Erick Erickson, seem reluctant to pursue this one. How come?

I don’t know..My first guess is that it is a bad idea..:)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:48 PM

If we still have a nation that is free after the dust settles, this group of craven crooks will be despised in our histories, if we still have honest men writing our histories

entagor on July 11, 2014 at 5:49 PM

The people who elected and re-elected Obama and continue to support him are the issue. Obama is one man. How do you deal with 100 million willfully ignorant parasites who can’t name the vice preisent let alone explain the concepts of limited government and separation of powers?

Kataklysmic on July 11, 2014 at 5:44 PM

That is a very good point..Bottom line it is the point..:)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:50 PM

i’ve always loved the way that sarah is willing to say things in a more bold way than anyone else. others aren’t willing to call for impeachment, but she is. she doesn’t wait for something to become popular before she supports it. instead, she tries to be a leader and influence others to support her opinions. and that’s awesome.

If not these violations and the president’s promise to continue to “go it alone” in ignoring the separation of powers and rule of law, what will it take for you to take a stand? How bad does it have to get?

that’s the question everyone needs to ask themselves. how bad does it have to get before you support impeachment? how many things can obama get away with?

The hard truth, I think, is that Americans don’t much care how the federal government operates as long as it gets them to an outcome they prefer.

yes that’s the sad truth. but i do think a lot of americans do not prefer the things obama has done. obamacare forcing people off their plans is probably the worst. and sarah does her best to make a compelling case, pointing out several other bad things obama has done. she may know deep down that much of the public does not care, but at least she’s trying to influence the public by speaking out.

Sachiko on July 11, 2014 at 5:50 PM

She’s right that there’s a case, but unfortunately, so are those like AP who state this is a political non-starter. Making the case to remove it from political non-starter status will be like moving a mountain.

Personally, I think the republic is farked.

thirteen28 on July 11, 2014 at 5:50 PM

I don’t know..My first guess is that it is a bad idea..:)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:48 PM

If even Ted Cruz does not agree, what chance does this have? Cruz is focusing much more on the border crisis right now, and rightfully calling it a problem of Barry’s own making.

cat_owner on July 11, 2014 at 5:51 PM

Rabble rouser. And you enjoy it.

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

..:):):)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:51 PM

I would support impeachment if I thought we could get not only the impeachment but also the conviction. But there is no way that the Senate would vote to convict (and frankly the House probably wouldn’t even vote to impeach). Given those facts, I don’t see any value in going down the impeachment path.

The real problem is that we live in a country that now tolerates — and in the case of many citizens actually celebrates — a president who is anti-American. It’s very depressing, actually.

Little Napoleon on July 11, 2014 at 5:52 PM

All of which, again, is to say that Palin’s right, again…

Just a little edit, lol.

Fallon on July 11, 2014 at 5:52 PM

Rabble rouser. And you enjoy it.

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

..:):):)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:51 PM

Rabble rabble rabble, Rabble rabble rabble, Rabble rabble rabble…

oscarwilde on July 11, 2014 at 5:52 PM

If even Ted Cruz does not agree, what chance does this have? Cruz is focusing much more on the border crisis right now, and rightfully calling it a problem of Barry’s own making.

cat_owner on July 11, 2014 at 5:51 PM

It has zero chance..Thumbs up to Cruz for that..:)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

What an idiot. You guys remember when she quit her job in Alaska?

beverlyfreaks on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

oscarwilde on July 11, 2014 at 5:52 PM

lolz..:)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

Palin is right. Obama does deserve to be impeached, but Allahpundit has a good handle on why that’s not likely.

Far too many people in this nation have become dependent, in one way or another, on the status quo and much of that staus quo is Unlce Sugar doling out the paychecks and benefits. Any threat to the status quo is regarded as a threat to those checks and benefits, whether directly or indirectly doesn’t matter. This portion of the electorate will vote for the status quo by rote regardless of the actions of a rogue president.

There’s also a matter of the timeline to impeach Obama. There would necessarily need to be an exhaustive investigation to gather evidence of each instance of Obama’s wrong doing. Constitutional scholars would have to look over each instance and determine the degree to which it was lawless. All of this takes time, and we know from past examples, like Bill Clinton, that the congress is reluctant to pursue impeachment, even looking at the evidence and considering it, even when handed an exhaustive report detailing hard evidence of the president’s wrong doing, until after any impending elections. The Starr Report was the culmination of four years of research and investigation and was given to congress and published on the internet on September 11, 1998, ahead of the elections, and congress didn’t move to impeach Bill Clinton until December 19,1998 after the election.

There are some cases where we know that Obama would not be held accountable even if he was charged. For instance, in the case of the IRS, the destruction of Lerner’s hard drives makes it likely that it will be impossible to prove that Obama ever knew about her targeting conservative groups and individuals before he claims he was made aware of that activity, which was several weeks after his staff admits becoming aware of the issue. There is no hard evidence, to date, to support the supposition that he knew any earlier. Even to charge him, that hard evidence would have to be found and in hand.

Then there would necessarily be hearings. The impeachment process is unwieldy and time consuming. Even if Obama was successfully impeached, it is unclear whether he’d actually be removed from office or if he’s be allowed to continue to hold that office. Nixon resigned rather than be impeached. It is highly unlikely that Obama would be possessed of either the dignity or the grace to resign ahead of impeachment.

thatsafactjack on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

I suppose asking people to stand up and stop the destruction of their country is a bit too much too ask.

darwin on July 11, 2014 at 5:37 PM

Apparently too many citizens haven’t reached their point of no return or lack the will to risk their own piece of the federal pie.

An unfortunately too many politicians can’t get beyond politics as usual and want to pretend it will all be better in 2016.

If the GOP isn’t willing to stand up to BO we’re going to have to learn to live with his destruction of the country. Just whining about things has gotten old.

katiejane on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

There’s no outrage because people don’t care. They only care about what is on their precious 5 inch screen and if they are being “followed.” They have squandered their freedom and liberty to a point where the foundation for tyranny has already been established. I fear we are in for darker days.

el hombre on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

The Obama Administration is NOT a festering boil of scandal.

The Obama administration is
1) A determined attempt by a small group of saboteurs to destroy the United States

2) which uses a over-sized decadent bureaucracy as a weapon.

If the United States is to survive.
1) All of the saboteurs must be appropriately removed from political power.
2) The bureaucracies must be eliminated.
3) Safeguards must be installed to prevent this in the future.

Hysterical statements about “What-Ever-His-Name-Really-Is” are not helpful. When the smoke clears, he will be exposed as the insignificant fraud he is and his “associates” will go on to the job of destroying your lives.

CrazyGene on July 11, 2014 at 5:54 PM

What an idiot. You guys remember when she quit her job in Alaska?

beverlyfreaks on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

freaks is perfect in your now, and I’m not even a SP adherent.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:54 PM

Busy ripping Noah in the other thread.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:45 PM

One of these days, some high mucky-muck here is going to decide her rants aren’t worth it.

That person will become my new HA favorite.

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:54 PM

thatsafactjack on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

Hey! No way! Three paragraph max!

Axe on July 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM

It has zero chance..Thumbs up to Cruz for that..:)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

We need to know what battles we can win. This isn’t one of them. It may be in the future, depending on how things play out. But it’s clearly not a winning battle right now, and if anything will backfire.

Barry is taunting Rs about impeaching or suing him. Shows his arrogance first and foremost, but also I think a belief it will never happen.

cat_owner on July 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM

Hi J.

Watch the fun of going to another star. This one is in its last stages.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM

It’s perfectly understandable as to why impeachment is off the table for now. It is not the right time for obvious reasons.

All bets are off after the mid terms though if the GOP takes back the Senate. They had better come up with a hell of a lot better excuse besides fear of losing elections for not impeaching Obama then. At some point you have to do what’s right regardless of the political winds.

HotAirian on July 11, 2014 at 5:39 PM

hmm, maybe this is true. maybe more people will call for impeachment later on and sarah is just saying something early. maybe we will look back on this moment and say “she saw this coming.”

of course, i could be wrong here. but you never know. keep hope alive. XD

Sachiko on July 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM

There’s no outrage because people don’t care. They only care about what is on their precious 5 inch screen and if they are being “followed.” They have squandered their freedom and liberty to a point where the foundation for tyranny has already been established. I fear we are in for darker days.

el hombre on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

Maybe if Obama signed an executive order banning cell phones. That would probably do it. I’m trying to be funny but typing that makes me kinda sad because it’s probably true.

darwin on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Good Lord. Conservatives, having tried to reverse the 1996 election with a BS impeachment, having won the 2000 election by overriding majority vote with a stacked court and a bogus ruling, are now trying to reverse 2012 through an equally bogus impeachment. Maybe if you guys had presidential candidates that didn’t suck, you might win on your own and start acting like you believed in democracy.

As for Palin, good for her for generating a few web hits with a desperate and cliched grasp at relevance. She may not know much, but you have to admire her PT Barnum-like genius for self promotion.

urban elitist on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

One of these days, some high mucky-muck here is going to decide her rants aren’t worth it.

That person will become my new HA favorite.

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:54 PM

Won’t happen, friend.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

The real problem is that we live in a country that now tolerates — and in the case of many citizens actually celebrates — a president who is anti-American. It’s very depressing, actually.

Little Napoleon on July 11, 2014 at 5:52 PM

I hope we can get it back..Sorta Return of the Jedi..:):)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Maybe the threat of impeachment could be like a mini-cloward-piven in reverse.

Maybe the Dems go so batshit crazy at the idea that they go ahead with the full Occupy Sharpton Pride Riot strategy to intimidate everyone out of laying a legal hand on their precious Prince, no matter the case against him.

They make a huge mess, and show the rest of the nation what they are really capabable of.

You know, get in their faces and organize the hell outta that community!

Brian1972 on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Business is good and the summer too, cozmo…Salem

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

If even Ted Cruz does not agree, what chance does this have? Cruz is focusing much more on the border crisis right now, and rightfully calling it a problem of Barry’s own making.

cat_owner on July 11, 2014 at 5:51 PM

It has zero chance..Thumbs up to Cruz for that..:)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 5:53 PM

Cruz has never said he opposes Impeaching Obama, what he has said, is that is the responsibility of the House. Cruz is a Senator, and he is absolutely correct, Impeachment does take place, not in the Senate, but the House of Representatives. Cruz, like the experienced prosecutor he is, side stepped the question with a technicality. Shrewed move on his part.

oscarwilde on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Axe on July 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM

Sorry, I just wanted to put in all in one and be done with it. :

thatsafactjack on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Won’t happen, friend.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Hey! I can dream.

Its Friday, happy day.

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:57 PM

Until we see 20 Senate Democrats actively opposing Obama across multiple issues, talk of impeachment is foolish.

Reno_Dave on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM

I somewhat agree with you. We need to do what is almost impossible in this day and age — embarrass democrats. We need to find a way to shame them into supporting impeachment, but until they actually attain a healthy sense of shame, we’re paddling upstream.

As it is, they have no shame, and are therefore complicit in his lawlessness. And proudly so.

However, talk of impeachment is not necessarily foolish if it gets people talking about his arrogantly lawless behavior. And as someone else here said, it baits his narcissism like little else. He won’t be able to resist pressing his luck too far for even the lawless democrats to stomach.

I don’t personally want to see him impeached. I want to see him snap and have to be led from the White House in shackles for his own safety.

CurtZHP on July 11, 2014 at 5:57 PM

Nothing wrong with impeachment but we need the senate and house leadership changes no impeachment until then.

sorrowen on July 11, 2014 at 5:58 PM

urban elitist on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Mucker, Gore lost his own state and you’re totally wrong, by all counts and recounts of your leftist media hacks.

But keep on telling lies about 2000.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:58 PM

Friday evening and Hot Air is going FULL GOPe

If the wider public shared her many objections to Obama — power grabs, amnesty, ObamaCare, NSA spying, Benghazi, the Bergdahl prisoner swap — his job approval would be in single digits. As it is, he’s at 41 percent, which is poor but not nearly so atrociously bad that any congressional Democrats would feel compelled to remove him from office. Even among the 54-55 percent who disapprove of his job performance, there are bound to be loads of people who think that he’s guilty of nothing more than incompetence, not dereliction of duty worthy of the first successful forcible ouster of the president in American history. I haven’t seen any polls on impeachment lately, but I’d guess that impeachment supporters


The new kid took this same tack earlier in the week
… so I dug out ACTUAL DATA to compare to the HORSESHITE being peddled on here.

Let’s reach into HISTORY and see what public opinion was on impeaching Richard Nixon in May of 1974

In early May 1974, just three months before his resignation, 49% told Gallup interviewers that the President’s actions were not serious enough “to warrant his being impeached and removed from the Presidency.”

Even near the end of Watergate, much of the public continued to show sympathy for the beleaguered President and a real reluctance to accept a forced resignation. 55% of respondents in a Harris poll of July 17 – 21, 1974 agreed that Nixon “is trying to do his best in an almost impossible job”.

And in another Harris poll completed just one week beforeNixon resigned, only 47% thought Nixon would ultimately be impeached and removed from office, while 40% thought that would not happen.

.
Now, either EVERY ONE of the Hot Air editors is ridiculously incompetent as functioning adults (i.e. knowing right from wrong and fact from fiction) or you are as corrupt as Reid, McConnell, Boehner and Pelosi.

Which one do you want to go with as your answer?

Because the conventional wisdom (HORSESHITE) being pumped morning, noon and night this week by the Kneepad Media and the the corrupt political elites is,

“OH, NOES! We couldn’t possibly impeach Obama unless every single person was standing in Washington, D.C. DEMANDING we do it!!!

And this asinine argument has the perfect capstone and counterpoint to the LIE that it would result in the “first successful forcible ouster of the president in American history”

Because if any shred of this craptastic logic was based in fact …

… then Richard Nixon should NEVER have been held to account for HIS crimes.

The actual public opinion numbers must have the elites literally scared shiteless given the depths they have sunk to this week.

PolAgnostic on July 11, 2014 at 5:58 PM

We need to know what battles we can win.

cat_owner on July 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM

I know plenty of battles we can win … and so does the GOP. Unfortunately many of them don’t want to fight them. That’s the problem.

darwin on July 11, 2014 at 5:58 PM

…and be done with it. :

thatsafactjack on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Yeah, like we’re gonna’ let you do that.

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:59 PM

The trolls speaks! And his voice wavers.

CurtZHP on July 11, 2014 at 5:59 PM

It’s Friday, happy day.

cozmo on July 11, 2014 at 5:57 PM

You too. Keep remaining caustic :)

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:59 PM

OT/

Sorry, I just wanted to put in all in one and be done with it. :

thatsafactjack on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

*hands cool washcloth* *yank computer powercord* *pulls batteries from iThing* *fluffs pillow*

*frowns accusingly*

Axe on July 11, 2014 at 5:59 PM

One of the main points of our late Constitutional Republic was that the Supreme Law is not the whim of the people – not even if 100% feel some way. The point of a Constitutional Republic is that the Supreme Law is THE CONSTITUTION and it is not open to popular referendum for its defense.

People who think that “popular support” is the key are totally misunderstanding the foundation of the late American Constitutional Republic. The point was NOT to make the Supreme Law subservient to popular support. If the people want to change the Supreme Law then they have methods for accomplishing that, but it doesn’t change on a whim and it doesn’t have its defense stopped for lack of “popular support”. That is a Democracy, which America was built specifically NOT to be.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on July 11, 2014 at 5:48 PM

Of course what you are saying is 100% accurate. However as Palin correctly points out we are in a unique situation where not even our elected representatives care about protecting the constitution. Once the judicial and legislative branches of government abidcate their responsibility to reign in the executive branch, the only remaining straw to grasp at is for a popular uprising powerful enough to light a fire under them.

The differnece between Palin and myself is she seems to have retained a modicum of faith in the American electorate.

Kataklysmic on July 11, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM

Good afternoon, Paladin. Watching, and enduring, the abuses of this president, and his administration, has been like sliding down a razor blade. I’ll be relieved when it has come to a final conclusion.

thatsafactjack on July 11, 2014 at 6:00 PM

and be done with it. :

thatsafactjack on July 11, 2014 at 5:56 PM

Like cozmo said, we won’t let you be “done with” because of light versus darkness.

Schadenfreude on July 11, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Barry is taunting Rs about impeaching or suing him. Shows his arrogance first and foremost, but also I think a belief it will never happen.

cat_owner on July 11, 2014 at 5:55 PM

Yes..And the Democrats are fund raising off it..:)

Dire Straits on July 11, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Until we see 20 Senate Democrats actively opposing Obama across multiple issues, talk of impeachment is foolish.
Reno_Dave on July 11, 2014 at 5:31 PM
I somewhat agree with you. We need to do what is almost impossible in this day and age — embarrass democrats. We need to find a way to shame them into supporting impeachment, but until they actually attain a healthy sense of shame, we’re paddling upstream.
As it is, they have no shame, and are therefore complicit in his lawlessness. And proudly so.
However, talk of impeachment is not necessarily foolish if it gets people talking about his arrogantly lawless behavior. And as someone else here said, it baits his narcissism like little else. He won’t be able to resist pressing his luck too far for even the lawless democrats to stomach.
I don’t personally want to see him impeached. I want to see him snap and have to be led from the White House in shackles for his own safety.
CurtZHP on July 11, 2014 at 5:57 PM
Now that is a fate he deserves and narcissism is actually his weakness.

sorrowen on July 11, 2014 at 6:00 PM

If 0bama cannot be impeached, then there is no one who can be impeached, and it should be removed from the constitution.

Not that anyone pays attention to the constitution these days.

Rebar on July 11, 2014 at 6:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5