Krauthammer: 'Impeachable Offense' [W:406]

pbrauer said:

President Obama didn't convince the public we needed to invade Iraq, Bush did that.

Click to expand...

Gaius46 said:

Testing the bounds of presidential authority or putting forth an unconstitutional order are not crimes.

Click to expand...

Hari Seldon said:

Lets hope so. A sure fire way to get out the democratic vote. Go Tea Party Whackos!

Click to expand...

matchlight said:

By severely crippling B.J. Clinton's ability to damage the country any further, his impeachment automatically contributed to better government.

No doubt my reading comprehension is nothing like yours--but let me try very hard to comprehend this. The Constitution, which is our highest law, authorizes the House to impeach a President. And yet both times the House has done that, according to you, it "had nothing to do with . . . the rule of law." If that makes sense to you, I'm not the least surprised.



Really? OK, if you say so. I'm happy to leave it to the people who have read my posts about legal and constitutional matters, and read yours, to decide which of us really has no idea what's going on.



Rot. Of course he has--flagrantly and repeatedly. Andy McCarthy, a very accomplished former federal prosecutor, wrote a book some months ago in which he catalogued a great many gross violations by your President, in several categories, even a fraction of which would be plenty to make out a bill of impeachment. This damned statist liar has nothing but contempt for the Constitution, and for the duty to see that laws are faithfully executed that it imposes on him. As a dedicated member of President Pinocchio's rear guard, though, you are committed to ignoring his many gross violations.



The only hackery I see here is your own. You know President Pinocchio's incompetence, habitual dishonesty, contempt for the law, and limp-wristed foreign policy have finally caught up with him and you are trying to hide it by pretending everything is fine. But I know the sound of whistling past the graveyard when I hear it.



I do not agree. But if he were, it would just mean their sorry carcases should be thrown out of office too.



I don't know what "the right" is, but it's nothing to do with me. I don't hate Mr. Obama any more than I hate any other un-American collectivist liar.



I never even suggested that Mr. Obama has committed any crimes, or that he should be prosecuted. One more time: Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding. Neither this President nor any other high official needs to have violated any criminal law for the House to impeach him.



That's exactly what you and your fellow members of this damned liar's rear guard have been forced to do in recent weeks. Your messiah's halo is tarnished, and his star is sinking fast--and you are more and more desperate to deny that fact

Click to expand...

it's just me said:

These are exciting times. Interest rates are lower than the price of gasoline and violating Constitutional law is not a crime.

Click to expand...

Misterveritis said:

No. High crimes and misdemeanors might be breaking the law. Or it might be violating the Constitution.

I want him out of office. I want him in prison for the rest of his life.

Click to expand...

Hari Seldon said:

Lets hope so. A sure fire way to get out the democratic vote. Go Tea Party Whackos!

Click to expand...

Perotista said:

If the president carries out this threat, I would wait and see what the people think. Polls have been conflicting at times on this issue. One poll says 63% of Americans are against the president acting along on amnesty. Yet on the same day another poll showed 51% of Americans in favor of amnesty. Which is it?

As for impeachment, for impeachment to work the public has to be for it. Without the public approval it is bound to fail. Failure will give the Republicans another black eye like they got in their attempt to impeach President Clinton. In fact I think Obama would like nothing better than for the House to take up impeachment.

Let the president go ahead, let the chips fall where they may and see how the American people react. There are other ways to deal with executive over reach. Keep in mind, impeachment is overthrowing an election result. If it is attempted, you better be darn sure the president has done something real horrible to warrant it and the people realize he has done something so horrible they want him out of office.

Outside of that, take him to court, defund his initiatives, perhaps even a censure.

Click to expand...

Grim17 said:

Impeaching the president will never fly because the main stream liberal media will never allow the American people to hear the facts, so in my opinion it simply isn't an option...

Now with that said...

Krauthammer's analysis, opinions and comparisons on the legality and future consequences of Obama taking action on the immigration issue, was absolutely spot on. It's simply mind blowing how democrats in Washington and the people on the political left are perfectly content with Obama taking such action. In my opinion it's quite a blow to the credibility of the political left and brings into question whether they can be trusted to govern this nation in the future.

I know that my words may strike some, especially those on the left, as being harsh but just think about the precedent Obama will be setting and ask yourself if you will feel comfortable with a Republican president being able to do the very same thing with the laws and issues that are of great importance to you? If you can honestly say that you would be comfortable with that, then go after me with both guns... But if you can't, then it's about time that you, and every single liberal who feels the same way, to use your voices to stop this from happening.

Click to expand...

Risky Thicket said:

Substantively? Not much. But he could possibly look damned good doing it. That could be a problem for the GOP.

Shooting straight from the hip I would think that impeaching Obama would piss off more people than the GOP can afford to piss off. Don't mistake the GOP win for a big "like" from America, it wasn't. The GOP doesn't have that much political capital to gamble on an impeachment hearing. Then there is the minority vote, which the party of angry old white dudes needs and will need more and more of in the future. I'm not an ethnic minority and thus I cannot speak for or with any real insight into ethnic communities, but I don't believe they are in love with either major party. I know for certain they aren't head over heels in love with the GOP. Many may equate impeachment with lack of respect, commitment, understanding of ethnic issues. Does the GOP really want to take that chance? Hell no, they don't.

Have it all happen and problems over a Ferguson verdict, minority voters just aren't going to flock to the GOP. Then Biden becomes the President and doesn't screw anything up and looks good and trustworthy. It could happen. Biden isn't stupid. He's not diplomatic, LOL, but that could play in his favor,not being slick and polished at a time when most of us are sick of that crap.

The establishment GOP is having none of that. They are better off having Obama finish his term and I think the establishment GOP are very much aware of that. Tea baggers? I don't know. Neocons? I have no idea. Krauthammer is in some ways like Limbaugh, except he is more educated.



They do have their own civil war going. Looking at both ****ed up parties I never regret having left both behind.

Click to expand...

grip said:

And it's a way to place crazy uncle Joe at the head of the table.





It's going to depend on what he actually does to the immigration laws. If he allows for an eventual partial amnesty for existing immigrants to stay and contribute or if he allows for future illegals to easily have access. Those are two big differences and will draw different responses. The Republicans using the impeachment process to throw a Dem out, based on partisan politics, would hurt them. It needs to be a 2/3rds of the public and Congress to be successful, and even then you get a weaker gov't as a result. Remember the general public approval numbers for Congress, as a whole, are far worse than the Presidents.





I agree it probably will not happen.

I believe the Democrats and Republicans are both overreaching on many issues to try and get movement towards their sides. It may get an emotional reaction from their base and opposition, but it alienates the middle. And though, I may have a liberal view on some issues, I'm by no means a party liberal and registered as a Republican voter, with a moderate stance. Your assumption was incorrect.

Click to expand...

Zyphlin said:

Talk of impeachment at this point is largely premature. Lets see what he ACTUALLY proposes.

If it literally grants anyone here illegally the ability to naturalize, then yes it's arguably an impeachable offense and given such a flagrant act at a time where the american voting base just sent forth a stout repudiation of the President and where it would be CLEARLY against the implied will of Congress I'd almost actually be able to get on board with such.

If it simply allows them the ability to stay in the country legally for a few years then its likely not an impeachable offense and attempting to do such would just be a waste of time and the tax payers money.

Right now we have no clue what he'll ACTUALLY do, so speculating on it is kind of worthless.

Click to expand...

Perotista said:

I believe what you said in your reply to me is true. Ford was much weaker than even a wounded Nixon and was run over by the Democratic controlled congress back then. Yes, it all depends on what the president does. Before anyone starts using the I word, they better be sure the public is behind them. It sure isn't now.

I will say this, after looking at the exist polls, so much of the anger, resentment at the Democrats was because of the economy. Getting into a fight on immigration reform instead of seeing what can be done to improve the economy is something that could hurt the new Republican majority before they are even seated and begin the new session.

Let Obama do what Obama is going to do, then sit back and gauge the public's response. According to the exit polls, the public wants action on the economy over immigration by at least a 5-1 margin, 54% vs. 11%. Let the president and the Democrats put immigration first, that is not what the election results last week meant.

If I were Mitch McConnell once Obama acts, I would say to the American people, "Now you know where the Democrats priority are, ours is to get the economy moving again.

Click to expand...

Grim17 said:

Isn't there one person on the left who will address the question I asked?

Here it is again:

... just think about the precedent Obama will be setting (using executive orders to decree new immigration law) and ask yourself if you will feel comfortable with a Republican president being able to do the very same thing with the laws and issues that are of great importance to you? If you can honestly say that you would be comfortable with that, then go after me with both guns... But if you can't, then it's about time that you, and every single liberal who feels the same way, to use your voices to stop this from happening.

Click to expand...

Grim17 said:

Isn't there one person on the left who will address the question I asked?

Here it is again:

... just think about the precedent Obama will be setting (using executive orders to decree new immigration law) and ask yourself if you will feel comfortable with a Republican president being able to do the very same thing with the laws and issues that are of great importance to you? If you can honestly say that you would be comfortable with that, then go after me with both guns... But if you can't, then it's about time that you, and every single liberal who feels the same way, to use your voices to stop this from happening.

Click to expand...

Bill Clinton was no stranger to far-reaching orders either. During his two terms in office, he banned the import of 50+ types of semi-automatic assault weapons and assault pistols, created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (which forced America to become more sustainable in line with the U.N.’s Agenda 21) and focused federal attention on environmental justice for minority and low-income populations.

Click to expand...

Two other Republican leaders used their executive powers to great effect. In May 1989, George H. W. Bush temporarily halted the importation of some semi-automatic firearms, following a school shooting in Stockton, Calif. This was made permanent a month later.

Click to expand...

Ronald Reagan also enacted some significant policy initiatives through executive power. The NSA has said that its controversial collection of e-mail and Internet data, for example, was authorized back in 1981 by Reagan's executive order. His order on cattle grazing in 1986 continues to rile bloggers to this day and in 1987, and Reagan issued an executive order banning federal workers from using drugs on and off duty.

Click to expand...

FDR issued one that forcibly transferred Japanese-Americans and German-Americans to internment camps during World War II.

Click to expand...

Harry Truman issued an order to seize and nationalize all steel mills in America, during a labor strike in 1952. These were clearly rights-violating orders. On the positive side, in a famous 1957 order that was respectful of rights, Dwight Eisenhower decreed an end to racial segregation in America’s public schools.

Click to expand...

1750Texan said:

You consider yourself a constitutionalist...Have you made case for impeachment? . . . I don't seem to recall your thread on making a case for impeachment.

Click to expand...

Seems the GOP has failed in that simple task.

Click to expand...

What exact crime, misdemeanor, or violation of the Constitution has the President committed?

Click to expand...

I love to check your constitutional reasoning.

Click to expand...

rocket88 said:

Which impeachment would not do.

View attachment 67175950

Click to expand...

Grim17 said:

Isn't there one person on the left who will address the question I asked?

Here it is again:

... just think about the precedent Obama will be setting (using executive orders to decree new immigration law) and ask yourself if you will feel comfortable with a Republican president being able to do the very same thing with the laws and issues that are of great importance to you? If you can honestly say that you would be comfortable with that, then go after me with both guns... But if you can't, then it's about time that you, and every single liberal who feels the same way, to use your voices to stop this from happening.

Click to expand...

Perotista said:

I believe what you said in your reply to me is true. Ford was much weaker than even a wounded Nixon and was run over by the Democratic controlled congress back then. Yes, it all depends on what the president does. Before anyone starts using the I word, they better be sure the public is behind them. It sure isn't now.

I will say this, after looking at the exist polls, so much of the anger, resentment at the Democrats was because of the economy. Getting into a fight on immigration reform instead of seeing what can be done to improve the economy is something that could hurt the new Republican majority before they are even seated and begin the new session.

Let Obama do what Obama is going to do, then sit back and gauge the public's response. According to the exit polls, the public wants action on the economy over immigration by at least a 5-1 margin, 54% vs. 11%. Let the president and the Democrats put immigration first, that is not what the election results last week meant.

If I were Mitch McConnell once Obama acts, I would say to the American people, "Now you know where the Democrats priority are, ours is to get the economy moving again.

Click to expand...

grip said:

It's ironic that people think the gov't has that much control over the economy. I guess if you throw in social programs, worker status, subsidies, gov't contracts, taxes, bailouts, FED rates, etc they have some marginal control, but not over the whole thing. Technology, energy, food, housing, retail sales, cars, traveling, investment, credit, wages, employment and trade are the real components of the financial sector.

Click to expand...

pbrauer said:

Why not lynch him,?

Click to expand...

rocket88 said:

We know you would be.

Lets see you answer this question: Did you know that the Constitution gives Obama the power to grant pardons to every illegal immigrant? What would be unconstitutional about him doing so?

Click to expand...

Risky Thicket said:

What does Fox News say?

Click to expand...

Grim17 said:

Isn't there one person on the left who will address the question I asked?

Here it is again:

... just think about the precedent Obama will be setting (using executive orders to decree new immigration law) and ask yourself if you will feel comfortable with a Republican president being able to do the very same thing with the laws and issues that are of great importance to you? If you can honestly say that you would be comfortable with that, then go after me with both guns... But if you can't, then it's about time that you, and every single liberal who feels the same way, to use your voices to stop this from happening.

Click to expand...

pbrauer said:

If I believe in a policy, it doesn't matter whether its a Republican or Democrat that does it.

Click to expand...