Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can We Talk About Impeachment?
Reaganite Republican ^ | 03 January 2014 | J.T. Hatter

Posted on 01/03/2014 3:23:43 AM PST by Reaganite Republican


Guest post by JT Hatter:

The United States of America was once a land of laws and not of men. Obama and the Democratic Party have changed all that, possibly forever. Millions of people, along with a few brave politicians, are now openly speaking of impeachment. Why? Because the Obama administration's wanton and destructive disregard for the laws of the land have become so egregious that it can no longer be tolerated...

A LAND OF LAWS NO MORE
The Attorneys General of Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Oklahoma, South Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia have issued A Report on Obama Administration Violations of Law, which says in part,
While the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) has received the most attention, it serves as a representation of a much larger picture that demonstrates the continued disdain for the Constitution and laws shown by the Obama Administration.
Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute wrote an article in 2011 titled "President Obama's Top 10 Constitutional Violations." Shapiro's list is serious business and includes the Obamacare individual mandate, Medicaid coercion, Dodd-Frank, the deep-water drilling ban, and health care waivers for labor unions and other regime political supporters.


Robert Knight's list of constitutional violations  includes the illegal war on Libya (a violation of the War Powers Act); violation of religious freedom by requiring faith-based institutions to provide insurance for abortifacients, sterilizations, and contraceptives; appointing agency czars without Senate approval; illegal recess appointments; refusing to enforce laws the administration doesn't like; refusing to cooperate with congressional investigations (notably Fast and Furious); violating equal protection and voting rights; and using federal agencies and boards to effect the administration's political agenda.
It's now the end of 2013 and the ever-growing list of Obama administration violation of laws and constitutional restrictions runs into the hundreds of cases. This no longer a matter of opinion: this president has behaved lawlessly -- and has encouraged lawless behavior in his administration since he first set foot into the Oval Office in January 2009.

WHO'S MINDING THE STORE?

On December 3, 2013, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing titled, "The President's Constitutional Duty to Faithfully Execute the Laws." BizPac Review has a good article and video collage of the hearing, and other examples of the Obama administration selectively enforcing, ignoring and violating federal and state laws.
During the hearing, Representative Trey Gowdy (R-SC) presented the testifying experts with electrifying questions, among which was this one to Simon Lazarus, senior counsel to the Constitutional Accountability Center,
"If you can dispense with immigration laws or marijuana laws or mandatory minimums, can you also dispense with election laws?"
Lazarus eventually answered "no," but Gowdy wasn't satisfied with that response. Lazarus, former Associate Director of President Jimmy Carter's White House Domestic Policy Staff, seemed reluctant to imply that Obama wasn't in compliance with the law. The vigorous exchange, as reported by cnsnews.com, continued,
"Why not? If he can suspend mandatory minimum and immigration laws, why not election laws?"
"Because we live in a government of laws, and the president is bound to obey them and apply them," Lazarus answered.
"Well he's not applying the ACA, and he's not applying immigration laws, and he's not applying marijuana laws, and he's not applying mandatory minimums. What's the difference with election laws?" Gowdy said.
"We have a disagreement as to whether in fact he is applying those laws. My view is that he is applying those laws," Lazarus replied.
Lazarus's defensive, dissembling response does not deter the issue -- and the implications of Gowdy's brilliant question are staggering and cannot be deflected.
The central issue is this: If the president can elect to ignore or enforce laws, rules and regulations as he chooses, or if he can simply revise the laws as he sees fit, then has he "faithfully executed" the laws, as required under Article Two of the Constitution? Some congressmen don't believe so and want to bring the president to trial on the matter.
The Christian Science Monitor cited George Washington University professor Johnathan Turley in his testimony before the House committee,
"The president is required to faithfully execute the laws. He's not required to enforce all laws equally or commit the same resources to them," he said. "But I believe the president has crossed the constitutional line."
President Obama hasn't merely crossed the line. He has ordered government agencies and departments, including the Justice Department, to do his political bidding with the specific aim of circumventing Congress. These actions have put the entire American experiment in jeopardy.
Professor Turley is a social liberal and outspoken champion of progressive causes. But he is also known as an ardent defender of the rule of law. He spoke of his fear of the executive office subverting the constitutional balance of power between the three branches of government, and the further imbalance created by the dangerous "fourth branch" of government, the bloated imperious bureaucracy,
"We have this rising fourth branch in a system that's tripartite," he said. "The center of gravity is shifting, and that makes it unstable. And within that system you have the rise of an uber-presidency."
Turley continued: "There could be no greater danger for individual liberty, and I really think that the framers would be horrified by that shift because everything they've dedicated themselves to was creating this orbital balance, and we've lost it."


At the conclusion of the hearing, Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte issued a summary statement, which includes the following selected remarks,
The President's far-reaching claims of executive power, if left unchecked, will vest the President with broad domestic policy authority that the Constitution does not grant him.
We must resist the President's deliberate pattern of circumventing the legislative branch in favor of administrative decision making.
We cannot allow the separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution to be abandoned in favor of an undue concentration of power in the executive branch. As James Madison warned centuries ago in Federalist 47, "the accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
A CONSTITUTIONAL REMEDY
Georgetown law professor Nicholas Rosenkranz, who spoke directly to the committee on a potential remedy to the toxic situation in the White House, was blunt in his assessment of the situation, "...As I said before, I think the ultimate check is elections but I don't think you should be hesitant to speak the word in this room," he told our congressmen. "A check on executive lawlessness is impeachment."
How much executive lawlessness should a nation of free people be expected to tolerate? Does it depend on which political party has a president in the White House? Are Obama's lawlessness and constitutional violations not excellent reasons to bring him to trial on these matters and seek his impeachment? Indeed, isn't Congress in violation of its duties and responsibilities if it does not vigorously seek impeachment?
Impeachment is not a complete remedy. The corrupt and partisan Senate would never vote to try or convict the president. But if the House -- on its own -- had the courage to hold a vote of no confidence, followed by issuing articles of impeachment, House prosecution of corrupt government officials, coupled with defunding of the administration's political agenda, then these measures would collectively check the administration's assault on our freedoms and liberties.
When I was growing up, my teachers, family, and friends always expressed a confident, even buoyant, optimism about the security of liberty, freedom, and prosperity in our great nation. Nobody would have believed our own government would one day work so hard and diligently to take all that away from us. This is the United States of America, they said, the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.
They said it couldn't happen here.
Abraham Lincoln said, "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
It's time to stop talking and do something.
Impeaching Barack Hussein Obama is a good start.


_______________________________________________________________________
J.T. Hatter is the author of Lost in Zombieland: The Rise of President Zero, a political satire on the Obama administration. J.T. can be reached at jt@jthatter.com   

(pics TruthMediaTV)


TOPICS: Government; History; Politics
KEYWORDS: impeach; impeachment; lies; obama

1 posted on 01/03/2014 3:23:44 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AdvisorB; ken5050; sten; paythefiddler; gattaca; bayliving; SeminoleCounty; chesley; Vendome; ...

***ping***


2 posted on 01/03/2014 3:24:21 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Obama is an evil, anti-American communist thug, but he will never be impeached. There is no point in trying when the Senate has the final say on removal from office. We need to focus on minimizing the damage inflicted by Obama and electing real Americans to the Senate this November.


3 posted on 01/03/2014 3:28:51 AM PST by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

we can do both......


4 posted on 01/03/2014 3:29:57 AM PST by Doogle (USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Haven’t you heard? Impeachment is a form of racism. /s


5 posted on 01/03/2014 3:31:25 AM PST by TADSLOS (The Event Horizon has come and gone. Buckle up and hang on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

AMEN


6 posted on 01/03/2014 3:33:05 AM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Maybe after the midterms. But not now. Not with boner. Not with most scared rabbit republicans in the house or senate. Don’t want to touch the first black _resident.


7 posted on 01/03/2014 3:42:01 AM PST by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Talk about it? Sure. Execute it? Nope.


8 posted on 01/03/2014 3:44:23 AM PST by arderkrag (An Unreconstructed Georgian, STANDING WITH RAND.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TADSLOS
Haven’t you heard? Impeachment is a form of racism. /s

All criticism of the Obungler is racism. F the rat bast---s.

9 posted on 01/03/2014 3:45:08 AM PST by Mark17 (Chicago Blackhawks: Stanley Cup champions 2010, 2013. Vietnam Veteran, 70-71)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

It is those “inside the velvet rope” (Washington elite) vs those “outside the velvet rope” (us)... The political elite are NOT going to turn on their own for fear of a future retribution over some issue... Party affiliation doesn’t matter...

One solution is TERM limits and it must come from US... the states...

http://www.conventionofstates.com/


10 posted on 01/03/2014 3:47:05 AM PST by bfh333 ("Hope"... "Change"... You better HOPE you have some CHANGE after the next 4 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

I’d rather see him arrested (along with Holder, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, & don’t forget Valerie Jarrett!).

I hold out hope that one of these days, he really will go too far.


11 posted on 01/03/2014 3:53:36 AM PST by KGeorge (Till we're together again, Gypsy girl. May 28, 1998- June 3, 2013)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

He should never have even made it past the primaries. And his impeachment should have been already a fond memory by the 2012 election. But I expect you’ll still find people on here saying it’s a waste of time to talk about impeachment.


12 posted on 01/03/2014 3:54:22 AM PST by OldNewYork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldNewYork

Never a waste of time to say it. But the Republican Party has to change 100 fold for it to happen. Perhaps after a bangup midterm election. I’m not holding my breath.


13 posted on 01/03/2014 4:03:31 AM PST by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

There are several things the House could do on its own. It could issue a sense of the House resolution stating that the majority of the House believe that Obunga is not a US citizen and not qualified to hold the office of president; that the House considers the office of presidency to be vacant; that the 20121 election is null/void due both to evidence of major fraud and the illegality of Obunga holding the office.
They could also enjoin the US military from obeying any orders coming from the white house.


14 posted on 01/03/2014 4:08:06 AM PST by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

He’s disrespect for the rule of law will be tolerated.. hated but tolerated. One must have a set of balls to stand up to someone like the messiah and there’s only one or two that are capable of doing so.


15 posted on 01/03/2014 4:22:16 AM PST by maddog55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Sorry if this is a nit, but this is not a Lincoln quote. It’s not a bad paraphrase, but shouldn’t be used with quotation marks.

An actual quote from which this probably derived, “If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time or die by suicide.”

http://www.greatamericanhistory.net/lincolnneversaidthat.htm


16 posted on 01/03/2014 4:31:06 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Yeah, but it would require action by the GOP.

RINOs don’t wanna be called waayssist—so it’s no go.


17 posted on 01/03/2014 4:39:30 AM PST by Flintlock ( islam is a LIE, mohammed was a CRIMINAL, shira is POISON.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Forgot the include the "quote" I was criticizing.

Abraham Lincoln said, "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."

Well, no, he didn't say that, though he said something much more powerful.

18 posted on 01/03/2014 5:02:02 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican
Impeach AND convict.

5.56mm

19 posted on 01/03/2014 5:11:32 AM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

I think we need to keep beating Boehner over the head with this non-stop... somebody has to


20 posted on 01/03/2014 5:21:18 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

he needs to be voted out as speaker. but I believe that is a year away.


21 posted on 01/03/2014 5:24:15 AM PST by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

But thanks to Harry Reid and the nuclear option, wouldn’t it be more possible now if we took the Senate in November?

Worth a try


22 posted on 01/03/2014 5:50:17 AM PST by Wildbill22 (They have us surrounded again, the poor bastards- Gen Creighton Williams Abrams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Hey, Bud. If you need a light for your next cigarette just use that fire and brimstone in the back of your cell.

23 posted on 01/03/2014 6:27:59 AM PST by Slyfox (We want our pre-existing HEALTH INSURANCE back!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wildbill22
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 Punishmnet, according to Law.

The nuclear option does not help in this situation, because conservatives actually follow the Constitution.

24 posted on 01/03/2014 6:30:05 AM PST by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

I’m for it but the Senate isn’t so not gonna happen.


25 posted on 01/03/2014 7:52:49 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

It’s racist just to mention the “I” word while Obama is in office.


26 posted on 01/03/2014 10:39:08 AM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

I’m not holding my breath either. And, sure, it would be better timed after victorious 2014 elections. But whether it would be guaranteed of success or not, when nothing is guaranteed, seems to me to be less important than doing the right thing. Fiat justitia ruat caelum.


27 posted on 01/03/2014 11:54:02 AM PST by OldNewYork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson