Skip to comments.Ted Cruz declines to follow Palinís lead in calling for Obamaís impeachment
Posted on 07/09/2014 9:53:49 PM PDT by Bratch
Every Republican has three options on impeachment. One: Lets do it. Hes got it coming. As far as I know, no one in Congress has joined Palin in taking that approach since her op-ed at Breitbart went live yesterday, although Im sure theres a constituency for it in the House. Someone should ask Tim Huelskamp or Michele Bachmann. Two: Hell no. Its political suicide. Lots of Republicans believe that, McCain and Boehner foremost among them, but they dont want to say so publicly or else theyll be attacked from the right for putting expediency above principle. Erick Erickson, whos no ones idea of a RINO, is bolder than they are in making the case today at Red State.
Thus, option three: Hes got it coming, but alas, it wont work. Democrats are too corrupt to join us in the effort. Thatll be the default position for Republican pols since it lets them shift blame while achieving suicide-avoidance. The mystery with Cruz was whether hed choose door number one or number three. He wants to preserve his cred as Mr. Tea Party ahead of 2016 but, after having spearheaded the defund effort, he also doesn't want to get knocked again as a guy whos willing to bet lots of Republican political capital on lost causes. His interview with Mark Levin on Monday night suggested that he was in the hes got it coming but it wont work camp.
And, per National Review, he is.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Give it time
I completely disagree than Palin has done one single thing wrong here.
Ted Cruz and every other politician needs to focus on things, in their everyday world.
Sarah Palin is not currently holding a public office. She is more free to speak her mind, and that is exactly what she did.
I am glad she did so. I am also not surprized people aren’t climbing all over themselves to support her suggestion.
That is fine. It is fine we’re discussing the topic. Perhaps it will develop traction. Perhaps not. But Palin did a good thing mentioning it.
It helps her, and it helps America.
I’m all for it.
Ted, you do it because its the constitutional thing to do.
I support both impeachment and prosecution
If he's got it coming, that means he's guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. (And we know that he is, and then some... and then some more.)
If it won't work, then the system doesn't work. And the Republic is no more.
You either have law, or you don't. We don't.
Important to note, Freepers have been calling for this since day #1
I prefer an indictment over impeachment.
Some. Lately many seem to side with the libs on impeachment, spouting all the reasons we cant/claiming political ‘realism’ over constitutional law. And they scream loudly when called on it.
At this point it doesn’t matter. I’d impeach him just so he has that distinction on his record.
Gays in the closet and rino’s on the floor, grab your partner, dosey doe and swing him ‘round and don’t let go.
On noes, they’ve uncovered the conspiracy! It takes two ya know.
I believe impeachment is a given. But the timing isn’t right. We need to slow down and take a breath. Time is on our side.
If Articles of Impeachment are brought against Obama after the 2014 elections [assuming GOP control of the Senate], its going to energize the liberal base for 2016. Not a good thing. Also, a GOP Senate will not have the 67 votes required to convict. So, why bother.
DEM enthusiasm for 2014 is at a low - so, the GOP should concentrate on regaining the Senate. Then, they should let Obama be Obama [with his wacko policies]- let him sink the DEMs in the 2016 presidential race.
Until then, the only thing they should do is sue Obama for abuse of power and hopefully win. That will make Obama more of a worthless president than he already is ...
“You either have law, or you don’t.”
I have heard where some of the talk-show people and politicians think bringing him up for impeachment now would help the dems in the fall and perhaps in 2016 (sympathy, portray the repubs as out to get all dems, etc.). And they make some fair points.
OTOH, you make a great point - not bringing him up on it is just playing politics. Treason is a serious matter not to be trifled with in playing games. Although one could also argue that one is “doing the greatest good for the country” by playing politics with it to win the next election.
Just like Nixon could have legally gone through the impeachment process, and I’m not sure, but I think he thought he had a chance. But instead, he resigned “for the good of the nation.”
It isn’t clear to me that the nation can survive another year and a half of this administration the way it’s going now. If we can’t impeach the guy, we need to find some way to stop the damage.
I prefer legislative valor instead of the ankle-grabbing timidity too many GOPsters readily practice.
There’s not enough backbone and wherewithal in the Republican party to properly handle impeachment. It would likely turn into a fluster cluck.
The Constitution set up a POLITICAL process and there is nothing wrong with Congress using POLITICAL rationales for deciding if and when to impeach.
Like always, Sarah Palin is ahead of the game. Soon Obama will be seen as deserving of impeachment—it will be so profound even the MSNBC crowd will be calling for it. Watch and be amazed.
Sure, Obama deserves impeachment, but that is NOT a good enough reason for Republicans to take this risk.
There is NO requirement for Congress to impeach. Congress violates not one thing by delay.
Well send a letter to Eric Holder. Tell him to get moving on this.
He will come around in time
Really? Have you looked around the world and down at our border? Time? We may have another 6 months before the Republic collapses. Plenty of time. No hurry. Just wait.
This is a case of
Doing the right things vs Doing whats political.
Yea I guess law is just optional. How very Obama of you to think so.
Does a cop have the option of not arresting someone caught murdering someone? No? Then why do you ‘FEEL’ that a congress has the option to not impeach a president caught in HCAM?
I agree. If only for the sake of history.
Because THEY DO!
It is called DISCRETION
Something you obviously lack.
Blather from one who has consistently dissed Cruz
And E. Erickson ain’t that conservative either
If the courts just laugh at the cop, pretty soon he’s going to quit caring.
And he has no ability to make any of it happen. Talk to Bonehead and Mitch the Meek
You hit the nail on the head, well said.
Your Personal grudge with me was thoroughly shown a few days back.
If a HCAM includes the word ‘crime’, what then do you suppose the binary options are here? If government can just let a crime pass, then why not keep obama as thats what he does now?
Couldn’t have said it better.
He has the ability to unite conservatives behind him. Thats the first thing needed.
Where in the constitution does it require congress to impeach? You can’t cite because it doesn’t exist. It says they can NOT they shall....big difference
What is the point of a government that ignores laws and allows a communist to wreck it? You want to tell me with a straight face that Bozo has committed nothing criminal?
If he has then they have a duty to impeach.
And by the way have you forgotten the debacle that was the Clinton impeachment.
Nixon resigned because congressional members of his own party, led by Barry Goldwater made the walk to the White House, and told him to resign or he would be impeached, and removed from office.
At this time there is not one Congressional Democrat that would consider making that trip to the White House.
It was a debacle because the GOP cowered from defending it’s actions. No other reason.
>> Then,they should let Obama be Obama [with his wacko policies]- let him sink the DEMs in the 2016 presidential race.<<
What???? My God what are some of you thinking? He’s not sinking the Democrats he’s destroying our country!! He’s ruining our lives!! And you wanna let him continue his “wacko policies!”
Well my God. I’m about ready to give up.
When you see a thread filled with ‘conservatives arguing against the constitutional remedy for the situation, then yes, it probably is.
You are talking about a moral obligation not the law....impeaching O will go nowhere in Reid’s senate and could well insure a conservative blood bath for decades to come. Did you forget the elections after Clinton was impeached?
Even the founders knew that their are times you do one thing and not another for the good of the whole. We as an electorate must do more to get conservatives elected. We cannot allow the politician class to continue to abuse us. If we are not willing to face reality we will not succeed. Impeach O and you will definitely get Hilary in the WH.
Make Buckwheat a laughingstock, and the Dems will disown him.
I am talking about upholding a legally binding oath. I am talking about upholding the laws on the books, not some hypothetical here.
They have a duty. A legal obligation to the constitution.
The senate behaved in Avery protective mode. They wanted to preserve their own power...that was both parties. Many in the senate then are still there. With Reid as majority leader an impeachment trial will never occur.
It is important to pick your battles lest you do more harm than good
You either belive in the constitutional remedy and by extension the authority of the constitution itself to govern us or you don’t.
Do you or not? you do not get to pick and choose.
>> the constitutional remedy
a constitutional remedy