Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Aug 26, 2013 in 2012 Elections, Featured, Law, Media, Politics, Race, Satire, Society | 15 comments

UPDATE — Impeach Obama NOW! Do the Paperwork Later.



Fair is fair.

It is gratifying to note that not all Republicans are obsessed with wanting to impeach the first black president of the United States — so much that “it would be a dream come true” for some.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal over the weekend rejected such irresponsible rabble-rousing.
Speaking on NBC’s Meet the Press, Jindal said, “Look, I reject that kind of talk. The reality is I didn’t like it when the left spent eight years trying to delegitimize President Bush, calling to question his election. I don’t think we should be doing that to President Obama.”

He added:

The reality is one of the great things about this country is we do have a peaceful transfer of power…I disagree with this president’s policies, but instead of talking about impeachment, let’s get out there and let’s have a legitimate debate, let’s fight his policies, let’s try to repeal Obamacare, let’s try to promote school choice, let’s fight against more government spending.

Thank you, Governor.

Original Post:

Republicans have already decided that President Barack Hussein Obama should be impeached — they even claim they have the votes for it. The little details, those pesky Articles of Impeachment, “documenting all this stuff” will be done “as it goes along.”

I don’t have the legal background to determine what offenses rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanor”– Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) makes a similar claim — but I do believe that before a person, whether Joe Blow or the president of the United States, is threatened with a Constitutional, judicial or criminal process, the charges should be crystal clear.

Being the subject of scorn and hate or having a Representative disgusted at you after an encounter is, in my humble opinion, not an impeachable offense. As far as I know, having Hussein as your middle name does not rise to high crimes and misdemeanors and neither does being President while black.

And while the Framers of the Constitution did not, in their wildest dreams, think that a black man would once be President, I am quite certain that neither did they believe that impeaching a president would become the stuff that dreams are made of — that for one legislator it would be “a dream come true.” That drafting the Articles of Impeachment would be as simple and nonchalant as going back to one’s Capitol office, calling in one’s lawyers — “PhDs in history,” mind you — and asking, ‘Tell me how I can impeach the President of the United States.”

I really do not believe that the Framers foresaw the day when our lawmakers would first decide to impeach a president and then fabricate the charges along the lines of “a ton of incompetence,” “some intended violation of the law” or when one Senator thinks that a president is “getting perilously close” to the constitutional standard for impeachment.

Nor do I think that the Framers ever imagined that those charged with the awesome responsibility of impeaching a president would first canvas their colleagues to see if they have enough votes to move forward with a potential impeachment and then get down to the serious business of deciding what to impeach the president for — “documenting all this stuff as it goes along.”

Never mind that the Framers exhaustively debated what those standards should be and expressly threw out “maladministration,” believing that “[A]n election of [e]very four years will prevent maladministration” and substituting it with “other high Crimes and Misdemeanors,” in addition to treason and bribery.

Never mind that the Framers never foresaw that legislators would go around town hall meetings whipping-up their constituents into impeachment frenzy without really knowing what the president should be impeached for. But never mind, those little details can be filled in later after the IMPEACH! IMPEACH! chants grow loud and angry enough. For now, Obamacare, Obama’s incompetent response to, yes, Hurricane Katrina, or even the first family’s “lavish” vacations to Hawaii and Martha’s Vineyard will do. Shame that Birthergate did not pan out.

Should Republican members of Congress still have doubts as to whether Obama should be impeached when they return from their August recess — from their motivational town hall meetings — a new book, “Impeachable Offenses: The Case for Removing Barack Obama from Office,” will be waiting for them, hand-delivered by the book’s publishing firm, according to Politico.

Co-author Aaron Klein believes his book “with its many pages of footnotes, acts as a possible blueprint for such an indictment.”

Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution states:

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

James Madison’s notes taken during the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on the Impeachment Procedures, reflect the great diligence, seriousness and concern on the part of the Framers when they drafted Article II of our Constitution.

I know that the expression has been overused, that it is a cliché, but I sincerely believe that the Framers of the Constitution would be rolling over in their graves if they could watch the mockery that is being made of their hard, pioneering, democracy-building work for purely partisan reasons.

Cross-posted from the Huffington Post


Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2013 The Moderate Voice
  • Today

    Fortunately, the Republican party, tee-party and Faux “News” are not racist or I would be suspicious of their motives. Wink-wink. I apologize for exposing my cynicism.

  • JSpencer

    Obama is a democrat and he’s black. Isn’t that enough to impeach him?

  • cjjack

    Well it is pretty obvious that he stole the country. I don’t know if you’ve heard, but the refrain from Republicans is “take our country back.” They are after all the rightful owners of the country – including all public offices and the White House in particular.

    As such, anyone who takes any of those things away (necessitating a campaign to take it back) is clearly guilty of theft. Stealing an entire country has got to be a pretty serious crime, right?

    Not only that, but he’s stolen it twice. And he just sits there in the White House acting like he’s supposed to be there or something. The nerve of that guy!

  • KP

    Good to see you back, DDW. Missed your thoughts this past month.

  • JSpencer hits the nail squarely on the head. An unfortunate but ugly truth.

  • epiphyte

    Obama is incomparably better than the neanderthals that seek to impeach him – but I’d feel better about saying that if I didn’t think he’d ceded control of the nation to corporate interests, the military + the NSA. This was a time at which we really, really needed a principled leader to step up to the task of unscrewing us. At this point I’m less than convinced that we picked the right (hu)man for the job.

  • DaGoat

    I disagree with the premise here. A GOP congressman I never heard of before said he thinks they have the votes to impeach Obama. Despite his adding he does not think impeachment should be pursued, that is turned into “Impeach Obama Now!”. In fact, as far as I can tell none of the people mentioned in DDW’s essay actually want to pursue impeachment.

    Ruth Marcus had a good article on this a few days ago, basically concluding that while Obama has committed some acts that might be considered flouting the law, he hasn’t done so at a level worse than prior presidents. I agree with her conclusions, namely that while Obama is not deserving of impeachment presidents should be watched closely for overstepping their constitutional boundaries.

  • dduck

    Thanks epi, I will be looking for an “UNSREW YOU” tee shirt, great idea.

  • petew


    Even if an impeachment process goes nowhere, as it undoubtedly will, The extreme right wing of Republicans, will still achieve a sense of satisfaction since they will once again have thrown red meant to the press, with yet another headline grabber.

    If one really examines the credibility of the many scandals Republicans have feverishly tried to lay on Obama, one will find that no real substance is behind these charges. But the intent by the GOP to besmirch the President’s credibility and good intentions, is served just by placing all of these political bogeymen out there,so that their implications of guilt is really enough to do the damage they desire.

    One by one, as Republicans jump like so many Pyranha onto the corpses of what are essentially self-concocted conspiracies, this creates yet another success at bogging down the Administration, which then, must waste energy countering and discrediting them.

    Yes, a few thousand emails of private citizens have been “spied” upon because of random computer glitches—and among these a few have resulted from unauthorized personal uses by agents—but these represent an infinitesimally small number of the personal emails and communications exchanged by Americans each day (the actually number is more than 2 Billion emails) even before regular phone calls and text messages are included. Here is a link to an excellent article done by THE PROPAGANDA PROFESSOR—a journalist who chooses to remain anonymous to avoid being accused of merely partisan rhetoric. On his site, he doesn’t create propaganda, as the name may suggest to some, but rather he debunks it. So if you visit this website you will witness what basic reasoning, and basic math, can do to shoot down this myth:

    Republicans are functioning on attack mode basically because, while programs like the ACA, will help countless low and middle income people, the very wealthy are going to see increased taxes, along with a challenge to the power and greed of private ensurers and the pharmaceutical industry—in this sense they wouldn’t give a damn if Obama really deserves impeachment, they only want to destroy his credibility and ruin the public’s trust—unfortunately that is the depths they are sinking to.

  • petew

    My first paragraph above should refer to “red meat,” not “red meant.”

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Noted, petew.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Thanks, KP

  • sheknows

    Hi Dorian. Hope you were taking a beautiful, wonderful, peaceful, restful vacation.
    While Have to agree with DaGoat on part of his criticism, I disagree as a whole.
    The true significance of this article lies in the fact that it is just one more travesty, one more insult on top of injury, one more radical, numbskull idea pursued by Obama opponents. Granted, one person talked of it and others dismissed it, but we all know if they thought they had a chance in hell of making it stick, they would pursue it.
    His unfounded hatred was obvious before he even took office in 2008. The continual road blocks and scandal mongering aimed at his administration has never ceased. So true DaGoat, it is only a vacant threat and dismissed by many, but at the same time it is far more serious than we know and a lot more vehement than we should allow.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Thanks for your wishes, sheknows.

  • slamfu

    This is the left equivalent of conservative theories that Obama is going to somehow nullify the 22nd Amendment and run for a 3rd term. Shake your head and move on is my advice.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :