Will The Republicans Impeach Obama If They Get The Senate?
 

Boehner and others like Ryan are going around using terms like lawless to describe Obama....the spineless Speaker did a 180 on immigration because Obama does not "enforce the laws". In other words the Speaker is still unable to stand up to the Dixiecrats in his caucus.


I was watching MSNBC and one of the pundits suggested that is just a build up to their plan to impeach Obama next year should they get the Senate.

I would imagine a vote of cloture might stop that but I am not sure on the impeachment process.
The Tea Party is anti-government (which to me is the same as Anti-American) and I would not be surprised if they try this just to damage Obama's legacy, even if they could not get the Senate to impeach.

I think we may be headed toward a constitutional crisis. In normal times I would think I was being hyperbolic but remember what Ted Cruz did last October.


hope I am wrong.

I wonder if he includes refusal to fund and implement a law called PPACA under the term; "Lawless"?

My guess is no.

Dave

As to the OP.

I'm sure they will try. But, even if they do, who cares? Does it really make much difference?

Dave

I am not an impeachment expert, but I believe the house needs to get a majority vote which is just bringing up the charges, like an indictment. The senate then has to have a vote 2/3 to convict. The case would be presided over by John Roberts, and I just don't see it happening, especially since the SCOTUS upheld the ACA to begin with.

I doubt it. He'd have to do something of perjurous stupidity to get there :D

Pete

Bob Barr, the GOP jagoff from Georgia (did I repeat myself?) who was a leader in the Clinton impeachment efforts is now running again in Georgia saying that he'll again consider impeachment proceedings if elected.

Impeachment proceedings against Obama would be the biggest gift they could ever give Obama and the Democrats. They would look even more foolish than they do now, as hard as that is to imagine.

And, of all the reasons they might have employed to impeach Clinton, they pick;

Lying about a blowjob.

Consider his wife. If I was married to that, I would lie too.

Dave

Reagan perjuring himself about some stupidity he and his cronies engaged in got him off the hook.;)

Dave

If they do I would think a race riot would follow.

People are not stupid.

We all know the good ole boys don't like the idea of an uppity negro elevated to such a stature.

Republicans cannot possibly be stupid enough to try this...

No offense Zeke, but I think this is one of the stupidest posts I have seen you make.

Boehner is facing a primary on May 6th. :D

Yes it seems a stupid thing to do....but I can see them doing it just so they can put "impeached Obama" on their resumes so they do not get primaried.


I see dark clouds ahead.

Somehow, I don't see the good folk in Ohio chucking the speakership for an untried loser of a 'bagger. Mebbe we will see a return to rational and responsible governance from the 'pubbies, once they drive the wackobirds from their midst.

I strongly doubt they'd do it. This whole "lawless" mantra is just a contrived schtick to gracefully (in their minds) back away from immigration reform while blaming Obama. Some of the 'Baggers actually believe it and may demand impeachment proceedings, but Boehner, McConnell all know it might be the death knell of their party.

1. It's not winnable.
2. it only hurts them.

I don't see it happening.

I think you missed his point, Zeke. He thinks they may be that stupid.

Remember the noise people on the left were making when Obama took office to prosecute Cheney et al for war crimes. The flaming radical that he is, he put the lid on that line of thought. Of course, no one on the right remembers that bit of moderation and good will.

Regards,

D-Ray

Indeed. The cooked-up rationalization for the trillion dollar and very deadly Iraq War was far greater grounds for impeachment than the issues of executive discretion exercised by Obama (fewer than any two-term president in more than 100 years).

As I said before, this lawless meme is nothing other than an attempt to provide plausible rationale for the GOP bailing on Immigration Reform. I read somewhere that they ironed out this approach at their recent retreat to Maryland's Eastern Shore. What other excuse could they concoct for bailing on immigration reform that provides them cover while blaming Obama for their own failure?

When the Republicans come out with a new word of the day - i.e. "lawlessness" - you can expect to see it here from the usual suspects. I can usually also expect to hear it from a guy who shares office space where I work.

Regards,

D-Ray

I agree with you, but they are that stupid.

Hit the nail on the head.

Bwahahahah

Exactly what the "T" Party wants seems to be driving that clown car.



Barney

My error.

I usually catch subtlety.

I've been off my game, recently. :)

Maybe not, but the Tea Party ones are crazy enough.

No. They'll start chasing money the day after the election. They have priorities after all.

I think the wingnuts are being goaded. Good strategy if it works, but I doubt if they will fall for it.

The thing is the average Republican voter has a bizarre misconception of what impeachment means.........Which is pretty much........nothing.

Republicans------They make great Parrots

Hi, I'm Teabagger Tommy! Just pull the string on my back if you want to know what I was told to think!

Dave

When is the GOP going to stop misusing all this money for frivolous BS and get on with conducting the real business of the day?

The House Rules Committee Democrats were correct. The taxpayers have witnessed House Republicans waste tens of millions of taxpayer dollars on stunts like seven Benghazi investigations, Darrell Issa’s IRS witch hunt, repeated Obamacare investigations, the DOMA lawsuit, and thousands of hours of employee manpower wasted fulfilling Republican requests for information that they already have.

The only thing that House Republicans seem able to do efficiently is waste taxpayer money. Speaker Boehner said that he wouldn’t give President Obama a blank check on funding for the humanitarian crisis on the border, but he has given himself a blank check when it comes to his lawsuit.

Republicans tout themselves as the party of fiscal conservatism, but it is Democrats who are demanding fiscal accountability from Boehner. Earlier this week Democrats demanded transparency from Boehner on the cost of the outside attorneys that he will be hiring for his lawsuit. Today’s letter took things a step beyond and demanded that Republicans let the taxpayers know how much money Republicans are planning on spending on this lawsuit.

Full article...

If our resident Teapublicans can't comprehend this simple economic analysis the mass of them are not going to alter their concept of reality.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Impeachment proceedings against Obama would be manna from heaven for the Democrats.

If image and self-regard are threatened if one concedes an obvious truth, 99 out of 100 people will stubbornly deny it.

Indeed it would. I very seriously want to see Boner do impeachment, he will look as stupid as Noot did. Of course Noot was having an affair while he was trying to impeach Clinton for one, gotta love the hypocrisy. Hmm, I wonder if ol Noot ever got over his sister being gay. :rolleyes:



Carl

I think it is more than a vote. I think the president has to have done something criminal.

Does an impeachment vote in the Senate have to get past Reid and a cloture vote?


What these idiots forget is that almost everyone wanted Nixon gone.....the whole country both Democrats and Republicans were upset.

You can't impeach without overwhelming popular support for such an action. Obama is not Richard Nixon and this is the type of stunt that only disloyal opposition factions in developing nations routinely endeavor in. It is a third rail that should only be used in extreme circumstances....like Watergate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeach..._United_States

I don't know about cloture but as MPHolland pointed out that it takes 67 Senators to convict. That'll never happen in Obama's case.

Plus two. :D

Well, here's this thing--the Constitution says 'high crimes or (again high) misdemeanors. But how high is high? That's an opinion, settled by vote of the senate.

Now suppose the counts clearly contain no crime at all, just a vague "failed to see that the laws are faithfully executed" or something. And suppose the senate votes to convict anyway. I don't see that the President has any recourse--he's got to go. I mean, one can imagine him defying the vote and trying an appeal to the Supreme Count, but that takes us into very strange Constitutional waters indeed, and plunges us into terrible disorder as everyone argues over whether to obey the President or not. I don't think any responsible President would go there.