"Impeachment Goes Mainstream." Next—The Realization That It Will Work.
November 14, 2014, 09:33 AM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF
More impeachment sightings:
...[I]mpeachment talk is reaching the supposed mainstream of the conservative commentariat. On Thursday night, Charles Krauthammer told Megyn Kelly on Fox News that Obama’s executive amnesty amounted to “an impeachable offense.” Multiple Fox News commentators and hosts have also mentioned impeachment, including Kelly, who correctly stated, “Some would suggest if he goes too far he should be impeached.” Chris Wallace has said the same: “You’re going to see calls for impeachment.” Sean Hannity averred, “Normally, when a president does something that would bring the country to a tipping point, the first thing people would say is impeachment.” Judge Andrew Napolitano has also raised impeachment.

Congressmen are raising the specter of impeachment again, too. Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) said three days ago, “Well, impeachment is indicting in the House and that’s a possibility. But you still have to convict in the Senate and that takes a two-thirds vote. But impeachment would be a consideration, yes sir.” Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) said, “To me a constitutional question means that we have the option of impeachment…We have a Constitution, and I am very disappointed from year to year that we do not follow the Constitution. To me, if you think the president has violated his trust of office, meaning with the American people, then follow the Constitution.” Jones has repeatedly called for Obama’s impeachment, and called for George W. Bush’s impeachment over the Iraq war.

Andy McCarthy, author of Faithless Execution, wrote today at National Review:

Impeaching Obama would be a very unpleasant choice, and there is clearly no appetite for it. But living with what he is otherwise going to do over the next two years (on top of what he has already done) will be a more unpleasant choice. And there are no other choices.

Impeachment Goes Mainstream, by Ben Shapiro, Breitbart.com, November 14, 2014
Shapiro argues that the Senate would not convict Obama, which needs 67 votes, although he does concede
Nonetheless, Republicans have been led to impeachment because there may be no other option. Republicans can defund major agencies, but courts are unlikely to restrict Obama on his failures to enforce the law. The failure to stop President Obama in 2012 may turn out to be the nail in the coffin for American accountability.
(Emphasis added. Links in original except for McCarthy's book).

Actually, I think Shapiro is too pessimistic here. As I wrote in my July 6 article Obama’s Border Dissolution Is Treason. The Answer Is Impeachment. It Would Work (published, ahem, before impeachment's 15 minutes of fame this summer), anyone who has ever had anything to do with litigation knows that trial lawyers are terrified of going to court. They know that anything can happen. A Senate trial would be intensely volatile—and that’s very bad for Democrats.

In effect, a vote against impeachment would be a vote for Amnesty, and for border dissolution.

How many Democrats really want to run on that in 2016?