Skip to main content

Well, we could start out by saying — everything. But let’s focus on some specifics by members of the media and the Republican Party. Let’s discuss what they’ve been saying and reporting about the possibility of impeaching President Obama.

The Beltway conventional wisdom these days is that Democrats are the ones pushing impeachment talk, both to raise money and to rev up their base for the mid-term elections in November. It’s true that progressive inboxes have exploded with emails from the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee), the DSCC (Democratic Senatorial Campaign Commitee), OFA (Organizing for Action), the DNC (Democratic National Committee), and whatever other kinds of alphabet soup combinations that raise money for Democrats, all asking for funds. But to say that Republicans haven’t been talking about impreachment only means that Beltway talking heads have been taking siestas. Consider these recent statements:

* A few days ago, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who has his own show on the Fox News Channel, was on a right-wing, Iowa-based radio talk show and said: “There’s no doubt that he has done plenty of things worthy of impeachment. … There’s a big difference between what we owe God and what we owe Caesar, and right now we’ve got Caesar acting like God.”

(Caesar, huh? Could a right-wing cartoon of Obama in a toga be far behind?)

* Rep. Bill Flores (R, Texas), said in a telephone town hall with constituents: “If you were to ask persons and many folks in the House, has the president violated the law and will he be worthy of impeachment, I think a fair number of people would say yes.”

* Rep. Walter Jones (R, N.C.) was one of five Republicans who voted against the GOP’s Obama lawsuit because it wasn’t right-wing enough. Just impeach already, he said on a radio show in Greenville, N.C. “Use the Constitution, that’s what it is there for.” Jones said impeachment was designed to get a president’s attention when he or she surpassed executive authority.

(Do we have to go through this again? You Tea Party types really should read the U.S. Constitution. Article II, Section 4, of the Constitution lists the possible reasons for impeachment: “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Nowhere does it mention “getting a president’s attention.”)

* Rep. Steve King (R, Deport ‘em all) raised the prospect of pursuing “that ‘I’ word that we don’t want to say.”

* In a recent Sunday morning TV interview, House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R, I-let-lobbyists-sit-in-on-interviews-for-staff-members) refused multiple opportunities to say that impeachment is off the table for the GOP.

* A GOP House candidate in Tennessee, State Sen. Jim Tracy, told the Chattanooga Times Free Press: “I would be open to impeachment as an option to put a stop to the out-of-control executive orders and overreach this president has shown.” Since he’s running in the Tennessee primary against the disgraced Rep. Scott DesJarlais in a very red district, it’s likely he’ll be in the U.S. House in January and just itchin’ to hit the impeachment button.

* And let’s not forget $arah Palin, the half-term Alaskan governor who wants you to spend good money to listen to her spout idiocies on her own TV channel. She claims that God wants Obama impeached. “This president’s forgotten man is we the people, and we the people know that our best days are still ahead because we know that God shed his grace. He’s given us our freedom to do what’s right. God doesn’t drive parked cars.”

(“God doesn’t drive parked cars.” It’s hard to know how to even respond to that kind of crazy.)

Let’s add to the list other Republicans who have brought up impeachment: Sen. James Inhofe (R, Stone Age), Sen. Tom Coburn (R, You-have-to-listen-to-me-because-I’m-a-doctor), Rep. Louis Gohmert (R, Craziest Guy in Congress), Rep. Ted Yoho (R, Really Looney), and many, many more, including Rep. Steve Stockman (R, Texas, of course) who said, “President Obama is begging to be impeached.”

Of course, Republicans are trying to have it both ways. House Speaker John Boehner (R, Sun Lamp) dismissed the entire story as a “scam” that Democrats “started” as an election-year stunt. Too bad that so many Republicans are feeding the narrative.

In a recent opinion piece in The Washington Post, Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., spelled out “Five myths about impeachment.” As he discusses the money raised on both sides over the impeachment threat, he writes: “The money pouring in would be just as well spent on defense against Bigfoot. Much of the debate has been more mythological than constitutional.” Read the whole thing for a clear explanation of what the conditions are that warrant impeachment. Specifically, he says that impeachment is not just anything Congress says it is; it does not have to involve a criminal act;  it is not like recalling a governor; there is no clear historical precedent; and that Obama will not be impeached.

“Obama is as likely to be impeached as he is to be installed as the next pontiff,” Turley writes. “And I say that as someone who has testified in Congress that this president has violated federal laws, unconstitutionally appointed various executive-branch officers and improperly transferred money. Nevertheless, many of these disputes have divided judges on the merits. Presidents are allowed to challenge Congress in such conflicts without being subject to impeachment. Where they cross the line is when they ignore final judicial rulings in acts of contempt of both courts and Congress. Obama has not done that.”

This is cross-posted at my own website, And from the Dept. of Shameless Self-Promotion, if you're interested in a murder mystery mixed with political media satire set at a Netroots Nation-type convention, check out The Political Blogging Murder, available as an e-book in a variety of formats for a mere $2.99.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (9+ / 0-)

    Want to read a funny mystery about political blogging? Visit

    by Molly Weasley on Thu Aug 07, 2014 at 03:00:05 PM PDT

  •  obama isnt going to be impeached, and since (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Demi Moaned, Chitown Kev

    the Dems didnt impeach Bush- who clearly deserved it- the latitude the president gets on things is increased. Not acting has consequences after all.

    •  This and (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Molly Weasley, OooSillyMe

      there's no grounds to impeach.

      I think that all this impeachment talk is a bunch of sound and fury (and you can finish that statement)

    •  If the GOPbags take both houses of congress .... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ... I dead-dog guarantee you impeachment charges will be introduced.

      As far as "grounds," who cares -- the constitution requires "high crimes and misdemanors," which is left up to the members of congress to intrepret, so in all likelihood "breathing while black" will be considered valid grounds for impeachment.

      Actually, their plan is to take out Biden too in a 2-for-1 proceeding (with Biden's removal coming first).

      •  they cant remove the president- they wont have (0+ / 0-)

        enough votes in the Senate- they need 67, and Rs havent controlled that many Senate seats since the post-Civil War era. removing Biden again would require 67 votes- which they wont get., since i doubt any Democrat would vote to remove Obama or Biden from office.

        •  In their dream scenario, they will take 55+ seats (0+ / 0-)

          ... in the Senate, and then they will be able to get 12 or more Dems to jump  the fence in fear of the raw visceral hate of Barack Obama they assume is universal among the citizenry.

          They truly believe Obama is so universally hated among the public at large they could credibly threaten electoral doomsday results for anyone voting to support him.

          Such is the result of a 24-hour diet of Faux Fascist Noise and right-wing screech radio.

  •  What I would like to know is can (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Molly Weasley

    the GOP majority in the house just hold the vote to impeach?  Is there a judge involved?
    I mean they have the votes...what is stopping them?  Does the President get a lawyer, is it like a trial?  I don't remember how it went down with Clinton.

    I hate these rotten bastards..

    We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

    by nocynicism on Thu Aug 07, 2014 at 05:13:20 PM PDT

    •  House impeaches; Senate votes on conviction (0+ / 0-)

      Senate needs two-thirds' vote to convict. 67 votes. Of course, some Tea Partiers think that if the GOP takes the Senate, Obama is gone. Once again, they need to read the Constitution.

      Want to read a funny mystery about political blogging? Visit and check out The Political Blogging Murder.

      by Molly Weasley on Thu Aug 07, 2014 at 06:02:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •   impeachment is akin to indictment. if the GOP (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Molly Weasley

        takes the Senate-which I consider to be unlikely- all that would happen is they might get a majority vote on conviction, but thats not enough to remove Obama. all that would do is rile up the Dem side, much like cl;intons impeachment did. if only there was a  mechanism for removing a house that refuses to do its job. like early elections..

        •  I know how it works in the Senate but (0+ / 0-)

          Just by voting their majority  in the house he is impeached? I know they can't remove him but they just want to destroy the man and his presidentcy.  It is just sickening.

          We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

          by nocynicism on Thu Aug 07, 2014 at 07:46:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  in the House all that needed is a simple majority (0+ / 0-)

            or 218 votes. the house impeaches the Senate tries and convicts or acquits. the senate needs 67 votes to remove a president from office, 50 isnt enough.No president has ever been remove from office- Andrew Johnson  was found guilty of his charges but there wasnt enough votes to remove him from office- the vote fell one vote shy of the two-thirds needed. Nixon resigned before he could be  impeached and removed from office. If Nixon had not resigned he likely would have been removed from office in a matter of days, the House would likely have voted near unanimously, and Senate would have done the same.Obama will not be remove from office

    •  It usually starts in the Judiciary Committee. (0+ / 0-)

      Evidence is presented and articles voted on.  Personal and WH Counsel are allowed to question witnesses as well.

      For history buffs CSPAN 3 has been broadcasting the Nixon impeachment hearings on Saturday evenings recently.  He resigned 40 years ago this weekend.

  •  If Obama does become Pope :-) (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Molly Weasley, gfv6800

    "Barack" translates as "Benedict". And since you don't have to be a cardinal or even a priest--or even a Catholic, in principle--to be named pope, "it could happen".

  •  Jeez, now you're trying to (0+ / 0-)

    fund-raise on impeachment BS along with the Democratic Party.

  •  "we the people know that our best days (0+ / 0-)

    are still ahead because we know that God shed his grace."

    Wow, God as either a reptile or an eczema patient.  That Sarah, she sure knows how to come up with the weird metaphors.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site