• #3
    If you are going to do it DO IT! Stop talking (testing the water) and just get it over with. Oh that's right it will be impossible to succeed. Hell Clinton admitted guilt and his improvement failed.

    This reminds me of when I was a kid in school. Someone would threaten to beat you up after school. They would spend the day posturing but when 3 O'clock hit NOTHING. I imagine when the clock hits 3 in Washington it will be the same.
  • #41
    It takes a lot more than 1 congressman to impeach the President. The votes aren't there in the House or the Senate.

    Threatening impeachment is something just about every President has had to face, so it's nothing new. All that's different here is that Obama has decided to use it as a Political tool (never let a crisis go to waste!) against the Republicans in order to exhort more money from panicked liberals.
  • #43
    @BakersfieldBob If so they are playing right into the plan by continuing to go on Fox and other conservative media platforms beating the impeachment drum. They should STFU. And I'm sure beating the drum is helping their fundrasing efforts as well.

    Point is I'm tired of hearing about it. There was not this much impeachment chatter before Clinton who was actually impeached. And almost nine on Bush. Its ridiculous.
  • #49
    @Waynestew Yes, but the Democrats DID enter a bill to impeach Bush. It's getting the play because the White House keeps beating the drum and use it as a badge of honor to raise money. Fox, and the other networks, are just after ratings (which translates into more money for them).
  • #56
    @BakersfieldBob Still not much chatter. Did networks not want ratings then? Hmm
    Furthermore Obama cannot beat a drum without congress beating a drum first.

    I say toMAYto you say toMAUto. But I have not seen Obama taking impeachment much but I have seen congress threatening it and my conservative friends and colleagues flood my email with petition to support impeachment. Did not get such during the Bush years from liberal friends and colleagues. Just saying.
  • #59
    @BakersfieldBob Oh and I'll add seems an effective tactic since the right will nit stip beating the drum themselves.
  • R Load more replies

  • #83
    Have you noticed Rep King has jaw muscles the size of cantaloupes from speaking all this #immigration and #impeachment bullshit?
  • #123
    DARSB......I like your posts because we think alike, but it's really nice to see a little comedy from you now and then, and this one was classic.
  • #15
    The problem is that nobody is giving impeachment a serious look except cynical Democrats and the few Republicans with poor math skills. Let's go over this again:

    * The GOP could have impeached at any time since 2011, but they didn't bother because,

    * They need 67 votes in the Senate to convict and remove the miscreant from office.

    * For the math-impaired, that means the GOP needs TWENTY TWO more votes than they can possibly get.

    * Again, they have 45 Senators. The GOP needs T-W-E-N-T-Y-T-W-O more votes.

    * Even Democrat journalists know this : the GOP needs T-W-E-N-T-Y-T-W-O more votes.

    * If the Republicans can get within striking range in November, just maybe, but that's about 5 more Senators than they are projected to get.

    p.s. T-W-E-N-T-Y-T-W-O
  • #53

    No one has to look any farther than at the numbers to 'get it'...maybe many more are actually using "Common Core" math than I had realized.
  • #63
    @BravoJuliet yeah, and even the math-impaired can solve the problem with social reasoning:

    Why are Democrat media outlets like Politix suddenly getting all Br'er Rabbit? Isn't it the Republicans who are supposed to be attacking Obama? It's just a little fishy if you ask me.
  • #65

    Drumming up the Sheep to donate big money to fight that mean and nasty "Impeachment Monster" from the Right...LOL!

    ...and they will.
  • #127
    The House can easily bring impeachment proceedings which will damage his reputation and perhaps cost the Dems some votes, but as you point out, the Senate must convict, which is unlikely.
  • #137
    @SAS86 A year ago I would have been for impeachment on general principles, but then there wasn't anything else going on in Congress - Harry Reid was sitting on 20-30 House bills.

    Now is not the time to vote on stuff that doesn't lead anywhere - the Democrats need to deal. Many of these new crises require special appropriations, and looking like they're sitting around isn't good during an election campaign.
  • R Load more replies

  • #114
    -Republican: We want to impeach Obama for many many many many things!
    -Democrat: Well if you're going to be that way, we will just inform our party of your plan and have fundraisers to counteract your impeachment.
    -Republican: You can't do that! We never said anything about impeachment! Even Karl Rove said we never said anything about impeachment. It was YOU who said something about impeachment. Now stop your fundraisers.
    -Democrat: You DID talk about impeachment. King, Palin, and more.
    -Republican: No we didn't.
    -Democrat: Yes, you did.
    -Republican: No we didn't. It's just another one of your conspiracies. Nobody said anything about impeachment. I'm right, you're wrong.
    -Democrat: Do you know what Google is?
    -Republican: Are you coming on to me?!?
    -Democrat: No, but keep talking.
    -Republican: Stop making money off of what we're not saying!
    -Democrat: What in hell are you talking about?
    -Republican: Nothing that has to do with impeachment that's for sure.
  • #31
    If you are a pragmatic person you would not undertake impeachment knowing that the democrats control the Senate and at this point it would be senseless to initiate impeachment proceedings. That doesn't mean giving Obama a pass by any sense of the meaning. If evidence were to come up that would meet or exceed the standard of High Crimes or Misdemeanors then I would have no problems in going after Obama if he refused to resign.
  • #144
    If the GOP had any pragmatism within its ranks, they wouldn't have tried to repeal the ACA about 50 times, all at taxpayer's expense. Knowing it would fail in the Senate didn't stop them, so why is it stopping them now?

    This is all nothing more than pre-election political grandstanding.
  • #4
    Typical election year political theater. The last time the GOP impeached, the Senate acquitted and it blew up in the Republicans' face at the next election. This time, a few House members looking for headlines will be encouraged by our irresponsible media.
  • #2
    Oh really? That can't be true. I was told the impeachment chatter was made up by the White House and planted in the media to make Republicans look stupid....

    Well, looks like some Republicans are doing the work for them.
  • #5
    The first part of your statement is true, and if you are on any liberal mailing (or e-mail) lists you will see the Democrats foaming at the mouth in mock desperation, begging for money to fight this evil impending impeachment. And, unfortunately, it's working, the gullible sheep are writing checks like mad. LOL
  • #11
    @UncleSi This is why Republicans are seen as fact averse. I'm commenting on a Republican leader who is quoted saying he wants impeachment. Therefore it cannot be the case that Democrats are simply making up stories about impeachment.

    And yes- I'm getting those emails. It's ridiculous. But it's something I expect out of any political party- even though it is certainly a lowbrow maneuver.

    So let's agree to this- a couple of Republicans are calling for impeachment. Many, but certainly not a majority of, Democrats are using it as an opportunity to mischaracterize all Republicans as desperate and grasping at straws. Which is stupid- because there are plenty of high ranking Republicans who have unilaterally declared that impeachment is not on their agenda at this time. I think that is a fair assessment of the situation. Do you agree?
  • #47
    @SmarterThanYou Steve King is a "Republican leader"? Last time I checked the Republican leaders in the House were Boehner, McCarthy, Scalise, Rodgers, and Lankford.

    So why not agree to this - a few Republicans in contradiction of their leadership are calling for Obama's impeachment while the Democrats, particularly the White House, are using it as an opportunity to mischaracterize all Republicans as desperate and grasping at straws. Which is stupid- because there are plenty of high ranking Republicans who have unilaterally declared that impeachment is not on their agenda at this time.
  • #88
    @BakersfieldBob I consider all elected officials leaders. A team manager is still a leader- even though he has a supervisor. Being the voice of an entire district of people is certainly a leadership position. But other than that- yeah I agree. They're playing a political game just like Republicans are playing with their lawsuit.
  • #162
    @SmarterThanYou - The difference is that the grandstanding and fundraising the Democrats are engaging in will not cost American taxpayers a dime, whereas this lawsuit Boehner has file will cost us plenty, and will likely take years.
  • R Load more replies

  • #20
    NOW, even the mainstream media (NY TImes) is writing how the President's comments are stirring this up.
    (They correctly point out, that in his 1st two years, the President could of easily pasted "Immigration reform" and gotten everything he wanted and he didn't.)
    BUT, if he gives citizenship to all the illegals now...(Not just a select group as he's done in the past) What alternatives does he leave? Especially if the Republican gain control of the Senate.
    One thing is for sure.. This President will leave a Hell of a mess to clean up.
  • #84
    " if he gives citizenship to all the illegals now...(Not just a select group as he's done in the past)"

    So far as I recall from Civics 101 about 40 years ago, the President doesn't have the authority to give citizenship to anyone all on his own. You'll have to show me where he did so for anyone in the country illegally, specifically this "select group" you refer to.
  • #129
    @DARSB Citizenship, not, but refusing to deport them when they are illegally in this country is dereliction of duty.
  • #12
    Needs a republican senate to have a realistic chance of going anywhere.

    Beyond that, it likely needs democrats with the same sort of integrity as the republicans who went to Nixon at the end and told him it was time to go.

    I think the best chance of that happening would be a dark change in the social mood that comes with a major economic/financial crash. You need to have the remake of "the exorcist" as the top movie at the box office. I mean, those were the conditions that sparked the near impeachment of Nixon, just as the level of the dow jones spared Clinton from impeachment over the same perjury charge that led to his disbarment from the law in Arkansas.
  • #145
    "Needs a republican senate to have a realistic chance of going anywhere."

    Right, you and several others here keep making that same statement. Where was that logic when the House GOP tried to repeal the ACA 50 times?
  • #216
    Why would you want a "...dark change in the social mood that comes with a major economical/financial crash."...just to impeach President Obama?

    How would that be good for our country?
  • #257
    Just as soon as they can figure out what grounds to use. It would be good for a laugh, if it weren't going to cost taxpayers so much! And suing Obama is an even stupider move!
  • #252
    Nancy Pelosi said action was 'off the table' against Bush/Cheney. Why are these republicans so petty and mean?
  • #222
    Can we waste anymore of the taxpayer dollars with grandstanding and theatrics? Would be hard-pressed to match the ineptitude of the current GOP. Don't they look at their own ratings? Don't they care?
  • #220
    Impeach a president because you don't like him or his policies? I thought that's why we have elections. I can't see where the president has met the criteria of serious crimes and misdemeanors. Going back to Teddy Roosevelt, Barack Obama has the lowest annual average of Executive Orders. If you disagree with a president or his party, elect your guy or guys. Man or woman up and elect.
  • #219
    I don't like the Obama Administration either, but impeachment requires a criminal act. What charge would one bring against Obama? Bad policy doesn't rise to the level of a criminal act.
  • R Load more comments...