Posted on 05/22/2013 11:06:50 AM PDT by Kaslin
As new revelations underscore the administration's epic incompetence in its handling of the Benghazi disaster and IRS abuses, some Republican voices in the House and Senate, along with pundits of every persuasion, have begun to speculate about "the I word" — impeachment. Even MSNBC, the most unapologetically progressive of all television news networks, has suggested that the president could face a serious effort to remove him from office.
As much as this prospect might excite the right and inspire the faithful with a renewed sense of purpose and unity, conservatives should steer clear of any push for impeachment as a catastrophic miscalculation for their cause. Regardless of damning evidence of dissembling and malfeasance that congressional committees could bring to light, there is no chance of driving the president from office, meaning that efforts to do so will damage the GOP far more consequentially than the administration.
First, a reality check: The Republicans currently control only 45 seats in the U.S. Senate and would therefore need to persuade 22 members of the Democratic caucus to vote to oust a president of their own party in order reach the two-thirds majority the Constitution requires. The possibility of winning these votes is, simply, non-existent. The last time Republicans forced a Senate vote to convict a president of "high crimes and misdemeanors," they didn't win a single Democrat to their cause.
In fact, all three of the serious impeachment drives (against Andrew Johnson in 1868, Richard Nixon in 1974 and Bill Clinton in 1998-99) occurred when the president's opponents controlled both houses of Congress by hefty margins. Nixon resigned before the House or Senate got the chance to cast final votes on the charges against him, but his Republican Party controlled 11 fewer Senate seats than Obama's Democrats today, making the prospect of removal vastly more plausible.
Given the virtual impossibility of winning an impeachment fight, any Republican efforts would be suicidal. A failed attempt at removing the president would only confirm the negative image of the GOP as hyperpartisan radicals more interested in scoring political points than working to address the nation's problems. In the Clinton era, the failed impeachment crusade boosted the incumbent's popularity while undermining support for Republicans and their leader, Newt Gingrich.
A Republican attempt at terminating the Obama presidency would also enable Hillary Clinton to reprise her role as the loyal, long-suffering help-mate working to protect a political partner unjustly persecuted by "a vast right-wing conspiracy." Instead of concentrating their attention on Obama's role in the Benghazi debacle, Republicans should focus on the more questionable role of then-Secretary of State Clinton — despite the fact that she has already resigned her office and placed herself beyond the reach of impeachment. Obama can never run for the White House again, but Hillary Clinton can — unless she's appropriately discredited for her role in these bloody events.
In addition to letting Clinton off the hook by aiming squarely at her boss, any impeachment drive could also boost the stock of another potential Democratic candidate, Vice President Biden. Concerted moves to push Obama from office could only enhance the stature of his constitutionally designated successor, whether those efforts succeeded or not. If Biden plays the role of president-in-waiting during an impeachment crisis, he looks more plausible in 2016.
And with no chance of success, even conjecture about impeachment ultimately serves to boost Obama. A series of scandals that looks increasingly dire — on Benghazi, the IRS, improperly seized phone records from reporters and assorted prevarications with the press and public — would still allow Obama a sense of victory and exoneration when he inevitably survives. Serious talk of impeachment makes any outcome less than that look like vindication.
Instead of pursuing an outgoing chief executive, Republicans should pursue the truth, no matter what. A new House select committee should uncover definitive conclusions to unanswered questions on Benghazi and the IRS. Those answers could weaken the administration even if they don't destroy it, and facilitate cooperation from a humbled White House on a conservative, reformist agenda that most Americans could embrace.
If new information exposes administration participation in especially egregious lies, there's always the chance for a resolution of censure — a formal reprimand voted by Congress (and applied to only one prior president, Andrew Jackson) that would allow nervous Democrats to distance themselves from their leader without actually removing him from power. The old saying sagely declares, "If you strike the king, you must kill him." Even without a king, that's good advice for re-energized Republicans who can hardly afford reinforcement of their reputation as flailing failures.
For Pete’s sake, an impeachment proceeding is not a political proceeding. Are all trials merely the voting of the jurors? Of course not. There has to be an investigation done first. An impeachment consists of several phases. We all realize that the Democrat Senators are Democrats before they are Americans. They will probably not vote their conscience, but how the party leadership tells them to vote. Our legal system does not guarantee justice. It only guarantees the opportunity for justice. Obama is my employee. It appears that he may have been involved in some wrongdoings. I want to know if he has because I don’t want to keep paying a crook. An impeachment proceeding provides a fair and disciplined means to look into the President’s behavior. I want a disciplined investigation into what our employees have been doing.
Very well said. Sadly, some in here don’t get it. I have said it during the 2012 election that we should concentrate on the Senate. We had a good chance to get the majority back, but obviously I did not know what I was talking about /s> because people stayed home and therefore guaranteeing the rats keeping the Senate
You would do well also, reading the article over and over again until you get.
Having once been a Democratic campaigner, and now a GOPe cheerleader, his philosophical bent is essentially that of an extreme middle-of-the-road statist.
A useless tool & a useless fool, with a thick coat of obnoxious self-righteousness. Turn the dial elsewhere.
better to use “Impeach and Remove”.
-- snip --
First, a reality check: The Republicans currently control only 45 seats in the U.S. Senate and would therefore need to persuade 22 members of the Democratic caucus to vote to oust a president of their own party in order reach the two-thirds majority the Constitution requires. The possibility of winning these votes is, simply, non-existent. The last time Republicans forced a Senate vote to convict a president of "high crimes and misdemeanors," they didn't win a single Democrat to their cause.
In fact, all three of the serious impeachment drives (against Andrew Johnson in 1868, Richard Nixon in 1974 and Bill Clinton in 1998-99) occurred when the president's opponents controlled both houses of Congress by hefty margins.
-- snip --
We only have the House
This is why we must make sure to get the Senate majority back. Preferable the super majority and increase our majority in the House. Otherwise we don’t to even think about it
Medved another Salem Radio Liberal
The House needs to start Impeachment NOW. Not impeaching Obama just means the GOP House condones Obama misdeeds
Let the Senate refuse to convict.....their vote will be noted next time they run if they refuse to convict
PhonyCon liberal GOP were wrong not going after Obama on Eligibility....look where we are now with PhonyCon Liberal stupidity?
I am sick and tired of wuss PhonyCon Liberal GOP. Impeaching Obama Now
There's no way the first minority President will be removed from office. Period.
In fact, according to the latest polls, Obama is maintaining and/or actually increasing his popularity with the American people during these revelations.
He truly seems to be made of Teflon. 
Of course it is. Law is a political proceeding at this stage. Look at the various systems of law in any big city.
The GOP is backing away from this, fast, because if they don’t it will cost them the election in 2014. There is little to no upside to this for the GOP, and a lot in letting things stand.
Did you stay home in the 2012 election, or did you vote for third party candidates who have no chance to get elected?
Regarding the polls it depends on what polls and did they just poll adults, which over sample the rats 3 to one or did they use Likely Voters which are more even
You mean he is increasing his popularity with the Low information voters, or as I call them idiot voters.
Intelligent voters saw through him, when he ran in 2008 and did not vote for him then and 2012
You mean he is increasing his popularity with the Low information voters, or as I call them idiot voters.Unfortunately, at this time, there appears to be more of them than there is of us.Intelligent voters saw through him, when he ran in 2008 and did not vote for him then and 2012
Melanin is more protective than Teflon.
What did the President know and when id he know it?
Nope. I read it. Can the House start impeachment proceedings, do some investigating, and then stop the proceedings? Sure they can. You are playing checkers and it’s a chess game with the Democrats. The Law Of Effect works with politics, too. Here it is.....
“You generally receive more of the behavior you reward and less of the behavior you punish.” Obama is our employee. If he has been doing wrong things, and he is not punished, then the rest of our employees will see this and we will have more of them doing wrong things.
I understand the importance of defeating the Democrats in 2014 and 2016. You, however, cannot guarantee that the Republicans will win big in 2014 and 2016 if there are no impeachment proceedings.
I want a fair, disciplined and thorough investigation into these accusations. I want to hear the Obama administration explain, in front of television cameras, their decision to overthrow the government of Libya. I want to hear them explain why they could send no one to Benghazi. I want them on record.
You and Medved seem to believe that an impeachment proceeding is nothing other than a Senate vote to determine whether to retain or dismiss the President. That is absolutely wrong. Do some studying on our impeachment proceedings and then you can be snide with me.
No, they should use the “J” word - Jail.
I’m sick and tired of these people cowering in fear that the GOP will suffer if they dare try to impeach Zero!
I don’t care that he’s black (half black that is), or that the media is in his lap (that will never change regardless). There are many legitimate grounds for impeachment and at least some involve TREASON.
Brown skin doesn’t get him off the hook for TREASON!
I am 100 percent in favor of impeaching that arrogant pos occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. I am also in favor of impeaching his entire administration. But I am not in favor of just letting it go at the impeachment. I want him removed from Office and without having the majority in the Senate it’s not going to happen. We need to be patient and make sure we get the Senate back and keep the House
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.