is there a logical reason Obama is not facing articles of impeachment?

[rhino]

Do you think that "independent" and "conservative" are mutually exclusive terms for some reason?

Not every conservative is a republican, and not all republicans are conservative. A significant number of republicans are very much as statist as any self-identified "progressive." A growing number of them libertarian, which is also not synonymous with conservative.

In addition to a lot of independents, it's also likely at least a few democrats self-identify as conservative as well (like Zell Miller).

Huh? Maybe look at actual recent polls that put the ratio of 23 Republican / 45 Independent / 30 Democrat

Party Affiliation | Gallup Historical Trends

You're the one flat out wrong. Being out of touch with reality like the last election or assuming not existent strength doesn't do any good. Whatever anyone wants to do politically needs to recognize that the lion's share is independent, even if the two party system doesn't make it seem so.

 

[Purdue Plinker]

Do you think that "independent" and "conservative" are mutually exclusive terms for some reason?

Not every conservative is a republican, and not all republicans are conservative. A significant number of republicans are very much as statist as any self-identified "progressive." A growing number of them libertarian, which is also not synonymous with conservative.

In addition to a lot of independents, it's also likely at least a few democrats self-identify as conservative as well (like Zell Miller).

Nope. I do believe that thinking R's share is double and I's share is half of what it really is means that old conventions and assumptions are outdated and dangerous to rely on.

If you want to focus on conservative vs. moderate vs. liberal: Liberal Self-Identification Edges Up to New High in 2013

38% is a whole lot less than stated 70% assumed majority...

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I haven't seen anything that specifically tracked back to him directly. You are welcome to show me in case I missed it.

Wasn't being accusational, just curious how you viewed it. I agree it can't currently be tied to him.

 

[TRWXXA]

I haven't seen anything that specifically tracked back to him directly. You are welcome to show me in case I missed it.

There was nothing tied directly to Nixon either, but they had articles of impeachment already drafted for him.

Again... You are completely misinterpreting the term, "high Crimes and Misdemeanors", by associating it with a criminal activity. That is not how the framers of the constitution used it. Nixon was never directly tied to the Watergate break-in. Just his association with those who perpetrated it was enough to impeach.

Historically, appointing officials unfit for their job is an impeacheable offense -- think, Kathleen Sabelius.

 

[Kutnupe14]

There was nothing tied directly to Nixon either, but they had articles of impeachment already drafted for him.

Again... You are completely misinterpreting the term, "high Crimes and Misdemeanors", by associating it with a criminal activity. That is not how the framers of the constitution used it. Nixon was never directly tied to the Watergate break-in. Just his association with those who perpetrated it was enough to impeach.

Historically, appointing officials unfit for their job is an impeacheable offense -- think, Kathleen Sabelius.

What? They had Nixon on tape. You can't get a better implication than a dude talking about a coverup while being recorded.

 

[TRWXXA]

What? They had Nixon on tape. You can't get a better implication than a dude talking about a coverup while being recorded.

They got Nixon on tape being told about a coverup, not planning it ("What did he know, and when did he know it?"). It's a shaky tightrope that didn't work for Nixon, but seems to be okay for President F***stick (Bengazi).

 

[ArcadiaGP]

What about things like this?

State lawyers don't have to defend gay marriage bans: Holder

A non-elected person, Holder, is telling states to ignore laws. Why can't this guy be removed?

 

[mrjarrell]

What about things like this?

State lawyers don't have to defend gay marriage bans: Holder

A non-elected person, Holder, is telling states to ignore laws. Why can't this guy be removed?

Sorry, I agree with Holder on this one. It's just another form of nullification. He is not wrong in the particulars. The AG determines what cases to pursue or not. Would you feel the same if an AG decided not to defend a gun ban? I think we know the answer. I support nullification. It plays to all sides of the field.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

On the topic of impeachment:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-presidents-duty-faithfully-execute-laws.html

 

[zippy23]

I see 2 reasons:
First (primarily) - the Democrats control the Senate and Reid would never bring articles up for a vote. Even if he did the dems would never vote to impeach.
Second - Boehner is a useless wimp.

^^^^^This

and the fact that republicans are scared crapless of the media, so they wont even go near the idea since they are scared little whimps.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

MSNBC is cool with just calling him "King", apparently.

 

[Bummer]

The Constitution is very clear on impeachment. Can someone cite the code and criminal statute he's broken?


Coming up with things he's done is all well and good but, unless they are an actual crime you're whistling Dixie here.

Murder.

See my post #56 in this thread.

Thoughts?

 

[mrjarrell]

I'm pretty sure he hasn't committed a murder in any degree, yet.

 

[Mark 1911]

The only good reason I can see for not impeaching the president is the vice-president.

 

[Bummer]

I'm pretty sure he hasn't committed a murder in any degree, yet.

Did you read the post I referenced? I certainly hope not. #56. It's a couple of pages back.

 

[mrjarrell]

Did you read the post I referenced? I certainly hope not. #56. It's a couple of pages back.

While I don't disagree with your take on the killing, there's not a court in the land that will ever choose to convict a president for doing that. I wish he and Bush would be prosecuted and convicted for their many crimes, but we know that's not going to happen. There's too much precedent in the government courts that will let them skate.

 

[printcraft]

What high crime or misdemeanor has he committed (please cite the relevant code to make your case). I don't care for the guy, but he's not done anything impeachable, yet, as far as I can see.

........ I wish he and Bush would be prosecuted and convicted for their many crimes, but we know that's not going to happen...........

So if "he" is obama which one of your posts is accurate?

 

[mrjarrell]

So if "he" is obama which one of your posts is accurate?

Both are accurate. While I, and many others sure think he committed murder when he killed American citizens without a trial there is no-one who will ever cede that and press charges. As far as the powers that be are concerned he, and Bush, have committed no crimes. Opinions don't count in the face of the law, unless you're a judge issuing one.

 

[gstanley102]

The only good reason I can see for not impeaching the president is the vice-president.

BINGO!!!!
I think we have a winner.

 

[spec4]

BINGO!!!!
I think we have a winner.

Beg to differ, a dose of Biden as POTUS would guarantee the Dems lose in 2016. As a bonus, I suspect when Biden realized he was POTUS, he would go catatonic. The man has been one of the top buffoons in DC for decades. He is as competent as a pile of rocks.