Sarah Palin says that it’s time to impeach Barack Obama

The influx of immigrant children at the Southwest border is the final straw for Sarah Palin, apparently. In an op-ed published yesterday at Breitbart, the former Governor of Alaska and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee opined that the time has come to impeach President Barack Obama:

Enough is enough of the years of abuse from this president. His unsecured border crisis is the last straw that makes the battered wife say, “no mas.”
[…]
President Obama’s rewarding of lawlessness, including his own, is the foundational problem here. It’s not going to get better, and in fact irreparable harm can be done in this lame-duck term as he continues to make up his own laws as he goes along, and, mark my words, will next meddle in the U.S. Court System with appointments that will forever change the basic interpretation of our Constitution’s role in protecting our rights.

It’s time to impeach; and on behalf of American workers and legal immigrants of all backgrounds, we should vehemently oppose any politician on the left or right who would hesitate in voting for articles of impeachment.

The many impeachable offenses of Barack Obama can no longer be ignored. If after all this he’s not impeachable, then no one is.

The lawlessness displayed by President Obama is certainly deserving of a response by Republicans, who, by the way, have done enough talking on executive power to the point at which they’d damn well better hold the next GOP president to the same standard.

The tools Republicans have are limited. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives has the power of the purse and can tinker with appropriations to express their disapproval of the Obama administration’s extraordinary power grabs. But appropriations bills have to be signed off by the Democrat-controlled Senate and the White House.

A failure to agree on appropriations measures, be they individually passed bills or a Continuing Resolutions, would result in a government shutdown. That’s not an attractive scenario for Republicans.

A legal challenge against President Obama’s power grabs is another avenue. Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) is planning to hold a vote to authorize such a lawsuit later this month. But that approach is filled with uncertainty and has been panned by many conservatives.

That means impeachment, as far as this author can tell, is the last resort to keep the executive branch in check.

But let’s say that articles of impeachment are introduced and let’s assume that the House Republicans managed to pass them. What, then, comes next? The Senate will never entertain the idea of removal proceedings. And even if they did, the 67 votes to remove President Obama just aren’t there.

Now, what any impeachment proceedings would do is motivate a malaised Democratic Party base to get out and vote this fall, potentially putting at risk the chances of a Republican takeover the Senate. Moreover, it could swing independent voters, who are frustrated with both parties, back to Democrats.

This is a lesson Republicans learned in 1998 in the run up to the impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton. Typically, mid-term elections are a boon to the party not in control of the White House. But Republicans, led by then-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), lost five seats in the House.

Those losses are largely attributed to the pending impeachment proceedings, which actually took place more than a month after the mid-term. Gingrich stepped down from his post within days of the election and, not long after, resigned from Congress.

Yeah, it may not be an ideal situation for Republicans, especially conservatives who are frustrated by what they see as milquetoast congressional leadership. As deserving of impeachment as President Obama may be, the politics of it would likely backfire.

If conservatives, Tea Party activists, and rank-and-file Republicans want to stick it to President Obama and Democrats, they need to focus on keeping their majority in the House and taking control of the Senate.


The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.