Impeachment- the legal alternative to assassination.

The below text (and title above) is mostly copied directly from the blog of David J Shetokas. I recommend a visit to his site to read the whole article. It strongly raises the question- Why hasn’t Obama been impeached???

The Constitution‘s Impeachment Clause regarding the president and all civil officers of the United States is in Article II and reads:

“The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Assassination was once the only way.

Julius Caesar is the world’s best known assassination victim. Caesar provides an example of how top government leaders were removed from office prior to the United States Constitution.

Constitutional provisions for the impeachment of the head of government were an American contribution to the world. The phrase “American exceptionalism” is properly applied to many of the Constitution’s political innovations. It was novel to the world that a country’s leader could be removed without being killed.

People are working on other legal ways to get rid of treacherous or under-performing elected officials. Obama has to go as soon as possible, but right now it looks like the US is stuck with him to the end of his term. Its a measure of how the US has sunk culturally that this liar and coward was elected twice and remains popular with 45% of the voters.

The reason this is so is the left’s unrelenting attacks upon our traditional western culture over the last fifty years. People claim there is no such thing as Cultural Marxism, but I claim Barack Obama’s otherwise inexplicable popularity is stark living proof of its success in gradually changing political perceptions in the West.

2 thoughts on “Impeachment- the legal alternative to assassination.

  1. I appreciate the attribution. It’s interesting to note that Ben Franklin brought up this subject and the historical context at the Constitutional Convention. He simply indicated the problem could be that the president might become obnoxious. While there is much scholarly debate about the meaning of “high crimes and misdemeanors” in reality, impeachment is a political act. Gerald Ford acknowledged as much when he opined that an impeachable offense was whatever a majority of the House and 2/3 of the Senate agreed upon. That’s the reality of the situation.
    Members of the Senate and House make political decisions regarding impeachment. As a practical matter the votes do not exist to successfully impeach the president and the political price of a failed effort is likely too high. (See the Bill Clinton failure and the 2000 election results, Republicans had their majority trimmed in the House, lost the Senate majority and George Bush lost the popular vote).
    The calculation has undoubtedly been made that impeaching Obama is a long term losing proposition as a political matter. Hopefully that will have been a correct decision as 2016 plays out with the potential to start repairing the country.


    • Your site is very interesting and I enjoyed perusing the articles there. I agree with your analysis. The problem as you say is that “the votes do not exist” in the house and the political impact among the voters could well be negative. The real problem is the mainstream media shape every narrative, and although alternative media is making a steadily growing impact, the MSM still generate most of the political opinion out there.


Comments are closed.