Main Menu

35 Responses to Rep. Stockman on impeachment

  1. avatar
    justlw October 17, 2013 at 9:21 pm #

    He does not appear to have a keen grasp of what the president actually does, or that “impeachment” is not a synonym for “do-over.”

  2. avatar
    CarlOrcas October 17, 2013 at 9:24 pm #

    Yawn!!

    The attorney he refers to is not on staff but rather a Virginia based lawyer whose website includes a section on “Biblical Wisdom”. http://lawandfreedom.com/

    Bottom line: Mr. Stockman will get nowhere with this silliness….other than a long walk to the leader’s office….should he get an appointment to present his “evidence”.

    It’s just more TeaParty lunacy.

  3. avatar
    Craig October 17, 2013 at 9:56 pm #

    Expect Zullo and the Klown Kar Krew to start proclaiming loud and long “SEE? TOLD YOU WE WUZ DOIN’ SOMETHING!” and then to blame congress when it all falls in a heap with no new “evidence”.

  4. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG October 17, 2013 at 10:02 pm #

    To me it seems that the people calling for impeachment don’t seem to understand that when a President does something that offends them, its not an impeachable offense.

  5. avatar
    Suranis October 17, 2013 at 10:04 pm #

    So, what exactly would a President have to do to get impeached? Leaving aside staining a blue dress.

  6. avatar
    CarlOrcas October 17, 2013 at 10:13 pm #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG:
    To me it seems that the people calling for impeachment don’t seem to understand that when a President does something that offends them, its not an impeachable offense.

    Some of them seem to think that being a member of the opposition party and getting elected President is the impeachable offense.

  7. avatar
    JPotter October 17, 2013 at 10:29 pm #

    You, know, all we need to further enable this stupidity, is recall for Presidents 😈

    I know, I know, giving them ideas.

  8. avatar
    CarlOrcas October 17, 2013 at 10:31 pm #

    Suranis:
    So, what exactly would a President have to do to get impeached? Leaving aside staining a blue dress.

    Good question. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says, “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.”

    Gerald Ford probably had the best answer a couple years before Watergate: “it is……whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”

    Since it is a political process with (if the person is convicted by the Senate) no punishment beyond removal from office and, as I recall, prohibition from holding another “office of trust” it could be for almost anything.

    In modern history Watergate set the standard (except in 1998) and I suspect that’s where it will remain……notwithstanding a lot of political hacks shooting their mouths off.

  9. avatar
    G October 17, 2013 at 11:20 pm #

    Exactly!

    Andrew Vrba, PmG:
    To me it seems that the people calling for impeachment don’t seem to understand that when a President does something that offends them, its not an impeachable offense.

    I agree – in terms of where the modern bar is set, that nothing Obama has done comes anywhere near that bar at all and that this is nothing but a bunch of political posturing and pathetic fantasizing by a bunch of bitter sore losers who simply can’t accept this president’s mere existence and who are desperately looking to magically “invalidate” him by any means necessary.

    CarlOrcas: In modern history Watergate set the standard (except in 1998) and I suspect that’s where it will remain…… notwithstanding a lot of political hacks shooting their mouths off.

  10. avatar
    gorefan October 17, 2013 at 11:42 pm #

    Here is a slightly longer version:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPEbPjNITT8&list=PLRjCBirCqsfCuWhn6MJEO9qmotrnqNyny

    In this one he uses the example of the IRS targeting tea party.

  11. avatar
    John Reilly October 18, 2013 at 12:28 am #

    The charge will be PWB.

    The question is whether Congress’ and the Tea Party’s ratings can go lower.

  12. avatar
    aarrgghh October 18, 2013 at 12:53 am #

    following up the shutdown victory with a righteous call for impeachment during the usurper’s latest push for a shamnesty bill couldn’t happen at a better time for the house gop.

    </wingnut>

  13. avatar
    gorefan October 18, 2013 at 2:15 am #

    aarrgghh: following up the shutdown victory

    Let’s see:

    shutdown the government – check

    try to impeach the President – check

    it’s 1998 all over again.

    “Maybe if people started to listen, history would stop repeating itself.” – Lily Tomlin

  14. avatar
    Lupin October 18, 2013 at 2:15 am #

    I know none of us can do anything about a lot of things, but this is another good topic to mention that actions have consequemnces, esp. in today’s wired global village.

    This lunacy gets broadcast far & wide and has already encouraged and keeps encouraging the world to look at the US as an unreliable nation that at best should not be trusted with its power or at worst should be defanged beforee it does real damage to the rest of the world.

    We here may laugh or weep at the craziness of peopole like Stockman, but most people around the world, esp. politicians and decision-makers don’t, no more than you would at a child playing with matches.

    Yes, first amendment, yada, yada, but these people really have and continue to be hurting the United States.

  15. avatar
    The Magic M October 18, 2013 at 4:00 am #

    I never got this “impeachment” talk anyway, not after the re-election.

    Before Nov 6th, it may have been another propaganda tool, but now even the most deluded member of Congress must know that they won’t have the votes in the Senate to convict.
    Or do they think this is their last hope of gaining some popularity points for the 2014 elections?

    Among the wingnuts, I understand it even less. They seem to believe impeachment achieves anything without conviction. The way they over-use the word, they seem to believe “impeachment” equals “removal from office” and even “nullification of the presidency”.
    And these are the people who allegedly “remember from civics class” that you “need two citizen parents”. I doubt they remember what they had for breakfast.

  16. avatar
    ArthurWankspittle October 18, 2013 at 4:23 am #

    If Stockman takes this any further look for it backfiring on Head Knob Holder Zullo and the CCP. Because Stockman will use his Bible Thumping friend’s reasons and not the CCP’s ebidence and daffydavits.

  17. avatar
    Bob October 18, 2013 at 7:59 am #

    The nonsensical threat of impeachment is a good tool for garnering the support of stupid people.

    Please proceed, Congressman.

  18. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 18, 2013 at 10:32 am #

    Turning the tables, John Dean argues that Republican obstructionism in Congress may be a crime:

    Thus, the question is whether the Congressional Republicans have entered into a criminal conspiracy by using the tactics they are now employing. More specifically, the inquiry is into whether Republicans are, in effect, obstructing, if not destroying, our government with their actions in violation of the federal criminal code, namely Section 371 of Title 18, which prohibits conspiracies to defraud (read also: obstruct) the government of the United States. – See more at: http://verdict.justia.com/2013/10/18/republican-obstructionism-criminal#sthash.VxE7jmSM.dpuf

    http://verdict.justia.com/2013/10/18/republican-obstructionism-criminal

  19. avatar
    G October 18, 2013 at 10:58 am #

    Sure seems like an intentional conspiracy to defraud the US government to me…

    Especially when there are so many soundbytes from the TP types calling to do just that…and threatening / vowing to attempt to do that again early next year.

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Turning the tables, John Dean argues that Republican obstructionism in Congress may be a crime:

    http://verdict.justia.com/2013/10/18/republican-obstructionism-criminal

  20. avatar
    Rickey October 18, 2013 at 11:46 am #

    Stockman is one of the four dumbest people in Congress, the others being Louie Gohmert, Michelle Bachmann and Steve King. Texas has the dishonor of being responsible for two of them.

    This reminds me that in 1998 the pundits predicted that Clinton would be tainted for the rest of his life by his impeachment – and they were wrong. Clinton left office with the highest approval ratings of his Presidency, and today the only time anyone thinks about his impeachment is when some right wing loon demands the impeachment of Obama.

    Any competent prosecutor will tell you that you don’t take a case to trial unless you have a fighting chance of winning. The math is so simple that even Stockman should be able to figure it out. There are 45 Republican Senators, meaning that they would need 22 Democrats to remove Obama from office.

    Thus endeth this lesson.

  21. avatar
    Daniel October 18, 2013 at 12:01 pm #

    Impeachment is a much more dangerous chance to take for the impeaching party than for the impeachee.

    Any serious suggestion from the GOP towards impeachment at this point would be political suicide.

  22. avatar
    Graham Shevlin October 18, 2013 at 12:19 pm #

    The GOP already has cemented the feeling in many people’s minds that they are a bunch of posturing, nihilistic wankers. If they try impeaching the POTUS, that will increase the breadth and depth of the conclusion that they are a bunch of posturing, nihilistic wankers.

  23. avatar
    donna October 18, 2013 at 12:24 pm #

    Bob: The nonsensical threat of impeachment is a good tool for garnering the support of stupid people.

    Please proceed, Congressman.

    how accurate – these know nothing republicans are raising money from constituents who agree with them – read the cook news – “Republicans lose ground in 14 House districts, according to new rankings from Cook Political Report.”

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/handicappers-shutdown-puts-more-than-17-gop-seats-in-play-20131017

    dems should run on the $24+ BILLION lost in this latest fiasco and the nearly $19 billion lost in the last republican fiasco of 2011 – fiscal conservatives?

    where could that $43+ billion be better spent?

    Obama Pollster Warns Republicans: Oppose Obamacare At Your Own Risk

    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/10/18/2803191/obama-pollster-warns-republicans-oppose-obamacare-risk/

    clinton was impeached because he lied under oath but not convicted

    what has obama done to cause impeachment? this talk of impeachment began shortly after obama was inaugurated in 2009 – he had and has done nothing for this talk except to raise money from know nothing constituents and YES this all has to do with RACE

    Yes, The South Really Is Different — And It’s Because Of Race

    it ends with “In reality, these younger folks hold ideas that are not very traditionally Southern. That’s a hopefully sign that the South’s past does not need to be its future.”

    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/10/18/2786841/yes-south-different-race/

  24. avatar
    Keith October 18, 2013 at 6:42 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Turning the tables, John Dean argues that Republican obstructionism in Congress may be a crime:

    http://verdict.justia.com/2013/10/18/republican-obstructionism-criminal

    I believe that argument fails because Congress is ‘the Government’.

    Granted that it is only one third of our ‘system of Government’, it is the ‘law-making’ part a country’s political system that is considered ‘the Government’.

  25. avatar
    Keith October 18, 2013 at 6:45 pm #

    Rickey: Stockman is one of the four dumbest people in Congress, the others being Louie Gohmert, Michelle Bachmann and Steve King. Texas has the dishonor of being responsible for two of them.

    I think you do a disservice to Jeff Flake, who seems bound and determined to live down to his name.

  26. avatar
    G October 18, 2013 at 8:27 pm #

    That was an exceptionally well-written article. Thanks for sharing!

    donna: Yes, The South Really Is Different — And It’s Because Of Race

    it ends with “In reality, these younger folks hold ideas that are not very traditionally Southern. That’s a hopefully sign that the South’s past does not need to be its future.”

    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/10/18/2786841/yes-south-different-race/

  27. avatar
    Whatever4 October 19, 2013 at 4:23 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Turning the tables, John Dean argues that Republican obstructionism in Congress may be a crime:

    http://verdict.justia.com/2013/10/18/republican-obstructionism-criminal

    How does that mesh with the Speech or Debate Clause? Seems that the Constitution says anything goes.

  28. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 19, 2013 at 7:40 am #

    I don’t agree with Dean, but generally speech in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy is not protected speech.

  29. avatar
    Sef October 19, 2013 at 12:26 pm #

    Whatever4: How does that mesh with the Speech or Debate Clause? Seems that the Constitution says anything goes.

    Isn’t the speech or debate clause only operative while actually in Congress? Wouldn’t the outside stuff be fair game for a gung ho prosecutor?

  30. avatar
    Monkey Boy October 19, 2013 at 6:37 pm #

    Rickey: Stockman is one of the four dumbest people in Congress, the others being Louie Gohmert, Michelle Bachmann and Steve King. Texas has the dishonor of being responsible for two of them.

    What ever happened to Virginia Foxx?

  31. avatar
    Keith October 19, 2013 at 7:49 pm #

    Sef: Isn’t the speech or debate clause only operative while actually in Congress? Wouldn’t the outside stuff be fair game for a gung ho prosecutor?

    Yes and yes.

  32. avatar
    Rickey October 19, 2013 at 10:00 pm #

    Monkey Boy: What ever happened to Virginia Foxx?

    Good point. In my defense I will just say that I did not claim that Stockman, et al. are the only dumb people in Congress.

  33. avatar
    Dave October 19, 2013 at 11:56 pm #

    I think your statement is true if by “protected speech” you mean speech protected by the first amendment. The Supreme Court has recognized many exceptions to the first amendment — but have they recognized any exceptions to the Speech or Debate Clause?

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I don’t agree with Dean, but generally speech in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy is not protected speech.

  34. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 20, 2013 at 7:27 am #

    I would be extremely surprised if they made such exceptions–Political Question doctrine and separation of powers. But as Sef said, much of the “conspiracy” has taken place off the floor of the House and Senate.

    Dave: The Supreme Court has recognized many exceptions to the first amendment — but have they recognized any exceptions to the Speech or Debate Clause?

  35. avatar
    JPotter October 20, 2013 at 9:40 am #

    It’s reasonable to me to be of the opinion that certain elements in Congress have violated their oath (in spirit), but ultimately, no matter how common or obvious, that’s just an opinion.

    Just imagine if the public’s opinion was more on board with the TPers …. the people being being more or less of the mindset that those ‘patriots’ were taking a stand for us and fulfilling their oath, etc. They could burn the house down while we cheered.

    Thanksfully, The Stupid is not that prevalent.