Judge Jeanine Pirro called for Obama’s impeachment Saturday night for the second time in two months, over the astonishingly awful Bergdahl swap. Last month, she called the Ben Rhodes email that revealed false Benghazi talking points originating from the White House, a “smoking gun” which should lead to the president’s impeachment.
This time, Pirro lambasted the president for trading five dangerous terrorists, for one deserter, and then sending out “old Faithful Susan Rice” to say Bergdahl served with honor and distinction.
“Now Susan…Isn’t English your first language?” Pirro wondered sarcastically. “Weren’t you briefed on what to say?”
“And not for nothing – don’t you know that those Sunday talk shows are a danger zone for you?” But then again, that despicable video lie got you moved up to National Security Advisor,” she purred.
Pirro warned that the future atrocities of the released terrorists will be on the president’s head.
Obama didn’t “release” these murderers, he “unleashed” them, said the Judge, “and you and you alone will be responsible for the hell that will be unleashed on us.”
She explained that the Taliban five were not POWs but enemy combatants who could be detained indefinitely and tried for their crimes.
“Here’s the bottom line,” she continued. “You negotiated with terrorists, you broke the very law that you signed. You have shown terrorists that they can win concessions by kidnapping Americans. In the history of this country, we have never traded mass murderers for a deserter.”
You call yourself a Commander in Chief,” she continued. “But what Commander in Chief doesn’t support a surge, but sends in 40,000 troops anyway?
What Commander in Chief reduces benefits to those in the military, closes the veterans’ war memorials, reduces the Army to pre-WWII levels, knowingly allows veterans to die in our hospitals, while replenishing the enemy at a time of war.”
“Mr. President you are destroying this country.
You have diminished us on the world stage. You have trampled on the very laws you swore to uphold.
You are NOT a true Commander in Chief.
We have impeached a president for sex with an intern.
Your actions, far more egregious – demand impeachment,” Pirro concluded.
Diane Dimond, RCP: The President’s Very Real Military Problem:
Forget what the politicians on Capitol Hill are saying about the prisoner swap. Forget the pontifications from the myriad talking heads on TV and radio. Now you know what members of our U.S. military are thinking and saying. They have lost all respect for their commander in chief.
It chills me to the bone.
John Hawkins, Townhall: 5 High Crimes And Misdemeanors For Which Obama Deserves To Be Impeached:
Barack Obama’s tenure in the White House has been one of the low points in the history of our republic. It may seem melodramatic to compare the damage Barack Obama is doing to 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and the White House being burned during the war of 1812, but in a sense he’s worse than any of those calamities because he’s a purely self-inflicted wound. It’s not a sneak attack from the Japanese laying us low this time; it’s the man our nation willingly chose to lead us not once, but twice.
Liberty Council: Impeach Barack Obama, our lawless President!
The Declaration of Independence states… “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” [emphasis added]
If the Declaration of Independence were written today, the next sentence would say… “The self-appointed dictator serving as President of the United States of America has a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.”
Our call to action!
Liberty Counsel Action is calling on the United States House of Representatives to begin drafting Articles of Impeachment against Barrack H. Obama for high crimes and misdemeanors… including failure to execute his duties in the office of President of the United States – and acting in willful violation of the Constitution of the United States.
Allen West, The Washington Post: Impeach Barack Obama:
Ladies and gentlemen, I submit that Barack Hussein Obama’s unilateral negotiations with terrorists and the ensuing release of their key leadership without consult — mandated by law — with the U.S. Congress represents high crimes and misdemeanors, an impeachable offense.
So I call upon the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives; Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to draft articles of impeachment as no one is above the law in America. The failure to do so speaks volumes.
The American Spectator: The Case for Obama’s Impeachment:
Andy McCarthy, a former senior federal prosecutor, has written the new book Faithless Execution, which is both a powerful case for the impeachment of Barack Obama and also a politically savvy explanation of why it will never happen. It’s brilliant and frustrating. Brilliant because of the constitutional analysis of the impeachment mechanism and frustrating because it recognizes that no matter how deserving of it he may be, Barack Obama will never be impeached.
Article II Section 4 of the Constitution says that 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.” Treason and bribery are, of course, crimes prosecutable in federal court. When impeachment is discussed — and it’s not in polite company these days because timorous Republicans are frightened by mere mention of the “i-word” — it’s largely understood to encompass only criminal conduct.
But that’s not what the Framers understood it to mean. The main “go-to” treatise on the Constitution I use is The Heritage Guide to the Constitution published by the Heritage Foundation. It says, “Because ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’ was a term of art in English impeachments, a plausible reading supported by many scholars is that the grounds for impeachment can not only be the defined crimes of treason and bribery, but also other criminal or even noncriminal behavior amounting to a serious dereliction of duty.”
McCarthy is one of those scholars, illustrating the point with references to an impeachment that was contemporaneous with the Constitutional Convention and debates among its members. The term “high crimes and misdemeanors,” as McCarthy points out, “…is a concept rooted not on statutory offenses fit for criminal court proceedings, but in damage done to societal order by persons in whom great public trust has been reposed.” One example he gives, the 1786 impeachment of the British governor-general of India, proves the point. William Hastings was impeached not only for the crimes of bribery and extortion, but also abuse of power.
McCarthy’s recitation of the history of the Constitutional Convention’s consideration of impeachment is worth the price of his book. I won’t give it all away, but the quotations from James Madison on the need for Congress to be able to remove the Chief Magistrate for “perfidy,” and the profound influence Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England had on the convention’s members (it spoke of the maladministration of officers who would be subject to impeachment), are essential to understanding the “high crimes and misdemeanors” standard.So if a president is guilty of significant malfeasance or misfeasance in office he can be removed by impeachment. But will he be? Only if the nation’s political mood demands it.