House Republicans to impeach Holder?

[Guest TankerHC]

Ok, so he is impeached. Then goes to trial in the Senate. Anyone see anything significant coming from this. I don't. Although a lot of Dem Senators may vote for, I doubt it. I say impeach Obama, the results will be the same but at least he would be more significant. Of course he would never be convicted in the Senate either.

 

http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/11/26959-republicans-to-impeach-eric-holder/

[Wingshooter]

It's something fun to think about, anyway. Brings a smile to my face :)

Impeach them both!



Of course, you're right, it will get covered up and die in the Senate :( Edited November 8, 2013 by Batman

[Mike.357]

what will come of it?

 

i will answer.   

 

A whole lot of nothing will come of it.

[TrickyNicky]

what will come of it?
 
i will answer.   
 
A whole lot of nothing will come of it.

I almost don't care. I'm just glad the right idea is finally publicly coming to the table.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If the effort is never made, sure, nothing will come of it. Profound!

[Guest TankerHC]

Heres why I say nothing will come of it. It's another waste of taxpayer time and money. Calling for either Obama or Holders Impeachment.

 

Continuing to call for it will do no good. on October 14th, for the umpteenth time, another Rep. suggested Articles of Impeachment be brought against Obama (And now Holder). That same day a group of Congressman began preparing Articles of Impeachment against Obama. Over the last couple of years, a number of members of Congress have called for Obama's Impeachment. Here is a short list. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), reason, Benghazi coverup. Rep. Jason Chavetz (R-UT), Benghazi cover up. Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas), reason, usurpation of Congress, Obama threatening to bypass Congress to implement gun control measures. Rep. Trey Freydel (R-FL), reason, same as Stockman, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), reason, Obama bypassing Congress to make and implement laws (Thats the job of Congress), Rep. Michelle Bachman (R-MN), reason, fail to secure the Borders. Set as a Responsibility of the office of the President, as Ronald Reagan stated, "A country that will not or can not secure it's borders is not a Country". Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), reason, Obama eschewing to raise the debt limit bypassing Congress (Which is what he just did for all intents and purposes, Congress handed him the purse strings, now he can run with it). Rep. Steve King (R-IA), causing the Country to possibly default on its debts. The office of the President is responsible, by Constitutional Law, to pay the interest on all of the Countries debts before anything is spent. If the Country were to default, it is solely on Obama's shoulders.

There is a list of 100 offenses that could be construed as high crimes and misdeameaners. First, there are no such thing as "high crimes" other than the way its spelled out in the Constitution. What high crimes are, according to real Constitutional scholars and the Supreme Court, years ago are crimes committed by persons in "High places", the "high" in high crimes. The crimes part is simply crimes and misdemeanors.

Know why Obama and Holder will never be convicted if impeached?

A simple explanation of impeachment. The House acts the same way as a Grand Jury, bringing Articles of Impeachment, voting whether to Impeach and sending the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for trial. The Senate is basically the Jury and the Chief Justice of the United States presides as the Judge in the trial (yes, its serious business). According to the Constitution, a Politician convicted in the Senate is to be immediately removed from office.

Back in 1974 RIchard Nixon resigned from office. Articles of impeachment were brought but for the good of the Country he resigned rather than go through an impeachment. His crimes? He bugged the offices of his political enemies, not like bugging the house of every single person living in the United States, he harassed his opponents, not unlike (But hardly like) sending the IRS, FBI, and any other organization you can think of against every opponent that might keep you from office, and 5 of his people broke into Democratic National Headquarters at the Watergate Hotel, something Nixon denied even knowing about which was later proven true (He didn't know about it). Generally Nixon was a good President. During the investigation an Attorney for the House Judiciary Committee was thrown out of the Committee for creating a false brief to insure that Nixon would be convicted if he were to go to trial in the Senate. That Attorney was Hillary Clinton, your next President. Jeff Zeifman was the House Judiciary Committee's Senior Counsel and Clintons Supervisor. He confirmed it and that was backed up by Franklin Polk.

The Chief Justice is John Roberts. The same Justice who found the ACA and its 20 taxes to be Constitutional without (Like everyone who voted for it) even reading it. He is also one of the Justices who gave the Secret Courts allowing the NSA to blanket monitor US Citizens Email, Web history, phone calls, texts and everything else.

Harry Reid, Obama's Chief Ass Kisser is the Senate Majority leader. Thats MAJORITY leader. In the House it only takes a simple majority to impeach. in the Senate it requires 2/3's to convict. The Senate consists of 51 Democrats, 2 independents and 47 Republicans. It would require all 47 Republicans to vote against Obama, both Independents and 18 Democrats. not gonna happen.

The Constitution requires that a President Impeached and Convicted be removed from Office. Read Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution. Bill Clinton was Impeached. All those people who whine that he was not, have no clue as to what they are talking about. Clinton was Convicted in the Senate. But, instead of being removed from Office as the Constitution says he should, he simply said he wasn't going anywhere, and didn't. Later, for the first time in US History, his impeachment was overturned by a Federal Judge. It calls for nothing in the Constitution other than immediate removal from Office. It didn't matter to Clinton.

Could Obama or Holder be impeached in the House? yes. The problem is that regardless of who calls for it and when, a Republican (Or Republicrat as he should be properly called), Rep. John Boehner, refuses to let Articles of Impeachment come to the floor. Says he doesnt want to put Americans through that (Must have never heard of Johnson, Nixon or Bill Clinton)

With Boehner in the House, Reid in the Senate, Roberts as Chief Justice, Clinton pull in Politics, and Democrats a majority. conviction on Impeachment in the Senate has an absolute ZERO chance of happening.

 

And that's why it will not be worth wasting the time. But if it were, lets say both are impeached. Put two checks in the Liberals win column.

Edited November 8, 2013 by TankerHC

[Wingshooter]

Best case = a criminal disguised as a leader gets the boot.

Worst case = they waste time that would have otherwise been spent screwing us over by crafting some new law. Even if nobody gets impeached, I'm happy just running the clock out on o's term.

[Mike.357]

If the effort is never made, sure, nothing will come of it. Profound!

 

 

by nothing will come of it I mean even if impeached what difference will it make?  Will he go to jail?  Will it even change how his office operates?

Obama and his admin are way above laws other's are expected to follow.

[DaveTN]

This is a whole bunch of useless noise to detract from the real issues and keep gun control in the spotlight.

Holder needs to be gone, but it won’t be over F&F.

We just had a partial government shutdown. How about our legislators go back to work and fix the problems instead of dangling shiny objects for dramas sake.

[DaveTN]

by nothing will come of it I mean even if impeached what difference will it make?  Will he go to jail?

No. They could spend millions on a case, if he was convicted (won’t happen) Obama could (and would) pardon him with the stroke of a pen.

[Spiffy]

Impeach Obama and Biden is President............this is why they wont impeach Obama. 

[Guest 6.8 AR]

No, he wouldn't go to jail on a senate vote for removal. That has to be dealt with by another court. I don't think the senate has the

authority to put anyone in jail, except maybe to place someone in contempt of Congress, but I have no clue about this matter.

 

Bill Clinton was impeached by the House and not removed from office by the senate. The senate acts as the court to adjudicate

after the House votes to impeach. The House says to move the process forward to the senate. The senate hearing with the Chief

Justice in charge, decides whether or not to remove. Is that not right?

 

Maybe, after the articles of impeachment wasn't used the first time, it isn't going to go anywhere until there are enough votes in

the senate to vote to remove exist, because Reid controls the votes right now. It may not be practical, but it is the right course

of action. It should have been done repeatedly in the last several administrations. And Clinton should have been removed from

office, but he was impeached.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

A replacement firewall as good as Holder would be hard to find. For instance an attorney general Van Jones might be a little too self-interested to make a good firewall.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

by nothing will come of it I mean even if impeached what difference will it make?  Will he go to jail?  Will it even change how his office operates?

Obama and his admin are way above laws other's are expected to follow.

Mike, I doubt he would go to jail in either case, there being multiple cases he could be impeached over, but removing him from office would accomplish further tarnishing this administration and set up future impeachment possibilities. It's doubtful Holder will resign. He's committed multiple crimes against states and has sued states for following the law. The man is a political criminal. He has been very dangerous in his position. I have my doubts anything will come of this, though. There are too many spineless Republicans in the senate.

 

I would rather be focusing on getting a majority in the senate before considering this stuff, knowing it won't fly until that

happens.

Edited November 8, 2013 by 6.8 AR

[Guest TankerHC]

Mike, I doubt he would go to jail in either case, there being multiple cases he could be impeached over, but removing him from office would accomplish further tarnishing this administration and set up future impeachment possibilities. It's doubtful Holder will resign. He's committed multiple crimes against states and has sued states for following the law. The man is a political criminal. He has been very dangerous in his position. I have my doubts anything will come of this, though. There are too many spineless Republicans in the senate.

 

I would rather be focusing on getting a majority in the senate before considering this stuff, knowing it won't fly until that

happens.

 

THIS. He's a Criminal. Which reminded me of something I read last year but cannot find, but I do know it is fact and has been upheld buy the Supreme Court numerous times. I always wondered how appointees could commit crimes and not be arrested  and get a jury of 100.

 

Well they can be arrested, ordered arrested by Congress. It doesnt take an impeachment. It's called "inherent contempt". And its been used (And as mentioned upheld by the Supreme Court). But the Congress is afriad to use that power they have, I believe the reason was because it doesnt look good. Last year the House voted overwhelmingly to hold Holder in criminal contempt. And voted overwhelmingly to hold a criminal case against him. But you know what happened (Yes, of course because he's still holding his office), nothing, because Boehner AGAIN said (just like he said about impeachment) that it is not going to come to the floor, its off the table.

 

So a good 7/10th's of Congress voted him in Criminal contempt, then voted to bring him to trial then let him walk out of the House. He should have been arrested the second the Criminal Contempt vote was taken.

 

Its like Sebelius just ignoring Congress, she and the rest simply saying "NO" when told Congress wanted to see documents or her "whatever" snide remark. The beetch should have been arrested 20 seconds later. But Congress has been neutered, period, and will do nothing but take votes that are meaningless.

 

You don't need impeachment, you just need a big set of testicles. Since Congress has neither Balls, heart or a spine, nothing will come of any of it.

 

Cruz just needs to start carrying a cane on the Senate floor.

 

(If you dont know what Im talking about look up Sumner - Brooks). Just give Cruz a Cane and let him fix this.

Edited November 8, 2013 by TankerHC

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It's because of the lack of morals and the looting factor of the members of Congress collectively. We have too many members

who forgot their oath of office, if they ever took it seriously, and their duty to their constituents. We vote people in and don't hold

them to that.

[daddyo]

Good luck wid dat!

[Dolomite_supafly]

How about rather say nothing will come of this we all start making calls and sending emails. Not to those who want to impeach him but to those who would not want to impeach him. We don't need to convince those that are doing it that they are in the right, we need to convince those who think Holder is in the right. I guarantee if everyone made a call a day it would soon make them think about their next term and they would do the right thing.

[Joe357]

IMO, just a way to get the eyes of the nation off of Obama...Obamacare, etc. or the Dems wouldn't be supporting it. :snore:   

[Guest 6.8 AR]

They nibble away at the Constitution, we should be nibbling away at them.

[No_0ne]

THIS. He's a Criminal. Which reminded me of something I read last year but cannot find, but I do know it is fact and has been upheld buy the Supreme Court numerous times. I always wondered how appointees could commit crimes and not be arrested  and get a jury of 100.

 

Well they can be arrested, ordered arrested by Congress. It doesnt take an impeachment. It's called "inherent contempt". And its been used (And as mentioned upheld by the Supreme Court). But the Congress is afriad to use that power they have, I believe the reason was because it doesnt look good. Last year the House voted overwhelmingly to hold Holder in criminal contempt. And voted overwhelmingly to hold a criminal case against him. But you know what happened (Yes, of course because he's still holding his office), nothing, because Boehner AGAIN said (just like he said about impeachment) that it is not going to come to the floor, its off the table.

 

So a good 7/10th's of Congress voted him in Criminal contempt, then voted to bring him to trial then let him walk out of the House. He should have been arrested the second the Criminal Contempt vote was taken.

 

Its like Sebelius just ignoring Congress, she and the rest simply saying "NO" when told Congress wanted to see documents or her "whatever" snide remark. The beetch should have been arrested 20 seconds later. But Congress has been neutered, period, and will do nothing but take votes that are meaningless.

 

You don't need impeachment, you just need a big set of testicles. Since Congress has neither Balls, heart or a spine, nothing will come of any of it.

 

Cruz just needs to start carrying a cane on the Senate floor.

 

(If you dont know what Im talking about look up Sumner - Brooks). Just give Cruz a Cane and let him fix this.

 

 

... just for curiosity's sake, how did this vote happen if Boehner wouldn't allow it on the floor...

[Guest TankerHC]

The problem is that impeachment will do absolutely nothing, accomplish absolutely nothing and instead of focusing where we need to be focused, which is the upcoming elections. This is a ruse. Half these sobs know or think they may be going home. If your congressman votes to impeach and he was one that started talking common sense gun control bs or one of those who has been making a lot of self serving votes for the last 2, 3 or 4 year's, well now he's a fricken hero. They as well as anyone who understands the process know this isn't going anywhere and the impeachment part of the impeachment process only belongs to the house. You don't need to be an attorney to understand constitutional procedure. The Founder's wrote it in plain English so anyone could understand it. Impeachment happens in the house, trial happens in the Senate. The chief Justice presides. It's that simple. We don't control the Senate and we can't trust Roberts. And even in the event there is a miraculous change of progressive heart, no one's leaving. I will say no to impeachment at every turn because I am against making these pos congress people heroes so they can be elected again and again. Fk that. It's time they pay a price at the polls. You want to get reelected. Grow some balls and use the power the founders gave you. Just arrest the sobs already. But they won't because of how it would look. They have already voted 30 something times on the impeachment issue. Maybe this time it will pass for Holder, nothing will happen but they tried and are heroes for trying so we can AGAIN reelect 89% of the scumbags. Forget it. The elections are less than a year away. Don't let them change your focus from where it counts. At the polls.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2

[Guest Lester Weevils]

It is a mafia or good old boys club. Lots of liberals were hot to investigate and prosecute various Bush folks when obammy got in. There might have actually been some there there in some cases, such as giving all that free money to banks most likely guilty of multiple heinous felonies. But obammy swept it under the rug and even sealed all the records up tight for his good buddy bush.

 

And if an R is ever elected president again, it will be the same old same old. All the current felons in office will get off scott free with generous pensions and bennies and accolades all around.

 

Neither side wants to "get something started" prosecuting previous criminals, because they themselves don't want to be prosecuted for their crimes when they eventually fall out of the cat bird seat.

[gun sane]

Not for nuthin', but the Constitutional provision which allows for impeachment of officials is not predicated on what is politically possible at the moment.  It's there because it's a just process for removing corruption in government.  I can't bring myself to believe the writers of the document would advise waiting until the next election to see how the tide turns.  The House should bring impeachable charges against the tyrants whatever their potential for success.  If evidence of crimes against the nation and the people are never brought to that level, how will we will ever foster an appreciation of justice and integrity in our government?

Edited November 8, 2013 by gun sane

[kieefer]

This thread is racist.

 

 

 

:P

 

 

 

Not going to happen either.