There has been much talk lately about removing the man now occupying the White House through impeachment. Is that just political posturing or is it a valid point that is well-taken?

Impeachment and trial under the Constitution

Articles of Impeachment are provided for in the Constitution in Article I, Section 3, Clauses 5 and 6. They are the congressional equivalent of an indictment. In this case, the charges are brought by the House of Representatives much in the same way charges may be filed and brought forth in a court of law by a prosecutor or district attorney. Thereafter, the Articles of Impeachment are sent to the Senate to try with the Chief Justice presiding. The actual trial in the Senate and the removal from office of the convicted party is separate and apart from the act of Impeachment itself and requires a 2/3 vote by the Senate to convict.

As they pertain to this argument, Articles of Impeachment are formal written allegations of the causes that warrant the criminal trial of a president or vice president before the Senate. Impeachment is restricted to removal from office and disqualification of the party impeached to hold or enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States. The language in the Constitution allows that, if convicted, the party shall be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment under the law in the court system. In other words, Congress can only remove the president or vice president and be sure he or she doesn’t hold certain offices, but that doesn’t mean it’s the end of the old ball game. After impeachment proceedings and a subsequent conviction by the Senate, any criminal action can be re-tried in a court of law and all due consequences imposed upon the person in question if found guilty.

Precedent for impeachment

In the history of the United States there have been two presidents that have been impeached and one that came close. President Richard M. Nixon avoided the impeachment process by resigning from office. The charges and evidence against Nixon included a cover up, which was obstruction of justice; abuse of power that rested upon charges that he ordered the IRS to audit the taxes of political adversaries; and his refusal to obey a subpoena from the Judiciary Committee.

President William J. Clinton was impeached for crimes of perjury and obstruction to conceal his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. It is widely believed that Clinton was acquitted because of his high approval rating of 70% and the strong economy. Republicans in both houses of Congress feared the repercussions from their constituents if they removed Clinton from office.

President Andrew Johnson was also impeached but acquitted for Congress falling one vote short of the required 2/3. Johnson had 11 Articles of Impeachment against him, including: obstructions of justice; thwarting duly enacted federal laws; attempting to bring disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt and reproach on the Congress, which consisted of making speeches with the intent to show disrespect for the Congress among the citizens of the United States.

Impeachment in the present case

The US Constitution. Photo: National Archives of the United States

In 2014 Articles of Impeachment against the man now occupying the White House are remarkably similar to those of his predecessors – but exceed them significantly. In researching and writing this article, it quickly became apparent that a comprehensive list of legitimate charges against the man now occupying the White House and members of his administration are so extensive that it would not be possible to compile. The following list represents just the tip of the proverbial iceberg and only the offenses that are more popularly known and in some instances overlap categories:

Obstruction of Justice (a charge included against all three presidents listed above): is a criminal offense that involves interference, through words or actions, with the proper operations of a court or officers of the court. The statute (18U.S.C.A.§§1501–1507) was written to offer broad protection for the integrity of the courts and congressional proceedings, and has always been interpreted by the courts expansively to proscribe any conduct that interferes with the judicial process. In the case of Barack Obama, he obstructed justice when he signed an Executive Order to protect Eric Holder in the matter of the Fast and the Furious.

Thwarting duly enacted federal laws: Mr. Obama has boldly thwarted immigration laws and as a result has created a myriad of crisis and literally opened the border of the United States unlawfully by instructing the Department of Justice to cease enforcing immigration laws. He did likewise for federal welfare laws, drug laws, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Offenses against the Constitution and failure to honor the Oath of Office, although offenses against the Constitution are not duly enacted federal laws, they fit into the preceding category as well as into the two succeeding categories and certainly qualify as a high crime and much more than a misdemeanor.

In defiance of the Constitution and his oath to uphold the Constitution, Mr. Obama has been creating a Civilian National Security Force under his exclusive control in the “Affordable Care Act.” In a speech on July 2, 2008, he said:

We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set.

And…

We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.

Additionally, he (supposedly a constitutional scholar) made recess appointments that the Supreme Court recently ruled were unconstitutional.

He also declared war on Libya, in defiance of a law he had personally signed.

Surrender of our national sovereignty to the United Nations through promoting and supporting treaties that circumvent our constitutional rights, thus violating his oath of office to uphold the Constitution:

• The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which strips parents of their god-given right to raise their children as they see fit and endows the children with rights to lawfully challenge their parents’ authority. Such challenges are not restricted to physical abuse but are broadly applicable to parents “requesting” that their children do their homework or attend church.
• The UN Convention on Children with Disabilities, which inserts UN delegates into the decision making process for all children with disabilities and strips parents of that right. The description of what qualifies as a disability is vague and can be applied to children that wear glasses, or a myriad of other minor classifications.
• The UN Arms Trade Treaty, which allows the United Nations to regulate the sale of small arms should they deem the sale to be conducted by terrorists. The description of who a terrorist is will be defined broadly by the United Nations Security Council, which is comprised of permanent and non-permanent members. The permanent members are: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The non-permanent members are: Argentina, Australia, Chad, Chile, Jordan, Rwanda, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Nigeria, and the Republic of Korea.
• The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which would establish a comprehensive set of rules and regulations governing the oceans. President Reagan rejected the treaty in 1982 on the basis of it being “out of step with the concepts of economic liberty and free enterprise” – as then being promoted by Reagan throughout the world.
• UN Agenda 21, which infringes upon our right to own property in a multitude of ways – all in the name of “sustainability.” However, the “sustainability” being promoted does not sustain the property in a productive manner, as would be expected, but sustains it in a manner that excludes its use by human beings by over-consumers. Over-consumers, according to the UN definition, includes populations that use air conditioning, eat meat, and use fuel through the use of driving cars. These practices are deemed by the United Nations to render the land “unsustainable.”

It should be noted that once ratified by the Senate, treaties become the law of the land. While it is often argued that treaties cannot violate the Constitution, they are able to circumvent it and marginalize the protection the Constitution offers to its citizens through restrictive rules and regulations.

Other acts of defiance that are attributable to Mr. Obama and his administration are:

• Violation of the No Child Left Behind Act by providing federal monies to states adopting Common Core State Standards;
• Using the EPA to shut down the coal industry and issuing a moratorium on Gulf Coast drilling and attempting to implement Cap and Trade;
• Raiding our treasury numerous times to send monies to foreign interests and countries, including $18 Million to Kenya for them to produce a Marxist-inspired Constitution;
• Releasing “cooked” unemployment numbers prior to the 2012 presidential elections, and of course
• Dismissing voter intimidation charges against the Black Panthers – just to name a few!

Attempting to bring disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt and reproach on the Congress of the United States (as charged to President Johnson): Mr. Obama has repeatedly accused anyone in Congress who disagrees with him as being guilty of political posturing and attributed and inferred that all challenges to his policies as being racially motivated. He has also subjected the entire United States to such indignity on his famous “Apology Tour” where he made our nation the laughing stock of the entire world.

Abuse of power: While the current IRS debacle has yet to be connected to the White House, Mr. Obama has demonstrated his abuse of power by boldly stating that he has a pen and a phone and can use it to circumvent Congress. And he both thwarted duly enacted federal laws and abused his power when he violated his own signature piece of legislation, known as ObamaCare. In so doing, without going through due process, he changed employer mandates, issued exemptions for members of Congress and their staff, issued waivers for cronies, and delayed its implementation – all through fiat. Additionally, since the Supreme Court of the United States declared that ObamaCare is a tax, issuing waivers and exemptions to members of Congress and their staff, as well as unions and others, constitutes a violation of the Constitution that specifies that all taxes are to distributed equally and without prejudice or preferential treatment.

He also appointed former SEIU official John Lund to the Office of Labor-Management Standards who proceeded to cut the number of labor union investigators by half and advise unions on how to circumvent reporting requirements.

[ezadsense midpost]

Perjury: Although the Mr. Obama may not be guilty of lying under oath, a case can be made that he deliberately and criminally lied to the American people when he repeatedly stated that under ObamaCare you could keep your health insurance and you could keep your doctor. When promoting ObamaCare publicly, he and his representatives told the American people that they would save on average $1500 per year for this plan, knowing just the opposite was most likely true and has proven to be true and has become the largest tax increase in the nation’s history. Mr. Obama and his minions also grossly misrepresented the actual costs of Obamacare to Congress.

Add to this the myriad of lies he has told through the course of his 5 years in office (including but certainly not limited to the Benghazi tragedy), and the spirit and intent of perjury is more than justified. He also knowingly provided false data that reported the illegal immigration deportations were at an all time high under his administration.

He also lied to Congress about a politically motivated National Labor Relations Board lawsuit against Boeing for establishing a 787 production line in the right to work state of South Carolina.

Violations against the 10^th Amendment: The 10th Amendment to the Constitution reserves all powers not delegated to the federal government under the Constitution (Article 1, Section 8) to be reserved by the states. Common Core State Standards violate the states authority to set curriculum standards as they see fit and assigns that authority to the federal government through the Department of Education. Since bribery is also a legitimate charge for impeachment, it can be argued that the monies given to states that comply with Common Core State Standards are tantamount to bribery by the federal government to coerce the states implementation of the standards, which are not set by the states – contrary to what the term implies. Bribery can also apply to buying votes for ObamaCare including the “Cornhusker Kickback”, “Louisiana Purchase” and “Gator Aid” and spending $2.8 billion to secure the support of the AARP.

The President’s Rural Council also attempted to impose rules and regulations on the farm industry which violates its authority under the 10th Amendment. This Council included regulations that would have crippled small family farms in many ways, including the requirement that anyone using any type of equipment had to have a CDL license.

Treason: While a good case can be made that the man now occupying the White House is guilty of all of the above, as well as the Articles of Impeachment against Clinton and Johnson, and those that would have been charged against Nixon, Mr. Obama is also guilty of the granddaddy of all despicable charges – treason.

The online legal dictionary (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Treason) defines constitutional treason under Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution as:

any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them Aid and Comfort. The term aid and comfort refers to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information. If a subversive act has any tendency to weaken the power of the United States to attack or resist its enemies, aid and comfort has been given. The Treason Clause applies only to disloyal acts committed during times of war.

According to the above definition, and when considering that the United States is engaged in a War on Terror that was declared upon us on September 11, 2001, Mr. Obama has earned the name of “Traitor.”

• He has given Aid and Comfort (including funding and jets) repeatedly, although subversively, to the Muslim Brotherhood who are proudly participants in the War on Terror declared against us.
• He has released the Taliban 5 in conjunction with securing the release of a deserter (all while refusing to lift a finger to help Sgt. Tahmooressi languishing in a Mexican jail).
• He has weakened the power of the United States subversively by reducing our troops in Iraq, which has also put those troops stationed there in increased danger.
• He has reduced our military to pre-World War II levels, which has weakened our power against attacks and to resist our enemies during this War on Terror.
• He has termed the Fort Hood shootings as being work place violence, which has betrayed those injured by this terrorist act by not allowing them to receive the funding they need for proper treatment.
• He gave the order to Stand Down (an order that can only come from the President) to those wanting to aid our American Ambassador and other brave Americans who were being fatally attacked in Benghazi – all while he went on a fundraising trip to Las Vegas.
• Additionally, he has demeaned and discouraged those who would enforce our laws by proceeding with criminal charges against Border Patrol agent Jesus Diaz, Jr.for “violating the constitutional rights of an illegal alien drug smuggler” even though he had already been twice cleared by investigators.

He alsoⁱ

• Pledged to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he will have “more flexibility” after the election to cave on contentious issues like missile defense.
• Diverted money away from a critically needed ballistic missile defense system due in 2013 for one that won’t be ready until 2020 at best.
• Ordered the FBI to read foreign caught terrorists their Miranda rights, thus encouraging them to keep silent.
• Instructed (whether by direct communications or through his chain of command) UN Ambassador Susan Rice and the White House representatives to lie about the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens in Libya, insisting it was a spontaneous mob action when in reality it was a well designed terrorist attack.
• He, along with Eric Holder, tried to give the federal government the right to detain American citizens for an indefinite period of time without due processⁱⁱ.
• Declaring a draw down date for Afghanistan before the surge was even implemented, thus endangering our troops and giving advantage to those forces that oppose our mission.
• Directly or indirectly responsible for multiple national security leaks from the White House including details on cyber attacks against the Iranian nuclear weapons program and the bin Laden raid, which led to the death of the Navy Seal team 6 that executed the bin Laden raid.
• Authorizing the Department of Homeland Security to spend millions on monitoring the web for critics of its policies and including the labeling of a vast array of citizen groups as “domestic terrorists”, while minimizing the terrorist action of Major Nidal Hassan at Ft. Hood.
• Trying to strip provisions out of the Iran Sanctions Bill that provides compensation to victims of the 1983 Hezbollah bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut.
• The irresponsible and national security threat created by skipping out on more than half of his daily intelligence briefings and instead relying on written reports distributed on his iPad or on breaking news reports by the media.
• Forcing the early retirement of or firing experienced Armed Forces officers near retirement to retire without full benefits in opposition to longstanding Department of Defense policy.
• He proposed nuclear scientist exchange program with China that was a golden invitation for espionage and would compromise our nuclear secrets.

In the words of Abraham Lincoln:

Any man who willfully takes actions during wartime that damages moral and undermines the military is a saboteur and should be arrested, exiled or hung.

Conclusion

This man has done more to deserve impeachment than any other president in the history of these United States. But more – he deserves to also be tried afterwards in a civilian court for treason and ultimately deserves just punishment for this crime to the full extent the law will allow. Unfortunately, if the House of Representatives and the Senate to not live up to their responsibilities and write the Articles of Impeachment and convict him, they will be accessories to his high crimes and misdemeanors and deserving of impeachment themselves. These crimes are not to be taken lightly; they are egregious and deserving of punitive measures. George Washington stated in 1778:

No punishment is too great for the man who builds his greatness upon his country’s ruin.

We can thank our Founders for having the foresight to include the impeachment process in our Constitution. The trouble is – few in Congress are following our Constitution today. Therefore, the final solution may lie with We the People – whatever that may be. God help us all and may God have mercy upon America.

[ezadsense leadout]