by Ben Barrack
As the United States continues on its downward trajectory, thanks to the policies of the Obama administration, the debate rages about whether he’s doing it all on purpose or whether he is merely incompetent. When talk radio giant Rush Limbaugh discusses this, he concludes that “it doesn’t matter” because the result is the same either way.
Limbaugh misses a critical distinction. If Obama is incompetent, it means he must be voted out of office. If he is intentionally destroying the country as it was founded, it means he has malicious intent and must be removed through impeachment and a Senate trial. It would also mean that he is a domestic enemy.
It wouldn’t matter if Al Capone were president of the United States, impeachment and a Senate trial is the only way to remove a sitting president from office. As for Capone, the Chicago mob boss was guilty of many things, the worst of which was murder. The feds knew this but couldn’t prove it. They also knew Capone was guilty of income tax evasion, which they could and did prove. Perhaps he wasn’t convicted of his most egregious crimes, but it didn’t matter; he could do no more damage.
If this administration is intentionally destroying our nation (at least Rush doesn’t dismiss this possibility), the responsibility to remove Obama necessarily falls to the 535 congressmen who took an oath to defend us against an occupant of the White House who is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. Maybe they cannot prove he is doing it on purpose but if they know it, they should impeach and convict for a crime they can prove. It is their Constitutional duty to do so. With a solid majority in the House, Speaker John Boehner would succeed, with the right message and the right case. Even if the House impeached and the Senate did not convict, Obama might think twice before usurping any more power from the legislative branch.
In May 2010, then-Republican minority whip, Eric Cantor spoke at the Heritage Foundation. Someone in the audience asked, “In light of what Obama has done…what would he have to do differently to be defined as a domestic enemy?”
Cantor replied: “Listen, let me respond very forthright [sic.] to that. No one thinks the president is a domestic enemy.”
Now that he is House majority leader, Cantor has an even greater responsibility to get to the truth. If he is wrong about Obama’s intentions, he will have violated his oath by not doing everything in his power to reveal them and help to prevent them from being carried out.
There have only been two impeachments in the history of our republic. Both were Democrats – Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton – and neither was convicted in the Senate. The only other president who was certain to be both impeached and convicted was Republican Richard Nixon, who resigned when he saw the handwriting on his administration’s stonewalls.
Barack Obama is our 44th president. If you count Nixon, only one president has been removed from office by Congress; that’s one out of 44. The odds of Obama facing a similar fate are barely more than two percent, which is why conservative Republicans continue the countdown to the 2012 election while saying it cannot get here soon enough.
Consider that Obama was inaugurated on January 20, 2009. He has been in office for slightly more than 31 months. Assuming he is defeated in 2012, he will not leave office for another 17 months. The first term of his administration is not even two-thirds complete, if you count the ten-week lame duck period. Yes, technically, the election is next year but it is still more than a year away.
If this president is intentionally trying to destroy the United States as it was founded, would he not attempt to do so completely before Obama leaves office? In fact, if the country survives and if Obama is defeated after one term, the administration may be at its most destructive during its last ten weeks. Does anyone remember what the outgoing 111th Congress did in the lame duck session after the Tea Party tsunami in 2010?
In a radio interview with Joe Pagliarulo on WOAI in Houston, TX, Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Judiciary committee, all but conceded there was nothing Congress could really do in response to Obama’s usurpation of its power by granting amnesty to illegal aliens on August 18th, in essence, by executive fiat. Smith said that hearings would take several months and do little more than embarrass the president; he then said that the 2012 election is the best option.
This president loves chaos; he loves redirection and misdirection; it keeps the opposition disjointed and ineffective. In Chicago, instead of wringing their hands about whether to indict Capone on charges of murder, conspiracy to commit murder, bootlegging, racketeering, or any other crimes, Eric Holder’s ancestors in the Justice Department picked the best option and went for broke: get him for income tax evasion.
Of all the things this administration has done, the best option for having Obama removed through impeachment and conviction is Operation Fast and Furious. It is a scandal that has been percolating just beneath the surface for months now and it involves the ATF allowing weapons to “walk” into Mexico; it reaches to the highest levels of the Justice Department at a minimum. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, ICE agent Jaime Zapata, and countless Mexican civilians are all alleged to have been murdered as a direct result of those who authorized it.
Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa has already chaired multiple rounds of hearings; he is well out in front of Lamar Smith in that regard. Attorney General Eric Holder, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich, and ATF Supervisor William Newell have all given testimony that reeks of perjury. As the scandal creeps along, it gets closer to the White House — and Issa says there will be even more hearings. If this administration either authorized or knew about Operation Fast and Furious, the scandal instantly becomes Watergate with murder.
If Obama authorized the operation, he could be guilty of criminally negligent manslaughter, which occurs when the death of another human being is the result of serious negligence or recklessness. Authorizing a program that puts guns into the hands of drug cartels who kill federal agents would necessarily qualify. If, as some have alleged, the intent of the Obama administration was to create a crisis of guns crossing the border – in order to further a gun control agenda – that would constitute constructive manslaughter, which is more severe because it involves malicious intent.
If Holder committed perjury when he told the Senate Judiciary committee on May 4th that he had only learned about Fast and Furious a few weeks earlier, did Obama know his Attorney General committed perjury and do nothing about it? Worse yet, did he instruct Holder to commit perjury? In the former case, he would be guilty of aiding and abetting perjury. In the latter case, he could be convicted of suborning it.
Manslaughter and perjury are both impeachable offenses, and Darrell Issa’s committee is getting close to the truth, which involves dead Americans and blatant stonewalling.
Issa has quickly become persona non grata in the left-wing media as well, a clear indication that he has become a threat. On August 15th, New York Times reporter Eric Lichtblau penned an article that consists of thirteen factual errors according to Issa’s office. Libel is appearing more and more possible as the Times has already issued three corrections with more likely to follow, including the charge that Issa’s office overlooks a golf course.
The doctoral dissertation of Obama’s ideological hero, Saul Alinsky, was an inside study of Capone’s mob, which Alinsky saw firsthand after endearing himself to the top henchmen. He described the experience in an interview, “The Federal Government could try to nail ‘em on an occasional income tax rap, but inside Chicago they couldn’t touch their power.”
This administration and its Justice Department seems to carry a similar air of invincibility. The metaphor carries ominous parallels. Alinsky ingratiated himself with mobsters; Obama panders to union thugs. Both share Chicago origins. Coming full circle, Obama is a reverent student of Alinsky.
The metaphor here is that Congress represents the feds, and the White House seems to carry the evil spirit of Capone.
If there is an Eliot Ness in Congress today, Darrell Issa might just be the best candidate but he could sure use a few more untouchables.
Ben Barrack is a talk show host on KTEM 1400 in Texas and maintains a website at www.benbarrack.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment