Admission: The Left Won’t Back Impeachment Because Obama’s Black

Philip C. Restino Jr., OpEdNews

Twenty years ago after U.S. forces had driven the Iraqi military out of Kuwait and back into Iraq, President George H.W. Bush as Commander in Chief ordered the U.S. military to cease-fire on February 28, 1991. Years later, in his 1998 memoir “A World Transformed,” Bush admitted that the reason he chose to order the cease-fire was because he understood that advancing further into Iraq, a country that had not attacked the U.S., and overthrowing its government could easily be seen as an illegal war of aggression and thus warrant a call from the American people for his removal from office by the Constitutional remedy of impeachment. It was the fear of a call for impeachment by the American people that in effect stopped the President from continuing the war.

Since the Presidency of Democrat Bill Clinton during the 1990′s, which immediately followed the Presidency of Republican George H.W. Bush, the American people have allowed a practice of the President acting as a “unitary executive” unaccountable to the rule of law in ordering the U.S. military into unprovoked, illegal wars of aggression and occupation.

During the Presidency of Republican George W. Bush, attempts were made to even re-define the office of the Presidency as a “unitary executive” with literally dictatorial powers beyond the rule of law. Now, because the American people have still not spoken up, the current Presidency of Democrat Barack Obama has allowed the President of the United States to order young Americans to war without consulting the American people’s representatives in Congress or even having to concoct a lie about the U.S. facing a “justifiable” threat to its national security.

President Obama’s ordering of the March 19, 2011, attack on Libya, without even consulting Congress, let alone getting a Declaration of War or other type of Congressional approval for the attack, has led to a good amount of discussion as to how the President could very well be impeached for having unilaterally ordered such an attack. People from both ends of the political spectrum, to include members of Congress, have been quite clear in publicly stating that the President’s attack on Libya is not only an impeachable offense, as per Democrat Representative and 2008 Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich from Ohio, but it also makes him accountable for war crimes, as per Republican Representative and 2012 Presidential candidate Ron Paul from Texas.

Notable legal experts and scholars from both the left and the right, including former Democrat U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, former Republican Deputy U.S. Attorney General Bruce Fein, and Professor of Law Francis Boyle, have publicly offered their services to assist in carrying out impeachment proceedings against President Obama over his unconstitutional and otherwise illegal war on Libya to any member of Congress willing to step forward and introduce Articles of Impeachment.

Let us not forget that it was the former Constitutional Law Professor and U.S. Senator Barack H. Obama who said himself during a December 20, 2007, interview with the Boston Globe that “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

The sovereign nation of Libya posed no such threat whatsoever to the United States, and Obama’s ordering of more than 120 Cruise Missiles fired into Libya on just the first day of his own March 19 “Shock and Awe” is nothing less than another outright illegal U.S. war of aggression similar to the illegal U.S. war of aggression on Iraq launched eight years to the day prior — minus the land invasion — which is the next step in the process if the American people don’t draw the line and call for a stop to it now.

With such a clear-cut case for impeaching President Obama over his war on Libya, along with the legal experts and political figures ready to proceed with a call for impeachment, why has there not been a call from leaders of the national antiwar organizations for impeaching Obama? It is obvious that making such a call now could actually prevent him from going ahead with a land invasion into Libya, and even be enough of a threat to force him to finally end the 10-year U.S. wars and occupations by using his unique ability as Commander in Chief to order a cease-fire.

People involved in national antiwar organizations have told me that the issue of racism is a major factor in their failure to call for impeachment of President Obama for what amounts to the same crimes cited in their former calls for impeachment and present calls for prosecution of President George W. Bush over his war on Iraq. If calling for the impeachment of the first Black American U.S. President for prosecuting illegal wars of aggression is racist, then that first needs to be squared with all the brown-skinned people being killed under his command….

Read more.

Video: Congressmen Sue Obama Over Illegal Libyan War

Obama, the New Caesar

Jeffrey T. Kuhner, The Washington Times

President Obama has crossed the Rubicon. He now believes – and acts – as if he is above the law; the Constitution no longer applies to him. This is the real meaning behind the U.S. military intervention in Libya. Mr. Obama is abrogating the linchpin of our democracy: the rule of law.

He is violating the War Powers Act. Passed in 1973, the law clearly stipulates that the commander in chief can only deploy U.S. forces for 60 to 90 days without congressional approval. He must then receive authorization from Congress. If he does not, he is usurping legislative authority and expanding the prerogatives of the executive branch – concentrating power in his hands, especially the most important act of all: war. In short, by flagrantly transgressing the War Powers Act, Mr. Obama has sparked a constitutional crisis. (Um, Mr. Kuhner, how about a little credit?BJ.)

House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, is demanding that the Obama administration explain why it has passed the deadline without seeking or getting congressional approval for the Libyan campaign. The White House’s response: Get lost. The administration sent a report to lawmakers defending the NATO-led Libyan war. For Mr. Obama, the War Powers Act does not apply because U.S. forces apparently are not engaged in “sustained hostilities” with troops loyal to strongman Col. Moammar Gadhafi. Moreover, U.S. air and missile strikes are only being conducted in a “supporting” role. Hence, there is no need to have congressional buy-in.

This is postmodern humanitarian interventionism. According to the liberal apparatchiks in the White House, Mr. Obama can bypass Congress simply by redefining “hostilities.” War is no longer war. It is whatever Mr. Obama says it is – or isn’t. George Orwell warned that the perversion of language is the first step on the dark road to authoritarianism.

Mr. Obama’s policy contravenes our national interest, is inept, immoral and illegal. This is why members of Congress are in open revolt. A bipartisan group of lawmakers led by Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, and Rep. Walter B. Jones, North Carolina Republican, have filed a lawsuit demanding that the courts force Mr. Obama to end the intervention in Libya. They are right. It is time Congress reined in an out-of-control administration. There is a growing alliance between conservative constitutionalists and anti-war liberals…

In addition, the hypocrisy of the liberal establishment is stunning. For years, progressives, such as Mr. Obama, railed against President George W. Bush. He was denounced as a “fascist” dictator and compared to Adolf Hitler for his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Bush lied, people died,” went the slogan. Yet, regardless of whether one supported those campaigns or not, Mr. Bush received congressional authorization…

Read more.

Wrong Boehner; Obama is Breaking the Law Right Now

by Ben Johnson, The White House Watch

Only in the liberal media can a weak entreaty to obey the law be considered an act of political warfare. The media have portrayed House Speaker John Boehner’s letter to Barack Obama, merely asking the president for another legal explanation for his war-by-decree in Libya, as “ratcheting up the pressure.” The New York Times correctly noted, “it is not clear if [Boehner’s Congressional] resolution and follow-up letter have any teeth.” It is actually a five-day pass to keep breaking the law.

The text of Boehner’s letter reads, “it would appear that in five days, the Administration will be in violation of the War Powers Resolution unless it asks for and receives authorization from Congress or withdraws all U.S. troops and resources from the mission.” After blasting the president’s “refusal to comply with the basic tenets of the War Powers Resolution,” Boehner invokes the Constitution – but not the section many legal scholars may have expected. Instead of noting what our Founding document has to say about the power to declare war, Boehner writes: “The Constitution requires the President to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,’ and one of those laws is the War Powers Resolution, which requires an approving action by Congress or withdrawal within 90 days from the notification of a military operation.”

There are only four problems with Boehner’s letter: it’s wrong on the Constitution, it’s wrong on the law, it offers no consequences for wrongdoing, and it came 30 days too late. Obama is in violation of the War Powers Resolution right now.

The Constitution or Cronyism?

Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman of California gave a more accurate assessment nearly a month ago when he said Obama is “shredding the Constitution.” Today, the House passed an amendment Sherman authored to….

Read more.

The GOP Alternative: Dither or Cave?

Michael Oberndorf, FloydReports.com

How did it come about that Congress got so overloaded with Republicans who want to bend over backwards to accommodate a “president” who hates America and tramples on the Constitution on a daily basis? It appears they are going to allow the debt ceiling to be raised with only minor cuts in spending, if that. This at a time when what is left of our economy is about to completely collapse, as the Democrats have worked so hard to assure. Our Republican “leadership” seem focused on choosing between dithering or caving. Oh, the tough choices! No wonder they pay themselves four times what the average American makes, plus expenses!

However, so as not to appear to be obsessed with the economy, they also have shown that they can dither and cave on foreign policy, too. It’s truly pathetic when raging socialists like Dennis Kucinich, D-OH, and Jerrold Nadler, D-NY, are far ahead of Republicans in stopping the unconstitutional war that Obama-Soetoro has gotten us into in Libya. In a speech in support of Kucinich’s bill mandating withdrawal of our troops in 15 days, Nadler accused Obama-Soetoro of acting like a king and a dictator. Boehner, in contrast, wants to play golf with him.

Eighty-seven Republicans voted for Kucinich’s bill. The rest wimped-out. Many knowledgeable people are now saying that Obama-Soetoro’s refusal to comply with the War Powers Act is an impeachable offense. Not among this group is the Republican “leadership,” which is far too busy deciding whether to dither or cave on the issue.

Thus, it appears another golden opportunity to get the Marxist Usurper out of the White House is going to be lost. The Republican “leadership” is becoming….

Read more.