Rep. Jim Clyburn: GOP will try to impeach President Obama

[Luis Gonzalez]

Who gives a rat's ass what Obama's approval ratings are after his term expires?

BTW... Clinton's approval ratings when the House impeached him rose to 73%. He ended his term with a 68% approval rating.

What does that say about the number of Americans who wanted him impeached?

[DCPatriot]

BTW... Clinton's approval ratings when the House impeached him rose to 73%. He ended his term with a 68% approval rating.

What does that say about the number of Americans who wanted him impeached?

You mean the same "reliable" polls that said the 2014 mid-terms were going to be "too close to call"?

Those kinds of polls?   

[Luis Gonzalez]

You mean the same "reliable" polls that said the 2014 mid-terms were going to be "too close to call"?

Those kinds of polls?   

No... I mean the actual numbers of support.

You can believe what you wish to believe, but that doesn't change the truth.

In fact, Clinton (Bill) TODAY has a higher approval rating than both W and Obama.

[Cyber Liberty]

There will be no impeachment charges brought up against Obama.

Obama will not be impeached.

Period.

The impeachment talk is being driven by Obama and the Democrats themselves because they see the obvious value to their collective careers.

The sheeple on the right are being driven by the DNC sheep dogs to a ledge.

There has been quite a conversation this morning...just catching up because it's earlier out here.

You are correct, there will be no impeachment, and the Republicans in DC would have to a lot more stupid than I've always given them credit for if there is.  I lots of people running right over the nearest cliff.  It's like 1999 never happened.

Fortunately, there are cooler heads prevailing.

[Cyber Liberty]

No... I mean the actual numbers of support.

You can believe what you wish to believe, but that doesn't change the truth.

In fact, Clinton (Bill) TODAY has a higher approval rating than both W and Obama.

Clinton survived his impeachment for the same reason Obama would survive one:  The Dems in the Senate are in lockstep in protecting "their boy."  They refused to even look at evidence or listen to testimony in 1999, and I see no reason they would behave any differently today.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Clinton survived his impeachment for the same reason Obama would survive one:  The Dems in the Senate are in lockstep in protecting "their boy."  They refused to even look at evidence or listen to testimony in 1999, and I see no reason they would behave any differently today.

I come from a big family.

We brawl, we disagree, we even avoid one another at gatherings.

Let ONE outsider mess with any ONE member of our family, and they'll have to contend with the entire family.

It's normal.

Look at Congress.

Lowest approval ratings in history, yet the majority of Congress will get re-elected. That's because while people disapprove of Congress in general, they approve of "their" guy/gal in Congress.

[Cyber Liberty]

I come from a big family.

We brawl, we disagree, we even avoid one another at gatherings.

Let ONE outsider mess with any ONE member of our family, and they'll have to contend with the entire family.

It's normal.

Look at Congress.

Lowest approval ratings in history, yet the majority of Congress will get re-elected. That's because while people disapprove of Congress in general, they approve of "their" guy/gal in Congress.

Yup.  Nixon wasn't worried about Impeachment until members of his own "family" came to him and said, "You'll lose in the Senate."

That's why the only Representatives you see banging the drum for impeachment are Democrats, specifically the members of the CBC.

[musiclady]

I think that is unexpectedly solid analysis, Musiclady.  Good post.

Thank you.................. I think.......

(Curious that you found it 'unexpected' that I could come up with a solid analysis, but I'll accept the compliment, regardless.  )

[Cyber Liberty]

Thank you.................. I think.......

(Curious that you found it 'unexpected' that I could come up with a solid analysis, but I'll accept the compliment, regardless.  )

A few more compliments like that and you'll be picking your teeth off the floor. 



...and you're no idiot.

[musiclady]

A few more compliments like that and you'll be picking your teeth off the floor. 



...and you're no idiot.

Appreciate the verification that I had been insulted, CL. 

[Cyber Liberty]

Appreciate the verification that I had been insulted, CL. 

 

Indeed you have.  By a real artist (if you count fingerpainting as a child as "artist").  I read it, was insulted, and scrolled up to see the predictable avatar.

[musiclady]

Indeed you have.  By a real artist (if you count fingerpainting as a child as "artist").  I read it, was insulted, and scrolled up to see the predictable avatar.

Weird and unnecessary.

It would have been so much easier to leave out the insult, and just agree........

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Thank you.................. I think.......

(Curious that you found it 'unexpected' that I could come up with a solid analysis, but I'll accept the compliment, regardless.  )

I meant to write "expectedly" solid.  I think the word sounded clumsy in my inebriated state.  I have great respect for your opinion.

[musiclady]

I meant to write "expectedly" solid.  I think the word sounded clumsy in my inebriated state.  I have great respect for your opinion.

I wondered about that.  We have no negative history.

In fact, in another life, we fought side by side.   

[Cyber Liberty]

I meant to write "expectedly" solid.  I think the word sounded clumsy in my inebriated state.  I have great respect for your opinion.

I'm glad to her that.  I'm sure the day is coming when we, too, shall fight side by side.

(I have days like you talked about lately myself.)

[aligncare]

Well, it's settled, then. No impeachment for probably the most impeachment deserving president of all time. I'm so proud of our guys – I could just cry.

[Cyber Liberty]

Well, it's settled, then. No impeachment for probably the most impeachment deserving president of all time. I'm so proud of our guys – I could just cry.

Don't blame our guys, they're likely very willing.

But they know the Rats will march in lockstep to protect their guy, no matter what he does.  Obama could eat a live puppy then behead an infidel on coast-to-coast TV and they'd still vote "Not Guilty."  It's been proven if you impeach a president and fail to secure a conviction, you are the one who's going to pay for it.  I wish it weren't so, but I don't think it's fair to call out guys chicken for having the brains to have figured that out.  (Some of them certainly are chickens.  Remember Arlen Specter in 1999?)

[Bigun]

Don't blame our guys, they're likely very willing.

But they know the Rats will march in lockstep to protect their guy, no matter what he does.  Obama could eat a live puppy then behead an infidel on coast-to-coast TV and they'd still vote "Not Guilty."  It's been proven if you impeach a president and fail to secure a conviction, you are the one who's going to pay for it.  I wish it weren't so, but I don't think it's fair to call out guys chicken for having the brains to have figured that out.  (Some of them certainly are chickens.  Remember Arlen Specter in 1999?)

I personally think we need to wait ans see just how things play out before we reach any conclusions.

[evadR]

Remember Arlen Specter in 1999?

Certainly do. Hopefully, he's still dead.

[Cyber Liberty]

I personally think we need to wait ans see just how things play out before we reach any conclusions.

If I can explain just one concept today, I'd like it to be, "If a party impeaches a President and fails to get a conviction, then that party will be the one that gets punished."

I could hit rack a happy man tonight.  If the next month or so delivers us a majority of Rats angry enough to impeach, go for it.

[Bigun]

If I can explain just one concept today, I'd like it to be, "If a party impeaches a President and fails to get a conviction, then that party will be the one that gets punished."

I could hit rack a happy man tonight.  If the next month or so delivers us a majority of Rats angry enough to impeach, go for it.

You and me both!

And I don't think we are as far from that possibility as some think we are.

[alicewonders]

In my opinion - the GOP should go about passing the necessary bills that have been languishing on Reid's desk.  Immediately, start the process to REPEAL Obamacare - no tinkering with it!  This will help the economy more than anything.

Now, while they are doing that - they should have a team quietly gathering together the case for impeachment, and as soon as possible - when things are starting to improve a bit - start impeachment for the son of a bitch! 

There's no way Obama should get away with not being impeached.  It sets a horrible precedent and destroys our constitution. 

Don't start it right off the bat - that's what they want us to do - to impede any progress from the git-go.  Fix some things FIRST - then start impeachment.  It's going to take courage......that's why I'm not too hopeful, sad to say.

[DCPatriot]

If I can explain just one concept today, I'd like it to be, "If a party impeaches a President and fails to get a conviction, then that party will be the one that gets punished."

I could hit rack a happy man tonight.  If the next month or so delivers us a majority of Rats angry enough to impeach, go for it.

Have made myself clear on which position I hold regarding Impeachment.

The strategy of the new Congress is going to be to pass bills that were log jammed at Harry Reid's desk...to force Obama to veto them..publicly proving that Obama is a lawless out of control president.

So too, should that strategy be extended with regard to impeachment proceedings.  Let's see which Democrats put party before the Republic and the Constitution.

My point is that GWB won in 2000.  Not Gore....who supposedly should have ridden to victory on Clinton's high approval coattails.

Fact is, Clinton's high approval ratings didn't extend to his own VP.  The country rejected a 'Clinton 3rd term'

And as long as there is no 3rd party candidate in 2016, the Republicans will win.

Impeach the man.  Don't shirk your duty.  Favorable ratings be damned.

[Cyber Liberty]

If (and it's a mighty big if) it appears some Dem Senators are waking up, I'd go for it.  As for tonight, will there's no earthly requirement that I should hit any bed a happy man.  I have failed the one task I gave myself.

[Cyber Liberty]

Have made myself clear on which position I hold regarding Impeachment.

The strategy of the new Congress is going to be to pass bills that were log jammed at Harry Reid's desk...to force Obama to veto them..publicly proving that Obama is a lawless out of control president.

So too, should that strategy be extended with regard to impeachment proceedings.  Let's see which Democrats put party before the Republic and the Constitution.

My point is that GWB won in 2000.  Not Gore....who supposedly should have ridden to victory on Clinton's high approval coattails.

Fact is, Clinton's high approval ratings didn't extend to his own VP.  The country rejected a 'Clinton 3rd term'

And as long as there is no 3rd party candidate in 2016, the Republicans will win.

Impeach the man.  Don't shirk your duty.  Favorable ratings be damned.

Bush would have won by a lot, and would have had real coattails had the Republicans not failed in the impeachment of Clinton.