GOP's impeachment dilemma: 'Have you met Joe Biden?'

[mystery-ak]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/224164-gop-lawmaker-on-impeachment-have-you-met-joe-biden

November 14, 2014, 08:57 am
GOP's impeachment dilemma: 'Have you met Joe Biden?'
By Peter Sullivan

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) has a succinct response when asked about impeaching President Obama: "Have you met Joe Biden?"

Gowdy was asked on Fox News Thursday night about the possibility of impeachment if Obama acts without Congress on immigration.

"Have you met Joe Biden, is my response to that," Gowdy replied. "So, no. Nobody's discussing impeachment except pundits and commentators. First of all, impeachment is a punishment, it's not a remedy. Second of all, the only people who want us to talk about impeachment are the president's allies."

Referring to the idea of impeachment as bait, Gowdy said, "I'm not going to take it because I've met Joe Biden."

Gowdy is strongly opposed to Obama's expected executive action giving legal status to miillions of people who entered the United States illegally.

He pointed to the confirmation process of Obama's attorney general nominee, Loretta Lynch, as a place where Republicans could fight, suggesting the GOP could use Obama's decision against her.

He said Republican lawmakers should ask Lynch pointed questions about the legality of Obama's actions.

"Specifically with this new attorney general, ask U.S. Attorney Lynch, 'What are the limits of prosecutorial discretion? What laws does he actually have to enforce?'" Gowdy said.

While Republican leaders have dismissed talk of impeachment, at least one member Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) is open to it. He said this week that impeachment "would be a consideration" if Obama moves ahead on executive action.

[Free Vulcan]

No great choices here - a  narcissistic wannabe king, or a guy with no filter that might just whip out his wee-wee for everyone to look at.

[mystery-ak]

Can't we do a twofer?...lol

[Atomic Cow]

The issue with impeachment remains; there are not 67 votes in the Senate for conviction.

Without that, it is all show with nothing in the end to gain from it.  It would probably help Obama like it did Clinton.

[truth_seeker]

The issue with impeachment remains; there are not 67 votes in the Senate for conviction.

Without that, it is all show with nothing in the end to gain from it.  It would probably help Obama like it did Clinton.

No 67 votes, not worth pursuing it. Next subject.

[jmyrlefuller]

Can't we do a twofer?...lol

The problem is, Biden wasn't in charge of anything Obama did, so there's really been no crime to levy against him. I mean, sure, it'd be nice to purge the whole administration, but as Gowdy said, it's a punishment for illegal behavior, and most of that was done by Obama's underlings and overseen by Obama himself. So the President is probably liable, but Biden isn't.

I suppose, though, that because Biden was President of the Senate when the Senate refused to bring up the House budgets during the shutdown, you MIGHT be able to conjure an idea that he was willfully derelict in his duties and allowed his top deputy, Harry Reid, to obstruct the legislature's official duties. That would probably be the only way to tie Biden to any of this, and it'd be a much longer shot than the laundry list of crimes Obama has overseen.

A couple years of President Biden might be amusing, anyway.

[raml]

I still think Biden would be better for the country than Obama even if he is an idiot. I do believe he loves this country unlike Obama. I think impeachment should always be on the table since it will not help Obama like it helped Clinton. Obama is a made up president allowed to be president by the leaders of this nation but not at all qualified he was a foreign aid student and has a false social security card anyone of the many background information's that make him ineligible will keep him from being felt sorry for ever if he were impeached. Clinton at least was a citizen a horny citizen and one who perjured himself but did not do what Obama has done to the very foundation of our country by ignoring the constitution and other various laws and basically ruling the country not leading the country.

[Fishrrman]

Agreed with raml above.

At least we know Joe Biden was born an American, and grew up "as an American", rather than as a muslim in Indonesia.

At least we know (or I suspect) that Joe Biden doesn't hate what America stands for.

At least we know that Joe Biden would not have a Valerie Jarrett behind him, pulling his every string.

I suspect that Joe Biden would not be interested in issuing a slew of executive orders that are intent on "fundamentally changing" the country.

And I thought that Trey Gowdy was s'posed to be a smart guy. He ain't soundin' so smart above. Certainly not wise.

Posted this before, but I think I'll post it again:
===================================
OK, Joey, here’s the deal. We’ll make you an offa you can’t refuse.

Come January, we’ll have both the House and the Senate.

We only need a majority vote in the House to send up some “Articles” against Obama to the Senate — piece o’ cake.

But we need some of your friends in the Senate to convict. You know as well as us that a large part of the country is sick of Hussein, and Valerie’s been pullin’ your strings as well as his. And we know how you feel about that, too.

You help us out, we’ll help you.

Lean on enough of your Senate buddies to get us the one vote we need. A vote with, let's say, "conviction".

And then, you're gonna get the best of the bargain — you go down in history as bein’ President, even if it’s only for a coupla years. We know how much you want it.

How’s dat, Joey???

[EC]

Agreed with raml above.

At least we know Joe Biden was born an American, and grew up "as an American", rather than as a muslim in Indonesia.

At least we know (or I suspect) that Joe Biden doesn't hate what America stands for.

At least we know that Joe Biden would not have a Valerie Jarrett behind him, pulling his every string.

I suspect that Joe Biden would not be interested in issuing a slew of executive orders that are intent on "fundamentally changing" the country.

And I thought that Trey Gowdy was s'posed to be a smart guy. He ain't soundin' so smart above. Certainly not wise.

Posted this before, but I think I'll post it again:
===================================
OK, Joey, here’s the deal. We’ll make you an offa you can’t refuse.

Come January, we’ll have both the House and the Senate.

We only need a majority vote in the House to send up some “Articles” against Obama to the Senate — piece o’ cake.

But we need some of your friends in the Senate to convict. You know as well as us that a large part of the country is sick of Hussein, and Valerie’s been pullin’ your strings as well as his. And we know how you feel about that, too.

You help us out, we’ll help you.

Lean on enough of your Senate buddies to get us the one vote we need. A vote with, let's say, "conviction".

And then, you're gonna get the best of the bargain — you go down in history as bein’ President, even if it’s only for a coupla years. We know how much you want it.

How’s dat, Joey???

Want to bet something like your letter is already securely tucked inside Joe's jacket? Or a letter from him tucked in McConnell's?
I have never bought into the dumb as a post thing he does. Every little gaffe, every premature leak has been too perfect and perfectly timed to be accidental, yet sure to be reported as "that's our Joe." He knows he has exactly one way of beating Hillary (or Warren, apparently) and that is if when Nov '16 rolls around, he's the guy in the Oval Office with his ass in the seat and something of a reputation for "fixing" Obama's problems.