Right-Wing Media Ready To Impeach Obama, Again

››› ››› MIKE BURNS

This month, right-wing media figures are arguing that President Obama should be impeached for actions he has taken with respect to Libya. Undermining the possibility that they really care about the constitutional issues involved, this argument is just the latest in the right-wing media's neverending quest to see Obama impeached.

Conservative Media Agitate For Obama Impeachment Over Libya Intervention

Wash. Times' Kuhner: "Only One Remedy Will Teach [Obama] That He Cannot" "Cavalierly Circumvent" Constitution: "Impeachment." In his March 24 Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner wrote that "[t]he Libyan war is part of a pattern of Mr. Obama's unethical and criminal behavior" and that "[i]f Republicans and conservatives are serious about restoring constitutional government, they will demand that Mr. Obama be impeached." Kuhner continued:

Mr. Obama is a socialist thug. Since entering office, he has engaged in a massive, almost unprecedented power grab. He thinks he is above the law, that he can cavalierly circumvent the limits imposed by the Constitution. Only one remedy will teach him that he cannot do so: impeachment. [The Washington Times, 3/24/11]

WND's Farah: "Yes, It's Time To Impeach Obama." In a March 29 column headlined, "Yes, it's time to impeach Obama," WorldNetDaily editor and CEO Joseph Farah -- who has repeatedly called for Obama to be impeached -- wrote:

Never before in the history of the United States has an occupant of the White House displayed less concern for the Constitution and the rule of law than Barack Obama.

It's about time somebody said it: It's time to impeach Obama.

Both Obama and his vice president stated explicitly and emphatically while serving in the U.S. Senate that the president did not have authority to take the nation into armed conflict without the express will of the U.S. Congress or unless the nation was under attack or faced imminent attack.

Sen. Joe Biden said a president who did so should be impeached.

I don't often agree with Obama and Biden, but they were right then. And it's time for them to be accountable to the same rule of law they saw so clearly in 2006 and 2007.


There were plenty of grounds to impeach Obama before Libya, as a WND special report prepared late last year revealed: jeopardizing America's ability to defend itself; undermining the free-enterprise system; corrupting democratic institutions; transferring massive amounts of power and wealth from American citizens to extremist special-interest groups whose loyalty lies not with the Constitution but with a global socialist movement.

However, misusing the U.S. military forces for some globalist mission without any accountability to the people or the rule of law should represent the last straw for every American -- no matter their political ideology.


It's not enough for us to hold our collective breath until 2012, hoping America can find qualified, mature, experienced, pro-American, pro-Constitution leadership. Obama is systematically destroying the country and all it stands for.

It's time to gear up the impeachment machinery. Let the opening argument be made by Obama and Biden themselves. [WorldNetDaily, 3/29/11]

Ace Of Spades: "Obama Never Went To Congress On Libya Because He Never Expected To Have To; Oh, And Impeach Him." From a March 22 post on Ace of Spades titled, "Obama Never Went To Congress on Libya Because He Never Expected To Have To; Oh, and Impeach Him":

The President has committed the United States to war and placed Service Members in danger without constitutionally-required authority to do so.

Waging war in violation of the U.S. Constitution sounds like a High Crime to me. So I'd like someone to explain to me why we shouldn't be talking about impeachment right now. [Ace of Spades HQ, 3/22/11]

Right-Wing Media Saw Obama's DOMA Decision As Grounds For Impeachment

Vadum: "So Many Reasons To Impeach Obama, Now He Gives Us A New One: DOMA." In a February 24 post on his Twitter feed, Capital Research Center senior editor Matthew Vadum wrote:

The link Vadum included went to a post by Ben Stein on The American Spectator blog, in which Stein argued that Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder's decision on the Defense of Marriage Act amounted to "a major constitutional coup." [Matthew Vadum, Twitter, 2/24/11]

Gingrich Flirts With Notion Of Obama Impeachment Over DOMA, Then Backtracks. In an interview with Newsmax TV, then-Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich asserted that Obama "is breaking his word to the American people over the Defense of Marriage Act. When the host asked, "Is what he's doing impeachable in your view?" Gingrich replied: "I think that's something you get to much later. But I think clearly it is a dereliction of duty, clearly it is a violation of his constitutional oath, and clearly it is something which cannot be allowed to stand." When the host pressed further, "At what point would the House or would you recommend the House consider articles of impeachment for that?" Gingrich replied: "Look, I don't think these guys set out to cause a constitutional crisis. ... I think that they didn't understand the implication that having a president personally suspend a law is clearly unconstitutional. This is an impossible precedent." [Newsmax TV interview, 2/25/11]

  • Gingrich later backtracked, reportedly issuing a statement saying that "Congress has every responsibility to demand President Obama live up to his constitutional obligations, but impeachment is clearly not an appropriate action." [Politico, 2/25/11]

Fox Nation Promotes Gingrich's Flirtation With Obama Impeachment. With the headline, "Gingrich Warns of Constitutional Crisis if Obama Isn't Stopped," Fox Nation promoted Gingrich's suggestion that Obama's DOMA decision could be an impeachable offense:

[Fox Nation, 2/26/11]

In Fact, Both Obama And The Justice Department Have Pledged To Continue Enforcing DOMA. In a statement, Holder acknowledged that, although the administration will not provide a legal defense in court of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, the Obama administration will continue to enforce the law while court challenges to the section continue. Furthermore, a 1994 memorandum issued by the Department of Justice cites numerous Supreme Court decisions establishing the legal basis for the Executive Branch to not enforce a statute it deems unconstitutional. [Equality Matters, 2/24/11]

Fox Contributor Pushed For Obama Impeachment Over Egypt Crisis

Fox Contributor Tammy Bruce Calls For Obama To Be Investigated, Possibly Impeached Over Egypt. In a series of posts on her Twitter feed, Fox News contributor Tammy Bruce called for Obama to be investigated and possibly impeached over the crisis in Egypt:

[Tammy Bruce, Twitter, 2/1/11]

Fox Nation Jumps On Tammy Bruce's Obama Impeachment Bandwagon. Fox Nation linked to an article on Bruce's tweets calling for investigations into, and possible impeachment of, Obama over the crisis in Egypt:

[Fox Nation, 2/3/11]

Right-Wing Media Called For Obama's Impeachment Over Health Care Reform Bill

Kuhner: Passing Health Reform Using So-Called Self-Executing Rule "Would Open Mr. Obama ... To Impeachment." In a Washington Times column headlined, "Impeach the president?" Kuhner argued that passing health care reform using a legislative procedure called a "self-executing rule"-- a common and perfectly constitutional procedure -- would "replace the rule of law with arbitrary one-party rule. It violates the entire basis of our constitutional government -- meeting the threshold of 'high crimes and misdemeanors.' " [The Washington Times, 3/17/10]

Conservative Media Use Phony Sestak Scandal To Push Impeachment Of Obama

Fox News Personalities And Other Conservatives Pushed For Impeachment Over White House Involvement In 2010 Election. Right-wing media figures claimed that the White House offering former Rep. Joe Sestak a position on a presidential panel if he did not enter the Pennsylvania Senate primary constituted a "high crime" and an "impeachable offense." They made similar assertions with regard to their false claim that the White House offered Andrew Romanoff a job in exchange for dropping out of Colorado's U.S. Senate election.

  • In fact, numerous legal experts who assessed the Sestak case concluded that no law was broken, and political and legal experts and historians have noted that such offers are commonplace. Likewise, Richard Painter, former White House ethics adviser to President Bush, has called it a "real stretch" to say the White House's conversations with Romanoff violated the law. [Media Matters, 10/14/10]

Morris Predicts Victorious GOP Will Convene An "Impeachment Panel" Over Sestak, Romanoff Allegations. On the June 3, 2010, edition of Fox News' On the Record, Fox News political analyst Dick Morris said: "I'll bet that the Republicans win majorities in both houses in the November elections and convene an impeachment panel" regarding the allegations about the White House's discussions with Sestak and Romanoff because it "is very clear" those conversations were illegal. [Fox News, On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, 6/3/10]

Hannity: "De Facto Bribe" To Sestak Is "An Impeachable Offense." On the May 24, 2010, edition of his Fox News show, Sean Hannity asked Morris: "This, at a minimum, we're talking about a congressman offered a high-ranking job, this is a de facto bribe, no?" Morris replied, "It is," later adding that the offer might be "a high crime and misdemeanor." Hannity then asked: "That would be -- in other words -- an impeachable offense." Morris replied, "Absolutely." [Fox News, Hannity, 5/24/10]

Morris: "If That Offer Were Conveyed, I Think That That Would Be, In My Judgment, Grounds For Impeachment -- If Obama Knew About It." On the May 28, 2010, edition of Fox News' Hannity, Morris said that with regard to Sestak, Bill Clinton "was acting as an agent of Rahm Emanuel. And the statute says 'you may not offer something of value.' Well, if it was valuable enough to possibly get him out of the race, it's valuable enough to qualify under that statute." He later added, "If that offer were conveyed, I think that that would be, in my judgment, grounds for impeachment ... if Obama knew about it." [Fox News, Hannity, 5/28/10]

Beck: "If This Guy From Pennsylvania Is Telling The Truth, Then Someone Has Just Committed An Impeachable Offense." On the May 28, 2010, of his radio show, Glenn Beck said of Sestak, "If this guy from Pennsylvania is telling the truth, then someone has just committed an impeachable offense, a felony. There is prison time." [Premiere Radio Networks, The Glenn Beck Program, 5/28/10]

Limbaugh: "We Have A Potential Impeachable Offense With This Joe Sestak Thing." On the May 26, 2010, broadcast of his show, Rush Limbaugh said: "We have a potential impeachable offense with this Joe Sestak thing. Was he or was he not offered a federal job in exchange for not running for the Senate in the primary against Arlen Specter?" [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 5/26/10]

Doocy Repeated Morris's Claim That Sestak Offer Could Be "An Impeachable Offense." On the May 25, 2010, edition of Fox & Friends, co-hosts Gretchen Carlson and Steve Doocy speculated on the potential legal repercussions of the Sestak offer. Carlson said, "The reporter there says what's the harm; the harm is this: it could be illegal! It could be illegal to offer somebody a job to drop out of a race." She went on to say "somebody's going to get them under oath. Hasn't Darrell Issa already called for hearings on this?...Somebody's going to get them under oath and somebody's going to have to start telling the truth." Doocy responded: "Dick Morris says that if this really happened, if for instance, he was offered a job to drop out, that is an impeachable offense!" [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 5/25/10]

Farah: "Obama's Stonewalling Over The Allegations Of Sestak, Is The Most Nixonian Reason Of All" For Impeachment. In a June 1, 2010, column headlined, "Impeach the stonewalling Obama," WorldNetDaily editor and CEO Joseph Farah argued that there are "many reasons to impeach Barack Obama," but "Obama's stonewalling over the allegations of Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., is the most Nixonian reason of all." He added: "Yes, it's time to start talking about impeachment. Ultimately, that was the only thing that shook the truth out of the trees during Watergate." [WorldNetDaily, 6/1/10]

Right-Wing Media Suggest Obama Should Be Impeached Over Immigration Issues

Gaffney: Obama "May Well" Have "Engaged In An Impeachable Offense" In Disputed Kyl Conversation If "Something Bad Happens Across That Border." On the July 13, 2010, edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Washington Times columnist Frank Gaffney said that according to Tom Tancredo, "When Senator John Kyl says the President isn't going to close the border or do steps to close the border until he gets a deal giving amnesty to illegal aliens already here, he's actually engaged in an impeachable offense." Gaffney added, "I don't know about that, but I can tell you this, if something bad happens across that border as a result of these kinds of things not being stopped, that may well be." The White House had already flatly denied Kyl's claim that Obama had made such a statement, and Kyl subsequently walked back his allegation. [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 7/13/10]

Napolitano: Obama Is "Violating His Oath" And Committing "Impeachable Offense" If He Grants "Amnesty." On Alex Jones' show, Fox Business' Andrew Napolitano played along with Jones' conspiracy theorizing that Obama is planning on committing "treason" and an "act of sedition against our republic." Napolitano recited a litany of complaints, saying Obama is "effectively writing laws himself. That is on its face unconstitutional." [Genesis Communication Networks, The Alex Jones Show, 6/24/10]

Conservative Media: Impeach Obama "Before He Destroys Our Nation!"

Farah: "Obama Should Be Impeached." In a November 1, 2010, column headlined, "What's wrong with impeachment?" Farah wrote lamented the fact that "there is 'not a chance' Republicans in the House will impeach Obama," arguing that "[t]his isn't about 'process.' It's about the Constitution. It's not just about Obama 'misusing' authority. It's about Obama exceeding his constitutional authority." Farah added: "The future of our nation is at stake. The survival of our nation is at stake." He concluded: "Obama must be challenged on every front - even if we don't win every battle. It's time to go on offense, buddy. We won't get a second chance this time. Obama should be impeached." [WorldNetDaily, 11/1/10]

Savage: "I Think It Is Time To Start Talking About Impeachment." On the March 10, 2009, edition of his radio show, Michael Savage said: "Well, what I don't like is that this guy is doing this by executive order, one after the other, and the American people are sitting like a bunch of schmucks watching a dictatorship emerge in front of their eyes." He continued: "And I think it is time to start talking about impeachment! Somebody's gotta get this guy under control. He's out of control." [Talk Radio Network, The Savage Nation, 3/10/09]

WND: "Impeach And Convict Obama Now, Before He Destroys Our Nation!" In a March 5 WorldNetDaily piece headlined, "Obama: Impeach and convict now!" Larry Klayman wrote: "[F]rom what has already occurred, the offenses of the 'mullah in chief' are 'already' so compelling as to warrant immediate impeachment and conviction for his high crimes and misdemeanors, before the United States is totally destroyed by him." After listing several reasons " of the most impeachable and convictable of President Obama's offenses," including "his recent refusal to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act," Klayman concluded: "These are just a few of the compelling reasons to impeach and convict Obama now, before he destroys our nation!" [WorldNetDaily, 3/5/11]

WND's Floyd And Mary Beth Brown: "The Groundswell Of Calls For The Impeachment Of Barack Hussein Obama Is Growing." An October 8, 2009, column by WorldNetDaily columnists Floyd and Mary Beth Brown claimed that "discussion of impeachment is mushrooming amongst conservative activists" and that "[t]he groundswell of calls for the impeachment of Barack Hussein Obama is growing." The Browns wrote that "his worldview makes Barack Hussein Obama a very dangerous man, and a threat to your personal liberty." [WorldNetDaily, 10/8/09]

Breitbart: "I Want There To Be An Impeachment" Of Obama. On the November 5, 2009, broadcast of Fox News' Red Eye, Andrew Breitbart said: "You know what I -- where I stand on -- I want there to be an impeachment, and I want Andy Levy to go after me at the halftime report for my wanting Obama impeached." [Fox News, Red Eye, 11/5/09]

Floyd Brown: After Republicans Take Congress, "The Next, Most Important Step For Them Is To Impeach Barack Hussein Obama." At WND's "Taking America Back 2010" convention, Floyd Brown said, "Every morning I get down on my knees and I pray that we're going to have a dramatic change in the makeup of Congress in November." Brown went on to say, "And, when that comes ... the new members of Congress should look look to the Constitution," which will convince them that "the next, most important step for them is to impeach Barack Hussein Obama, and they have all the grounds to do it." [WorldNetDaily, "Taking Back 2010" convention, 9/21/10]

Posted In
Government, The Presidency & White House
The Washington Times, WorldNetDaily
Joseph Farah, Jeffrey T. Kuhner
Ace of Spades
We've changed our commenting system to Disqus.
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.