GOP impeachment talk may just hand Hillary the presidency

Hillary Clinton is probably on two knees thanking baby Jesus at this point. Because if the Republicans win a majority in the US Senate tonight, they may just hand the presidency to Hillary.

Thinkg about it. Ted Cruz, the author of the recent disastrous government shutdown, was enough of a problem when he was in the minority in the Senate. But imagine the damage Cruz can do if he’s in the majority.

And it’s not just Ted Cruz. John McCain will take over the Senate Armed Services Committee. Even better, climate change denier Jim Inhofe will take over the Senate Environment Committee.

Then there’s these guys. The Family Research Council, an officially-designated “hate group,” that pretty much controls the upper reaches of the Republican party. They’re demanding a GOP Congress impeach President Obama:

frc-impeachm-ent

impeachment-2

It’s not “good” losing the Senate. The Republicans will attempt a lot of bad things, and they may even succeed on some of them. They will most certainly muck even further with President Obama’s judicial appointees. But there is a silver lining in that a GOP Congress might just hand Hillary (or whichever Democrat runs in 2016), the White House.


Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

67 Responses to “GOP impeachment talk may just hand Hillary the presidency”

  1. ComradeRutherford says:

    I’ll bet they’ll try to replace FDR with Saint Reagan on the dime again…

  2. ComradeRutherford says:

    And what did they do with that veto-proof majority? Absolutely NOTHING. They pandered and kow-towed to the GOP minority so much that the Democratic Base was completely demoralized with the Dem’s bootlicking thereby ensuring that the GOP won back the house.

    I’ve watched the Dems supplicate to the far right for 30 years. They INTEND to LOSE every time. The only time they ever win is when the GOP goes so extreme that the Dems accidentally win. And when that happens, EVERY SINGLE TIME the Dems betray the base to make sure the GOP wins the next cycle.

    I’m nearly 50 years old, I’ve watched the Dems sell out to the GOP for decades. The Dems do this intentionally, they know full well that if they were to uphold the values of their voting base that they’d win majorities every single time.

  3. Mike scott says:

    Healthcare was done sneakily and hopefully it will be repealed the same way,

  4. Real Brother says:

    There’s not silver lining when you’re dealing with the stupidity of White people. White Dems running from Obama because he’s Black is why they lost the Senate. If they do that in 2016 then you’re only ending White control of Government. President can become like Quarterbacks mostly Black.

    http://realbrotherradionetwork.com

    TKCAL

  5. Badgerite says:

    Uh huh. It is at the TOP of Mitch McConnell’s to do list. That is a far cry from “at least a half dozen, if not more, Democratic senators who are in favor of the Keystone pipeline.” And that far cry can make all the difference in whether it can be stopped or not. The odds just tipped heavily against that. Everything in Washington, DC is a political decision. That is like saying the sky is blue.

  6. Silver_Witch says:

    Sad, true and still sad.

  7. Silver_Witch says:

    Those who hate never cease to amaze me – I must say however, that you have left me gobsmacked at your post here and your horrendous FB page. Those who wallow in the grief of losing a child and blaming it on the President – well cause – are animals – that sir would be you.

  8. Strepsi says:

    Well we do know that to the Tea Party he is guilty of BPWB: Being President While Black.

  9. Olderandwiser says:

    It wasn’t a lack of leadership, it was a lack of voters on the left. Or is this one of those blogs where right wingers pretend to be left? If so, I lost my way. Did you vote Dem-or were you sticking to your “liberal” principles?

  10. Olderandwiser says:

    Seriously? The Congressional majority of 2008-2010? You know that’s bs. Are you hoping we don’t read?

    “One of the standard Republican talking points is that the Democrats had a filibuster-proof, super majority for two years between 2008 and 2010.”

    The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period, insufficient time to undo even a small portion of the legislation passed during six years of Republican control. Here are the details:

    http://factleft.com/2012/01/31/the-myth-of-democratic-super-majority/

  11. Moderator4 says:

    Please do not add your website/Facebook page/etc. to your comments without John’s permission.
    Thank you.

  12. Olderandwiser says:

    That would be fun to have Joe. He may speak when he shouldn’t but he’s the most honest, least wealthy, man of the people.

  13. Ninong says:

    I’m not “blaming” President Obama, I’m just pointing out what I think is obvious. For one thing, there are at least half a dozen, if not more, Democratic senators who are in favor of the Keystone pipeline. I’m just counting the ones who have been outspoken in their support for Keystone.
    The delay in doing anything about it, one way or the other, was strictly a political decision.

  14. Badgerite says:

    Maybe. But it is the GOP top of the list, priority issue. And if he has been planning to use it as a bargaining chip it is because he knows that that much money at stake can probably not be denied politically. Not because he has no commitment to environmental issues. So long as the GOP did not control the Senate there was some chance of not going ahead on that. Now that they do, there is none. Don’t blame Obama for the fact the the left doesn’t get American politics enough to know that those are the political facts of life. The left puts everything on the POTUS and forgets the power of the legislative branch. The money never makes that mistake and they play the long game. Advertising and long term aims, its what they do while the left if off looking for the purest of the pure saviors. Good luck with that.

  15. Indigo says:

    And the lie that just sits there, that the nation is fully integrated.

  16. Indigo says:

    It has everything to do with partisan politics and if you don’t know that yet . . . well, no wonder you have to SHOUT.

  17. Indigo says:

    That could happen. I have one question for Hillary, though. Do you support legalizing marijuana? I’m not talking medical games or recreational games, I’m talking legalize the herb, tax it however, and shut up. Does she? or is she just another Obama-waffle?

  18. TeaPartyImmigrationCoalition1 says:

    THE REASONS FOR IMPEACHMENT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH PARTISAN POLITICS: THEY HAVE EVERYTHING TO DO WITH CRIMES BY THE PRESIDENT

    According to most polls, we can glean a few juicy tidbits that should scare the pants off this imposter. First, the mood of the country is miserable. The people just voted to destroy this Presidency. They didn’t vote Republican because they like the GOP. They voted against Obama. Obama made a rather salient point in that many of his previous supporters stayed home and did not vote. But he is wrong in assuming that they still support him and his policies.

    To the contrary, most of his previous voters didn’t want to vote Republican but also didn’t want to vote for supporters of Obama either! Thus, it is a complete rejection of everything that is Obama.

    Furthermore, we can say with absolute certainty that the public has very little real knowledge of how bad Obama is or of the crimes he has committed. When the public learns of how badly Obama has screwed the little guy in favor of his crony capitalists, even liberals will want his head! When the public learns of the chicanery that brought him to power in the first place, they will demand removal.

    The method by which the public will learn of the true Obama is the impeachment process. As the House of Representatives begins to unravel the myriad real crimes, myriad assaults on the Constitution, and the testimony of those who used to work for him, the public will begin to learn. When the House finally impeaches, the case goes before the Senate who can compel the President to stand in the dock. When the public sees the crude and evil nakedness of this man, even the most hearty democrat will fear for his or her own personal political survival. We will get the votes necessary for removal.

    http://WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/TPIMMIGRATIONCOALITION @TEAPIC

  19. Ninong says:

    I predict that President Obama will agree to the Keystone Pipeline in exchange for something else he wants, like a comprehensive immigration reform bill. I don’t think Obama is as gung-ho on the environment as he pretends to be. I think he has been delaying Keystone waiting for an opportunity to use it as a bargaining chip and for a situation where he could claim that he didn’t do it, it was forced on him.

  20. Ninong says:

    Which reminds me… Now that the Republicans control both houses of Congress, will they bring up that bill to officially name the Moon the Ronald Reagan Memorial Moon?

  21. Ninong says:

    How’s that idea working out for Kansas?

  22. Ninong says:

    There are no direct flights from Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea to the United States. All of those flights go to the European Union first. Do you want to ban all travel from the EU to the US?

  23. Badgerite says:

    Even better? Mitch McConnell was on the TVs putting the Keystone Pipeline at the top of his to do list.

  24. ComradeRutherford says:

    Oh, don’t you worry, there’ll be plenty of ‘Democrats’ eager to vote to convict because, like ALL Democrats, they think that pandering to the far right will help them get re-elected.

  25. ComradeRutherford says:

    They were elected by endlessly repeating the lies that Fox ‘News’ and Rush Limbaugh made up. That is what motivates the Republican voter, the willfully ignorant being knowingly lied to.

  26. ComradeRutherford says:

    They didn’t impeach Clinton for his constitutional violations, no, they went after Clinton over the meaning of the word ‘is’.

    The Republicans have made up a raft of lies and they’ll impeach him on those, not any of the actual crimes Obama has committed.

    Why here’s a lie they made up right here, “BEENNGGGHHHHAAAAAZZZZZZIIIIIIIIIIII!”

  27. ComradeRutherford says:

    Nothing crazy about it. That is the historical record since Saint Reagan made a deal with the radical Islamist state of Iran to continue to imprison the US hostages until *after* Reagan ‘won’ the 1980 election.

    The Dems ALWAYS try to lose by betraying their voting base and pandering to the right.

  28. ComradeRutherford says:

    OF COURSE the Democrats wanted to lose! They ALWAYS try to lose. It’s been their party’s mandate since the early 1980s. Run as moderate Republicans to demoralize the Democratic Voting Base to make sure the GOP wins.

    And when they do find themselves in the accidental majority after the GOP has screwed everything up so very badly, such as Obama and the Congressional majority of 2008 – 2010, they STILL side with the GOP to make sure they lose again as soon as possible.

  29. ComradeRutherford says:

    The House wil impeach by May and the Senate will vote on conviction by July 4.

  30. ComradeRutherford says:

    Talk about lies, your whole screed is filled with them:

    Placing a trave ban for Ebola will only make sure that people traveling from those nations lie to get in and then we’d have no way to identify them.

    The biggest lie about ‘Obamacare’ is that it’s ‘liberal’, when it was written by Conservatives in the 1970s, packaged by the Heritage Foundation in the 1980s, championed by Gingrich in the 1990s after the Conservatives killed ‘Hillarycare’, and put in place by Mitt Romney in Massachusetts – and hailed by the far right at the time as the answer to those horrible liberals and their crazy notion that not-rich people should be allowed to receive health care.

    I’ve been out side of the USA before, clearly you have not. The USA looks to the rest of the world like a bunch of fools only because we of people like you, foolish Conservatives that make up brazen lies and then believe every single one of them. People ask me all the time why we let Conservatives anywhere near political power since they only ever diminish the standing of America in the world.

    The radical nutbags are the Christian Conservatives like Chaps Klingenhoffer and Joni Earnst who openly call for the overthrow of America and the institution of Biblical Law indistinguishable from that of the Islamic State – except our nutbags don’t speak arabic.

    If the Democrats would run as actual Democrats and not Moderate Republicans (which they’ve done for the last 30 years), the Dems would win every time.

  31. ComradeRutherford says:

    Fox ‘News’ declared Bush II the Acting President in 2000. Then it was up to the political machinery to make sure it stuck, no matter how many votes Bush lost by.

  32. ComradeRutherford says:

    No one lies ever as much as Conservatives. Liberals can’t even come close to the lies Conservatives tell. Lies like: ‘Cutting taxes increases revenue,’ for example.

  33. ComradeRutherford says:

    Circuit judge Posner, appointed by Saint Reagan Himself.

    Posner is the one who openly laughed at the state attorney’s nonsense claims to keep gay marriage illegal.

  34. ComradeRutherford says:

    Hillary as President. What a disaster! Why can’t we vote for actual Democrats? I am tired of fake Dems like the Clintons and Obama, right-wingers that call themselves Democrats but ALWAYS side with the GOP when it really counts to help the GOP move even more to the right.

  35. Ninong says:

    Since when does a “committee investigation” require 60 votes in the Senate?

  36. Mike scott says:

    we will see about that and the reason I hate lying liberals which is probably redundant anyhow.

  37. is4u2p says:

    BeccaM I listen to conservative media all the time and every time the idea is broached by callera, it is dismissed as a dumb idea brought about by a few radicals.

    The very idea that you think this is a serious discussion among conservatives is a sign that you need better news sources.

    If anything they would go for Censure.

  38. is4u2p says:

    So how did Tim Scott and Mia Love get elected as Republicans?

    Remind me again why the Republican Party was founded?

  39. is4u2p says:

    You do realize none of what you said is accurate for an Obaa impeachment right?

    It has to do with constitutional violations of which he’s already been proven go be suspect.

  40. is4u2p says:

    They don’t have the 60 Votes needsd in the Senate for most of these things. You guys are ridiculous.

  41. is4u2p says:

    You think squealing is why this election went the way it did? Ha!

    This election and the presidency will swing to the right because the people know full well what the agenda of the Left is and they don’t like it!

    They don’t like the lack of a travel ban for Ebola!

    They don’t like that they were lied to about the health insurance!

    They don’t like that we look like fools to the rest of the world!

    They don’t like this presidents policies regarding Islam and the radical nutbags!

  42. is4u2p says:

    Hillary is an even going to sniff the presidency Obamas made sure of that.

  43. Ninong says:

    Let’s hope that if a vacancy comes up on the Supreme Court in the next two years it’s either Clarence Thomas or Antonin Scalia who is dearly departed. Then President Obama might nominate a moderate Republican with impeccable credentials and dare the Republicans in the Senate to reject him.

  44. Ninong says:

    Tony Perkins’ comment makes no sense whatsoever because impeachment only requires a simple majority vote on at least one count in the House and then the bill moves to the Senate where it must come to trial. They would never get the 67 votes in the Senate to convict but they would still have to bring up the bill of impeachment.

    Maybe he thought that Harry Reid could block consideration of a bill of impeachment passed by the House? Could that be it? I think he just wants to see President Obama impeached even if he’s not convicted in the Senate. Remember what happened the last time the Republicans did that. Bill Clinton’s popularity soared during the impeachment process.

  45. Ninong says:

    The 2016 Senate election is more favorable to the Democrats. Of the 34 seats up for election, 10 are currently held by Democrats and 24 are held by Republicans. It’s possible the Democrats could regain control of the Senate, especially if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee and her running mate is a minority male (e.g., Cory Booker or Julian Castro). I have no idea who she might want for a running mate but it wouldn’t hurt to pick a Hispanic or an African-American to guarantee a large turnout by that part of the base.

    If Hillary wins big, meaning 55% or better of the popular vote, then it’s quite possible the Democrats could win back the Senate but probably not the House.

  46. atalex says:

    Why would you possibly think that? Because of the way the impeachment of Bill Clinton handed the presidency to Al Gore? Because that didn’t happen. I can easily see the Repukes trying to impeach Obama and STILL winning in 2016 because of Obama fatigue (which is to say, people finally giving in to the pig-people to have a few years of peace from their squealing).

  47. Max_1 says:

    Now that the G(no)P are back in charge of the Congress…
    … I’ll bet the first committee investigation will be about:

    A) Birth Certificates
    B) Benghazi
    C) Repealing “Obama Care”
    D) Women’s contraceptive care
    C) Marriage Amendment
    E) All of the above taking us back to 1950

  48. Max_1 says:

    Me too… (see above)

  49. Silver_Witch says:

    I just posted this very thing on another blog….I thought I was crazy – maybe not.

  50. KingCranky says:

    Before anyone else gets a cut, Perkins wants the big donors to contribute to Perkins, all that money without the fuss of an actual political campaign.

  51. KingCranky says:

    And the gold mine hucksters & their fund-raising groups hustle from enthusiastic rubes.

  52. FLL says:

    That is exactly the counterargument to Hillary’s unspoken proposition that she has risen through the ranks and, therefore, is entitled to progressive votes. A candidate earns progressive votes by virtue their track record, not necessarily by virtue of the length of their political career. I’m sure that some Democratic politicians (hopefully not all) are motivated by deceit. You can be sure about the ill intentions of the ones who remain silent about equitable tax reform or reining in Wall Street.

  53. BeccaM says:

    BTW, this particular theory is exactly why I’ve been wondering at the lack of Dem leadership and spending commitment in this mid-term cycle. As in, perhaps they want to get trounced so that in two years, assuming there’s still an America here, they can run not on progressive policies and accomplishments, but on nothing more than, “See, those GOP guys are dicks. Elect us instead.”

  54. FLL says:

    Now that I look at your summary, I can see that the loonie camp is a very big tent while at the same time being a very sparsely populated tent. All the little subgroups must feel weak and ineffective individually, so they gang up with each other. You wind up with a melange of Mexican haters, gun worshipers, anti-black Klan types, conspiracy theorists, anti-United Nations paranoids, bunker survivalists… and a few lunatic fundie preachers for good measure. Individually, these groups are nothing, but I guess there’s a feeling of increased relevancy if they all blend together and call the resulting mess “the Tea Party.” I think this nonsense has always been the case with America’s nativist movements (e.g., the 20th-century Klan). Most people don’t know that the 1920s Klan was anti-immigration to the point of obsession.

  55. BeccaM says:

    Marriage equality is a piece of it, but let’s not forget all the other reasons the frothing-mouthed Tea Bagger contingent thinks Obama can be impeached:

    – ‘Obamacare’ (but keep your hands off my Kynect!)
    – Immigration ‘amnesty’ (ignore the fact Obama’s administration has, sadly, deported more undocumented immigrants and refugees than any other previous administration)
    – Takin’ our God-given guns! (despite the fact there have been zero new laws or regulations or anything)
    – The deficit (never mind the fact not one penny can be spent without Congressional budgetary approval…or that the deficit has been slashed massively since the Dubya days)

    – Keeping essential parts of the government running, despite a GOP shut-down; failing to keep non-essential parts of government open, such as national parks, despite a GOP shut-down (I always saw this as an absolutely prime demonstration of GOPer double-think).
    – And of course: Bennnnnn-ghaaaaaaaah-zeeeeeeeee!!!!11one!
    – Followed by Sharia Law, Birtherism, U.N. Agenda 21, HAARP, FEMA concentration and re-education camps for conservatives, chem-trails, and Ebola.

    Of all of those, Benghazi remains the top topic among the Impeach Obama crowd — in large part because they think they can nail Hillary Clinton with it, too. An African-American and a female, both Democrats — it’s no wonder the ‘Baggers spooge themselves compulsively like Pavlov’s dog whenever Benghazi is mentioned.

  56. BeccaM says:

    You’re likely right.

  57. FLL says:

    I suspect Tony Perkins knows how to read and understands the requirement of a 2/3 majority in the Senate to convict (remove a president from office). So it’s all kabuki. To what purpose? My guess is that Perkins wants to push big donors to contribute to a like-minded candidate, like Mike Huckabee. I think, in his heart of hearts, Perkins knows that Huckabee and the other fundie candidates will go down in flames in 2016. Perkins probably just wants to play some dramatic role in his own sexual Götterdämmerung.

  58. BeccaM says:

    No, and they don’t care Nicho. Fascist assholes like Perkins are counting on the bag-of-hammers stupidity of their followers not to know the most basic details of the Constitution or our system of government.

    This is all about rabble-rousing the radical far-right and racist base with false visions of kicking the (snark) Kenyan usurper out of the WHITE House (/snark).

  59. FLL says:

    Some white fundamentalist Xtian loonies are also racist, but not all. As a whole, I think the fundies ignored Obama’s first couple years of office, but they have been flat out obsessed with Obama since he refused to defend DOMA and started supporting marriage equality. Regardless of who finds this annoying—or for what reason they find it annoying—this obsession to impeach Obama has been incorporated into the DNA of Tony Perkins’s entire generation of fundie preachers. The fundies will shriek about impeachment non-stop through the Republican primaries of 2016. The silliness will probably be incorporated into the 2016 Republican primaries. What fun (for satirists).

  60. BeccaM says:

    Do these morons even comprehend that it takes a 2/3 majority vote to convict in the Senate — and there are actually still a few sane Republicans left? This isn’t the filibuster, which is just a rule they made up to protect the influence of the minority party. The 2/3 vote is required in the Constitution itself.

    Wait, what am I saying? Of course they either don’t know or don’t care. This is just more waving of the bloody red shirt. All to convince the ignorant mouth-breathing rubes that 51 GOPer/Tea-Bagger Senators = No more African American Democrat in the White House.

  61. MichaelS says:

    Let’s not be naive… If the Republicans win, their sole goal will be to set up 2016 for a Repug victory. They’ll do it by attaching onerous measures — health care repeal, union-gutting, slashing progressive programs — to the budget bill and also to the debt limit bill. Obama will either have to sign them or veto them. If he signs (at least a 50-50 scenario, given past history) then a DEM will be responsible for these atrocities against the middle class, and further alienate the Dem base in 2016. If he vetoes them, then a DEM will be responsible for the next government shutdown, or perhaps even the first default of US debt in history.
    Obama could turn it back on the Repugs, but that would require him to have courage, be a fighter, and a savvy politician. He is absolutely none of the above.
    Willing to bet any money on this scenario. Watch out.

  62. Nefercat says:

    I agree. Handsome Old Joe has a surprisingly shark-like smile when he’s seriously pissed off. (See, VP debate with Paul Ryan.) He scattered little bits of Ryan all around the stage when he wasn’t just laughing right in Ryan’s face.

  63. BradCav says:

    I almost wish the Republicans would successfully impeach the President. Then they would have to deal with an Angry Joe Biden as President.

  64. TheOriginalLiz says:

    As far as I can tell, they can impeach away, for all the good it will do them. Oh, well it will give them something to do other than any actual work…

  65. Unless they sway some weak-kneed Democrats. . .are there any of those? (kidding, obviously, of course there are)

  66. nicho says:

    The GOP would need to pick up 22 additional senate seats today to get a conviction for impeachment. I haven’t been following the polls. Is that likely? Are there 22 seats at risk?

© 2019 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS