Impeachment: Boehner and company are being manuevered into a position of weakness by Obama

Writing in American Thinker Jeanine DeAngelis argues that the Republican pledge to not impeach Barack Obama falls into the Administration's hands.

"Or could it be that Obama's pathetic attempt to garner sympathy at the expense of Republicans is a Saul Alinsky tactic? Think about it -- the impeachment chatter on the left may very well ensure that the very thing Obama is accusing the right of wanting to do -- and goading them into vowing not to do it -- will clear the way for the president to do whatever he darn well pleases without obstruction. After pointedly proclaiming that impeachment is off the table, Republicans will not be able to appropriately respond to impeachable offenses without looking like idiots who can't keep their word."

FINALLY someone said it! Rush Limbaugh has been chewing on the edge of this for a few days, arguing that the GOP is wrong to take impeachment off the table though to actually impeach the president would be politically foolish - and I agree, although perhaps in a less than enthusiastic manner. But he has avoided coming to the heart of the issue, whereas Jeanine has not missed.

---

DeAngelis continues:

"Here is how the impeachment/no impeachment gambit would work: Valerie, Barry, and the crew hatch the idea to accuse the Republicans of wanting to impeach Obama, and then they float the rumor that the allegation is just the left's way of trying to divert attention before the midterm elections. Responding according to plan, the Republicans crawl to the podium and with a unified front they issue a firm denunciation of impeachment. Pried from his tanning bed, John Boehner proudly calls impeachment talk "all a scam started by Democrats at the White House," adding, "We have no plans to impeach the president. We have no future plans." This smacks of a Saul Alinsky Rule #4 "gotcha" if ever there was one, because John and Mitch may have been abruptly hooked by Barack Obama's bait."

After this Obama has the door wide open; either the GOP rolls over whenever he violates his oath of office or they break their pledge. Either way they are caught in a trap.

Defund the Executive Branch. The GOP attempted this first remedy with little courage and great timidity

The Constitution offers two, and only two, remedies available to Congress to rein in an out-of-control President. One way - tried half-heartedly just a little while back - is to defund the Executive Branch. The GOP attempted this first remedy with little courage and great timidity, and Obama, ever the bare-knuckle politician, made a very public display of hurting the public. He closed national monuments and threatened to arrest elderly veterans who crossed his "barrycades" to visit their WWII Memorial. He closed roads, wrecking businesses that made their livelihood from the tourist trade. He refused to send checks out to those dependent on government aid. And, with the complicity of the media, the public blamed the GOP. The Republicans caved, and John McCain went on television to the rapture of Democrats, saying with his chattering false teeth "I hope we learned our lesson". Of course the GOP never did learn their lesson; Saul Alinsky Rule #11 "If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside... every positive has its negative. When the media lambasted the GOP for "shutting down the government" - something done by Obama, not Congress - the low information voters' immediate reaction was to hold a negative view of the GOP. In their usual fashion the linguini-spined Republicans waved the white flag in terror of suffering all manner of electoral horrors. Saul Alinsky #9 "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." The Republicans were overcome by phantom fears of raze and ruin, a fear more terrifying than any backlash they would have suffered. Had they remained steadfast it could well have rebounded in their favor as it would have become obvious to the low info types who was actually doing the harm. Maybe not, too, but the reality is the public just wasn't that angry about the government shutdown. Even if the GOP was blamed, the public saw it really didn't matter that much to them by and large. It was a great teachable moment, one the Republicans squandered. So remedy #1 failed, primarily out of timidity. Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese military philosopher, argued "When he has penetrated into hostile territory, but to no great distance, it is facile ground." and he admonished "On facile ground, halt not." The Republicans, frightened of the polling data, halted almost immediately. In fact, they never truly wanted to invade Obama territory from the beginning. Sun Tzu warned against this:

"When invading hostile territory, the general principle is, that penetrating deeply brings cohesion; penetrating but a short way means dispersion."

And in fact he advised Generals:

"At the critical moment, the leader of an army acts like one who has climbed up a height and then kicks away the ladder behind him."

The GOP leadership didn't want to make that fight, and they penetrated but shallowly into enemy territory, and ran like scared rabbits at the first sign of trouble. That fear comes from the government shutdown under Bill Clinton. And while the Republicans were blamed in that instance too (not surprisingly, since the Leftist media was driving the narrative in both instances and the Republicans never explain their position, part of their duck-and-cover strategy) they did not suffer any long-term political backlash then, and they did not suffer any after the Obama shutdown. The fear of the thing was worse than the thing itself. They never understood Tzu's admonition:

"Place your army in deadly peril, and it will survive; plunge it into desperate straits, and it will come off in safety. For it is precisely when a force has fallen into harm's way that it is capable of striking a blow for victory."

An impeachment of Obama would be quite different from the Clinton impeachment

So now we are faced with the use of remedy #2, something that equally terrifies the GOP Establishment. This also was tried with Bill Clinton and failed, and for the same reasons of timidity. The Clinton impeachment was not wanted by the Senate Republicans and they sought to dispose of it as quickly as possible out of political considerations. The rules set for the trial allowed the defense to keep key witnesses off the stand (like Betty Curry, who knew where the bodies were buried and who would have sung like a bird had she been threatened with imprisonment) and allowed the case to rest solely on the meaning of the word is. It was a farce, and in the end the stupid GOP looked ridiculous for having wasted so much time and money on "nothing" when in fact they could have brought Clinton down. They feared putting AL GORE in the Presidency! What buffoons! An impeachment of Obama would be quite different from the Clinton impeachment, too; Ken Starr referred only two articles against Clinton, and both revolved around his sexual peccadilloes. There were crimes committed, but they were related to a salacious sexual appetite and the public, enraptured with Jenny Jones and Jerry Springer, were unwilling to see him tossed for what they perceived as his private sex life. Sex tainted the impeachment. Furthermore, the economy was roaring, and the public does indeed vote their pocketbooks. The same cannot be said of the current situation; Obama will be impeached (if he is) based on massive abuses of power and nothing personal. The public will be more understanding of some of this, as it effects them personally. And Obama will not be shielded by a good economy. But it is still a dangerous affair, and the GOP leadership is frightened. They are trying to use the extra-constitutional approach of suing the President instead. There is nothing wrong with suing him, but how can you push this off to the courts if what he is doing is illegal? That is what is wrong with the entire Republican approach; it suggests the GOP knows deep down that there is no there there, that this is simply a political spectacle and not a serious issue of high crimes and misdemeanors. If the Republicans don't have the stones to impeach then they must not really believe Obama guilty! Or at least that is how it will appear to the public. You do not penetrate shallowly into enemy country. Actually, Boehner and company are seeking to use what should be the first remedy for an out of control president - the ballot box. They hope to win big in November and then the tables are turned. But they are being manuevered into a position of weakness by Obama in this whole impeachment discussion. Most of these guys were lawyers; they should understand "you have the right to remain silent". Sun Tzu also said;

"Confront your soldiers with the deed itself, never let them know your design. When the outlook is bright, bring it before their eyes, but tell them nothing when the situation is gloomy."

And yet Boehner and his chums trumpet the bad news that he does not intend to impeach. Strange. Bringing articles of impeachment now would be foolish, but it is equally foolish to dismiss the idea of impeaching Obama. You never give your enemy that sort of security. Obama is a lawless revolutionary, a man who would be king. Congress alone stands in his way, and Congress is mired in cowardice and indecision. Obama is strong because Obama is unafraid. That must change.