House votes to sue the president

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Fox News: House approves lawsuit against Obama over alleged abuse of executive powerhttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nst-obama-over-alleged-abuse-executive-power/http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nst-obama-over-alleged-abuse-executive-power/

The House on Wednesday approved a highly contentious lawsuit against President Obama over his alleged abuse of executive power, teeing up an election-year legal battle sure to spill onto the midterm campaign trail.

The House backed the lawsuit resolution on a vote of 225-201, with all Democrats opposed.

Republicans say the lawsuit is necessary to keep the president in constitutional check, after he allegedly exceeded his authority with unilateral changes to the Affordable Care Act.

Not surprised Boehner was true to his word. Not surprised, either, it was strictly a party line vote. Dems made the expected charges that it was all politically motivated, though they've apparently backed off their rhetoric of the last two days trying to equate the lawsuit with impeachment. Republicans reiterated they have no plans to impeach Obama.

 

[InTheLight]

Republicans reiterated they have no plans to impeach Obama.

Yes, because if they were to do so it would energize Democrat donors, something they do not want to happen in an off year election.

 

[Revmitchell]

Yes, because if they were to do so it would energize Democrat donors, something they do not want to happen in an off year election.

Actually, it is because the dems will protect Obama no matter what he does there is no chance of it going through the Senate.

 

[InTheLight]

Actually, it is because the dems will protect Obama no matter what he does there is no chance of it going through the Senate.

Yes, this is true. But the expected fallout from an impeachment would not reach Dems running for the House and Senate. It would, however, be a great fund raising tool for the Dems.

 

[Revmitchell]

No one gave any thought to impeachment prior to the up coming election and the only reason is that it would go no where in the Senate. If impeachment were to occur it would be only after the election when the GOP wins back the Senate.

 

[Rolfe]

... when the GOP wins back the Senate.

If.

 

[carpro]

No one gave any thought to impeachment prior to the up coming election and the only reason is that it would go no where in the Senate. If impeachment were to occur it would be only after the election when the GOP wins back the Senate.

Exactly. But probably not even then.

I believe it takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict. It'll never happen.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Exactly. But probably not even then.

I believe it takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict. It'll never happen.

That depends on how well the House prosecutor presents his case. My guess is, it would by Trey Gowdy. He would be an excellent choice.

Can you imagine a month or more of him presenting fact after fact after fact to the American public? Some of the more moderate Democrats might be forced to vote with the Republican majority in order to save their own necks in 2016.

-------​

That said, I heard former Judge Andrew Napolitano on Fox & Friends this morning. He said the lawsuit is not the proper vehicle for the Republicans' complaints against the president. Ironically, he believes the very separation of powers -- the checks and balances in the Constitution -- would make a judge reluctant to tell the president his job.

Napolitano said the proper vehicle is impeachment. He wasn't recommending it because of the destruction it would render on the country, but he reiterated it is the proper vehicle.

 

[carpro]

That depends on how well the House prosecutor presents his case. My guess is, it would by Trey Gowdy. He would be an excellent choice.

No it doesn't.

Democrats will never vote to remove Obama from office.

It doesn't matter what crime he commits.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

No it doesn't.

Democrats will never vote to remove Obama from office.

It doesn't matter what crime he commits.

Look at how many of them are running and hiding from the healthcare law. That's a prime example of how "loyal" they are when it starts affecting their position and power.

If Gowdy were to prove Obama a criminal, guilty of malfeasance and misfeasance in office and a borderline traitor -- and more importantly if overnight polls were showing that proof was making a point with the public -- they'd do the same thing to their president they did to his healthcare law.

 

[Crabtownboy]

It looks as if the GOP is cutting off their own nose to spite their face. Seems the GOP new folks do not remember what happened the last time they went down this rabbit track.

John Boehner’s lawsuit against the president is seriously wounding Republicans. The DCCC announced that they had outraised Republicans in June, $25.3 million to $10.9 million.

Congressional Democrats have $50.9 million in the bank, and $18.4 million more than they had at this point in 2012. As of June, House Democrats have $8.4 million cash advantage over House Republicans.

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07...emocrats-trounce-republicans-fundraising.html

 

[Salty]

It looks as if the GOP is cutting off their own nose to spite their face. Seems the GOP new folks do not remember what happened the last time they went down this rabbit track.

When was the last time the House voted to sue the POTUS?

 

[Crabtownboy]

When was the last time the House voted to sue the POTUS?

Hey Salty, I was thinking of when the House voted to impeach Clinton and the GOP paid dearly politically for that one. I am not arguing the merits or lack of merits of this one, just the politics. My guess is that this is a political play and will cost the GOP even more as time goes by. This is not a subject that most voters give one whit about. Just a play to the conservative audience and nothing to gain from it IMHO.

As an aside I find it amusing how the GOP screams about Obama's executive orders when Dubya issued more than Obama. Seems it was all right at that time. Of course it is all politics anyway.

 

[carpro]

Look at how many of them are running and hiding from the healthcare law. That's a prime example of how "loyal" they are when it starts affecting their position and power.

If Gowdy were to prove Obama a criminal, guilty of malfeasance and misfeasance in office and a borderline traitor -- and more importantly if overnight polls were showing that proof was making a point with the public -- they'd do the same thing to their president they did to his healthcare law.

Doesn't matter.

Democrats always cover for their crooks.

A 2/3 vote to convict in the Senate is totally impossible now and next year.

You are giving them far too much credit for good sense and not enough for party loyalty.

 

[carpro]

As an aside I find it amusing how the GOP screams about Obama's executive orders when Dubya issued more than Obama. Seems it was all right at that time. Of course it is all politics anyway.

Bush did not unconstitutionally rewrite legislation from the oval office.

It's routine for the criminal occupying the oval office now.

 

[Salty]

Hey Salty, I was thinking of when the House voted to impeach Clinton ...

Impeachment and suing is comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Impeachment and suing is comparing apples and oranges.

Maybe so, maybe not. Regardless politically I believe this will cost the GOP ... if not in votes then in fund raising ... but personally I believe in both areas. This is such an obvious political ploy with no real meaning and no real chance IMHO.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Bush did not unconstitutionally rewrite legislation from the oval office.

It's routine for the criminal occupying the oval office now.[/QUOTE]

As in all politics that would be in the eye of the beholder.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

A 2/3 vote to convict in the Senate is totally impossible now and next year.

If the Republicans have a 56-44 advantage on the Senate side in the 114th Congress -- and that's doable -- it requires only 11 Democrats with either a conscience or an innate fear of looking for a real job.

I think it could happen. Not easily, and not without rancor. But it could happen.

 

[Crabtownboy]

If the Republicans have a 56-44 advantage on the Senate side in the 114th Congress -- and that's doable -- it requires only 11 Democrats with either a conscience or an innate fear of looking for a real job.

I think it could happen. Not easily, and not without rancor. But it could happen.

It is an impossible pipe dream. Just is not going to happen.