Judge Napolitano Raises Impeachment Option

by JASmius

And he's almost right - though not for the reason he sets forth:

The only way to stop President Barack Obama from nullifying duly enacted laws is impeachment, says Judge Andrew Napolitano. The problem is, neither Congress nor the American public have the guts for it.

Wrong.  There is no way - no conventionally legal way, anyway - to stop Barack Obama from nullifying duly enacted laws.  It's practically definitional: A lawless ruler cannot be stopped by the law.

Impeachment would be a noble and meaningful gesture, and could perhaps be educational to the public in systematically explaining how and why his effective usurpation of Congress's Article I/Section I lawmaking powers is the ultimate "high crime and misdemeanor".  But given the makeup of the current Senate, the likelihood of even a trial is dubious, much less a conviction, and the media firestorm in the dictator's defense would drown out Republicans' indisputable substantive arguments worse than a Colin Kaepernick snap count at CenturyLink Field in January.  As with last year's government shutdown, the GOP would be consumed, Red Barry's poll numbers would soar, and, this close to the midterms the expected election tsunami would rapidly shift from "red" to "blue".  Which is why Republicans don't have the "guts" for go for impeachment - or do have the "brains" not to, depending on your strategic point of view.

To the degree that the society Barack Obama rules still requires some level of public consent, the only way to even modify or retard said lawless ruler from nullifying duly enacted laws - to update his belief that "I can do whatever I want" - is electorally.  The problem there is, that way failed in November 2012, and O was re-elected anyway (by whatever unsavory means).  Taking the Senate away from his party a little under nine months from now would make his lawlessness somewhat more difficult because the election results would reflect the arousal of public opposition to his actions.  It would also require him to actually have to work for a living by himself resisting a unified anti-statist/pro-constitutionalist legislature bearing a fresh mandate to roll back his tyrannical leftwing excesses instead of delegating the stonewalling duties to Harry Reid.  But given The One's stubbornness, blind ideological devotion, and immense self-regard, it is inconceivable that he would take another tidal midterm election "shellacking" - one that his IRS abuses of power couldn't avert - as a rebuke to be humbly heeded, any more than he did after 2010.  To the contrary, it would drive him to dig himself in even deeper and escalate his transitioning of his regime towards open dictatorship.

As I have been saying for over fifteen months, now, We, The People are in profoundly dangerous and uncharted civic waters, and the sooner we all come to this realization and all its implications, the sooner we can begin dealing with it in a meaningful way.  Such as....an Article V convention.  Since the federal government was created by the "Several States," and the power balance of that creation has been thrown so far out of whack as to be functionally irreparable, it is both logical, constitutional, and entirely appropriate that the States, to coin a phrase, hit the "reset button" and begin bringing this century-in-the-making "progressive" train wreck under control, and then reverse it.

The only way, in short, to stop Barack Obama from nullifying duly enacted laws is to render him irrelevant.  No justice could be more poetic.

An Article V convention is, of course, even less likely than impeachment.  But unlike any in-Beltway gambit, it could actually succeed.  And isn't success the best revenge?