Republicans are not planning to impeach President Obama. Yes, Sarah Palin has called for it. The South Dakota GOP passed an impeachment resolution. Andy McCarthy is out with a book arguing that the legal foundation for ousting Obama exists, but the political will does not. And the occasional House back-bencher floats the 'I-word' from time to time. But there is no groundswell of support, or any semblance of a serious campaign, to remove the President of the United States from office. That's not a thing. When asked about Palin's impeachment advocacy House Speaker John Boehner -- who's suing Obama for executive overreach -- flatly responded, "I disagree." The Republican chairman of the relevant House committee has shut the idea down, too. Indeed, the parties most excited about invoking the specter of impeachment are the White House...
A top aide to President Obama said it's possible that Obama could be impeached by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. House Speaker John Boehner's decision to proceed with a lawsuit against the president has "opened the door" to the third presidential impeachment in the nation's history, Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer told reporters at a Friday breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor...Later, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said "prominent voices in the Republican party" have called for impeachment, but was hard-pressed to name one other than Palin. "I think there are some Republicans, including some Republicans that are running for office, hoping that they can get into office so they can impeach the president," he said.
I attend a lot of conservative events. Idea of impeaching Obama has come up more on MSNBC today than all those events combined.
Leading cable news at 6PM/ET: CNN: Gaza conflict; Fox: Legislative deal to fix V.A.; MSNBC: GOP calls for Obama impeachment
The uptick in impeachment hand-wringing from the Left isn't an accident. It's a coordinated fundraising and base-goosing effort that's latched onto this CNN poll as a news hook:
Roughly a third of adult Americans want to see President Barack Obama impeached, according to a new CNN poll released Friday. Support for impeachment cuts down party lines, with 57% of Republicans favoring the idea but just 35% of independents and 13% of Democrats feeling similarly.
A majority of Republicans! This is serious, they clamor. Not really. In 2006, roughly the same percentage of CNN poll respondents favored impeaching George W. Bush, presumably with heavy support from Democrats (that survey didn't include internals). A substantial majority of liberal Vermont residents told a CBS News pollster they wanted Bush impeached in 2007. In short, it's not unusual for partisans to want the other guy thrown out. Hell, more than half of self-identifying Democrats believed that it was at least "somewhat likely" that Bush knew about 9/11 in advance, according to a 2006 poll. Congressional Democrats never came close to advancing articles of impeachment against the 43rd president even though some really wanted to -- including the powerful House Judiciary Committee Chairman. Rep. John Conyers and dozens of fellow liberals convened fantasy impeachment hearings in the Capitol basement in 2005, before they took over the lower chamber. Obama impeachment chatter hasn't even sniffed that level of, er, "seriousness." Here's what's going on: Democrats are desperate to light a fire under their base before November, as enthusiasm indicators have looked fairly grim so far. One way to galvanize support and raise easy money is to try to convince low information lefties that the nasty, racist GOP is actively scheming to bring down The Precious. The White House, evidently, is not above playing along with the charade. This is about fear-mongering and raising cash, plain and simple. Did I mention that Democrats are desperate? Here's a screen grab from an endless parade of borderline stalker-esque, impeachment-themed contribution solicitations:
I attend a lot of conservative events. Idea of impeaching Obama has come up more on MSNBC today than all those events combined.— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) July 28, 2014
Leading cable news at 6PM/ET: CNN: Gaza conflict; Fox: Legislative deal to fix V.A.; MSNBC: GOP calls for Obama impeachment— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) July 28, 2014
The uptick in impeachment hand-wringing from the Left isn't an accident. It's a coordinated fundraising and base-goosing effort that's latched onto this CNN poll as a news hook:
Well, it wouldn’t be a liberal conference without liberals discussing voter rights and voter ID legislation that they allege is being used to suppress the vote. Jess McIntosh, the communications director of EMILY’s List, moderated the panel, which was filled by Ohio State Senator Nina Turner, Maggie Toulouse Oliver, and Jocelyn Benson. All three women are running or ran for the position of Secretary of State. Nina Turner is the current Democratic candidate in Ohio; Oliver is running in New Mexico; and Benson ran for the office in 2010 in Michigan.
McIntosh noted that there have been efforts to curb voting rights before, but we’re, or shall I say liberals, are seeing a full-blown assault on voting rights since the 2012 election.
Benson noted that this battle in our democracy (we’re a constitutional republic) has always existed in American society since our founding; it’s just taken different forms. The power this office holds was on display during the 2000 presidential election under then-Florida Secretary of State Katharine Harris, which elicited disgust, even hisses, from the audience when Benson mentioned her name.
It shows “how important this one office is to ensuring that democracy works the way it’s supposed to,” she said.
“If we leave you with anything here today, I hope that we leave you the the recognition that each of you have a responsibility to make sure these offices are not just another office on the ballot in this year’s election or in future elections, but are ones that are taken seriously and that we talk about as very, very powerful positions for ensuring that every other issue we work on actually is able to come to fruition through the democratic process.”
Oliver said when she became Bernalillo County Clerk in 2007, her first goal was to make sure the office functioned properly. After all, Bernalillo is the most populous county in the state; the county seat is the city of Albuquerque.
After getting her office in order, Oliver said it was necessary to give her residents more opportunities to cast their ballots in elections.
On the alleged assault on voter rights, Oliver described it as “an insidious thing because it takes the form of trying to win at the expense of people’s personal civil rights.” Hence why she decided to run for Secretary of State, saying “I’m running against a current incumbent who has been sort of taking the mantra, or carrying the mantel forth of [John] Husted and [Scott] Gessler and some of these other bad guys and really replicating those same things, only they look a little bit different in my state, but it’s basically the same idea: let’s keep people from casting ballots.”
For Nina Turner, it’s all about protecting the “greatest equalizer” in our society. She described how voting no longer comes with any obstacles regarding race, sex, and socioeconomic status. But she’s running to become Ohio’s next Secretary of State to stop the wave of voter suppression happening across the country, which she decried as “immoral.” She said Republicans “subscribe to a mantra of if we can’t beat them, cheat them.”
When it comes to the issue of access to voter materials, like being able to register to vote, Oliver noted how there are kiosks in New Mexico’s Department of Motor Vehicles where you can register to vote after waiting a millennia for your driver’s license. Not many people have participated.
In Ohio, Turner listed occasions where voting rights are being suppressed. The state legislature took away “golden week,” where one could register and vote at the same time. Ohio residents are now unable to participate in Sunday voting, where African-Americans would go to early voting locations after services to cast their ballot. Why? Because African-Americans tend to vote Democratic, said Turner, remember, “If you can’t beat them, cheat them.”
Another example of voter suppression she gave was the Cincinnati Board of Elections’ decision to move the early voting location outside of the city. By bus going one-way, it took ninety minutes, but it gets worse; you had to walk a half-mile from the bus stop to the polling location. Turner pointed out the obvious: this would be devastating to people who are public transportation dependent.
She said the video is somewhere in the archives of MSNBC; the Ed Show and the New York Times documented this development. I’ll let you troll around for that on your own.
But what about those horrible, racist photo voter ID laws?
Oliver noted how incumbent New Mexico Secretary of State – and her Republican opponent – Dianna Duran said she was pushing for such a policy to protect the integrity of the elections. Right now, New Mexico doesn’t have such a law, which Oliver hopes will remain, especially if she’s elected, but commented on how proponents of the legislation talk about this issue. They say, according to Oliver:
“We can’t trust the election process. That all of us that are going out to vote and our neighbors and our friends, that we can’t trust that it’s really them; that who they say they are that are going to the polls and therefore we must put these – and let me be perfectly frank – these sort of new Jim Crow laws in place, such as photo voter ID, such as rolling back early voting etc. etc. that’s what it is.”
On voter fraud, Oliver insisted, “this stuff hardly ever happens” and that attempts at in-person voter fraud in her county are mythical.
My colleague Katie Pavlich wrote two years ago that UN poll watchers were “baffled” that our elections don’t require voters to verify their identity. As for concerns about people not the proper documentation, it only costs $10 for a non-driver’s license in New York (4 years) or New Hampshire. It used to be $13.50 in Pennsylvania, but their fees went up astronomically to $27.50 due to the state’s new transportation bill. That’s an issue for another time.
Bloomberg's new anti-gun Organization Everytown is out with a new advertisement that inadvertently proves why women should be trained and armed before being faced with a violent attacker.
The new ad shows an unarmed woman with her child alone in her home when her violent ex-husband shows up at the door in a violent rage. She calls 911, but because when seconds count the police are minutes away, that phone call didn't matter. The ex-husband breaks down the door, takes the kid and pulls a gun on the woman. All of this could have been prevented if the woman had a firearm in her possession as soon as she saw her ex-husband pounding on the door.
The point of the video according to Everytown is to urge people to contact their legislators about keeping guns out of the hands of domestic abusers. Fair enough, but what happens when a domestic abuser disobeys firearms laws already on the books and gets a gun illegally (as most criminals do)? As the video makes clear, there was a restraining order against the husband, which he violated. What are women supposed to do when violent attackers disobey the laws? I happen to believe that a piece of paper and a false assurance police will show up on time aren't good enough. Women must be able to go on the offensive with equal force to protect themselves.
When Everytown was established earlier this year, the group's organizers made it clear they were going after women. Unfortunately, the anti-gun, unarmed policies Everytown stands behind only make women more vulnerable, not less. Their own advertisement proves it.
Tomorrow the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing about "protecting women from gun violence" as part of the Violence Against Women's Act.
Gun control is a war on women. Be sure to check out my book Assault and Flattery: The Truth About the Left and Their War on Women to find out why.
"The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War has been over for 20 years." -Barack Obama, October 22, 2012.
It's been 12 days since Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot out of the sky by Russian separatists with a surface to air missile, yet President Vladimir Putin seems untouched by global outrage over the incident. Now, the United States is accusing the Russians of violating a key nuclear test ban put forth by President Ronald Reagan and the former Soviet Union's Mikhail Gorbachev. The accusation comes after it was discovered Russia has been testing long range missiles for years. More from the New York Times:
The United States has concluded that Russia violated a landmark arms control treaty by testing a prohibited ground-launched cruise missile, according to senior American officials, a finding that was conveyed by President Obama to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia in a letter on Monday.
At the heart of the issue is the 1987 treaty that bans American and Russian ground-launched ballistic or cruise missiles capable of flying 300 to 3,400 miles. That accord, which was signed by President Ronald Reagan and Mikhail S. Gorbachev, the Soviet leader, helped seal the end of the Cold War and has been regarded as a cornerstone of American-Russian arms control efforts.
Russia first began testing the cruise missiles as early as 2008, according to American officials, and the Obama administration concluded by the end of 2011 that they were a compliance concern. In May 2013, Rose Gottemoeller, the State Department’s senior arms control official, first raised the possibility of a violation with Russian officials.
“The United States has determined that the Russian Federation is in violation of its obligations under the I.N.F. treaty not to possess, produce or flight test a ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM) with a range capability of 500 kilometers to 5,500 kilometers or to possess or produce launchers of such missiles.”
Meanwhile, sales to Russia from the United States have increased, not decreased, since heavy sanctions were put in place months ago.
U.S. Census Bureau foreign trade data show that exports rose 17 percent from March through May _ the most recent months for which the data is available _ compared with the previous three months, before sanctions were imposed. The value of exports has risen in each consecutive month this year, an unusual trend in a trade relationship that historically fluctuates on a monthly basis.
Russian markets account for less than 1 percent of U.S. exports, but what the U.S. sells to Russia is largely high-tech and expensive goods, including technology and equipment for the energy sector, which faces the threat of targeted sanctions.
I'll leave you with this.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday that the 17-foot cross beam salvaged from the wreckage of Twin Towers will remain in the National 9/11 Museum, despite the very best efforts of American Atheists Inc.
In “American Atheists v. Port Authority of New Jersey and New York” the group asserted that the artifact's positioning in the museum towered "over any other symbols in the vicinity, expressing Christian primacy." It charged that the Latin cross's dominance violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause and the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.
The judges found, however, that the "Ground Zero Cross" is a constitutional and an important symbolic artifact from the terrorist attack. According to the ruling:
"The stated purpose of displaying The Cross at Ground Zero to tell the story of how some people used faith to cope with the tragedy is genuine, and an objective observer would understand the purpose of the display to be secular...there is no evidence that the static display of this genuine historic artifact excessively entangles the government with religion."
This common sense ruling still comes as a major legal victory. Eric Baxter, Counsel for the Beckett Fund, noted that the court made a very key distinction:
“Even though the Ground Zero Cross is unquestionably a religious symbol, and holds deep religious meaning for many people—particularly those who found hope and inspiration in its discovery—the government does not violate the Establishment Clause by recognizing and educating others about the actual role played by religion in our history and culture.”
This historic relic will now continue to show the importance of religion in the United States for years to come.
Former GOP Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin has launched a new online community dubbed the Sarah Palin Channel. The channel will feature videos of Palin and her family as well as "behind the scenes" videos of the Palin household as well as links to Bristol Palin's blog and video chats with Palin herself. Access to the channel is available via a subscription.
We'll go directly to the root of the problems confronting America. We'll talk about the issues mainstream media won't talk about.
The Palin family is quite familiar with reality television. "Sarah Palin's Alaska" lasted for one season on TLC in 2010 and "Amazing America with Sarah Palin has been renewed for a second season on the Sportsman Channel.
The channel can be accessed via computer, tablet or smartphone.
While this is certainly an unusual endeavor for an ex-politician, all power to Palin for marketing her personal brand.
Incidence rates continue to climb as the Ebola virus spreads through West African nations in what epidemiologists are calling the largest-ever recorded outbreak of the disease.
As the Associated Press reports, Liberian president Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has taken initiative to contain the virus by calling for the quarantine of entire communities and closing all but three land border crossings into the country.
The disease, which is transmitted through direct contact with bodily fluid, puts both public health officials and the general population at risk. Those infected include two Americans, a medical director from Samaritan's Purse and a missionary worker with the Christian humanitarian organization Serving in Mission. Thousands more have fallen ill and nearly 700 have died.
USA Today has the stats:
Since it was detected in March, the number of cases attributed to Ebola in the West African nations of Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea stands at 1,201, including 672 deaths:
Symptoms of Ebola include acute weakness, sudden onset fever, headache, muscle pain, and in some cases, internal and external bleeding. The incubation period from the time of contraction can range anywhere from two to 21 days and the virus only becomes contagious once the patient begins to show symptoms.
The World Health Organization (WHO) says there is currently no cure for Ebola and no vaccine to prevent it. Though the fatality rate is a staggering 90 percent, the disease can be treated by maintaining adequate blood pressure, balancing electrolytes, and quickly treating any other developing infections.
The latest scare arose in the Nigerian city of Lagos after a man traveling from Liberia brought the virus with him. As health professionals are working to stop the spread, we must be reminded that the threat of infectious disease is just one flight away.
With David Perdue’s win over Rep. Jack Kingston in the Georgia Republican primary, the game is set. But it isn’t without Democratic Senate candidate Michelle Nunn making more mistakes, like, uh, her campaign releasing campaign memos outlining their game plan.
Over at National Review, Eliana Johnson wrote how these memos were posted, albeit temporarily, in December of last year and seemed to have been regarded as confidential. Well, not anymore (via NRO):
Much of the strategizing in the Georgia contest as is typical in southern politics, revolves around race. But the Nunn memos are incredibly unguarded. One is from Diane Feldman, a Democratic pollster and strategist who counts among her clients Minnesota senator Al Franken, South Carolina representative James Clyburn, and former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Feldman, who did not return calls seeking comment, is frank in her characterization of the demographic groups — Jews, Asians, African Americans, Latinos, and gays — that are essential to a Democratic victory. The Nunn campaign declined to comment about the document on the record.
The campaign’s finance plan draws attention to the “tremendous financial opportunity” in the Jewish community and identifies Jews as key fundraisers. It notes, however, that “Michelle’s position on Israel will largely determine the level of support here.” That’s a position she has yet to articulate, and Israel goes unmentioned on her campaign website.
Asians are also identified as key fundraisers. The community is described as “very tight,” one in which people work to “become citizens quickly.” Nunn’s strategists also say there is a “huge opportunity” to raise money from gays, bisexuals, and transgender individuals, who are described as having “substantial resources.”
As southern whites have moved to the right, Democrats have been forced to cobble together a coalition of minority voters. Feldman recommends as a goal winning just 30 percent of the white vote while working to increase turnout among African Americans and Latinos. So while Jews, Asians, and gays are characterized as potential “fundraisers,” African Americans and Hispanics are the ones the campaign needs to get to the polls in historic numbers, the document makes clear.
Johnson elaborated on how Democrats know that Nunn will struggle with rural voters, which is why they’re focusing on turning out Hispanics and Blacks in historic numbers; something that’s described as “critical” to victory.
Democrats know that they have trouble with white voters in the South, and Johnson made it clear in her piece that no Democrat has come within the thirty percent mark since 2002.
Then again, Democrats may have jeopardized their hopes of picking up this very winnable seat for Democrats by sharing their playbook. Here's a list of Nunn's faults, which includes "service awards to terrorists."
The Research team will produce a "pushback" document for each identified vulnerability in Michelle's record, as well as common attacks frequently leveled against Democratic Senate candidates
These will be prepared as early as possible and will serve as the basis for our response when attacks are leveled against Michelle. Some, such as the document relating to Michelle's conservation easements, are complex and lengthy; while others will be short "fact checks" pushing back against common distortions (e.g. "Obamacare cut $500 billion from Medicare).
Points of Light
Grants to problematic entities
POL audit/IG report
Travel packages investigation
service awards to inmates, terrorists
Nunn is too liberal
Nunn is a rubber stamp for Democrats
Nunn is Obama’s/Harry Reid/Nancy Pelosi Best Friend
Nunn is not a 'real' Georgian
Nunn is a lightweight
Serve America Act Healthcare/Obamacare
Cut Medicare/Social Security
Points Of Light was established by Bush 41 to encourage volunteering. Nunn became the CEO of the foundation in 2007. Under Nunn's tenure, they gave grants to Islamic Relief USA, a group that Johnson says is legally separate from Islamic Relief Worldwide, which has Hamas ties; but shares their "a common vision, mission, and family identity.”
When it comes to raising money, Nunn’s campaign listed all of their targeted “affinity groups,” or groups with “particular connection with Michelle,” and their messages to each of them. The memo obviously includes women and floats around this message marketed for them to help fill the Nunn campaign coffers: “Women ended the government shutdown. Help me get to Washington where I can bring a much needed [sic] spirit of collaboration.”
You can read the rest of the memos here
In more good news coming out of the Middle East today, hundreds of thousands of weapons given to Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) by the United States, including machine guns, are missing.
According to a report issued earlier this month from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) titled Afghan National Security Forces: Actions Needed to Improve Weapons Accountability, nearly half of weapons issued are unaccounted for.
"Controls over the accountability of small arms provided to the ANSF are insufficient both before and after the weapons are transferred. Accountability over these weapons within DOD prior to their transfer to Afghan ownership is affected by incompatible inventory systems that have missing serial numbers, inaccurate shipping and receiving dates, and duplicate records, that may result in missing weapons prior to transfer to the ANSF," the report states. "However, the problems are far more severe after the weapons are transferred to the ANSF. ANSF record-keeping and inventory processes are poor and, in many cases, we were unable to conduct even basic inventory testing at the ANSF facilities we visited. Although CSTC-A has established end use monitoring procedures, the lack of adherence to these procedures, along with the lack of reliable weapons inventories, limits monitoring of weapons under Afghan control and reduces the ability to identify missing and unaccounted for weapons that could be used by insurgents to harm U.S., coalition, and ANSF personnel."
Through corruption and bad accounting practices, these weapons more than likely in the wrong, violent hands of terrorists.
A new CNN poll reveals that if a do-over of the 2012 presidential election were held today, Republican Mitt Romney would handily defeat President Obama. Hindsight is 20/20, of course, and the survey is meaningless on a practical level. The old cliche is spot on: The only poll that counts is on election day. Nevertheless, the findings reinforce a trend of deteriorating public confidence in the man Americans re-elected less than two years ago. Romney, who fell to Obama by three percentage points nearly two years ago, has now opened up a nine-point lead in a hypothetical head-to-head contest. What explains the double-digit swing? Major shifts among women, young voters and independents. According to CNN's respected 2012 exit polls, Obama won female voters by 11 points, carried young voters by 23 points, and lost independents by five points. Today?
Anti-Obama shifts of 18 points, 16 points, and 15 points, respectively. I suspect this poll comes as cold comfort to Romney, who might be thinking, "I literally told you so, America." On the stump, Romney frequently suggested that a more accurate variation of Obama's "Forward" slogan would be "Forewarned." Voters appear to be belatedly realizing that the Republican nominee was right about Obama, as well as a number of his policies. Before conservatives get cocky over Obama's dramatic fall from grace, though, they should note that the same poll shows Hillary Clinton leading Romney by double-digits in a 2016 match-up. Romney has stated repeatedly and unequivocally that he will not seek the presidency for a third time, though rumors continue to swirl. In the ridiculously early GOP nomination sweepstakes, the survey finds a logjam near the top, with Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Rand Paul, Gov. Mike Huckabee, Gov. Rick Perry and Rep. Paul Ryan tightly packed within the 11 to 13 percent support range. Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. Ted Cruz are next with eight percent apiece, followed by Sen. Marco Rubio at six percent, and Gov. Scott Walker at five percent. In far more relevant polling news, a massive nationwide survey conducted by the New York Times, CBS News and YouGov points to a continued GOP advantage -- but not a wave-level advantage -- heading into the November midterm elections.
The Republicans appear to hold a slight advantage in the fight for the Senate and remain in a dominant position in the House. They need to pick up six seats to gain Senate control, and they hold a clear advantage in races in three states: South Dakota, Montana and West Virginia. The data from YouGov, an opinion-research firm that enjoyed success in 2012, finds the G.O.P. with a nominal lead in five additional states. The five states where the Republicans hold a slight lead in the YouGov panel include three Southern ones — Arkansas, Louisiana and North Carolina — where Democratic incumbents face tough re-election contests and where Mitt Romney won in 2012. Republicans also have a slight edge in Iowa and Michigan, two open seats in states that usually vote for Democrats in presidential elections.
If these results were to hold, Republicans would net eight Senate seats, two more than they need to secure the majority. For a more detailed look at the Senate battle, click through to my lengthy analysis from last week. But such a huge poll that uses a still-emerging online methodology should be taken with a grain of salt. For example, compared to other polling, these projections look a bit sunny for Republicans in North Carolina, and very optimistic in Michigan. On the other hand, they may underestimate the GOP's chances in places like Alaska and Colorado. This "mega poll" appears to be right on target in measuring Republicans' three likeliest Senate gains (Montana, South Dakota and West Virginia), and predicts the party will retain its contested seats in Kentucky and Georgia (the latter race just took an embarrassing and possibly catastrophic turn for the Democrats). It also finds that the GOP is "overwhelmingly likely" to keep its House majority, and could well expand it. I'll leave you with this nugget out of Texas:
Oh yeah, I almost forgot: Wendy Davis is down 17.— Nate Cohn (@Nate_Cohn) July 28, 2014