Rosenkranz and Guildenstern are dead

“I wish a motherfucker would” doesn’t do this justice (apologies for linking to #dickwhisperer):

One of the majority’s witnesses, Georgetown law professor Nicholas Rosenkranz, encouraged the Republicans not to be so shy. “I don’t think you should be hesitant to speak the word in this room,” he said. “A check on executive lawlessness is impeachment.”

What will it be for? Benghazigate? ACAgate?

138 replies
  1. 1
    Elmo says:


  2. 2
    SFAW says:

    Benghazigate? ACAgate?

    No. PWB.

    ETA: Which is, as Villago noted, “Presidentin’ While Black”

  3. 3
    Yatsuno says:

    Who the fuck are these Republican witnesses, and why should I care?

  4. 4
    SFAW says:


    and why should I care?

    Well, if you start channeling Chairman Darrell “GTA” Issa, you will.

  5. 5
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    What will it be for? Benghazigate? ACAgate?

    Presidentin’ while blah, of course. There can be no greater crime.

    Also, he’s fathered two black children. I feel an attack of the vapors coming on.

    /shakefist at SFAW

  6. 6
    TheMightyTrowel says:

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    Presidentin’ while blah, of course. There can be no greater crime.

    Also, he’s fathered two black children. I feel an attack of the vapors coming on.


  7. 7
    maya says:

    Have we all forgotted Solyndra?

  8. 8
    Yatsuno says:

    @maya: Fast and Furious baby, Fast and Furious. There is still an open hearing about that, though now they’re trying to get the scalp of Holder for it.

  9. 9
    SFAW says:

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    Also, he’s fathered two black children. I feel an attack of the vapors coming on.

    Does that mean Strom gave you half-vapors?

  10. 10
    Mike E says:

    When your only tool is a dildo hammer, every problem looks like a wetsuit nail.

  11. 11
    dmsilev says:

    Don’t forget IRS-targeting-conservative-groups-gate!

  12. 12
    SFAW says:

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    /shakefist at SFAW

    It’s ’cause I’m on the East Coast, so I am able to post an hour (or more) earlier.

  13. 13
    MikeJ says:

    What will it be for? Benghazigate? ACAgate?

    Per the title of your post, they’ll flip a coin.

  14. 14
    Short Bus Bully says:

    Bring it bitches.

    The American people would just LOVE another impeachment proceeding in the midst of all the other shit we have to take care of as a nation…

  15. 15
    SFAW says:


    Fast and Furious baby, Fast and Furious.

    No doubt we’ll find that Paul Walker’s death was caused by Obama.

  16. 16
    Violet says:

    Can they bring the impeachment charges at the same time they shut down the government again? Twofer!

  17. 17
    Yatsuno says:

    @SFAW: Too soon. I’m still in mourning dammit. Gawd he was pretty.

  18. 18
    Jeffro says:

    I love it.
    It’s probably never occurred to them to simply (gasp) a) accept the outcome of an election, and then b) figure out how best to fight the next one.

    $10 says they were the first in their pre-schools to flip the Candyland board when they were about to lose

  19. 19
    SFAW says:

    What will it be for? Benghazigate? ACAgate?


  20. 20
  21. 21
    GregB says:

    If there is anything that will cause these ratfucking fascists to plunge headlong over an electoral abyss from which there is no return it will be the urge to impeach Obama.

    Please proceed ratfuckers.

  22. 22
    Hawes says:

    Filibuster reform.

    While it was done by Harry Reid, we all know that Obama was behind it.

    Either that or helping tens of millions of Americans get health insurance.

    Also, too, death panels.

  23. 23
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    Well, if you start channeling Chairman Darrell “GTA” Issa, you will.

    I’d much rather channel Stalin, Khomeini, Pol Pot, or He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named-By-Command-Of-Godwin.

    All of them were not total fuckups in their evil, at least.

  24. 24
    Hawes says:

    @GregB: Actually, we should be ratfucking THIS.

    Where can we go to help push them to impeach Obama? Can I make phone calls? Sign a petition? Drive my Hoverround scooter around the Beltway to snarl traffic?

  25. 25
    scav says:

    For all their passionate defense of dead white guy European literature, their familiarity with it is dead level with their insight into scripture. Will they next call their expert Dr Leontes Othello to the stand to opine on the state of the Obama and de Blasio marriages?

  26. 26
    Smiling Mortician says:

    @MikeJ: An infinite number of times, one hopes.

  27. 27
    Schlemizel says:



    I think you may be onto something here. Obama did have Vince Foster killed, right? I know he was importing cocaine to a landing field in Arkansas.

  28. 28
    mdblanche says:





    “Don’t you discriminate at ALL?”

  29. 29
    JR says:

    I’m one of Nick’s former students. I’m out at the moment, but I’ll elaborate in a bit on what I think he means by this. In short, this is a snippet of a much larger, completely consistent view of government that he holds.

  30. 30
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    Aha! Vince Foster was Michelle Obama’s lesbian lover!

    It all fits! Alert Rush Limabaugh and Richard Melon-Scaife!

  31. 31
    SFAW says:


    Obama did have Vince Foster killed, right? I know he was importing cocaine to a landing field in Arkansas.

    Well, I know he put a hit out on Vince from his (i.e., Obama’s) home base in Nairobi. But I hadn’t heard about the Arkansas coke thing. The one on the Big Island, though – well, EVERYONE knows about that.

  32. 32
    Suffern ACE says:

    Well they won’t touch the NSA with a 20 foot pole. I’m still not certain what they expect from Benghazi. Did the president hire those thugs to shoot at the CIA compound?

    I’ll go with IRS Gate. It’s the closest they can come to abuse of power. They’d only have to stretch 1/3 of the facts and make up 1/2 in that one.

  33. 33
    JPL says:

    @Suffern ACE: I actually like Fast and Furious. Just cuz homeless guys could buy dozens of guns and transport them, doesn’t mean they weren’t doing anything wrong.

  34. 34
    NotMax says:

    High crimes and uppitiness.

  35. 35
  36. 36
    chopper says:

    come on, if anything is impeachment-worthy, it’s a website sucking for 2 months.

  37. 37
    Smiling Mortician says:

    @mdblanche: Hawaii: a conspiracy of cartographers.

  38. 38


    This is how small a world Los Angeles is. I found out today that my Weight Watchers leader is friends with Walker’s family. And she doesn’t work in show business (in her non-WW life, she’s a nurse).

  39. 39
    Hawes says:

    C-SPAN has the following film of Darrell Issa’s hearing today:

  40. 40
    Davis X. Machina says:

    I’m surprised they’re only calling for impeachment. That’s a mild form of redress to seek against the leader of a government of occupation, imposed by a foreign power, and maintained by force against the will of its citizens.

    These people do not actually believe that non-Republicans are due any of the privileges and immunities of citizens, like the ballot.
    These people do not think Democrats are actually Americans.
    Do not let the lack of shooting lull you into thinking that there is no civil war going on.

  41. 41
    maya says:

    He’ll be impeached for actually having the gall to use the White House toilets instead of cleaning them. They just have a little work to do on the proper wording for the indictment.

  42. 42
    Pen says:

    @Davis X. Machina: every time I bring up that point I’m accused by friends and family of “being shrill”. But then the biggest proponent of that worldview is my just retired from public service grandmother who, while spending 3 months a years
    Traveling on vacation, legitimately believes that “college students should be allowed to vote at school so of course their ID shouldn’t be valid in elections, they can vote at home”. The fact that they spend as much time in the city every year as she does completely gets ignored, so there is that.

  43. 43
    Yatsuno says:

    @Suffern ACE: Not really. There is more evidence of incompetence from Bush legacies than anything else. Plus the Cincinnati office was SCREAMING for advice from HQ and getting nada. Unfortunately they made it up as they went along. Oh and totally ignore the progressive groups that also were submitted to the extra scrutiny.

    @SFAW: S’okay. Going the James Dean route is not necessarily a bad way for a star to go.

  44. 44
    Schlemizel says:

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    Well, it may not be true but it fits the pattern so it could be true – IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE NOT TO SPECULATE!

  45. 45
    SFAW says:


    every time I bring up that point I’m accused by friends and family of “being shrill”.

    Prof. Krugman? Is that you?

  46. 46
    a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q) says:

    The Congressional GOP gives me a chronic headache. I should be more technically accurate and note that reading about the idiotic ways the morons can wast their (tax funded) salaries on acting out 3 year old style tantrums gives me headaches. So I can perhaps engage in prevention by not reading.

    @Yatsuno: He was indeed pretty, and died too young. I think he played on my team. :)

  47. 47
    El Cid says:

    The New ACORN Black Panthers being sent to target Tea Party leaders with the IRS in order to send guns to Mexican drug gangs via Fast & Furious so that Mexican Shari’a anchor babies would have the arms with which to kill our embassy staff in Benghazi in order to manipulate the 2012 elections.

  48. 48
    Joe Buck says:

    Unfortunately, there are real crimes being committed, but they have bipartisan backing: NSA blanket surveillance in violation of the 4th amendment, defiance of the convention against torture (which requires signatories to prosecute government officials who engage in or order torture), execution of American citizens without trial, and so on. If we hadn’t abandoned the rule of law long ago, any of those could justify impeachment.

    But since Republicans are fully on board for all or most of that, we’ll only hear about Benghazi and the like.

  49. 49
    Ash Can says:

    Dickwhisperer’s concluding point needs a little adjustment:

    Why bother with impeachment? They need a revolution medication and therapy.

  50. 50
    SFAW says:

    @El Cid:

    The New ACORN Black Panthers being sent to target Tea Party leaders with the IRS in order to send guns to Mexican drug gangs via Fast & Furious so that Mexican Shari’a anchor babies would have the arms with which to kill our embassy staff in Benghazi in order to manipulate the 2012 elections.

    You forgot Poland!

    But outside of that, I think you pretty much covered it.

  51. 51
    scav says:

    @Ash Can: Binkies and a timeout might be more age-appropriate.

  52. 52

    @Mnemosyne (iPhone): One of the more astounding things I discovered when I moved out here is just how many people know each other. Ms Martin is an amateur singer, but had the same voice coach as many quite famous people (Discord!) and got to know them pretty well. A number of years back she got to be on her favorite show through a connection. One of her best friends from HS (still a close friend) got an Oscar a few years ago (the speech kind, not the ‘good job with the rigging’ kind).

    And you get one or two of these contacts and all of a sudden you hook into a whole bunch of other people. We know several auto racers through similar networking (lots of auto racing teams here in SoCal).

    It’s really kind of weird.

  53. 53
    mai naem says:

    Y’all are wrong. They are going to impeach him for Hillary’s fall and all of Biden’s verbal faux pas because he was trying to look better than the Dems who will inherit the Dem leadership role. Also too, Princess Snooki of the Northwest’s word salad issues. Obama put some voodoo spells on the Snow Princess that he learned at the Mombasa Madrassa that he was born at.

  54. 54
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    Michael Smerconish, who IIANM self-IDs as libertarian and ex-Republican, just pretty much did a commercial for Obamacare on L O’Donnell’s show

  55. 55
    mk3872 says:

    Really? A #dickwhisperer link??

    And you failed to mention this beauty from the #dickwhisperer in that story:

    “… it’s true that this president has stretched the bounds of executive authority”

    Well, then the GOP is justified in impeachment, right?

  56. 56
    rda909 says:

    Well, we already know that if they pick something like DROOONZZ!1! or the NSA activities that President Obama has actually curtailed during his time in office, that many of the white “progressives” will happily “stand with Rand” and join with Grover Norquist as has already happened, in order to bring down the most liberal President in any of our lifetimes, so they could try those some more. Many people here even would be completely on board with that too, considering what they say here every single day.

    Fortunately, the Online Progressive Party (Yea, OPP…) makes a lot of noise but never does the necessary hard work to actually achieve their goals, so yea, please proceed Republiprogressives! It’ll backfire on them as usual.

  57. 57
    Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN) says:

    I’m still trying to figure out what the underlying problem with Fast & Furious was. When I put together their arguments and their underlying philosophy, as near as I can tell the problem is that they like Mexico being a murderous anarchy and so they don’t want the ATF taking the guns there that would help to make it a polite society.

  58. 58
    A Humble Lurker says:

    Briar patch.
    I wish they would just decide whether or not to do it already. It’s all this waffling that’s annoying me. We know you’re full of shit, so either shit or get off the pot.

  59. 59
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @scav: Stoppard isn’t dead.

  60. 60
    somethingblue says:

    @JR: You know who else held a much larger, completely consistent view of government, don’t you?

  61. 61
    kindness says:

    So if the idiots in the House do actually start hearings for impeachment….how long before the nuts in this country start a revolution all on their own? No, I don’t mean organized. They aren’t. They are testosterone driven, dick challenged troglodites dreaming of killing the ‘others’. We and a bunch of other folk are those others. What I guess I mean is that are Republicans trying to drive the nuts to start killing people or what? Sure looks like it.

  62. 62
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN):

    The wingtards are a mass of conflicting, contradictory impulses that would cause Norman to go comatose in seconds. You wouldn’t even need to use Harry Mudd’s “I’m lying to you” gambit to cause the shutdown.

    Paul Ryan epitomizes this in his claim to be a Christian and an Ayn Rand acolyte.

  63. 63
    Yatsuno says:

    @kindness: They need some kind of backing from the military. Right now they don’t have that. I doubt they are willing to put in the work to win over the military. So yeah, maybe a few isolated pockets of frustration (to wit: the white supremacist who tried to take over a town in North Dakota) but otherwise just simmering resentment.

  64. 64
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @mdblanche: “There must have been a moment, at the beginning, where we could have said — no. But somehow we missed it. ”

  65. 65
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    What I guess I mean is that are Republicans trying to drive the nuts to start killing people or what? Sure looks like it.

    Start? They’ve been doing it for years now. It’s just that because they’re not Arabs/Muslims/Hippies/Environmentalists/The Weather Underground, they’re not classified as “terrorists” even though they have absolutely classic, textbook motivations and tactics.

  66. 66
    Kay says:

    @Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN):

    Because they believe that Obama and Holder sent guns from the US to Mexico so Mexicans would then carry the US guns back over the border into the US and commit crimes with the guns and the Mexicans-with-US-guns crime wave would lead to “anti-second amendment” regulation.

    This is the actual theory.

    I think they love it so much because it has both guns and illegal immigrants and of course Eric Holder, who has to be removed because Alberto Gonzales had to resign, so that makes it fair.

  67. 67
    scav says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: But his were absurdist, the sycophants onlie begetter is well-attending that convocation of politic worms.

  68. 68
    Yatsuno says:


    and of course Eric Holder, who has to be removed because Alberto Gonzales had to resign, so that makes it fair.

    BOF SIDES!!!

    And F & F started as a Bush fuck-up continued by career legacies in the DoJ. They already knew it wasn’t working but decided to hot potato it so Nobummer could get blamed.

  69. 69
    RaflW says:

    @Pen: I suspect that a chunk of these folks think the students parents should be able to vote their kids ballots “since dad is paying for their edumacashun.” Or at the very least that the kids might be cowed into voting TeaTard with dadio watching them vote at the home precinct.

  70. 70
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @scav: Worms had a Diet not a Convocation.


  71. 71
    Kay says:


    You don’t have to tell me. I think the Fast and Furious theory is proof that they’re actually insane.

    They really do loathe Holder, though. I think it’s the AA prosecutor/power thing, definitely, myself. There’s just no rational reason to hate him so much.

  72. 72
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    Regarding Rosenkranz’s encouragement of impeachment, I offer this from Stoppard’s play: We cross our bridges when we come to them and burn them behind us, with nothing to show for our progress except a memory of the smell of smoke, and a presumption that once our eyes watered.

  73. 73
  74. 74
    RaflW says:

    “… it’s true that this president has stretched the bounds of executive authority”

    Well, if congress would do even 1/3 of its job, the Preznit might not be stretching executive orders and spitballing on stuff like extending ACA deadlines.

    But, eh! who has time to thing about why these actions occurred. That would be like journalism rather than punditry. Only punditry is both profitable and easy.

  75. 75
    Omnes Omnibus says:


    I think it’s the AA prosecutor/power thing,

    Supposedly, LBJ talked Marshall into taking the Solicitor General’s job by taking him to the DoJ and pointing down the hall at the SG’s office and saying something like, “I want the bastards to look down this hall and know that there is a n*****r in that office.”

  76. 76
    rikyrah says:

    The Charge is being President while Black.


  77. 77
    jheartney says:

    If you’re up for a blast of Wingnut Crazee, try the comment thread for this article. (Warning: Daily Caller.) They’re angrily shouting about how everybody knows the gummint shutdown was engineered by Harry Reid and the Muslim Usurper, and that we should impeach his near ass for doing muslim prayin’ in the White House. (The article was linked from Millbank’s piece.)

  78. 78
    John Dillinger says:

    The eventual articles of impeachment put up for a vote will be in ALL CAPS and refer to the President a “Obummer.”

  79. 79
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    Well,yeah. I mean, just how outrageous is it on a scale of 1 to 10 (I’d say a 14 to 18) that a blah man is exercising any executive authority at all?

    Never mind that the deserting coward/Dark Lord malasstration is the one that basically said “fuck the Geneva Convention, it’s quaint, we’re going to institute a Night and Fog decree for everyone on the planet” NOT an extension of executive authority.

    Oh, I forget. IOKIYAR.

  80. 80
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @rikyrah: Yeah, they are just looking for a hook on which to hang that hat. Obama just won’t give it to them – that makes them crazier.

  81. 81
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @John Dillinger:

    You mean like Death on Discworld?

  82. 82
    Kay says:


    So, the vendetta against Eric Holder began with the New Black Panther Scandal, which was complete bullshit, but that’s why I think the Holder-hate is race-based. They were waiting for “proof” he would treat black people differently than white people from the moment he was sworn in.

    I read a transcript of the fake-hearing. They called Thomas Perez, who was then the head of the civil rights division (now sec of labor). I felt sorry for him. He was really trying to track what they were saying, but it was too crazy. He gave up, eventually, and they just yelled at him for a really long time.

  83. 83
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    OT: I am watching NL’s Christmas Vacation and they just aired a Liberty U Online ad. Followed by something from Dior with Natalie Portman and what sounded like Grace Jones covering La vie en rose. Bipolar much?

  84. 84
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @somethingblue: William O. Douglas?

  85. 85
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @JR: Doesn’t mean he is right.

  86. 86
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    The stupid. It burns. In stereo.

  87. 87
    Kay says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    “I want the bastards to look down this hall and know that there is a n*****r in that office.”

    Don’t you think that’s it, though? I just can’t imagine getting extremely riled up about Eric Holder.
    He’s very…lawyerly.

    We see this sort of buttoned-up DC person and they see wild-eyed radical defense counsel for the New Black Panther Party.

  88. 88

    @Omnes Omnibus: Actually, that a bit more colorful than how it actually happened, but it’s not terribly far off either. The conversation was recorded and transcribed.

    President Johnson: And our government. And then ourselves way down at the bottom of the list. I want you to be my Solicitor General.

    Marshall: Wow.

    President Johnson: Now, you lose a lot. You lose security and you lose the freedom that you like. And you lose the philosophizing that you can do. And I’m familiar with all those things.

    Marshall: The number one [unclear].

    President Johnson: Well, you won’t lose any. And I want you to do it for two or three reasons. One, I want the top lawyer in the United States representing me before the Supreme Court–

    Marshall: [Unclear]–

    President Johnson: –to be a negro.

    Marshall: Oh.

    President Johnson: And be a damn good lawyer that’s done it before. That’s–so, you have those peculiar qualifiations.

  89. 89
    scav says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: check your arras Polonius, or at least your folio, while your worm is your only emperor for diet, I’m still finding a convocation of politic ones, and that’s before a king may go a progress through the guts of a beggar.

  90. 90
    Omnes Omnibus says:


    Don’t you think that’s it, though? I just can’t imagine getting extremely riled up about Eric Holder.
    He’s very…lawyerly.

    It is as good an explanation as any I have heard. To me – as you suggest, Holder is a lawyer-bureaucrat who is careful and cautious, but generally moving in the right direction. An Obama guy – oops, there it is.

  91. 91
    rikyrah says:

    They hate Holder because:

    1. He’s Black.
    2. He’s Black.
    3. Did I fail to mention that he’s Black?
    4. Black Black Blackilicious, Blackedity Black Black.

  92. 92
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    You left out…

    5. He’s African-American.

  93. 93
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    Get thee to a nunnery. Out, damned spot!

  94. 94

    @Villago Delenda Est: Dronez did it. Don’t even need forensics. can diagnose via internet.

  95. 95
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @👾 Martin: That’s what I get for listening to lawyer gossip.

    @scav: Dude, you making me work too hard.

    @rikyrah: You forgot to note that a Black man appointed him.

  96. 96
    scav says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: Cut the crap, Hamlet! My biological clock is ticking, and I want babies now!

  97. 97
    Churchlady says:

    @SFAW: Issa has no traction because he keeps lying, hiding documents, falsifying data, and calling NO witnesses from “the other side” – not Dems. PEOPLE. He has shown himself to be so utterly corrupt that nothing he says makes headway with any but the most zealous anti Obama people who are, thank heavens, relatively few on the ground.

  98. 98
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @scav: There is a small town outside of the small central Wisconsin city in which I grew up named Wittenberg. In IB English as we read Hamlet, inordinate amusement resulted from, “Go not to Wittenberg.” Especially because you had to go through Nutterville to get there.

  99. 99
    PaulW says:

    They will bring a list of items for impeachment, during which they’ll force another shutdown of the government (remember, that’s what March 2014 is for!) and impeach him for that too.

    At some point the majority of Americans who are not in the wingnut 27 percent are gonna wake up to the fact that the Republicans will impeach every Democratic President if they can. Because the Republicans can no longer conceive of the notion of Democrats interfering with their 1000 years of Pax Reaganicus (or is that Reagana? I need someone with better understanding of Latin to confirm).

  100. 100
    PaulW says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    There is a small town outside of the small central Wisconsin city in which I grew up named Wittenberg. In IB English as we read Hamlet, inordinate amusement resulted from, “Go not to Wittenberg.” Especially because you had to go through Nutterville to get there.

    Hey! I might be related to Wittenberg…

  101. 101
    Churchlady says:

    @Suffern ACE: Sorry – there are NO ‘facts’ showing discrimination. Quite the opposite since the only groups denied their c-4 were liberal. I’d like to have the IRS’s head for LETTING these groups HAVE their c-4 when they turned around and did partisan politics which is a no-no. My organization has a c-4, and we use it as intended. I’m sick of the RW getting handled with kid gloves over this. They are violating the law!

  102. 102
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    The last guy who promised a glorious reign of 1000 years managed to eek out 12 and a few months.

  103. 103
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @PaulW: You are related to a town?

  104. 104
    Amir Khalid says:

    The Republican party knows Obama will never be stupid enough to do anything actually impeachable. But its members want his head on a pike anyway, don’t they? That’s the unicorn they want for Christmas. When they name this or that imaginary crime for which they tell themselves they can impeach him, they’re just having a naming contest for their unicorn.

  105. 105
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Amir Khalid: Thank you. I have been waiting to drop this Stoppard quote:
    It would have been nice to have had unicorns.

  106. 106
    scav says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Nutterville! Oh, seriously brilliant. I might have enjoyed this far far earlier if so gifted . . . . and a Staadts too . . .

  107. 107
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    You mean it’s like Bill Frist issuing a medical opinion about Terri Schiavo from watching her on a video feed?

  108. 108
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @scav: Central Wisconsin is an odd place. Yankees, Germans, and Poles, with just enough Scandinavians and French to make it interesting. Plus ice fishing.

  109. 109
    NotMax says:

    @Villago Delenda Est

    The Skeksis had a much better track record, millenium-wise.

  110. 110
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @scav: Also, the town next to Wittenberg is Birnamwood.

  111. 111
    karen says:

    @Davis X. Machina:

    I’m surprised too. I figured they’d ask for death, since that’s the only thing they’d be happy with.

  112. 112
    karen says:


    Don’t you know, Republicans only have to follow the rule of “WE HATE BLACK PEOPLE” rule. The law doesn’t apply to them.

  113. 113

    @Villago Delenda Est: is there anything these guys can’t do?

  114. 114
    Villago Delenda Est says:


    They’re like donuts, you know. Except they taste bad.

  115. 115

    No one else read to the end? This was the best part:

    Read more about this topic: Charles Krauthammer: An outbreak of lawlessness George F. Will: Obama’s unconstitutional steps worse than Nixon’s Charles Krauthammer: Can Obama write his own laws?

  116. 116
    Napoleon says:

    @JR: I was hoping you would post more. How is it that major law schools appear to have complete nuts on the faculty that would, short of being forced or appearing in opposition, would appear in front of a Congressional panel with such a completely lawless purpose to remove a duly elected President for nothing coming withing a hundred miles of a legitimate reason?

  117. 117
    Patricia Kayden says:

    “apologies for linking to #dickwhisperer”

    Funniest thing I’ve read all week. BJ Frontpagers are a hoot.

  118. 118
    sparrow says:

    @jheartney: Woah. I guess it’s totally normal that all the popups for that site involve smiling families that are uber-white, blond-haired and blue-eyed. I’m not even sure what they’re trying to sell me…. creepy.

  119. 119
    Anya says:

    I am not sure about impeachment backfiring on republicans. So far nothing has. As long as the MSM is enabling them, and as long as hacks like George Stephanopoulos, Dancing Dave, Candy Crowley, and to lessor extend, Jack Tapper are repeating GOP talking points, American people will not get the real story and by the end of the impeachment proceedings, they would have convinced Americans that not only was Obama born in Kenya, stole two elections, committed hight crimes and fraud, he was also responsible for abducting and killing, (insert the name of a missing white woman). And let’s not forget the cowardice that’s the democratic party, they will abandon Obama like their life depends on it. Some of them might even make a case why he should be impeached. And some liberal blogs will argue that Obama is in this predicament because he was not pure enough.

  120. 120
    Napoleon says:


    I think your concern about the Dems reactions is unfounded. At one time, yes, but I think pretty much everyone in the caucus now realizes how collosal the bad faith and insanity is from the Rep.

  121. 121
    debbie says:


    I am not sure about impeachment backfiring on republicans. So far nothing has.

    Then how do you explain their very low polling numbers?

  122. 122
    Anya says:

    @Napoleon: I am miss remberimg the way they reacted to the website glitches?

    @debbie: both sides do it, baby! Also, too, last polling shows that generic republican is beating generic democrat.

  123. 123
    Napoleon says:


    None of them called for a repeal of Obamacare, etc (some voted with the Rep on some of their bills, but they are things they had voted for before the web issues). To the extent legislation was offered it was doing things around the margins. I don’t think Obama lost a single Dem with that complete self inflicted fiasco on Obamas part.

    By the way, the website was a genuine f-up of the first order and should have been criticized, which makes it entirely different from a ginned up, baseless impeachment push.

  124. 124

    @debbie: The thing to look at is the national House party polling, which is pretty much neck and neck:


    The Republicans hurt themselves badly with the shutdown/debt ceiling business, but it was very temporary: the ACA rollout fuss immediately erased the damage once the crisis was over, and they were ahead for a while. The numbers are really volatile now, so who’s ahead depends on how much smoothing you apply.

  125. 125
    Just One More Canuck says:

    Has there ever been a coherent explanation (not a foaming at the mouth, falling over backwards explanation) of how anything that they claim Obama has done (or hasn’t done) reaches the standard of an impeachable offense?

    Christ these people are crazy

  126. 126
    Cacti says:

    The charges for impeachment will include:

    1. Presidentin’ while Black

    2. Presidentin’ while Democrat

    3. Presidentin’ while a Black Democrat

  127. 127
    briber says:

    It is important to understand that the Watergate scandal is perceived differently by liberals and conservatives.

    the liberal view: “Even the President of the United States is not above the law.”

    the conservative view: “Since Democrats have already used impeachment to achieve partisan political ends, we get to do the same.”

    Conservatives CAN NOT SEE that Nixon did anything wrong. Therefore, “having done something wrong,” must not be a pre-condition for impeachment.

  128. 128
    JR says:

    Okay, sorry for the delay: long night.

    Prof. Rosenkranz is an adherent to the notion that we’ve failed to properly give weight to a lot of the Constitution’s language. For example, there isn’t much done by way of enforcing the Take Care Clause (“[The President] shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”) So in a situation, say, where the President orders the DOJ to stop defending DOMA in court, or where he permits HHS to delay implementation of a provision of Obamacare, those would be violations of his duties under the Take Care Clause, and would be impeachable offenses. I don’t know Nick’s views of Presidential war powers versus congressional ones, but I imagine that the President’s failure to abide by the War Powers Resolution would likewise rise to the level of impeachable offense.

    Rosenkranz is a Textualist, and government is replete with examples of practicality trumping formal textual requirements. In order to get the government to function in line with the Constitution’s text (which establishes a much stronger Legislative Branch than we have now, and a less empowered Executive), Congress has to start throwing elbows more. Rosenkranz would like to see impeachment for impeachment’s sake: a way for Congress to exert its primacy in government and re-balance the checks and balances between branches, but also to establish that Textualism will be the way that presidential actions are judged.

    @Napoleon: First, I’d bear in mind that Georgetown Law is one of the most left-leaning law schools, being one of the main homes of Critical Legal Studies adherents–when I went there, the joke was that Rosenkranz was the Republican on the faculty. But beyond that, impeachment is a political act. Congress decides what rises to the level of an impeachable offense, with only public opinion to hold them in check. So Congress could say that our air strikes against Gaddafi were unauthorized by law and hence impeachable. Or they could go with the assassination of US citizen Anwar al-Awlaki. Or instructing the Solicitor General’s office to not defend DOMA in court. Or instructing ICE to defer deportations for certain undocumented immigrants. Any of those would be enough for Congress to begin impeachment.

  129. 129
    Teejay says:

    I saw no comment about Prof. Turley’s testimony.
    I watched the full House Judiciary hearing.
    It’s unconstitutional for Obama to legislate from the oval office!
    Yes the R’s are idiots along with Fox and others.
    Tribalism has run a muck here. Turley says
    Obama’s actions are clearly, egregiously

  130. 130
    JustRuss says:

    @JR: So how did Rosenkranz feel about Bush’s many, many, signing statements?

  131. 131
    Napoleon says:


    Thanks for the reply. Maybe impeachment is a political act, but Congress ought to save it for truely extraordinary circumstances where you would ordinarily expect there to be a large bipartisan majority in agreement.

    I did not realize that about Georgetown, but then again when I was chosing a law school I did not look at them and even if I had that was long enough ago that things may have changed by now.

  132. 132
    Napoleon says:

    PS, Rosenkranz has a point on Congress’ powers, but I think inpeachment is really a last resort if that is your issue and only under the right circumstances. Honestly a lot of the reason that the executive has accumulated power not contemplated by the Constitution is that Congress essentially hands it over to the President by running away from issues.

  133. 133

    it’s true that this president has stretched the bounds of executive authority

    Really, Dana, really? Pray tell…..

  134. 134
    JR says:

    @JustRuss: In principle, he strongly supports Presidential signing statements for their value in determining the meaning of legislation and the President’s duties under the Take Care Clause. The President’s duties under the Take Care Clause are always dependent on the meaning of the law at issue, and if the President announces his interpretation of it, Congress is able to act to change or supplement the law before problems arise. Signing statements let the rest of the Executive Branch know how the White House wants the law interpreted, and lets the public know the President’s view of the law at issue. In court, he doesn’t think signing statements should carry much (if any) weight in how judges interpret the statute, or the President’s obligations under it, because he doesn’t believe anything other than the statute’s text should guide judicial interpretation.

    So, long story short, every branch gets to interpret a statute. Congress interprets it when they write it to get the words to match their intention. The President interprets it in directing the manner of its enforcement. The Judiciary interprets it to settle disagreements about its implementation or validity.

    He offered pretty extensive testimony to Congress on this topic back in 2007, which you can read here:

  135. 135
    JR says:

    @Napoleon: He would probably say that’s the perfect position for you to take as a member of the body politic. We’re the people who have the most direct check on Congressional excesses, because when they do things that they are empowered to do but shouldn’t, we get to vote their asses out.

  136. 136
    JR says:

    @Napoleon: Yep, Mark Tushnet, Mike Seidman, and Gary Peller are all Georgetown Law professors or emeriti, and are considered leaders in Critical Legal Studies. There’s even a special Crit-heavy curriculum offered to a portion of 1Ls.

  137. 137
  138. 138

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

Comments are closed.