Krauthammer: Obama tricking GOP into impeaching him for humanitarian effort to save immigrant children.

Conservatives are so removed from reality that they're now blaming Obama for their inside the bubble hysterics. Sue then impeach? Who said that?

The latest surreal Charles Krauthammer column said it all for me:

That's right, Obama is using the GOP lawsuit against him to eventually make Republicans try and impeach him for an executive order John Boehner told him to make to help those homeless immigrant children. What a devious plan. After all, no ones talking impeachment....



...or pushing impeachment talk as described here by Chris Hayes....



But Krauthammer doesn't just suggest Obama is manipulating tea party Republicans into foolishly impeaching him, that scoundrel, but he also implying the president is lying about GOP inaction. Republican's were on it:

Last week, the House of Representatives passed legislation that deals reasonably with this immigrant wave.

Reasonable? In this short 30 second summation by Al Sharpton, I guess the mass deportation of children back to their violent oppressive countries, where they'll starve to death... is reasonable:



Can they really limit the presidents powers? We're seeing  the results of our trade deals like NAFTA and CAFTA, which destroyed the economic base those countries depended on. For Republicans, it's a big surprise those displaced workers are now seeking refuge in the U.S..

Devoid of Populist Policy, GOP will pursue lawsuit against Obama.

It’s funny how the AP reporter didn't actually notice the big underlying story in the piece below, even though they eluded to it a number of times; that despite a Democratic majority in D.C., Republicans have held up the majority’s agenda. Americans will never know if liberal policies are better because Republicans have held everything up . 

  

Like all Republicans, John Boehner thinks Democrats are “ignoring the American people’s elected representatives”…even though Democrats hold a majority.

I've highlighted the various clues:

AP: House Speaker John Boehner could file a lawsuit against President Barack Obama in days, in an attempt to challenge the administration's heavy use of executive actions to further its agenda.

"The president has a clear record of ignoring the American people’s elected representatives and exceeding his constitutional authority, which has dangerous implications for both our system of government and our economy," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said in a statement. 

The lawsuit is just a prelude to the bigger movement to impeach Obama, which is really a clear admission by Republicans that they can’t win on policy ideas. 

Impeach Obama Idiocrasy!!!

Oh, did you know you could…

“Get ‘Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office,’ autographed, at WND’s Superstore, at a special price just today.”

That’s the reminder you see over and over separating paragraphs in this incredible exclusive story sent to me by my conservative friend in Milwaukee:

WND EXCLUSIVE: RELEASE OF 36,000 CRIMINAL ILLEGALS IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE? Murderers, rapists, kidnappers, drug dealers turned loose by DHS … argue New York Times bestselling authors Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott in their book “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office.”

The Obama administration initially blamed the controversial move on the budget sequester cuts. 

However, the releases were just the tip of the iceberg, documented Klein and Elliott in “Impeachable Offenses” … Why were the criminal illegals released? The audit blamed the actions on “agent ‘staffing challenges,’” such as vacancies and “increasing workload levels.”

Hey, you can still get the book for an amazing price….

MSNBC reported Klein and Elliott’s “Impeachable Offenses” fueled the national conversation to impeach Obama, while BuzzFeed.com reported the book “ushers in the Obama impeachment movement.”

The book lays out the blueprint for impeaching Obama, alleging high crimes, misdemeanors, bribery and other offenses committed against the U.S. Constitution and the limitations on the executive office. The Daily Mail of London has called the “Impeachable Offenses” “explosive,” reporting the book contains a “systematic connect-the-dots exercise that the president’s defenders will find troublesome.”

“Consider this work to be the articles of impeachment against Barack Obama,” stated Klein.

Said...the author Klein? But if they still couldn't sell you, they've included so much more to choose from:

The authors stress the book is not a collection of generalized gripes concerning Obama and his administration. Rather, it is a well-documented indictment based on major alleged violations.Among the offenses enumerated in the book:

Obamacare not only is unconstitutional but illegally bypasses Congress, infringes on states’ rights and marking an unprecedented and unauthorized expansion of IRS power.

Sidestepping Congress, Obama already has granted largely unreported de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens using illicit interagency directives and executive orders.

The Obama administration recklessly endangered the public by releasing from prison criminal illegal aliens at a rate far beyond what is publicly known. The president’s personal role in the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attack, with new evidence regarding what was transpiring at the U.S. mission prior to the assault – arguably impeachable activities in and of themselves.

Illicit edicts on gun control in addition to the deadly “Fast and Furious” gun-running operation intended, the book shows, to collect fraudulent gun data.

From “fusion centers” to data mining to drones to alarming Department of Homeland Security power grabs, how U.S. citizens are fast arriving at the stage of living under a virtual surveillance regime.

New evidence of rank corruption, cronyism and impeachable offenses related to Obama’s first-term “green” funding adventures.

The illegality of leading a U.S.-NATO military campaign without congressional approval.

Obama has weakened America both domestically and abroad by emboldening enemies, tacitly supporting a Muslim Brotherhood revolution, spurning allies and minimizing the threat of Islamic fundamentalism.

Tea party has Tantrum, sues over sign ban on bridge overpass

For years signs have been banned on pedestrian overpasses to prevent driver distractions and possible abusive free placement of advertising on public property.

But these and other reasons don't amount to a hill of beans to low information tea party voters hell bent on impeaching Obama for...who knows what.

jsonline: Two La Crosse men have sued the Town of Campbell over its 2013 ordinance banning signs and other displays from a pedestrian bridge over Interstate 90, and from an area 100 feet around the bridge. The plaintiffs contend that the bridge is like a sidewalk, a traditional public forum, and that town officials tried to ban signs only after tea party activists hung banners urging passing motorists to impeach President Barack Obama.

Yup, instead of getting special treatment, tea party loons are always getting picked on. And since they haven’t caused an accident with their distractingly stupid signs...yet:

According to their lawsuit Greg Luce and Nicholas Newman had been demonstrating along the pedestrian bridge from August to October without incident, or any traffic accidents … In early October, the town passed an ordinance banning signs, flags, banners and such from the bridge, citing safety concerns. The plaintiffs contend the ban was in response to local news media coverage of the impeachment message.

And what a serious message too. Never one to act like adults, these losers decided to act like bratty children. Come to think of it, didn't conservatives bash Walker protesters for their signs and civil disobedience...but that was different? 

So on Oct. 24, Luce and fellow demonstrators came to the bridge wearing T-shirts that spelled out IMPEACH on one side, and OBAMA on the other. They were told by Campbell police to leave the overpass, and they did. On Oct. 27, Newman stood on the overpass with an American flag "to express his pride for his country and the ideals on which it was founded" when he was ticketed for violating the new ordinance, the suit states.

Brent Smith, a La Crosse attorney who represents the town, said the point of the ban was to prevent accidents. Smith said a similar restriction was adopted in Madison several years ago that was subjected to a similar challenge but upheld by a federal appellate court.

I just loved the reason given for defending these teabillies:

Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center "defends and promotes America's Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values."

Is anybody still buying this crap?