The Hill: Democrats Have Raised Impeachment Some 20 Times More Often Than Republicans

260px-capitol_building_full_viewI recently wrote on the issue of impeachment that has been reportedly so widely in the media. As I noted in the column and in prior interviews, there is no serious move toward impeachment by the Republicans and most of the impeachment talk has come from the White House and Democrats, including in fund-raising campaigns. Indeed, I was critical of the Washington Post column after one of the hearings in which I testified on executive over-reach. While the issue of impeachment was mentioned only a handful of times and usually to dismiss it as an option, the column was entitled “Republicans see One Remedy for Obama — Impeachment.” It seems that even denying impeachment as an option still constitutes discussing impeachment. Now The Hill newspaper has looked at the congressional record to see who is raising impeachment more often. The result was that Democrats raised the issue 20 times more often than Republicans, who barely uttered the “I” word.

The Hill found just 4 references to impeachment on the House and Senate floors by Republicans while finding 86 such references by Democrats.

Of course, the issue remains a cash cow for Democrats with millions being raised to fight off impeachment when the money could be just as well spent on chupacabra repellant. As of yet, President Obama has not committed an impeachable act and Speaker Boehner has steadfastly ruled out such an effort in the House.

The top three House Democratic leaders — Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) and Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn (S.C.) also have all been flogging the impeachment horse. The black caucus has also been active in raising the issue, including Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee who raised it 18 times. She is followed by Georgia Rep. Hank Johnson (six times), New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (nine times), CBC Chairwoman and Ohio Rep. Marcia Fudge (once), California Rep. Barbara Lee (twice), New Jersey Rep. Donald Payne (once), North Carolina Rep. G.K. Butterfield (twice) and Maryland Rep. Donna Edwards (once). Other members discussing impeachment are Reps. Kurt Schrader (Ore.), Bill Pascrell (N.J.), Steven Horsford (Nev.), Luis Gutierrez (Ill.), Louise Slaughter (N.Y.), Jackie Speier (Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (Md.) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.), the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee.

Source: The Hill

261 thoughts on “The Hill: Democrats Have Raised Impeachment Some 20 Times More Often Than Republicans”

  1. So according to many on here. Perjury by a President is ok as long as it is a Democrat. Because that is what it boils down to.

    If you passed law school and somehow find perjury to be acceptable, there is something wrong with you.

    It is time to step back from the fray and reevaluate what exactly you stand for because it clearly is not truth and justice and that is the biggest problem of all in these issues.

    Seeking the truth should never be dependent on political party. That my friends, is just immoral, no matter how just and righteous you think your cause is. You are treading into the dangerous waters that dictators sink into.

  2. Karen: For someone who claims to want the truth, you seem to have very little to do with it yourself. For starters, the House committee investigating it concluded that the thee was no coverup. That would be the House as in House of Representatives, there in Washington D.C., currently in the control of the Republican Party. Way to stay up on current events.

    Benghazi was a tragedy that Republicans are shamelessly trying to exploit for political purposes, a cynical exercise in an attempt to distract the public and administration. There was no conspiracy or coverup, merely bad judgements on the part of the State Dept officials, but neocons have used it as a rallying cry for the weak-minded. But, again, once the evidence was brought forward, not even the leaders of the pack were able to say there was a scandal. Apparently, you follow current events as Fox News defines them.

    The NSA surveillance program began before Obama took office. Bush made the claim that calls were not being listened to more often than Obama has denied surveillance was occurring; in fact, Obama at least made a show of forming a committee to look into the spying. Bush merely said relax, lay back, and enjoy.

    There’s plenty to fault Obama for but you have failed to correctly identify those things. You keep feeding off the tray being put in front of you by the propaganda wing of the one and only political party in control of this country.

    1. RTC – I clearly missed the part where the House decided there was no cover-up with Benghazi. Could you cite the committee report?

  3. Paul – you are so right. Joe Biden is the “yeah but” that everyone talks about when they bring up impeachment. What’s the point? We’d be just as bad off.

    I want a reform government like in Squeeky’s New Zealand article.

  4. Oh, and none of us get to lie under oath. That’s called “perjury”. And there is no such thing as a “little white lie perjury.”

    Clinton has a history of sexual harassment and exploitation of women. I don’t really feel sorry for him. Monica Lewinsky paid the freight for his exploits. By all accounts, the man is still a womanizer, and Monica is still a pariah.

    From what I recall about the Starr Investigation, he looked into a string of Clinton’s alleged wrongdoing, and uncovered the sexual harassment of Paula Jones, and the affair with Monica Lewinsky, during its course.

    I personally wish that the investigation remained with Whitewater, sexual harassment, and any legal wrongdoing, rather than anyone’s marital affairs. That’s Hillary’s problem. Although anyone who is a habitual liar to his wife does tend to be a habitual liar to everyone.

    1. Karen – It is my contention that somewhere early in their marriage the Clintons made an arrangement that Bill could bonk as many woman as he wanted as long as it did not bounce back on her. Monica bounced back on her. It was Hillary who was leading the Bimbo Brigade to shut down the reports from women who had been bonk by Bill. She was not the wounded wife, she was party to the action. With Monica, she just got caught in the blowback.

  5. Annie (and Pelosi and anyone else who believes this urban legend): “What does a BJ have to do with legislation to prohibit the right to an abortion and legislation regarding the access to birth control have to do with each other?”

    Pelosi got a bunch of Pinnochios for claiming that the Supreme Court discussed the legality of birth control, abortion, Plan B, or whether a boss would decide whether a woman could use a diaphragm. It was complete and utter nonsense, but it has persisted in people’s minds, for some reason.

    As of 2 years ago, not every birth control method was covered by every single insurance policy, and the ones that did had a copay. There was ACCESS to birth control. It was LEGAL. It had a copay and insurance policies typically decided which ones would be on their formulary, and which would have co-insurance for being off formulary. ACCESS and FREE are not the same thing. We all have “access” to insulin, but we pay a copay. Understand?

    For some reason, people get confused by “access” and “legal” compared with “no copay.” Or that an employer should be forced to provide all 20 forms, free of copay, or it was a “war on women.” There was no war on women 2 years ago. I guarantee you that women in the past decade did not feel they were at war when they spent a copay, or chose a birth control method on their insurance plan’s formulary.

    It’s nonsense political rhetoric, and I cannot believe people obediently repeat it.

    Now, we have 20 different forms of birth control, all without copay. But we also have drug formularies tightened up, and there is NO OFF FORMULARY benefit, and any cost for such does NOT COUNT towards your max caps. So, wonderful, thank God Obama got me 20 different forms of birth control “for free” (increasing my premium astronomically to do so) but now women can’t get some MS medications at all, that were covered previously. They cost thousands of dollars out of pocket. My asthma medicine is no longer covered, and I can’t afford to buy it out of pocket, because it does not count towards my deductible or max cap.

    So, because Democrats “helped” me, now I won’t have a copay if I need birth control, but I pay a LOT more money, and life saving or vital drugs are now no longer covered at all. How is that “helping” women?

    These stupid political ploys really hurt people.

  6. Lee:

    Benghazi is an example of what we’ve all been complaining about – that there is a ruling government class that is above the law and consequences. Republicans have used Benghazi to monologue. Democrats have blocked the investigation as much as they could. Survivors were not allowed to speak with anyone for many months. The White House claimed the CIA changed the talking points until a FOIA by Judicial Watch uncovered emails that proved this was yet another lie. The talking points were altered for political reasons. It should have been the mainstream media, rather than Judicial Watch, that did their job and requested a FOIA. But they’ve abandoned their role as journalists, by and large.

    Democrats keep trying to block the investigation, dragging everything out, not cooperating, and then complaining that so much time has passed that it’s now irrelevant. They do this every time.

    Republicans have used Benghazi to make speeches rather than ask questions.

    I just want the truth, and all of the truth, to come out. When Republicans grand stand, it makes them appear to be politically motivated, when all I want is an honest outside investigation. Can we really trust the same government that deleted emails from the IRS, lied about NSA spying, lied about the Benghazi talking points . . . there is a long list of lies that they have been caught making. But who can be an impartial investigator in the Beltway???

    When we send an ambassador into one of the highest risk embassies in the world, pull out military security and replace it with notorious local security, and then deny him aid during an attack, when we had boots on the ground within range, yes, there needs to be an investigation and accountability. But accountability is a bit of a unicorn in politics.

  7. Paul the S,

    Dre – you are an insufferable twit and geographically challenged …
    Just give the Sheriff a good burial for me would you dep u ty?

  8. Elaine M,

    I’m sorry. Perhaps you are simply confused. After you posted a video with the implication that women are more than capable if not superior, I simply asked you if you don’t think it is hypocritical for you to support affirmative action.

    You posted the video twice. You are making a statement by displaying the video that women are eminently capable. I’m not disagreeing, I’m asking if it is not hypocrisy to support affirmative action and you have evaded. It is more interesting with each evasion.

  9. Well, I’m still getting caught up on the thread.

    But what is troubling me is both the increasing trend in dishonesty from our political leaders, and an increasingly jaded public.

    The Watergate scandal, which rightly led to Nixon’s resignation, seems so tame. They broke into the Democratic election headquarters and bugged it. It did involve breaking the law, and I am over simplifying.

    But the vast majority of Americans polled believe that Obama lied to us about important issues. There have been so many scandals, from Pigford to the IRS, it’s grown from a pile into a mountain. But we are so inured that we just shrug our shudders with each new scandal.

    I do not know if any of this has reached the legal threshold for impeachment, especially since each would have to be tied directly to Obama. (He can always continue to claim he didn’t know. That he just woke up in the morning and found out what was going on by watching the news.) But it has absolutely passed the point of tolerance.

    Our politicians would do better if we demanded better. Every time they get away with lying, ignoring the Constitution, or breaking the law, it emboldens everyone in the Duopoly to do more. We need to hold their feet to the fire. All the House can do, as I understand it, is sue or impeach or refuse to fund. We’ve all seen what happens when they exercised their Constitutional right to refuse to fund Obamacare. Obama chose to shut down the government, and refused their offer to fund everything except Obamacare while they thrashed out their differences.

    So what’s left is impeachment or a lawsuit. Professor Turley has remarked that we have not satisfied the requirement for impeachment. The Supreme Court has ruled against the WH something like 20 times, and that has not convinced him that he’s wrong. Perhaps a lawsuit will. Perhaps if we had done so earlier we could have reined in a lawless president and saved ourselves some trouble.

    But in any case, we must make an effort for there to be negative consequences to every politician, of every party, when they do wrong. Government employees should not have a different standard than private citizens.

    I, for one, would frankly like to see some serious consequences for the IRS, which appears to have deliberately destroyed evidence, and targeted private citizens based on politics. That is one of the most serious charges there can be.

  10. Paul the S,

    Dre – Yuma would be beach front property, not Maricopa County.
    If it was your world.

    It isn’t.

    And when you see the Sherrif tell him this:

  11. Paul C. Schulte

    Dre – the last thing I want to be is a beach bunny. I burn, I don’t tan.
    Let’s not bring up what you did to yo momma.

    1. Dre – you are an insufferable twit and geographically challenged. If California were to fall/slide into the ocean it would do it at the Colorado River where Yuma is. Therefore, Yuma, with its lovely sand dunes, would be beachfront property. I am about 200 miles from the Colorado River.

  12. Paul C. Schulte

    Annie – I am an equal opportunity basher. Just ask Dredd.
    Ask me what?

    Why I do not like beta turing machine drone software?

    I am waiting for Paul the S 2.7 before I can give it a maybe.

    This 1.0 crap is not a British cup of tea.

    It is T-bagger choreography.

  13. Elaine M.


    I don’t know why John is fixated on affirmative action and me. I never said anything about affirmative action. Maybe he has me confused with someone else.
    He has you confused with Paul the S.

    A beach bunny wannabe.

    1. Dre – the last thing I want to be is a beach bunny. I burn, I don’t tan.

  14. I was going to stay away because of the tenor of te conversation but had to reply to John;s latest reply Women are superior. vs. Women need affirmative action.
    Those are not mutually exclusive. When one has people who are superior one often works very hard to put them down/keep them down. (as is the case with for instance the repubs refusing to pass the lilly ledbetter fair pay act)

  15. I don’t get it either Elaine. I never said a thing about affirmative action either, nor has any female commenter that I can recall.

  16. Annie,

    I don’t know why John is fixated on affirmative action and me. I never said anything about affirmative action. Maybe he has me confused with someone else.

Comments are closed.