Beyond Impeachable

In 1998, America saw President Bill Clinton impeached by the House of Representatives for perjury and obstruction. While Clinton was spared by the cowards in the U.S. Senate, we never thought we’d see something like that again. Certainly, no Congress would want to go through another impeachment trial after the media thrashing, but even still, it was a dark time for the country and one hoped it would never reoccur.

Who would have thought that 16 years later we would look back on Bill Clinton’s crimes as being almost quaint. Barack Obama has taken lawlessness to a whole new level culminating in his illegal (though it’s debatable) deal to free an American “hostage” soldier in exchange for 5 dangerous Taliban criminals. Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy says this goes beyond statues and veers straight into dereliction of duty.

As I demonstrate in Faithless Execution, high crimes and misdemeanors are not primarily statutory offenses. They are the political wrongs of high public officials—the president, in particular—in whom great public trust is reposed. When the commander-in-chief replenishes the enemy at a time when (a) the enemy is still attacking our forces and (b) the commander-in-chief has hamstrung our forces with unconscionable combat rules-of-engagement that compromise their ability to defend themselves, that is a profound dereliction of duty.

That’s what we ought to be outraged about. The chitter-chatter about a 30-day notice requirement is a sideshow. Yes, the president has once again violated a statute. And as I said in yesterday’s column, he undoubtedly did so in order to get the swap done before public and congressional protest could mount. But in the greater scheme of things, that’s a footnote to the real travesty.



Unbelievable. General Betrayus Petraeus Confirmed By Senate Unanimously

I say that not because I disagree with the decision…I strongly support it, but it’s the ultimate chutzpah for the Democrats in the Senate to support him now after the way they treated him when he led the Surge in Iraq. And don’t give me the excuse that it was the “loose canons” in acting alone when they called him General “Betrayus.” The Moveon morons do what the power-brokers tell them.

So is anyone gonna ask Senator Harry Reid why he just voted for a man he called a liar three years ago?

McChrystal Fired, Petraeus Back In Action

President Obama has fired General McChrystal and put General Petraeus back in day-to-day command of the war in Afghanistan.

Petraeus needs to just go rogue and win this war outright. He could be the next Eisenhower.

MORE: Glenn Reynolds makes a good catch with a post from Michael Yon (the Ernie Pyle of the War on Terrorism) back in April: “McChrystal is a great killer but this war is above his head.”

Look, I’m no expert on battlefield planning. I only know what I read and ascertain with my fertile brain, but my take is as follows: Despite the fact that General McChrystal told some cold, hard truths about the Obama Administration, he needed to be fired. Without protocol, the military is nothing. McChrystal went outside protocol and that is unacceptable. However, now that we know some of these cold, hard truths, something must be done about them. If Obama won’t get rid of Holbrooke and Eikenberry, then the GOP needs to ramp up the pressure and make it an issue. Meanwhile, General Petraeus is going to have to spearhead the effort to defeat the Taliban once and for all. Obama is going to continue to try and have it both ways, appeasing his anti-war base while at the same time trying not to be the second president (LBJ) to lose a war. However, his interest in the subject is tepid at best. This gives Petraeus the opportunity to take charge.

EVEN MORE: is backtracking on their General “Betray Us” ads from a few years back, going so far as to even erase it from their website.

They should have just done this:

Obama’s Truman Moment

Mark this day on the calendar, folks. It’s one of the few times I’m siding with President Obama. He needs to fire General Stanley McChrystal, whose conduct is unbecoming to say the least. McChrystal’s take on members of the Obama Administration may be spot-on, but there are different rules for our generals. They have to be above the ugly frat boy town of Washington, D.C. and handle themselves with decorum and dignity. McChrystal’s behavior is a disgrace and his disrespect for his Commander-in-Chief is unacceptable.

Mr. President, you have an opportunity to lead. Take it.

MORE: Daniel Foster over at NRO posits the theory that McChrystal is falling on the sword as a way to get word out to the people that Obama is losing Afghanistan. Intriguing, but I’ll have to think about that.

EVEN MORE: After reading more on the story and other analyses, I’m starting to come over to the side of conspiracy theorists. *sigh* I really hate this era.

What War Again?

I was thinking about this the other day but Byron York beat me to it.

Remember the past 6 years how the Left wingers at Daily Kos and went crazy on a daily basis about how we were in illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the troops must be brought home immediately, etc., etc.?

Well, it’s 2009, there’s a Democrat in the White House and we still have troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Outrage anyone?


It’s not getting much attention, but the Netroots Nation conference (formerly known as YearlyKos, a spinoff from the left-wing website DailyKos) is going on in Pittsburgh this weekend.  Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg has conducted a straw poll of the participants and found that a majority of those surveyed, 53 percent, say they “cannot support a health care reform bill that does not include a public option.”  Other results include word that most of the attendees are willing to compromise a bit on environmental legislation, even though it gives a lot of benefits to big corporations, and the finding that, amazingly enough, attendees voice near-unanimous approval, 95 percent, of the job Barack Obama is doing as president.

What’s truly striking in Greenberg’s poll is the degree to which the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have fallen off the progressive radar.  I attended the first YearlyKos convention, in 2006, and have kept up with later ones, and it’s safe to say that while people who attended those gatherings couldn’t stand George W. Bush in general, their feelings were particularly intense when it came to opposing the war in Iraq.  It animated their activism; they hated the war, and they hated Bush for starting it.  They weren’t that fond of the fighting in Afghanistan, either.

Now, with Obama in the White House, all that has changed.  Greenberg presented respondents with a list of policy priorities and asked, “Please indicate which two you think progressive activists should be focusing their attention and efforts on the most.”  The winner was passing comprehensive health care reform, with 60 percent, and number two was passing “green energy policies that address environmental concerns,” with 22 percent.  Tied for eighth place, named by just eight percent of respondents, was “working to end our military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Put plainly, it was all a lie. The outrage, the concern over soldier deaths…all a lie. It was and is what it’s always about: power.

Obama Not Much For The "V" Word

Fresh off of Gateway Pundit this morning:

President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but “victory” in the war-torn country isn’t necessarily the United States’ goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview.

“I’m always worried about using the word ‘victory,’ because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur,” Obama told ABC News.

Yeah, that was awful, wasn’t it? Total victory against Japan, rebuilding the country into the thriving democracy that it is today with not even the slightest fear of them attacking us ever again. It would be horrible if the same fate awaited Afghanistan.

UPDATE: GP points out what I’m sure many of you caught: it wasn’t the Emperor that signed the surrender.