Impeach Joe Biden now!!!

Let me start out by saying we don’t need an “official” impeachment inquiry.

And we don’t need all of these hearings and investigations into Joe Biden’s obvious corruptness.

We don’t need to tie this check to that account, or that money to this person.

We just really need to stop playing these legislative games, which it seems, only republicans feel obligated to observe.  

All we have to do is bring attention to the unquestionable “high crimes and misdemeanors” conducted by Joseph R. Biden and his cast of treasonists, regarding the colossal mess he has created on our southern border, and go from there.

But, what exactly are “high crimes and misdemeanors?”

According to Madeleine Carlisle, for Time Magazine, reporting regarding the impending impeachment of then President Donald Trump at the time, “The House of Representatives voted in favor of two articles of impeachment — accusations of abusing the power of his office and obstructing Congress’s investigation into his relationship with Ukraine — that Democrats argue fall under the umbrella of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors.’”

“According to the U.S. Constitution, a President can be impeached for committing ‘Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.’ Treason and bribery are relatively clear, but what exactly are ‘high crimes and misdemeanors?’ The answer, it turns out, is complicated, and has been evolving for hundreds of years.”

“The phrase ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ appears in Article II section 4 of the U.S. Constitution.”

“There are currently two major legal disputes over the definition of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors.’ The first is whether or not something in that category actually has to be a crime. Frank Bowman, a law professor at the University of Missouri School of Law and the author of High Crimes & Misdemeanors: A History of Impeachment for the Age of Trump, tells TIME he believes it doesn’t. ‘The defenders of the impeached officer always argue, always, that a crime is required,’ he says. ‘And every time that misconception has to be knocked down again.’”

“He offers this example: ‘Let’s say the President were to wake up tomorrow morning and says, “All this impeachment stuff is kind of getting on my nerves. I think I’m going to go to Barbados for six months. Don’t call me, I’ll call you,” and just cuts off all contact and refuses to do his duty,’ Bowman theorizes. ‘That’s not a crime. It’s not violating a law. But could we impeach him? Of course we could — otherwise what’s the remedy? We have a country without a President.’”

“What’s the Constitutional history of the term?”

“The concept of impeachment was used by the British Parliament as early as 1376, as a legislative safeguard against overreach by the aristocracy, and the terms in question were part of the process early on.”

‘“In England a lot of the impeachment cases had relied on this language of “high crimes and misdemeanors” from the 1640s onward,’ Bernadette Meyler, a law professor at Stanford Law School, explains.”

“But the phrase didn’t have a set definition in British practice; it was used to describe whatever thing the person was being impeached for, according to Bowman. There were several things for which people were impeached during this era: ordinary crimes, treason, corruption, abuse of power, ordinary incompetence and misbehavior in relation to foreign policy.”

“When the framers of the U.S. Constitution realized they needed a way to remove executive officials who abused the nature of their positions, they decided to add a definition for an impeachable offense. Though many suggestions were made at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, by the end of the summer they’d winnowed it down to two examples: treason and bribery.”

“But George Mason of Virginia took issue with limiting it to the two definitions, arguing they were too narrow. At the same time the Constitution was being drafted, newspapers were covering the impeachment of a statesman named Warren Hastings for misconduct during his time the Governor General of India. Mason pointed out that under their current definition, Hasting wouldn’t be impeachable. Mason suggest they broaden the definition to include ‘maladministration,’ meaning mismanagement or ineffective governance. James Madison argued back that the word would be too broad, and make it so the President would be serving at the ‘pleasure of the Senate.’ He worried Senators could remove the President if they disliked a policy move.”

“George Mason then proposed including the phrase ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ instead, and that’s the term they settled on.”

“To understand what the framers thought ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ meant, Harvard Law professor Jennifer Taub points to Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist Paper No. 65, in which he explains the impeachment process. ‘The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust,’ Hamilton wrote in 1788.”

Soooo, a “high crime” is just a term deemed to recognize something negative a person of power is capable of doing, which the typical person isn’t even in the position to do, or even capable of doing.

It’s a “high crime.”

It’s a special kind of crime.

So, again, we don’t need an “official” impeachment inquiry.

And we don’t need all of these hearings and investigations into Joe Biden’s obvious corruptness.

We don’t need to tie this check to that account, or that money to this person.

We just really need to stop playing these legislative games, which it seems, only republicans feel obligated to observe. 

All we have to do is bring attention to the unquestionable “high crimes and misdemeanors” conducted by Joseph R. Biden and his cast of treasonists, and go from there.

This is exactly what Colorado Representative, Lauren Boebert, did on 06/13/2023, when she introduced House Resolution 503, to impeach Joseph R. Biden, Jr., President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.   

The latest action by the House, regarding this resolution, was to refer it to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement. 

Submitted articles of impeachment:

ARTICLE I: ABUSE OF POWER

The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment” and that the President of the United States “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. In his conduct as President of the United States—and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of the President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed—Joseph R. Biden, Jr., has abused the powers of the office of the President of the United States, in that:

Using the powers of his high office, President Biden has knowingly presided over an executive branch that has continuously, overtly, and consistently violated Federal immigration law by pursuing an aggressive, open-borders agenda by purposefully and knowingly releasing more than 2,000,000 illegal aliens into the interior of the United States without the intention or ability to ensure that they appear in immigration court to face asylum or deportation proceedings.

President Biden has intentionally facilitated a complete and total invasion at the southern border. President Biden ended the Migrant Protection Protocols to require aliens seeking asylum to remain in Mexico while being processed by the Department of Homeland Security. President Biden has closed Department of Homeland Security detention facilities and refused to cooperate with State and local law enforcement officials in securing the border. He has allowed illegal aliens to enter the United States as asylum seekers despite knowing they did not qualify for asylum. President Biden has pursued this open-border agenda purposefully and willfully, circumventing every safeguard, check, and balance required by law, resulting in mass illegal immigration into the United States, to the detriment of the American people.

President Biden, with such conduct, has demonstrated a failure to uphold Federal immigration law, violating his oath to the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with the rule of law and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, President Biden, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

ARTICLE II: DERELICTION OF DUTY

The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment” and that the President of the United States “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. In his conduct as President of the United States—and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of the President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed—Joseph R. Biden, Jr., has neglected the constitutional duty of the office of the President of the United States, in that:

Neglecting the powers of his high office, President Biden has abandoned his duties to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed and upheld, by presiding over an executive branch that has continually, overtly, and consistently refused to enforce the Nation’s immigration laws and secure the southern border. President Biden has endangered the security of the United States and the health and safety of the American people. President Biden has caused a national security crisis and is endangering the lives of the American people.

President Biden has presided over the largest influx of illegal immigrants in American history, and as evidence of his dereliction, the deportation cases pursued by his administration are at historic lows. President Biden’s negligence of duty has resulted in the surrender of operational control of the border to the complete and total control of foreign, criminal cartels—putting the lives of American citizens in jeopardy. On President Biden’s watch, illegal aliens have been processed and released into the interior of the country under a mass system of parole, contrary to the clear terms of Federal immigration law. Utilizing the “CBP ONE” program, the executive branch will release nearly 40,000 illegal aliens per month into the United States. He has failed to uphold the mandatory detention and deportation provisions of immigration laws, resulting in the mass entry of inadmissible aliens and the continued presence of deportable aliens. Through this complete and total dereliction of duty and extreme absence in oversight of his own administration’s policies, President Biden has allowed more than 1,500,000 illegal immigrants to invade the southern border. On Joe Biden’s watch, illicit fentanyl has killed more than 100,000 American citizens. In fiscal year 2023, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol seized more than 9,000 pounds of fentanyl at the southern border.

In his failure to uphold the rule of law, President Biden has demonstrated that he will neglect his duty to execute the office to which he has been entrusted, violating his oath to the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with his constitutional duty to take care that the laws of the United States be faithfully executed.

Wherefore, President Biden, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

I believe that about sums it up.

If these aren’t the clearest, and most valid, reasons to impeach Joseph Biden, I really don’t know what would be.

Can someone please explain to me what the House Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement is doing with this referral?

Can someone please explain to me what our Speaker of the House is doing with this proposal?

Does anyone in Washington D.C. give a damn about our country anymore, save a handful of patriotic conservative House representatives?!

We don’t have time for political games anymore.

Who can reasonably argue against Biden’s “high crimes,” as laid out by Representative Boebert?

IMPEACH JOE BIDEN NOW!

IMPEACH JOE BIDEN NOW!!

IMPEACH JOE BIDEN NOW!!!

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please share them, and please choose to “follow” me, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts, and/or leave me a comment.   I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

My reaction to some recent headlines:  (1) Lock up Attorney General William Barr?  (2) Another date that will “go down in infamy?” (3) Why are the House Democrats out to get Attorney General Barr?  (4) Democrat lawmaker records himself harassing a pro-life woman.  And (5) Joy “less” Behar of “The View” is at it again. 

There are so many topics I’d like to offer my insight on, but so little time!  So every once in a while I like to respond to a number of articles that I couldn’t necessarily devote an entire daily blog to on an article by article basis.

Welcome to my second edition of “MrEricksonRules’ headline buffet line!”

100 chance of winning

Pick your favorite(s) or have some of each.  It’s totally up to you!

<<<<<<<1>>>>>>>

“Imprisoning Bill Barr is [the] left’s new rallying cry: ‘Have him locked up!’”

By Brooke Singman of Fox News.

“The battle between congressional Democrats and the Justice Department over Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report has reached new levels of vitriol, as some on the left call for Attorney General Bill Barr to be physically dragged in to testify or even locked up for defying congressional subpoenas.”

“The demands have escalated after the attorney general refused to appear before the House Judiciary Committee last week amid disagreements over the format of the hearing.”

“Though he testified a day earlier on the Senate side, Democrats on the committee still want to bring in the DOJ leader to answer questions on the conclusion of Mueller’s investigation. Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., also imposed a Monday morning deadline for Barr to turn over the full, unredacted Mueller report and additional files — a deadline the DOJ apparently missed, prompting Nadler to schedule a Wednesday vote on contempt proceedings against Barr.”

Everything that William Barr has done up this point is completely within in rights and responsibilities as Attorney General.

What we have on the democrats’ side is a bunch of grandstanding, and now desperation, as they learned that Mr. Barr was looking into what really happened regarding Russian collusion, and what really happened regarding spying on Americans, and what really happened that caused this fraudulent investigation to be launched in the first place.

headlines 3

Their main goal now is to discredit him, silence him, and preferably have him resign or be removed from office.  Anything but allow him to drag their “swampy” friends out into the sunlight.

headlines 15

‘“He [Attorney General Barr] lied to Congress.  And if anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime,’ Pelosi told reporters. ‘Nobody is above the law. Not the president of the United States.  Not the attorney general.’”

Apparently Mrs. Pelosi is an exception to that rule…, as she lies ALL of the time to Congress, to us, to basically anyone within earshot of her.

“Pelosi’s public comments came after she, according to Politico, told Rep. Charlie Crist, D-Fla., during a private caucus meeting Thursday: ‘We saw [Barr] commit a crime when he answered your question.’”

“However, according to both the Post and the Justice Department, Mueller made clear that he did not feel that Barr’s summary was inaccurate.  Instead, Mueller told Barr that media coverage of the letter had “misinterpreted” the results of the probe concerning obstruction of justice.”

We all know it doesn’t matter to the democrats what anyone actually says…, the only thing that matters is what they want us to hear.

<<<<<<<2>>>>>>>

“NPR reporter refers to Barr summary in same terms as FDR describing attack on Pearl Harbor.”

By Anna Hopkins of Fox News

“The Department of Justice reporter for NPR [National Public Radio] referred to the date of Attorney General Barr’s summary of the Mueller report as ‘a date that will live … in infamy,’ a phrase many associate with President Franklin Roosevelt’s 1941 speech following the Pearl Harbor attack.”

headlines 10

“NPR’s Carrie Johnson made the comment during the NPR Politics podcast last Wednesday while discussing Barr’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, during which he answered questions about the summary he gave of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.”

NPR…, another arm of the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

Aren’t you be a tad dramatic there Ms. Johnson?

“A day that will live in infamy?”

Really?

How about the day that people in our government were contemplating a coup against President Trump?  How about that day?

How about the day the DOJ and the FBI decided they were going to falsify testimony to the FISA court and spy on the Trump campaign?  How about that day?

How about the day that the FBI overstepped its bounds and declared Hillary did not break any laws, regarding obstructing justice by destroying her server and then deleting over 33,00 emails, because that was not her “intent.”  How about that day?

You’re pathetic, Carrie Johnson.  You’re just a tool to be used by the liberal propaganda machine. You’re no journalist, and you’re no reporter.

You’re a fool.

<<<<<<<3>>>>>>>

“Why are the House Democrats out to get Attorney General Barr?”

By Representative Andy Biggs for Fox News

“Democrats in Congress are so worried that the American people will find out what is NOT in the Mueller report that they will say and do almost anything. The report exposes their false assertions that President Trump cooperated with the Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election. They will resort to embarrassing stunts like bringing fast food chicken buckets into congressional hearings. And, they will attempt to destroy the reputation of Attorney General William Barr simply because he is the messenger who released the Mueller report to the public.”

headlines 13

“Consider that House Democrat leaders are claiming Barr lied about … what? They are upset because he wrote a memo iterating the major findings in the Mueller report. They castigated Barr for the few weeks it took for him to make legally required redactions in the Mueller report before he could publicly release the report. Turns out Barr’s initial summary was accurate. And, we have a special counsel report that is available for public viewing with very few redactions, proving that Democrats weren’t telling the truth for over two years.”

“The Democrats must also be troubled that the inspector general will soon be releasing his report regarding the findings of his investigation into the abuse of power, which includes obtaining secret warrants to spy on the Trump campaign under the Obama administration. They dare not let go of their attack on the president and anyone who works with him, knowing that the IG report will likely contain damaging revelations of the Democrat National Committee and the Clinton presidential campaign working with Russians to unleash the police apparatus under President Obama to spy on the Trump campaign for political purposes.”

headlines 5

The democrats are counting on the complicit “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” to do their part and downplay or ignore any potentially damaging evidence that turns up.

They, in turn, will just continue to deny, deny, deny, and attempt to discredit William Barr, and anyone else that may need to be silenced.

Republican Representative Andy Biggs represents the 5th Congressional District of Arizona.

<<<<<<<4>>>>>>>

“Dem state lawmaker records himself harassing pro-life woman outside Planned Parenthood”

By Caleb Parke of Fox News

“PA [Pennsylvania] State Representative Brian Sims recorded himself harassing a pro-life woman peacefully protesting outside a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Sims’ Philadelphia district.”

headlines 12

“A Pennsylvania Democratic state representative went on an eight-minute rant, verbally harassing an elderly woman protesting outside a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic.”

“Brian Sims recorded a woman outside Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, which is in his district, telling her to pray at home, calling her an ‘old white lady’ and lecturing her about her Christian beliefs on the Periscope app.”

‘“Push back against Planned Parenthood protestors, PLEASE!’ Sims wrote on Twitter Thursday. ‘They prey on young women, they use white privilege, & shame. They’re racist, classist, bigots who NEED & DESERVE our righteous opposition. Push back, please!’”

So here we have another obvious example of double standards exhibited by the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake new media.”

Here we have a politician no less, harassing an elderly citizen, who is doing everything within her rights as a citizen to do.

He brings her race into play, and then has the nerve to later call her a racist!

He also attacks her religion, which is okay to do, as long as it’s Christianity.  God forbid he would attack a Muslim!!!  Then we would really have a problem here!

The level of confusion exhibited by these clowns is just so impressive.

<<<<<<<5>>>>>>>

“Joy Behar slams ‘unpatriotic’ Trump, says GOP supporters should remove ‘those flag pins.’”

By Brian Flood for Fox News

‘“The View’ co-host Joy [less] Behar said on Monday that Republicans who support President Trump should take off ‘those flag pins’ because the president’s behavior regarding Russian meddling is ‘unpatriotic.’”

headlines 2

‘“It isn’t just that. Let’s talk about, you know, the fact that he met with Putin for 90 minutes… and never once brought up the fact that Russia, Russia interfered in our election,’ Behar said.

These libs just throw this stuff around like they know what they’re talking about.

How exactly did the Russians “interfere” with our elections?  They sure interfered far less than our own FBI and DOJ!  And I don’t hear her crying about James Comey or Loretta Lynch though!

That’s because Joy “less” Behar has no idea what she is talking about.  She is just a part of the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

headlines 3

“Behar continued: ‘I said last week I don’t want to see any of those flag pins anymore on Republicans who don’t stand up against this guy for Russian meddling, and other things that he’s done. It seems as though he’s unpatriotic.’”

headlines 4

Joy “less” Behar is so far off base here, it’s hard to know how to respond.  So I guess I won’t.

“You can’t argue with crazy” is something my wife says all of the time.

And she’s right.

So I won’t.

“Behar has attacked Trump and his supporters on a regular basis, mocking everything from Mike Pence’s Christian faith to women who support Trump.  She immediately backtracked last September after saying ‘God forbid President Trump lives another 20 years.’”

What a peach.

headlines 1

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑