Suggestion: Ron Paul impeaching Obama on NDAA

[colbyhowell]

This is sooo ballsy, but it would change the landscape of not just the GOP race, but politics in general. We have Newt/Frothy/Perry doing our dirty work on Mitt right now, right? So why they battle it out, wouldn't it be game-changing for Ron Paul to file impeachment papers on Obama over the NDAA? For one, it paints Ron Paul as THE champion for civil liberties and the Constitution. Other than us political junkies, NOBODY really knows what the NDAA is. Can you imagine Obama even start to defend himself over this?

Ron Paul is the only GOP candidate capable of filing impeachment papers. Taking it to Obama would completely change the GOP race's conversation. The story isn't Paul vs Romney anymore, it's Paul vs. Obama. People start thinking in these terms and all of a sudden , BAM, Paul is now electable. With papers filed, people would be much more interested in a Paul/Obama fight than Romney/Obama. The right-wing media would eat it up which would give us millions of Obama haters.

As I see it...

PROS
1) Ron Paul is now a strong candidate able to take on Obama in the eyes on many 'anybody but Obama' people.
2) Ron Paul becomes the only candidate supporting the Constitution and personal freedom.
3) Obama has to defend why he took the Patriot Act one step further and went against his own party's platform.
4) The fight isn't Romney vs Paul anymore, Paul bypasses Romney and takes the fight straight to Obama. Neo-cons start to warm up to RP, as well as the media.

CONS
1) Many Americans throw Paul into the 'Obama-hater' sect, which we all know isn't the particularly the case. But if RP articulates that he is fighting FOR Americans, and not merely fighting Obama for ego/campaign sake, I think this could be HUGE bringing any Obama defectors.
2) Independents view this the same- as some partisan, FOX news shenanigans. But once again, if RP can articulate he is doing this for ALL Americans, it could be big.

So, is this too big of a risk? I don't think so. The NDAA is evil. People really have no idea what it is. Bringing it to the surface, and going straight for Obama could bypass any fight with Romney, change the political landscape and give the GOP some reason to give him the nomination. It really is a game changer. Nobody could ignore Ron Paul (and his supporters) anymore. Thoughts?

 

[sailingaway]

Isn't it a bit of a stunt to file impeachment papers in a House that just voted the bill passed? Wouldn't they have to impeach themselves?

I agree drawing attention to it is good, but I think it might be viewed as a campaign stunt. Up to Ron.

 

[eleganz]

On one hand, it will show Ron is serious about taking Obama down.

On the other hand, many republicans are on board with 'precautions' taken to deter terrorism, at all costs.

 

[bobmurph]

thread title is a little misleading

 

[gb13]

Only if he also impeached every single member of the House and Senate who voted for it.

 

[Okie RP fan]

I don't know... The idea should be floated around, for sure.

 

[timbo2097]

I like it!

It would shake this whole deal up big time and bring NDAA front and center!

 

[KEEF]

I like it!!! It would shut the Limbaughs and Hannity's right up and NDAA has got to go!!! Romney's numbers are up since the only thing he talks about during stump speeches is Obama.

I think a move like that would win over the NEOCON RINO crowd.

 

[socal]

Couldn't papers be filed with the courts to overturn (parts of) the bill for being unconstitutional?

 

[rideurlightning]

It would be a tough sell. But it needs to be done.

 

[RonPaulFever]

It reeks of Kucinichesque grandstanding.

 

[colbyhowell]

Isn't it a bit of a stunt to file impeachment papers in a House that just voted the bill passed? Wouldn't they have to impeach themselves?

But Dr. Paul didn't vote for it. He was on the campaign trail. I know what you are saying, but I don't see people lumping Paul in with the others.

 

[RJB]

It's a matter of principle. Not a stunt.

Go for it good Dr.!!!!

 

[jmdrake]

Isn't it a bit of a stunt to file impeachment papers in a House that just voted the bill passed? Wouldn't they have to impeach themselves?

I agree drawing attention to it is good, but I think it might be viewed as a campaign stunt. Up to Ron.

^This. Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one.

 

[unknown]

I kid you not someone else is going to steal this idea.

Regardless of how its portrayed in the media, it would resonate with the people.

 

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

This is sooo ballsy, but it would change the landscape of not just the GOP race, but politics in general. We have Newt/Frothy/Perry doing our dirty work on Mitt right now, right?

No. IMO we should add to the dog pile and take that sucker down. He has to be stopped in his tracks before he can begin running away with this. The more momentum he builds, the more the party lines up behind him, and the harder it will be to stop him.

 

[jmdrake]

It reeks of Kucinichesque grandstanding.

I don't know why your insulting Kucinich. He, like Dr. Paul, has suggested impeachment when presidents violate the constitution and go around congress. This is violating the constitution with the blessing and indeed the insistence of congress.

 

[Pauls' Revere]

impeach over the recent appointments! and drag him into court.

 

[kylejack]

I think it hurts us in the primary process. Republicans seem to love NDAA.

 

[Babylon]

Treason? No
Bribery? no
hight crimes and misdeamnors? No

Signing a bill is not an imoeachable offense.

Furthermore, the troublesome passages in the bill itself do NOT clearly authorize Americans being held without trial. in fact it says the opposite.

prove me wrong...
Cite the provision that you think is so problematic.