Roger L. Simon asks whether Obama's tsar system is grounds for impeachment:
Barack Obama’s Czar System (it's "tsar," dammit! Tsar! T-S-A-R!!! -- ed.) which has recently come under scrutiny for some repellent, even paranoid, statements by his “Green Czar” Van Jones, a onetime “9-11 truther” who calls Republicans “assholes” on television – is an entirely different matter. This is directly an affair of state and seemingly an end run around the Separation of Powers. According to an article recently published at Examiner.com by Patrick McMahon, there are now thirty-one of these czars, covering areas from terrorism to domestic violence. Congress has not vetted a single one of them, as far as I know. Indeed, with only a couple of exceptions (Dennis Ross, etc.), we know who few of them are. Are others as extreme as Mr. Jones? Who knows? All we know is that they are there and that Obama (or someone) approved them. We don’t know exactly what their authority is and what they are supposed to do ultimately. They are a completely new part of our Executive Branch, invented by the President and/or his advisors. Was this what the Framers intended when they created the three branches of our government with all the checks and balances?To explain how the US executive is expected to function under the Constitution, POTUS appoints cabinet secretaries, who take their posts only upon "advice and consent" of the Senate. The legislative branch thus serves as a check on executive power.
This legislative power has been circumvented to some extent in past administrations. The best example is that of Richard Nixon, whose secretaries of state and defense were relegated to merely ministerial functions, as Nixon centralized the defense and foreign policy responsibilities under his national security advisor, Henry Kissinger. There was a definite secrecy to it, but everyone knew who Kissinger was and his activities were largely public.
Now that model is being repeated exponentially with Obama's tsar system, but with the twist that these people are being given broad authority with no legislative review or public scrutiny whatsoever. Many of the ones identified so far have been found to be incompetent, corrupt or, worst of all, anti-American.
That's right. People who hate the United States are being given power to rule the United States by Barack Obama as tsars, with no opportunity for public input or even oversight. Van Jones. John Holdren. How many more America haters has he slipped in there?
With the tsars, even if the Republicans take over Congress next year, their power of oversight will be limited. The cabinet secretaries will be largely figureheads (see, e.g. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton). The real power will lie in the tsars -- secret, unaccountable, and hostile to the United States. With nothing anyone can do about it.
This counterdemocracy gets worse. While the tsars evade congressional oversight, Obama's old group ACORN is being given large powers over the census -- and vote fraud, in which it has been proven adept in the past. Efforts at removing Obama and his supporters from office could be hamstrung by ACORN's vote fraud.
There is also the Service Employees International Union, which in support of Obama's agenda makes no effort at hiding its willingness to practice physical intimidation and even assault of opponents of Obama. SEIU is a latter-day SA.
Examined as a whole, these appear to be elements of a concerted effort to prevent the American people from having any say over the activities of the Obama administration. And to keep it that way.
Is that grounds for impeachment?
|