the case for
why barack hussein obama should be impeached to save america
Senior Research Fellow, Western Journalism Center
A joint project of WorldNetDaily and the Western Journalism Center
When some people hear there’s a movement afloat to persuade Congress to impeach President Barack Obama,
they often dismiss it as a joke. But it is no longer a laughing matter. With the economy continuing to implode,
the coming collapse of the dollar, high unemployment rates, the government takeover of entire industries, the
administration’s weak and naive response to the worldwide jihadist threat, and the ongoing frontal assault on our
Judeo-Christian heritage, the impeachment option is one that can no longer be ignored.
Many Americans wrongly assume impeachment requires an actual crime be committed. But as Webster’s
Dictionary states, impeachment is “unrelated to any offense in criminal law.” The reality is our nation’s Founders
were concerned America would some day have a president who had not committed an actual crime but whose
behavior and policies were so detrimental to America’s interests as to cause irreparable damage to the country.
Some argue impeachment is unnecessary because that’s what elections are for. But the Founders were obviously
worried that, by the time elections were held, the damage done by an out-of-control president would be
irreparable. Thus, the Founders gave us the impeachment option as a way to remove a president mid-term in
order to minimize damage to the country.
Indeed, our Founders inserted language into the Constitution giving Congress power to impeach the president
for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” “High crimes and misdemeanors” is an old
English common law phrase which, in the 1600s, meant negligence, abuse of power, and abuse of trust. In
modern terms this can be translated to mean incompetent leadership that imperils the country. Indeed, some
have interpreted this phrase so broadly it can mean just about anything. As former president Gerald Ford stated,
an impeachable offense is, “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment
in history.”
We believe it is necessary to impeach a president if his policies and actions have so endangered and weakened the
country that his removal is essential in order for the country to survive. Not only has the Obama administration
promoted dangerous and unsustainable policies, but it has also engaged in corrupt and illegal activities such as
bribery, a crime the Founders specifically cited as an impeachable offense. Moreover, this report details numerous
instances of Obama lying to the American people, a pattern which clearly indicates a character defect that in
itself endangers America. Given this, we believe impeachment is necessary for the future survival of America.
the case for impeachment
We also believe impeachment is justified not just on national security, economic and criminal grounds, but,
most importantly, on Constitutional grounds. In numerous areas Obama has initiated policies which disregard
the spirit and intent of Constitutional principles as envisioned by our Founding Fathers.
Indeed, Obama has appointed many extremists to key positions within his administration. As they are aiding
and abetting Obama’s efforts to undermine the U.S. Constitution, this report will also expose their actions
and beliefs.
Dozens of Obama’s key appointees, including Attorney General Eric Holder, belong to the American
Constitution Society. Contrary to its patriotic sounding name, ACS is an ACLU-type legal organization that
seeks to undermine the Constitution as written by the Founding Fathers. ACS members are insistent about
changing the Constitution to make it “relevant” to the modern world. Its members support the concept of
international law – such as United Nations treaties – taking precedence over the Constitution. Indeed, one
of Obama’s key advisors is Preeta Bansal, an ACS leader and radical legal scholar notorious for her antiConstitution views.
Many of these appointees openly refer to themselves as part of the “progressive” movement, a movement to
“progress” America beyond its Constitutional principles and toward the European notion of government. For
example, Eric Holder announced at a 2008 ACS convention, America would soon be “run by progressives.”
Of course, an impeachment campaign will first require that Republicans take control of Congress and the GOP
leadership have the courage to initiate such proceedings. It will also be necessary for the American people to
create a massive pressure campaign targeting Congress, but the tea party movement has demonstrated Americans
are ready and able to mobilize to save their country.
This much is crystal clear – the longer America waits to impeach Obama, the more damage his administration
will inflict on the country. This report is presented to give the American people the information necessary to
create a nationwide campaign to make the case for impeachment of President Barack Hussein Obama.
the case for impeachment
Obama has not only undermined the integrity of American elections, but has brought Chicago-style corruption
to D.C. His promise to “clean up Washington” has been shown to be only campaign rhetoric.
The Obama administration has offered jobs in exchange for political favors. It is illegal to offer government
jobs in exchange for political favors, yet Democrat Congressman Joe Sestak has publicly detailed how the
Obama administration offered him a high ranking government job if he would not run against Senator Arlen
Specter in Pennsylvania’s U.S. Senate Democrat primary. The White House defends itself by saying it used
former President Bill Clinton as the go-between, but the use of a third party does not make this offer legal. Nor
does it change anything if the job offered is uncompensated, as the White House now claims. A felony was still
committed. Moreover, the law in question also bans government officials from “interfering with, or affecting, the
nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of ….Senate.” This is clearly a form of bribery, a crime
specifically enumerated in the Constitution as an impeachable offense.
The Obama administration engaged in bribery in yet another campaign. According to e-mail messages now
public, Obama’s deputy chief of staff, Jim Messina, offered Democrat Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff three
different jobs within the Obama administration if he would abandon his primary challenge to U.S. Senator
Michael Bennet of Colorado. A motion made in the House Judicial Committee to force the release of
documents related to both the Sestak and Romanoff scandals was defeated by Democrats on the committee. It
stretches credibility to believe such offers would be made without the knowledge of the president.
Contrary to his claim, Obama attempted to influence the selection of the U.S. senator for Illinois. Court
papers filed by the scandal-plagued former governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, reveal Obama, using an
intermediary, tried to persuade the governor to fill the vacated Senate seat with his longtime advisor Valerie
Jarrett. This is worrying due to the fact the FBI had previously taped Blagojevich attempting to sell the seat in
exchange for financial gain. One week after Blagojevich was indicted, Obama told reporters, “I had no contact
with the governor or his office…” Facts now make it apparent Obama was not telling the truth. Moreover, John
Harris, Blagojevich’s former chief of staff, has testified in court that Obama knew Blagojevich wanted to be
named to a cabinet position. Such a swap is illegal and, though it never transpired, Obama probably committed
a federal crime.
the case for impeachment
Obama’s FEC disclosures show his presidential campaign illegally received at least $33.8 million in
foreign contributions. Many of these illegal contributions came from Muslim countries. At least $30,000
came from the Hamas-controlled Gaza area. This money was contributed online, making it difficult to track,
but the Federal Election Commission never even investigated it. Indeed, Obama’s campaign Web site was set
up to accommodate foreign contributions. This illegal foreign interference with a presidential campaign is
unprecedented in American history.
Obama’s campaign knowingly registered to vote thousands of illegal aliens. As district attorneys in a
least a dozen states have revealed, ACORN – the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now
– engaged in widespread election fraud during the election, much of it focused on registering illegal aliens.
Obama has claimed he had little to do with ACORN, but this also is not true. Not only was Obama a former
ACORN attorney and trainer at its activist school, but his presidential campaign contracted out ACORN’s voter
registration affiliate. There is little doubt Obama and his campaign officials knew of – and perhaps encouraged
– ACORN’s illegal voter registration tactics since that’s what this group specializes in. Indeed, ACORN’s
nationwide criminal conspiracy should have resulted in federal prosecutions. Newly released documents reveal
the FBI and Obama’s own Justice Department investigated ACORN and found massive evidence of voter fraud
and other crimes, yet shut the investigation down without filing any charges. We believe the evidence strongly
suggests Obama has abused his office to cover up election fraud committed by his campaign and its agents.
Sadly, the FBI, the nation’s chief federal law enforcement agency subordinate to the White House, has placed
politics ahead of its duty to enforce the law.
ACORN collaborated with the Obama campaign to illegally raise funds. As ACORN defectors have related,
the activist organization was illegally given a list of Obama donors by the Obama campaign, donors whom they
would call for contributions. This money was used for ACORN’s fraudulent voter registration efforts. It is illegal
for a political campaign to give its donor list to a non-profit, but this was never investigated by the FEC.
Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, protected black nationalist thugs who intimidated voters on
Election Day. Holder refused to prosecute members of the New Black Panther Party who intimated voters
outside a polling place by wielding weapons. One of these racists has since stated, “You gotta get out and kill
some white people...” Not since the 1950s has the U.S. Department of Justice refused to prosecute those who
the case for impeachment
were threatening voters. This refusal by Holder to prosecute those who violate our right to vote undermines our
democratic values. As a result, one of the DOJ attorneys involved, Christian Adams, resigned stating, “I believe
the dismissal of the Black Panther case was motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law.”
Obama has given big donors White House access privileges. Attorney General Holder has refused to
investigate charges that Obama gave big donors access to the White House in exchange for large contributions, a
violation of federal law and, again, can be considered a form of bribery.
Obama fired an inspector general for exposing corruption linked to one of his political allies. Gerald
Walpin, inspector general of the Corporation for National and Community Service, investigated Sacramento
Mayor Kevin Johnson, a close friend of the president, for misusing an AmeriCorps grant. Shortly thereafter,
Obama fired Walpin, but a subsequent investigation vindicated Walpin’s judgment in the matter.
Obama rewarded big donors with government jobs and contracts. Over seventy people who raised $50,000
or more for Obama’s campaign have been rewarded with ambassadorships or high ranking jobs within his
administration. Moreover, according to DNC documents, those who personally donated $30,400, or “bundled”
$300,000 for the 2010 midterm elections, were promised special access to senior White House officials, even
to Obama himself. Moreover, the Obama administration has awarded contracts to big donors. For example,
Checchi & Company, owned by Obama donor Vincent Checchi, was awarded a $25 million no-bid contract for
work in Afghanistan. Such actions are unethical, if not a form of bribery.
the case for impeachment
ENDANGERING AMERICANS. This attitude has manifested itself in a number of ways:
Obama’s casual attitude toward terrorist attacks on American soil during his tenure increases the risk of
further attacks. The Obama administration’s casual attitude may have encouraged domestic terrorist attacks,
such as the November 5, 2009, Ft. Hood shooting by Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan that left thirteen American
military personnel dead, and the attempted Christmas Day suicide bombing of an airliner above Detroit by
Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. It took Obama weeks to recognize the Ft. Hood event as a terror-connected event,
and when Abdulmutallab failed in his attempt to bring down Northwest Airlines Flight 253, Obama remained
silent for days while golfing in Hawaii on his vacation. Later, Obama declared Abdulmatullab was an “isolated
extremist,” even though security experts had already connected Abdulmatullab to terrorist training camps in
Yemen. Planners of future terror attacks have been given no reason by the president to fear their activities will be
met with greater vigilance by his administration.
Obama has granted Constitutional “rights” to terrorists. This administration wants to try enemy combatants
in civilian courts with court-appointed attorneys and give them rights normally reserved for American citizens.
The most glaring example is Obama’s desire to try the 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, in a civilian
court in Manhattan. Already this administration has lost valuable intelligence when it gave Miranda rights to the
Christmas bomber, resulting in his discussions with U.S. authorities being cut short.
The Obama administration refuses to interrogate terrorists. President Obama lied when he claimed Bush
violated the law by authorizing “torture,” such as water boarding and other techniques. Such proven techniques
were all within the law and had helped U.S. forces obtain information that saved perhaps thousands of American
lives. It now appears the Obama administration has decided to stop altogether questioning captured terrorists, a
policy that will clearly endanger not only our military, but the American homeland.
Obama is prosecuting the very U.S. intelligence professionals who have kept the homeland safe. Obama’s
attorney general, Eric Holder, is investigating CIA agents who successfully obtained information from terrorists
by using enhanced interrogation techniques. Contrary to claims of the Obama administration, these agents were
the case for impeachment
operating under lawful directives. Indeed, seven former CIA directors signed a letter to Obama urging him to
overrule Holder. This public attack on our intelligence agencies gave America’s enemies a propaganda bonanza
and certainly encouraged terrorists to continue.
Obama has released top-secret CIA documents detailing interrogation methods. This is unprecedented in
American history. Obviously documents classified “Top Secret” should never be released to our enemies, as this
information will assist future captured terrorists by teaching them how to deal with American interrogators.
If private citizens had released these documents, they would have been charged with treason, defined by the
Constitution as giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Obama has attempted to close the Guantanamo detainment facility. Guantanamo remains an ideal place to
keep terrorists, but Obama’s effort to close the detainment facility at the U.S. base in Cuba has resulted in release
of some terrorists who have since rejoined terrorist groups and are fighting against U.S. troops. Indeed, a quarter
of all released terrorists have returned to the battle against the United States. In a related issue, the ending of
military trials for many terrorists makes little sense and has given our enemies a propaganda victory. Such a
policy endangers our military and our country.
Obama’s director of Homeland Security downplays terrorism. After Obama appointed Janet Napolitano
to head the Department of Homeland Security, she sent out a memo instructing staff to refer to the war on
terror as an “overseas contingency operation” and terrorist incidents as “man-caused disasters.” She also refuses to
use the word “terrorism.” Such self-deception only serves to undermine our resolve in fighting terrorism while
encouraging our enemies to continue planning their next “man-caused disaster.”
Obama’s Department of Homeland Security described veterans and other law-abiding Americans as
“right-wing extremists.” Rather than focusing on fighting real terrorists, Obama’s DHS issued a ten-page memo
warning that military veterans, pro-life activists, and those opposed to illegal immigration may be attracted to
terrorism. This is an unprecedented attack on American citizens who peacefully exercise their Constitutional
rights. One must ask why the administration would want to shift the focus away from real terrorists.
the case for impeachment
Obama lifted the travel ban on a Muslim Brotherhood terrorist. Obama’s casual approach to terrorism has
led him to lift the travel ban on Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of Hassan al Banna, founder of the pro-terrorist
Muslim Brotherhood. Ramadan himself is a leading European Muslim Brotherhood member.
Obama invited Muslim Brotherhood members to his Cairo speech. Middle Eastern media sources reported
Obama staff members insisted ten members of the pro-terrorist Muslim Brotherhood be allowed to attend
Obama’s Cairo speech. This was done even though the Egyptian government considers the Muslim Brotherhood
a threat and has officially banned the organization.
Obama froze the budget for the program that prevents terrorists from obtaining U.S. visas. The
Department of Homeland Security, acting through U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, operates the
Visa Security Program to check backgrounds of visa applicants. The program needs to be expanded as terrorists
continue to try to obtain visas to infiltrate the United States. However, the Obama administration froze the
budget of this vital homeland security unit.
Obama has filled the Justice Department with attorneys sympathetic to terrorists. Obama’s Justice
Department has hired nine radical attorneys who have defended or represented Islamic terrorists in the past.
No wonder we are giving terrorists “rights.” One, for example, was the attorney for Osama Bin Laden’s driver.
Holder himself exhibits a casual attitude toward terrorism. He gave the keynote speech to a Michigan group
which included the local branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group whose top
leaders have been indicted or arrested for pro-terrorist activity. Moreover, it was also Holder who, during the
Clinton years, pushed through pardons for sixteen members of the violent Puerto Rican terrorist group Fuerzas
Armadas de Liberación Nacional (FALN).
Obama’s nominee for deputy attorney general, James Cole, compared 9/11 to domestic crimes. Cole’s
writings compared 9/11 to criminal acts such as rape and child abuse, stating, “The acts of September 11 were
horrible, but so are these other things.” He also opposed the use of military tribunals to try terrorists, claiming
they are an inferior form of justice. Like most of Obama’s key Justice Department officials, Cole has a history
of representing terrorists. Specifically, Cole defended Saudi Prince Naif when he was caught raising millions of
dollars for al-Qaida, both before and after 9/11.
the case for impeachment
The Obama administration has created a politically correct climate that pressures the military to prosecute
American soldiers for the pettiest of “crimes.” The Obama administration is so fanatical about the “rights”
of terrorists, the climate they’ve created has pressured the military hierarchy into prosecuting soldiers for petty
“crimes.” For example, three Navy SEALS were prosecuted because one of them allegedly punched a captured
terrorist in the stomach. All three were exonerated at trial. Such actions send a message to our enemies that the
United States is more concerned with the “rights” of terrorists than with fighting them. It also demoralizes our
troops and causes them to second guess their training while in combat situations, increasing the likelihood they
will be killed or injured.
Obama’s State Department invited a terrorist media outlet to America.
Even though the Al-Quds television network is owned by the terrorist group Hamas, they were invited to the
United States by Obama’s State Department to produce a propaganda film and were given a State Department
grant to finance the project.
The Obama administration has required the military to carry out rules of engagement in Afghanistan
that imperil our troops. The anti-military attitude of the Obama administration has resulted in the creation
of engagement rules that are asinine and place our military personnel in jeopardy. For example, night searches
are no longer allowed; U.S. soldiers may not fire upon insurgents unless fired upon first; and our forces are not
allowed to fire upon insurgents walking away from placing an IED. Moreover, the Obama team has created a
new medal called the Courageous Restraint Medal, awarded to soldiers who demonstrate restraint in combat
by not firing their weapons even when threatened by the enemy. Such a mentality is a formula for not only
endangering the lives of American soldiers, but losing the war in Afghanistan.
Obama appointed a terrorist apologist to the Organization for the Islamic Conference. Obama appointed
Rashad Hussain to be special envoy to the OIC, a Saudi-based entity formed to “protect” Jerusalem from the
Israelis. Hussain has publicly defended Sami al-Arian, a Florida professor who headed U.S. operations for the
terrorist group Palestinian Islamic Jihad. According to Hussain, the Obama administration and the OIC are
working together within the U.N. to criminalize the “defamation of religion,” which means they’re going after
those who criticize Islam for its widespread human-rights abuses such as its denial of basic rights for women.
the case for impeachment
Obama sent senior advisor Valerie Jarrett to the annual convention of the Islamic Society of North
America. The ISNA was ruled an “unindicted co-conspirator” in a case involving a terrorist fundraising
operation based in Texas that resulted in five federal convictions. Moreover, the Justice Department has classified
the ISNA as a front for the Muslin Brotherhood.
Obama’s TSA director equates the war on terrorism with fighting global warming. Obama’s appointee to
head up the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Erroll Southers, has said the war on terrorism should
be given “some parity” with “global warming, with education, with the economy.”
Obama blames terrorism on “poverty.” In Obama’s 2008 Berlin speech, he refused to blame Islamic jihadists
for terrorism and instead blamed “poverty,” a belief that only gives cover to those who commit terrorist acts and
will lead to more terrorism.
Obama appointed Susan Rice – who bungled the capture of Osama bin Ladin – as U.N. ambassador.
Before 9/11, Osama bin Ladin was based in the Sudan training terrorists. The Sudanese government offered to
capture and deliver him to American intelligence services. However, the offer was rejected by Susan Rice, who,
sources say, didn’t consider bin Ladin a serious threat.
Obama appointed Samantha Power to the National Security Council. Power is hostile to America’s leading
Middle East ally, Israel, and for years pooh-poohed the notion Iran was working to create nuclear weapons,
an indisputable fact today. She refers to our presence in Iraq as an “occupation” while favoring sending troops
to Israel to forcibly impose a Palestinian state, which all evidence suggests would be governed by people
sympathetic to terrorists and hostile to America.
Obama entertains celebrity supporters without appropriate security clearances in the White House
Situation Room. The Situation Room at the White House is a highly confidential room filled with topsecret communications equipment which allows those in charge of national security to track terrorist threats
worldwide. Access to the room requires a very high clearance level. Nonetheless, media photos show rapper
Jay-Z and his wife Beyonce casually sitting around the Situation Room, “hanging out” with Obama. This further
demonstrates lack of seriousness by the Obama administration when dealing with national security.
the case for impeachment
Pressure from the Obama White House forced the Pentagon to disinvite Rev. Franklin Graham from its
National Day of Prayer event. This was orchestrated by the anti-Christian group Military Religious Freedom
Foundation (MRFF), headed by atheist activist Mickey Weinstein. This group pressured the White House to
remove Rev. Graham, even though he was the Honorary Chairman of the National Day of Prayer. This was due
to factual comments Graham made in the past about how radical Muslims kill innocent people and subjugate
women. According to Weinstein, Graham’s presence would offend Muslim Pentagon employees! Weinstein,
whose success indicates he has the White House’s ear, has also said when officers pray or express their faith,
they “should be court-martialed.” It is apparent an anti-Christian zealot has more influence with the Obama
administration than does one of the nation’s most respected Christian leaders.
Obama’s Census Bureau has done business with radical Muslims. The Census Bureau has signed a $582,000
lease with the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center, a radical mosque tied to the 9/11 Pentagon attack. This is the
same mosque Obama’s State Department depicted in a video as a model Islamic community. However, the
Department of Homeland Security warns Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center is “operating as a front for Hamas” and
has “been under numerous investigations for financing” terrorism.
The Obama administration has omitted all mention of Islamic extremism from key national security
documents. Numerous Homeland Security and Pentagon reports on terrorism have left out all mention of
Islam, as if to appease radical Muslims. Even the report regarding the Ft. Hood shooting refused to mention
Islam, despite Maj. Nidal Hasan’s connections with extremist Muslims. This would be like preparing a report
on German aggression in World War II without mentioning the Nazis. Similarly, when Attorney General Eric
Holder appeared before a Congressional committee to answer questions about the Hasan investigation, he
refused to state “radical Islam” motivated Hasan and would only say, “People have different reasons.” By refusing
to identify the ideology behind terrorism, the Obama administration is undermining the effort to defeat our
enemies who have neither doubts or qualms about that ideology.
the case for impeachment
Obama’s top counterterrorism Advisor has refused to use the term “jihadist.” Deputy National Security
advisor John Brennan has publicly argued that the term “jihadist” should not be used “because jihad is a holy
struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community…” However, numerous Islamic
documents define jihad as a duty to kill unbelievers. The leadership of al-Qaida certainly uses the term in this
way. Brennan also stated in a speech, “Violent extremists are victims of political, economic, and social forces.” Such
statements excuse the actions of terrorists and lead to more terrorism.
Obama appointed a radical Muslim to the White House Advisory Counsel on Faith-Based and
Neighborhood Partnerships. Soon after Dalia Mogahed was appointed, she gave an “exclusive interview” to
a pro-terrorist Islamic Web site operated by Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. In this interview, Mogahed parroted
the usual radical Islamic propaganda about the “injustices” Muslims face in America, our “discriminatory
immigration policy,” and the “erosion of civil liberties.” In a previous interview, Sheik Al-Qaradawi wrote a piece
about how “Allah imposed Hitler upon the Jews to punish them.”
the case for impeachment
Obama’s actions in other foreign policy areas reveal policies that have alienated our traditional allies and
ultimately endangered American security.
Obama gave foreign speeches apologizing to the world for America. Such speeches have signaled to friends
and foes alike how weak America has become. In numerous speeches Obama declared, “America has been
arrogant,” thus giving our enemies and allies reason to believe we are less resolved to defend ourselves and, hence,
more vulnerable to attack.
Obama has undermined our alliance with Japan. Obama shattered America’s strategic commitment to defend
our ally Japan after North Korea launched a ballistic missile near Japan, announcing the U.S. would only shoot
down a missile targeted at the United States.
Obama has undermined our alliance with South Korea. When North Korea torpedoed a South Korean
warship, killing forty-six sailors, it was the most blatant act of aggression by the communist government of
Pyongyang since 1953. But Obama did nothing. No discussions with Japan or China, no attempt to censor
North Korea at the U.N., no strengthening of our forces in the region. As a result of his inaction, more
aggression by North Korea can be expected.
Obama is forcing our long-time ally Israel to commit national suicide. Obama’s demand for the immediate
establishment of a Palestinian state, with no guarantees Israel will not be attacked, is winning him applause from
the radical Islamic community. Indeed, Obama has shown himself to be more concerned about Israel’s insistence
on its need for defensible borders and its right to defend its security interests than he has over the mullahs of Iran
developing nuclear weapons while declaring Israel should be wiped off the map. When Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu visited Obama for a meeting, he had to enter the White House through a back door,
photographers were banned, and he was presented with a list of thirteen demands (there’s no record of Obama
making any demands of Arab countries who want to destroy Israel). After a few minutes, Obama abruptly left
for dinner, leaving Netanyahu by himself.
the case for impeachment
The Obama administration is funding anti-Israel terrorist groups. The Obama administration gave $900
million in foreign aid to Hamas, a Palestinian terror group, and channeled it through a U.N. front group. The
American taxpayer is subsidizing foreign aid that will be used to undermine a country that used to be America’s
top ally in the Middle East. Since 2001, the United States has listed Hamas as a “Specifically Designated Global
Terrorist” organization and has previously supported strong sanctions against those who supported Hamas.
Obama’s hostility to Israel is consistent with his relationships with groups dedicated to the destruction of
Israel. For example, according to the Los Angeles Times, Obama was a “frequent dinner companion” of anti-Israel
scholar and PLO supporter Rashid Khalid and has been present at events in which Israel is condemned. Obama
has also been long-time friends with Ali Abunimah, a Palestinian activist, and with Bettylu Saltzman, a major
donor to Obama who serves as an officer for an anti-Israel group. We should also not forget that former Obama
staff member and Middle East advisor Robert Malley is a Hamas supporter and Israel basher, that Obama’s
pastor for twenty years, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, routinely preached hatred of Israel, and that Obama has employed
several members of the Nation of Islam, the notorious anti-Semitic group led by Louis Farrakhan. Moreover,
Obama served on the board of the Woods Fund, a foundation that supported anti-Israel causes. But this should
not have come as a surprise to anyone. Prior to Obama’s election, we were warned by Jesse Jackson – one of
Obama’s closest friends – that although “Zionists have controlled American policy for decades,” they will lose a great
deal of clout when Barack Obama becomes president.
For the first time ever, the United States has supported a U.N. resolution condemning Israel. For decades
the U.N. has introduced resolutions condemning Israel. And always, the United States has voted against such
resolutions. Until now. The U.N. introduced a resolution calling for a nuclear free Middle East that singled
out Israel but ignored Iran’s nuclear program. Instead of blocking the resolution as previous American U.N.
delegations have always done, Obama’s delegation supported it.
Obama abandoned Israel as the world attacked Israel for defending itself. When a phony “humanitarian”
flotilla tried to break the blockade erected by Israel to defend itself from terrorist infiltration and attacks, the
U.N. Security Council issued a statement condemning Israel’s actions and the United States supported it.
Security Council resolutions require unanimity, so the United States had the power to block it by simply not
voting. However, America has now joined the rest of the world in attacking what used to be our strongest ally
the case for impeachment
in the Middle East. We now know the “peace activists” were in fact trained by terrorists, wore bullet-proof vests,
and had night-vision masks. More flotillas have been announced because Obama’s condemnation of Israel has
given a green light to the Islamic world to initiate new hostilities toward Israel. Obama’s intimate and formerWeatherman terrorist Bill Ayers was one of the organizers of the “Freedom Flotilla.”
Israeli intelligence leader has warned of America’s weakness leading to increased attacks on Israel. Mier
Dagan, head of Israel’s Mossad external security service, has issued a statement warning American weakness is
giving strength to Israel’s enemies. He stated Obama’s first year as president was a period of “devaluation” for
“Israel and American strategic assets.” Another source close to Prime Minister Netanyahu has described Obama as
a “strategic catastrophe” for Israel and at “supporting the Palestinian position as the expense of Israel.” As actor Jon
Voight wrote in a widely read open letter to Obama, “You are putting Israel in harm’s way.”
Obama has refused to support Iranian pro-democracy protesters. Obama remained silent while hundreds of
thousands of Iranians protested in favor of democracy, with many of them slaughtered in the streets. Obama’s
failure to give this democratic movement support has strengthened the mullahs in power who are now close to
completing a nuclear weapon. It is apparent Obama has ignored the pro-democracy protesters in order to not
offend the Muslim world. Such a policy has undermined Western security, since this movement may have been
the last opportunity to reform this regime. The Obama administration, in the 2010 budget, also zeroed out all
funding for the Iranian pro-democracy movement. The appeasement of Iran is also illustrated by the request
made to a judge by the Obama administration to throw out a $6.6 billion class-action lawsuit filed against Iran
by the fifty-two Americans held hostage by Iran thirty years ago.
Obama’s proposed sanctions on Iran for developing illegal nuclear weapons are ineffective. Obama’s
sanctions do not include the blacklisting of Iran’s central bank, sanctions against Iran’s oil and gas industry, or
inspections on the high seas, etc. Moreover, two of America’s traditional allies, Brazil and Turkey, have sensed
Obama’s weakness and have now decided to form a partnership with Iran in its nuclear venture.
Obama has destroyed our alliance with former Soviet Republics, such as Georgia and Ukraine. Russia has
reasserted its sway over Eastern Europe by forcing oil concessions from Ukraine and informing Georgia the
Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions are now part of Russia. The Obama administration did not protest this
the case for impeachment
action, thereby undermining our alliances with former East Bloc countries. Moreover, Obama has engaged in
secret talks with Russia in an effort to reverse a previous American commitment to defend Eastern Europe with
anti-missile technology. Russia has always opposed plans for a U.S. missile defense interceptor base in Eastern
Europe. The East Bloc media has portrayed this as total betrayal.
Obama has refused to condemn Syria as it works to destroy Israel. Even though Syria continues to dominate
Lebanon, and supplies Hezbollah and Hamas with Scud missiles to bombard Israel, Obama has been silent
regarding this activity and has continued good diplomatic relations with Syria as if nothing has happened.
Obama has devastated our relationship with our closest ally, the United Kingdom. Argentina would like to
take control of the Falklands, a group of islands owned by Britain. Yet the vast majority of Falklanders want to
remain British subjects. However, Obama reversed years of policy by announcing that America was “neutral”
should Argentina invade the Falklands as they have tried to do in the past. Obama also insulted the U.K. when a
bust of Winston Churchill loaned to the White House after 9/11 was returned. Reportedly, Obama told White
House aides to “Get rid of the f***ing thing.” Apparently, Obama detests one of the great heroes of Western
civilization. When British Prime Minister Gordon Brown came to visit Obama, no state dinner was held, as is
customary, nor did the White House even plan a joint press conference. Indeed, state dinners have only been
held for India and Mexico, but neither country has the historic close relationship with the United States we once
had with Britain.
Obama is not committed to modernizing our military. Obama gave a speech during the campaign promising
to “slow our development of future combat systems.” If a president refuses to modernize our defense capabilities, our
enemies will surpass us militarily. Indeed, Obama has imposed a ceiling on all defense spending, while spending
for questionable domestic programs continues to skyrocket. Obama has promised to cut funding for the F22
fighter plane, the V-22 Osprey, the Virginia-class submarine, and the DDG-1000 destroyer.
Obama has cut funding for missile-defense research. This program was initiated by President Reagan and
derided by the media and liberals as “Star Wars.” But it was also one of the reasons, according to formerUSSR President Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union fell apart. Despite incredible advances in research
allowing lasers to shoot down incoming missiles, this program is now being cut. As Obama states, “I will cut
the case for impeachment
investments in unproven missile defense systems.” To do this – at a time when Iran, North Korea, and perhaps
other rogue states are acquiring missile technology that can be used against us – can only be interpreted as
endangering U.S. security.
Obama has announced plans to slash America’s nuclear arsenal. Obama has ordered the Pentagon to prepare
for deep cuts in our nuclear arsenal. At a time when enemies of America are acquiring nuclear technology, this
policy will endanger America’s security interests.
Obama has encouraged sending missile technology to China. Despite a recent State Department report
detailing the growing threat from China’s missile systems, the Obama administration has shifted authority for
approving technology sales to China away from the White House and to the Commerce Department. Such a
shift signals a loosening of technology controls and emphasizes a “business first, national security last” approach.
A recent Justice Department report details Chinese espionage operations – targeting technology – ongoing
at a level not seen since the Cold War. There is little doubt China seeks military superiority over America, a
dangerous trend encouraged by Obama’s policies. Halting our missile defense research, while at the same time
allowing the transfer of missile technology to China, clearly endangers American security.
Obama has limited America’s ability to take out enemy missiles. Obama has cut funding for the development
of offensive bombs that will destroy hardened and deeply buried targets – such as missile sites. Should America,
for example, obtain information that North Korea or Iran is planning a missile attack on America, we will not
have the capability to destroy these missiles in advance. This action limits our options and endangers America.
Obama has remained silent as Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez turns that country into a dictatorship.
As with the Iranians, Venezuelans are protesting the efforts by Chavez to transform their country into a
dictatorship. Indeed, the Chavez government continues to imprison critics and shut down media outlets.
However, the Obama administration has remained largely silent.
Obama ordered all U.S. flags removed in Haiti. When the United States rushed in $179 million in
humanitarian assistance to Haiti, the Obama administration ordered all U.S. buildings to take down their
American flags. This illustrates how Obama’s worldview causes him to be ashamed of our flag and think of
America in negative terms.
the case for impeachment
The Obama administration has sided with anti-democratic socialists in Honduras. When Honduran
president and Chavez ally Manuel Zelaya was removed from office by the Honduran Supreme Court for
attempting to turn Honduras into a socialist dictatorship, the Obama administration sided with the budding
dictator and friend of Castro. Indeed, Obama’s point man on Honduras is Fulton Armstrong, a hard-left John
Kerry aide with a history of supporting leftist dictators and close friend of Ana Belen Montes, the highest
ranking Cuban spy ever to penetrate the Pentagon.
Obama showed no concern over the recent arrest of Russian spies. Obama appears to be so naïve about the
reality of spying that he expressed no concern when ten individuals were caught by the FBI spying for Russia as
part of an effort to compromise high ranking officials and steal state secrets. Obama was asked twice to comment
but refused both times and, according to media sources, was angry the FBI embarrassed him. Moreover, Press
Secretary Robert Gibbs stated, “I do not believe this will affect the reset of our relationship with Russia.” Incredibly,
Philip Gordon, a State Department official for Europe, acted as if Russia had nothing to do with the spies:
“We are moving towards a more trusting relationship; we’re beyond the Cold War…. I don’t think anyone was
hugely shocked to know that some vestiges of old attempts to use intelligence are still there.” Apparently the Obama
administration does not take espionage against the United States by a country they regard as a “friend” to be a
serious matter.
the case for impeachment
AND INTENT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. Many of Obama’s actions, if they do not flat-out
violate the Constitution, certainly undermine the spirit and intent of the Constitution as envisioned by our
Founding Fathers.
Obama has made excessive use of executive orders to implement policy. Obama’s heavy reliance on executive
orders is a way of circumventing the democratic process and implementing radical policies which would never
have been supported by the American people. The use of executive orders in this way was never envisioned by
our Founding Fathers.
Obama has appointed “czars” to initiate and carry out policy. These czars were never confirmed by the U.S.
Senate and, yet, many have the authority to initiate and carry out policy. This violates the spirit and intent of the
Constitutional principle of separation of powers. Even the late Democrat Senator Robert Byrd agreed, saying,
“The accumulation of power by White House staff can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances.”
Obama has illegally used the Census Bureau to create more Democrat-voting districts. Obama is
unconstitutionally pushing his Census Bureau to count illegal aliens and thereby, not only dilute the
representation of American citizens, but also add more-likely Democrats to the voter database which, of course,
will be used to justify adding additional Democrat Congressional districts.
Obama has announced plans to create a domestic para-military force. Obama’s proposal to create a “Civilian
National Security Force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded” as the U.S. military, was listed as a
$439 billion item in the 2009 budget. This is a quasi-military force that would report directly to the Executive
Branch and operate within the boundaries of the United States. This is clearly unconstitutional.
Obama supports surrendering U.S. sovereignty under the Constitution to international treaties and
reliance on the U.N. to guarantee American security. Obama has repeatedly called for international treaties on
global warming that will devastate the U.S. economy and undermine American sovereignty in numerous ways
that violate the Constitution. Moreover, Obama wants to rely on the U.N. for our security. In a recent speech
to West Point, Obama said, “We have joined with others to develop an architecture of institutions – from the United
Nations to NATO to the World Bank – that provide for the common security and prosperity of human beings.”
the case for impeachment
Obama’s State Department legal counsel, Harold Koh, supports making our Constitution subservient to
international legal bodies. Koh stated, “U.S. courts must look beyond national interest to the mutual interest of all
nations,” and believes in “the blending of international and domestic law.” He also believes judges should interpret
the Constitution according to other nations’ legal norms. This would mean, for example, American soldiers
could be tried for “war crimes” in international courts by Third World bureaucrats hostile to the United States.
Koh has been frequently mentioned by Obama officials as a future Supreme Court nominee.
Indeed, the Obama administration is sending Koh to the November meeting of the International Criminal
Court (ICC), also known as the World Court. This is the first time an American has attended an ICC meeting,
thus giving it new credibility. The ICC dominated by leftist delegations and its goal is to hold “evil” countries
like America “liable” for world poverty, for “occupying” Afghanistan, etc. Obama is breathing life into an entity
whose main goal is to supersede the American Constitution. This is contrary to everything our Founding Fathers
wrote about America maintaining its national sovereignty.
The Obama administration is reviving efforts to have the United States sign the U.N.’s “children’s rights”
treaty. This treaty is a gross assault on parental rights that will undermine U.S. sovereignty. As the Heritage
Foundation states, “To the extent that an outside body, a group of unaccountable so-called experts in Switzerland have a
say over how children in America should be raised, educated and disciplined – that is an erosion of American sovereignty.”
Obama is not eligible to serve as president. Despite the controversy surrounding the so-called “birther” issue,
Obama has yet to show anyone a legal, long-form birth certificate demonstrating he was born in the United
States. The only document he has shown is a semi-legal document called a “Certification of Live Birth” that
is not accepted by most courts as legal, since it does not list important details such as the attending physician
or the birth hospital. Indeed, even the Department of Health and Human Services issued a report in which
it warned of the ease by which forgers create what is essentially a glorified birth announcement. Moreover,
Hawaiian law at the time of Obama’s birth essentially allowed Hawaiian citizens to request a “Certification of
Live Birth” without having to prove the baby was actually born there.
the case for impeachment
Finally, many scholars believe the Constitutional definition of “Natural Born Citizen” means both parents of
the person in question must be U.S. citizens. Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen. Indeed, at the time of
Obama’s election to the U.S. Senate, his Kenyan relatives and Kenyan newspapers celebrated the fact that a
fellow Kenyan citizen was elected (the Senate doesn’t require American citizenship). Moreover, a former senior
elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu – where Obama was allegedly born – has declared there is no
long-form birth certificate on record for Obama and maintains that he was therefore not born there.
When Senator McCain ran against George Bush for the presidency in 2000, his eligibility was questioned due
to his Panamanian birth. As a result, hearings were held to determine McCain’s eligibility. In the case of Obama’s
eligibility, Congress refused to investigate, despite far more ambiguity than McCain’s situation. Indeed, Obama’s
legal team has spent close to $2 million fighting numerous eligibility lawsuits rather than simply producing his
legal long-form birth certificate and ending the controversy. Given this, it is difficult to not conclude Obama is
unconstitutionally serving as president.
The Obama administration has asserted the right to spy on American citizens without warrants. The
Obama administration has issued a legal opinion claiming the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House
and has used this claim to launch a program to conduct warrantless tracking of citizen cell phones using GPS
data. Moreover, Obama’s attorneys have argued Americans enjoy no “reasonable expectation of privacy.” Obama
repeatedly attacked Bush for his phone tapping program, but at least Bush’s program targeted the conversations
of identified terrorists. Obama’s program targets American citizens.
Obama wants to give more power to unions to force workers to join. Obama supports “card check”
legislation which allows union leaders to observe workers as they vote on whether or not a company’s workforce
should be unionized. Secret voting is a hallmark of democracy, but this bill does away with it. Obama has
also stacked the National Labor Relations Board with union partisans who have been active at finding every
way possible to force workers to join unions. Forcing workers to join unions as a condition of holding a job is
unconstitutional. Moreover, Obama supports legislation that forces local governments to recognize only unions
for the purpose of bargaining. This action would force more than half the states to change their laws and is
clearly an unconstitutional breach of federal power.
the case for impeachment
Obama’s successful nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court threatens our Constitutional
principles. Despite White House efforts to portray Sotomayor as a pragmatic and thoughtful moderate,
Sotomayor is nothing of the sort. She is obsessed with the far left agenda and refuses to acknowledge both
religious freedom and the Second Amendment for starters. During her confirmation hearing she claimed
she supported the Second Amendment, but just a few months later voted against it as if this right could
arbitrarily be dismissed. She also voted with the far left to allow a public university to deny recognition to a
Christian student group that refused to accept homosexual members who disagree with Christian doctrine on
homosexuality. This refusal to recognize freedom of association rights would be equivalent to forcing a black
student group to accept KKK members.
Obama’s nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court reveals his hostility to the Constitution. Kagan
does not support the Founder’s view of the U.S. Constitution; rather she refers to it as a “living charter” to be
changed by progressives to accommodate their goal of transforming America into a socialist nation. For example,
Kagan is hostile to the Second Amendment and, as dean of Harvard Law School, illegally banned military
recruiters from the campus because the military doesn’t allow open homosexuals to serve. Moreover, Kagan
accepted $20 million from the Saudi royal family to establish at Harvard the Center for Islamic Studies, a group
that promotes Islamic law, or “Sharia law,” a body of law which undermines basic Constitutional principles
such as freedom of speech, separation of powers, and due process. Kagan’s obsession with homosexual behavior
has also warped her mind, illustrated by her action as dean to force Harvard Law’s health insurance company
to fully cover sex change operations. Dean Kagan also allowed bathrooms to be chosen according to one’s
self-proclaimed “gender identity,” encouraged students to participate in homosexual legal work, and recruited
homosexuals to teach “queer” legal theory. Whether Kagan is a lesbian, as many have suggested, she surely will
use her homosexual obsession to create new homosexual “rights” at the expense of normal Constitutional rights.
Obama cannot be allowed to appoint another Supreme Court Justice. Obama’s disregard for Constitutional
principles is demonstrated by his nominations of Sotomayor and Kagan to the Supreme Court. If Obama is
allowed to nominate another Supreme Court justice before his term ends, it could tip the court to the liberal
bloc and irreversibly place America on the path to socialism.
the case for impeachment
engaged in dozens of questionable and likely unconstitutional activities in the course of creating a fiscal crisis
that is leading America to economic chaos and damaging our fiscal health for decades to come.
Obama’s takeover of private companies is both unjust and unconstitutional. Such action smacks of fascism.
Obama has set a new government precedent by taking over banks, America’s largest insurance company (AIG),
the mortgage industry, large parts of the health insurance industry, and the bulk of the automotive industry,
thus depriving bondholders, shareholders, and others of their property. This is an unprecedented takeover of the
private economy by the Federal government, something our Founding Fathers would never have tolerated.
Obama was untruthful regarding the “stimulus bill.” The bulk of the stimulus funds went to pork projects
that favored certain Congressmen and key donors, or to enlarge local government entities. Many of the “jobs
created” were fictional or simply “make work” jobs, such as millions spent to study ants or to study if young
people “hook-up” after getting drunk. Indeed, Obama’s own stimulus Web site listed over 400 non-existent
Congressional districts in which jobs were supposedly created. Obama promised 90 percent of jobs created
would be in the private sector but, in reality, 90 percent were government jobs. This bill was a cruel hoax as its
real goal was to grow government, not create jobs. It is clear Obama misled Americans about this. Nevertheless,
he has continued to propose additional “stimulus” bills that continue to defraud Americans.
Obama’s inflation will jeopardize the economy. The Obama administration has increased the monetary base
by nearly $1 trillion by simply printing new money. The percentage increase in the monetary base is the largest
increase in the past fifty years by a factor of ten. Such a reckless policy will have devastating consequences. The
coming inflation disaster will dramatically depreciate the dollar, lead to rapidly rising prices, create higher
interest rates, and have a devastating impact on output and employment.
Obama’s debt is crippling our economy. Obama is running up debt at an alarming rate. In the first nine
months of Obama’s term, the national debt went up by over a trillion dollars. The net debt is expected by some
to rise to more than 75 percent of annual economic output by 2013, but what’s worrying is that our debt is
growing much faster than our gross domestic product. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts publicly
the case for impeachment
held government debt will reach 82 percent of GDP by 2019 – roughly double what it was in 2008. And under
Obama’s policies, it will keep climbing after that. The CBO says this is “unsustainable.” This debt level all but
guarantees higher interest rates and massive tax increases. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “To preserve [the] independence
[of the people] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.”
Obama’s spending has created massive deficits. Obama’s deficit will hit 10.6 percent of GDP in 2010 and he
has announced the United States will run a cumulative budget deficit of $9 trillion over the next ten years – $2
trillion more than previously projected. The government will have to borrow nearly 50 cents for every dollar it
spends in 2010, exploding the record federal deficit past $1.8 trillion. Such a deficit sucks much of the available
capital out of the economy and starves the private sector. Government spending is now 25 percent of our GDP,
five points higher than the average of the last fifty years. However, Obama claims huge deficits are necessary to
get the country to grow out of the recession, an economic viewpoint not held by any free market economist.
At the G20 economic meeting, nearly all of the leaders present called for spending cuts – except for the Obama
team. They actually called for more government spending.
Obama’s economic policies have created the highest unemployment rate in decades. The unemployment rate
in the United States now averages around 10 percent, which means the real unemployment rate (including those
who have stopped looking for work, or can’t find full-time work) is over 17 percent. Moreover, among teenagers,
the unemployment rate is at least double this.
Obama’s budgets are unsustainable. Obama’s last budget – a record $3.83 trillion dollar budget – contains
federal outlays equaling 25.4 percent of the GDP, a modern spending record that is simply not sustainable.
Obama has called for a “spending freeze” for three years, but the freeze only affects less than 1 percent of the
deficit. Numerous studies have shown FDR’s massive spending in support of the “New Deal” actually prolonged
the Great Depression by seven years. FDR is idolized by Obama and, like FDR, his spending could very will
lead to a depression.
Obama has used taxpayer money to benefit his cronies. Many entities that received federal bailout funds
directly or indirectly are connected to Obama. For example, a Chicago-based bank called Shore Bank was on
the verge of folding, but the White House pressured major Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan,
the case for impeachment
and General Electric Capitol to bail it out to the tune of $140 million. All the entities bailing out Shore Bank
also received massive government assistance during the financial crisis – so indirectly, the taxpayers are keeping
Obama’s friends afloat. Shore Bank is connected to Obama in many ways, primarily due to Shore Bank’s large
contributions to many “community organizing” projects in Chicago. One bank official involved told the press
that during a conference call involving all the participating banks, “The inference was that the White House wanted
this bank saved.”
The Obama administration is considering taking over all 401K plans in order to fund their socialist
governing schemes. Obama’s Treasury and Labor Departments have asked for public comment on its proposal
to convert 401 (K) savings accounts into annuities. The idea is to confiscate 401(K) accounts in exchange
for a promise to pay out monthly benefits to people during their retirement years. However, the Obama
administration will use this money to pay for the trillion dollar budget deficits just as liberals have raided the
Social Security Trust Fund for decades to pay for government spending. If this proposal becomes reality, it is
doubtful taxpayers will ever see this money again. The promoters of this idea are Obama’s Big Labor allies who
favor this idea because it lets them off the hook for their collapsing retirement plans.
Obama is raising taxes to the point of destroying whatever productivity remains in the U.S. economy. In
Obama’s 2011 budget, he raises capital gains taxes to 20 percent, raises income taxes, unemployment taxes, and
many other smaller taxes. Some of this is accomplished by allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire. This is the worst
possible time to create new taxes. In addition, Obama’s health care plan contains twenty new types of taxes, and
his cap-and-trade scheme will also create new taxes on employers.
Obama’s budget included $220 billion in new energy taxes. These are taxes on energy production and
consumption that will not only raise prices at the gas pump but will severely damage an oil industry that is
already fighting off a hostile Obama administration.
Obama is proposing other taxes as well. Obama is proposing a tax on bank transactions which will make
it more expensive for individuals and companies to borrow money. Obviously this tax will depress economic
activity. Moreover, Obama’s allies in Congress have massively increased the federal estate tax from 0 percent to
the case for impeachment
55 percent. In other words, when someone dies, his family will be hit hard by new taxes. Obama even taxes
wounded veterans in his health care bill by forcing them to pay taxes on prosthetic limbs.
Obama’s allies in Congress refused to prevent the expiration of seventy new taxes.
Seventy new taxes went into effect on January 1, 2010. Contrary to Obama’s pledge to not raise taxes on the
middle class, at least 28 million middle Americans will now get hit with the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)
this year; the homebuyer tax credit has been nuked; the tax deduction for state and local taxes is gone; the federal
deduction for college tuition is gone; even the R&D tax credit that businesses depend on for new innovation has
been suspended. The 50 percent write-off for small business for capital purchases is also gone.
Obama has refused to address the fundamental issue that caused the mortgage crisis and actually played
the leading role in creating the collapse of the housing market. Mortgage lending standards were lowered in
the 1990s due to a sustained pressure campaign by Democrats and ACORN to successfully change federal law to
force Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to guarantee high risk mortgage loans made by banks. Obama was complicit
in this in many ways. First, he served as an attorney for one of the first ACORN lawsuits designed to force a
bank chain to lower lending standards. Second, as U.S. senator, he, along with the Democrat majority, refused
repeated requests from Republicans to hold hearings on Freddie Mae’s and Fannie Mac’s lending practices.
Lastly, as president, he has refused to reverse the federal law behind the crisis – the Community Reinvestment
Act – which forces banks to make loans based on factors other than financial considerations. It should also be
pointed out that Sen. Obama received more PAC contributions from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae than did all
other U.S. senators.
Obama’s fanatical obsession with “animal rights” is endangering America’s economy. The Obama
administration is promoting animal rights at the expense of America’s economic needs. Fishing industry
spokesmen report Obama’s environmental bureaucrats are planning a total ban on all recreational and
commercial fishing along America’s coasts, and even within America’s lakes, all to appease Obama’s radical
environmental friends. Such a ban will cause the loss of at least a million jobs.
the case for impeachment
Obama’s cap-and-trade bill will cripple the American economy. Obama continues to push for global
warming legislation – “cap and trade” – despite the growing body of evidence proving much of the original
global warming research is rife with fraud and deception. The Congressional Budget Office estimates Obama’s
cap-and-trade bill will reduce the GDP by between a quarter and three-quarters of 1 percent by 2020 and will
cost every American family, on average, $6,800 to comply with its dictates. Harvard researchers have determined
in order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to the levels required, gasoline prices will have to rise to $7 a gallon.
In reality, the cap-and-trade bill will have no effect on climate; but it has everything to do with controlling
the economy. To illustrate how all encompassing the Obama administration is regarding the global-warming
mythology, Obama ordered the Security and Exchange Commission to force companies to disclose the impacts
of climate change on their business, a total perversion of its role.
Obama’s energy czar is Carol Browner, a socialist. Browner is in charge of selling the cap-and-trade bill to
Congress, but what many people don’t know is that she served on the Commission for a Sustainable World
Society, an arm of Socialist International. Browner’s ideology demonstrates Obama’s phony environmental
agenda is all about using the environment to increase government control of society, which is essentially the
socialist worldview.
Obama’s EPA is attempting to list carbon dioxide as an element to be regulated under the 1970 Clear Air
Act. This would extend the reach of an over-zealous EPA into all aspects of our lives. Carbon dioxide is what we
exhale when we breathe. The new rules would involve 18,000 pages of new regulation involving every form of
economic activity. It could have a devastating impact upon our economy.
Obama is constraining America’s energy needs. Despite his rhetoric, Obama has refused to allow energy
companies to pursue nuclear energy, drill in existing oil reserves, or even engage in oil exploration. Obama’s
Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar, has announced the closing off of all federal land for oil and gas drilling.
Moreover, Obama’s Department of Energy has closed the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste facility, an action
the case for impeachment
making it almost impossible to pursue the development of new nuclear energy plants. Obama’s policy of
depending on “alternative energy” to take care of all of America’s energy needs will severely damage our economy
and undermine our national security. Already gas prices have increased a $1 a gallon since Obama took office.
Obama’s negligence is responsible for the Gulf oil disaster. The refusal by the Obama administration – and
others before him – to allow oil drilling in the Arctic and in shallow coastal waters where oil extraction is
much safer, has led oil companies to apply for drilling leases in deeper – and riskier – ocean areas. The Obama
administration approved this particular BP lease – 5,000 feet deep – and then granted BP an exemption from
filing a detailed environment impact analysis, something BP lobbyists were pressuring the Obama administration
to do. The Obama administration also – one week before the spill – gave BP permission to alter the design of
its oil well, allowing drillers to remove a extra pipe which would have reinforced the pipe that broke. During his
time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received $71,000 in campaign donations from BP,
making him the top recipient of BP PAC money over the past twenty years. While Obama’s Justice Department
is calling for an investigation of BP, perhaps the investigation should instead focus on the relationship between
the Obama White House and his own Interior Department oil industry regulators to determine if there was any
pressure placed on them to allow BP to cut corners.
Obama has completely bungled the clean-up effort. Contrary to its claims, this administration was slow
to react. For example, the Army Corp of Engineers refused for twenty-one days to grant permits to Louisiana
to build sand barriers to slow the crude oil approaching its shoreline. Moreover, the Obama administration has
refused help from at least sixteen countries offering ships with skimming equipment because it would violate
the union-inspired Jones Act, an archaic 1920 law that prohibits foreign ships working in American waters.
However, Obama has the power to waive this law temporarily as George Bush did during Katrina. Apparently
Obama is more concerned with maintaining union support than he is with saving the Gulf coast. Moreover,
the Obama administration has mobilized only 1 percent of all American skimmers due to foot-dragging by his
bureaucracy. Obama is blaming BP and, while the company is financially responsible for part of the clean-up
cost, the damage control is NOT BP’s responsibility, but rather that of the federal government. After all, the spill
took place in federal waters.
the case for impeachment
Obama’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has impeded efforts to save the Gulf coast. Louisiana has been
dredging along its coast to create sand barriers to protect the sensitive Chandeleur Islands from the oil, but Fish
and Wildlife bureaucrats have shut down the dredging, claiming it has concerns about where the dredging is
taking place. Meanwhile, the oil spill is on the verge of destroying habitat throughout this entire area.
Obama is exploiting the oil spill to decrease our oil supply and garner support for the cap-and-trade
bill. Despite the fact oil drilling in the Arctic and even elsewhere in the Gulf has little in common with BP’s
extremely risky project, the Obama administration has suspended all drilling. Fortunately, a court threw out
this illegal order but Obama has resubmitted another brief in favor of moratorium. Indeed, a moratorium on
all oil drilling would cost hundreds of thousands of jobs, drive up the cost of gas, and undermine our economy.
Meanwhile, Russia has announced new drilling in the Gulf. In his address to the nation and in other speeches,
Obama has used the oil-spill crisis to push for passage of the federal cap-and-trade legislation.
Obama’s Interior Department issued a phony report in support of a drilling moratorium. In this report, a
number of oil experts were cited allegedly claiming an oil-drilling moratorium is good policy. However, eight of
the oil experts listed were contacted by the media and it was discovered that all forcefully reject a moratorium
and have charged their names were used by the Obama administration for political purposes. It is clear the
public was misled regarding the oil moratorium.
Obama has ordered the CIA to create a climate-change center. Instead of focusing on fighting terrorism,
the CIA has been ordered by the Obama administration to conduct espionage operations against greenhousegas emitters.
the case for impeachment
Obama does not believe in gun ownership for self-protection. His Web site states he supports the Second
Amendment “for the purposes of hunting and target shooting.” Nowhere does he acknowledge the right to own
firearms to defend one’s self, home, and family.
Obama supported banning all handguns. On a Second Amendment questionnaire, Obama indicated his
desires to ban all handguns, but once this position became controversial during his campaign, Obama claimed a
rogue aide filled out the questionnaire. However, upon careful examination, it is clear that it was Obama’s own
handwriting on the questionnaire. Indeed, he supported both the Illinois and D.C. state-wide handgun bans.
Obama despises the Second Amendment and has appointed people dedicated to abolishing it. Obama’s
attorney general, Eric Holder, does not believe the Second Amendment is an individual right, a view completely
contrary to the views of our Founding Fathers. Holder will use the Justice Department to chip away at
Americans’ Second Amendment rights. Moreover, Obama’s “regulatory czar,” Cass Sunstein, favors banning guns
and says, “We ought to ban hunting.” He also believes, “Animals should be permitted to bring suit.”
Obama has given the green light to Secretary of State Clinton to negotiate a U.N. treaty to ban guns
in America and worldwide. The Bush administration would not even participate in these negotiations, but
the Obama administration is. Called the “Small Arms Treaty,” it would create an international gun registry,
ban the trade, sale, and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons, and lead to the confiscation of all
“unauthorized” civilian firearms. While such a treaty must be ratified by the United States Senate – an unlikely
prospect – nonetheless the Obama administration has decided to participate in the drafting of a treaty which
clearly violates the Second Amendment. Since many Obama administration officials believe international law
supersedes the U.S. Constitution, perhaps they believe signing such a treaty will allow them to do an end run
around the Second Amendment.
the case for impeachment
TO OUR CONSTITUTION. America’s Judeo-Christian culture is a hallmark of American culture and the
bedrock of our freedoms. It is also the backdrop behind America’s amazing economic success and unparalleled
civil liberties. There is no surer way to destroy America than to destroy its religious heritage. Many historians,
theologians, and others believe once America abandons its Judeo-Christian culture, America will cease to be
great, and in fact may even be destroyed by its enemies. As President Thomas Jefferson puts it, “God who gave us
life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are
the gift of God?” But Obama denies the importance of America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and seems intent on
destroying it. A few examples:
Obama supports homosexual marriage. Despite Obama’s claim during his campaign that he opposes
homosexual marriage, correspondence between Obama and the homosexual community reveal he was
misleading the public. In this correspondence Obama states, “We need to fully repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.”
The Defense of Marriage Act prohibits states from being forced to recognize homosexual marriages approved in
other states. To repeal this law means all states would be forced to recognize homosexual marriages that occurred
in states that recognize same-sex marriages, such as Massachusetts. Moreover, while a U.S. senator, Obama voted
against a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.
Obama supports homosexual “rights” over military effectiveness. Obama has pledged to end the “don’t
ask, don’t tell” policy by forcing the military to allow homosexuals to openly serve, which, of course, will
dramatically undermine troop moral. Homosexuals are already allowed to serve, but Obama’s proposal will
allow them to openly flaunt their lifestyle in front of other soldiers. Such a policy weakens morale and, by
extension, weakens the effectiveness of our troops. This policy also creates a situation where for the first time
in American history an open conflict will exist between the virtues taught by military chaplains and the
moral message delivered by the military. Moreover, the Obama administration is purposely ignoring internal
military reports detailing hundreds of rapes of straight men committed by homosexual military men. Turning
our military into a social engineering experiment will send a signal of weakness to our enemies. The lives of
the case for impeachment
soldiers may be endangered by this policy, but Obama is apparently more concerned with the homosexual
agenda than he is with military morale and effectiveness.
Obama granted new “rights” and benefits to homosexual government employees. At the same time the worst
oil spill in history is destroying our Gulf region, Obama decided to issue a proclamation ordering all government
agencies to grant benefits to the partners of homosexual employees in terms of health care, vacations, employee
assistance programs, etc. Despite the fact these people are not married, rarely have stable relationships, and are
among the most affluent class of people in America, Obama’s order will require millions of dollars be spent
toward benefits for the partners of homosexual bureaucrats.
Obama is hiring personnel based on their homosexuality. The Obama administration is working hand
in hand with the Gay and Lesbian Leadership Institute, to identify homosexuals willing to work in his
administration. This group boasts of their success on its Web site ( where they list 102 homosexuals
Obama has appointed to key administration positions. Apparently participation in such a lifestyle is the quality
the Obama administration values highly when it comes to hiring.
Obama is illegally using the Department of Education to promote homosexuality to children. Obama has
appointed Kevin Jennings to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Department of Education. Jennings is the
founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) and has dedicated his life to promoting
the homosexual lifestyle in America’s public schools. His new job involves doing the same thing, but instead
with federal tax dollars. Under Jennings’ leadership, GLSEN promoted dozens of books that featured adult-child
sex. Jennings once related a story about how a young boy came to him as a teacher to confess that he was having
sex with an older man. Jennings’ advice was to “use a condom,” but did not advise the student to terminate
the relationship. Jennings also wrote the foreword to the book, Queering Elementary Education, which includes
an essay declaring that “queerly raised” children can be agents of change. This person should be arrested for
endangering youth, but instead Obama has placed him in a position where he can promote his perversions on a
nationwide scale.
Obama signed “hate crimes” bill into law. This bill was attached to the military appropriations bill so few
people would notice it. This legislation sets up different levels of justice for American citizens. If someone
the case for impeachment
assaults both an elderly woman and a homosexual, they will receive a stiffer penalty for the latter incident.
Thus, people who engage in abnormal sexual behavior have more “rights” under “hate crime” laws than those
who engage in normal sexual behavior. Such laws may also be used against pastors and others who teach
homosexuality is sinful; these laws have already been used in Canada and Europe to shut down free speech. This
law not only infringes on the First Amendment, but it violates one of our most basic Constitutional concepts –
equal justice under the law.
Obama’s State Department has integrated “gay rights” into its policies. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
held a briefing to discuss how the State Department will “integrate” lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered
human rights into American foreign policy.
Obama believes homosexual relationships are “just as admirable as a relationship between a man and a
woman.” Obama also believes people are born homosexual. But social science says the opposite. No one has
ever proven a genetic origin and many psychologists still consider homosexuality a deviant behavior. Moreover,
numerous lifestyle studies have shown homosexuals are far more prone to suicide, drug use, mental breakdowns,
domestic violence, and alcoholism. Obama’s view also flies in the face of 2,000 years of Christian and Jewish
teaching and undermines the traditional family unit, one of the foundations of Western civilization. It is this
view of homosexuality which permeates the Obama administration’s policies and is the driving force behind its
attack on our religious freedoms.
Obama appointed a Christian-hater and homosexual activist to be the liaison to religious groups.
Obama appointed Harry Knox, a radical homosexual activist, to the White House Office of Faith-Based and
Neighborhood Partnerships. Knox has bashed Christians in speeches before gay rights groups and has publicly
attacked the pope. The Knox appointment can only be interpreted by people of faith to be an insult to them.
Obama turned Father’s Day into a homosexual affirmation event. Obama issued an official White House
proclamation on Father’s Day that placed homosexual fathers on the same level as traditional families. The
proclamation stated: “Nurturing families come in many forms, and children may be raised by a father and mother, a
single father, two fathers, a stepfather, a grandfather, or caring guardian.”
the case for impeachment
Obama believes “gay rights” trump religious liberty. Obama’s nominee to the Federal Equal Opportunity
Commission, Professor Chai Feldblum, stated that if there’s a clash between the homosexual agenda and
religious liberty, “Gays win, Christians lose.” He also said, “I’m having a hard time coming up with any case
in which religious liberty should win.” In other words, deviant sexual behavior trumps religious freedom, a
Constitutional right. Feldblum is also the lead drafter of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA),
which grants homosexuals “rights” based solely upon their sexual behavior and forces these rights upon the
private sector. This would mean, for example, if a Christian bookstore owner refused to hire a transsexual,
he could be sued under ENDA. Obama supports ENDA, which means he opposes the meaning of religious
freedom as defined by our Founding Fathers.
Obama’s position on abortion is the most extreme of any American president in history. Despite the
Constitutional phrase, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” Obama opposes a ban on partial birth
abortion and, as state senator, supported the “right” of hospitals to withhold care from newly born infants
who survived an abortion. He also opposed parental-consent laws and supports the “Freedom of Choice” act,
legislation that would override every single state law limiting or regulating abortion.
Obama spends taxpayer money for abortions in foreign countries. A week after his election, Obama reversed
a Bush administration order banning abortion funding from our foreign aid budgets. The Obama policy is
to fund abortions both domestically and internationally, a policy not only morally indefensible but fiscally
irresponsible, considering the financial crisis America is in.
Obama has appointed abortion extremists to key positions. Obama appointed Melody Barnes as director
of his Domestic Policy Council; Barnes supports abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy, glorifies
abortion as “a concept of liberty,” and told a group of shocked pro-life leaders, “It is not our goal [the Obama
administration] to reduce the number of abortions.”
Obama also nominated Dawn Johnsen to be assistant attorney general. Johnsen supports abortion for any
reason during any time of pregnancy and, as legal director for the National Abortion Rights Action League,
argued being pregnant is “disturbingly suggestive of involuntary servitude.” In other words, she compared child
raising to slavery. Johnsen, did however, withdraw her nomination. Obama’s “science czar,” John Holdren, has
the case for impeachment
said if America ever has a population crisis, he would support “laws requiring compulsory abortion,” government
confiscation of newborn babies, and “adding a sterilant to drinking water...” The views of these Obama appointees
are completely contrary to traditional American values.
The Obama administration appointed America’s leading child-porn defender to be deputy attorney
general. Despite rising child-molestations statistics, it is likely the Obama administration will not be
pursuing cases against child pornographers due to the appointment of David Ogden as deputy attorney
general. Ogden has done more than anyone in America to defend the “rights” of pornographers. He has
argued in court against the right of public schools to filter their library computers so as to prevent children
from viewing pornography. Not only does Ogden believe children have the right to access pornography on
public computers, but, as an ACLU attorney, he defended in court the “right” of a defendant to possess child
pornography. But this should not be surprising. As an Illinois state senator, Obama refused to vote against
a 2001 bill that would have banned porn shops from being located within 1,000 feet of a school or church.
And in 1998, Obama opposed legislation that would require schools to filter out pornography on school
computers. Fortunately, Ogden resigned his position.
Ramadan, but not Christmas, is celebrated at the Obama White House. According to White House Social
Secretary Desiree Rogers, the White House was planning to not set up the historic White House nativity scene
for the first time in modern history because the Obamas wanted to make the holiday season “more inclusive.”
Apparently his advisors warned him of the controversy this decision would create, and the Nativity scene did go
up. Obama also told People Magazine his family does not give Christmas presents because they “want to teach
limits.” One can only wonder if Obama really understands the meaning of Christmas and how Christianity
is intimately intertwined with American history and culture. After all, Obama’s “spiritual mentor” Reverend
Jeremiah Wright apparently never preached about the importance of the birth of Christ – his politicized sermons
were instead focused on black victimhood, evil white people, socialism, how America bombed the Twin Towers,
and anti-Jewish conspiracy theories. But Obama had no such misgivings about celebrating Ramadan, the Islamic
holiday; indeed, the Obama White House hosted a gala event to celebrate the Muslim holy day.
Obama sides with Muslims. In his book, The Audacity of Hope, Obama wrote of Muslims and Arabic
immigrants: “… I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”
the case for impeachment
Despite Obama’s claim to be a Christian his entire life, he wasn’t. According to school registration records
from the time he lived in Indonesia, Obama was registered as a Muslim. At this school, students identified as
Muslim were segregated each day for Koranic studies.
Obama informed the Egyptian foreign minister he is a Muslim. Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul
Gheit announced, “The American president told me in confidence that he is a Muslim.” This reportedly occurred at
a private one-on-one meeting with Obama in January 2010. Obama also informed Gheit that he is the son of
a Muslim father, the stepson of a Muslim stepfather, that his half brothers are Muslims, and the Muslim world
needs to have patience with him, but he would eventually show the Muslim world how to deal with Israel.
Obama believes we are no longer a Christian nation. In 2006, he said, “Whatever we once were, we are no
longer a Christian nation.” When Obama gave a speech in Egypt he said, “You might say that America is a Muslim
Obama has appointed a legal counsel who believes in applying Sharia Law. Obama appointed Harold Koh
as State Department counsel. Koh is a radical attorney who believes Muslim law, called “Sharia law,” should
be applied in some disputes in U.S. courts, a view clearly in violation of the Constitution. Sharia law is NOT
compatible with Constitutional law in that it doesn’t recognize freedom of speech, freedom of press or due
process, and regards women as second-class citizens.
Obama did not attend the first National Day of Prayer. Obama is the only modern-day president to skip the
National Day of Prayer events during his first year in office.
Obama covered up Jesus. When Obama spoke at Georgetown University, a Catholic institution, the White
House insisted that a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name be covered up. Georgetown complied.
Obama excluded private and Christian school children from the annual White House Easter egg roll. The
White House gave 3,000 tickets to the White House Easter egg roll to D.C. public-school children, but none
to children from D.C.’s religious schools. All White House events are financed by public money, but Obama
apparently doesn’t consider Christian-school children as part of the public, even though their parents pay taxes
like everyone else.
the case for impeachment
Obama has de-Christianized the White House Easter message. In his 2010 Easter greeting message, Obama
quoted from a sermon given by a military pastor on Iwo Jima in 1945. However, he removed passages dealing
with Christian doctrine – like Christ’s resurrection – in order to make the quote appealing to all religions, even
though Easter is NOT a multicultural event; it’s a Christian event. Obama altered a great historical quote in
order to serve his multicultural worldview. Apparently he is embarrassed by America’s Christian heritage.
Obama nominated a Catholic hater to the top Justice Department position. As an ACLU attorney, Dawn
Johnsen spent years attempting to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status because the church
supported the pro-life cause, a position completely consistent with Catholic teaching. Eventually the Church
prevailed after spending millions of dollars defending itself. Again, Obama nominates people who do not share
the Founder’s meaning of religious freedom.
Obama opposes the use of the Bible for Congressional swearing in ceremonies. Obama wrote, “The First
Amendment to the Constitution precludes us from requiring or prohibiting the use of any single religious text in
government swearing-in ceremonies.” This is a stunning misunderstanding of our Constitutional principles.
Obama supported sex education for kindergarten students. Throughout his short legislative career, Obama
exhibited a casual attitude toward child porn and seemed unbothered by the sexualizing of children at very
young ages. Indeed, he voted for a sex-education program that targeted kindergarten students. When this
became an issue during the campaign, he attempted to claim he never voted for such a bill. However, the
legislative record of the Illinois Senate makes it very clear he did in fact support legislation which would mandate
sex education for kindergartners.
the case for impeachment
socialized medicine – he calls it a “right” – and he has made statements to that effect for many years. Indeed, as
an Illinois state senator, he voted for legislation that created universal health care in that state. However, during
the campaign he made the claim he didn’t support socialized health care, a clear attempt to mislead voters
regarding his ideology. The facts:
Obama’s healthcare plan will cause fiscal chaos and destroy health care in America. Obama’s healthcare plan
will massively raise taxes, raise federal spending, cause premiums to rise at least 10 percent, and eventually force
out the private healthcare insurance market. The plan’s costs will dramatically increase over the years and will
turn America into a stagnant European-style, economic desert. The claim by Obama that it will “not add a dime
to the deficit” is untrue. Even the Congressional Budget Office says the program will grow by 8 percent a year.
The CBO has also estimated that Obamacare will raise premiums for millions of families by $2,100 by 2016. It
is apparent Obamacare has little to do with improving health care and everything to do with unionizing millions
of hospital and health care workers, thus adding more money to Democrat campaign coffers. Indeed, as Obama
confidant and political consultant Robert Creamer stated, the health care battle was really about “the distribution
of wealth and power.”
Obama’s healthcare “reform” is unconstitutional. Obama’s healthcare reform is clearly unconstitutional since
nowhere in the Constitution does it give authority to the federal government to force individuals and businesses
to purchase a federal benefit. Moreover, Constitutional experts also believe fining Americans thousands of
dollars and jailing those who refuse to participate in Obama’s health care plan is likewise unconstitutional.
Obama’s health care plan is already causing the loss of health care for some people. A Virginia-based health
insurance company has announced that, due to the uncertainties of Obamacare, it is closing its door by the
end of the year. Moreover, a coalition of employer and trade associations – such as the National Restaurant
Association – has announced Obamacare, due to a ban on spending caps employers use to determine how much
they pay out on health policies, will cause more than one million people to lose their insurance coverage. They
are mostly low-wage workers, the people Obamacare was supposed to help. Other analysts have now announced
that due to the perverse incentives of the bill, many corporations will be spooked by the rising costs of health
the case for impeachment
care and will instead pay the fine for not providing coverage for their employees. It is more cost-effective to do
this. It is being estimated that between 87 and 115 million Americans will lose their current coverage under
The Obama health care plan was in part written by socialists. Obamacare was quietly written by a group
called Health Care for America Now (HCAN), an organization advocating complete government control of
health care. The bill was partially crafted by HCAN’s attorneys to attract just enough votes to pass Congress, but
was also set up in such a way that it inevitably sets the stage for the eventual takeover of all health care by the
federal government. HCAN was founded by a group of socialists who have fought for socialized health care for
decades. Thus, the Obama administration has allowed an extremist group to essentially control the creation of
legislation impacting one-sixth of the U.S. economy. This can only be interpreted as an attack on the concept of
representative democracy.
Obama has chosen a socialist to head up Obamacare. Despite claims by the Obama administration that
Obamacare is not a stepping stone toward complete government takeover of health care, Obama has appointed
Dr. Donald Berwick to run Obamacare. Berwick is an advocate of government control of health care and says
he is “romantic about the NHS. I love it.” NHS is the National Health Service – Britain’s disastrous socialist
healthcare system. But Berwick is critical of American health care due to the “darkness of private enterprise.” He is
also a supporter of rationing, which the British system engages in. If fact, he calls the British agency that rations
health care “a global treasure.” Indeed, the NHS is not allowed to spend more than a certain amount to extend
someone’s life. As the cost of Obamacare rises, Berwick will no doubt institute rationing.
the case for impeachment
idea of citizenship is deeply ingrained in American culture and was designed by our Founders to help maintain
our cultural identity and our national sovereignty. Obama’s actions undermine the Constitution, encourage more
illegal border crossings, and are destroying the concept of citizenship. Illegal aliens now cost American taxpayers
$113 billion annually. The Constitution requires that the president “shall protect each of them [states] against
invasion,” a requirement that Obama is clearly violating.
Obama is jeopardizing border security. Obama has proposed dramatically cutting spending on border security
tools such as “virtual fences,” and radar and ground sensors. Indeed, immediately after Obama entered the
White House, construction of a double-barrier fence in Arizona was halted. Moreover, Obama has stripped
federal authority from Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio to use federal immigration law to arrest the thousands of illegal
aliens that overrun Arizona.
Obama has appointed open-borders advocate Cecilia Munoz as Director of Intergovernmental Affairs.
Munoz is the former vice-president of the National Council of La Raza, a group that advocates open borders
and the “right” of illegal aliens to be able to access the benefits of our society (driver licenses, welfare, health
care, etc.).
Obama supports amnesty and voting rights for illegal aliens. Three years ago, Sen. Obama supported
amnesty for America’s 12 million illegal aliens and is planning legislation to push amnesty once again. These 12
million new citizens would not only receive free health care – adding billions to our deficit – but the Obama
forces will surely utilize groups such as ACORN to register them as Democrats in an effort to lock Democrats
into a permanent power structure.
Obama’s Department of Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, has offered her agency’s services to assist illegal
aliens. The DOL has released a public service announcement in which Solis urges “undocumented” (her words)
workers to call her office if they need assistance with being paid minimum wages. It is clear DOL, as with all of
Obama’s agencies, makes no distinction between legal citizens and illegal aliens, even though this is in violation
of federal law.
the case for impeachment
Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, is challenging the right of states to use citizen-verification
procedures. These are laws that have already been approved by the courts – such as requiring an ID before being
allowed to vote. If Holder is successful, illegal aliens will be voting in large numbers, completely contrary to the
views of the Founding Fathers regarding citizenship.
Obama and Eric Holder have publicly attacked Arizona’s immigration law. The elected representatives of
Arizona duly passed a law that was overwhelmingly supported by Arizona citizens. There is nothing illegal about
this law. Even a 2002 Justice Department memo makes it clear states have authority to arrest illegal aliens. Both
Obama and Holder have impugned racist motives to those who passed the bill, even though it simply mirrors
federal immigration law and specifically bans “profiling.” Indeed, California already has a near-identical law on
the books (Penal Code 834b), but again, Obama’s actions appear to be not about the law, but about agitating
Hispanics ahead of the coming elections.
The Obama administration AND Mexico are suing Arizona for enforcing federal immigration law.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced in an interview with a media outlet in Ecuador that we “will be
bringing a lawsuit against the act.” Associated Press reported, “Lawyers for Mexico on Tuesday submitted a brief
in support of one of five lawsuits challenging the law.” In others words, a foreign country has teamed up with
the federal government to sue a state for simply enforcing federal immigration law. Meanwhile, the Obama
administration refuses to sue cities that institute “sanctuary” policies that illegally grant benefits to illegal aliens
and order local police to not cooperate with federal immigration officials.
Obama invited the President of Mexico to attack America’s immigration laws before Congress. Obama
invited Mexican President Felipe Calderon to address Congress so he could attack the Arizona bill. Never before
has an American president invited a foreign leader to address Congress for the purpose of attacking a law
duly passed by the elected representative of a state. Meanwhile, Mexico encourages the violation of our common
border while at the same time harshly treating illegal aliens who cross its southern border.
Obama’s federal immigration agency refused to cooperate with Arizona in enforcing immigration law.
Obama has not only attacked the Arizona law, but has asked his Justice Department to find ways to legally
challenge it. Moreover, John Morton, Obama’s appointee to the Immigration of Customs Enforcement (ICE),
the case for impeachment
appears to be following the White House line when he told the Chicago Tribune, “I don’t think the Arizona law, or
laws like it, are the solution.”
Obama’s State Department has attacked Arizona’s immigration law while whitewashing China’s Human
Rights Violations. State Department official Michael Posner, the assistant secretary for democracy, human
rights and labor, announced while meeting with a delegation from communist China, “We brought it [Arizona’s
immigration law] up early and often.” He also said that the Arizona law is part of a “troubling trend in our
society.” China jails dissidents, tortures people, represses free speech, and maintains concentration camps, but
Posner presented the administration’s view of the Arizona law to demonstrate America is also a human-rights
violator – as if there were moral equivalency between the nations. Posner also told the Chinese representatives
that America is unfair to “Muslim Americans in an immigration context.” While that’s not true either, it is clear
the Obama administration has given permission to its officials to attack America on human-rights grounds,
especially when addressing regimes that have no concept of human rights.
Obama is interfering with the rights of states to prohibit employers from hiring illegal aliens. The Obama
administration has asked the Supreme Court to prohibit Arizona from enforcing a law passed two years ago that
punishes employers for hiring illegal aliens.
Senator Jon Kyle was informed by Obama in a private meeting the federal government will not enforce our
borders until a “comprehensive” immigration bill – which includes amnesty – is passed. Sen. Kyle is a longserving senator from Arizona and an expert on immigration. Obama denies this conversation, but Kyle stands by
it. The White House tapes all meetings, but has not released any transcripts of the conversation. If this is true, it
means Obama is subverting the Constitution for political considerations.
Obama’s immigration agency is making life easy for illegal aliens. ICE has issued orders to “soften” the
physical appearance of its detention centers with “hanging plants,” give detainees e-mail access and free Internetbased phone service, and to avoid lockdowns and detention-uniform requirements. Moreover, the detention
facilities now have fresh vegetables, bingo sessions, arts classes, and even movie nights. Since Obama became
president, fifty ICE detention facilities have been closed down. Clearly, this sends a message to illegal aliens that
America is not serious about enforcing its immigration laws.
the case for impeachment
Obama has always supported “rights” for illegal aliens at the expense of American taxpayers. As a U.S.
senator, Obama voted to continue giving federal funds to “sanctuary cities” which were purposely sheltering
illegal aliens in violation of federal law. Obama also voted in favor of allowing illegal aliens to participate
in Social Security and voted against a bill declaring the English language the official language of the U.S.
government. He has been a long-time supporter of granting amnesty to all those here illegally.
the case for impeachment
Obama’s appointee wants to censor conservative talk radio. Obama appointed Mark Lloyd as the “diversity
officer” for the Federal Communications Commission. Lloyd’s views on free speech are incompatible with the
U.S. Constitution. He believes freedom of speech “is all too often an exaggeration… The purpose of free speech is
warped to protect global corporations.” Lloyd advocates $250-million fines for radio stations whose programming
does not conform to government standards. He wants enforced “balance” on talk radio. This is code for
shutting down conservative talk shows and giving government subsidies to failing liberal talk shows. Lloyd also
champions the Marxist revolution in Venezuela led by dictator Hugo Chavez who, incidentally, shut down all
dissent by closing down every privately owned media outlet. Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, wants to
reinstitute the “Fairness Doctrine” by creating a panel of “nonpartisan experts” to mandate “diversity” on the
airwaves. All of this is designed to create a regulatory climate that gives Obama cover when he attempts to shut
down conservative talk radio.
Obama’s FCC proposed the takeover of much of the radio spectrum used by television. The FCC’s
“National Broadband Plan” proposes that the FCC recapture nearly half of the radio spectrum used by the 1,600
broadcast TV stations. That would put the government in control of much of America’s broadcast industry. FCC
Chairman Julius Genachowski hired Stuart Benjamin to advise him on radio spectrum use and, alarmingly,
Benjamin has written proposals advocating the phasing out of all broadcasting! As he wrote, “Some [FCC]
regulations that would be undesirable on their own will be desirable once we factor in the degree to which they will
hasten the demise of over-the-air broadcasting.”
The Obama administration is now endangering free speech by regulating the Internet. Obama’s Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) made an effort to regulate the Internet, but was smacked down by a
recent court decision, Comcast v. FCC, which held the FCC has no jurisdiction over the Internet. However, the
Obama administration reclassified the Internet as a telecom business, allowing the FCC to regulate the Internet
under 1930’s rules written for telephone companies. The result is the Internet is now subject to controls from
fifty state public utility commissions, not to mention increased political interference. Not only has the media
ignored the takeover of another industry by the Obama regime, but this action adds new risks to investors who
may now back off from investing in Internet-based companies.
the case for impeachment
The Obama administration wants to regulate Internet content. Susan Crawford, the “Internet czar,”
advocates government intervention in the Internet. Crawford is active with a group called Free Press that
advocates government intervention in the Internet. Free Press was founded by Robert McChesney, a professor
at the University of Illinois and the former editor of the Marxist journal Monthly Review. McChesney is a
self-proclaimed Marxist. Crawford is also an advisory board member of Public Knowledge, a hard left group
funded by socialist billionaire George Soros. Moreover, Lawrence Strickling, the administrator of the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, is Obama’s principle advisor on telecommunications
policy and has proposed regulations giving the government new authority to regulate Internet content.
The Obama administration is planning to curtail freedom of the press. Obama’s Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) has issued a plan for the “reinvention of journalism” that details dozens of new taxes and regulations
designed to stifle free speech and which would undoubtedly be used against conservative journalists. The
report proposes new taxes on news aggregators like the Drudge Report, a tax-subsidized program to train new
journalists (of course, they would be all trained by liberals), a fund to bail out failing newspapers (again, that
would be failing liberal newspapers), and a 5 percent tax on news-related electronics such as the iPad, television
sets and radios.
the case for impeachment
endanger America’s security, they do collectively inform us that Obama misled Americans in order to win the
presidency. Such constant lying also defines his character. Can we risk having a commander-in-chief who lied to
get elected? What else is he lying about?
Obama refused to disclose personal records. Unlike every president before him, Obama has refused to release
school records, medical records, legislative records, and other records that all Americans have the right to see.
Obama claimed during his campaign he was born as a result of his parents attending the Selma civil rights
march. But the Selma march was in 1965; Obama was born in 1961. Obama is attempting to claim a civil rights
pedigree, but neither he nor his family had any connection to the civil rights movement. Indeed, by making such
assertions, he opens himself up to some very damning information concerning his real pedigree. His family’s
ancestral tribe in Kenya is the Luo tribe, which was infamous in the 18th century for collaborating with Muslim
slavers to capture and sell rival tribesmen into slavery. Obama’s relatives helped create the institution of slavery
that led to a culture of oppression in America which the civil rights movement was created to fight.
Obama claimed his father was a proud freedom fighter. In reality, he was part of one of the most corrupt and
violent governments in Kenyan history.
Obama claims his name has Swahili origins. Not true. All three of his names are of Arabic origin.
Obama lied about his occupation. He claims to have been a Constitutional lawyer at the University of
Chicago, but in reality was only a “senior lecturer on leave.”
Obama claimed he passed 900 bills in the State Senate. No, he didn’t. He passed twenty-six, most of which
were written by other legislators and given to him.
Obama claimed he wouldn’t take PAC money during his campaign. He took lots of PAC money.
the case for impeachment
Obama lied about how his administration would be the “most open and transparent administration in
history.” The reality is most of Obama’s legislative agenda has been carried out in secrecy. For example, no one
was allowed to see the final version of the healthcare bill until immediately before the vote on it, a total violation
of Congressional procedure. Moreover, Obama holds the record for the longest stretch of time without holding a
press conference – over a year at this writing. He does not like to respond to the press and has become the most
secretive president in history.
Obama lied about banning lobbyists from his administration. Obama has hired at least forty-seven former
lobbyists thus far.
Obama lied about his relationship to extremists. During the campaign, he repeatedly misled voters about his
relationships to Marxist and socialist extremists, such as former Marxist terrorist Bill Ayers, racist Rev. Jeremiah
Wright, Communist Party operative Frank Marshall Davis, PLO operative Rashid Khalidi, and many others. He
also left out of his biography his membership in, and support for, Chicago’s “New Party,” a socialist party.
Obama covered up his former (and current?) Marxist philosophy. For much of his academic life, Obama was
likely a Marxist. Many of his fellow students at Columbia were also Marxists and socialists and have publicly
stated that as a student Obama supported “revolutionary Marxism.” The mainstream media has refused to
interview any of them. Obviously, the Marxist worldview is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.
Obama lied about the authorship of his own biography. Obama claims to have written Dreams from my
Father, but former Marxist terrorist Bill Ayers ghostwrote the book, according to Obama biographer Christopher
Obama lied about how he will reform the “earmark” process and eliminate pork barrel spending. In reality,
Obama’s 2010 budget contained over 10,000 pork items, totaling at least $10 billion.
Obama claimed his healthcare bill would not cover abortions and would not allow illegal aliens to
participate. Veteran legislative analysts have confirmed that every incarnation of the health care bill would cover
illegal aliens and pay for abortions.
the case for impeachment
Obama claimed he will not raise taxes on the middle class. By allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, the
middle class will be hit hard with new taxes. Moreover, both the healthcare legislation and the cap-and-trade
bill will involve massive new taxes to be passed on to the middle class. Finally, new energy taxes and higher
estate taxes will also hit the middle class hard. Indeed, the middle class will be hit harder with new taxes than at
anytime in the last 100 years.
President Barack Obama has proven to be incompetent, reckless, deceitful, and naive when it comes to making
economic decisions and protecting America’s security interests. His history of corruption, power-grabbing, and
misleading the American people has created a pattern we believe jeopardizes America.
If only a few of the items listed in this report occurred, one could perhaps attribute it to rookie mistakes. But it’s
not just a few “mistakes.” Rather, this report reveals a pattern that demonstrates Obama is constantly engaging in
actions that reflect a hard-left ideology antithetical to America’s founding principles.
Indeed, many believe Obama is following the theories of Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven, two radical
professors from his undergraduate university – Columbia – who advocated overwhelming the economy with
so much spending and entitlement demands that the resulting chaos would cause people to clamor for more
government intervention, thus leading to socialism.
Obama is clearly dismissive of America’s Constitutional principles and obviously dislikes the role America plays
in the world. He dislikes our Judeo-Christian heritage and detests America’s historical allies. He underestimates
the Islamic threat and is constantly apologizing for his country to the world. He gives beautiful speeches, but
so did Adolf Hitler. This man was not prepared to be president and never will be. He has neither the experience
nor the temperament to guide America during the troubled times we live in. Nor is his worldview consistent
with the values and principles espoused by our Founding Fathers or even consistent with those held by the vast
majority of Americans.
Less than halfway through his first term, Obama has done more damage to America than any previous president
in history. Some of the damage can be repaired; some can’t. Some of his policies will haunt generations to come.
America simply cannot afford Obama to remain in office any longer.
It’s time for the American people to rise up and demand Congress impeach him.
The Founding Fathers enshrined the impeachment clause into the United States
Constitution because they feared that a president intent on subverting the very
principles the American experiment was built on would someday rise to power.
Despite all the checks and balances and obstacles they put in place, the Founders
knew a determined cabal could still gain control of all three branches of
government and wield this consolidation of power to dismantle our cherished
Constitutional principles, and eradicate the freedoms that generations of
Americans sacrificed their lives to preserve.
The Case For Impeachment is an insightful summary of how President Barack
Hussein Obama’s purposeful actions have jeopardized America’s ability to defend
herself, and undermined our free enterprise system, corrupted our democratic
institutions, and transferred massive amounts of power and wealth from American
citizens to extremist special interest groups whose loyalty lies not with our
Constitution, but with a global socialist movement. This is the beginning of the
end for the United States unless the people exercise their precious remaining
liberties and stand and demand that their elected representatives impeach this
president before further mortal damage is inflicted upon America.
If the silent majority can summon the indignation, willpower and energy to make
their voices heard, there is still a chance our country may survive.
Senior Research Fellow, Western Journalism Center
A joint project of WorldNetDaily and the Western Journalism Center
© Copyright 2010 Western Journalism Center. All rights reserved.