"... charging President Biden’s top immigration official with refusing to uphold the law and breaching the public trust in his handling of a surge of migration at the U.S. border with Mexico.... The charges against Mr. Mayorkas... are all but certain to fizzle in the Democratic-led Senate.... But the process would yield a remarkable election-year political spectacle...."
What's the "high crime"/"misdemeanor" bringing this policy disagreement within the constitutional power to impeach?
The first impeachment article essentially brands the Biden administration’s border policies an official crime. It accuses Mr. Mayorkas of willfully and systematically flouting laws requiring migrants to be detained....
The second article charges Mr. Mayorkas with lying to Congress about whether the border was secure and obstructing lawmakers’ efforts to investigate him....
Here's the full text of the articles of impeachment.
Posts
64 comments:
Dereliction of duty is indeed a high crime that warrants impeachment. And Mayorkas and others in the administration have definitely lied about it under oath in congressional testimony, and they know they are lying about it.
In politics "lying" is more like Mere Puffery.
Glad the Articles cite the statutes he has failed to enforce.
I'm sure the Trump Impeachment 2 standard of "no proof needed, you can see it with your own eyes" will not be allowed here.
I, generally, do not support the promiscuous use of impeachment, but this seems totally appropriate to me.
"The first impeachment article … accuses Mr. Mayorkas of willfully and systematically flouting laws requiring migrants to be detained...."
I mean, that's hard to argue with.
"Policy disagreement"? I suppose that's one way to frame it. But if the man in charge of border security is deliberately permitting masses of unvetted foreign nationals to enter the country illegally, how different is that from, say, a government official in charge of Fort Knox deciding, as a matter of "policy," to hand out bars of gold to random passers-by? Congress makes the laws. The executive takes an oath to enforce the laws. Once a statute is enacted, the president no longer has veto power over it; he and his officers must in good faith attempt to enforce it.
The charges against Mr. Mayorkas... are all but certain to fizzle in the Democratic-led Senate
The precedent has been set. Mitch McConnell ensured a trial is required.
And it's the trail which will prove more embarrassing to the Administration than any conviction.
Bill Clinton can be called as an expert witness on the definition of "secure".
What's the "high crime"/"misdemeanor"bringing this policy disagreement within the constitutional power to impeach?
8 U.S. Code § 1324 - Bringing in and harboring certain aliens
(A)Any person who—
(i)knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien;
(ii)knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;
(iii)knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;
(iv)encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or
(v)
(I)engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or
(II)aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts.
Yancey said it.
Yancey said it.
Begley said it.
Mike, Big said it.
More failure theater from the GOPe. Nothing will happen. Mayorkas will be just fine.
The charges against Mr. Mayorkas... are all but certain to fizzle in the Democratic-led Senate
Possibly and if the media continues it blackout of the crisis then almost certainly. However, growing populations in major blue areas like Chicago and NYC might push things a bit further than what happened to Trump. Especially when a Senator that votes against might just get a few bus loads sent to their state.
How many have read Kurt Schlicter's new book, "The Attack?" It's plausible.
The Pro Hamas demonstrators, as vile and borderline violent as they already are, will be as nothing once enough actual Hamas terrorists are infiltrated across our borders. Does anyone seriously think many are not being so infiltrated? Hezbollah for one (I don't know about Hamas) has been working with drug criminals for years in Latin America. We are inviting (sanctuary cities in particular) a catastrophe.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/01/biden_the_border_and_tik_tok_too.html
Yes, it's theater. Designed to publish the fact that the Biden Administration is actively promoting the border invasion that at least 70% of the country wants stopped.
@Tina Trent, thank you very much, but it was Mike, Original, who said it.
History has told us in no uncertain terms a high crime and misdemeanor is anything Congress says is a high crime and misdemeanor, so you fuckers can can the let’s analyze the charge crap…
My money is on ‘this goes nowhere’…
There is the large lie he peddled about the false whipping hoax of illegal immigrants, for one.
Lying to Congress/Perjury.
Willfully allowing goverment employees to violate federal law-to the death and destruction of American Citizen by foreign invaders.
This is not a policy disagreement.
It is Treason.
In a just and honest world, Mayorkas should face capital punishment, and have his head on a pike at the southern border.
"We're impeaching him for not solving the problem which we refuse to pass legislation to solve! Are we on FoxNews yet?" ~ GOP MAGA Caucus
This type of nonsense might work with the MAGA base but for the rest of us, including independents, it proves republicans have no ability to govern. I find it hilarious — that MAGA republicans are so mentally limited and tribalist that they would fall for Trump's open and public ploy to make the situation worse and then blame Biden. And they will fall for this.
How does Congress use their power to ensure the exectutive branch is carrying out their duties.
Congress creates the laws. What is supposed to happen if the Executive branch refuses to enforce the laws?
This will captivate the electorate almost as much as the bombshell Mueller Report. I can't wait for Tucker to tell us what it all means.
I'm sorry, Rich, outline for all of us MAGA know-nothings precisely what Biden needs from Congress in order to get control of the border- be specific by pointing out the new abilities that are included in the Senate bill that includes aid for Ukraine and Israel. I await your enlightening answers.
It's fun being Congress. The stuff you can do.
Rich said...
"We're impeaching him for not solving the problem which we refuse to pass legislation to solve! Are we on FoxNews yet?" ~ GOP MAGA Caucus
This type of nonsense might work with the MAGA base but for the rest of us, including independents, it proves republicans have no ability to govern. I find it hilarious — that MAGA republicans are so mentally limited and tribalist that they would fall for Trump's open and public ploy to make the situation worse and then blame Biden. And they will fall for this.
1/28/24, 12:26 PM
BIDEN made it worse. It's idiots like you who are falling for the Biden lies. Watch something besides MSNBC.
Rich is lying. There is no additional legislation needed; the Biden administration needs only to enforce existing law at the border.
When the attacks come, remember the lies and other willful acts and who was behind them. They, too, are enemies of America.
Blogger iowan2 said...
>>How does Congress use their power to ensure the exectutive branch is carrying out their duties.
Congress creates the laws. What is supposed to happen if the Executive branch refuses to enforce the laws?<<
Kurt Gödel famously said that the U.S. Constitution contained a logical flaw that could lead to the collapse of the country. I wonder if this was it.
For two centuries the system worked reasonably well, in that if Congress passed a law, then the Executive enforced it even if they weren't big fans of it, and if the Supreme Court invalidated the law, the Executive stopped enforcing it even though the Court had no enforcement mechanism.
Then during the Clinton administration it suddenly became ok to ignore Congress or the Court, not for "national security" reasons, but because it was politically embarrassing for Bill Clinton, and you know, protecting Bill Clinton's political viability was really the purpose of the Constitution, right?
Then that idiot Bush decided that he could do unilaterally whatever some weasel in the Intelligence bureaucracy told him was ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY and the dimwitted Republicans decided to paper it all over by passing laws (that they hadn't read) that were essential "Yeah. What that guy said." So we ended up with an uncontrollable Intelligence/Defense apparatus...
...which Obama--completely predictably--decided to turn against any American citizens who disagreed with him, plus, the rest of the bureaucracy got jealous of what Intelligence/Defense could do until they realized that there was nothing stopping them from ruling enormous portions of the country by fiat ("Dear Colleague" letters which somehow have the force of law without the policies they enforce ever having been voted on by a legislature)...
...and then, when Trump go elected, the internal Executive Branch agencies and all the good little worker bees decided that they did not have to listen EITHER to the Bad Orange Man or to the Congress or to the Courts but could just do things or refuse to do things based on their own judgments (because a combination of self-righteousness and mid-wit intelligence is surely guaranteed to lead to good results)...
...and Biden being a dementia patient is these geebos' wet dream, since the government is currently being "run" by committee with no official authority and therefore absolutely no accountability...
...so now we have prosecutors who believe that they can just invalidate whole swathes of law while simultaneously more and more members of the government apparatus make themselves immune to it through specious claims of absolute and qualified immunity.
(Like so many of our dysfunction, it goes back to Bill Clinton's utter selfishness (on-brand for a Boomer, but still...) and follows a path through George Bush's stupidity, Obama's malevolence, Trump's cluelessness about personnel, the spastic insanity of the whole ruling class' response to Trump, and Biden's dementia, immorality, corruption, ignorance, and stupidity. Sadly, I think we are very close to the "Emperor Puts His Horse in the Senate" stage of the collapse).
Mayorkas is so fucked up he has to have been created in a lab. They should’ve nuked that Petri dish.
We're impeaching him for not solving the problem which we refuse to pass legislation to solve!
Pass legislation? That was done over 200 years ago, Article IV Section IV. Get with the times.
These days, impeachment is little more than a vote of no confidence. No crimes are necessary, negligence and gross incompetence is more than enough. The Democrats say so, so it must be true.
Mayorkas is doing a terrible job. He lied to his boss and allowed his department to decline into chaos. It's a firing offense if every there were one.
We are not a parliamentary democracy. That's not how our constitution works. The president is elected by the voters and the executive branch works for him.
If the president does a bad job, the voters can elect a new one. That's how our system works.
Y'all can vote in November. I will.
The evolution of cooperation, the book, discusses that there is no strategy better than "tit for tat".
If Republicans want Democrats to cooperate, and not file frivolous lawsuits or promiscuous impeachments, they will have to file lawsuits and impeachments themselves. Until the Dems agree that too there have been too many impeachments over too small things.
Clinton's perjury, not oral sex adultery nor sexual harrassment, was on the verge -- all the Democrats voted to Not Punish perjury. Yet complain constantly about Trump; avoiding talking about Biden's lies.
Both of Trump's impeachments were Dem Derangement Syndrome vs Trump, promiscuous.
In retrospect, Nixon's was an FBI jilted #2 (Mark Felt) illegally leaking info about covering up a minor crime; a far smaller crime than Obama's illegal spying on Trump in 2016.
This against the illegal immigrants is more serious and meritorious. Biden's many actions and inactions have led to this point; it should probably be him being impeached but it was Mayorkas who was lying to Congress about the border being secured.
It will probably fizzle in the Senate ... BUT names will be taken, and those Senators up for re-election might not want to be tagged with "supports illegal immigration / open borders for rapists, terrorists, and those w/o documents".
Blogger Rich said...""We're impeaching him for not solving the problem which we refuse to pass legislation to solve! Are we on FoxNews yet?" ~ GOP MAGA Caucus "
Everybody here recognizes this as nonsense. Why do you bother?
Want to know why military recruitment is no longer signing up enough of their target population. The 18 - 20 year old white males are aware the country no longer values their existence.
“The charges against Mr. Mayorkas... are all but certain to fizzle in the Democratic-led Senate.”
Maybe not. A lot of Democrat led cities are having a hard time handling the mass influx of illegal immigrants. It’s costing them billions. This is turning into a issue that’s making Democrats vulnerable. It possible, if unlikely, that some Democrat senators might vote to impeach Mayorkas in an attempt to save themselves. Of course, that raises the issue of Joe Biden’s responsibility for this debacle.
"We're impeaching him for not solving the problem which we refuse to pass legislation to solve!
OK. I'll bite. Just what legislation needs to be passed in order to secure the border?
tim maguire said...
"These days, impeachment is little more than a vote of no confidence."
Not so. A vote of no confidence is a serious thing, and has the effect of removing the leader from office. An impeachment without a conviction is utterly meaningless. It is no more than a partisan middle finger.
I remain unconvinced that the only resort Congress has if the executive branch refuses to enforce a law is to vote for a different President in the next election. A presidency might refuse to enforce an environmental law, or a law imposing higher taxes. Are people really argument that Congress should just shrug in these circumstances, and say, well that's just the way it is. My own view is that "high crimes and misdemeanors" is whatever Congress chooses it to mean and is defined in the specifics of a given particular impeachment and trial for removal.
All this phony stuff about "we're just so concerned about border security, you see," from the Republicans. Then they get a border deal that also will allow Ukraine aid to be funded. And suddenly, "er, no, we can't accept it, because it might make Biden look good," and because Trump wants to make sure we stab Ukraine in the back and help Putin.
The question I have is why do Trump's political priorities so consistently help Putin?
The president is elected by the voters and the executive branch works for him.
I agree. Impeaching Mayorkas would be doing Biden a favor. Hang it around his neck instead.
Is Rich really this stupid? I’m leaning toward a yes.
Was "All this phony stuff" a hint as to what was to come in the rest of your post?
I will repeat my question again, Rich, since you didn't answer it:
Outline for all of us MAGA know-nothings precisely what Biden needs from Congress in order to get control of the border- be specific by pointing out the new abilities that are included in the Senate bill that includes aid for Ukraine and Israel. I await your enlightening answers.
What was in the bill that would have secured the border, Rich? Be specific. Surely, you have an answer, right, and not just repeating Democrat talking points.
"Then they get a border deal that also will allow Ukraine aid to be funded. And suddenly, "er, no, we can't accept it, because it might make Biden look good,"
No. Ukraine has nothing to do with it. Deal with the border. If Biden can't make himself look good there, well- that's because he (and the rest of the Democratic party) is about as useful as a bag of dicks when it comes to benefitting the American people.
"Trump's open and public ploy to make the situation worse and then blame Biden. "
Do tell.
What the hell does Ukraine have to do with our illegal immigration problem?
Biden only wants $$ to further streamline the invasion.
Time for Rich to open up the guest room for some high density bunk beds and rape kits.
Michael K.,
Schlichter's book certainly points up the primary lesson of the Bedlam terrorist attack. The only possible practical defense against those kinds of attackers is widespread carrying of arms and good, consistent situational awareness.
The question I have is why do Trump's political priorities so consistently help Putin?
Do you mean like telling Europe not to depend on Russian LNG?
So Rich, I have a question for you. I'm mildly curious. What purpose are you trying to serve with your comments here? With Feder and Howard its pretty obvious. To me not so much with you. You seem bright enough to know you are posting drivel. Mostly incomprehensible drivel at that. What would cause a person to do that? I have some idea why, but I would like an explanation from you for my own curiosity's sake.
Sigh. At least they used “flout” rather than “flaunt.”
Yancey Ward said...
Dereliction of duty is indeed a high crime that warrants impeachment.
How about impeaching the GOP majority in the House of Representatives? How many House bills reached the floor concerning problems on our southern border other than an unprovable warrant to impeach Mayorkis which assures further waste of time for the Senate as well.
"The 118th Congress is on track to be one of the most unproductive in modern history, with just a couple dozen laws on the books at the close of 2023, according to data from data analytics firm Quorum.
Why it matters: It's the product of not only divided partisan control of Washington but infighting within the House Republican majority that has routinely ground legislative business to a halt."
https://www.axios.com/2023/12/19/118-congress-bills-least-unproductive-chart
tim maguire said...
These days, impeachment is little more than a vote of no confidence. No crimes are necessary, negligence and gross incompetence is more than enough. The Democrats say so, so it must be true.
Mayorkas is doing a terrible job. He lied to his boss and allowed his department to decline into chaos. It's a firing offense if ever there was one.
Sorry tim, you don't get to make the rules for imposing Articles of Impeachment. Biden never said Mayorkas lied to him, and most importantly, more than half of Trump's cabinet failed to perform adequately. We can start with all of TFG's Attorneys General (Sessions, Whittaker, and Barr), and the big personal spenders, HHS Sec'y Tom Price, VA Sec'y David Shulkin, HUD Sec'y Ben Carson, Treasury Sec'y Steve Mnuchin (and wife), and Interior Sec'y Ryan Zinke. Most of these folks never interacted with Trump because Trump didn't have time except at the Cabinet Meetings where they had to tell the press how great Trump was.
@ pacwest: A lot of people are missing the point. Biden is just playing a tactical game. He can resume permits in 12 months. He never said never. These projects will restart after the general election no matter who wins.
What was in the bill that would have secured the border, Rich? Be specific. Surely, you have an answer, right, and not just repeating Democrat talking points.
1/28/24, 6:31 PM
Rich is too busy parroting Rachel Maddow and Joy Reid. I think he is really Joe Scarbourough Bzezinski.
Not my fault ...
WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden on Friday vowed to halt crossings at the border when it’s “overwhelmed” if Congress passes bipartisan immigration legislation giving him that authority.
NBC NEWS
At least the Dems will have to vote in favor of the invasion, on the record. Even the Corporate Media has to cover an impeachment vote. A vote for Mayorkas is a voted for the Invasion. How will Fwtterman vote? Manchin? Tester? Cinema? Brown?
"How many House bills reached the floor concerning problems on our southern border other than an unprovable warrant to impeach Mayorkis which assures further waste of time for the Senate as well.
Same question to you, Gadfly- what powers does Biden need to secure the southern border that he doesn't already have? Be specific. What was in the bill Johnson has shelved that would have made the difference. Again, be specific. If you aren't willing to answer this question, it will prove that you are just running talking points for the Democrats.
"tim maguire said...
Mayorkas is doing a terrible job. He lied to his boss and allowed his department to decline into chaos. It's a firing offense if every there were one."
This in inane. He lies because he was told to. By his boss. But in reality not by Biden. He's a fucking potted plant. By Biden's handlers. Who ultimately do the biding of Obama.
What a waste. He’s just the designated piñata. The problem is Biden and his handlers.
“I just don't believe they have a cognizable basis here for impeachment." ~ Jonathan Turley
Even when Turley acknowledges the duplicity of Republican impeachment theatrics, you know their latest bit of political theater has totally jumped the shark. I suppose the MAGA logic goes like this: If *everyone* gets impeached, they think Trump’s won’t look so bad by comparison.
Lars Porsena said...
What a waste. He’s just the designated piñata
--
Raaaaccciiiisssst!
I suppose the MAGA logic goes like this: If *everyone* gets impeached, they think Trump’s won’t look so bad by comparison.
Why don't you answer the questions people have posed to you instead of posting the same, stupid shit?
Oh sheesh! No matter how many thimes you proofread...
Bedlam => Beslan
Post a Comment