If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!


by Sharon Rondeau

Will Obama be impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives in the near future?

(Dec. 22, 2014) — In a conversation with a source on Monday afternoon, The Post & Email was told that the impeachment of Barack Hussein Obama is being contemplated by Republicans currently both in and out of Congress.

While the source said that the information she provided is reliable, she advised us to “go to the source,” which she identified as “Palin, Cruz, Huckabee, Gingrich.”  The references are to Sarah Palin, former Governor or Alaska; Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas; former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee; and former congressman and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.

“Go to their websites,” the source said.

On a section of Palin’s Facebook page, the former governor states underneath her photo, “Impeach Barack Obama.”  Speaking at the Western Conservative Summit last summer on the surge of illegal aliens crossing the southern border, Palin said, “There’s only one remedy for a president who commits high crimes and misdemeanors, and it’s impeachment. It was Alexander Hamilton who described impeachable offenses as ‘the abuse or violation of some public trust.’”

The following is also posted on the same Facebook page:

Palin described a litany of Obama offenses, including the Department of Justice wiretapping journalists, the president’s infamous lie about keeping your doctor under Obamacare, IRS targeting of conservative groups, and many others. Some she referred to as as impeachable offenses, others as “just offensive.”

The primary violation in Palin’s opinion is this president’s failure to secure the borders. “If that’s not impeachable,” she said, “nothing is.”

Cruz is serving his first term as the junior U.S. senator from Texas and may run for president in 2016.  However, his constitutional eligibility, like Obama’s, is in question because Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires that the president and commander-in-chief be a “natural born Citizen.”  Cruz was born in Canada to a Cuban-citizen father and U.S.-citizen mother and has produced no evidence that he is a U.S. citizen himself, let alone a “natural born Citizen.”

The constitutional eligibility of Cruz, Mitt Romney, and Sen. John McCain has been discussed in the media, but not the questions surrounding Obama’s dubious eligibility for the presidency.

The U.S. State Department today advises that the U.S.-citizen parents of a child born in a foreign country must file a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA) claiming U.S. citizenship for the child.  After The Post & Email attempted to obtain Cruz’s CRBA, if it exists, we were advised that the form is not releasable other than to the subject citizen whose name it bears.

Last year, The Dallas Morning News reported that Cruz possessed dual citizenship, although no evidence of the claim has surfaced or been issued by Cruz’s spokesperson.  Early this year, Cruz officially renounced his Canadian citizenship.

Obama claims a birth in Hawaii, but his long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration form have been declared “100% forgeries” by a law enforcement investigation commenced in September 2011 and continuing today.  His claimed father, a Kenyan citizen, historically would have potentially disqualified him from consideration as a “natural born Citizen.”

Approximately a year ago, Cruz discussed the topic of impeaching Obama with Newsmax TV’s Steve Malzberg.

At the end of July, Gingrich had associated Obama’s hypothetical impeachment with Democrats seeking donations from potential donors for the midterm elections, which heavily favored Republicans and yielded GOP congressional majorities in numbers not seen since the Great Depression.  Speaker of the House John Boehner appeared to agree with Gingrich at the time.

In February 2011, Gingrich stated that Obama’s refusal to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996 while Gingrich was Speaker of the House, was a “dereliction of duty.”

Huckabee, who ran for president in 2008 unsuccessfully, suggested in May of last year that the cover-up of the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012 which killed four Americans and injured many more “could lead” to Obama’s impeachment.

Current Speaker of the House Rep. John Boehner has denied that there are any plans to impeach Obama.  Boehner has said that a lawsuit filed against Obama earlier this year for allegedly failing to “faithfully execute the law” is not “a step towards impeachment.”

When we asked the source if she were aware of the investigation launched by Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio about “the birth certificate,” she responded, “Yes.”  She also said that it appears to her that Obama was not raised in the United States.  The website of the Maricopa County Cold Case Posse is now offline, although lead investigator Mike Zullo has given numerous interviews on the discovery that Obama’s only proffered documentation is fraudulent.

We were told that impeachment would occur if and when a certain condition is met.

Both Atty. Michael Connelly of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) and Atty. Stephen Pidgeon have written proposed Articles of Impeachment naming Obama in the commission of constitutional violations and crimes worthy of impeachment and removal from office.

On November 13, Connelly wrote on his blog, “We have confirmed that members of Congress have referred these articles to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration. The granting of blanket amnesty by Obama should be the final nail in the coffin of impeachment. If the new Congress does not act, Obama will continue his path of destruction unabated, and we will lose our country.”

Pidgeon has accused Obama of “criminal identity fraud.”

Republicans in Congress have affirmed that impeachment is a consideration.  During the summer of 2013, Rep. Blake Farenthold said at a townhall meeting that he believed there “probably” were enough members of the House of Representatives to vote affirmatively on Articles of Impeachment.

Last January, Rep. Steve Stockman, who did not run for re-election on November 4, said he was “considering filing Articles of Impeachment against Barack Obama.”

His declaration came before Obama’s unilateral action declaring that federal immigration laws will be suspended to allow illegal aliens facing deportation to avoid it in many cases.  Last week, Obama also announced that the United States’ policy toward Cuba, which has included an embargo on trade and diplomatic relations for five decades, will change without action from Congress.

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. This has been kicking around for a while. According to LTCDR. Walter Fitzpatrick, you cannot impeach an illegal POTUS as this would assume he is legal. One of the things that keeps DC and all the law people in business is being able to hide behind the “secrecy” of law and laws supposedly not known to the public. One says this, another says another and trying to interpret many of the laws or their if/ands or buts may take a great part of your life and everyone is assumed to be a “specialist”. When the “specialists” are challenged then it kicks up to a “judge” who is a glorified lawyer but since they are all “public trustees” and operatives of the 1946 amendments to common law grand juries to speedup case revenues and protect trial attorneys. Valerie Jarret is another Muslim operative who is Obama’s right hand with Muslim and gun felon Eric Holder. The entire White House is now controlled by Muslims and homosexuals in a massive power grab. For six years we have experienced our country completely out of control and have only heard it’s all gotten too big to fix-don’t call us-we’ll call you! Just send your tax dollars and everything will be fine? We are being cheated by our government, Veterans Fitzpatrick and Darren Huff were illegally imprisoned probably by Valerie Jarrett who vowed to enforce vengeance against anyone who opposed Obama and the DNC. These power-crazed DNC maniacs will continue to do damage long after they are forced out of control of the White House since they have been allowed to illegally operate for six years going on seven. Sadly, America has abandoned its religious, Military and intellectual leaders to a “below the belt” mental/social cabal that has ruined America in multiple areas. Too much of America is “well off” and has escaped direct involvement with the working and below six figure lifestyles. When things finally deteriorate to the point that the hide and seek crowd are affected-then we will see change and something may be forced to change-until then-don’t hold your breath. I was told several years ago when we were in American Grand Jury that this was worse than anything I could imagine and it has all come true. Watching this all evolve has been horrific and hearing nothing but excuses as people protect their positions and monetary gains while their country fails and a lawless society has been nurtured to enforce criminals power into the future control of America and its judicial system to ensure their control. Our Constitutional rights to petition the Judicial for governmental or lawless corruption has been obfuscated since 2008 when the Obama coup/usurpation was forced into effect. America has nailed its own coffin closed by allowing this to retain its falsehood and empowered wicked corruption beyond imagination of average citizens. We have many “scholars” but none will jeopardize their “positions”, in the meantime-America burns.

  2. Sorry Sharon, but why bother reporting on more political hot air? Golly gee, some folks are “considering impeachment”. That’s like news? These folks won’t ever actually DO ANYTHING worth reporting on. Oh they might form a committee to study some options … study it until hell freezes over.

  3. If only more republicans were conservative like Ted Cruz! And if only more state governors had Ted Cruz’s courage to stand up and just say “No!” to the federal government!

    I like Ted Cruz. He is a patriot, but he is ineligible to become president.

    If the founders had just intended that a president merely be a born citizen, then why does the Constitution call for a natural born Citizen? What further restriction beyond mere born citizen could natural born Citizen imply?

    By the “progressive” wide open definition (“born citizen” = natural born Citizen) Ted Cruz would be a natural born Citizen of Canada (his place of birth and his only officially recognized citizenship for the first few years of his life), of Cuba (his father’s citizenship at the time) and of the USA (his mother’s citizenship at the time). I guess Ted Cruz could spend a few years in either of those other places and run for the leadership of those countries, too. After all, he is just as much a natural born Citizen of Cuba or Canada as he is of the USA.

    But how can someone be a natural born Citizen of three countries at once? The idea opens the umbrella so wide as to make the requirement meaningless. The idea would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous (as made abundantly clear by the anti-American actions of our current “citizen of the world” putative president and criminal identity fraud in chief, aka obama).

    If someone tells you that a president need only be a born citizen, then ask them why did the founders very deliberately write the requirement as natural born Citizen? It is simply ludicrous to claim that they inserted a totally meaningless and superfluous word into such an important section of the Constitution. What additional restriction does the word “natural” add to born Citizen?

    From their writings at the time, it is clear that the founders desired that our president be a person with no conflicting allegiances, which means someone with lifelong exclusive allegiance to America. Therefore, a natural born Citizen must be someone who is not only a born citizen by law, but who is by their very inborn nature one hundred percent all American and nothing else. Words mean things and obviously natural born Citizen must be a more restrictive subset of mere born citizen.

    The reality is that there are millions of conservative voters who still take the Constitution seriously and understand the importance of the presidential eligibility requirement. These voters would stay home rather than vote for such a person as Ted Cruz (or Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, Nikki Haley, etc.). When by far the majority of citizens are USA born to two USA citizens, why risk losing these votes with anyone else? Go with someone like Sarah Palin or Scott Walker and get all the conservative votes (anyway, Ted Cruz knows he is ineligible and is a patriot who loves America, so I doubt he will run).

  4. Impeachment literally implies that at one point Obama was “eligible.”

    Clearly impeachment, though arduous, is more easily understood and mapped out as a process than a declaration of INELIGIBILITY.

    In ancient Christian practice, in cases of emergency, a person in need of baptism where no water was present was allowed to be baptized with dust or sand..”for economy.”

    Perhaps, impeachment is the equivalent of a tactic “of economy,” after which a retroactive declaration of ineligibility (with all of its ramifications) could be issued.

    The rhetoric will be rude and nasty if impeachment is attempted, but imagine hearings on “ineligibility.”

    More than a few perceive (and Walid Shoebat seems to agree in a recent article) that Obama et al desire TUMULT in the nation to “divide America.” Verily, it is a modus operandi to neutralize any attempt to declare Obama “ineligible” or “impeachable.”

    Everything that we are witnessing now in the streets and in the Sharpton-esque vitriol is NOT really about “police/community” relations.

    That theme is convenient and exploitable as a kind of future insurance that Obama will hold on to ill gained power till the end of this term.

    The Founding Fathers and Framers surely would have been capable of handling the situation in a very savvy way.

    Is there a Constitutional scholar in the land who is capable today?

    The only one who comes to mind is Ambassador Alan Keyes.