Faithless Execution

erAndrew McCarthy will be speaking at the Freedom Center’s Wednesday Morning Club in Los Angeles on June 18, 2014. For more info, click here.

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Andrew C. McCarthy, a policy fellow at the National Review Institute, a contributing editor at National Review, and a columnist for PJ Media. He was a top federal prosecutor involved in some of the most significant cases in recent history. Decorated with the Justice Department’s highest honors, he retired from government in 2003, after helping launch the 9/11 investigation. He is one of America’s most persuasive voices on national security issues and author of the bestsellers Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad and The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America. He is the author of the new book, Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment.

FP: Andrew C. McCarthy, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

McCarthy: Jamie, it’s a pleasure to speak with you again.

FP: Let’s begin with what inspired you to write this book.

McCarthy: Presidential lawlessness and derelictions of duty. I guess that, in light of my background, it’s not surprising that I’m intrigued by how our Constitution deals with modern challenges—or, more accurately, modern iterations of eternal challenges like abuse of power. President Obama’s lawlessness is unprecedented in its scope, starkness, and purpose to undermine the separation-of-powers. The Framers rightly believed the latter was the key to safeguarding liberty—preventing the accumulation of too much power, and especially the joining of executive and legislative powers, in a single set of hands. Because they so worried about the specter of executive lawlessness and overreach, they gave Congress tools to address it decisively. But there are really only two of them: the power of the purse and impeachment.

So I wrote the book to say, “Look, presidential lawlessness is a significant threat to our liberties and to our aspiration to be a Republic under the rule of law. The system gives us weapons to combat it. If we don’t use them, that is a political choice that can be made, but let’s make it with our eyes open because it has serious consequences. I means we will no longer be the same kind of country.”

FP: What exactly are “high crimes and misdemeanors” and can you give a few brief examples of how has Obama committed them?

McCarthy: Thanks for asking that because it gets to another reason I wanted to write the book. There is mass confusion about what “high crimes and misdemeanors” means, which is somewhat surprising given that the Clinton impeachment happened less than a generation ago. But it does not refer to conventional “crimes” and “misdemeanors” that I prosecuted back when I was a government lawyer. It is a term of art borrowed from British law—in fact, the impeachment trial of Warren Hastings, who was charged in Parliament with “high crimes and misdemeanors” by Edmund Burke, was underway in England while our Constitution was being written, and the Framers were very engaged in such affairs. The phrase, as Hamilton explained, refers to the “political wrongs of public men”—meaning abuses of power and breaches of the public trust reposed in high executive officials. More than penal offenses, it much more resembles concepts found in military justice, e.g., dereliction of duty, failure to honor an oath, etc. The Framers were most concerned about executive maladministration that would undermine our constitutional framework, usurping the powers of the states and the other federal branches.

I recently heard former Attorney General Mukasey give a great example of how an impeachable offense need not be a standard crime or an indictable offense. Presidents have plenary, unreviewable constitutional power to issue pardons and commutations for federal crimes and sentences. If a president suddenly decided to pardon and commute the sentences of every single convict in federal prison and every indicted defendant in a federal case, there would be no crime in that. A president clearly has the constitutional authority to issue such an order. But it would also be a massive abuse of power and he could and, one hopes, surely would be impeached and removed from office for doing it.

FP: You emphasize that making the legal case for impeachment is not enough. Kindly explain.

McCarthy: In their genius, the Framers wanted us to have a clear standard—treason, bribery and high crimes and misdemeanors—defining what misconduct legally suffices to remove a president from power. But recognizing that removing a president would be very disruptive to our society, they wanted it to be hard to accomplish—so it would only be done in worthy cases, not as a result of partisan hackery. So while articles of impeachment (i.e., accusations of high crimes and misdemeanors) may be filed on just a simple majority of the House of Representatives, it requires a two-thirds Senate supermajority to remove the president from power. No matter how many provable impeachable offenses you have, then, a president will not be removed unless there is a broad-based popular will that he should be ousted. So the legal case for impeachment, the establishment of high crimes and misdemeanors, is not as important as the political case that the impeachable offenses truly warrant removal. Impeachment is essentially a political remedy, not a legal one.

FP: As a former prosecutor, you have gained some extra insights on this matter, the differences between a legal case and impeachment?

McCarthy: Yes, I have a chapter in the book that analyzes how different the criminal investigation and trial process is from the substantially political process of impeachment. I don’t mean “political” in a pejorative sense. I mean it in the sense that the Constitution is a division of political power—so I’m talking about the judicial process of ordinary law-enforcement cases versus the process of filing articles of impeachment in the House and conducting a Senate impeachment trial.

FP: The campaigns to impeach Nixon and Clinton involved very different ingredients than why Obama would need to be impeached, right?

McCarthy: The lawlessness in which Nixon and Clinton engaged, while certainly qualifying as “high crimes and misdemeanors,” was different not only in degree but kind from Obama’s. Clinton’s conduct was reprehensible but it did not really touch the core of his presidential duties, much less undermine the constitutional framework. Nixon’s was more severe, but it was largely based on a single transaction and was not a systematic assault on our governing framework—in fact, Nixon obeyed a court order, surrendered the tapes, and ultimately resigned from office rather than stonewalling, destroying the tapes (other than the infamous 18-minute gap), putting the country through an impeachment trial, and otherwise using his enormous power to fight to the bitter end.

FP: You demonstrate that all of this is very much connected to the “fundamental transformation” that Obama promised. Illuminate that for us please.

McCarthy: In marked contrast to Nixon and Clinton, Obama is a committed movement leftist who is using his raw power to make good on his vow to “fundamentally transform the United States of America” under circumstances where he does not have a public mandate and governing majority—most Americans, it turns out, like the country and don’t want it transformed. Of necessity, then, if he’s going to transform us, Obama has to do it outside the bounds of the law and traditional notions of presidential duty. It follows that there’s a slew of lawlessness and derelictions of duty.

Indeed, because Obama is a trained community organizer and steeped in Leftist strategies like Piven-Cloward, it follows that he presses his raw power beyond his legitimate authority as far as he thinks he can afford to go politically and that he overloads the system with crisis—so that by the time you barely wrap your brain around the details of one scandal, he’s two or three scandals down the road. There were lots of Clinton scandals, but they were mostly about his personal failings not a strategic challenge to the constitutional framework.

FP: What would the framers of this country think of Obama?

McCarthy: They’d think he should be impeached and removed, but they’d be more surprised, I imagine, at how drastically the country had changed, and how much the relation between the citizen and the central government had changed. Obama is a known quantity and he’s doing what one who had studied his background and record would expect him to do. And the president’s political opposition in Congress is feckless, but they are not inventing out of whole cloth the possibility of being damaged politically for resisting him. The wild card in the equation is the public. How important to us is it that we are still a republic under the rule of law rather than subjects of presidential whim. That’s hard to say, and that’s what would have surprised the Framers.

FP: The consequences for this nation if the American people do not give their support for their leaders to pursue impeachment?

McCarthy: Well, as I argue in the book, the best thing for the country would not be Obama’s impeachment. It would be to create the political conditions—by emphasizing the issue of presidential lawlessness—under which the president sees his interest as following the law, honoring his oath, and finishing his term that way. But if he is not going to do that—and things seem to be getting worse rather than better—something has to be done about it. The Framers gave Congress two tools: the power of the purse and impeachment. If neither of those remedies is going to be used, we are going to be a very different kind of country.

FP: Final thoughts?

McCarthy: The precedents being set today by Obama’s lawlessness and derelictions of duty are going to be available for exploitation by every future president, regardless of party or ideological bent. This should not be a partisan or a conservative issue. We all have a stake in the president’s not being above the law.

FP: Andrew C. McCarthy, thank you so much for joining Frontpage Interview.

McCarthy: It’s been my pleasure, thanks so much.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    The Bergdahl/Taliban trade is one of the worst things the Obama administration has ever done.

    Obama needs to be recalled or impeached.

  • cedarhill

    A foolish exercise. Obama is untouchable while the Senate remains in Dem control. Even supposing the GOP wins the Senate, it will be January 2015 when they take office, leaving only 24 months. The 2016 campaigns will start cranking up shortly afterwards moving most of the MSM “oxygen” to bashing the GOP candidates.

    What would be better, imho, is for the House to convene a Special Select Constitutional Change Committee be formed to propose Constitutional changes. They can form it under the guise of recognizing Harry Reids move to change the Bill of Rights. However, the committee’s agenda would start with seperation of powers. The first change will examine the 10th Amendment and the seperation of powers between Federal and State. They could also have a concurrent sub-committee addressing limitation of powers of the Executive which might include the Congress needing to ratify each EO. A final sub-committee could explore putting in place a Superior Court of State Chief Justices that review SCOTUS.

    And, of course, make the hearings all about politics and the misery the Left produces. Call relatives of the ones killed by the actions of the Left. I.E., all the illegals killing, raping, etc. Call Holder, Reid, Biden, Pelosi and all the drooling, raving, barking made, baying at the moon “leaders” to testify as to their recommendations to impose totalitarian Federal control. Ask Obama to testify as well as a curtesy under what might be called The Hope Amendement. Even call Oprah, Whoppi, Jesse J., Farakhan, Maddow, Mathews and every journalist in America. Even all the Taliban leaders that were just released.
    And, for sure, call folks being crushed by the Feds – ranchers, the couple that built a State approved pond only to see the Feds levying thousand dollar a day fines. Even bring in the kids trying to munch through Michele’s arugula. And don’t forget the “war on energy”. Et al.

    The States controlled by the GOP should do the same. Call for a State Constitutional Convention. Be smart for a change and coordinate with the Congress. It will give the House Committee cover since they can say what they’re doing is to head off that evil Article V Convention.

    Reid brought this up — it’s time to make “Change” the focus for 2016.

    It’s a battlefield with a huge number of vulnerable targets.

  • RetiredMilitarytoo

    This is a repeat of my comment to the Ben Shapiro article written on June 12, 2014:

    Lets stop calling Obama, “America’s First Black President” … lets refer to him as “America’s First Half White President”. Might make it easier for Congress to do what they need to do, to get him out of office.

    • NJK

      How about America’s first fake president.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        First fifth columnist president.

  • Adheeb

    Two men were shown an ink blot and asked what they see. The first man responded, ‘a spider’, the second said, ‘an ink blot’. Some people see things for what they are, others see something else.

    When Mr Obama was elected in 2008 I was astounded. How could a man with virtually no credentials possibly get elected President of the United States? But after his re-election in 2012 it was obvious that American voters are detached from reality and will never find their way. The problem is not the leaders, it’s the people who elect them.

    • NJK

      I hear they stole it.

      • Adheeb

        I’m certain that was part of the problem. :-)

    • Randy Townsend

      Well said and I concur. This is not a destructive government being imposed on an unwilling population – it is national suicide, committed voluntarily.

  • nimbii

    Obama wants to redistribute illegals to key voting districts to turn them blue because he will allow them to vote.

    Yes, he should be impeached before he does this because once we let illegals vote we can’t close that door.

  • CarlMM

    1. There will be evidence in one of his “phony scandals” that will require impeachment by both sides and support of the people.

    2. There will be a future “phony scandal” that will be so big that will require impeachment and supported by both sides and the people.

    What is that evidence? A tape perhaps of his aiding and abetting the enemy while possibly attacking his own troops. A tape? You don’t think there is a tape of him siding with Muslims/Arab Spring/Muslim Brotherhood and terrorists as legally labeled by the U.S. government over our troops and country? Donald Sterling. Somebody has a tape of this and they will blackmail Obama. Who? Didn’t we listen in on Merkel of Germany and many other leaders? You don’t think they can do the same to Obama? Does Israel feel threatened by Obama? Do they have the capability to spy on Obama? Is there someone in the WH that would do it? Has a country, like Israel, have the technical capacity to have a tape? But in all these scenarios, that country will not put their name on the tape but they’ll have a “small time hacker in a hole-in-the-wall town in Denmark” reveal the tape. “Is that Obama’s voice?” Donald Sterling.

    What if Obama went on a racist rant about White people and maybe even adding “those Mexicans?” What if he made racist remarks about our Congressional leaders including on Pelosi and Reid?

    Obama is all about Black Liberation Theology and if he was caught making racist remarks, how could he defend them when the attack on Donald Sterling was on a national scale especially be Blacks but again, very few Whites defended and made excuses for him.

    Besides a racist rant, a General could reveal Obama’s tendency to side with Muslims over our interests, and those of Israel, and he could detail certain moves that proves it. What if he was caught saying he hoped Iran would get a nuke so they could wipe out the Jews and then proved that he and Kerry allowed a secret Iranian program? What have both said about Israel? Didn’t Kerry have to backtrack on one his statements only two weeks ago? Why would he make that statement in the first place if he wasn’t brainwashed in that thinking? Obama spits on Israel, especially Netanyahu, all the time and mostly blames them while siding with its sworn enemies. Now three teens were kidnapped by Hamas and they will use the teens, one with American citizenship, as Bergdahl Bargaining Chips to get their leaders, and more, released. Obama will be blamed for “negotiating with terrorists who now kidnapped an American and will kidnap Americans worldwide as Chips in a Trade Game.” No American is safe anywhere now including from non-terrorists like drug lords. The problem will come when the U.S. doesn’t give in to their demands. They will kill each prisoner to show they mean business and they’ll keep kidnapping and killing till Obama says “Uncle” again. The cycle will never end and the world will “fundamentally change” forever.

    The next “phony scandal,” whatever it is, has to be so big that Obama’s staunchest supporters have to vote to impeach and will run from him as fast as possible. If any Democrat still supports him, defends him, and makes excuses for him, they too should be impeached since they too are not following their oath and it will then expose them as caring more for their Party, one man, his color, maybe mutual color, and our “First Black President,” than for the United States of America and its Constitution.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    I have mixed opinions about this.

    First, I want Obama out. I hope and pray that an Oswald doesn’t come along, and make him a martyr. But that’s only the first type of martyrdom.

    The second, and possibly worst, kind of martyrdom is the political sort. The MSM, all the Soros organizations, and surely the NAACP, race-p!mps like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, and extremist groups like the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam, would go ballistic. A successful removal would probably set America’s cities ablaze.

    Last, this would be the second impeachment in three presidencies, both initiated by my party of choice, the GOP, and the consequences for the future of the party could well be devastating. Of course, Obama’s term in office has been devastating, too. But there’s only one viable alternative to the DEMs, and impeachment of Obama might well make it a permanent minority party, if it even survives.

    So, I advise the utmost caution, a watchful eye, and hope for the best. When Obama is out of office, the possibility of prosecution for some of his crimes appeals to me. My own State of Illinois regularly imprisons its former governors. Why should a president be immune from his actions in office?

    • http://www.stubbornthings.org NAHALKIDES

      Yes, most of our living ex-governors seem to be behind bars, and I agree the time to get Obama is when he’s out of office. Since impeachment isn’t going to happen, maybe House Republicans should consider again using the power of the purse to reign in Obama. At this point, it probably makes sense to wait until after the November elections. If Republicans can take the Senate, they could more easily win a showdown with Obama and answer charges they were trying to “shut down” the government by explaining they were merely trying to reign in a lawless President.

    • WhiteHunter

      Agreed. But there’s much more damage still on Obama’s To Do List–it’s frightening to think that most of it might be irreparable–until January 20, 2017 (the hundreds of corrupt pardons issued by Clinton literally up to his last hour in office are just one example of what’s possible, and not the worst, although pardoning Holder and Lerner would help Obama cover his own crimes–and I’m sure he’s already been in touch with them about that kind of quid pro quo).

      At a minimum, Republicans in Congress need to maintain strict party discipline for once, as the Dems ALWAYS do, and use every possible parliamentary tool to refuse to confirm every one of Obama’s nominations and appointments (as they should have been doing all along, which would have saved us from disasters like Holder, Hillary, Kerry, Sebelius, Napolitano, Hagel, Sotomayor, Kagan, Shinseki, “Jeh” Johnson, and every one of the rest).

      If we can at least prevent him from continuing to install any more of his fellow travelers in the Executive and Judicial branches, and use the power of the purse to starve his devastating programs of funds, it would be a big step toward slowing, if not completely stopping, the damage he’s determined to inflict on us.

    • Guest

      The Left creates its own martyrs out of futility when all else fails. They then have a perpetual icon/victim who can be eulogized as often as needed. Sacco, Vanzetti, Chavez, et al.to rally the duped.

    • nomoretraitors

      “A successful removal would probably set America’s cities ablaze”
      Then let them burn. We can then declare martial law and deal with the thugs as they should have been dealt with all along: sho*t on sight/sh*ot to k*ll

    • ron44

      he has been operating a criminal enterprise and is guilty of racketing along with his Chicago buddies.. The IRS hidden EMAILS will prove who all else in involved, Time for prison for the whole rotten bunch..

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        I like YOUR wolf! …

        I don’t know what the hidden emails will show, and that’s the point, isn’t it? I suspect that you’re right about what the emails will show, though. But we can’t know until we see them.

        By God, I want to see them …

    • objectivefactsmatter

      “First, I want Obama out. I hope and pray that an Oswald doesn’t come along, and make him a martyr.”

      That would be the absolute worst possible outcome. Anyone that imagines it as a good scenario for the constitution is extremely ignorant.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Exactly …

  • Chiron_Venizelos

    Mr. McCarthy has diligently gathered the nails that should be driven in the coffin of the 0bama regime.
    However!
    Unless or until there is a majority of rock-ribbed Conservatives in BOTH Houses of Congress, NOTHING can be done about prosecuting Mr. 0bama and his regime for their serial crime spree (including TREASON).
    On another note, some of you may have noticed an advertisement for Jim Tracy, who is running for the US Congress, in Tennessee. Mr. Tracy is a RINO. Please do NOT vote for him. Please also check the conservative credentials of Dr. DesJarlais, the incumbent; I believe you will be impressed!

  • Lanna

    As long as the politicians worry about getting re-elected and being politically correct, they will allow the manipulation of the good people of America…Its a sorry state of affairs. Just like Cantor was so involved with getting re-elected, and going to meetings with Lois Gutierrez on amnesty, he didn’t even identify with the mood of his voters…Hindsight…..Worry about the people and the issues that matter and you will get re-elected! That’s what we see in so many politicans….what the heck is the definition of your jobs?….Work for lower taxes, more jobs, better economy, national security, providing the utmost of yourself to problem solving and availability for your constituents, quit ignoring their needs and their letters and being focused on thyself…politicians make fatal errors after they are in office and think they can get a free ride to being elected!

  • Nederman

    There aren’t any people who are willing to affect their chances at re-election so professional politicians go along to get along. All bark and no bite.

  • FrontPgSubscr

    Is this going to be more than just “more rhetoric”??

  • WeroInNM

    Obama is the Manifestation of a Multi-Generational Soviet Plot to Destroy America! (Part 3)
    http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/obama-is-the-manifestation-of-a-multi-generational-soviet-plot-2
    “Food For Thought”
    Hello: When Are Americans Going To Wake Up?-God Bless America!
    Semper Fi!
    Jake

  • Hktony

    Nothing will happen! The electorate are as dumb as dumb can be, well a majority at least. Your govt on both parties are rotten to the core, minus one or two! So this is just another feel good article as you watch. your country being sold to soros and Saudis. Same in Europe! The parties are rotten. They wont improve. Why on earth would they give up their cosy first class life style? Only one solution because the next election another corrupt politician will take charge. Soros is still there and the Saudis have plenty of money for everyone .
    In Europe the countries are small enough for social unrest to change things, I hope. In the USA that’s a different story. You have a militarized police and lots of dumb people who will support them against the freedom loving people. It will be hard without a leader to unite people across a vast country. The media will get taken down and a police state introduced over night. Impeach odumbo? It won’t happen although it should. Good luck any way!
    Sometimes I look at it as kamma for the usa’s constant and never ending war on other people around the globe whether it was putting troops on the ground or CIA destabilization of countries.

  • Guest

    “Clinton’s conduct was reprehensible but it did not really touch the core of his presidential duties, much less undermine the constitutional framework.” Clinton facilitated the transfer of sensitive weapons technology to China and received cash in return (Johnny Chung, I believe). Clinton also unlawfully pilfered, blackmail latent, “raw” FBI files on dozens of GOP and other political figures. Clearly an impeachable offense according to the author.

  • ron44

    i f this gets done please revoke all of his executive orders,,

  • http://senatormark4.org senatormark4

    If you call the cops telling them your neighbor is robbing your garden, they arrive, and watch it happen again. They turn to you and say, “How many times has he done that?”, You reply, “Every morning for breakfast.”

    Duh?

    Congress is supposed to be a coEQUAL branch of government and they’ve been letting the henhouse get robbed without saying anything. They will look toooo stupid to try and impeach somebody for something that they have watched them do for 5+ years.