Commentary

AOC Floats Impeaching Trump and AG Barr To Stop SCOTUS Nomination

Combined Shape

The announcement of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death sent shockwaves throughout Washington on Friday evening. The realization that this liberal icon might be replaced by a conservative judge threw Democrats into a frenzy.

With Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer by her side during a news conference Sunday in Brooklyn, New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was asked whether she supported impeaching President Donald Trump or Attorney General William Barr in order to “buy time” and stop Republicans from filling the Supreme Court vacancy before the November election.

The congresswoman said yes, impeachment should be “on the table.”

Echoing remarks made earlier by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the democratic socialist said there has been “an enormous amount of law-breaking in the Trump administration” and “potentially law-breaking behavior” by Barr, whom she declared “unfit for office.”

“That being said, these are procedures and decisions that are largely up to House Democratic leadership,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “But I believe that also we must consider, again, all of the tools available to our disposal and that all of these options should be entertained and on the table.”

Trending:
Explosive Report: Hunter Biden Finally Brought Down - 26-Year FBI Vet Nailed Him - Dynasty in Ruins

As Ocasio-Cortez, Pelosi and others on the left raise the idea of impeaching the president and his attorney general, they are overlooking one important fact: Not only is it legal for Trump to nominate a candidate to fill the vacant seat, it is his constitutional duty.

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who knows a thing or two about the Constitution, noted in a tweet Sunday that the founding document “allows impeachment for ‘high crimes and misdemeanors.'”

“Nominating a Supreme Court Justice does not meet that standard…to put it mildly,” he said.

So why are AOC and other Democrats acting as if impeachment is even an option for them?

Aside from the fact that lies fall off their tongues with great ease, the addition of a conservative justice to the Supreme Court — in addition to its impact on abortion and other issues — would toss a MOAB into their hopes for an electoral trump card.

While many expect Trump to have a solid lead at the conclusion of in-person voting Nov. 3, the mail-in ballots that will be counted after Election Day are likely to favor Biden. The president has often pointed to the fact that mail-in votes are susceptible to fraud. In a close race, the ensuing hostilities and turmoil over ballots very likely would require resolution by the Supreme Court.

Related:
AOC Planning to Form 1.5M-Member 'Climate Corps' to Work on Government-Funded Projects

The Democrats had been hoping that Ginsburg, one of the most activist justices ever to sit on the court, would help steer Biden to victory in that scenario.

The confirmation of a Trump appointee to the court prior to the election would result in either a 5-4 or a 6-3 conservative advantage. This would seemingly render the decision of Chief Justice John Roberts — the George W. Bush appointee whose swing votes have often sided with court’s liberals — irrelevant.

If Ginsburg’s seat were still vacant after the election, the court could easily wind up deadlocked 4-4 in the event of a case related to the vote, possibly triggering a constitutional crisis.

Do you think the Democrats have any grounds to impeach President Trump or Attorney General Barr?

Cruz, a member of the Republican legal team during the 2000 Bush v. Gore recount dispute in Florida, joined Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Friday night to discuss this nightmare scenario.

Referring to the Florida recount, he told Hannity, “For 37 days, the country did not know who the president was going to be. And if we had a 4-4 court, it could have dragged on for weeks and months.”

Speaking of the 2020 election, Cruz said that “Democrats and Joe Biden have made clear they intend to challenge this election. They intend to fight the legitimacy of the election. As you know, Hillary Clinton has told Joe Biden, ‘Under no circumstances should you concede, you should challenge this election.’ And we cannot have Election Day come and go with a 4-4 court.

“A 4-4 court that is equally divided cannot decide anything, and I think we risk a constitutional crisis if we do not have a nine-justice Supreme Court, particularly when there is such a risk of a contested litigation and a contested election.”

In an excellent and informative article, National Review’s Dan McLaughlin noted that presidents have nominated candidates to fill Supreme Court vacancies in presidential election years on 29 occasions. Interestingly, this piece was published Aug. 7, six weeks prior to Ginsburg’s death.

Far from being an impeachable offense, McLaughlin argued, “Choosing not to fill a vacancy would be a historically unprecedented act of unilateral disarmament. It has never happened once in all of American history. There is no chance that the Democrats, in the same position, would ever reciprocate, as their own history illustrates.”

He continued:

“Historically, throughout American history, when their party controls the Senate, presidents get to fill Supreme Court vacancies at any time — even in a presidential election year, even in a lame-duck session after the election, even after defeat. Historically, when the opposite party controls the Senate, the Senate gets to block Supreme Court nominees sent up in a presidential election year, and hold the seat open for the winner. Both of those precedents are settled by experience as old as the republic.”

As for the Republicans supposedly ramming through a confirmation just six weeks ahead of a presidential election, Sean Davis of The Federalist reminds us that three justices were confirmed in far less time. From nomination to confirmation, the process took only 19 days for former Justice John Paul Stevens, 24 days for Roberts and 33 days for former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

AOC and Pelosi are trying to deceive Americans just as they’ve done so many times before. They’ve created a narrative that they will repeat over and over until the many people believe it. This is no different from the Russian collusion hoax, the bogus case against Michael Flynn and Trump’s infamous July 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Indeed, it is the president’s constitutional duty to nominate a replacement for Ginsburg, and it is the Senate’s duty to vote on that nominee.

Republicans need to stop the Democrats’ latest deception before it gains momentum. This is an act of desperation and it must be met with strength and resolve. The future of America depends on it.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →






We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Tags:
, , , ,
Elizabeth is a contract writer at The Western Journal. Her articles have appeared on many conservative websites including RedState, Newsmax, The Federalist, Bongino.com, HotAir, Instapundit, MSN and RealClearPolitics. Please visit Elizabeth's new conservative blog: TheAmericanCrisis.org
Elizabeth is a contract writer at The Western Journal. Her articles have appeared on many conservative websites including RedState, Newsmax, The Federalist, Bongino.com, HotAir, Instapundit, MSN and RealClearPolitics.
Please visit Elizabeth's new conservative blog: TheAmericanCrisis.org




Conversation