Why We Shouldn't Impeach Barack Obama

In his latest book, The People vs. Barack Obama, Ben Shapiro charges the president with counts of espionage, involuntary manslaughter, violation of internal revenue laws, bribery, and obstruction of justice, not to mention the recent charge of child endangerment.

Benghazi, ObamaCare, Fast & Furious, the IRS scandal, the NSA, Solyndra, appointed czars, the James Rosen affair, and the illegal children’s exodus into the U.S. are just some the issues that show how Obama has become an imperial president.  The president has decided when to enforce immigration laws, advantageously delayed ObamaCare, and micromanaged the economy, as well as attack the Supreme Court, Congress, and the sovereign states.  He does this while proclaiming he is the voice of the people, yet he encroaches upon their rights.  American Thinker interviewed Shapiro about his book and its premises.

In The People vs. Barack Obama, Ben Shapiro brings Obama into the people’s court and addresses each of his abuses of power.

American Thinker: Why not go the impeachment route?

Ben Shapiro: It’s important to start seeing the Obama administration as a criminal enterprise.  It’s really the only way to understand what it is that they’re doing.  Impeachment says this is a political problem.  This is not a political problem, but a criminal problem.  And detailing it in those terms, in terms of what laws have been broken, is important to understanding exactly who these folks are, and what they’re doing: exploiting their power.

AT: Can the families of Brian Terry, the border patrol agent killed, and the families of the Benghazi victims sue the federal government?

BS: Right now, the answer is basically no, because suing the executive branch is considered unpalatable under RICO, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.  What I propose is changing the RICO law so that you could sue the president of the United States, and the attorney general of the United States.  So in that case, clearly Brian Terry’s family has standing, they would be able to sue, and they would be able to win damages against individual officers of the United States.  Same thing would happen with regard to the four folks who died in Benghazi.  Their families could sue the Obama administration for negligent homicide – for example, if RICO was broadened to include negligent homicide, which it should, or violations of the Arms Export Control Act, which is what I have suggested also happened in Benghazi.

AT: You compare what President Obama did with the IRS scandal to the practices of the Mafia.  Please explain.

BS: President Obama went out and did exactly what a Mafia boss would do.  He went out and said, "Oh, wouldn’t it be great if somebody knocked over this bank?"  And then one of his low-level guys goes and knocks over a bank.  I mean, shocker.

President Obama repeatedly kept saying over and over that Tea Party groups were the death of the American political system, that the exploitation of 501(c)(4) status had destroyed the American political system, and that we had to take action against these groups.  And then a bunch of his friends in the Senate sent letters to the IRS saying, "It’d be great if you’d take an extra look at these Tea Party groups."  The IRS begins coordinating with the FBI on all of these groups, and suddenly low-level staffers have gotten it in their heads that it would be a wonderful thing to start checking out 501(c)(4) groups.  So is all of this a giant coincidence, or is it more of a criminal enterprise?

The president doesn’t have to order Lois Lerner to crack down on conservative groups.  All he has to do is go out there and talk about how terrible conservative groups are.  And you have a few senators write a few letters to the IRS.  And then, lo and behold, the IRS does exactly what it is that he wants.  Then the president expresses outrage.  And then time goes by, and they all turn into “phony scandals.”

AT: Because your book was published before the illegal crisis became prevalent, do you think another chapter can be entitled “Child Endangerment”?

BS: They are certainly violating federal law.  This was purposeful.  Because of his 2012 edict, it is obvious that America is not going to deport anyone between the ages of 16 and 30.  With his actions and because of this incident, Obama has basically killed any possible deal on immigration. 

AT: What do you want readers to get out of this book?

BS: We should wake up from this attitude of a Stockholm syndrome.  We must not sit back and tune out.  We need to hold politicians accountable for their crimes.

President Obama has decided that he will rule via executive fiat, or, as he said, with his phone and his pen.  Commentators will tell you that constitutionally, Congress has two options: impeachment or cutting off funds.  Meanwhile, Congress play patty-cake with the executive branch because they do not want to be held responsible for their actions.  With all these scandals, no one has been held responsible.  Has Congress actually held anyone in contempt?  No one who has participated in a scandal has been fired.

This executive branch is completely out of control and violating our rights.  We must change the laws so that someone who works for the government is held criminally responsible just like you or I would be.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com