Gingrich: If Palin Took Obama Actions, There Would Be Calls for Impeachment

Huge question--If Holder defended the Defense of Marriage Act wouldn't he "throw" the case anyway?  And, wouldn't it be cool if a President did declare Roe v. Wade unconstitutional, end all federal subsidies for abortion and tell the states to prosecute at will all takers of the innocent lives of pre-birthing event children?---rng

Does Gingrich smell blood? Who knows, maybe this will be a campaign issue. But frankly, I don't trust Mr. Gingrich or his policies at all.  -----lee 

By Jim Meyers and Ashley Martella

Friday, 25 Feb 2011 02:53 PM 

     In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV Friday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said President Barack Obama’s decision not to fully enforce the Defense of Marriage law eventually could lead to a constitutional crisis, as he has directly violated his constitutional duties by arbitrarily suspending a law.

     Gingrich even suggested that, if a “President Sarah Palin” had taken a similar action, there would have been immediate calls for her impeachment. Asked directly whether Obama could be subject to articles of impeachment, Gingrich said, “I think that’s something you get to much later. But I think clearly it is a dereliction of duty. Clearly it’s a violation of his constitutional oath. Clearly it is not something that can be allowed to stand."

     (A Gingrich spokesman stressed after the interview that we are not currently in a constitutional crisis, nor was Gingrich calling for the direct impeachment of the president. His statements were meant to illustrate the hypocrisy of the left and the mainstream media.)

     Obama Attorney General Eric Holder said on Wednesday that the administration will not defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act in the courts, which has banned recognition of same-sex marriage for 15 years. President Clinton signed the act into law in 1996.

     Obama’s decision to forgo a legal defense of the law has caused a firestorm of anger from conservative groups.

     Gingrich slammed Obama for his decision, telling Newsmax that he is not a “one-person Supreme Court” and his decision sets a “very dangerous precedent” that must not be allowed to stand.

     “Imagine that Governor Palin had become president. Imagine that she had announced that Roe versus Wade in her view was unconstitutional and therefore the United States government would no longer protect anyone’s right to have an abortion because she personally had decided it should be changed. The news media would have gone crazy. The New York Times would have demanded her impeachment.

     “First of all, he campaigned in favor of [the law]. He is breaking his word to the American people,” Gingrich says.

     “Second, he swore an oath on the Bible to become president that he would uphold the Constitution and enforce the laws of the United States. He is not a one-person Supreme Court. The idea that we now have the rule of Obama instead of the rule of law should frighten everybody.

     

For more .....