TIMELINE: LaRouche's Leadership in the Fight to Impeach Obama
February 21, 2014 • 1:30PM

Had the U.S. Congress listened to Lyndon LaRouche, and paid attention to its oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, Barack Obama would have been impeached long before he had the potential to drive the world to the brink of thermonuclear war. Now that the situation has reached the point of an emergency, it is useful to review the warnings which LaRouche, the LaRouche Political Action Committee, and Executive Intelligence Review have issued over the last five years — along with those of certain collaborators.

It is vital to remember, when considering this topic, that impeachment, as narrowly defined in the U.S. Constitution, has the primary purpose of protecting the nation from abuses of power which threatens the liberties and well-being of society. As Alexander Hamilton put it in an essay in the American Daily Advertiser in 1794,

"If it should be asked, What is the most sacred duty and greatest source of our security in a Republic? The answer would be, An inviolable respect for the Constitution and Laws—the first growing out of the last.... A sacred respect for the constitutional law is the vital principle, the sustaining energy of a free government."

The absence of respect for constitutional law, of course, leads to dictatorship, and, in many cases—such as that at present—to war.

The following is a sampling of the LaRouche movement's initiatives for impeachment, as well as a few others. Fuller documentation can be found on this website's "Impeach Obama" page.

- The First Steps -

Lyndon LaRouche's first raising of the necessity for impeachment came on May 15, 2009, not long after Obama went on his all-out drive for his Nazi health plan. In a short memo entitled "Is It Warranted to Impeach Obama Now?", LaRouche wrote:

"The relevant principles under which the plausibility of impeachment hangs presently, are:

1.) "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." (Declaration of Independence).

2.) 14th Amendment, Section 1 (U.S. Constitution).

"The substantive issue is not only the substance of President Obama's offense against the right to life, but the added odiousness of such conduct as his declared intention on account of both the identity of pursuit of that action to Adolf Hitler's odious 1939 law, and the extensive proceedings conducted by the United States and other powers on precisely this account.

"Neither the U.S. Congress, President Barack Obama, or a simple act of legislation can undo a principle of both the U.S. Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. Such offensive action, in this case, is odious in the most profound of all possible senses."

As the Nazi parameters of the health care bill became increasingly obvious, LaRouche declared Obama "impeachable." On July 24, 2009, after Obama went on national TV to declare his support for an Independent Board that would act to reduce health care costs, LaRouche said:

"President Obama is now impeachable, because he has, in effect, proposed legislation which is an exact copy of the legislation for which the Hitler regime was condemned in the post-World War II trials. It is an impeachable offense to propose such a thing in this time. With this statement from him, the President now deserves impeachment."

On January 6, 2010—in the wake of Obama's successful pushing through of the Hitler health care law in the House of Representatives—Lyndon LaRouche wrote a major article entitled "Tantamount to Treason," identifying that Hitlerite law as such, and raising impeachment as a necessary option. As a companion piece, EIR on January 9, published its first outline of "The Case for Impeachment."

By Feb. 3, 2010, after Obama came out with his budget that slashed the NASA budget, LaRouche made an even more definitive statement, entitled "Why Obama Must be Impeached."

Over the course of the year, another element was added: Whether Obama might be removed under the 25th Amendment, due to his lack of mental competence to serve as president.

- Obama's Drive to War -

Then came Obama's open drive for war, specifically against Libya in the spring of 2011.

In April 2011, constitutional lawyer Bruce Fein, who was an associate deputy attorney general in the Reagan administration, drafted an Article of Impeachment, charging that Obama had violated the Constitution by his de facto declaration of war against Libya, and usurpation of the war powers of the Congress.

In the fall of that year, after the illegal Libya war "ended" with the murder of Qaddafi, more lawyers began to come forward with demands for impeachment, including constitutional law professor Francis Boyle.

On Nov. 7, EIR then updated its proposed articles of impeachment, "Toward a Bill of Impeachment of Barack Hussein Obama," incorporating the evidence of Obama's war crimes, and violations of the Constitution on the declaration of war.

As Obama's war drive escalated into the next year, LaRouche continued to call for impeachment. One sharp call was issued July 23, 2012, in light of Obama's clear intent to launch war against Syria.

Then, on Sept. 11, 2012, the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, happened, putting a spotlight on the danger which Obama's unconstitutional policies had created. On Sept. 12, EIR reiterated and updated its case for impeachment.

On Sept. 21, 2012, Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) convened a press conference on Capitol Hill, to call attention to the pattern of violations of the Constitution on the question of war powers. Rep. Jones presented his H. Res. 107, which declared any president impeachable, if he went to war without the authorization of Congress. Co-participants Jeffrey Steinberg, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, attorney Bruce Fein, and Col. Anthony Shaffer then all addressed Congress' abdication of responsibility, and raised the question of impeachment of Obama.

In the context of that discussion, Fein discussed impeachment at some length:

"What we call a combination of Legislative, Executive, Judicial power, plus being executioner, all in one man! Which the Founding Fathers described in Federalist 47, as the very definition of tyranny! Now, think of that: The whole reason we had a Declaration of Independence and fought the war of the American Revolution was what? To end the tyranny of King George III. And now, we're practicing exactly what we revolted against some 225, 230 years ago!

"And where's the Congress? The invertebrate branch, other than Congressman Jones? And what's so stunning, is that you don't need to do archeological expeditions to find the evidence of the impeachable offense: It's on the front pages! It's openly confessed!

"Now, many suggest, 'Oh, impeachment sounds like a coup d'etat, like only banana republics do impeachment.' At the Constitutional Convention, Ben Franklin said, no. Impeachment is a substitute for assassination, to rid yourselves of a tyrant; it is a substitute for Brutus and Cassius plotting against Julius Caesar. So, it is the civilized way, in which we don't impose criminal punishment. It's simply ouster from office: 'We cannot trust you with the reins of power any more.' That's why it's my judgment, that it really is quite obtuse to suggest to think about impeachment as some kind of revolutionary idea. No! It's the first time to civilize, to domesticate, the kinds of convulsions that typically happen, when you've got to change a regime, from abuse of power."

On the eve of the election, Nov. 2, LaRouche himself, along with EIR's Jeffrey Steinberg, held a press conference at the National Press Club, on the subject of "Benghazi 9/11: Obama's Impeachable Crimes," where the implications of Obama's alliance with al-Qaeda, which led to the Benghazi murders, were drawn out.

- The Grounds Expand -

During the course of 2012, when the Obama "kill list" procedure was discovered, and on into 2013, when the Snowden revelations came to light on un-Constitutionally broad surveillance in violation of the 4th Amendment, the prima facie grounds for the impeachment of Obama expanded. These have been picked up by many civil libertarians, Republicans, and others — but no Congressman has yet moved to take action.

At present, the situation remains: Obama is assuming the powers of a dictator, using executive power to change laws, carrying out extrajudicial killings, launching undeclared wars, and proceeding with de facto genocide against the elderly and others with Obamacare. The grounds for impeaching him are clear.

Every day without action, brings the United States, and the world, closer to destruction.