President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
June 14, 2023 12:01 PM UTC

Boebert Introduces New Nonsensical Im(p)eachment Articles

  • 10 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Hopefully she’s learned to spell it right since the first try.

As CBS4 Denver reports today, Colorado’s most frenetic fringe-right fandoozle Rep. Lauren Boebert is living out the axiomatic definition of insanity: doing the same stupid thing twice and expecting a different result:

Colorado Congresswoman Lauren Boebert has introduced articles of impeachment against Pres. Joe Biden for “his unconstitutional dereliction of duty at the southern border.”

Boebert released this statement, “Joe Biden unconstitutionally violated his duty under Article II of the Constitution to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed’ by intentionally disregarding our immigration laws and enabling an invasion along our southern border. Joe Biden is unable and unwilling to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States. To preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, it is imperative that the House of Representatives impeach Joe Biden and hold him accountable for his egregious violations of his oath of office.”

Rep. Lauren Boebert (Ang-R-tainment).

Boebert’s latest articles of impeachment seem to have been written totally indifferent to how reality has played out along the southern border since the expiration of the COVID-19 pandemic era rules that had governed asylum requests. Boebert predicted a massive surge of migration after the expiration of Title 42, but thanks to even stricter long-term rules put in place afterward, unauthorized border crossings have plummeted by half or more. Every mention of this change of circumstance feels a little like tempting fate, but over a month in it’s undeniable that the “invasion” Boebert was certain was coming has not.

None of which matters, since these latest articles of impeachment aren’t going to go anywhere even in a House narrowly controlled by Boebert’s fellow Republicans. If anything, Boebert is setting herself up to alienate even more of her colleagues whenever this silly effort stalls out, since it will be a fellow Republican who tells her thanks but no thanks.

Above all, there is nothing going on here that benefits the residents of CD-3 in any way. Everyone’s time is being wasted by this performative no-win exercise, which doesn’t even have a factual basis after the “migrant surge” Boebert forecast failed to materialize. In addition to Biden, as readers know, Boebert has called for the impeachment of Vice President Kamala Harris, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Attorney General Merrick Garland, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and former White House Chief Medical Advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci. These calls have all had one effect, to make Lauren Boebert look silly while adults did their adult jobs.

No votes will be won by this stunt, and the votes Boebert loses she cannot afford to lose.

Comments

10 thoughts on “Boebert Introduces New Nonsensical Im(p)eachment Articles

  1. They can't even get 218 members of the House to vote on a rule to open debate on a bill they actually like (i.e., protecting gas stoves from discrimination).

    How the hell do they think they will get 218 for this?

  2. I think the Bobo angertainment show has officially jumped the shark. Shit is getting very, very old fast. Lets' hope the voters of CD3 agree and her days of impersonating a member of Congress are numbered. 

    1. With a handful of Democrats (including Rep. Caraveo) voting in affirmative. 

      May God save America and may God save the gas stove!

    2. So, it is a message from the House Republicans (and a few others).  I can't imagine what impact such a bill would have, even if it WERE passed by the Senate (unlikely in this term) and signed by a President (I got no idea what Biden would do).   Sounds like it is "no, you can't do what you aren't doing now."

      If there were a major regulatory push to do something about gas stoves (and other fossil fuel consuming appliances), there would no doubt be LOTS of public comment and development of a much more nuanced approach than a total ban.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

121 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!