I don't have exactly the same sense of irony as Kevin Zeese, but IMHO he got it exactly right in his recent article for the progressive website Truthdig.
The irony of the Obama presidency may hinge on whether he attacks Syria. He began his presidency prematurely winning the Nobel Peace Prize and could end it being impeached for starting an illegal war without congressional or UN approval – violating both domestic and international law.
But then the irony of the situation gets a lot more obvious.
“If there is an impeachment proceeding his own words will be quoted. When he was running for president, Obama told the Boston Globe: "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
Meanwhile in the House of Representatives...
More than 100 lawmakers, including 16 Democrats, have signed a letter that says President Obama would violate the Constitution by striking Syria without first getting authorization from Congress.
So let's add up this more or less perfect storm of bad news for President Obama.
1. Many Congressional Democrats and the President himself have already testified to the effect that attacking Syria without any kind of authorization from Congress would violate the Separation of Powers Clause of the US Constitution.
2. Attacking Syria without even so much as a fig-leaf of legalization from Congress or the UN would be a flaming example of what Article Two calls "high crimes and misdemeanors."
"The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
3. In contrast to conviction and removal from office, which requires a two-thirds majority vote in the US Senate,
the question of impeachment would be decided by the flat-earth Republican majority in the House of Representatives, who would do anything in their power to thwart and embarrass the President.
4. Team Obama made some progress with selling this adventure, but it's still an extremely unpopular idea.
"Some 53 percent of those surveyed this week said the United States should stay out of Syria's civil war, down from 60 percent last week. Just 20 percent said the United States should take action, but that was up from 9 percent last week."
The public hates the idea of bombing Syria, and they hate it even more if Obama bombs on his own say-so alone.
"A whopping 79 percent of respondents — including nearly 7 in 10 Democrats and 90 percent of Republicans — say the president should be required to receive congressional approval before taking any action."
Newt Gingrich and his gang of Congressional thugs impeached Bill Clinton for a blow job!
They impeached an extremely popular President (70% approval!) with the polls running totally against impeachment!
Would Boehner and his insanely hateful Teabaggers give Obama a free pass for bombing Syria sua sponte, when his own testimony is already enough to convict him?
The next witness is Joe Biden!
And I want to make it clear and I made it clear to the president, if he takes this nation to war in Iran, without congressional approval — I will make it my business to impeach him.
That's a
lot of ammunition, and even if it wasn't an absolutely sure thing that the President would have been impeached if he had bombed the Syrians under his own authority alone...
Who wants to play Russian Roulette with three or four bullets in the gun?
So Obama backed down, and that's lucky for all of us.