What do you think?
Rate this book
Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment
We still imagine ourselves a nation of laws, not of men. This is not merely an article of faith but a bedrock principle of the United States Constitution. Our founding compact provides a remedy against rulers supplanting the rule of law, and Andrew C. McCarthy makes a compelling case for using it.
The authors of the Constitution saw practical reasons to place awesome powers in a single chief executive, who could act quickly and decisively in times of peril. Yet they well understood that unchecked power in one person’s hands posed a serious threat to liberty, the defining American imperative. Much of the debate at the Philadelphia convention therefore centered on how to stop a rogue executive who became a law unto himself.
The Framers vested Congress with two checks on presidential the power of the purse and the power of impeachment. They are potent remedies, and there are no others.
It is a straightforward matter to establish that President Obama has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” a term signifying maladministration and abuses of power by holders of high public trust. But making the legal case is insufficient for successful impeachment, leading to removal from office. Impeachment is a political matter and hinges on public opinion.
In Faithless Execution , McCarthy weighs the political dynamics as he builds a case, assembling a litany of abuses that add up to one overarching the president’s willful violation of his solemn oath to execute the laws faithfully. The “fundamental transformation” he promised involves concentrating power into his own hands by flouting law—statutes, judicial rulings, the Constitution itself—and essentially daring the other branches of government to stop him. McCarthy contends that our elected representative are duty-bound to take up the dare.
The authors of the Constitution saw practical reasons to place awesome powers in a single chief executive, who could act quickly and decisively in times of peril. Yet they well understood that unchecked power in one person’s hands posed a serious threat to liberty, the defining American imperative. Much of the debate at the Philadelphia convention therefore centered on how to stop a rogue executive who became a law unto himself.
The Framers vested Congress with two checks on presidential the power of the purse and the power of impeachment. They are potent remedies, and there are no others.
It is a straightforward matter to establish that President Obama has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” a term signifying maladministration and abuses of power by holders of high public trust. But making the legal case is insufficient for successful impeachment, leading to removal from office. Impeachment is a political matter and hinges on public opinion.
In Faithless Execution , McCarthy weighs the political dynamics as he builds a case, assembling a litany of abuses that add up to one overarching the president’s willful violation of his solemn oath to execute the laws faithfully. The “fundamental transformation” he promised involves concentrating power into his own hands by flouting law—statutes, judicial rulings, the Constitution itself—and essentially daring the other branches of government to stop him. McCarthy contends that our elected representative are duty-bound to take up the dare.
248 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 3, 2014
5 people are currently reading
70 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
October 29, 2014
McCarthy claims that impeachment is a political process that requires political will of the people and that his book is an attempt to persuade readers that the Obama administration has committed high crimes and misdemeanors. However, from the start of the book the author employes rhetoric that is both partisan and hyperbolic--the only audience he has a chance of reaching are the minority who already agree with him (he acknowledges that this group is a minority in stating that the political will of the people for impeachment is not currently there).
For those of us who don't believe there is an administration since the Carter administration--and likely well before that--that has *not* engaged in activities that could be considered high crimes and misdemeanors (Iran Contra, invading Iraq in 2003, sanctioning torture, revoking Glass Steagall, to name a few), this book doesn't really attempt to make a persuasive case--it assumes a readership that is already persuaded. I am politically left of center but I try to expose myself to ideas outside my own ideology and I tried to come to this book with an open mind. (In part because there are any number of things about the current administration that I am deeply dissatisfied with.
The book goes into detail describing the many misdeeds of the Obama administration, some of which *are* disturbingly obstructionist, partisan, self serving, etc. But for the most part I didn't find these complaints compelling as "high crimes." Unsurprisingly Benghazi gets a lot of ink and I absolutely agree that the administration did a lousy job in their response to Bengazhi, I just don't find it convincing that trying and failing to achieve spin on a story constitutes high crimes and misdemeanors. And while I don't think the loss of life in Benghazi should be downplayed, a lot of embassies have been attacked and many people have died with virtually no notice on either side of the political spectrum. It's hard to understand why Benghazi is so special beyond partisan opportunism. See also: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-met...
I was really surprised that this book didn't talk about the expansion of the NSA and spying on Americans, targeting american citizens for drone strikes, and the hostility the administration has for whistleblowers). As far as I'm concerned, this administration has been shockingly and disappointingly conservative--one of its biggests successes is slashing the deficit for pity's sake!(http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/s...)
This book is not going to persuade many people who don't already agree with the underlying deeply partisan premise. If you're looking for even-handed conservative critique, look elsewhere.
For those of us who don't believe there is an administration since the Carter administration--and likely well before that--that has *not* engaged in activities that could be considered high crimes and misdemeanors (Iran Contra, invading Iraq in 2003, sanctioning torture, revoking Glass Steagall, to name a few), this book doesn't really attempt to make a persuasive case--it assumes a readership that is already persuaded. I am politically left of center but I try to expose myself to ideas outside my own ideology and I tried to come to this book with an open mind. (In part because there are any number of things about the current administration that I am deeply dissatisfied with.
The book goes into detail describing the many misdeeds of the Obama administration, some of which *are* disturbingly obstructionist, partisan, self serving, etc. But for the most part I didn't find these complaints compelling as "high crimes." Unsurprisingly Benghazi gets a lot of ink and I absolutely agree that the administration did a lousy job in their response to Bengazhi, I just don't find it convincing that trying and failing to achieve spin on a story constitutes high crimes and misdemeanors. And while I don't think the loss of life in Benghazi should be downplayed, a lot of embassies have been attacked and many people have died with virtually no notice on either side of the political spectrum. It's hard to understand why Benghazi is so special beyond partisan opportunism. See also: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-met...
I was really surprised that this book didn't talk about the expansion of the NSA and spying on Americans, targeting american citizens for drone strikes, and the hostility the administration has for whistleblowers). As far as I'm concerned, this administration has been shockingly and disappointingly conservative--one of its biggests successes is slashing the deficit for pity's sake!(http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/s...)
This book is not going to persuade many people who don't already agree with the underlying deeply partisan premise. If you're looking for even-handed conservative critique, look elsewhere.
May 21, 2016
McCarthy makes the point that impeachment is a political venture, not a legal one. The American people just don't have enough impetus to pressure their elected people in Congress to impeach the president. And with just 8 months until a new president takes office, what's the point?
What this book does do is show how ignorant the citizenry today is about the Constitution and why a chief executive should not be allowed to trample its provisions and legislate his own policy preferences into law. With Mr Obama's example, I fear the next president, no matter his or her nominal party, will continue the lawlessness in using a "pen and a phone" to curtail the rights of Americans under the rule of law rather than the rule of men. This is a problem even were I to believe that any future president will decree items that I would like to see enacted. If one doesn't like the laws as written, the law must be changed, not merely trampled upon.
On to the review of the book and off the political rant--Mr McCarthy is a lawyer and writes like one. Not that it's boring or long-winded; the prose requires one to think about the words. It is not written for the lowest common denominator. As a cautionary story, future voters should consider carefully what political system they want to live under, for if chief executives continue to act unilaterally and the Congress continues to refuse to rein him in, we will no longer have our Republic. Instead, we will have tyranny and an elected king ruling us.
What this book does do is show how ignorant the citizenry today is about the Constitution and why a chief executive should not be allowed to trample its provisions and legislate his own policy preferences into law. With Mr Obama's example, I fear the next president, no matter his or her nominal party, will continue the lawlessness in using a "pen and a phone" to curtail the rights of Americans under the rule of law rather than the rule of men. This is a problem even were I to believe that any future president will decree items that I would like to see enacted. If one doesn't like the laws as written, the law must be changed, not merely trampled upon.
On to the review of the book and off the political rant--Mr McCarthy is a lawyer and writes like one. Not that it's boring or long-winded; the prose requires one to think about the words. It is not written for the lowest common denominator. As a cautionary story, future voters should consider carefully what political system they want to live under, for if chief executives continue to act unilaterally and the Congress continues to refuse to rein him in, we will no longer have our Republic. Instead, we will have tyranny and an elected king ruling us.
July 11, 2014
I didn't get this book. The author's thesis was basically we know Obama is doing wrong, we know we cannot impeach him out of office, but we need to try, for the sake of trying.
Nothing new here. Two thumbs down.
Nothing new here. Two thumbs down.
September 10, 2014
A nice discussion of the history of impeachment and laying out the case for impeachment. Very researched if not a bit short. Puts the facts in legal structure.
September 7, 2014
Makes an intriguing case how impeachment works and if it's time to be applied to President Obama.
May 14, 2022
A good review of the scandals that Fox News (cough-Hanni-cough) and other outlets kept dogging the Obama administration with. McCarthy also offers a novel argument about impeachment as a first-and-foremost political check on presidential / executive overreach. Some details were indeed perturbing, but the overarching theme for me through the whole book was hindsight, since I only read it recently. It does make one wonder what a US President would have to do to compel a politically divided country like what we have today to successfully call for impeachment through the legislature.
December 15, 2022
I got some information from this book but by the end of the day obama hadnt be impeached
July 11, 2014
Half the book is footnotes.
The book is quite good but I was expecting more detail and a more thorough analysis. For what I paid for the book, it is a bit overpriced.
The book is quite good but I was expecting more detail and a more thorough analysis. For what I paid for the book, it is a bit overpriced.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews