Imagine if, during the campaign of 2008, someone had written the following: “If Barack Obama is elected president, then each year from now on the federal budget will be a trillion dollars in the red. He will pile up in two terms more debt than all previous presidents combined. Interest rates will stay at near zero; 7.6 percent unemployment will be proof of progress in creating jobs. Record use of food stamps, unemployment, and disability insurance will be hallmarks of recovery. The government will take over health care, and the costs will skyrocket. During Obama’s second term, ammunition will vanish from America’s store shelves in panic buying. Gay marriage will become uncontroversial. Women will be eligible for infantry combat. The only question about amnesty for illegal aliens will be when, not if, it is enacted. States will begin legalizing marijuana.” Obviously, such a conspiracist would have been dismissed as an unhinged nut.
Hanson doesn't ask this question, but perhaps he should have -- is blatant, intentional misrepresentation (a/k/a fraud) to get elected an impeachable offense? I doubt it. The democratic process and the give-and-take of campaigning is supposed to identify and weed out the fraudfeasors from potential public office. But what if it doesn't? What if the jury isn't allowed to hear the evidence of the candidate's fraud, because the gatekeeper (in court, a judge; in politics, the mainstream media) decides not to permit the evidence to be heard?
Obama lied to us, over and over, to get elected, and then re-elected. He continues to lie to us. And there's not a lot we can do about it.