If We Took the Constitution Seriously, Obama Would Be Impeached

[NYcarbineer]

The government can choose not to prosecute certain cases just the way a policeman can choose not to write you a ticket when he pulls you over for running a stop sign.

 

[Cecilie1200]

constitutional treason......did it bother you when reagan did it?

if we took the constitution seriously there would be no professional politicians

When did Reagan ever unilaterally decide that he wasn't going to enforce the written laws?

 

[JakeStarkey]

When he allowed his NSA team to run wild in Nicaragua.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why is there such a push to legalize all the illegals that are here already?

How is proposing new laws and policies analogous to unilaterally declaring that laws on the books no longer apply?

 

[The T]

constitutional treason......did it bother you when reagan did it?

if we took the constitution seriously there would be no professional politicians

When did Reagan ever unilaterally decide that he wasn't going to enforce the written laws?

He never DID...problematic...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nicaragua, gang, Nicaragua.

 

[Peach]

Cinton was impeached because he lied under oath.

The POTUS isn't allowed to have a "secret life," otherwise get out of the job. Sneaking women into the White House behind the curtain is not in the job description when state secrets could be damaged.

If military people's lives are going to be investigated inside and out to get their security clearances, then the POTUS better have a clean life and keep it that way while on the job. How could Bill Clinton enforce any adultery UCMJ charge while he was POTUS?

Every lie under oath is not a crime, nor perjury; attorneys are held to a higher standard. No doubt he could be readmitted to the Bar, if has not already been so. The lie must be MATERIAL to the case at Bar. And Bush hid his criminal convictions both before the election, and after. He really may have committed a crime. On the questionnaire for Grand Jury services, during his term as Governor, he denied any criminal convictions! He has THREE. In addition to my occupation, I have served on a Grand Jury, the penalty for lying was explained in DETAIL.

 

[The T]

Nicaragua, gang, Nicaragua.

Past tense gang...past tense. Has NO bearing on TODAY.

 

[regent]

So the Senate did not find Clinton guilty of any of the impeachment charges.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Republicans are usually on the top of this impeaching business so why are they remiss in doing their duty now? The Republicans have a majority in the House of Representatives, the branch of government that does the impeaching, so why aren't they doing their job?

Because it would take longer to impeach him than it would to simply wait for the election?

 

[Cecilie1200]

What is the matter Republicans?

What are you waiting for? If you can impeach over a blow job, you can impeach over this

Hey, fuckwad, Clinton was impeached for perjury, or did you miss that salient point?

Nope becuse the lie he uttered on the stand was NOT perjury you fool

I'm sure the legal profession will be astounded to learn that it's possible to lie on the stand and not commit perjury, since - as you would know, if you weren't such a brainless dipshit - that IS the definition of "perjury".

Thanks for offering us your redefinition. Too bad that most people consider you not good enough to spit on, much less listen to or take seriously.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Perjury - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary



per·ju·ry
noun \ˈpər-jə-rē, ˈpərj-rē\







Definition of PERJURY



: the voluntary violation of an oath or vow either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath : false swearing



Perjury Law & Legal Definition



Perjury is the crime of making a knowingly false statement which bears on the outcome of an official proceeding that is required to be testified to under oath. A statement is made under oath when 1) the statement was made on or pursuant to form bearing notice, authorized by law, to the effect that false statements made therein are punishable, or 2) the statement recites that it was made under oath, the declarant was aware of such recitation at the time he made the statement and intended that the statement should be represented as a sworn statement, and the statement was signed by an officer authorized to administer oaths.

Interesting how you cite us the actual definition, and then arrogantly inform us that it's something entirely different that doesn't appear in the definition.

What amazes me is that you actually wonder why people value your existence less than a bucket of cold piss.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Ah..so signing statements are illegal now?

And where were you guys when Reagan violated legislation handed down from Congress by selling arms to Iran and the Contras?

And then lied about it. How quickly the rw's forgot the Ronnie Ray-Gun Mantra of

I don't know, I can't recall, I don't remember ...

Which was worse? That the PRESIDENT did not know? Or than he could not remember.

As for President Obama's actions, The GObP/Rs/bags have refused to do their job for almost 4 years. They have openly stated that they will not work but they DO cash their checks before they head to the bars or the golf course. What is "constitutional" about that?

Thank you Mr President, for continuing to do your job, exceptionally well, while the crooked and corrupt R steals the country blind.

 

[Polk]

My question is where is the constitutional violation. Every president directs his cabinet, and by extension the rest of the executive branch, to make certain things enforcement priorities.

 

[Pheonixops]

links in article at site

SNIP:

Michael Filozof

If the citizens of this Republic still took the Constitution seriously, Obama would be impeached for his decision to unilaterally grant amnesty to certain illegal aliens.

Article 1, Sec. 8 of the Constitution, which enumerates the power of Congress, states that "Congress shall have the Power To... establish an [sic] uniform Rule of Naturalization." Congress has passed numerous laws pertaining to immigration and naturalization, including laws requiring the deportation of illegals.

The role of the President, according to Article II, Sec. 3, is to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." Obama's refusal to execute Congress's immigration laws (or, for that matter, Congress's Defense of Marriage Act) is an impeachable offense. Article II, Sec. 4 states that the President "shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for... Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." The deliberate failure to enforce valid immigration law and allow hordes of foreigners to live and work in the U.S. is, arguably, "treason," and doing so in an election year to appease Hispanic voters could certainly be considered "bribery."

In theory, Obama could exercise his power in Article II, Sec 2. to "grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States" and offer a blanket pardon for all violators of immigration law. He's not doing that, because he'd certainly lose in November if he did. (However we should be concerned that if he does lose in November, he'll do it anyway on his last day in office).


Read more: Blog: If We Took the Constitution Seriously, Obama Would Be Impeached

Thanks for the laugh!!! I'm pretty sure the same could be said about the rest of the Presidents as well.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

BTW, Stephanie and other rabidly ignorant rw's, EXACTLY what was "unconstitutional" or illegal about the president's action?

Thanks ever so much.

 

[Cecilie1200]

BTW, Stephanie and other rabidly ignorant rw's, EXACTLY what was "unconstitutional" or illegal about the president's action?

Thanks ever so much.

That you have to ask demonstrates both your utter ignorance of the Constitution and the job of the President as laid out there, and the OP you're presuming to comment on.

Come back when you've read one or, better yet, both.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

BTW, Stephanie and other rabidly ignorant rw's, EXACTLY what was "unconstitutional" or illegal about the president's action?

Thanks ever so much.

That you have to ask demonstrates both your utter ignorance of the Constitution and the job of the President as laid out there, and the OP you're presuming to comment on.

Come back when you've read one or, better yet, both.

Oh, so now reading the Constitution makes one an authority?

Tell all those Constitutional scholars AND the SCOTUS that they don't need to spend all that time studying and reading when they could just ask any rw who happens to wandering down the street.

Since you have read it and therefore know all there is to know, perhaps you would be willing to enlighten me?

NO??

Thought not.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. This shall bury Obama.
2. Like the pile of shit he is, burying him will be whats best, for everyone involved.
3. He is openly trying to buy Mexican votes or illegal alien votes what have you.
4. I don't think we've seen a President sink to this level before.
5. Just shows everyone what kind of people that they are, really.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Luddly Neddite]

While you're at it, Cecilie1200, could you also tell me what makes it unconstitutional when President Obama does it but not when the Rs do it?

LOL