Impeached v. Summarily Removed

[Flanders]

Hamlet famously asked “To be or not to be: that is the question.” Americans are now faced with a tricky question of their own: To impeach or to be summarily removed by Congress? Hamlet couldn’t answer his own question but he answers ours. I’ll get to Hamlet’s answer by starting with this:

Former Attorney General, Edwin Meese, recently went on record to say that the proposed executive orders would be an “impeachable offense.” There is a growing chorus of resistance to Obama’s “imperial presidency”, but whether it is the executive orders or a judgment rendered by a forthcoming Supreme Court conference, it would appear that Obama has over-reached.

Reining in presidential power to some degree would benefit the country tremendously. Aside from Biden becoming president not much else happens if Hussein is impeached and removed for writing executive orders.

More importantly, the forthcoming Supreme Court conference refers to eligibility:

The Supreme Court has scheduled a conference—not a hearing—regarding a case that challenges President Obama’s eligibility to be President. Court observers believe this will lead nowhere. If the justices were to favor elevating the case to a hearing that found Obama guilty, he could face impeachment hearings or possibly be summarily removed from office by Congress.

XXXXX​

A hearing could generate a Constitutional crisis that could lead to Obama’s impeachment and removal. It would mean that Obama was ineligible to run for office for both terms and would render his previous executive orders and the laws that he signed null and void.

Hamlet tells us Hussein ain’t going to be summarily removed from office by Congress:

To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?

The choice is living with the ills Hussein inflicted on the country, or fly to unknown ills by overturning everything he signed. Frankly, I would take the chance for no other reason than to get rid of Biden, too. If Hussein is removed for ineligibility Biden goes, too. If Hussein is impeached and removed for executive orders Biden becomes president. How’s that one for a Devil’s choice!

Here’s the link explaining some big doings bubbling beneath the media’s veneer:

Obama is Begging for Impeachment
Alan Caruba
Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Obama is Begging for Impeachment

 

[TNHarley]

Who cares? Just get rid of that quack

 

[PratchettFan]

I understand this might be a radical idea, but wouldn't it be a good idea to wait and see exactly what is being proposed before we get out the rope and hot tar?

 

[Flanders]

I understand this might be a radical idea, but wouldn't it be a good idea to wait and see exactly what is being proposed before we get out the rope and hot tar?

To PratchettFan: I would agree with you were it not for Hussein’s track record, Biden’s involvement, and the people who have expressed concern.

 

[Sallow]

Yep.

Impeaching a third Democratic President.

See how that works out.

And that with yet a single Republican President to be impeached. And plenty of reason to impeach at least 3 of them.

 

[Truthmatters]

they want to make sure the republican party dies in the tar pit they walked into.


They are the republican partys worst enemies

 

[PratchettFan]

I understand this might be a radical idea, but wouldn't it be a good idea to wait and see exactly what is being proposed before we get out the rope and hot tar?

To PratchettFan: I would agree with you were it not for Hussein’s track record, Biden’s involvement, and the people who have expressed concern.

You mean their record of doing absolutely nothing about gun control?

 

[whitehall]

Hamlet was fiction and Shakespeare died 500 years ago. The greatest document ever written allows for the impeachment of an elected official which is merely a trial.

 

[George Costanza]

Hamlet famously asked “To be or not to be: that is the question.” Americans are now faced with a tricky question of their own: To impeach or to be summarily removed by Congress? Hamlet couldn’t answer his own question but he answers ours. I’ll get to Hamlet’s answer by starting with this:

Former Attorney General, Edwin Meese, recently went on record to say that the proposed executive orders would be an “impeachable offense.” There is a growing chorus of resistance to Obama’s “imperial presidency”, but whether it is the executive orders or a judgment rendered by a forthcoming Supreme Court conference, it would appear that Obama has over-reached.

Reining in presidential power to some degree would benefit the country tremendously. Aside from Biden becoming president not much else happens if Hussein is impeached and removed for writing executive orders.

More importantly, the forthcoming Supreme Court conference refers to eligibility:

The Supreme Court has scheduled a conference—not a hearing—regarding a case that challenges President Obama’s eligibility to be President. Court observers believe this will lead nowhere. If the justices were to favor elevating the case to a hearing that found Obama guilty, he could face impeachment hearings or possibly be summarily removed from office by Congress.

XXXXX​

A hearing could generate a Constitutional crisis that could lead to Obama’s impeachment and removal. It would mean that Obama was ineligible to run for office for both terms and would render his previous executive orders and the laws that he signed null and void.

Hamlet tells us Hussein ain’t going to be summarily removed from office by Congress:

To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?

The choice is living with the ills Hussein inflicted on the country, or fly to unknown ills by overturning everything he signed. Frankly, I would take the chance for no other reason than to get rid of Biden, too. If Hussein is removed for ineligibility Biden goes, too. If Hussein is impeached and removed for executive orders Biden becomes president. How’s that one for a Devil’s choice!

Here’s the link explaining some big doings bubbling beneath the media’s veneer:

Obama is Begging for Impeachment
Alan Caruba
Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Obama is Begging for Impeachment

You are joking with this, right? You simply cannot be serious. Obama's "imperial presidency"????

I want you to take a little trip with me down Memory Lane. The period: 2000 - 2008. Eight years. Ring any bells? George W. Bush. Dick Cheney. Remembering what went on during those eight years, you have the outrageous audacity to put up a slap-dick post like this accusing President Obama of engaging in an "imperial presidency"? You truly ought to be ashamed of yourself. Truly.

Bush/Cheny gave NEW DEFINITION to the term, "imperial presidency." Nixon started it. Bush and Cheney took it to previously unimagined heights. Dick Cheney was actually quoted as saying that, in his belief, there should be no checks whatsoever on the power of the president.

Do yourself a favor. Ask a Mod to delete this thread and we'll all pretend it never happened.

 

[Katzndogz]

I don't know what Dick Cheney actually said. I know what the democrat media said he said, but not what he really said. As the democrat controlled media is untrustworthy it's not to be relied upon.

 

[Sallow]

I don't know what Dick Cheney actually said. I know what the democrat media said he said, but not what he really said. As the democrat controlled media is untrustworthy it's not to be relied upon.

Of course you don't.

Let's review:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-vEb8nSzQE]Cheney doesn't care 2/3 of America thinks the war is wrong - YouTube[/ame]

 

[George Costanza]

I don't know what Dick Cheney actually said. I know what the democrat media said he said, but not what he really said. As the democrat controlled media is untrustworthy it's not to be relied upon.

I see. Cheney never said that but that's what the "democrat controlled media" reported. OK. Thank you very much for this penetrating analysis.

Pacific Views: Cheney's Imperial Presidency

The Bush/Cheney White House leveraged pervasive post-9/11 fears to reverse what Cheney called "the erosion of presidential power" since Watergate. Relying on pliant Justice Department lawyers for legal cover, it put into practice a vision of executive power unconstrained by Congress or the courts. It achieved what James Madison once called the "accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive and judiciary, in the same hands," which he condemned as "the very definition of tyranny."

Dismantling the Imperial Presidency | Brennan Center for Justice

 

[whitehall]

Hamlet famously asked “To be or not to be: that is the question.” Americans are now faced with a tricky question of their own: To impeach or to be summarily removed by Congress? Hamlet couldn’t answer his own question but he answers ours. I’ll get to Hamlet’s answer by starting with this:

Former Attorney General, Edwin Meese, recently went on record to say that the proposed executive orders would be an “impeachable offense.” There is a growing chorus of resistance to Obama’s “imperial presidency”, but whether it is the executive orders or a judgment rendered by a forthcoming Supreme Court conference, it would appear that Obama has over-reached.

Reining in presidential power to some degree would benefit the country tremendously. Aside from Biden becoming president not much else happens if Hussein is impeached and removed for writing executive orders.

More importantly, the forthcoming Supreme Court conference refers to eligibility:



Hamlet tells us Hussein ain’t going to be summarily removed from office by Congress:

To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?

The choice is living with the ills Hussein inflicted on the country, or fly to unknown ills by overturning everything he signed. Frankly, I would take the chance for no other reason than to get rid of Biden, too. If Hussein is removed for ineligibility Biden goes, too. If Hussein is impeached and removed for executive orders Biden becomes president. How’s that one for a Devil’s choice!

Here’s the link explaining some big doings bubbling beneath the media’s veneer:

Obama is Begging for Impeachment
Alan Caruba
Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Obama is Begging for Impeachment

You are joking with this, right? You simply cannot be serious. Obama's "imperial presidency"????

I want you to take a little trip with me down Memory Lane. The period: 2000 - 2008. Eight years. Ring any bells? George W. Bush. Dick Cheney. Remembering what went on during those eight years, you have the outrageous audacity to put up a slap-dick post like this accusing President Obama of engaging in an "imperial presidency"? You truly ought to be ashamed of yourself. Truly.

Bush/Cheny gave NEW DEFINITION to the term, "imperial presidency." Nixon started it. Bush and Cheney took it to previously unimagined heights. Dick Cheney was actually quoted as saying that, in his belief, there should be no checks whatsoever on the power of the president.

Do yourself a favor. Ask a Mod to delete this thread and we'll all pretend it never happened.

"Memory Lane" seems to be a dead end street to the radical left. Lefties have always depended on emotion and hatred and even wishful thinking rather than logic based on history. Logic indicates that democrat Harry Truman did not seek permission from congress for his adventure in Korea that cost the lives of anywhere from 38,000 to 55,000 American troops but the emotional left ignores that fact and just loves the little ignorant lightweight. President Bush received permission from congress for boots on the ground in Iraq and then democrats undermined the mission for the next several years.

 

[George Costanza]

I don't know what Dick Cheney actually said. I know what the democrat media said he said, but not what he really said. As the democrat controlled media is untrustworthy it's not to be relied upon.

Here, sweetheart - don't trust the "democratic media." Just listen to Dick-Head HIMSELF:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pYe3uya220]Dick Cheney Says The Powers Of The President Are Unlimited - YouTube[/ame]

 

[George Costanza]

Hamlet famously asked “To be or not to be: that is the question.” Americans are now faced with a tricky question of their own: To impeach or to be summarily removed by Congress? Hamlet couldn’t answer his own question but he answers ours. I’ll get to Hamlet’s answer by starting with this:



Reining in presidential power to some degree would benefit the country tremendously. Aside from Biden becoming president not much else happens if Hussein is impeached and removed for writing executive orders.

More importantly, the forthcoming Supreme Court conference refers to eligibility:



Hamlet tells us Hussein ain’t going to be summarily removed from office by Congress:

To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?

The choice is living with the ills Hussein inflicted on the country, or fly to unknown ills by overturning everything he signed. Frankly, I would take the chance for no other reason than to get rid of Biden, too. If Hussein is removed for ineligibility Biden goes, too. If Hussein is impeached and removed for executive orders Biden becomes president. How’s that one for a Devil’s choice!

Here’s the link explaining some big doings bubbling beneath the media’s veneer:

You are joking with this, right? You simply cannot be serious. Obama's "imperial presidency"????

I want you to take a little trip with me down Memory Lane. The period: 2000 - 2008. Eight years. Ring any bells? George W. Bush. Dick Cheney. Remembering what went on during those eight years, you have the outrageous audacity to put up a slap-dick post like this accusing President Obama of engaging in an "imperial presidency"? You truly ought to be ashamed of yourself. Truly.

Bush/Cheny gave NEW DEFINITION to the term, "imperial presidency." Nixon started it. Bush and Cheney took it to previously unimagined heights. Dick Cheney was actually quoted as saying that, in his belief, there should be no checks whatsoever on the power of the president.

Do yourself a favor. Ask a Mod to delete this thread and we'll all pretend it never happened.

"Memory Lane" seems to be a dead end street to the radical left. Lefties have always depended on emotion and hatred and even wishful thinking rather than logic based on history. Logic indicates that democrat Harry Truman did not seek permission from congress for his adventure in Korea that cost the lives of anywhere from 38,000 to 55,000 American troops but the emotional left ignores that fact and just loves the little ignorant lightweight. President Bush received permission from congress for boots on the ground in Iraq and then democrats undermined the mission for the next several years.

Deciding whether or not any particular president has engaged in an "imperial presidency" is largely a subjective determination. I like to think that I engage in legitimate debate here, rather than debate based upon "emotion and hatred." I think that, by any objective standards whatsoever, the Bush/Cheney administration attempted to, and did, extend presidential powers far beyond anything even contemplated by the Obama administration.

 

[George Costanza]

Cheney's Law:

'Cheney's Law' Gives Absolute Power

 

[Katzndogz]

obama sees himself as absolute ruler. Bush never did that, neither did Dick Cheney and out of context clips won't help. The difference between obama and Bush is that Bush was a decent man, sometimes wrong, but basically decent. obama is pond scum.

 

[Flanders]

I understand this might be a radical idea, but wouldn't it be a good idea to wait and see exactly what is being proposed before we get out the rope and hot tar?

To PratchettFan: I would agree with you were it not for Hussein’s track record, Biden’s involvement, and the people who have expressed concern.

You mean their record of doing absolutely nothing about gun control?

To PratchettFan: I mean if at first they don’t succeed they try, try again.

Hamlet was fiction and Shakespeare died 500 years ago. The greatest document ever written allows for the impeachment of an elected official which is merely a trial.

To whitehall: I thought Hamlet was a real person:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JD6gOrARk4&feature=player_embedded]Hamlet Act3, Scene1 Soliloquy - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[George Costanza]

obama sees himself as absolute ruler. Bush never did that, neither did Dick Cheney and out of context clips won't help. The difference between obama and Bush is that Bush was a decent man, sometimes wrong, but basically decent. obama is pond scum.

Written quotes are lies, planted by the "democratic controlled media." Actual film clips of Cheney himself speaking are "out of context."

I'm sure you really believe this. Sad . . . .

 

[whitehall]

You are joking with this, right? You simply cannot be serious. Obama's "imperial presidency"????

I want you to take a little trip with me down Memory Lane. The period: 2000 - 2008. Eight years. Ring any bells? George W. Bush. Dick Cheney. Remembering what went on during those eight years, you have the outrageous audacity to put up a slap-dick post like this accusing President Obama of engaging in an "imperial presidency"? You truly ought to be ashamed of yourself. Truly.

Bush/Cheny gave NEW DEFINITION to the term, "imperial presidency." Nixon started it. Bush and Cheney took it to previously unimagined heights. Dick Cheney was actually quoted as saying that, in his belief, there should be no checks whatsoever on the power of the president.

Do yourself a favor. Ask a Mod to delete this thread and we'll all pretend it never happened.

"Memory Lane" seems to be a dead end street to the radical left. Lefties have always depended on emotion and hatred and even wishful thinking rather than logic based on history. Logic indicates that democrat Harry Truman did not seek permission from congress for his adventure in Korea that cost the lives of anywhere from 38,000 to 55,000 American troops but the emotional left ignores that fact and just loves the little ignorant lightweight. President Bush received permission from congress for boots on the ground in Iraq and then democrats undermined the mission for the next several years.

Deciding whether or not any particular president has engaged in an "imperial presidency" is largely a subjective determination. I like to think that I engage in legitimate debate here, rather than debate based upon "emotion and hatred." I think that, by any objective standards whatsoever, the Bush/Cheney administration attempted to, and did, extend presidential powers far beyond anything even contemplated by the Obama administration.

Well it seems you are basing your opinion on emotion rather than logic when you make a claim that you fail to back up with facts. FDR was the most notorious example of an "imperial presidency" with his alphabet schemes, 4 terms, and incarceration of innocent citizens based on the slant of their eyes but the emotional left chooses to forget it. Truman sent Troops to Korea on an executive order and 38,000 to 55,000 were killed in three years. What did Bush do that would place him in the same class of FDR and Truman?