The Evolution Of Advice & Consent

Flanders

ARCHCONSERVATIVE
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
7,628
Reaction score
743
Points
205
Should Republicans take control of the Senate next year Vice President Joe Biden should kill any serious move to impeach the president even though removal is justified. Impeaching Barack Taqiyya would be akin to removing Hitler so Stalin can move on up.

If the topic of impeaching the president interests you please begin by watching the following three videos:


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KmKkNQyKyUU]Steve King Threatens Impeachment During Judiciary Hearing - YouTube[/ame]​

These two non-Youtube videos are opening statements by Nicholas Rosenkrantz & Michael Cannon.

This excerpt is taken from an article discussing testimony before a House Judiciary Committee. There is a problem to be sure but it isn’t this:

“It’s a real problem,” House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte says. One of the biggest frustrations: Senate Democrats don’t seem to give a rip.

“To me, the Senate being complicit in watching the executive branch strip the powers of the Congress is absolutely despicable,” Goodlatte tells me. “You don’t hear a peep out of Harry Reid about the fact that prerogatives of Congress are being trampled upon by the executive branch.” Following Issa’s questions, Iowa Republican Steve King asked the expert witnesses what remedies Congress has for a president unbound by the law. Having dismissed the “power of the purse” as obviously ineffective (just look at the government shutdown, several lawmakers and witnesses pointed out), King moved on down the line to lawsuits and, finally, the remedy that shall not be named.

December 5, 2013 1:00 PM
The I-Word Seeking ways to limit the president’s executive overreach, Republicans still shy away from impeachment.
By Jonathan Strong

The I-Word | National Review Online
Before the election in 2008 I pointed out that the media was determined to put a sitting senator in the White House. One of four senators was going to win; Barack Taqiyya, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, or John McCain. Beginning in late November 2008 I said the Administration would be a Senate Administration. I was right. Ergo, Harry Reid and Senate Democrats do not see any loss of Congress’ authority so long as the president is a Democrat implementing the Socialist agenda.

Bottom line: In the minds of Senate Democrats Taqiyya the Liar is carrying out the wishes of the legislative branch. Constitutionality matters little to the Senate with or without the House. Senate control only looks constitutional when Democrats have a majority in the House.

There is not much difference when Republicans control the Congress and the presidency. The government continues to grow, the country is betrayed to the United Nations with impunity, borders open wider, and the private sector standard of living plummets with each Administration.

A more accurate analysis of the growth of presidential powers show that presidents and the Senate have been doubled-teaming the House’s constitutional authority. Controlling the public purse is the primary objective for that nest of traitors in the US Senate. The Senate’s phenomenal success in controlling the country is easily measured in bailouts, and stimulus packages —— all agreed to by the House. One sentence sums it up. The country’s domestic and foreign policies represent the Senate’s political philosophy.

If you doubt that the Senate controls spending remember that Harry Reid tried writing revenue-raising bills years before this one:


The tax levied on Americans who don't buy health insurance under the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional because it started in the wrong house of Congress in violation of the Constitution's Origination Clause, say arguments in a case on appeal before the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.

"The Supreme Court … said the Obamacare tax is not an enforcement penalty," Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Tim Sandefur told Newsmax. "They said this is actually a revenue-raising tax, in which case the Origination Clause does apply."

Lawsuit: Obamacare Violates Constitution's Origination Clause
Thursday, 10 Oct 2013 10:30 PM
By Andrea Billups

Lawsuit: Obamacare Violates Constitution's Origination Clause
Confirming an overt liar like Elena Kagan is proof that Senate Democrats have controlled the Judicial Branch for so long through the Advice & Consent Clause they no longer bother pretending that “America is a nation of laws.” Kagan was put on the court specifically to uphold HillaryCare II.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
Taqiyya the Liar ignores the law, writes laws, while picking and choosing which part he will enforce. He does it because the Senate is his partner, and because he has nothing to fear from federal judges who lie. A majority of those judges are put on the bench for the sole purpose of carrying out the wishes of the US Senate no matter who the president happens to be. Indeed, Harry Reid changed a centuries-old Senate rule in order to confirm three more big government, International-minded, judges. Those judges will sit on the very court that will rule on the Pacific Legal Foundation’s challenge to the ACA.

Advice & Consent also included blocking confirmations; a technique Democrats mastered decades ago. Between denying confirmation, and confirming the “right” nominees, the evolution of Advice & Consent had more to do with neutering the House than did any single imperial president.

After FDR’s court-packing scheme failed, Democrats began confirming their activist judges in order to dictate domestic policy. The Senate version of packing the court was followed by confirming New World Order cabinet officers and bureaucrats. The most important evolutionary step took place after 9-11-2001 when the Senate overcame a longstanding obstacle. Global government traitors in the Senate finally gained control of America’s intelligence apparatus.
 
Last edited:

jwoodie

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
14,497
Reaction score
3,169
Points
280
This should be surprising to no one. With every passing election, the Dems are further emboldened to establish tyrannical rule. Their ends always justify the means.
 

mamooth

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
22,437
Reaction score
4,561
Points
290
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
And back in reality, it was the Republicans who recently attempted court-packing, by way of removing judgeships so that only conservatives remained. Democrats merely tried to fill vacancies, which has never been considered court-packing. It takes some serious hypocrisy to accuse Democrats of the thing that the Republicans were trying to do, but look who's talking.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top