Impeach the so called President?
- Thread starter 1Shot1Kill
- Start date
Doer
Well-Known Member
But, never, RBP, Really Bad Person. Hmmm..... That's the quentisential Neo-Liberal insult, is it not? So, they dare not say that. In fact, I dare not say that, especially about Buck. I kinda like him and that would hurt.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it's not, the polls dictate that quite nicely.
however, the pawlbots are a quite vocal contingent.
tryingtogrow89
Well-Known Member
She knows i am beautiful.i just showed my wife the pictures, she said you remind her of the kid who walks down our street singing along loudly to death metal, completely oblivious how silly he looks.
and i'm not gay, but if i were, you would so totally not be my type.
my wife would also like some pointers on how you get your hair so shiny.
Just tell her to remember, "you are what you eat".
tryingtogrow89
Well-Known Member
I have a death metal show to go mosh at.
G'bye!
G'bye!
Doer
Well-Known Member
Oh, I don't know. Her hair looks pretty shiny already, I'd say. Prell?my wife would also like some pointers on how you get your hair so shiny.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
maybe if she had bigger tits...
Doer
Well-Known Member
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Impeach the president... Here is some legitimate ammo:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/the-biggest-obama-scandals-are-proven-and-ignored/275960/
"
Has this president broken the law, lied under oath, or authorized war crimes?
Yes, President Obama has broken the law on multiple occasions. Despite clearly stating, in a 2008 questionnaire, that the commander-in-chief is not lawfully empowered to ignore treaties duly ratified by the Senate, Obama has willfully failed to enforce the torture treaty, signed by Ronald Reagan and duly ratified by the Senate, that compels him to investigate and prosecute torture. As Sullivan put it earlier this year, "what Obama and Holder have done (or rather not done) is illegal."
Obama also violated the War Powers Resolution, a law he has specifically proclaimed to be Constitutionally valid, when committing U.S. troops to Libya without Congressional approval. Or as Sullivan put it in 2011, "I'm with Conor. The war in Libya becomes illegal from now on. And the imperial presidency grows even more powerful."
On the subject of war crimes, Sullivan wrote that "Obama and attorney-general Eric Holder have decided to remain in breach of the Geneva Conventions and be complicit themselves in covering up the war crimes of their predecessors - which means, of course, that those of us who fought for Obama's election precisely because we wanted a return to the rule of law were conned." In a separate entry, he went so far as to say that Obama is "a clear and knowing accessory to war crimes, and should at some point face prosecution as well, if the Geneva Conventions mean anything any more." That seems rather farther than Noonan went in her column."
Just angry, red necked teabaggers, right? Wrong. This was published in the Atlantic.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/the-biggest-obama-scandals-are-proven-and-ignored/275960/
"
Has this president broken the law, lied under oath, or authorized war crimes?
Yes, President Obama has broken the law on multiple occasions. Despite clearly stating, in a 2008 questionnaire, that the commander-in-chief is not lawfully empowered to ignore treaties duly ratified by the Senate, Obama has willfully failed to enforce the torture treaty, signed by Ronald Reagan and duly ratified by the Senate, that compels him to investigate and prosecute torture. As Sullivan put it earlier this year, "what Obama and Holder have done (or rather not done) is illegal."
Obama also violated the War Powers Resolution, a law he has specifically proclaimed to be Constitutionally valid, when committing U.S. troops to Libya without Congressional approval. Or as Sullivan put it in 2011, "I'm with Conor. The war in Libya becomes illegal from now on. And the imperial presidency grows even more powerful."
On the subject of war crimes, Sullivan wrote that "Obama and attorney-general Eric Holder have decided to remain in breach of the Geneva Conventions and be complicit themselves in covering up the war crimes of their predecessors - which means, of course, that those of us who fought for Obama's election precisely because we wanted a return to the rule of law were conned." In a separate entry, he went so far as to say that Obama is "a clear and knowing accessory to war crimes, and should at some point face prosecution as well, if the Geneva Conventions mean anything any more." That seems rather farther than Noonan went in her column."
Just angry, red necked teabaggers, right? Wrong. This was published in the Atlantic.
Doer
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure any of that will rise to the level of Impeaching a President.
A conviction following an Impeachment Charge in the House has never happened. That is not how the apple rolls around the Freedom Tree. Almost nothing is the fault of the President, by very definition of the Job. People want to blame the King. Nope.... Denied. He was Joe Blow elected and it will soon be over. Time for the next one.
William J. Clinton lied in deposition about a woman and was tried and not convicted.
Richard M. Nixon resigned from office after a House Committee had voted to put before the full House a number of impeachment charges, concealing evidence, having the FBI lie about things, etc. Nixon avoided impeachment, though not disgrace.
Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Abraham Lincoln's assassination in 1865, was impeached because of his failure to follow procedures specified in federal legislation (passed over his veto) that prohibited the firing of Cabinet officials without the permission of Congress. The legislation, known as the Tenure of Office Act, was arguably unconstitutional because it compromised the independence of the executive. He was tried and not convicted.
--------------
A conviction following an Impeachment Charge in the House has never happened. That is not how the apple rolls around the Freedom Tree. Almost nothing is the fault of the President, by very definition of the Job. People want to blame the King. Nope.... Denied. He was Joe Blow elected and it will soon be over. Time for the next one.
William J. Clinton lied in deposition about a woman and was tried and not convicted.
Richard M. Nixon resigned from office after a House Committee had voted to put before the full House a number of impeachment charges, concealing evidence, having the FBI lie about things, etc. Nixon avoided impeachment, though not disgrace.
Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Abraham Lincoln's assassination in 1865, was impeached because of his failure to follow procedures specified in federal legislation (passed over his veto) that prohibited the firing of Cabinet officials without the permission of Congress. The legislation, known as the Tenure of Office Act, was arguably unconstitutional because it compromised the independence of the executive. He was tried and not convicted.
--------------
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/2/essays/100/standards-for-impeachment
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Article II, Section 4
Because "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" was a term of art used in English impeachments, a plausible reading supported by many scholars is that the grounds for impeachment can be not only the defined crimes of treason and bribery, but also other criminal or even noncriminal behavior amounting to a serious dereliction of duty. That interpretation is disputed, but it is agreed by virtually all that the impeachment remedy was to be used in only the most extreme situations, a position confirmed by the relatively few instances in which Congress has used the device.
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Article II, Section 4
Because "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" was a term of art used in English impeachments, a plausible reading supported by many scholars is that the grounds for impeachment can be not only the defined crimes of treason and bribery, but also other criminal or even noncriminal behavior amounting to a serious dereliction of duty. That interpretation is disputed, but it is agreed by virtually all that the impeachment remedy was to be used in only the most extreme situations, a position confirmed by the relatively few instances in which Congress has used the device.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
An Irishman advises us (correctly) on our constitutional obligations. Obama is an inept POS, but he is OUR inept POS. "We" elected him so we damn well ought to suffer the consequences.
Doer
Well-Known Member
Yeah and an amateur yet, surrounded and handled by Agenda Professional.
Prepped by speech and dogma Pros.
And no one guarding the hen house.
Just the foxes. My duty to hate them all. There is no Constitutional Break for the President. After he is a citizen then he can manage to be deposed. He can still smell like a rose.
In one Underverse, the only way he could be allowed to live is if the Secret Service guards him for life against the Chicago boys. Hell to pay.
Prepped by speech and dogma Pros.
And no one guarding the hen house.
Just the foxes. My duty to hate them all. There is no Constitutional Break for the President. After he is a citizen then he can manage to be deposed. He can still smell like a rose.
In one Underverse, the only way he could be allowed to live is if the Secret Service guards him for life against the Chicago boys. Hell to pay.
Rak on Tur'
Active Member
We got the president we deserve, I blame the republicans a 100%. They put up some fool who knows nothing but money, then before they ran a pshyco path who represented everything wrong with the GOP.
Until republicans get their nose out of people's private lives and embracing a massive central government they will continue to lose. As they should.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Yeah, it's totally the Republican's fault.
And the two party system (cartel) gains another victim.
Cos the Republicans TOTALLY put a gun to your head and forced you not to vote third party.
Awesome tale, brosef.
Rak on Tur'
Active Member
I voted for Johnson, you couldn't of payed me to vote for any of the freaks the GOP put up last election.