HOR Republicans vote 225-201 to sue the President

[DriftingSand]

This simply confirms that Republicans care nothing for Americans.

Ummm ... Republicans ARE Americans, dear one. Just sit back, relax, and have another sip.

 

[DriftingSand]

Democrats need to pound House Republicans on what they have refused to vote on and the impact it has had on the country

Why don't they sue the repubs?

Because they are not idiot Tea Baggers.

Like Michelle Nunn? LOLOLOLOL

 

[DriftingSand]

Glad to see our nation's system of checks and balances being exercised. Obama certainly needs to be reined in and kept "in his place." He's not a king nor should he be a dictator. He's a servant of the People of the United States and needs to be reminded of that. Hope this entire thing has a happy ending for everyone.

In the real world the built in constitutional check against alleged overreach by a president is Congress passes a law to override the Executive. That power has been exercised many times. Suing the Executive has never been, ever.

Thanks for your deep insight. Perhaps "suing an Executive has never been" done because Congress has never come across a President who's abused his position so egregiously as the current POTUS. Nevertheless and whatever the case may be, suing is still a legal avenue to take and it is a form of "checks and balances." Whatever it takes to slow Obama down is (or will be) good for you, me, and the rest of the world.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Glad to see our nation's system of checks and balances being exercised. Obama certainly needs to be reined in and kept "in his place." He's not a king nor should he be a dictator. He's a servant of the People of the United States and needs to be reminded of that. Hope this entire thing has a happy ending for everyone.

In the real world the built in constitutional check against alleged overreach by a president is Congress passes a law to override the Executive. That power has been exercised many times. Suing the Executive has never been, ever.

Thanks for your deep insight. Perhaps "suing an Executive has never been" done because Congress has never come across a President who's abused his position so egregiously as the current POTUS. Nevertheless and whatever the case may be, suing is still a legal avenue to take and it is a form of "checks and balances." Whatever it takes to slow Obama down is (or will be) good for you, me, and the rest of the world.

That's wonderful. A sitting president cannot be sued for the things he does as president.

Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), therefore does not apply here.


So, the the Tea-Drinkers in the HOR can vote to sue the President, but the actual lawsuit can only happen after January 20, 2017.

This entire circus is just delightful to watch.

 

[DriftingSand]

In the real world the built in constitutional check against alleged overreach by a president is Congress passes a law to override the Executive. That power has been exercised many times. Suing the Executive has never been, ever.

Thanks for your deep insight. Perhaps "suing an Executive has never been" done because Congress has never come across a President who's abused his position so egregiously as the current POTUS. Nevertheless and whatever the case may be, suing is still a legal avenue to take and it is a form of "checks and balances." Whatever it takes to slow Obama down is (or will be) good for you, me, and the rest of the world.

That's wonderful. A sitting president cannot be sued for the things he does as president.

Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), therefore does not apply here.


So, the the Tea-Drinkers in the HOR can vote to sue the President, but the actual lawsuit can only happen after January 20, 2017.

This entire circus is just delightful to watch.

That's fine with me. If you or I were to break a law or abuse someone's civil rights (whether we're at work or not) then we can expect to be punished via legal means. In fact, I would fully expect to be punished if I knew the rules and willingly chose to break them. Obama isn't above the law so he's subject to the same code of ethics and moral standard that you and I are subject to. He "poops" just like anyone else.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Glad to see our nation's system of checks and balances being exercised. Obama certainly needs to be reined in and kept "in his place." He's not a king nor should he be a dictator. He's a servant of the People of the United States and needs to be reminded of that. Hope this entire thing has a happy ending for everyone.

In the real world the built in constitutional check against alleged overreach by a president is Congress passes a law to override the Executive. That power has been exercised many times. Suing the Executive has never been, ever.

Thanks for your deep insight. Perhaps "suing an Executive has never been" done because Congress has never come across a President who's abused his position so egregiously as the current POTUS. Nevertheless and whatever the case may be, suing is still a legal avenue to take and it is a form of "checks and balances." Whatever it takes to slow Obama down is (or will be) good for you, me, and the rest of the world.

No, 'suing' the president has never been done before because it's comprehensively moronic and ignorant.

No one with even the most basic understanding of Constitutional law would advocate Congress 'suing' the president:

Congress lacks standing

The president has in fact not 'abused' his powers

And the Federal courts do not involve themselves in political conflicts between Congress and the president out of deference for those respective branches of government who reflect the will of the people.

 

[Faun]

Thanks for your deep insight. Perhaps "suing an Executive has never been" done because Congress has never come across a President who's abused his position so egregiously as the current POTUS. Nevertheless and whatever the case may be, suing is still a legal avenue to take and it is a form of "checks and balances." Whatever it takes to slow Obama down is (or will be) good for you, me, and the rest of the world.

That's wonderful. A sitting president cannot be sued for the things he does as president.

Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), therefore does not apply here.


So, the the Tea-Drinkers in the HOR can vote to sue the President, but the actual lawsuit can only happen after January 20, 2017.

This entire circus is just delightful to watch.

That's fine with me. If you or I were to break a law or abuse someone's civil rights (whether we're at work or not) then we can expect to be punished via legal means. In fact, I would fully expect to be punished if I knew the rules and willingly chose to break them. Obama isn't above the law so he's subject to the same code of ethics and moral standard that you and I are subject to. He "poops" just like anyone else.

My G-d. It's like Conservatives have never seen the U.S. Constitution. Free lesson ... there are provisions in the U.S. Constitution to handle a president who's broken the law. It's called, "impeachment." Following their time as president, they can then be charged with whatever crime it was they may have committed.

What we see here is a Republican party which doesn't have the balls to impeach Obama, so they're toying around with suing him instead. They know they can't and they know their suit won't get past the first judge to review it. They don't care about that. All they're trying to do is to feed their base with something because in reality, they have nothing.

 

[Stephanie]

We should just do away with Congress and just anoint a king/dictator

why pay these people for this petty crap they come up with, like how the Washington Redskins should change their name while letting this President and his comrades administration run all over we the people

screw the whole system we are fucked anyway

now they're telling us , it's none of our business what the government is doing, they are openly calling the people they Represent, teabaggers and you have a citizenry who is more into American idol than what their government is doing...and they know it.....so lets just dive into the gutter we're headed there anyway

It was good while it lasted

 

[DriftingSand]

You know of course if this whole situation was reversed and Obama was a Republican doing the same thing the left would be trashing him and the right cheering him.

Oh, I don't know. Most on the Left know silliness when they see it. When Righties see silliness, they then bow down to Rush Limpballs and kiss his ring and wait for further instructions...

Howdy. I'm actually not a very big fan of Rush or Beck. Too soft on most issues and way too centrist for my blood. They say what they've got to say to get ratings -- cash. There's a difference between talkers and doers -- between corporals and generals. If they were true threats to the elite string-pullers then they would have been silenced a long time ago.

 

[Stephanie]

You know of course if this whole situation was reversed and Obama was a Republican doing the same thing the left would be trashing him and the right cheering him.

Oh, I don't know. Most on the Left know silliness when they see it. When Righties see silliness, they then bow down to Rush Limpballs and kiss his ring and wait for further instructions...

Howdy. I'm actually not a very big fan of Rush or Beck. Too soft on most issues and way too centrist for my blood. They say what they've got to say to get ratings -- cash. There's a difference between talkers and doers -- between corporals and generals. If they were true threats to the elite string-pullers then they would have been silenced a long time ago.

gawd, that reply from the static wasn't just silly it was downright stupid
I guess the mask came off the so called, non partisan person (the liar op) they claimed they were
and they can insult anyone they want in the Politic forum...must be someone special

 

[DriftingSand]

That's wonderful. A sitting president cannot be sued for the things he does as president.

Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), therefore does not apply here.


So, the the Tea-Drinkers in the HOR can vote to sue the President, but the actual lawsuit can only happen after January 20, 2017.

This entire circus is just delightful to watch.

That's fine with me. If you or I were to break a law or abuse someone's civil rights (whether we're at work or not) then we can expect to be punished via legal means. In fact, I would fully expect to be punished if I knew the rules and willingly chose to break them. Obama isn't above the law so he's subject to the same code of ethics and moral standard that you and I are subject to. He "poops" just like anyone else.

My G-d. It's like Conservatives have never seen the U.S. Constitution. Free lesson ... there are provisions in the U.S. Constitution to handle a president who's broken the law. It's called, "impeachment." Following their time as president, they can then be charged with whatever crime it was they may have committed.

What we see here is a Republican party which doesn't have the balls to impeach Obama, so they're toying around with suing him instead. They know they can't and they know their suit won't get past the first judge to review it. They don't care about that. All they're trying to do is to feed their base with something because in reality, they have nothing.

Free lesson back at ya: There's more than one way to skin a cat. Apparently, members of Congress have chosen a path as yet untraveled. So what? Perhaps a lawsuit is more suitable under the circumstances than impeachment. Just think about it (but don't hurt yourself).

 

[DriftingSand]

In the real world the built in constitutional check against alleged overreach by a president is Congress passes a law to override the Executive. That power has been exercised many times. Suing the Executive has never been, ever.

Thanks for your deep insight. Perhaps "suing an Executive has never been" done because Congress has never come across a President who's abused his position so egregiously as the current POTUS. Nevertheless and whatever the case may be, suing is still a legal avenue to take and it is a form of "checks and balances." Whatever it takes to slow Obama down is (or will be) good for you, me, and the rest of the world.

No, 'suing' the president has never been done before because it's comprehensively moronic and ignorant.

No one with even the most basic understanding of Constitutional law would advocate Congress 'suing' the president:

Congress lacks standing

The president has in fact not 'abused' his powers

And the Federal courts do not involve themselves in political conflicts between Congress and the president out of deference for those respective branches of government who reflect the will of the people.

Apparently, you've been asleep for the past 5 to 6 years. Read the news once in awhile. Obama HAS abused and/or misused his office and, apparently, someone has enough evidence/proof to sue him for it. They will either win the suit or lose the suit but at least they're representing their constituents who believe that Obama has overstepped his bounds. You may not like what Congress is doing but then who really cares what you like. You're just as much a nonentity as I am so we just get to sit back and watch this interesting development.

Oh ... and quit pretending to be a Constitutional Lawyer -- because you're not.

 

[Stephanie]

That's fine with me. If you or I were to break a law or abuse someone's civil rights (whether we're at work or not) then we can expect to be punished via legal means. In fact, I would fully expect to be punished if I knew the rules and willingly chose to break them. Obama isn't above the law so he's subject to the same code of ethics and moral standard that you and I are subject to. He "poops" just like anyone else.

My G-d. It's like Conservatives have never seen the U.S. Constitution. Free lesson ... there are provisions in the U.S. Constitution to handle a president who's broken the law. It's called, "impeachment." Following their time as president, they can then be charged with whatever crime it was they may have committed.

What we see here is a Republican party which doesn't have the balls to impeach Obama, so they're toying around with suing him instead. They know they can't and they know their suit won't get past the first judge to review it. They don't care about that. All they're trying to do is to feed their base with something because in reality, they have nothing.

Free lesson back at ya: There's more than one way to skin a cat. Apparently, members of Congress have chosen a path as yet untraveled. So what? Perhaps a lawsuit is more suitable under the circumstances than impeachment. Just think about it (but don't hurt yourself).

you'll burst that hoity toity they had going...and we should know by now only Democrats are allowed to change the rules in midstream, like Harry Reid did they all cheered at that, now a Republican does something it's called, stupid, ingnorant, blah blah

 

[Meathead]

You really cannot be that stupid, now can you? Why, yes, you can.

In that one and only poll, it was Obama 32, Bush 29 and then some others. This means that 78% of respondents did NOT think that he is the worst president since WWII.

You do understand that very simply mathematical fact, right?

Wtf is it these days with Righties and simple math?

Let's see if anybody can spot the "that very simply mathematical fact".

You pompous and stupid imp!

Well, the intelligent ones figured it out. Must suck to me you.

The intelligent ones would have never written anything that sloppy, especially prefaced with, "You cannot really be that stupid, now can you?", then followed up with "Wtf is it these days with Righties and simple math?".

Of course also pretending to be a expert at statistics clearly implied by your name, Statistikhengst, made that a post worthy of mocking and make you a fake and an idiot.

Get a life imp!