I hope the Republicans IMPEACH Obama!

[Kondor3]

...explain why the Republican controlled House hasn't even considered starting impeachment proceedings.

Waiting until after the new Congress is sworn-in, in January 2015?

Playing their cards close to the vest until then?

it will be interesting ... will they address issues like the economy, jobs, etc or will they stay focused on party line rhetoric such as impeachment, abortion etc ?

their actions could be their undoing or their upswing.

Of course that possibility always exists.

Then again, if Obumble goes through with his threat, it may be necessary to legally remove the Arrogant Autocrat from office, in order to stabilize the political situation sufficiently in order to move on to other and ultimately more important matters.

 

[Syriusly]

So is that a misdemeanor? Or a high crime?

What is the criminal penalty for your imagined crime?

Archaic terms from the Founders' time....."high crime" means committed by somebody in "high office" and "misdemeanor" meant a crime then, not less then a felony that it means today.

So once again- since the Constitution is very specific- you tell me which of these you believe that the President should be charged under:

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.

That is pretty specific:
Treason
Bribery
Other high crimes
Misdemeanors

Which of these do you imagine that President Obama is guilty of- and for what?

 

[Kosh]

So is that a misdemeanor? Or a high crime?

What is the criminal penalty for your imagined crime?

Archaic terms from the Founders' time....."high crime" means committed by somebody in "high office" and "misdemeanor" meant a crime then, not less then a felony that it means today.

So once again- since the Constitution is very specific- you tell me which of these you believe that the President should be charged under:

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.

That is pretty specific:
Treason
Bribery
Other high crimes
Misdemeanors

Which of these do you imagine that President Obama is guilty of- and for what?

Troll!

 

[Syriusly]

Feel free to name the felonies. And those 'mountains of proof'

And explain why the Republican controlled House hasn't even considered starting impeachment proceedings.

That's easy...multiple counts of perjury, wire-fraud, and bribery...RICO criminal conspiracy to take over the healthcare system through illicit and illegal means and profiting from a nefarious scheme.

Perjury?

When has President Obama testified in a legal proceeding?
Wire-fraud? Seriously- I can't wait to hear you explain that one.
Bribery? Who did he bribe?
Rico Criminal Conspiracy......you mean signing into law the bill passed by Congress?
And how is President Obama profiting?

And are you delusional?

 

[Kondor3]

So is that a misdemeanor? Or a high crime?

What is the criminal penalty for your imagined crime?

Archaic terms from the Founders' time....."high crime" means committed by somebody in "high office" and "misdemeanor" meant a crime then, not less then a felony that it means today.

So once again- since the Constitution is very specific- you tell me which of these you believe that the President should be charged under:

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.

That is pretty specific:
Treason
Bribery
Other high crimes
Misdemeanors

Which of these do you imagine that President Obama is guilty of- and for what?

If impeachment (and a successful subsequent conviction in the Senate) DOES materialize, what difference the charges?

Obama's ever and vastly and swiftly -increasing circle of opponents and adversaries can certainly conjure-up something sufficient to the task at-hand, that can be made to stick, when the time comes, yes?

Why tip one's hand in advance of calling the other's bluff at the poker table?

 

[Siete]

IMO removing Obama is pointless. IF it does get to that point he will be on the verge of being out of office anyway.. the average American voter wants a better job and healthy economy, not countless $$ and time wasted on a lame duck potus.. if the new congress doesn't make a solid effort to provide the country with voter wants and wishes, the GOP and its politicians will be toast for who knows how long.

Impeach Obama.

 

[ogibillm]

Feel free to name the felonies. And those 'mountains of proof'

And explain why the Republican controlled House hasn't even considered starting impeachment proceedings.

That's easy...multiple counts of perjury, wire-fraud, and bribery...RICO criminal conspiracy to take over the healthcare system through illicit and illegal means and profiting from a nefarious scheme.

i'd love to see your evidence for perjury, wire fraud, and bribery. please.

 

[Syriusly]

So is that a misdemeanor? Or a high crime?

What is the criminal penalty for your imagined crime?

Archaic terms from the Founders' time....."high crime" means committed by somebody in "high office" and "misdemeanor" meant a crime then, not less then a felony that it means today.

So once again- since the Constitution is very specific- you tell me which of these you believe that the President should be charged under:

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.

That is pretty specific:
Treason
Bribery
Other high crimes
Misdemeanors

Which of these do you imagine that President Obama is guilty of- and for what?

If impeachment (and a successful subsequent conviction in the Senate) DOES materialize, what difference the charges?

Obama's ever and vastly and swiftly -increasing circle of opponents and adversaries can certainly conjure-up something sufficient to the task at-hand, that can be made to stick, when the time comes, yes?

Why tip one's hand in advance of calling the other's bluff at the poker table?

I understand- from your perspective, the charges are just a means to an end- you just see impeachment as a tool to remove a President for political reasons- the charges are just an excuse.

 

[ogibillm]

If impeachment (and a successful subsequent conviction in the Senate) DOES materialize, what difference the charges?

Obama's ever and vastly and swiftly -increasing circle of opponents and adversaries can certainly conjure-up something sufficient to the task at-hand, that can be made to stick, when the time comes, yes?

Why tip one's hand in advance of calling the other's bluff at the poker table?

you do make a good point. if republicans chose, and could somehow get the votes, they could impeach for whatever they wanted. it's not a criminal court, they don't have to prove anything, they just have to have the votes.

where you go wrong is in thinking that people are either so upset with the president or so enamored with republicans that there wouldn't be huge backlash for impeachment on unfounded allegations.

 

[Jackson]

Lets see

Conservatives can talk the talk, can they walk the walk?

I doubt it

Be clear, Obama and Holder have committed felonies - with mountains of proof. Obama is impeachable - more so than any president in history.

Interstate extortion is a no-no.

Feel free to name the felonies. And those 'mountains of proof'

And explain why the Republican controlled House hasn't even considered starting impeachment proceedings.

Joe Biden President

 

[Kondor3]

IMO removing Obama is pointless. IF it does get to that point he will be on the verge of being out of office anyway.. the average American voter wants a better job and healthy economy, not countless $$ and time wasted on a lame duck potus.. if the new congress doesn't make a solid effort to provide the country with voter wants and wishes, the GOP and its politicians will be toast for who knows how long.

Impeach Obama.

There are probably a couple of points that argue strongly in favor of removing the current President through impeachment and conviction...

1. his successor can be cajoled to reverse the EO, the moment that he is sworn-in to finish the term

2. it prevents any further arrogant, autocratic measures by the current President, who seems, quite probably, far more inclined to act in such a fashion than Old Joe would be.

Now, whether that is sufficient to stimulate the Impeachment and Conviction sequence in Congress early next year... I haven't a clue.

Merely that it seems more likely after the new Congress is sworn-in, than it is now.

 

[ogibillm]

That's easy...multiple counts of perjury, wire-fraud, and bribery...RICO criminal conspiracy to take over the healthcare system through illicit and illegal means and profiting from a nefarious scheme.

Perjury?

When has President Obama testified in a legal proceeding?
Wire-fraud? Seriously- I can't wait to hear you explain that one.
Bribery? Who did he bribe?
Rico Criminal Conspiracy......you mean signing into law the bill passed by Congress?
And how is President Obama profiting?

And are you delusional?

obviously.

 

[Kondor3]

If impeachment (and a successful subsequent conviction in the Senate) DOES materialize, what difference the charges?

Obama's ever and vastly and swiftly -increasing circle of opponents and adversaries can certainly conjure-up something sufficient to the task at-hand, that can be made to stick, when the time comes, yes?

Why tip one's hand in advance of calling the other's bluff at the poker table?

you do make a good point. if republicans chose, and could somehow get the votes, they could impeach for whatever they wanted. it's not a criminal court, they don't have to prove anything, they just have to have the votes.

where you go wrong is in thinking that people are either so upset with the president or so enamored with republicans that there wouldn't be huge backlash for impeachment on unfounded allegations.

Perhaps I am, indeed, wrong about that.

But, based on the just-fulfilled mid-terms, it seems best not to count too heavily one way or the other about how the American People would react to such an EO.

They - and a pissed-off incoming Congress - whipped-up into a frenzy by a suddenly more-cooperative media looking to influence things and throw Obama under the bus - might not only sit still for it, but they might end-up actually cheering for it, broadly speaking.

I dunno... I just know that more things are uncertain and up for grabs now than they have been for years... I think that complacency at this point is a mistake... IMHO.

 

[Kondor3]

So is that a misdemeanor? Or a high crime?

What is the criminal penalty for your imagined crime?

Archaic terms from the Founders' time....."high crime" means committed by somebody in "high office" and "misdemeanor" meant a crime then, not less then a felony that it means today.

So once again- since the Constitution is very specific- you tell me which of these you believe that the President should be charged under:

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.

That is pretty specific:
Treason
Bribery
Other high crimes
Misdemeanors

Which of these do you imagine that President Obama is guilty of- and for what?

If impeachment (and a successful subsequent conviction in the Senate) DOES materialize, what difference the charges?

Obama's ever and vastly and swiftly -increasing circle of opponents and adversaries can certainly conjure-up something sufficient to the task at-hand, that can be made to stick, when the time comes, yes?

Why tip one's hand in advance of calling the other's bluff at the poker table?

I understand- from your perspective, the charges are just a means to an end- you just see impeachment as a tool to remove a President for political reasons- the charges are just an excuse.

Exactly.

The excuse du jour.

The legal basis for firing the guy.

Their legitimacy and truth are far less meaningful to the nuts-and-bolts mechanics of removal than the presence and effective employment of devices (charges) that can be made to stick.

Is that not the nature of down-and-dirty politics, when one side or the other gets pushed to the limit, as Obama seems hell-bent upon foolishly doing, in the coming days?

 

[Synthaholic]

Prior to the elections last week I thought that was a bad idea.

No more

AS SOON as he uses that damn pen to do congresses job IMPEACH HIS ASS

In the words of Obama: "Elections have consequences"

You same people who stood up for Wall Streeters getting their bonuses and not going to jail because everything they did when the crashed the economy was legal under the law NOW want to impeach a president who is going to do something that is legal under the law.

no, what he wants to do is not legal.

He's not going to issue an illegal executive order. He's a Harvard Law professor, surrounded by top lawyers and access to top law advice with just a call from the White House.

Right-Wingers seem to cultivate their stupidity on issues like this. I guess it's part of their victimization identity.

 

[Kondor3]

Lets see

Conservatives can talk the talk, can they walk the walk?

I doubt it

Be clear, Obama and Holder have committed felonies - with mountains of proof. Obama is impeachable - more so than any president in history.

Interstate extortion is a no-no.

Feel free to name the felonies. And those 'mountains of proof'

And explain why the Republican controlled House hasn't even considered starting impeachment proceedings.

Joe Biden President

True.

But folks are probably beginning to ask themselves if they're better off with Old Joe than Arrogant Autocratic Obama.

Their answer may end-up surprising us all.

 

[Kondor3]

Prior to the elections last week I thought that was a bad idea.

No more

AS SOON as he uses that damn pen to do congresses job IMPEACH HIS ASS

In the words of Obama: "Elections have consequences"

You same people who stood up for Wall Streeters getting their bonuses and not going to jail because everything they did when the crashed the economy was legal under the law NOW want to impeach a president who is going to do something that is legal under the law.

no, what he wants to do is not legal.

He's not going to issue an illegal executive order. He's a Harvard Law professor, surrounded by top lawyers and access to top law advice with just a call from the White House.

Right-Wingers seem to cultivate their stupidity on issues like this. I guess it's part of their victimization identity.

It doesn't have to be illegal.

It just needs to piss off enough people (and power brokers) to stimulate lawmakers to conjure-up charges that can be made to stick, as prelude to removal.

 

[Syriusly]

So is that a misdemeanor? Or a high crime?

What is the criminal penalty for your imagined crime?

Archaic terms from the Founders' time....."high crime" means committed by somebody in "high office" and "misdemeanor" meant a crime then, not less then a felony that it means today.

So once again- since the Constitution is very specific- you tell me which of these you believe that the President should be charged under:

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.

That is pretty specific:
Treason
Bribery
Other high crimes
Misdemeanors

Which of these do you imagine that President Obama is guilty of- and for what?

If impeachment (and a successful subsequent conviction in the Senate) DOES materialize, what difference the charges?

Obama's ever and vastly and swiftly -increasing circle of opponents and adversaries can certainly conjure-up something sufficient to the task at-hand, that can be made to stick, when the time comes, yes?

Why tip one's hand in advance of calling the other's bluff at the poker table?

I understand- from your perspective, the charges are just a means to an end- you just see impeachment as a tool to remove a President for political reasons- the charges are just an excuse.

Exactly.

The excuse du jour.

The legal basis for firing the guy.

Their legitimacy and truth are far less meaningful to the nuts-and-bolts mechanics of removal than the presence and effective employment of devices (charges) that can be made to stick.

Is that not the nature of down-and-dirty politics, when one side or the other gets pushed to the limit, as Obama seems hell-bent upon foolishly doing, in the coming days?

I am just quoting the Constitution- and asking you to identify what 'crimes' you apparently are convinced that Obama can be impeached for- don't know why that is hard for you:

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.

That is pretty specific:
Treason
Bribery
Other high crimes
Misdemeanors

Which of these do you imagine that President Obama is guilty of- and for what?

 

[Syriusly]

Prior to the elections last week I thought that was a bad idea.

No more

AS SOON as he uses that damn pen to do congresses job IMPEACH HIS ASS

In the words of Obama: "Elections have consequences"

You same people who stood up for Wall Streeters getting their bonuses and not going to jail because everything they did when the crashed the economy was legal under the law NOW want to impeach a president who is going to do something that is legal under the law.

no, what he wants to do is not legal.

He's not going to issue an illegal executive order. He's a Harvard Law professor, surrounded by top lawyers and access to top law advice with just a call from the White House.

Right-Wingers seem to cultivate their stupidity on issues like this. I guess it's part of their victimization identity.

It doesn't have to be illegal.

It just needs to piss off enough people (and power brokers) to stimulate lawmakers to conjure-up charges that can be made to stick, as prelude to removal.

Ah so you think Congress should violate the Constitution.....in order to remove the President....who you accuse of violating the Constitution.....

A fine example of the Conservative approach to Constitutional law.

 

[Syriusly]

If impeachment (and a successful subsequent conviction in the Senate) DOES materialize, what difference the charges?

Obama's ever and vastly and swiftly -increasing circle of opponents and adversaries can certainly conjure-up something sufficient to the task at-hand, that can be made to stick, when the time comes, yes?

Why tip one's hand in advance of calling the other's bluff at the poker table?

you do make a good point. if republicans chose, and could somehow get the votes, they could impeach for whatever they wanted. it's not a criminal court, they don't have to prove anything, they just have to have the votes.

where you go wrong is in thinking that people are either so upset with the president or so enamored with republicans that there wouldn't be huge backlash for impeachment on unfounded allegations.

Or that it wouldn't seem like a purely political act to most Americans.