Impeachable: President Obama waives law that forbids U.S. from providing ‘aid and comfort’

The Blaze ^ | 9/17/2013 | The Blaze

[Mr. K]

Glenn opened the radio program this morning with some very troubling (and bizarre) news that lead him to call for President Obama’s impeachment. Yesterday, the President waived a federal provision specifically designed to prevent the U.S. from supplying arms to terrorist groups in order to begin providing military assistance to the Syrian rebels.

“Today I come to you with the news that our President actually waived the restriction on countries supplying arms to international terrorists, specifically Al‑Qaeda. And the reason why he waived that is because we’re providing arms to international terrorists, specifically Al‑Qaeda,” Glenn said. “Now, if that isn’t an act of treason, I don’t know what is. If that is not an act of insanity, I don’t know what is.”

“This isn’t, ‘Well, we don’t know who the terrorists are. We don’t know who the rebels are.’ No, no. Mr. President, you apparently do know exactly who they are because you felt compelled to waive the restriction on arming them,” he continued. “Now, why would you do that? So you can no longer make the case ‘We don’t know who these guys are’ because the President felt compelled to tell us who they are by waiving the restrictions. They’re international terrorists. If that’s not an act of suicide, if that’s not an act finally of the President admitting we’re on the wrong side – when you have to waive the law so you can arm terrorists, you’re on the wrong side.”

[Mr. K]

So.. the pResident can just 'waive' laws he doesn't want to follow?

cool...

[jsanders2001]

> So.. the pResident can just ‘waive’ laws he doesn’t want to follow?
cool...

Like the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments for starters though he’d like to repeal the 22nd too

[Sicon]

He is daring someone to stop him. Unfortunately, with the media in his pocket, not to mention the NSA and IRS, no one will.

[Diogenesis]

Article III, Section 3, Paragraph 1, of the Constitution of the United States:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them,
or, in adhering to their Enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

The "aid and comfort" prong of treason has been interpreted
by SCOTUS as requiring proof of four elements:
1. an intent to betray the United States (which can be inferred from);
2. an overt act;
3. witnessed by two people; and
4. that provides aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States.

---

"What difference does it make?"

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious.
But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.
But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.
For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.
He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist.
A murderer is less to be feared."
-- Marcus Tullius Cicero

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.
We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream.
It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same,
or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children
and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."
President Ronald Reagan

[rarestia]

He is daring someone to stop him.

He is literally trying to evoke a response. If I woke up tomorrow and realized I'd been dreaming about a series of articles from the Onion, I wouldn't be surprised.

It's a win-win for Obama: subvert American laws, ignore established codes and Constitutional amendments, get on the dais and harp about Republican this and Tea Party that... it's all an attempt to whip up tempers. If no one angers, he still gets his way. If one person goes rogue, he uses the power of his office and his compliant media to demonize, polarize, and destroy entire swaths of America.

[Ray76]

Obama couldn’t do it without his right-hand man: John Boehner.

[Fester Chugabrew]

The man wears a sandwich sign that says, “IMPEACH ME, PLEASE!”

[PowderMonkey]

Well said, Ray. There you have it. A completely neutralized GOP stands by while the President shreds what little is left of the U.S. constitution. He is effectively eroding the bonds of union.

[knarf]

I respect Glenn, and don't doubt his statements, but I want to read or see on a clip, the actual waiving of that law.

We can't go screaming into the streets yelling, "Impeach him .... just because .. "

[elpadre]

I am not doubting, but I would like to see, hear or read where Obama waives Article III, Section 3, Paragraph 1, of the Constitution of the United States.

[Rappini]

I’m all in my Senators and Representatives are getting emails this morning.

[Rappini]

Good luck trying to get two more people in his administration to witness the same overt act.

[prof.h.mandingo]

This has to be an executive order. Can someone find out the exact number of the order? Should be easy if Bambi did this yesterday or the day before. I'm at work but I will try and post if I find it. We cannot go off half-cocked on this but he may have bitten off more than he can chew if this checks out. Our local tea party helped our congresscritter get in so he owes us. But we must be sure before we act.

[prof.h.mandingo]

In a quick search there is executive order 13637 from back in March. I do not have time to wade through the whole crapfest but it seems to indicate a change in who and what can be exported to others. This may be what Beck is referring to but I'm not sure. Parts of this override an executive order from all the way back in 1977. Trust but verify.

[Buckeye McFrog]

He could invite Ayman Al-Zawahiri to the White Hut and give him a medal, and these spineless Pubbies would not vote to impeach him.

[Leaning Right]

I want to read or see on a clip, the actual waiving of that law.

You make a good point. And it's possible that the law contains a clause that gives the President the power to modify certain sections of the law.

If that's the case, then what the President is doing is legal.

But if that's not the case, then all hell should break loose, and some GOP congressman should immediately file a protest before the Supreme Court.