Posted on 09/10/2015 2:30:00 PM PDT by bestintxas
House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday that it was "very possible" that he might sue President Barack Obama over the Iran nuclear deal, a day after a federal judge ruled that the Ohio Republican's lawsuit on Obamacare could move forward.
At his weekly news conference, Boehner said that he believed that Obama had not presented to Congress the full deal with Tehran for review. That is required by law. "If you read the provisions in [the congressional review law], it's pretty clear that the president has not complied," Boehner said, according to Politico. "Because it makes clear that any side agreements and any other type of an agreement — including those that do not directly involve us — must be turned over as part of it."
"I do not believe that he's complied," he said.
Boehner called the accord, which was reached in TK, "worse than anything I could've ever imagined."
House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday that it was "very possible" that he might sue President Barack Obama over the Iran nuclear deal, a day after a federal judge ruled that the Ohio Republican's lawsuit on Obamacare could move forward.
At his weekly news conference, Boehner said that he believed that Obama had not presented to Congress the full deal with Tehran for review. That is required by law. Special: New Teamster Union Platform Pushes for Better-Paying Jobs Latest News Update Get Newsmax TV At Home »
"If you read the provisions in [the congressional review law], it's pretty clear that the president has not complied," Boehner said, according to Politico. "Because it makes clear that any side agreements and any other type of an agreement — including those that do not directly involve us — must be turned over as part of it."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Impeach the corrupt traitor! It’s your duty.
Doesn’t one need an IQ in the 26-50 range to qualify as a mere imbecile?
Third in Command in succession and this is the best we can find in the GOP?
I agree with you regarding Boehner’s action. The President’s failure to follow the law is an impeachable offense. Boehner should forget the lawsuit and begin impeachment proceedings. He has Constitutional authority to do that irrespective of any Court.
Gwjack
Boner’s not even worth the booze he pours down his gullet every day.
Heard Pat Toomey on Philly talk radio (after turning off Beck) saying that legal challenge to the Iran sellout might take years to resolve, IF you could get a court to hear the case. And by then, it would be firmly entrenched. But that’s what the Whigs are going to do.
There must be some really powerful stupid juice in the Versailles on the Potomac water system.
1. Give Obama everything he asks for.
2. Beat your chest and explain how hard you fought.
3. Ask for campaign money so they can be re-elected and fight harder next time.
I'm Jeb Bush and I approve this message.
“Possibly”??? “Might”???
Do you believe anyone thinks your statement means anything, John”
Low T yes. Retarded, no. He was smart enough to get genuinely retarded people to vote for him and many many more to run around demanding he be reelected after campaigning on working with Barry.
So who has the low intelligence really? Bhoner or his traitorous supporters?
Same goes for mitch and every other ‘lesser evil’ in the GOP.
Sorry loser, we all know Baraq has you blackmailed into submission.
Boehner is next in line for the office of president after Joe Biden.
so we have a disagreement between two branches of government regarding whether enough information was provided .. and Boehner thinks the Supreme Court will intervene and take sides? We shall see ... in a few years.
Trying REALLY hard to keep his job...LMAO
He’s got a LONG, very LONG way to go for me to ever listen to what the drunk has to say...
The Congress has been made meaningless decades ago by executive orders. We have no Constitutional government. We have a Rule of Oligarchy as Jefferson feared-—and Boehner is on their payroll, and always has been, as is most in Congress.
They sold our country for money and power to a few evil, sodomite elites, like Epstein and Kissinger and Soros and his NWO Luciferean group, who perform boy-sacrifices to their goat-god at the Bohemian Grove. The Leviathan has been in place for a good 20 years and in the plan for 100 years since the Fabians were whispering about making the “Love” that dare not say it’s name “normalized” (for the children, like in the boys harems in muslim countries).
Those who stayed home let Obama and Iran gain nukes.
May God have mercy your souls.
Yes indeed. Some poor fool from the GOPe of FL just called wanting to know about my experience working for Romney. I gave him an earful about what we expected from the victories they were given vs the worthless crap we were dished out. Itold him I was done with the party. He said it scared him how many times a day he hears that.
“What is it with Pubbie leadership that they goes weak-kneed over every major issue?”
Perhaps the prosecution of former Speaker Dennis Hastert was a very clear message from Obama to the GOP leaders —”Fail to toe the line and I will destroy you personally.” Usually administrations do not prosecute members of the other party for past sins.
The specific federal crime Hastert is being accused of is withdrawing money he owns from his personal bank accounts in such a way as to not trigger federal requirements a bank report transactions exceeding $10,000. One could argue this is an odious law that actually violates the the 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizure. Government has no legitimate interest in a private citizens banking transactions without some compelling evidence actual criminal activity is involved.
Why charge Hastert with what is really a non-crime at this time?
1) He is a former Speaker of the House of the opposite party. Obama is communicating to sitting representatives he will go after the even the most powerful political opponents at any time.
2) This is a fully discretionary prosecution. There is no evidence Hastert was committing any real monetary crime such as laundering drug money or financing illegal activity.
3) The criminal indictment coincided with leaks from the government that Hastert’s transactions were associated with payoffs he was making as a victim of extortion. He was actually a victim of a real crime, yet the government has chosen not to charge the extortionist. In addition it was leaked the payments were hush money to keep the extortionist quiet about a past homosexual relationship with Hastert. This leaked information served the purpose of permanently ruining Hastert’s reputation and destroyed his ability to continue his employment as a lobbyist. The leaks had nothing to do with the actual crime for which Hastert is charged.
While Boehner and McConnell have been extremely weak leaders, since the Hastert indictment both have capitulated without a fight on every key issue. Iran, immigration, EPA climate change regulation, Obamacare repeal, and soon the budget. There hasn’t even been a token resistance even though they have the power to block Obama’s agenda. Compare Pelosi and Reid during the last two years of the Bush administration to McConnell and Boehner since the GOP captured both the House and Senate. Pelosi and Reid effectively used every power granted the legislature in the Constitution to completely tie the hands of Bush from January 2007 to January 2009. In contrast, Obama is experiencing zero resistance from the Republican leadership to behavior that flouts the rule of law and is an anathema to the Republican base.
What does Obama have on McConnell and Boehner?
What does the “JB” part stand for?
Pardon me for a possibly naive question, but I now see the constitutional authority of the president to negotiate treaties, or whatever Obama is doing with Iran, versus the House’s power of the purse.
More specifically, the Senate has the constitutional authority to approve treaties negotiated by the president. But I hadn’t considered that the House’s unique “power of the purse,” evidenced by the Constitution’s Clause 1 of Section 7 of Article I, arguably gives the House the power to trump the Senate's approval of a treaty, effectively saying no to a treaty.
But because of unconstitutional handling of taxpayer dollars by corrupt Congress over the last several years, the House’s “power of the purse” to say no to a treaty is useless at this point in time because the president already has the funding. Something like that.
Insights welcome.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.