Don’t put Orly Taitz (Clown, Dentist, Whackjob) on the case.
Well, she can't work for Obama -- and -- some other conservative, at the same time, doncha know... LOL ...
I just sent Orly Taitz another payment for her work.
Posted on 03/25/2010 12:45:04 PM PDT by conservativesister
I've searched FR, googled, and wicki-ed, the only thing I can find about removing a president is :
The House of Representatives has the power to bring articles of impeachment against a president. If articles are brought, then the president is considered impeached (but not guilty). A simple majority of the vote is sufficient to bring articles of impeachment.
Article 2, section 4 of the Constitution indicates reasons removal from office. "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."
Obviously, The House isn't going to listen to the people, my question is what rights do the people have for recall (like Gov. Davis) or removal of the President?
The amendment hasn’t been around that long. I believe the only use of the amendment has been when Nixon nominated Gerald Ford to be VP after Agnew resigned and on several occasions when the President was undergoing some procedure where he was under anethesia. On those occasions, the President transmitted a statement that he was relinquishing power, and one resuming duties when he came out of surgery. For the Cabinet and the VP to initiate action would be a momentous move, and some would consider it a coup d’etat, but it IS one method available.
I know there’s no way to win a veto proof majority in 2010, which is basically what you’d need to impeach + convict, so we may have to wait till 2012 so Americans can remove him.
But if the GOP manages to get a simple majority in both houses in 2010, he’ll virtually be a lame duck for two years.
Biden’s next in line. Then Pelosi. Just wow.
Bribery - Rep. Darryl Issa is calling for a special investigator be appointed to uncover the WH bribery offer and subsequent cover up of an Obama Admin. job offer made directly to Rep. Sestack-PA if he’d drop out the PA Senate race against Senator Spector. Robert Gibbs has denied answering press questions more than 13 times about this issue, because it’s a felony to make the offer, know about the offer and fail to report it, and to know about the incident and lie about your knowledge. Either Sestack or the WH is lying. This is a “balck & white” issue. Both parties can NOT be telling the truth. Sestack vigorously stands by his claim he was directly offered an Obama job to drop out of his race.
Okay yea you’re right, this part is just as scary.
I know, I know, the Birth Certificate thing. To wit we have no concrete evidence, nor do we have statutory requirements for him to produce said BC. California has a ballot law but it’s obviously not strong enough.
Well..., that's the most intelligent things I've seen written about the "Birth Certificate thing" -- after months and months of hand-wringing and screaming (by some) here on Free Republic....
Congratulations for managing to say something sensible about that issue... :-)
[ ... however let me warn you right now, that you are now a target of the "Obama Derangement Syndrome" group on Free Republic... put your shields up, right away... LOL ...]
“You think the dems are going to do it to O?”
He might. Zero is destroying the Democrats for the next generation. He might end up getting thrown out if/when the Republicans take control. Clinton got impeached over a sex scandal and lying, but I don’t think that Clinton would have done half the things Zero has.
Zero has alienated the other Dems, insulted the Dalai Lama, dissed his colleagues, enraged our allies and stupidly thinks he’s on equal standing with Putin and the others. I don’t think he has a chance in 2012 and no Democrat is going to stand by and let him destroy the chances for the Dems to hold onto power.
Furthermore, toss in the economic collapse and you have a recipe for a bunch of Dems to get rid of him through impeachment. Clinton survived because the economy was so great that people really didn’t care at all about his hijinks. Clinton could have set up a brothel and gotten away with it, with the economy so good. If/when the Republicans take over, Obama will be impeached and convicted, what the racist hoardes say be damned. People want results and they want this economy to turn around and if Zero isn’t going to do it, someone better.
Yeah, not good options... :-)
Then Hillary.
Isn't that supposed to stop things like The Louisiana Purchase?
1. Don’t put Orly Taitz (Clown, Dentist, Whackjob) on the case.
Okay. Now I’ve got real willies.
For the Cabinet and the VP to initiate action would be a momentous move, and some would consider it a coup d’etat, but it IS one method available.
I see this as something that would happen only in the event of the President becoming physically incapacitated, and he was either willingly going or else he was in a coma in which he couldn't say or do anything.
But, I don't ever see this being done against a President's will when he is fully physically capable and mentally capable.
There are also things in the Constitution that I don't ever see as happening. I was just on another thread where they were talking about the states invoking a Constitutional Convention to make some changes to our present form of governing (as we conservatives see it happening right now).
The only trouble there is "opening the door" to a Constitutional Convention (which can be done) will open the door to all sorts of liberals and Marxists making changes to that same Constitution, too.
So, I never see this one as happening in our futures, either.
The Amendment you've brought up isn't going to happen (be put into action) with a President that is physically and mentally capable of discharging his duties and he's "taken out" by this Amendment... no way... :-)
I’d like to see him take a tumble down the stairs of his big ol Air Force One.
Don’t put Orly Taitz (Clown, Dentist, Whackjob) on the case.
Well, she can't work for Obama -- and -- some other conservative, at the same time, doncha know... LOL ...
I just sent Orly Taitz another payment for her work.
Legislatively, he may only have a few more months to hurt us if the Republicans take over at least the House. What worries me the most is the two months between the Nov. elections and January 3rd when a lame duck Congress is in charge. Those that have lost their seats won’t have anything to lose at that point.
He might. Zero is destroying the Democrats for the next generation. He might end up getting thrown out if/when the Republicans take control. Clinton got impeached over a sex scandal and lying, but I don’t think that Clinton would have done half the things Zero has.
The Dems might be Marxists, liberals and leftists, but they are not crazy... LOL ...
They're not going to destroy the Democrat Party to get rid of Obama. They've got other ways of dealing with Obama, if they ever get to that point -- which I don't think they are.
Obama was born in a hospital located in modern day Kenya. Whatever other arguments might be made, he did not become a citizen by right of birth. So it isn't possible for him to be eligible to hold the office of President.
The office is thus vacant at this time. The eligible person who got the most votes as Vice Present is the acting president until an eligible person is declared elected by Congress.
Point is, you can't impeach Obama because he doesn't hold the office.
Procedurally, probably the most effective way to attack the situation is by making a collateral attack on some action he takes purporting to act as President. For example, a Quo Warranto action might be commenced against Sonya Sotomayor, seeking to eject her from the Supreme Court on the grounds that to be lawfully appointed to the Court, a person must be appointed by the President.
You should be able to get that case to trial without having to contend with standing issues to sue the President or other procedural limitations on your ability to get a lawsuit at issue against the person who occupies the White House.
You would still need to have standing to raise the issue as to Sonya but it would seem that a litigant before the Court would be qualified. There is lots of law on cases where a litigant has standing to successfully attack the capacity of the Judge.
I suspect that any of these states suing to overturn the Health Care Act might well have original jurisdiction rights to initiate such a challenge before the Supreme Court--if not, at least in the District Court in DC.
You get a hearing on the merits of your claim; prove he was born in Kenya; and get an order kicking Sonya out with findings supporting the order.
You then take that order and start off attacking other action he may have taken--signing the Health Care Bill; issuing military orders; etc.
The moving trucks are not far behind.
The office is thus vacant at this time.
Point is, you can't impeach Obama because he doesn't hold the office.
Ummmm..., told you this one was coming from some of the "Obama Derangement Syndrome" crowd... LOL ...
See my Post #38 ... :-)
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.