Posted on 03/11/2012 1:40:07 PM PDT by RobinMasters
Let the president be duly warned.
Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr., R-N.C., has introduced a resolution declaring that should the president use offensive military force without authorization of an act of Congress, “it is the sense of Congress” that such an act would be “an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.”
Specifically, Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution reserves for Congress alone the power to declare war, a restriction that has been sorely tested in recent years, including Obama’s authorization of military force in Libya.
In an exclusive WND column, former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo claims that Jones introduced his House Concurrent Resolution 107 in response to startling recent comments from Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.
“This week it was Secretary of Defense Panetta’s declaration before the Senate Armed Services Committee that he and President Obama look not to the Congress for authorization to bomb Syria but to NATO and the United Nations,” Tancredo writes. “This led to Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., introducing an official resolution calling for impeachment should Obama take offensive action based on Panetta’s policy statement, because it would violate the Constitution.”
In response to questions from Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., over who determines the proper and legal use of the U.S. military, Panetta said, “Our goal would be to seek international permission and we would … come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress – I think those are issues we would have to discuss as we decide what to do here.”
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Why?
It won’t go anywhere.
The Dems control the Senate.
If it does pass the House, it will be seen as a political move and will cost the Republicans.
Even if The House impeached him, and they won't, The Senate will not convict. This is a stunt. It may serve the interest of a few congressmen, but it will not help us bring down Obama.
A triple-dog-dare. Like duh!
Agreed!
the public is divided about a communist usurper forger? Just submit a forged Impeachment bill and call it even.
Or, I double-dog dare you and your friends too. Never heard of a triple-dog dare before. It’s been a sheltered life.
Boehner wouldn’t dare bring it to a vote.
He remembers which one lost his job when another Speaker brought impeachment charges against a sitting president.
By granting an international body--the UN--rather than Congress, the power to authorize the use of military force, Obama has committed the highest crime, treason.
Well, not having ever been a little boy, I was extrapolating a bit. Maybe shouldn’t have.
I think this is a big mistake. The public is divided on Obama and this will only allow him to divert our attention from the collapsing economy, crushing debt and skyrocketing gas prices. The media will sell it as a “racist” political “lynching” and at least some brain dead voters will buy.
Even if The House impeached him, and they won’t, The Senate will not convict. This is a stunt. It may serve the interest of a few congressmen, but it will not help us bring down Obama.
I agree.
I agree with your statement....going to NATO. This sumbitch wants a one world gummit.
Book review of 'Sell Out'.......
David Schippers, the chief investigative counsel for the Clinton impeachment, wants to be sure Americans know just who contributed to the debacle and how. A trial attorney and a Democrat, Schippers was hired by Republican congressman Henry Hyde to lead an oversight investigation of the Justice Department, then was redirected to handle the impeachment. The quintessential honest man, Schippers was shocked, not so much by Clinton's actions (which he calls a far-reaching conspiracy to obstruct justice with perjury, lies, and witness tampering), but by Republican and Democratic politicians who sold out the impeachment process.
If you ever want to vote again, you might not want to know what went on behind the scenes in the Capitol Hill meat grinder leading up to and during the impeachment proceedings against William Jefferson Clinton.... Lies, cowardice, hypocrisy, cynicism, amorality, butt-covering--these were the squalid political body parts that, squeezed through the political processor, combined to make a mockery of the impeachment process.
Presidents have been doing this at least since WWII.
And there are a hundred better, stronger cases to be made for Obama’s impeachment and imprisonment.
But if it works I’m all for it!
People in America don’t want the idiot impeached. They want him fired.
Doing something like this just excites his crazy base...the race based voters, media buttkissers, and other true believers. Impeachment won’t hurt him politically, it’ll make him stronger.
We need to find ways to demoralize his supporters, not fire them up.
Book review of 'Sell Out'.......
David Schippers, the chief investigative counsel for the Clinton impeachment, wants to be sure Americans know just who contributed to the debacle and how. A trial attorney and a Democrat, Schippers was hired by Republican congressman Henry Hyde to lead an oversight investigation of the Justice Department, then was redirected to handle the impeachment. The quintessential honest man, Schippers was shocked, not so much by Clinton's actions (which he calls a far-reaching conspiracy to obstruct justice with perjury, lies, and witness tampering), but by Republican and Democratic politicians who sold out the impeachment process.
If you ever want to vote again, you might not want to know what went on behind the scenes in the Capitol Hill meat grinder leading up to and during the impeachment proceedings against William Jefferson Clinton.... Lies, cowardice, hypocrisy, cynicism, amorality, butt-covering--these were the squalid political body parts that, squeezed through the political processor, combined to make a mockery of the impeachment process.
This won’t fly, so it is likely done strictly as a p.r. piece. This is why (my comments after):
“The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548) is a federal law intended to check the power of the President in committing the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress.
“The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or in case of “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.”
“The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto.
“The War Powers Resolution was disregarded by President Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign in Kosovo, and again by President Obama in 2011, when he did not seek congressional approval for attack on Libya, arguing that the Resolution did not apply to that action. ALL presidents since 1973 have declared their belief that the act is unconstitutional.”
The bottom line is that, since the very founding of the United States, the presidency has been on a trajectory of becoming an “imperial presidency”.
Presidents, the congress, and the Supreme Court have allowed this to happen, and it has reached the point where presidents are able to assume powers granted to the other two branches at will, utterly disregarding the constitutional checks and balances.
The rough timeline of some of the major events in this process:
1789 - George Washington uses 15,000 militia to suppress a “stupid tax” revolt during the Whiskey Rebellion, violating the constitution and establishing the supremacy of the federal government over the individual states and citizenry.
1803 - In the Marbury v. Madison decision, the SCOTUS asserts that it can declare federal laws unconstitutional. But when they try to order the president to obey their decision, he refuses. From this point the president is effectively above the law, though removal from office after impeachment is close to impossible.
1833 - South Carolina attempts to nullify federal tariffs by state law. Congress passes a ‘Force Bill’, authorizing president Andrew Jackson to use military force against the government and citizens of that state. He threatens to hang all government officials who voted for nullification, so they vote to rescind nullification.
1836 - Andrew Jackson destroys the Second Bank of the United States, then issues the ‘Specie Circular’ executive order, just before leaving office, which effectively wiped out the savings of many Americans, causing a terrible depression that lasts five years. Its intent was to “punish land speculators and bankers”, people of wealth that Jackson despised.
1861-1865 Abraham Lincoln invalidates much of the Bill of Rights during the Civil War; imposes the first direct federal tax on American citizens, the income tax; among many expansions of presidential power.
1865-1870 The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments further increase federal supremacy over the states, as well as making the federal government central to all government power in the US.
1890-1920 The Progressive Era diminishes the value of state citizenship, clearing the path for unhindered involvement by the federal government directly into the individual lives of citizens. It then proceeds to do so.
1933-1935 The National Recovery Administration effectively nationalized American agriculture and created (modeled on fascist economics) public-private partnerships of many industries.
1936 President Franklin Roosevelt declares the commerce clause of the constitution to be an overriding principle of federal economic control over all aspects of the US economy.
From this point, virtually every US president has in some way increased the power of the office of the presidency, until under most circumstances they may function as a dictator. Among the most recent abuses are:
The Presidential Signing Statement - in which the president asserts how he *chooses* to interpret a law, what parts he will carry out, and what parts he will ignore.
Czars and recess appointments - no longer even trying to get unacceptable individuals approved by the us senate, just declaring them to have governmental power.
Subordinate dictatorial authority - cabinet officers and bureaucrats making extreme regulations outside of their authority.
Executive privilege - asserted in any circumstance that could embarrass the president, in flagrant contempt of congress.
Refusal by cabinet officers to carry out duties against presidential allies, while unfairly prosecuting presidential opponents.
Radical expansion of the number of federal police organizations (100+) and their authority, while granting police powers to non-police federal agencies.
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.
