Posted on 10/17/2014 12:38:55 PM PDT by RummyChick
While the bipartisan voice grows to ban Ebola victims from entering the United States, a new report claims that President Obama is considering a plan to bring the world’s Ebola patients to the United States to be treated.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
New Ebola Czar already MIA
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/17/obama-convened-a-meeting-coordinating-govt-ebola-response-and-someone-was-noticeably-absent/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=ShareButtons
Yep, healthcare workers should strike in the face of this threat.
Let the left-wing union supporters chew on that....
The people will say Thus far, and no futher.
That is the front line, and what will stop the insane 0bola policies.
How long before it shows up in Staten Island
Hey Obama, be a MAN - Implement a travel BAN!!
Either the author of the article is ‘way off base or Obama is. Probably both.
African ebola patients could not come to the US, check into hospitals, and get treated with out dozens of people noticing.
It’s bad enough to have US servicemen flying to Africa. Bringing patients here would spell the immediate end of Obola.
this story makes no sense. have ebola symptoms, been in contact with ebola person..but then they let the person leave
The others helped him get where he is or refuse to do the right thing
That’s why I said armed people
I was thinking of the remnants of constitution upholding military
The Trial of Andrew Johnson, page 522:
Hon. John A. Logan, one of the Managers of the impeachment on the part of the House of Representatives:
Now, it is admitted by all sides that any officer may be removed under our laws for any reason, no reason, or for political reasons simply, the contest between the Executive and Congress being as to the person or body by whom such removal shall be exercised—whether by the President alone or by the President and Senate in concurrence, or whether such right of removal may be restrained by legislation.
This power of removal by somebody is recognized in a variety of statutes, but nowhere as the penalty for crime. The phrase “removal from office” appears only once in the Constitution. Must it not, therefore, have the same meaning and construction there as it does in the other laws of the United States? Is not this construction of the phrase “removal from office” made certain by the uniform legislation and practice of the Government? And as the phrase “removal from office” is only found in the Constitution as the consequence of conviction upon impeachment, the judgment of which can extend no further than such removal or disqualification for office, is it not equally certain that such judgment is not a punishment for crime, and, therefore, that an officer may be removed by impeachment for political reasons, as he may be for the same reasons by any department of the Government in which the right of removal is vested?
Is not this view of the constitutional provision strengthened by this consideration: that by the theory of and practice under the Constitution, every officer, other than the President and Vice President, may be, and in practice is, removable by the power that appointed him at pleasure; or, in other words, when the service of the
Government, in the judgment of the appointing power, seems to make such removal necessary and proper? Is it not, therefore, more consonant with the theory of the Constitution to hold that the President may be removed from office by presentment of the House, who represent in his case the people who appointed him, if the reasons for the removal shall be found sufficient by two thirds of the Senate, who, by the Constitution, are to adjudicate thereupon? Can we not illustrate this by supposing a case of inability in the President to perform the duties of his office because of his insanity? Now, insanity is not a crime, but every act of an insane man might, and almost necessarily would, be a misdemeanor in office.
Is the phrase “misdemeanor in office” any more than the Norman French translation of the English word misbehavior? Judges are to hold office during good behavior. Is not that equivalent to saying they hold office during good demeanor, i.e., while they demean themselves well in office? Are not both phrases the equivalent of the Latin one “dum se bene gesserit?”
How is an insane President or an insane judge to be removed under our Constitution? Clearly not until his insanity is ascertained. By whom is that to be ascertained? The Constitution makes no provision save by presentment by the House, and adjudication by the Senate. And it is remarkable, as sustaining this argument, that the first case of impeachment of a judge under our Constitution, Judge Pickering’s, was of an insane man, as the defense allege, and clearly made out by evidence. Judge Pickering was removed, the defense of insanity apparently not being considered by the Senate. Is it not clear that the process of impeachment, under the English constitution, being a mode of punishment of all crimes, as well as a method by which an officer whose official or personal conduct was hurtful to the State might be removed, that our Constitution limiting the form of impeachment to removal only takes away from it its punitive element which it vests in the ordinary courts of law alone; thus leaving the process of impeachment an inquisition of office for any act of the officer or cause which the House of Representatives might present as, and the Senate adjudicate to be, hurtful to the State or injurious to the common weal.
Will anyone say that if the President should veto every bill that should pass the Congress—and there not be a two-thirds vote against his veto—and thereby defeat all appropriations, so as to completely block the wheels of Government, that he could not be impeached for an improper use of said power, although he is authorized by the Constitution to use such power? Here would be a case wherein the exercise of lawful power was done in such a way as to become so oppressive and obviously wrong that there must be a remedy, and impeachment would be the only one.
DEFINITION OF CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS.
Having thus shown that a party can be impeached for offenses not punishable by statute law, it behooves us next to inquire what have been the definitions of crimes and misdemeanors as used by writers of acknowledged authority. It is by the light of these definitions that we are to inquire and determine what culpability, if any, attaches to each and all of the acts by the President of which we complain, and how far he may palliate or justify the act after having admitted its performance. These which I shall read are but few among the many authoritative definitions of crimes and misdemeanors.
What is a crime? Blackstone defines a crime or misdemeanor as being—”An act committed or omitted in violation of a public law either forbidding or commanding it. This general definition comprehends both crimes and misdemeanors, which,
properly speaking, are mere synonymous terms; though in common usage the word crimes is made to denote such offenses as are of deeper and more atrocious dye; while smaller faults and omissions of less consequence are comprised under the gentler name of misdemeanors only.”—Blackstone’s Commentaries, book 4, p. 5.
“The distinction of public wrongs from private crimes and misdemeanors from civil injuries seems principally to consist in this: that private wrongs or civil injuries are an infringement or privation of the civil rights which belong to individuals merely as individuals; public wrongs or crimes and misdemeanors are a breach and violation of the public rights and duties due to the whole community considered as as community in its social aggregate capacity.”—Blackstone’s Commentaries, book 4, p. 5.
“When the words high crimes and misdemeanors are used in prosecutions by impeachment, the words high crimes and misdemeanors have no definite signification, but are used merely to give greater solemnity to the charge.”—Sentence from a note to Blackstone’s Commentaries, 5 Christian.
The Trial of Andrew Johnson, 1868, congressional record: http://books.google.com/books?id=XDsC22cMrcEC...
Thanks for the ping!
Yes, there is. The problem is the FDA granting permission to release the drugs. The red tape is massive. Mark Levin mentioned this on his show tonight.
Just when you thought it couldn’t possibly get any worse.
When bullies bothered us at school, my mother told us “Don’t let them know it bothers you.” That actually worked.
We have let him know how much all of this bothers us, and so he is piling it on, faster and faster. But what can we do? We can’t roll over, so we have to keep showing him how much it bothers us. We are trapped, by our own courage in speaking out.
Like the Nazis, they are forcing us to participate in our own destruction.
The man’s insane, and must be impeached before he kills us all.
If he were a “plant” .... he’d be a Florida Poison Tree, toxic in leaf, flower, fruit, bark, root. Total poison, and malignant as hell.
"Judicial Watch has learned that the Obama administration is actively formulating plans to admit Ebola-infected non-U.S. citizens into the United States for treatment."
"Specifically, the goal of the administration is to bring Ebola patients into the United States for treatment within the first days of diagnosis."
"It is unclear who would bear the high costs of transporting and treating non-citizen Ebola patients. The plans include special waivers of laws and regulations that ban the admission of non-citizens with a communicable disease as dangerous as Ebola."
"One source tells us that the Obama administration is keeping this plan secret from Congress. The source is concerned that the proposal is illegal; endangers the public health and welfare; and should require the approval of Congress."
Waiting for this to be double sourced and triple checked. If they truly are doing this, then they have completely jumped the shark and need to be reigned in. Congress won't do it. Pentagon anyone? Are there a few good men left? Massive rally at the mall? The tipping point is past. .
This is going to be very difficult to get confirming sources and the MSM will likely ignore the report ... unless Obama has become so bold that he announces it as part of some new initiative to contain Ebola in Africa by bringing patients here to treat them. This is utter madness, but I can see it all wrapped up in the usual leftist "we care more" insanity and the average citizen just sitting back and waiting for the next outrage.
I have a plan for treating the Ebola patients IN PLACE - costly yes... rational - yes ... to be done in the American style of of yesteryear - Going Big and taking care of the problem ... I will post it soon...
Look for the Topic Thread ... U.S.S. Compassion ...
You can laugh - you can joke - you can make snide remarks - but my plan would turn the obama treachery on its head...
GO BIG TO DEAL WITH THE EBOLA PROBLEM
Operation Compassion - U.S.S. Compassion Hospital Ship
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3216737/posts
“Decimate the infidel’s military by sending them into plaque-ridden areas without proper protection. Create a crisis to further cripple response times and resources needed for a national emergency. Further incapacitate health facilities and hospitals by flooding them, making them useless to the general population. Strategize by placing the faithful opposition in every state and in as many population centers as possible. Install faithful opposition members in government offices where they can effectively bend laws and procedures to accommodate the cause.
Enlist the support of any group or organization that will oppose the enemy on their own premises, thus increasing the number of antagonists.
Create an onslaught of any vulnerable entry points into enemy territory. Flood those points with unauthorized
entrants in numbers large enough to disquise the infiltration of large numbers of faithful opposition.
Remove or restrain any persons capable of mobilizing or organizing retaliation.
Remain vigilant until The Perfect Day is declared by our leaders”
We had better be quick to realize what is happening when that day comes. If there is anyone who still can’t see who is orchestrating and strategizing this nation’s downfall, please look at the reality of our leadership today and their actions. They aren’t inept. They are brilliantly diabolic. You can safely assume that the cure and prevention of the Ebola virus is already in the possession of a few, just not us. Just another hair-brained conspiracy theory? I fervently hope so.
If I had my wish, this would be the end of the end times and Our Creator would be preparing to sort it all out, once and for all! However, such evil is as old as time.
I think Joe Biden is having some declining memory or issues....every time he talks it gets more bizarre.
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.