Congress Planning Obama Impeachment

[Kurr]

http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/0 ... ted-42321/

Congress Planning Obama Impeachment After Bipartisan Debt Plan Rejected

The U.S congress is planning to file Articles of Impeachment against President Obama after he rejected another bipartisan plan debt plan to prevent the U.S from a credit default.
Earlier today republicans warned President Obama that impeachment proceedings would be brought against him if he causes the nation to default on its debt.

Congressman Steve King, the Republic member of the House of Representative from Iowa, wrote on his twitter account Monday that President Barack Obama “would be impeached” if the nation falls into default.

Politico reported afterward on King’s threat and added that other members of congress were also ready to bring impeachment charges against Obama over the debt talks. Rep. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) warned earlier this month it would be “an impeachable offense” and Bruce Fein has already drafted articles of impeachment for House republicans to introduce.

more at link.

Boy that would shake things up, no? Any predictions on how the market would re act to impeachment hearing invokement, sucessfull or not?

Or what do you think the fallout from such actions would bring?

What do YOU think of the whole thing?

[NHsorter]

Obama won't be impeached. He has the worlds best impeachment insurance... Joe Biden.

[68Camaro]

Obama won't be impeached. He has the worlds best impeachment insurance... Joe Biden.

Ouch - it that wasn't so true it would be funny.

[franklin]

He really had insurance last year with Nancy behind Joe.

[theo]

From what I understand an impeachment is roughly equivilent to an indictment in a criminal trial. It only requires a majority vote in the house. However, I believe a 2/3 vote by the Senate is required to convict Pres. Obama and remove him from office. Without a conviction, impeachment is nothing more than political slap in the face. The press would call it a purely partisan stunt by the delusional Tea party right and Obama would just laugh and shrug it off. Clinton was impeached (but not convicted) in 1998 and it barely put a dent in his reputation.

[Kurr]

CAN they impeach for him vetoe-ing the budget plans? Is that a "high crime or misdomeaner"?

Why now, over this? IMHO impeachment proceedings SHOULD have went forth after the Mav'ri was boarded and an American Citizen was executed at point blank range and he went to plead for the aggressors at the U.N.

Operating on behalf of a foriegn nation that attacked and siezed an American flagged ship ininternational waters, kidnapping American citizens and execicuting one citizen is FAAAAR more treasonous than excersizing a judgement call on a veto.

Also what would a credit rating drop mean for us and how would that affect the markets is an impeachment proceeding insued, successful or not?

[Kurr]

You can not try a sitting president by law. They mustbe removed from office first. The impeachment is that vehicle to see if a president has indeed committed an offence worthy of removal.

Once removed, a criminal charge and trial can be effected. This is where I do not see the light here. What criminal charges could they bring for him vetoing an item, a function of the office, with the power to do so properly delegated to him.

[Mossy]

I don't know enough about the finacial side of the question, but the gun mess on the southern border is certainly "high crimes and misdemeanors", and an act of war against both Mexico and Honduras (arguably treason). Holder may end up taking the fall to protect "the cause". I hope he turns on them, he has dirt going back to before Waco and that Cuban kid.

[scrapper2010]

I don't follow how this could be done. Okay hypothetically then, house Republican's could draft up any debt limit plan they wished, however unreasonable and with absolutely zero concessions to the left, stand by it without compromising whatsoever, and if the prez doesn't bow to their demands in full then he could be impeached for not allowing the debt ceiling to be raised??? It seems to me, like it or not, voters have elected a majority of dems in the senate and a dem president. So isn't it the Repub's responsibilty to do the lion's share of compromising?

[theo]

You can not try a sitting president by law. They mustbe removed from office first. The impeachment is that vehicle to see if a president has indeed committed an offence worthy of removal.

Once removed, a criminal charge and trial can be effected. This is where I do not see the light here. What criminal charges could they bring for him vetoing an item, a function of the office, with the power to do so properly delegated to him.

An impeachment will not remove a President from office. The Senate must hold a trial to either convict or aquit. Both Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Clinton in 1998 were impeached by the House and aquitted in the Senate. Nixon resigned if you remember.

To answer your question, I don't believe an Obama veto would warrant an impeachment as it is his right. If the President is being unreasonable with his veto power then Congress can over ride with a 2/3 vote in both houses. However, if he refused to service our debt after August 2nd, causing a formal default then an impeachment would be highly likely.

[theo]

I don't follow how this could be done. Okay hypothetically then, house Republican's could draft up any debt limit plan they wished, however unreasonable and with absolutely zero concessions to the left, stand by it without compromising whatsoever, and if the prez doesn't bow to their demands in full then he could be impeached for not allowing the debt ceiling to be raised??? It seems to me, like it or not, voters have elected a majority of dems in the senate and a dem president. So isn't it the Repub's responsibilty to do the lion's share of compromising?

Not after last November.

[Kurr]

So your saying thathe would have a chance atproceedings based on how he handled the treasury? I can see that a little better, thanks.

[Redneck]

Congress Planning Obama Impeachment...???

I seriously doubt it.

More like the Republicans want to tarnish his image going into the next election.

For him to be impeached, the truth would have to come out about the whole mess we're in.

Trust me.

That's not going to happen.

>

[fb101]

BS

[Sheikh_yer_Bu'Tay]

I cannot see them impeaching him over his veto power. How could they? and even if the House did impeach him, there is no way in Hell Harry Reid will let it go through the Senate. (Except as a sham trial crafted to embarrass the Republicans)

I have noticed there are a large amount of dumb-asses in the House on both sides of the isle. They can talk tuff about a lot of stuff that never happens.

If you would like to know how to impeach Obama, that process is working right now on some real crimes he has committed. A DC District Court judge has ordered a subpoena from the federal court for the state of HI to produce his real birth certificate, not the stupid fake birth certificate he posted a few months ago. HI is trying hard not to comply. They are even giving their state department of health director and everyone in the attny. generals office leave for two weeks so they don't have to answer the court ordered subpoena. Why the two week wait? Maybe someone needed time to manufacture more phony docs.

First, Social Security fraud. He proffers his SS# to be 042-68-4425. That is nearly impossible, for the prefix "042" is for a state Obama never was in at the time of his applying for a SS# at the age of 15 or 16. That is for the area around either CT, or NJ. I don't remember for sure. AND it was originally issued to someone else in the state. SSI Admin. states this number is not valid for any living person.

Second, Draft Registration fraud. Mr. Obama has used this invalid SSI# 042-68-4425 to register for the draft.

FOIA's are working their way through the courts. Time will tell if Emperor O gets impeached, or not.

My guess is he is such a Narcissist he will destroy the nation first before he allows himself to be thrown out of office. (Kinda like Hitler did). Maybe that is why he is resisting the budget process so hard. To destroy the dollar and our nation before the truth about him is finally outed.

[moparal7]

I cannot see them impeaching him over his veto power. How could they? and even if the House did impeach him, there is no way in Hell Harry Reid will let it go through the Senate. (Except as a sham trial crafted to embarrass the Republicans)

I have noticed there are a large amount of dumb-asses in the House on both sides of the isle. They can talk tuff about a lot of stuff that never happens.

If you would like to know how to impeach Obama, that process is working right now on some real crimes he has committed. A DC District Court judge has ordered a subpoena from the federal court for the state of HI to produce his real birth certificate, not the stupid fake birth certificate he posted a few months ago. HI is trying hard not to comply. They are even giving their state department of health director and everyone in the attny. generals office leave for two weeks so they don't have to answer the court ordered subpoena. Why the two week wait? Maybe someone needed time to manufacture more phony docs.

First, Social Security fraud. He proffers his SS# to be 042-68-4425. That is nearly impossible, for the prefix "042" is for a state Obama never was in at the time of his applying for a SS# at the age of 15 or 16. That is for the area around either CT, or NJ. I don't remember for sure. AND it was originally issued to someone else in the state. SSI Admin. states this number is not valid for any living person.

Second, Draft Registration fraud. Mr. Obama has used this invalid SSI# 042-68-4425 to register for the draft.

FOIA's are working their way through the courts. Time will tell if Emperor O gets impeached, or not.

My guess is he is such a Narcissist he will destroy the nation first before he allows himself to be thrown out of office. (Kinda like Hitler did). Maybe that is why he is resisting the budget process so hard. To destroy the dollar and our nation before the truth about him is finally outed.

Well said.

[Mossy]

I cannot see them impeaching him over his veto power. How could they? and even if the House did impeach him, there is no way in Hell Harry Reid will let it go through the Senate.

I think this is true. Congress has to pass something in order to force Obama to veto it, otherwise they are just acting like a bunch of cowards.

The rest? I just keeps piling up, doesn't it?

[Sheikh_yer_Bu'Tay]

I cannot see them impeaching him over his veto power. How could they? and even if the House did impeach him, there is no way in Hell Harry Reid will let it go through the Senate.

I think this is true. Congress has to pass something in order to force Obama to veto it, otherwise they are just acting like a bunch of cowards.

The rest? I just keeps piling up, doesn't it?

Speaking Constitutionally, it is the House of Representatives, and the House alone, that has the authority to write spending bills. No one can do it for them, it must be done by them. After they have done their job, the Senate can then work with the House's bill, or reject it entirely. The President can sign the spending bill into law, or veto it.

There is definitely a clash of ideologies. Both sides are playing for the ones' who voted them into office. This is all political gamesmanship, and this time it may get us into trouble. The Democrats are so used to the Republicans caving in on their convictions, they think they can bully the Repub.s into anything. Not this time (I hope).

I am with you, Mossy. The House must do it's job. Keep writing spending bills and send them to the Senate. After that, it's the other guy's fault if they don't pass a budget.

[theo]

I cannot see them impeaching him over his veto power. How could they? and even if the House did impeach him, there is no way in Hell Harry Reid will let it go through the Senate.

I think this is true. Congress has to pass something in order to force Obama to veto it, otherwise they are just acting like a bunch of cowards.

The rest? I just keeps piling up, doesn't it?

I doubt that Obama would veto anything that gets through the Senate. Such a bill would require at least a few democrat votes and, thus, be harder to cast as tea party extremism.

If a bill doesn't get through I think Obama will try to get around the debt ceiling as Bill Clinton is encouraging him to do. My fear is that he'll use Fed loans to spend money on what benefits him politically (union contracts, funding certain groups, bailing out California. . etc) and refuse funding in ways that make the House Republicans look bad, proclaiming, "I can't because of the debt ceiling." However, if he is not careful doing in that he could draw an impeachment.

Although, allowing the 8/2 or 8/10 deadline to pass without a deal might seem like good idea in some respects, it does seem to give a lot of discretionary spending authority to the executive branch supported by the Fed. Is that really what we want?

[Sheikh_yer_Bu'Tay]

I doubt that Obama would veto anything that gets through the Senate. Such a bill would require at least a few democrat votes and, thus, be harder to cast as tea party extremism.

If a bill doesn't get through I think Obama will try to get around the debt ceiling as Bill Clinton is encouraging him to do. My fear is that he'll use Fed loans to spend money on what benefits him politically (union contracts, funding certain groups, bailing out California. . etc) and refuse funding in ways that make the House Republicans look bad, proclaiming, "I can't because of the debt ceiling." However, if he is not careful doing in that he could draw an impeachment.

Although, allowing the 8/2 or 8/10 deadline to pass without a deal might seem like good idea in some respects, it does seem to give a lot of discretionary spending authority to the executive branch supported by the Fed. Is that really what we want?

http://people-press.org/2011/07/28/obam ... ction-bid/

[henrysmedford]

Snapz Pro XScreenSnapz012.jpg (39.96 KiB) Viewed 564 times

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14351148
So the BBC in number three in the photo there is the word Impeachment

[Mossy]

So the BBC in number three in the photo there is the word Impeachment

The Beeb is hardly an expert on US law.