Wednesday, December 3, 2014
The case for removal
On January 20, 2012, Barack Obama said these words with his hand on a Bible, indicating that he was making an oath both to the citizens of the US and to the God of the Bible (who happens to be the true God): “I, Barack Obama, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Article. I. Section. 1. of the Constitution of the United States states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” And Article. II. Section. 1. states, “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”
The Constitution says nothing about the president having power to change a law; he is only authorized to execute the laws that are made by Congress. Yet in a speech on November 25, 2014, President Obama responded to hecklers with these incriminating words: “But what you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law, so that’s point No. 1. Point No. 2, the way the change in the law works is that we're reprioritizing how we enforce our immigration law generally. The point is that though I understand why you might have yelled at me a month ago, although I disagree with some of your characterizations, it doesn’t make much sense to yell at me right now when we’re making changes.”
(Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Obama-Addresses-Hecklers-During-Chicago-Speech-283908031.html#ixzz3KhTEmw1c)
Yes, he stated publicly, “I just took an action to change the law.” He then reiterated this point by saying, “The way the change in the law works is...” and “now when we’re making changes.” These words seen to me to be tantamount to an overt admission that he has decided to no longer “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”---a blatant usurption of congressional power and a disgraceful abrogation of his sworn duty as president? Is this not a firm constitutional ground for impeachment and removal from office? Up to this point I have opposed any efforts to impeach, being unimpressed by the grounds others have asserted. But these words make the case open and shut for me. So I say, let’s give ole Joe a shot at it for the next two years. I mean, why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
if we impeached every time a POTUS said something stupid, we would never have a POTUS. Maybe that's a good thing. Who knows.
What Obama said may have been stupid, but after saying for years that he did not have the constitutional authority to change the law, he then did it, and he then admitted in plain language that he did it. If this was a slip of the tongue, then it only proves he can't speak coherently without the telepromter. But this was no slip of the tongue. This was an admission.
actually I hope they try to impeach him. It will show just how stupid the entire republican party is. Just liek the justice dept.said bush had the authority to torture, they now say Obama has the authority to prioritize deportations, so by all means...go for it. I wait impatiently for it. and this is an issue I couldn't care less about.
Tom, I just got back from spending a week in Cuba, and frankly, I think you would like it a whole lot better down there where the strong man can make law by a mere declaration. I admit it's a simpler system. There's no arguing, no debate. Just whatever Fidel decides is the way it is (now Raul). One guy told me he had it pretty good, as long as he didn't criticize the government. Well, a lot of good men have lost their lives protecting us from what Washington called "arbitrary rule" and preserving our right to criticize our governing officials. I for one am not about to roll over and ignore it when an official changes the law by his own arbitrary declaration, and he does it right in front of our collective faces.
Post a Comment