Could Obama be impeached by congress for using executive actions in violation of
I am just hearing about Obama'a use of executive action to ban bullets for the AR15, a popular rifle. He couldn't enact a gun ban so he decided to ban the bullets which in my opinion, is the same thing. It's violating the constitution and in my opinion, he violated the law and the constitution. Didn't he swear an oath? Sounds illegal to me. Impeach him.
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
16 comments
He doesn't think that he knows it, with the help of the ostrich "media".
Obama doesn't get it. He proposes legislation/actions that will fail and people just rush to buy guns/ammo before ti goes into effect. Either he is clueless or he is secretly trying to promote gun ownership. (Might make sense with the rise in all the lone wolf terrorist attacks lately).
Could he be impeached? Seems like it. Would the Republicans choose this issue to make their stand on? I doubt it even though they would have strong support on this one. Last time they tried to impeach a president they ended up doing more harm to themselves. Mind you constitutional violations are more serious matter than receive a BJ from an intern, IMO.
This is what happens when you get all your news from internet conspiracy sites. Chill. With the recent supreme court decisions, gun rights have never been more secure.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/us/mov…
The main thing that bothers me about all the SOB's (sorry female dogs puppies usually behave better than politicians) is that they have forgotten that they are employees and we have let them. A politician deserves no more respect than any other employee. If they do their job properly, don't steal, treat the owners with respect and do their part in keeping the company safe and operating they can stay. 90% of all politicians do none of the items I have listed. They do not do their jobs, They disrespect the owners, US. They STEAL. They do all that is possible to make us unsafe and are trying to bankrupt us. Do you know why there are so few Doctors, Engineers, and other professionals (that actually require a code of ethics) in congress is because Professionals are required to subscribe to a code of ethics that first states protect the public interest and DO NO HARM. Lawyers do not subscribe to a code of ethics that includes the public good. The lawyers code ascribes first loyalty to themselves and other lawyers. There is a definite lack of doing the correct thing. The prevailing thought is "we are the government therefore whatever we do must be legal" That is why the constitution was so restrictive so as to prevent the government from becoming God. We have let the government become just that.
Why do we have FBI, ATF, SECRET SERVICE, TREASURY...... and on and on of governmental "investigative agencies" Why does the Secret service investigate counterfeiting why not the FBI. Why does the ATF even exist with their history of murdering suspects? Wasn't it the FBI that caught and jailed Al Capone (another Chicago Criminal) after the ATF killed hundreds if not thousands of underlings and bystanders for the fun of it? More recently the Fast and Furious secret operation the Holder ran through the amateurs at ATF because the professionals at the FBI would not have participated in such an ill conceived operation knowing it would fail and get people killed. But that was the whole point wasn't it... to force more gun control. They did not know that someone would talk, expose the scam for what it was (forcing legitimate gun shop to knowingly sell to criminal under threat of closure) and embarrass the lead criminal.
The uninformed voted to put a Chicago criminal syndicate into the white house and expected different results? The bastard was not even on the ballot in Indiana legally. No it is not a citizenship issue...he did not have enough signatures on his ballot petitions. More than half were forged making his primary candidacy tens of thousands short of the required signatures to be on the ballot (that means he was never on the ballot legally in Indiana in 2008). By the time it was investigated it was after he was sworn in and it was decided it was impractical to prosecute because he had the entire federal government's "injustice department" and the vindictive pelosy cunt to fight little Indiana. Surprise the ballot signature fraud occurred in the counties next to Chicago!
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!
I can sort see that maybe the guy has a plan with ISIS - let them self-destruct on their own. So maybe he has some subtle thinking on this one? Could really just be picking a fight he knows he won't win? Maybe just so he can say he tried his best? Is it all for his "legacy" even if it just means more gun and ammunition ownership?
Congress can impeach for almost any reason, say, lying about a BJ. But it's often political. GW could have been impeached for plenty of reasons, but the American People don't really like it when one party takes such action.
The supreme court decides what is and is not constitutional. They do tend to be slow.
Better read up! You state, "Congress can impeach for almost any reason, say, lying about a BJ."
Both false. Congress can NOT impeach. And no one was impeached about lying about a blow job.
Article One of the United States Constitution gives the House of Representatives (NOT Congress) the sole power of impeachment and the Senate the sole power to try impeachments.
clinton was tried for perjury. Yes, a BJ was involved, but could have been anything lying under oath!
*SMH*
If Congress were really that upset about it, and they're not, they could pass a law nullifying his orders and hope they get enough votes to override his inevitable veto. Note how nobody is proposing that.
It remains to be seen whether such an order will hold up in court. The SC has been typically been more than moderately favorable to Presidents with regard to such, when they don't violate the restrictions set forth in Article II.
Just tried it with Keystone. No liberal will vote with the other side to override his veto.
Impeaching a 6th year President is a waste of time and resources. We've already moved on to election 2016. Everything Obama does now can be easily reversed by the next president. If Obama s moves are politically unpopular, that's a winning issue for republicans in 2016. If they're popular, impeachment would be political suicide.
Obama's clearly afraid that the Latinos and the We-want-Warren crown may just stay home in 2016. He may actually WANT his exec orders to get blocked by the courts, to get the far left worked up in a lather.