Jack Cafferty read my reply!!!!

[originalpckelly]

"I have a feeling this "law" could finally trigger a profound Constitutional conflict. Can the Republican Congress pass a law to protect a President from their own party? That is a very interesting question. It is tantamount to the President pardoning himself for his crimes. We all know that is impossible under the Constitution, but is it legal for the same political party to pardon one of its' own members? Our Constitution doesn't contemplate that, mainly because the framers didn't know political parties would develop in our system. This could be very interesting.

Chris,
Denver"

I hope everyone understands the issue I raised in the reply. It is possibly one of the most important things to happen in our nation so far. This "law" is proof that the executive and legislative are joined at the hip. Had this been a Democratically controlled Congress, the President would have been impeached. But because of political parties the President is about to get off scott free. This cannot be allowed. President's simply cannot go around breaking laws and have "their" Congress legalize that activity. It is in essence the most profound threat to the rule of law in the history of our nation since the times of the Revolutionary War. We need to be very worried about this because it means other laws could simply disappear, at least for the President. In other words, the President would no longer serve the law, the law would serve the President. The President would become a king in effect.

[Catherine Vincent]

1. Very good!

:thumbsup:

[originalpckelly]

3. Thanks...

but I hope you understand why I thought it was so important. Our everyday lives could be profoundly altered with this precedent on the books.

[niyad]

2. excellent!!

[originalpckelly]

4. Cue Monty Burns...

image.

[flyarm]

5. i called numerous of the senators offices today and said just that!

i was furious watching the hearings today..and then Arlin makes a deal with * to give him a get out of jail free card for spying on americans with the NSA

and then this shit..

so it seems no matter how many laws this war criminal commits..they give him a get out of crime card...

i am so sick of this shit..and most Americans don't even seem to care what is happening to our constitution..

i ask people all the time..i go in stores and ask people..if they know whats going on and i get blank stares..

amazing that these criminals know that the American people are so damn ignorant,.and appathetic..

fly

[The_Casual_Observer]

6. This is a unique and insightful idea.

It is a testament to the weakness of human nature that it took such a short time for one party rule to fail.

[ladjf]

7. Congratulations! You are definitely making a difference. All of us

on DU dream of such an accomplishment but few achieve it.

[notadmblnd]

8. excellent question.

if you don't mind, I ask my political science professor your question. It will be interesting to hear his answer.

[originalpckelly]

9. Go ahead...

I recommend you look over Calder v. Bull, once you do you'll see why:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0003_0386_ZS.html

[etherealtruth]

10. Excellent

Jack chose well!

[originalpckelly]

11. Thanks.

:hi: :)

[WiseButAngrySara]

12. I saw this and it is a very good question. "I serve at the pleasure of

the pResident." Where do you think that coerced and rehearsed statement came from, for all in this current administration, and why is it said? You could so easilly substitute 'king' or 'his royal highness' for pResident. I can't recall any administratiion using it before this one, but correct me if I'm wrong. Powell used to grimace/smirk like he was lying, everytime he uttered it. They already consider themselves 'above the law.' They are the law, so they are above the law. We know they think they are above the 'hoi polloi'. No Democracy with these thugs. I think our constitutional Democracy is screwed until they are out of power, and as long as they are in power, they will tamper with the vote, as needed. So, we're screwed.

[ComerPerro]

13. I thought that letter was a little more profound than most!

[originalpckelly]

14. Thank you...

:-)

[2008]

15. I just saw that!

was impressed, didn't know (of course) it was written by a DUer

[tulsakatz]

16. good post!

If Congress is going to change the law so that the Prez is not respnsible for illegal actions, that kind eliminates the need for the oath of office. You know.........that pesky little thing when he is sworn into office stating that he promises to uphold the laws according to the constitution....

[vickitulsa]

17. Excellent point!

And OriginalPCKelly, I heard your response read by Jack and thought it by far the BEST of the several good replies he read!

Succinct, very well put, just outstanding work on your part -- and great discernment on Cafferty's part.

We need to hammer this point home in every conversation we have with everyone around us, day after day. It can be done so well by simply posing the question!

"Do you think it's right that a President can pardon himself?"

How could anyone answer this in the affirmative? And then the follow-up discussion can begin, where we can inform those who have no clue -- and perhaps even make them CARE!

I say "WAYTAGO, OPCKelly, and GOODONYAMATE!"

Thanks for giving us a really meaty and concise way to present the problem for others!

:bounce: :woohoo: :applause:

[originalpckelly]

19. Thanks a bunch...

:-)

[RagAss]

18. it doesn't matter....

he'll live out his years on his ranch like LBJ....holding meetings around a big table at 6 am with ranch hands...still talking like he's the leader of the free world, having long since been kicked to the curb by the corporate war machine that used his idiot ass to stuff their pockets with billions.....

must be a Texas thing.

Congrats on making the Cafferty list !!!!....

[Straight Shooter]

20. You framed it well. The lights of Denver shine brightly tonight.

:thumbsup:

[originalpckelly]

21. Thank you very much...

I am glad he read it. Hopefully, people who watch CNN will understand it.

[Joey Liberal]

22. Thank you and Jack Cafferty!

I think Cheney wants to be King, and he's using Prince Moron Bush and the rubber stamping republican Congress to get his way.

[Hissyspit]

23. I will make the argument that the reason it would set off a Constitutional

crisis is that it is un-Constitutional - implicitly (which you, of course, do touch on).

Good job! :thumbsup: