I Still Say This Is All About Impeaching Obama

[SoFlaJet]

these RW whackadoodles from the tea party are going to force Obama to invoke the 14th amendment on this debt limit and then when he does they will draw up articles of impeachment-remember articles of impeachment must start in the house of representatives. Nobody else can see this but it's ALL I see.

[Drale]

1. How can you impeach someone for using the Constitution?

In fact drawing up such false papers would be an act that should warrant a deep investigation into those peoples lives.

[AndyTiedye]

2. That is Why Obama Is Not Planning to Invoke the 14th

He also knows the Supreme Court would rule against him,
so it would be a pointless exercise anyway.

[Tx4obama]

3. Please explain how invoking the 14th amendment is a 'criminal act'

'To impeach' means to bring forth criminal charges.

How can 'the president invoking the U.S. Constitution' be a criminal act?

Please explain.

[kestrel91316]

4. Hey, a House full of Repigs can impeach for any reason or no reason at all.

You think they need a reason??????

[SoFlaJet]

6. when I said this 2 weeks ago

I kept getting all these arguments and un-recs (like I care about such shit) like we're talking about dealing with sane and rational ideals and people-with this group of republicans-we are NOT

[Tx4obama]

8. You are wrong. There must be a 'criminal charge' brought forth in order 'to impeach'

Impeachment means 'to charge criminally'

So, what would the 'criminal charge' be?

There would not be one.

[SoFlaJet]

9. that the executive branch will have over stepped it's

constitutional authority by superseding the congressional budgetary authority-that would constitute a crisis-at least in the tea party scumbags eyes-again; we're talking about zealots here who even though it would fail would be more than happy to stain Obama's presidency

[Tx4obama]

10. The fact remains, if a president uses the 14th amendent - then it is NOT criminal.

The president has the right and obligation to follow and enact what the U.S. Constitution says.

The GOP in Congress would NOT have a legal criminal charge to bring forth against the president.

End of story - no impeachment.

[SoFlaJet]

11. Congress has all the say on budgetary issues

it will create a constitutional crisis if the executive branch goes over their head and with a 5-4 split for the conservatives they will go along with the tea party. The president is not a dictator in a democracy and can not just say "we're doing this". The zealots in the house will immediately draw up articles of impeachment.

[Tx4obama]

14. 'Paying' debts is not the same as creating a new budget.

Paying debts that have already been created by bills that the Congress have already passed - is just PAYING THE BILLS.

I am sorry but I believe you are wrong. There would be NO 'criminal charge' that the GOPers in the Congress could bring forth.

And if The President decides to use the 14th amendment that is his RIGHT to do - it would not be criminal.

Now, since you are refusing to see the 'legal' side of the matter there is no use for me to continue to debate this issue with you. Ciao!

[Tx4obama]

15. Perhaps you should read the FULL article on the link below

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x714433

[kestrel91316]

19. A "criminal charge" is whatever a Repig-controlled House decides it is.

[SoFlaJet]

5. it will create a constitutional crisis

they will argue that the executive branch is overstepping it's boundaries and that ALL budget matter MUST go through congress

[David Gill]

7. I don't think so

I think the leadership would quash any cries for impeachment. Why? Because John Boehner and Mitch McConnell know the debt HAS to be raised. They would love it if Obama took that responsibility away from them. Or maybe they wouldnt, and the House moves on it and Republicans look even more unreasonable. Obama's A LOT more favorable than Congress.

I also don't think it would get thrown out by the Supreme Court, because I can't think of anybody with standing to bring a lawsuit about this. There would have to be somebody with an injury in fact, and just being a taxpayer isn't enough.

[murielm99]

12. That is correct.

There is no one with the standing to bring a lawsuit.

And the Constitution trumps any statute. President Obama is a Constitutional scholar. He has to know this.

He should do this.

There is nothing criminal about this. Let them scream.

I hope he announces this about five minutes before midnight on August 1st.

[golfguru]

13. No impeachment before November 2012

First, there is not enough time before 2012.
Second, Repugs are counting on Obama losing.

[elocs]

16. Ultimately it may be that the 14th Amendment is the ace up Obama's sleeve,

and it is there to use if he needs it. Obviously he knows about the 14th Amendment and it has been discussed so it has been decided by the administration if it is applicable or not.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CakeGrrl]

18. Why call the OP names? They're more on top of it than you are

Darrell Issa has been making noises about investigating this administration up, down and sideways since they took office.

Dennis Kucinich helpfully went on Fox News to say that some of the Administration's actions might be impeachable offenses.

As soon as the 14th Amendment option was even mentioned as a possible option regarding the debt ceiling, Rep. Tim Scott squawked "impeachment" if the Administration planned to invoke it.

Mitch McConnell is solidly on record wanting nothing more than to make President Obama a one-termer.

And you think Republicans aren't thinking of impeachment if they get the opportunity? You give them far too much credit.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.