Why is Boehner even trying this lawsuit thing?

[bronzeage]

Of course.. I never thought it would happen, even back then. My point was, talking about impeaching Obama shouldn't even come into anyones thinking with that huge matzoh ball hanging over our heads.

When it was time to impeach Bush, our boys were fighting and dying in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now that's out of the way, they just want to impeach somebody. They don't really care who.

They don't actually remember how it got started, anymore than they remembered how Vietnam ended, when they started it all.

 

[cowslinger64]

When it was time to impeach Bush, our boys were fighting and dying in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now that's out of the way, they just want to impeach somebody. They don't really care who.

They don't actually remember how it got started, anymore than they remembered how Vietnam ended, when they started it all.

I'm not sure they don't care who... I think if they could have just one, it'd be the brutha in WHITE house..

Regardless of the correct term.. those men shoulda paid for their sins.


and vette, fuck you if you say they ain't sins, according to the constitution.

 

[cjh]

Lol....first of all, I said TREASONOUS

which is based on TREASON

— n
1. violation or betrayal of the allegiance that a person owes his sovereign or his country, esp by attempting to overthrow the government; high treason
2. any treachery or betrayal

Secondly, I said it was their treasonous lies that should lead to their IMPEACHMENT.


They betrayed the trust of the American people and should be imprisoned for it. They also betrayed 5000 American soldiers or so and cost them their lives. Plus, the trillions of dollars wasted...


and you wanna play fuckin semantics?

Vette has a good point.

Unless the definition in the Constitution includes the word "unjust."

If so, feel free to ignore it.

 

[bronzeage]

I'm not sure they don't care who... I think if they could have just one, it'd be the brutha in WHITE house..

Regardless of the correct term.. those men shoulda paid for their sins.


and vette, fuck you if you say they ain't sins, according to the constitution.

Impeachment fever is a strange thing.

The three stooges are paying for their sins. They get to watch everything they pinned their reputations on crumble and be rejected by the American people. In the end, history will remember them as failures who reached beyond their grasp.

 

[Mr Noone]

Who's going to pay the lawyers?

This is rhetorical, innit?

General serious question: In what court would the House bring suit against the Executive? Or would it be against Obama as an individual? Small claims in DC? Some Federal court?

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[cowslinger64]

You don't even know the definition of treason.

He stupid. If you said treasonous, why did you provide a definition of Treason?


Lord knows Obama has violated this article.

==================

Jeeeeezus you're dumb.

 

[Mr Noone]

He stupid. If you said treasonous, why did you provide a definition of Treason?

This is the only definition of treason that applies in the United States:

Article III, Section 3:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."

Lord knows Obama has violated this article.

That's ridiculous. "Lord" may know, but he has no standing. Cf: the First Amendment.

 

[bronzeage]

This is rhetorical, innit?

General serious question: In what court would the House bring suit against the Executive? Or would it be against Obama as an individual? Small claims in DC? Some Federal court?

Actually, I would like to know. Congress has the Office of Legislative Counsel, but their function is:

The purpose of the Office shall be to advise and assist the House of Representatives, and its committees and Members, in the achievement of a clear, faithful, and coherent expression of legislative policies. The Office shall maintain impartiality as to issues of legislative policy to be determined by the House of Representatives, and shall not advocate the adoption or rejection of any legislation except when duly requested by the Speaker or a committee to comment on a proposal directly affecting the functions of the Office. The Office shall maintain the attorney-client relationship with respect to all communications between it and any Member or committee of the House.

There's nothing about representing the Congress in court, the same way the Office of Whitehouse Counsel would.

It would probably be illegal to use public funds to bring a suit against the executive branch, but the GOP caucus could use private funds to do so. Of course, why Boehner would give the spotlight over to a Federal judge who could demand legal briefs and then sit on them for months before ruling is a mystery. If he really had cause, there would be a committee formed to investigate and publicize the wrong doing.

This is just Boehner trying to keep his far right muzzled until after the election. If they all start talking at once, the crazy gets thick as they try to out right each other.

 

[Mr Noone]

Actually, I would like to know...

There's nothing about representing the Congress in court, the same way the Office of Whitehouse Counsel would...

This would have to be a civil suit, no? To be criminal a District Attorney would have to convene a grand jury to establish an indictment. Right? Am I missing something?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Skiddles2014]

Republicans are trying to sue to stay relevant.

They are old whiny losers.

The whining started on the day he was elected and will stop when Obama changes his skin colour.

 

[bronzeage]

This would have to be a civil suit, no? To be criminal a District Attorney would have to convene a grand jury to establish an indictment. Right? Am I missing something?

If there was a whiff of a criminal case, there would already be a Congressional committee on it. There could also be a grand jury, as well. This happened during Watergate.

I don't think Boehner wants to meet the Democrats in a civil trial, where every Republican Representative could be called to give a deposition. The testimony about the previous government shut down would be gold to the Dems. We would be treated to emails and memos about who thought it was a good idea and what political damage would be inflicted. The GOP would come off looking smaller and even more mean spirited than they do now, and that's before the Obamacare strategies get exposed.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[cowslinger64]

Hey stupid. I see you edited out the real definition of treason, too embarrassing?

hey, fucking retard. You asked why I gave you the definition of treason..it was

BECAUSE YOU ASKED FOR IT,STUPID ASS



And no... I am not embarrassed for showing you the definition of treason.


You're worse than query.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

When he reconstituted the high command of the Taliban while we are still engaged on the battlefield, I say he aided and abetted the enemy. When he telegraphed our every move, he sided the enemy as well. When he insisted on arming Libyan guerrillas who it turns out to be part of al Qaeda and Isis, he obviously aided the enemy.

http://media0.giphy.com/media/Rhhr8D5mKSX7O/giphy.gif

"I say he..."

None of what you opined in this gaseous gust of garrulous gut wind constitutes treason.

You and your side are so full of shit.

 

[cleaver]

It won't happen under any circumstances as long as Harry Reid is Majority Leader of the Senate. He will refuse a bill of impeachment, as he's refused dozens of other lawfully legislated bills in the House.

i'm sorry. read your constitution...

the house brings impeachment charges.
the senate is obligated to hear and then pass judgement on the case, should charges be brought.
harry reid (nor any senate majority leader) has absolutely no power to stop any impeachment charges being brought.

please, vette!

you cannot be this dogmatically dense~!

 

[jeninflorida]

obama is a criminal

 

[jeninflorida]

hey, fucking retard. You asked why I gave you the definition of treason..it was

BECAUSE YOU ASKED FOR IT,STUPID ASS



And no... I am not embarrassed for showing you the definition of treason.


You're worse than query.

someone has moose knuckle .... oh wait, you don't have balls...pussy boy

 

[KingOrfeo]

What brought this suit about besides plain old frustration?

Plain old cynicism. Boehner knows this suit will never hold up in court, and almost certainly will never be filed; he's just grandstanding.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Obama and his administration, shocked and frustrated by the outcome of the 2010 elections, decided not to recognize the legitimacy of that Republican victory, which interrupted their agenda. He has spent every one of the days since that election denigrating Republicans, and by extension, the people who elected them. He did this by refusing to recognize their issues, their interests, and their beliefs.

You are a lying sack of shit. Obama and the Dems have always been ready to work with the Pubs and compromise. But the Pubs won't compromise and won't even accept or acknowledge Obama's legitimacy as POTUS (see post #31).

See It's Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism, by think-tankers Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein. Mann is with the nonpartisan Brookings Institution, Ornstein is with the conservative Heritage Foundation -- certainly neither has any LW or liberal bias -- and both agree that stubborn ideological Pubs are almost entirely to blame for the present political gridlock in America, and for the debt-ceiling crisis and government shutdown in particular.

He has demonstrated by his actions and words that he is not their President . . .

See, that's exactly the kind of bullshit I'm talking about.

 

[RobDownSouth]

You're worse than query.

Kind of spiffy how Queerbait is now the gold standard for willful ignorance around here.

 

[RobDownSouth]

What brought this suit about besides plain old frustration?

A need to placate the foaming-at-the-mouth Republican core demographic.
:nods: