H.CON.RES.107: Defining "an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor"

[eyer]

112th CONGRESS
2d Session

H. CON. RES. 107
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 7, 2012

Mr. JONES submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.

Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.CON.RES.107:

"Mr. Jones" is Republican Walter Jones of North Carolina...

 

[Drixxx]

Good luck with that.

 

[eyer]

Watch the current Secretary of Defense assert that the United States military needs "legal" permission from international allies and coalitions (eg: NATO, UN) to offensively act...

...but does not consider needing the permission of the Congress of the United States of America to militarily act necessary at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zNwOeyuG84&feature=player_embedded

 

[eyer]

In June last year, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”

Obama tried to legitimize his failure to obtain Congressional approval for military involvement by sending a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he said the military assault was “authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council.”

Pentagon Launches Desperate Damage Control Over Shocking Panetta Testimony

http://www.infowars.com/pentagon-launches-desperate-damage-control-over-shocking-panetta-testimony/

 

[koalabear]

Haven't you seen the latest recruiting commercials. We are “a global force for good.”

 

[unregistered]

 

[JackLuis]

I'd be for it. The idea that a President would use the Military as a replacement for an effective State Dept. is ludicrous as well as morally repugnant, in the absence of a creditable threat to American Soil.

I just hope it is retroactive so we can hang Bush and Company on the same tree.