• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim[W:88]

Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

NIMBY said:
Wouldn't that be better stated as McConnell's GOPs changed the rules so the Senate is "technically" never in recess?
Click to expand...

Nope, the senate sets the rules for their recesses.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Perotista said:
It is almost time to go get the grand daughter. I don't know about a Republican president. I think a Republican president's morals would have been higher.
Click to expand...

With all respect to your polls on impeachment and other matters, I've never seen you trot out the same type of poll as far as any gun measure is concerned, such as the true conservative Toomey/Manchin, Manchin being your guy.Mr. Obama's EOs on anything guns will be added to the "I" list .
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Anthony60 said:
I don't think this is a scandal, but really, you don't think there is even a Constitutional question here? Don't you think there is a separation of powers issue when the executive branch declares the Senate to be in recess, even though they have not adjourned and do not declare themselves to be in recess? If the SC lets this through, there is really no point in the Senate confirming anyone, as the President can just make appointments at will, and the Senate will be nullified.
Click to expand...

If the Senate goes GOP, they can and will block appts, unless done during recess.
Are we ever "technically" in recess and who changed those rules ?
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

j-mac said:
You think that bolded part is true just because you say it? :lamo
Click to expand...

Do you only agree/disagree with legit polling based on your lean?
How about if the SCOTUS rules against American polls, as with ACA and Citizens United?
Did Dems persue Reagan when laws were clearly broken in Iran/Contra ?
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Thank you for admitting you did not read into the topic, that should help people understand the uninformed posts you have been making.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

NIMBY said:
If the Senate goes GOP, they can and will block appts, unless done during recess.
Are we ever "technically" in recess and who changed those rules ?
Click to expand...

"The Recess" occurs at the end of one session of Congress and before the new session reconvenes. That is when most recesses occur. Or when Congress adjourns and declares that it is in recess. The Obama administration declared Congress to be in recess, when it was not. If that was the case, the President would be able to make appointments whenever they went to lunch. Clearly, that is not a recess.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

So do you know the last time the Senate was "officially" in recess, because I don't.
The Senate GOP now uses the recess like all of their other filibusters, and refuse to allow the recess to be "official, on McConnell's technicalities .
Anthony60 said:
"The Recess" occurs at the end of one session of Congress and before the new session reconvenes. That is when most recesses occur. Or when Congress adjourns and declares that it is in recess. The Obama administration declared Congress to be in recess, when it was not. If that was the case, the President would be able to make appointments whenever they went to lunch. Clearly, that is not a recess.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

NIMBY said:
So do you know the last time the Senate was "officially" in recess, because I don't.
The Senate GOP now uses the recess like all of their other filibusters, and refuse to allow the recess to be "official, on McConnell's technicalities .
Click to expand...

You could look it up?

The senate decides when they recess, not Obama.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

scatt said:
You could look it up?

The senate decides when they recess, not Obama.
Click to expand...

McConnell and the GOP decided it wasn't in recess, not the Senate. They should be impeached for being in contempt of an honored institution by turning it into a sham.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Threegoofs said:
McConnell and the GOP decided it wasn't in recess, not the Senate. They should be impeached for being in contempt of an honored institution by turning it into a sham.
Click to expand...

Silly.

Breyer asked the SG if he thinks the actions by anyone in the senate were unconstitutional, and the SG of course said no.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Moderator's Warning:
Just a reminder here, personal comments and zero content posts should be avoided. Stick to the topic please.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

NIMBY said:
With all respect to your polls on impeachment and other matters, I've never seen you trot out the same type of poll as far as any gun measure is concerned, such as the true conservative Toomey/Manchin, Manchin being your guy.Mr. Obama's EOs on anything guns will be added to the "I" list .
Click to expand...

I was just interested in the topic and so too were the others. I think Clinton was a good president and think the Republicans tried to railroad him out of office. Now if my life had been different those 10 years I spent in Southeast Asia, perhaps I would have looked upon his escapes different. But when one has visited the Cellar Bar in Bangkok and Madam Lulu's in Vientiane and partook of the local cuisine, I do not think I am one to condemn him over a simple BJ in the White House.

It was plain stupid on his part, it showed a total lack of common sense and he should have known better. As for gun control, I never got into that as hot and heavy as I did this. But stay tuned, the time will probably come.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Perotista said:
You're right. But what exactly did you accomplish outside of perhaps embarrassing Clinton a little. When it comes to a president and overturning a legal election, one better have their ducks in order. Yes, Clinton committed a crime with perjury. So then the question becomes was that crime serious enough to warrant impeachment and throwing a sitting president out of office. To you apparently it was yes and to quite a lot of other Republicans. To most Americans it wasn't.

An attempt to over turn an election and throw a sitting president is very serious stuff. Not only do you have to have a legal, constitutional reason for doing it, the American people must understand the basis for it. In the end, it was decided Clinton's crime of perjury was not enough to over turn an election. It didn't meet the constitutional requirements of high crimes. It is that simple.
Click to expand...

In that then I would have to ask, what does? I mean if a President can lie to a Federal Judge, and it is, in your words here, not enough of a high crime to remove him from office, I'd say that Clinton, and his supporters accomplished more than just getting through that scandal, they succeeded in circumventing the Constitution, and weakening it. Good Job.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Perotista said:
I was just interested in the topic and so too were the others. I think Clinton was a good president and think the Republicans tried to railroad him out of office. Now if my life had been different those 10 years I spent in Southeast Asia, perhaps I would have looked upon his escapes different. But when one has visited the Cellar Bar in Bangkok and Madam Lulu's in Vientiane and partook of the local cuisine, I do not think I am one to condemn him over a simple BJ in the White House.

It was plain stupid on his part, it showed a total lack of common sense and he should have known better. As for gun control, I never got into that as hot and heavy as I did this. But stay tuned, the time will probably come.
Click to expand...

See, there you go again....You admitted to me that it was the perjury that got him impeached, not the BJ, but now in talking to someone else you are right back to blaming it on a BJ...This is why it is so frustrating, either you understand what a crime it is to lie to a Federal Judge, or you don't...You can't have it both ways. As far as Clinton is concerned it wasn't a common sense matter, more like a lack of moral, and ethical boundaries. Lewenski wasn't the first bimbo in his collection, and thank God he isn't President anymore, because I feel certain it wasn't the last. He is a reprobate. We as a nation need to get back to honorable people, with ethical, and moral compass to run this country. The damage that one President can do in perception, and standing in the world is too important to have some adolescent wanna be running around with a perpetual hard on disgracing the office.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

He perjured about the relationship, which has nothing to do with his governing. He lied sure, but about things that do not have any illegal connections.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

scatt said:
He perjured about the relationship, which has nothing to do with his governing. He lied sure, but about things that do not have any illegal connections.
Click to expand...

My point is that a lie is a lie...If found to be such, and a crime like lying to a Federal Judge, btw, for you and I punishable by imprisonment, then damned right he or any President that does this should be removed.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

j-mac said:
My point is that a lie is a lie...If found to be such, and a crime like lying to a Federal Judge, btw, for you and I punishable by imprisonment, then damned right he or any President that does this should be removed.
Click to expand...

Only if the issue relates to his governing.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

scatt said:
Only if the issue relates to his governing.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute, can you show me that distinction in the Constitution? I missed it....Also, are President's above the law?
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

j-mac said:
Wait a minute, can you show me that distinction in the Constitution? I missed it....Also, are President's above the law?
Click to expand...

Yeah I can. The meaning of perjury has been legally altered slightly, and the founders would not consider this a high crime or misdemeanor. Perjury would have been breaking the oath of office, which he did not do.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

scatt said:
Yeah I can. The meaning of perjury has been legally altered slightly, and the founders would not consider this a high crime or misdemeanor. Perjury would have been breaking the oath of office, which he did not do.
Click to expand...

I'm all eyes....Prove it.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

j-mac said:
In that then I would have to ask, what does? I mean if a President can lie to a Federal Judge, and it is, in your words here, not enough of a high crime to remove him from office, I'd say that Clinton, and his supporters accomplished more than just getting through that scandal, they succeeded in circumventing the Constitution, and weakening it. Good Job.
Click to expand...

You're opinion. I suppose the bottom line was he wasn't impeached, or at least found not guilty by the vote in the senate. I think if he had lied about something else that effected his job, perhaps the American public would have been more upset about. But then maybe not. Maybe the majority of Americans were showing sympathy towards him as they perceived the Ken Starr and the Republicans in congress as a witch hunt.

Do you really believe that lying about a BJ is an impeachable offense? It very well maybe to you, but I think in order to remove a president he needs to have done something very bad, unspeakable so to speak. All I can do is show you that at the time 65% of all Americans thought he shouldn't be impeached. You are part of that 35% who did. So in the end it seems to boil down to political persuasion.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

NIMBY said:
So do you know the last time the Senate was "officially" in recess, because I don't.
The Senate GOP now uses the recess like all of their other filibusters, and refuse to allow the recess to be "official, on McConnell's technicalities .
Click to expand...

As far as I know, there is a recess every two years, when we move from one Congress to the next. Also, I believe that the Senate can recess whenever it wants, as much as it wants, but if the House is still in session, then Congress as a whole, is not in recess. So Blaming McConnell makes no sense, since it was the house that stayed in session, I believe, when Obama made the unconstitutional appointments.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Perotista said:
You're opinion. I suppose the bottom line was he wasn't impeached, or at least found not guilty by the vote in the senate. I think if he had lied about something else that effected his job, perhaps the American public would have been more upset about. But then maybe not. Maybe the majority of Americans were showing sympathy towards him as they perceived the Ken Starr and the Republicans in congress as a witch hunt.

Do you really believe that lying about a BJ is an impeachable offense? It very well maybe to you, but I think in order to remove a president he needs to have done something very bad, unspeakable so to speak. All I can do is show you that at the time 65% of all Americans thought he shouldn't be impeached. You are part of that 35% who did. So in the end it seems to boil down to political persuasion.
Click to expand...

God, the left will rationalize anything. He was impeached, that is a fact. No maybe, or at least, impeached. Period (to use Oboma's favorite emphasis).
By your rational, the Nixon attempted impeachment was a witch hunt, since he did not know about the break in, he just lied about it. And, in my opinion, far less of an offense than things that Obama has done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom