• 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!

Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it cou

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

votemout said:
Guess we wait till after the 2014 election then, the dems will lose the senate come 2014
Click to expand...
I think it still takes 67 senate votes to impeach a president. Even if republicans control the senate after 2014, you will still need 15+ senate democrats to go along with them and that is just not going to happen. Obama will be out in January 2017. We are stuck with him til then. Unfortunately.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

vesper said:
A president has the power to sign a bill into law or veto it. If he found something unconstitutional about the bill at the time, he had every right to veto it.
Click to expand...

The problem is that if a bill is vetoed because one portion is believed to be unconstitutional means vetoing perhaps hundreds of other parts of the bill that the President believes to be Constitutional. Every President since Carter has pointed out (often through signing statements) portions of bills they signed but disagreed with on Constitutional grounds and would not enforce. Bush 43 did that something like 160 times, about twice the average of his peers.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Fletch said:
I think it still takes 67 senate votes to impeach a president. Even if republicans control the senate after 2014, you will still need 15+ senate democrats to go along with them and that is just not going to happen. Obama will be out in January 2017. We are stuck with him til then. Unfortunately.
Click to expand...

he will never leave office, willingly. I see martial law before that ever happens.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Fletch said:
I think it still takes 67 senate votes to impeach a president. Even if republicans control the senate after 2014, you will still need 15+ senate democrats to go along with them and that is just not going to happen. Obama will be out in January 2017. We are stuck with him til then. Unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Unless Biden resigns first, I think I will choose to keep the lesser of two evils. Should Biden resign, and we impeach Obama, then we would have a president Boehner. Not much of an upgrade, many would say worse yet, but better than either of the other two in my opinion.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

votemout said:
he will never leave office, willingly. I see martial law before that ever happens.
Click to expand...

:roll:

Of course you do.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Gaius46 said:
The problem is that if a bill is vetoed because one portion is believed to be unconstitutional means vetoing perhaps hundreds of other parts of the bill that the President believes to be Constitutional. Every President since Carter has pointed out (often through signing statements) portions of bills they signed but disagreed with on Constitutional grounds and would not enforce. Bush 43 did that something like 160 times, about twice the average of his peers.
Click to expand...

this is why they should make every law a single law and not tag crap on.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

votemout said:
this is why they should make every law a single law and not tag crap on.
Click to expand...
I will agree with that.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Lord of Planar said:
The 30 day notice is in section 1035 (d) of HR 3304. Here is the text:

Text - H.R.3304 - 113th Congress (2013-2014): National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
Click to expand...

Exactly. The President is going to veto the Defense Authorization because of one provision he finds unconstitutional. Imagine what would happen if he actually did.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Kobie said:
:roll:

Of course you do.
Click to expand...

Stay tuned
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Gaius46 said:
Exactly. The President is going to veto the Defense Authorization because of one provision he finds unconstitutional. Imagine what would happen if he actually did.
Click to expand...
Was this law ruled unconstitutional? Or are we now granting to the executive branch judicial authority?
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Lord of Planar said:
Yes, but as executor of law, he has the option to implement parts at his discretion. Especially if he points out in a signing statement what he opposes.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but this president has taken such liberties in what law he will execute and uphold and what laws he will not. He certainly hasn't fulfilled his oath to defend and uphold the Constitution. Just last month Obama signed Ted Cruz's bill that would bar an Iranian diplomat from entering the United States, but immediately issued a statement saying he won't enforce it. What kind of happy horse crap is that? You can't cherry pick, dissect laws to your liking and disregard the rest. This is an abuse of power. Especially if the one signing the bills is doing such!
Obama signs Ted Cruz bill into law, but says he won't enforce it | WashingtonExaminer.com
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

votemout said:
Stay tuned
Click to expand...

There were real fringe nutters on the left who convinced themselves that Bush was going to do the same thing. And they were hilariously wrong, just like you will be.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Fletch said:
Was this law ruled unconstitutional? Or are we now granting to the executive branch judicial authority?
Click to expand...

Hmmm....did you perhaps the post where I stated that the President probably has a Constitutional duty to not enforce laws he believes to be unconstitutional?
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Gaius46 said:
The problem is that if a bill is vetoed because one portion is believed to be unconstitutional means vetoing perhaps hundreds of other parts of the bill that the President believes to be Constitutional. Every President since Carter has pointed out (often through signing statements) portions of bills they signed but disagreed with on Constitutional grounds and would not enforce. Bush 43 did that something like 160 times, about twice the average of his peers.
Click to expand...

I don't care how many presidents have done it, the Constitution gives the executive branch the power to veto anything he sees unconstitutional. You know the founders set up our government purposely so it wouldn't be easy to change laws. Now some are saying like you "well Carter did it" "Bush did it" bottom line it was never intended for the executive to cherry pick what he liked and ignore the rest after he signed a bill into law PERIOD.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

vesper said:
I'm sorry but this president has taken such liberties in what law he will execute and uphold and what laws he will not. He certainly hasn't fulfilled his oath to defend and uphold the Constitution. Just last month Obama signed Ted Cruz's bill that would bar an Iranian diplomat from entering the United States, but immediately issued a statement saying he won't enforce it. What kind of happy horse crap is that? You can't cherry pick, dissect laws to your liking and disregard the rest. This is an abuse of power. Especially if the one signing the bills is doing such!
Obama signs Ted Cruz bill into law, but says he won't enforce it | WashingtonExaminer.com
Click to expand...

This president isn't as bad as his predecessor was. Are you similarly critical of him?

edit: withdrawn. you answered.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

vesper said:
I'm sorry but this president has taken such liberties in what law he will execute and uphold and what laws he will not.
Click to expand...
And as executor of law, he has that right.

vesper said:
He certainly hasn't fulfilled his oath to defend and uphold the Constitution.
Click to expand...
I agree with you here, but this is a different issue. Laws passed by congress are subordinate to the constitution, and he is the executor or law.

vesper said:
Just last month Obama signed Ted Cruz's bill that would bar an Iranian diplomat from entering the United States, but immediately issued a statement saying he won't enforce it. What kind of happy horse crap is that?
Click to expand...
Was it a stand alone law, or included in a larger package of laws he agreed with?

What does his signing statement attached to that law say? Did you even think to look it up?

vesper said:
You can't cherry pick, dissect laws to your liking and disregard the rest. This is an abuse of power. Especially if the one signing the bills is doing such!
Obama signs Ted Cruz bill into law, but says he won't enforce it | WashingtonExaminer.com
Click to expand...
Sure he can. That is his prerogative as the executor of law in this nation. That is also a reason you don't elect idiots like Obama to the highest office in this nation.

Blame the people who put him in office.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Gaius46 said:
Hmmm....did you perhaps the post where I stated that the President probably has a Constitutional duty to not enforce laws he believes to be unconstitutional?
Click to expand...
Probably??? The SC determines the constitutionality of laws not the president--unless you prefer a king. There is really no excuse for NOT notifying congress and following the law he, himself, signed. The role of the president is to 'faithfully execute' the laws of the land not follow only the ones he wishes to follow. Not sure why anyone in their right mind would defend this sort of thing.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Gaius46 said:
This president isn't as bad as his predecessor was. Are you similarly critical of him?

edit: withdrawn. you answered.
Click to expand...

Yea bush sucked also, I see a trend.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Lord of Planar said:
And as executor of law, he has that right.


I agree with you here, but this is a different issue. Laws passed by congress are subordinate to the constitution, and he is the executor or law.


Was it a stand alone law, or included in a larger package of laws he agreed with?

What does his signing statement attached to that law say? Did you even think to look it up?


Sure he can. That is his prerogative as the executor of law in this nation. That is also a reason you don't elect idiots like Obama to the highest office in this nation.

Blame the people who put him in office.
Click to expand...

It is only his prerogative because of recent history. It was never the intent of the founders for the president to sign a bill into law and then blatantly claim he will not honor it in full or at all. And if you can find such an occurrence other than recent history including the 1960's forward, I will gladly step down. Good luck.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Lord of Planar said:
And as executor of law, he has that right.


I agree with you here, but this is a different issue. Laws passed by congress are subordinate to the constitution, and he is the executor or law.


Was it a stand alone law, or included in a larger package of laws he agreed with?

What does his signing statement attached to that law say? Did you even think to look it up?


Sure he can. That is his prerogative as the executor of law in this nation. That is also a reason you don't elect idiots like Obama to the highest office in this nation.

Blame the people who put him in office.
Click to expand...
The executor of the law does not have the power to decide which laws are constitutional and, therefore, which ones he will follow and which ones he will ignore. That is tyranny. If Obama felt something in this law was unconstitutional, he should have had his AG pursue a review.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Fletch said:
Probably??? The SC determines the constitutionality of laws not the president--unless you prefer a king. There is really no excuse for NOT notifying congress and following the law he, himself, signed. The role of the president is to 'faithfully execute' the laws of the land not follow only the ones he wishes to follow. Not sure why anyone in their right mind would defend this sort of thing.
Click to expand...

Because much like that stupid House rep from Texas, they do not even know or understand how our government works. Here is sheila jackson lee stating we they the lawmakers should write obummers executive orders!! are you freaking kidding me!!!!! But she also thinks our Constitution is 400 years old so whatever.

Lawmaker: Congress Should Write Executive Orders for Obama to Sign
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Lord of Planar said:
And as executor of law, he has that right.


I agree with you here, but this is a different issue. Laws passed by congress are subordinate to the constitution, and he is the executor or law.


Was it a stand alone law, or included in a larger package of laws he agreed with?

What does his signing statement attached to that law say? Did you even think to look it up?


Sure he can. That is his prerogative as the executor of law in this nation. That is also a reason you don't elect idiots like Obama to the highest office in this nation.

Blame the people who put him in office.
Click to expand...


No he can not pick and choose which laws to obey and which to ignore, Do you have a right to ignore laws you dont like? OF COURSE NOT.
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Fletch said:
Probably??? The SC determines the constitutionality of laws not the president--unless you prefer a king. There is really no excuse for NOT notifying congress and following the law he, himself, signed. The role of the president is to 'faithfully execute' the laws of the land not follow only the ones he wishes to follow. Not sure why anyone in their right mind would defend this sort of thing.
Click to expand...

And the President swears an oath to preserve the constitution. That oath would seem to require him to not enforce laws he found unconstitutional - until the SC weighed in on the matter.

Look at it this way. Say the Legislature re-instituted slavery and overrode the President's veto. Is the President obligated to enforce that law until the SC gets around to declaring it unconstitutional?
 
Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Fletch said:
The executor of the law does not have the power to decide which laws are constitutional and, therefore, which ones he will follow and which ones he will ignore. That is tyranny. If Obama felt something in this law was unconstitutional, he should have had his AG pursue a review.
Click to expand...

One
Big
ass
Mistake
america
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom