Is Libya intervention an ‘impeachable’ offense?

[Fire11]

Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul will be co-sponsoring an amendment announced Tuesday by Ohio Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich that would defund the American military intervention in Libya.

Kucinich suggested during a Saturday conference call with anti-war Democrats that he thought impeachment could also be considered for Obama’s “unconstitutional” actions in Libya.

Paul’s spokeswoman Rachel Mills confirmed to The Daily Caller via email that Paul shares Kucinich’s point of view on the severity of the constitutional breach. “Yes, he thinks it is an impeachable offense,” Mills wrote.

“The President committed the U.S. to military invention without consulting Congress, in clear subversion of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which gives only Congress the power to declare war,” Kucinich wrote in a Tuesday letter to colleagues.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/22/ro...hable-offense/

Could Obama be Impeached over Libya? Let's ask Biden

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA

Obama: ‘President Does Not Have Power Under Constitution to Unilaterally Authorize a Military Attack’

Obama made the assertion in a Dec. 20, 2007 interview with the Boston Globe when reporter Charlie Savage asked him under what circumstances the president would have the constitutional authority to bomb Iran without first seeking authorization from Congress.

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Obama responded.

Monday, March 21, 2011

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/

110 Tomahawk missiles at 20 air-defense system sites inside Libya

http://online.wsj.com/video/pentagon...F8A461EC3.html

Is 120 Tomahawk missile strike on Libya a cover-up for Japan's nuclear tragedy?

Other forum:

7 days ago the idea of war on Libya was completely rejected by the majority of the UN security council. The US position was against a military involvement in Libya. Here's what MSN published of Hilary Clinton's address to the House of appropriations committee I believe just prior to the earthquake and tsunami in Japan.

This is from the West Australian dated March 11, 2011.

Quote:

Clinton also expressed deep doubts about proposals to set up a "no-fly" zone over Libya, saying previous no-fly zones set up over Iraq and Serbia had had little effect…

"Absent international authorization, the United States acting alone would be stepping into a situation whose consequences are unforeseeable," Clinton said.

Clinton said the United States was focusing on humanitarian relief and building links to Libya's opposition groups… Clinton... said a proposed a no-fly zone over the country may not be the best one.

"I want to remind people that we had a no-fly zone over Iraq. It did not prevent Saddam Hussein from slaughtering people on the ground and it did not get him out of office," Clinton said.

"We had a no-fly zone and then we had 78 days of bombing in Serbia. It did not get Milosevic out of office. It did not get him out of Kosovo until we put troops on the ground with our allies…"

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-...move-on-libya/

Now what happened to change things in just 7 days?

I suggest the possibility the Libyan war is a useful distraction from the nuclear catastrophe developing in Japan. England, France, and the US are heavily invested in nuclear energy. You might want to look at the involvement or planned involvement of governments to establish a nuclear energy sector in those other countries supporting the 'humanitarian' military strike against Libya.

The radiation situation in Japan is far worst than many governments are letting on, that is those governments heavily invested in new nuclear construction projects. You just can't miss the fact the process of evacuating international personnel has been quietly accelerated largely under the public radar over the past two days.

Most if not all of the international search and rescue teams have left Japan two days ago. Compare this to Christchurch where the last international USAR left more than three weeks after the earthquake. The Japanese search and rescue team were still in Christchurch right up until the earthquake in Japan.

Add to that the US military have been evacuating from Honshu island since two days ago.

The insanity of starting a new war in Northern Africa suddenly begins to appear more logical. Rational no, logical yes.'

[Fire11]

Is donating Multi-Trillion Tax-payer's money an "‘impeachable’ offense"?

Obama collected multi-Trillion dollars from USA Tax-payers and donated it to giant companies

Obama is worth $5 million. USA politicians maybe collectively worth $1 billion to $5 Billion (not sure).

How did USA politicians donate multi-Trillion dollars to giant companies? There is nothing wrong in donating personal money but you need confirmed permission from Tax-payers to donate their hard earned money.

[acptulsa]

I'd love to see Kucinich introduce articles of impeachment. I'd hate to see Ron do it, because the evangelical neocon contingent spent forty million impeaching Clinton and that's not what we need right now.

But if Kucinich did it, it could trigger the Left to finally take their own party back (or try to) as we're trying to do. In any case, the $#!+storm would be entertaining.

[Fire11]

but you need confirmed permission from Tax-payers to donate their hard earned money.

Other poster:

Such "permission" would have to come in the form of an amendment to the Constitution.

Federal Government spending is mandated to be for "the general welfare". When Government directs taxpayer money to an individual or group (and not for the general benefit of all Americans).... that's unconstitutional and against the law... as are earmarks and others.

[Fire11]

The declaration of Independence. IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

[Stary Hickory]

Yeah it sure is, doesn't mean it will happen. But yes especially when the hypocrisy is so high.

[sailingaway]

Yes, but it won't happen.

[Aratus]

wrongheadedly done libyan intervention could be an impeachable offence by the jerry ford definition
of things that had richard milhous nixon slinking out of office with a fast discretion. i do ask, if the
1865/66 pardoning of them there confederates when congress was not in session by a POTUS C-I-C
was not immediately an impeachable 1867 offense, what does this say about james madison all told!!!

[Fire11]

China Moves to Save Gaddafi as Russia Warns Of ‘All Out War’

An “urgent” dispatch from Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) chief Mikhail Fradkov to President Medvedev that is circulating in the Kremlin today says that the Chinese warship Xuzhou is preparing to offer protection to Libyan leader Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi and his family to protect them from assassination from the US-led air assault on that North African Nation.

In what this report calls a “stunning betrayal” by the West, Russian leaders say their abstention in the United Nation Security Council vote to establish a no-fly zone over Libya to protect its civilian population from both Gaddafi and rebel forces is, instead, being used by the West to engineer their takeover of Libya’s vast oil and water resources, and which we had previously warned about in our March 8th report, “Global Resource War Warned Has Begun Between East-West.”

Even though Chief of the Russian General Staff Nikolai Makarov had previously warned that foreign military intervention in Libya could trigger an all-out war with the West, his warnings have fallen on deaf ears as British Defense Secretary Liam Fox said the direct targeting of Gaddafi was “possible” and British submarines fired two missiles at the Libyan leaders compound in downtown Tripoli bringing number of civilians killed by the West to 48 with over 150 wounded.

After the West’s massive killing of Libyan civilians Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich called for the immediate halt to the US-led attacks against Libya, a call that was joined by both China and India who just days before these attacks were said to be considering offers to drill for Libyan oil.

China’s most important political newspaper, The People’s Daily, further warned that the United States and its allies are violating International rules and that in places like Iraq “the unspeakable suffering of its people are a mirror and a warning” and the military attacks on Libya are, following on from the Afghan and Iraq wars, “the third time that some countries have launched armed action against sovereign countries.”

http://www.eutimes.net/2011/03/china...f-all-out-war/

[Aratus]

some say thaddeus stevens and charles sumner were wearing lead britches.
some say jefferson davis did not have the backing of more than 1/2 the voting confederates
and that all through the war, the "scalawags" were the equivilency of our fickle indpendents now. some
say after the war down south three political machines collided like a car crash, namely the
dixicrats, the unionists and the GOP republicans! oh lordy lordy lordy lordy!

[Aratus]

folks... loose lips sink ships. auld lang syne!
in WW2 we had china and russia as allies...

[Philhelm]

I felt compelled to vote "No." While the obvious answer is that it should be an impeachable offense, the reality is that nothing will come of it, and we all know it. So, by de facto, it is not an impeachable defense.

[Aratus]

onto bretton woods THREE we go!
don't great recession ask this one!
RON PAUL is our FED watchdog if the
2.3 trillion slipped out of the pentagon
BEFORe the "W" and his team found their
own boss tweed epithanies. this is very big...

[Fire11]

Obama: 'I was born in Hawaii. I can't change those facts.

While calling for less fighting between Republicans and Democrats, President Obama also sent a message last night to critics -- the so-called birthers -- who say he was not born in the United State (and is therefore ineligible for the presidency).

"I was born in Hawaii, what can I say?" Obama told Democratic donors in Boston. "I can't change those facts."

"We didn't just rescue the economy we put it on the strongest footing for the future," Obama said. "And along the way we saved the auto industry and a few other things."

Obama noted that when he took office, "this country was going through as tough a time economically, as tough a time financially, as any period since the 1930s." As a result, he said, his administration "had to make a series of quick decisions, and often times unpopular decisions."

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...-those-facts/1

[Aratus]

OBAMA = FDR...? the social meme? our FED up~ness?
this gunboat diplomacy is more TR than FDR! sincerely!

[Fire11]

Maybe, the Army $#@!ed up/screwed world leaders big time this time. Army is fed up/tired of world situation. Why else would the Army/military fire 110 Tomahawk missiles in a single day?

[acptulsa]

this gunboat diplomacy is more TR than FDR! sincerely!

Why choose when you can have both? In other words, LBJ II.

[TheNcredibleEgg]

I voted no.

In theory, yes, you can say it's impeachable, but in reality - clearly not. 99% of the Congress will nullify and probably 90% of the public are against. Plus, if President Obama even thought for a second there would be serious impeachable consequences - he would not have done anything in Libya.

So the only hope would be to change the opinion of the 90% of the public before it could be considered impeachable. And then Presidents won't do it in the first place to risk impeachment.

[Dr.3D]

It is an impeachable offense, but since so many other presidents have gotten away with it, this one will too. It's not like anybody is going to put their foot down on this situation, it would look like this one president was being singled out from the others who have done the same type of thing.

I believe the best course of action from this point is to let it be known, any repeat of such activity in the future, by any president, will be prosecuted.

[acptulsa]

Obama could be prosecuted as soon as he leaves office. Unfortunately, however, I doubt any penalties are proscribed for it.

[Fire11]

It is an impeachable offense, but since so many other presidents have gotten away with it, this one will too.

But somebody has to be impeached or else every future president will do the same. An strict example has to be set.

[surf]

should have put quotes around "intervention" in the title.

war is failure.

[Dr.3D]

But somebody has to be impeached or else every future president will do the same. An strict example has to be set.

If that is the case, then the president who got us into Korea and the one that got us into Vietnam etc. would have to be prosecuted to be fair. It's probably best to let it be known, any future involvement with an undeclared, out of congress, war will have repercussions and any future president bypassing congress will be prosecuted.

[acptulsa]

If that is the case, then the president who got us into Korea and the one that got us into Vietnam etc. would have to be prosecuted to be fair. It's probably best to let it be known, any future involvement with an undeclared, out of congress, war will have repercussions and any future president bypassing congress will be prosecuted.

Didn't Truman and LBJ both go to Congress? I admit that LBJ, like Dubya, went up The Hill after a false flag silliness, but he still made the short trip.

[Dr.3D]

Didn't Truman and LBJ both go to Congress? I admit that LBJ, like Dubya, went up The Hill after a false flag silliness, but he still made the short trip.

I don't remember for sure, but what I do remember is when I went to Vietnam, it wasn't called a war, but instead a conflict. I don't want to see anymore of this type of nonsense. Either it's a war, or it isn't. If it isn't, then we (the U.S.) have no business doing it at all.

[newbitech]

Yes, the president is breaking the fundamental law of the land by committing the armed forces to aggressive hostile actions against a sovereign nation without congressional much less representative approval from the American people.

[BamaAla]

Does a bear $#@! in the woods?

[Fire11]

If that is the case, then the president who got us into Korea and the one that got us into Vietnam etc. would have to be prosecuted to be fair. It's probably best to let it be known, any future involvement with an undeclared, out of congress, war will have repercussions and any future president bypassing congress will be prosecuted.

Somebody has this signature "Limit politicians to two terms. One in office and one in jail"

[Teaser Rate]

Not even close.

[low preference guy]

Not even close.

Didn't he swear to uphold the Constitution? Isn't going to war without even consulting Congress unconstitutional?

He is going to war like Kings do. This is exactly what the Framers wanted to prevent, and Obama isn't even pretending to follow the law. It is absolutely obvious he should be removed from office.