One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Republicans Call for Impeachment of Obama
Page 1 of 2 next>
May 22, 2016 11:35:37   #
Sicilianthing
 
Republicans call for impeachment of Obama! Transgender bathroom order final straw for one state…

May 22, 2016 | Carmine Sabia

For a group of Republican lawmakers in one state, President Obama‘s directive to allow boys to use girl’s restrooms in public schools was the last straw.

The order to allow “transgender” students to choose whichever bathroom they want has angered many across the nation but Oklahoma Republicans are prepared to take extreme action.

A bill introduced last week calls for the state’s members of the House of Representatives to file articles of impeachment against Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of Education John B. King and others, Fox News reported.

The bill is largely symbolic, non-binding guidance that does not carry the force of law.

Those in favor of the bill believe the president has gone beyond what his constitutional authority allows, Reuters reported.

A second bill that passed committee called for granting student’s religious accommodations if they want separate bathrooms from the opposite sex, according to the Oklahoman.

“This is about allowing a religious accommodation,” Republican state Sen. Anthony Sykes told the Oklahoman. “The federal government not only wants to tell us what to do in education, in our schools, but in our bathrooms, locker rooms and changing rooms.

“People tell me they want to push back against the Obama administration. This is your chance.”

The bills followed Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin’s veto of a bill that would have made abortion a felony in the state.



Reply
May 22, 2016 14:28:33   #
L8erToots
 
Sicilianthing wrote:
Republicans call for impeachment of Obama! Transgender bathroom order final straw for one state…

May 22, 2016 | Carmine Sabia

For a group of Republican lawmakers in one state, President Obama‘s directive to allow boys to use girl’s restrooms in public schools was the last straw.

The order to allow “transgender” students to choose whichever bathroom they want has angered many across the nation but Oklahoma Republicans are prepared to take extreme action.

A bill introduced last week calls for the state’s members of the House of Representatives to file articles of impeachment against Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of Education John B. King and others, Fox News reported.

The bill is largely symbolic, non-binding guidance that does not carry the force of law.

Those in favor of the bill believe the president has gone beyond what his constitutional authority allows, Reuters reported.

A second bill that passed committee called for granting student’s religious accommodations if they want separate bathrooms from the opposite sex, according to the Oklahoman.

“This is about allowing a religious accommodation,” Republican state Sen. Anthony Sykes told the Oklahoman. “The federal government not only wants to tell us what to do in education, in our schools, but in our bathrooms, locker rooms and changing rooms.

“People tell me they want to push back against the Obama administration. This is your chance.”

The bills followed Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin’s veto of a bill that would have made abortion a felony in the state.
Republicans call for impeachment of Obama! Transge... (show quote)
Whatever it takes

Reply
May 22, 2016 14:56:52   #
Sicilianthing
 
L8erToots wrote:
Whatever it takes



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

They'll get it pretty close in the coming months but it won't happen...

It will take Occupy Washington to reverse all the damages.


Voting will has/is/will fail, fixed, sham fraud.

Reply
May 23, 2016 11:52:20   #
Carol Kelly
 
L8erToots wrote:
Whatever it takes


Why did we wait til he blew the house down?

Reply
May 23, 2016 12:28:28   #
Sicilianthing
 
Carol Kelly wrote:
Why did we wait til he blew the house down?


>>>>>

Just shows you how complacent and broken congress is.

Reply
May 23, 2016 13:44:30   #
usewillow
 
This is a copy of a letter I sent to my Senator in D.C. The precedent is already set so why does Congress not act?
Dear Senator,
I am writing to ask why none of our elected Senators have started impeachment procedures against Mr. Obama. He and Mrs. Clinton have both mislead the public while all the time knowing it was a lie. Further, they were directly responsible for other staff to also lie to us. I would like to know with an answer to why. Below is a summary of Bill Clinton’s charges. The one I referenced is the fourth one. I am sure an investigation into other areas would also reveal more violations. Additionally, I am sure you know to what I am referring and the investigation by Mr. Gowdy has stalled so why have they not issued subpoenas or Congressional contempt charges to the “witnesses”.

Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992 and reelected in 1996. During his first term, an independent counsel was appointed to investigate Whitewater, an Arkansas land deal involving Clinton that had taken place about 20 years previously. The counsel’s investigation later expanded to include scandals surrounding the firing of White House staff in its travel office, the misuse of FBI files, and an illicit affair that the president had with a White House intern. In 1998, Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr issued a report to the House Judiciary Committee. It found 11 possible impeachable offenses, all related to the intern scandal. Based on the independent counsel’s investigation, the House Judiciary Committee voted four articles of impeachment.

The fourth charged that he misused and abused his office by deceiving the American public, misleading his cabinet and other employees so that they would mislead the public, asserting executive privilege to hinder the investigation, and refusing to respond to the committee and misleading the committee about the scandal.

I find it very disagreeable that the charges used were basically non-starters. The result was he could write off all the bad stuff (special investigator cleared) and he knew he would not lose the position after everything was done. The public was modified, he would not face investigation again, and although in theory he was convicted but nothing happened.

The fact that he was not removed from office does not change any facts that led to his being charged with an impeachable offense. His wife was complicit in the above and has done much worse even as a civilian and this is what you want in office.

This information to me seems to allow exactly what I am talking about. “authority includes the power to use compulsory processes, such as the issuance of subpoenas. See Eastland v. U.S. Serviceman’s Fund, 421 U.S. 491, 504 (1975). The scope of Congress’s power “is as penetrating and far-reaching as the potential power to enact and appropriate under the Constitution.” Id. at 504 n.15 (quoting Barenblatt v. U.S., 360 U.S. 109, 111 (1959)). Put another way, although Congress ought not to delve needlessly into the “private affairs” of the citizenry, it has the power to inquire about and investigate any issue “on which legislation could be had.” Id. (quoting McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 177 (1927)). So long as Congress stays within this “necessarily broad” grant of constitutional authority, courts have little power to restrain its action. See Id. at 508 (“The wisdom of congressional approach or methodology is not open to judicial veto.”)”.

Reply
May 23, 2016 19:29:13   #
Sicilianthing
 
usewillow wrote:
This is a copy of a letter I sent to my Senator in D.C. The precedent is already set so why does Congress not act?
Dear Senator,
I am writing to ask why none of our elected Senators have started impeachment procedures against Mr. Obama. He and Mrs. Clinton have both mislead the public while all the time knowing it was a lie. Further, they were directly responsible for other staff to also lie to us. I would like to know with an answer to why. Below is a summary of Bill Clinton’s charges. The one I referenced is the fourth one. I am sure an investigation into other areas would also reveal more violations. Additionally, I am sure you know to what I am referring and the investigation by Mr. Gowdy has stalled so why have they not issued subpoenas or Congressional contempt charges to the “witnesses”.

Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992 and reelected in 1996. During his first term, an independent counsel was appointed to investigate Whitewater, an Arkansas land deal involving Clinton that had taken place about 20 years previously. The counsel’s investigation later expanded to include scandals surrounding the firing of White House staff in its travel office, the misuse of FBI files, and an illicit affair that the president had with a White House intern. In 1998, Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr issued a report to the House Judiciary Committee. It found 11 possible impeachable offenses, all related to the intern scandal. Based on the independent counsel’s investigation, the House Judiciary Committee voted four articles of impeachment.

The fourth charged that he misused and abused his office by deceiving the American public, misleading his cabinet and other employees so that they would mislead the public, asserting executive privilege to hinder the investigation, and refusing to respond to the committee and misleading the committee about the scandal.

I find it very disagreeable that the charges used were basically non-starters. The result was he could write off all the bad stuff (special investigator cleared) and he knew he would not lose the position after everything was done. The public was modified, he would not face investigation again, and although in theory he was convicted but nothing happened.

The fact that he was not removed from office does not change any facts that led to his being charged with an impeachable offense. His wife was complicit in the above and has done much worse even as a civilian and this is what you want in office.

This information to me seems to allow exactly what I am talking about. “authority includes the power to use compulsory processes, such as the issuance of subpoenas. See Eastland v. U.S. Serviceman’s Fund, 421 U.S. 491, 504 (1975). The scope of Congress’s power “is as penetrating and far-reaching as the potential power to enact and appropriate under the Constitution.” Id. at 504 n.15 (quoting Barenblatt v. U.S., 360 U.S. 109, 111 (1959)). Put another way, although Congress ought not to delve needlessly into the “private affairs” of the citizenry, it has the power to inquire about and investigate any issue “on which legislation could be had.” Id. (quoting McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 177 (1927)). So long as Congress stays within this “necessarily broad” grant of constitutional authority, courts have little power to restrain its action. See Id. at 508 (“The wisdom of congressional approach or methodology is not open to judicial veto.”)”.
This is a copy of a letter I sent to my Senator in... (show quote)


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Noted and agreed, I'm happy to see more are doing things like this but not enough yet and actually it won't work anyway.

This is more of an Indictment of the branches n players involved in the safety net to it's final outcome, and that is not my Humble Opinion.

Voting is a fraud and will solve nothing or reverse the damages, the layers of Lies, Wreckage, Trickery n Deceit are too many to rescind via the vote.

Occupy Washington approaches.

Reply
May 23, 2016 19:37:09   #
Carol Kelly
 
Sicilianthing wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Noted and agreed, I'm happy to see more are doing things like this but not enough yet and actually it won't work anyway.

This is more of an Indictment of the branches n players involved in the safety net to it's final outcome, and that is not my Humble Opinion.

Voting is a fraud and will solve nothing or reverse the damages, the layers of Lies, Wreckage, Trickery n Deceit are too many to rescind via the vote.

Occupy Washington approaches.
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g... (show quote)


Can't wait!

Reply
May 23, 2016 19:41:20   #
Sicilianthing
 
Carol Kelly wrote:
Can't wait!


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Me too, spread the word.

Reply
May 23, 2016 20:29:21   #
Gatsby
 
Sorry, only the house of representatives has the power to impeach.
usewillow wrote:
This is a copy of a letter I sent to my Senator in D.C. The precedent is already set so why does Congress not act?
Dear Senator,
I am writing to ask why none of our elected Senators have started impeachment procedures against Mr. Obama. He and Mrs. Clinton have both mislead the public while all the time knowing it was a lie. Further, they were directly responsible for other staff to also lie to us. I would like to know with an answer to why. Below is a summary of Bill Clinton’s charges. The one I referenced is the fourth one. I am sure an investigation into other areas would also reveal more violations. Additionally, I am sure you know to what I am referring and the investigation by Mr. Gowdy has stalled so why have they not issued subpoenas or Congressional contempt charges to the “witnesses”.

Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992 and reelected in 1996. During his first term, an independent counsel was appointed to investigate Whitewater, an Arkansas land deal involving Clinton that had taken place about 20 years previously. The counsel’s investigation later expanded to include scandals surrounding the firing of White House staff in its travel office, the misuse of FBI files, and an illicit affair that the president had with a White House intern. In 1998, Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr issued a report to the House Judiciary Committee. It found 11 possible impeachable offenses, all related to the intern scandal. Based on the independent counsel’s investigation, the House Judiciary Committee voted four articles of impeachment.

The fourth charged that he misused and abused his office by deceiving the American public, misleading his cabinet and other employees so that they would mislead the public, asserting executive privilege to hinder the investigation, and refusing to respond to the committee and misleading the committee about the scandal.

I find it very disagreeable that the charges used were basically non-starters. The result was he could write off all the bad stuff (special investigator cleared) and he knew he would not lose the position after everything was done. The public was modified, he would not face investigation again, and although in theory he was convicted but nothing happened.

The fact that he was not removed from office does not change any facts that led to his being charged with an impeachable offense. His wife was complicit in the above and has done much worse even as a civilian and this is what you want in office.

This information to me seems to allow exactly what I am talking about. “authority includes the power to use compulsory processes, such as the issuance of subpoenas. See Eastland v. U.S. Serviceman’s Fund, 421 U.S. 491, 504 (1975). The scope of Congress’s power “is as penetrating and far-reaching as the potential power to enact and appropriate under the Constitution.” Id. at 504 n.15 (quoting Barenblatt v. U.S., 360 U.S. 109, 111 (1959)). Put another way, although Congress ought not to delve needlessly into the “private affairs” of the citizenry, it has the power to inquire about and investigate any issue “on which legislation could be had.” Id. (quoting McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 177 (1927)). So long as Congress stays within this “necessarily broad” grant of constitutional authority, courts have little power to restrain its action. See Id. at 508 (“The wisdom of congressional approach or methodology is not open to judicial veto.”)”.
This is a copy of a letter I sent to my Senator in... (show quote)

Reply
May 23, 2016 20:33:02   #
Sicilianthing
 
Gatsby wrote:
Sorry, only the house of representatives has the power to impeach.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes Sir we know that but it's got to start somewhere.
I'll roll the dice and try anything to TRASH This ScumBag Muslim RAT Half Cracker TRAITOR TRASH BAG !

Reply
 
 
May 23, 2016 21:27:56   #
Gatsby
 
I have been wondering the same thing for some time; as yet I have only questions to offer.
1. Attacking Obama at this time may drive all of his supporters firmly into the "Clinton Camp"?
2. As with Bill Clinton, dealing with Obama would be much easier once he is out of office?
3. Republican congressmen are more concerned with maintaining their majority, than with dealing with Obama, at this point?
4. Many Republican congressmen are really just RINO chumps?
5. All of the above?
6 None of the above?

As for a special prosecutor for Hillary?
1. The republican majority in both houses desperately want the democratic party to fully commit to her nomination, then? ? ?
2. Polls, at this point, would seem to indicate that Sanders would be more difficult for Trump to defeat?
3. Keeping the democratic party divided until the end of July would seem to be a good strategy?
4. At this stage of the game, and considering how much is at stake, discretion and timing could be critical?
5. Perhaps Judicial Watch and their pending FOIA lawsuits are considered sufficient pressure at this time?
6. All of the above?
7. None of the above?

What do you think?


Sicilianthing wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes Sir we know that but it's got to start somewhere.
I'll roll the dice and try anything to TRASH This ScumBag Muslim RAT Half Cracker TRAITOR TRASH BAG !

Reply
May 23, 2016 22:29:27   #
usewillow
 
It is truly unfortunate but, I think more and more that legal avenues of getting back our country are fading each and every day. You are probably right in your analogy.

Reply
May 23, 2016 22:32:53   #
usewillow
 
Johnson became the first president impeached by the House, but he was later acquitted by the Senate by one vote. The Constitution gives the House of Representatives the sole power to impeach an official, and it makes the Senate the sole court for impeachment trials.

Reply
May 23, 2016 22:33:37   #
Sicilianthing
 
Gatsby wrote:
I have been wondering the same thing for some time; as yet I have only questions to offer.
1. Attacking Obama at this time may drive all of his supporters firmly into the "Clinton Camp"?
2. As with Bill Clinton, dealing with Obama would be much easier once he is out of office?
3. Republican congressmen are more concerned with maintaining their majority, than with dealing with Obama, at this point?
4. Many Republican congressmen are really just RINO chumps?
5. All of the above?
6 None of the above?

As for a special prosecutor for Hillary?
1. The republican majority in both houses desperately want the democratic party to fully commit to her nomination, then? ? ?
2. Polls, at this point, would seem to indicate that Sanders would be more difficult for Trump to defeat?
3. Keeping the democratic party divided until the end of July would seem to be a good strategy?
4. At this stage of the game, and considering how much is at stake, discretion and timing could be critical?
5. Perhaps Judicial Watch and their pending FOIA lawsuits are considered sufficient pressure at this time?
6. All of the above?
7. None of the above?

What do you think?
I have been wondering the same thing for some time... (show quote)


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

All of your points are valid... I agree.

I get all the email updates for JW among many other sites like that...
ACLJ is another one, Jay Sekulow
There are so many to list here...

Anyway, sadly I'd roll the dice at this point with any other measure of attack on all of them since nothing else works.

Nothing anyone has posted or talked about here on OPP or anywhere else has worked to reverse the damages. That being said is why I think we are seeing 16 states take a stand against The Traitor in the White House like Oklahoma, because everyone is seriously fed up.

Again I'll point...

Activate the Militias
Reach out, meet, hold town halls, discuss, plan
Form Camp
Fund
Recruit
Train
Begin rotations and assignments...

This is coming and no one can stop it !

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.