Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Harry Pulls A Clinton: ‘What difference does it make?’ who was informed of Bergdahl’s release

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 06:55 AM
link   
well i was wondering when this buffoon would open his pie hole. this country will be in so much better shape when he is gone.
he never fails to support obuma, no matter what he does.




The subject of congressional notification -- whether Obama violated federal law by failing to notify lawmakers of his plans to swap the five terrorism detainees in exchange for Bergdahl at least 30 days beforehand -- has been debated on Capitol Hill in the days since the exchange. Republicans generally have faulted Obama for failing to provide formal congressional notification, while most Democrats have defended Obama's decision, saying he was acting within his powers as commander-in-chief.
Harry Reid: ‘What difference does it make?’ who was informed of Bergdahl’s release


according to this most dems support the move, almost all reports i've seen on all news sources say that democrats are upset as much as republicans. and i say when dianne feinstein bails on a democrat president and comes out of a Senate Intelligence Committee meeting, saying that laws may have been broken, and that the explanation of the move was disappointing. harry should have taken note and kept his pie hole shut. but if he didn't think that to to be a wise choice, he at least could have used words that haven't already caused a stir in the nation and more or less spit in our face like hillary did.
edit on 6-6-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 07:25 AM
link   
Already posted.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 07:25 AM
link   
delete
edit on 6-6-2014 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 07:34 AM
link   
As much as I dislike being on the same side as Obama and Reid, I have to agree with them on this point.

While it is up to Congress to declare war, it is up to the President as Commander and Chief to conduct that war as he or she may see fit. Trading prisoners is a military decision. I understand there was a law requiring 30 day Congressional notification prior to the exchange, but that isn't always practical in a war, and Congress should understand that. And notification does not mean that Congress would have to consent to the exhange, just that they should be aware. Ideally, the President could inform Congress and then do the exchange whether they like it or not.

So, it would seem to me that if time was of the essence, the President could make the exchange and then explain why it wasn't practical to notify Congress 30 days in advance at his or her earliest opportunity. Which is pretty much what happened. Technically he may have broken the law, but if the reason was justified, no harm no foul.

Kind of like speeding to get to the hospital.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 07:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
As much as I dislike being on the same side as Obama and Reid, I have to agree with them on this point.

While it is up to Congress to declare war, it is up to the President as Commander and Chief to conduct that war as he or she may see fit. Trading prisoners is a military decision. I understand there was a law requiring 30 day Congressional notification prior to the exchange, but that isn't always practical in a war, and Congress should understand that. And notification does not mean that Congress would have to consent to the exhange, just that they should be aware. Ideally, the President could inform Congress and then do the exchange whether they like it or not.

So, it would seem to me that if time was of the essence, the President could make the exchange and then explain why it wasn't practical to notify Congress 30 days in advance at his or her earliest opportunity. Which is pretty much what happened. Technically he may have broken the law, but if the reason was justified, no harm no foul.

Kind of like speeding to get to the hospital.


They had 5 years....I think 30 days would have fit in there quite a few times......

Obama simply just did what he wanted, he broke a law and nobody seems to care that they had 5 YEARS to make this decision....



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

It seems I heard someone say this whole deal had been laid out for all to se back in Dec. of 2011.
If that be the case, maybe some of these "public servants", or atleast some of their staffs, need to learn how to research and read.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: teamcommander
a reply to: Vasa Croe

It seems I heard someone say this whole deal had been laid out for all to se back in Dec. of 2011.
If that be the case, maybe some of these "public servants", or atleast some of their staffs, need to learn how to research and read.


The deal was discussed that far back, but it was not agreed on as the right course of action at the time. They all knew it was a possibility I am sure, but that does not mean the President can just decide to do it one day....still have to go through the law and give 30 days notice. He had ample time to do this yet somehow decided not to.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Obama is the one who signed the law that required 30 days notice to Congress on any Guantanamo detainee prisoner releases.

He seems to act as if he is above any law, even one he was a part of.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
Already posted.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Indeed it has..

Please add further discussion to the above linked thread.

Thread closed.






top topics



 
2

log in

join