It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne
Know how many were "reestablished"?
Three.
Extensions?
Two.
Do you have a link for this? Or are you just doing that "jedi hand wave" thing?
originally posted by: buster2010If his EO's violate the Constitution then they can be struck down by the Supreme Court.
originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne
I can admit it... can you?
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: _BoneZ_
Why is anyone giving attention to this creep? If ANYONE practiced "lawlessness", it was him and his puppet, Georgie. They got us into a mess we'll likely never recover from.
That creepy picture scared me.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
No one has yet given specifics of how Obama has exceeded his authority, as Cheney claims. And each time I ask, all I hear is crickets.
In the aftermath of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl's weekend release in exchange for five Taliban figures held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, some in Congress allege President Barack Obama broke the law by failing to inform them about the move 30 days in advance -- as called for under the National Defense Authorization Act.
"The law says they are to give us 30 days' notice. If the President thought that was unconstitutional or an invalid law, than he shouldn't have signed the bill," said Georgia's Saxby Chambliss, the top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee. "He knew very well that he was required by law to give us 30 days' notice and he didn't do it."
Obama told reporters in Poland on Tuesday that the circumstances required an immediate decision within his authority as commander in chief.
...
CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin disagreed, saying Obama "clearly broke the law" even if he can provide a legal justification for what he did. The bottom line, to Toobin, was that the law calls for 30 days' notice and Obama didn't do it.
Abdulrahman al-Awlaki
Anwar al-Awlaki and his Egyptian-born wife, Gihan Mohsen Baker, had an American son, born on Sept. 13, 1995, in Denver, while al-Awlaki was a student at Colorado State. His son's name Abdulrahman Anwar al-Awlaki. He was killed at age 16 in a drone strike on Oct. 14, 2011, in Yemen. It, too, was a controversial extra-judicial killing. Some U.S. officials called it a mistake. Even the president is said, in some reports, to have considered it a bad mistake.
It is not clear where the young al-Awlaki was when he was killed. Some reports say that he was in a cafe with friends; other reports that he was sitting by the road eating with friends. His family said that he had run away from home and was trying to find his father. He had no known ties to terrorism.
Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, stated that his death was justified, and that he "should have had a more responsible father."
Link.
1. Delay of Obamacare’s out-of-pocket caps. The Labor Department announced in February that it was delaying for a year the part of the healthcare law that limits how much people have to spend on their own insurance. This may have been sensible—insurers and employers need time to comply with rapidly changing regulations—but changing the law requires actual legislation.
2. Delay of Obamacare’s employer mandate. The administration announced via blogpost on the eve of the July 4 holiday that it was delaying the requirement that employers of at least 50 people provide complying insurance or pay a fine. This time it did cite statutory authority, but the cited provisions allow the delay of certain reporting requirements, not of the mandate itself.
3. Delay of Obamacare’s insurance requirements. The famous pledge that “if you like your plan, you can keep it” backfired when insurance companies started cancelling millions of plans that didn’t comply with Obamacare’s requirements. President Obama called a press conference last month to proclaim that people could continue buying non-complying plans in 2014—despite Obamacare’s explicit language to the contrary. He then refused to consider a House-passed bill that would’ve made this action legal.
4. Exemption of Congress from Obamacare. A little-known part of Obamacare requires Congressmen and their staff to get insurance through the new healthcare exchanges, rather than a taxpayer-funded program. In the quiet of August, President Obama directed the Office of Personnel Management to interpret the law to maintain the generous congressional benefits.
Link
originally posted by: loam
My bet is because anyone who tries is met with "well the last guy started it...or did it first...or did something similar", and in your book, that somehow magically coverts what is reasonably argued as unlawful action today into cupcakes and roses.
originally posted by: loam
My bet is because anyone who tries is met with "well the last guy started it...or did it first...or did something similar", and in your book, that somehow magically coverts what is reasonably argued as unlawful action today into cupcakes and roses.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Bilk22
I may have missed part of the conversation - How does Posse Comitatus apply?
I seem to remember drones being used to kill US citizens abroad. That's a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.
‘Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.’.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
originally posted by: loam
My bet is because anyone who tries is met with "well the last guy started it...or did it first...or did something similar", and in your book, that somehow magically coverts what is reasonably argued as unlawful action today into cupcakes and roses.
You lose the bet. And thanks for the attitude. I really have never been able to get an answer. Thanks for taking the time to respond.
Second, in a 5-to-4 decision, the court embraced a broad reading of a president’s power to make recess appointments, although not as broad as Mr. Obama had claimed. The second decision is a landmark. www.csmonitor.com...
He needed the approval from Congress and he never sought that. He was judge, jury and executioner.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Bilk22
The act prevents active duty federal military units from engaging in civilian police actions inside the US. That act does not apply to state guard units and does not apply outside of the US. Congress passed the law at the end of the civil war to start bringing the southern states back into the Union - a transition from military occupation back to elected officials by the people.
The law is not in the Constitution, meaning it can be changed by congress.
Secondly the military / civilian oath specifically states they would protect the Constitution from ALL enemies, foreign and domestic.
The law states you cannot murder a person. However, in circumstances where life is threatened, deadly force can be used to stop the threat.
He could join any terror group he wants.
He was free to assist individuals who are at war with the US.
He became a legitimate military target.
If your gonna play stickball in Brooklyn, you better know the rules.
Clause 3: Calling Congress into extraordinary session; adjourning Congress[edit]
The President may call extraordinary sessions of one or both Houses of Congress. If the two Houses cannot agree on a date for adjournment, the President may adjourn both Houses to such a time as befits the circumstances. The last time this power was exercised was in 1948, when President Harry S Truman called a special session of Congress. That was the twenty-seventh time in American history that a president convened such a session.[17]