Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Poll: One-third say impeach Obama

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 12:54 AM
link   
A new CNN/ORC poll has many people thinking Obama should be impeached.

Obviously, more Republicans think this than Democrats.

But the results show 13% of Democrats think Obama should be impeached.

Read story for details.



One third of Americans think President Barack Obama should be impeached, a new poll says.

According to a CNN/ORC International poll released Friday, 33 percent of Americans think the president should be impeached and removed from office, compared with 65 percent who say they don’t support impeachment. Fifty-seven percent of Republicans say they support impeaching Obama, compared with just 35 percent of independent voters and 13 percent of Democrats.



Poll: One-third say impeach Obama

Democrats turning on Obama ?





posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Hmm. I can understand the sentiment; but, correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't the president have to commit a crime to be impeached? Or is it also to be a way for dissastisfied citizens to oust the man in power?



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 01:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: LucidWarrior
a reply to: xuenchen

Hmm. I can understand the sentiment; but, correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't the president have to commit a crime to be impeached? Or is it also to be a way for dissastisfied citizens to oust the man in power?


Probably Yes.

And many people think he has.




posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 01:17 AM
link   
Impeachment is one of those "political processes" I've never fully understood.

I personally believe 0bama is the wrong guy for that office ... but I understand what he's doing and how he's doing it. The 'why' of course eludes me ... much as the reasons he hasn't been impeached already.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 01:17 AM
link   
And then what? Biden? Really? Biden?
Really?



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 03:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
And then what? Biden? Really? Biden?
Really?

Biden is Obama's insurance. We can eat our turd sandwich, or we can eat a turd sandwich with extra mayo on a stale bun. Same with Bush/Cheney.
If McCain had won, we would be one stroke away from having Sarah Palin in charge. Truly nightmarish to contemplate.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 03:42 AM
link   


but, correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't the president have to commit a crime to be impeached?

a reply to: LucidWarrior
No, not really, just be incompetent, much like Obama and fail to perform their duties.
Like keep our borders secure.


Because "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" was a term of art used in English impeachments, a plausible reading supported by many scholars is that the grounds for impeachment can be not only the defined crimes of treason and bribery, but also other criminal or even noncriminal behavior amounting to a serious dereliction of duty. That interpretation is disputed, but it is agreed by virtually all that the impeachment remedy was to be used in only the most extreme situations, a position confirmed by the relatively few instances in which Congress has used the device.

Link


Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says, "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." In his report, Independent Counsel, Starr accuses President Clinton of committing eleven acts for which he could be removed from office by impeachment. Are any of those acts "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors?" Well, that's up to the members of the House of Representatives. According to constitutional lawyers, "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" are (1) real criminality -- breaking a law; (2) abuses of power; (3) "violation of public trust" as defined by Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. In 1970, then Representative Gerald R. Ford defined impeachable offenses as "whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history." An excellent definition, Mr. Former President. In the past, Congress has issued Articles of Impeachment for acts in three general categories:

Exceeding the constitutional bounds of the powers of the office.
Behavior grossly incompatible with the proper function and purpose of the office.
Employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or for personal gain.

Linky usgov
edit on 26-7-2014 by guohua because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 03:47 AM
link   
Impeached for what?? Being president with the wrong skin colour? Oh wait, it's a Xuenchen thread, never mind!


+8 more 
posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 03:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Impeached for what?? Being president with the wrong skin colour? Oh wait, it's a Xuenchen thread, never mind!


You have nothing to contribute except to Scream Racism.
Common Practice,,,,,,,,,

Run and Break Glass,,,,,you have nothing to add!



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 04:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: guohua

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Impeached for what?? Being president with the wrong skin colour? Oh wait, it's a Xuenchen thread, never mind!


You have nothing to contribute except to Scream Racism.
Common Practice,,,,,,,,,

Run and Break Glass,,,,,you have nothing to add!


Oh come off it, these calls for impeachment are ridiculous. The man's done nothing wrong apart from to do his best to clean up the vast pile of rubble left by Bush, a man who should have been impeached three times over. Let's face facts - the moment that Obama set foot in the White House the GOP started to go raving mad.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 05:04 AM
link   
a reply to: guohua

Ah, thanks for clearing that up.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 05:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: LucidWarrior
a reply to: xuenchen

Hmm. I can understand the sentiment; but, correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't the president have to commit a crime to be impeached? Or is it also to be a way for dissastisfied citizens to oust the man in power?


I was going to say the same - impeached for what exactly?

You can't just impeach a President because you don't like him.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 05:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Let's face facts - the moment that Obama set foot in the White House the GOP started to go raving mad.


One just has to look at the nonsense and lies the birthers and Tea party nation etc. pushed even before Obama was elected



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 05:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
I was going to say the same - impeached for what exactly?

You can't just impeach a President because you don't like him.


Impeached for not being a Republican, or being black. What other reason do the crazies need? Oh, also having a middle name of Hussein.

www.dailykos.com...


This bit of humor aside, there is no denying that Ted Cruz meets the constitutional requirements to serve as president. This includes the required that the president be a natural born citizen. It is irrelevant that he was born in Canada because his mother was a United States Citizen and thus he acquired citizenship, at birth, through her. President Obama's mother was also a United States Citizen. Of course, that fact was irrelevant in his case because he was actually born in the United States of America. Kind of funny, though, how their 'logic' works, isn't it?
edit on 26-7-2014 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 05:47 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

So a clear majority think Obama should Not be impeached?

The number in this poll matches the polls over Clinton and GWB, from link provided:

The numbers generally fall in line with CNN results from the past two presidencies — 30 percent of Americans support impeachment for former President George W. Bush in 2006 and 29 percent support impeachment for former President Bill Clinton in 1998.


I find it interesting that 57% of republicans support impeachment despite a huge amount of money spent to further there agenda.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce
'...because his mother was a United States Citizen and thus acquired citizenship, [by] birth, through her'.
True, but did he choose to retain it, or did he keep his canadian citizenship?



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 06:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

Oh come off it, these calls for impeachment are ridiculous. The man's done nothing wrong apart from to do his best to clean up the vast pile of rubble left by Bush, a man who should have been impeached three times over. Let's face facts - the moment that Obama set foot in the White House the GOP started to go raving mad.



1. NSA spying worse than watergate by many, many magnitudes
2. Fast and furious
3. All the war crimes he has commited
4. His censorship of the media
5. The IRS scandal

And these are just the 5 biggest reasons off the top of my head.
Yes Bush should have been impeached too but its kinda funny how progressives claim a higher moral standard yet when one of their leaders is shown to be a evil monster they are so quick to point out the flaws in the gop as if that somehow makes anything they do okay.

The attitude could be summed up as "We'll he may be a war criminal but at least he isn't a republican"
edit on 2672014 by monkofmimir because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 06:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: monkofmimir
1. NSA spying worse than watergate by many, many magnitudes


Surely as a result of the previous Administrations "Patriot Act", rampant xenophobia and "War on Terror"?


originally posted by: monkofmimir
2. Fast and furious


Granted, they are average films, but surely not the fault of the President...................



originally posted by: monkofmimir
3. All the war crimes he has commited


Such as? And how come Bush Jnr doesn't fall into this category as well?


originally posted by: monkofmimir
4. His censorship of the media


Examples?


originally posted by: monkofmimir
5. The IRS scandal


Was this something he was directly involved or complicit in, or simply a Government department doing what Government departments do, namely, fudge up from time to time?



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 06:47 AM
link   

1. NSA spying worse than watergate by many, many magnitudes
2. Fast and furious
3. All the war crimes he has commited
4. His censorship of the media
5. The IRS scandal

And these are just the 5 biggest reasons off the top of my head.
Yes Bush should have been impeached too but its kinda funny how progressives claim a higher moral standard yet when one of their leaders is shown to be a evil monster they are so quick to point out the flaws in the gop as if that somehow makes anything they do okay.

The attitude could be summed up as "We'll he may be a war criminal but at least he isn't a republican"




You wasted your time posting a laundry list, and you still failed to list a single crime for which Obama can be impeached.
edit on 7/26/2014 by muse7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

You just got to love reading and imagining the Obama Supporters Foaming at the Mouth when they hear the Words Impeachment of their Messiah.
They all keep coming back with claims of it because we're Racist or because we're Republicans and They Hated Obama since Day One or It's The Birthers or some other any other excuse they can come up with.
The truth of the matter is, Obama has Lied to Americans since Day One.
No Shovel Ready Jobs, No Open and Transparent Administration, Bills have Not Been Posted on the Web for all to read before they are voted on. Instead, they had to Pass The Bill To Know What Was In The Bill,,,,, Remember That One?

Impeachable Offences:



Aug. 14, 2013: The Obama administration delayed the provision in ObamaCare to cap out-of-pocket health care costs, picking and choosing parts of the law to enforce, which is to exceed its authority.

July 17, 2013: The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals joined the federal appeals courts in D.C. and Philadelphia in ruling President Obama’s National Labor Relations Board recess appointments — who by law must be approved by Congress — were unconstitutional. Thus far, the president has ignored the ruling.

July 1, 2013: The Obama administration unilaterally decided to delay the employer mandate provision of ObamaCare for a year, which is to provide information to the feds about the extent of an applicant’s insurance. Never mind that the law states the mandate must go into effect on Jan. 1, 2014 — they are now relying on the “honor system” from applicants to determine if they are qualified for subsidies.

June 25, 2013: The Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County v. Eric Holder that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is “unconstitutional” and that “the formula can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdiction to preclearance.” Instead of complying with the ruling, Holder filed suit to order Texas to submit to preclearance, in defiance of Congress’ authority to legislate and the Supreme Court’s authority to rule on the constitutionality of the law.

June 15, 2012: The Obama administration announced it will stop deporting illegal immigrants under the age of 30 in a “deferred action” policy to circumvent immigration laws. This comes after Congress rejected a similar measure about a year ago. Since then, more than 500,000 illegals have received the deferment and only 20,000 have been rejected. As for the law-abiding applicants who have been waiting in line, well, that’s Obama’s idea of “lawfulness.”

May 20, 2013: A Washington Post article revealed that Fox News reporter James Rosen was investigated by the DOJ, which subpoenaed his phone records and emails in direct contravention of the First Amendment under the pretense of a leak investigation.

Link

(1) Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution mandates that from time to time the President “shall give to Congress information on the State of the Union….” Implicit in this is an obligation for the President to be truthful with the Congress and the American people. Barack Hussein Obama has repeatedly violated his oath of office and the requirements of the Constitution by willfully withholding information on important issues or actively taken part in misleading the Congress and the American people. Specific actions include, but are not necessarily limited to:

A. Using Executive privilege to block Congress from getting documents relating to the DOJ’s Operation Fast and Furious and the death of U.S. Border Patrol Brian Terry.

B. Had members of his administration provide false information about the act of terrorism committed in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012 and refusing to allow the State Department and other federal agencies to cooperate in the Congressional investigation.

C. Falsely labeled the mass murder of American soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas as “workplace violence” instead of the act of Islamic terrorism it was.

D. Falsely labeling the IRS targeting of conservative and Christian groups as a “phony” scandal and refusing to order an active pursuit of the investigation into who was ultimately responsible.

E. Refusing to order an independent investigation of the actions of Eric Holder and the DOJ in targeting the phone records of members of the news media.

F. Telling the American people on a television show that the NSA was not prying into the emails and phone calls of Americans when the facts prove otherwise.
impeach


For now, the impeachment movement is too fringe even for the likes of Cruz, the capitol's chief boat-rocker. But I was curious: What does Klein’s case for impeachment consist of? There’s a lot in the book, he told me, but he gave a few examples. The constitutional standard for impeachment is "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Klein's claims fall under the second two categories.

* Obamacare: Klein describes a number of arguments involving the health-care legislation, with the crux being that Obama committed a crime against his office by bypassing Congress in some way. "An obvious response is that the healthcare legislation was upheld by the Supreme Court," he noted. "But the book reports the White House has been hard at work changing the implementation of key sections of Obamacare without Congressional oversight."

* Immigration: Did Obama’s executive orders and interagency directives usurp Congress’s legislative authority? “President Obama has bypassed Congress, which has legislative authority for setting immigration policy in America,” Klein says. Last summer’s temporary reprieve for young undocumented immigrants, for example, “seems to be de facto amnesty without congressional approval.”

* Benghazi: In the attack last fall that killed four diplomatic workers, Klein sees a new version of the Iran-Contra scandal, claiming his original reporting has uncovered arms trafficking that wound up in the hands of al-Qaeda fighters.

* Fast and Furious: “I would think it would be very easy to argue that sending weapons deliberately with the intention of getting them in the hands of the drug cartels is a very clear violation [of the law], especially since it resulted in the murder of a U.S. border agent.”

* Surveillance: Klein claims to have uncovered much of the expansive surveillance regime that’s now coming to light; his book went to press before NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden went public.

* The Libya campaign: “There’s a chapter that questions whether the entire campaign was unconstitutional. We don’t conclude it was or wasn’t; we present both sides of the debate.”

* Bribery: “There are a lot of questions about stimulus-bill money that went to campaign donors. There’s money that went to different green companies that some of the top leaders then popped up as members of the Obama administration.”

The Book
edit on 26-7-2014 by guohua because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join