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.

 

Impeachment yes or no and why?(why not..)

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Seeing how this is an opinion thread I would like to chime in again would like to remind people that perjury is an impeachable offense. Remember all these crooks took an oath to uphold the constitution and TARP was unconstitutional no matter what the Supreme Court says. I'm perfectly capable of reading and understanding the constitution as it is written in plain english and not legalese.

If you look at it from that stand point Just about every president we have ever had could have been impeached, because perjury is again breaking the law they are breaking the oath that they swore upon entering office. Now some presidents might be given a little leeway, but for the most part I can think of a multitude of reasons to impeach just about every president.




posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Choiseul
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


So lets say we could impeach because the president wasn't doing a good job... maybe, if that could be made a law one day... maybe that could be for the better good?


Then the president would be so busy going on trial every week that s/he couldn't get anything done!

Then again........

Maybe the president should get annual reviews. Every year we could vote to see if he keeps the presidency. Or maybe vote at the halfway mark.

I don't know though. We don't want the president constantly campaigning to keep his job.

You are certainly inspiring some thought!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:11 AM
link   
reply to post by yadda333
 


I know some will disagree with me on what I'm about to say maybe even you will, but to me the current president hasn't stopped campaigning, and honestly what more does he really need to do? The president's only real duty is to be commander and chief and sign and veto laws, and of course suggest policies.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by yadda333
 


I do think that should come around... the presidency is a job.. and at an even lame job serving pizza, after so much time there you still get reviewed... so why not the #1 job in the u.s.? If impeachment is out because there is no hard evidence.. then that would be a good idea. Have annual job reviews based on the american people.. his peers maybe not.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:33 AM
link   
they should put his face on the penny

seriously though, they asked geithner to step down, they should be able to ask him to do the same for the same reasons if not more.

[edit on 12-12-2009 by notsympl]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Just saying,
Our founding fathers actually had a very good idea. Now, as you can see, these great men carefully planned every aspect of government they could possibly forsee while keeping certain things as vague as possible- enumerated powers etc.

One of these hotly debated items at the time of our framework was term limits. Obviously these great men decided for the leadership role four years per term was just enough for them to get what they needed done....not too long to become excessively oppressive with their leadership.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Why whats the point? getting rid of Obama won't do any good, you have to get rid of THEM ALL!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Honestly, how can you impeach a president that does not exist? We have no legal president, we have an impostor. If you want to impeach him on a legality, then forging court documents would be a place to start, or being involved in a conspiracy to commit election fraud, since it has been shown that Pelosi knew about his birth certificate issues before hand, and made copies of the election registration papers that they had to turn in to each state, omitting the part that says he is or was, legally qualified to be elected in the USA constitutionally.

But truthfully, let's face it, the powers that be may have been using him all along. What better way to start a great civil unrest that leads to martial law than by electing a black president and then assassinating him?

If nazi's are in power in high places, and some evil jewish people in other high places, and both groups tend to have problems with black people, then how likely is it that they ever respected Obama in the first place?

Like everything else the diminati do, they plan way, way ahead. I am just glad that God plans even futher ahead.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Choiseul
 


Actually our "term limits" and "review periods" are called something else,
Elections!

In fact, exactly as our founding fathers designed ever so carefully, we do have a system to "audit" the Presidency as well as Congress.

You will find as of recently many prominent "grassroots" Libertarian campaigns run by a few businessmen are funding term limit legislation from out of state.

How could a movement that claims to uphold everything our founding fathers have done....deny the public the very framework that was designed purposely without term limits!

That was my rant....
term limits = elections



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   
The Pelosi Election Fraud documents and story:

www.wnd.com...



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Thanks for those few new posts.. not too personal heh which I like for now since this issue isn't a very strong felt opinion but it is ... or soon will be more dominant if things go for the worse.

I am going to look up a link to embed for the first time so bear with me.. this was another topic of debate a couple weeks ago and someone replied to what I posted... which amazed me.
Apparently someone voted a while back to change the terms? It hasn't made much of any progress but just the fact that now with obama that it even got voted upon... makes me a lil more nervous.

I will try to embed it now... or not, here is the link... it is now ONE step further than previously a couple weeks ago.. ... ... ...


www.govtrack.us...



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nyhee
Honestly, how can you impeach a president that does not exist? We have no legal president, we have an impostor. If you want to impeach him on a legality, then forging court documents would be a place to start, or being involved in a conspiracy to commit election fraud, since it has been shown that Pelosi knew about his birth certificate issues before hand, and made copies of the election registration papers that they had to turn in to each state, omitting the part that says he is or was, legally qualified to be elected in the USA constitutionally.

But truthfully, let's face it, the powers that be may have been using him all along. What better way to start a great civil unrest that leads to martial law than by electing a black president and then assassinating him?

If nazi's are in power in high places, and some evil jewish people in other high places, and both groups tend to have problems with black people, then how likely is it that they ever respected Obama in the first place?

Like everything else the diminati do, they plan way, way ahead. I am just glad that God plans even futher ahead.


OMG
God plans farther ahead? So this was some sort of a mistake that got by God? Was He sleeping or something?
Thy kingdom come thy will be done...and it was. Now here you come along second guessing God. You are saying His will was wrong and the President He gave your country is not satisfactory for you. Perhaps you don't know your God as well as you think.

PS The link provided above is from the "Bob Unruh News" This is your source?

[edit on 12-12-2009 by rusethorcain]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:54 AM
link   
You guys couldn't even get Bush out the door with approval ratings in the teens.

In any case, Americans should definitely impeach Obama; it would surely speed things along. The American economy is hanging by a thread as it is, if the president was impeached, creditors would jump ship left and right when confronted with the economic and social instability/uncertainty that would follow. A presidential impeachment would be the straw that broke the camel's back.

Lets get it over with already, I can't take anymore old, white, male Americans bitching and crying about flag pins and birth certificates. To the other 50% of Americans, I apologize, but the rest of the planet finds them more irritating than we find you pleasant. Good luck.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:58 AM
link   
He will never be impeached if for no other reason than to keep people from screaming racism. If he were to be impeached too soon, then Bush would get the blame for all of Obama's poor decisions. It might be argued that Obama hadn't been in office long enough to make any lasting changes.

[edit on 12-12-2009 by gazerstar]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:59 AM
link   


I do not believe religion and politics are ever able to be in the same category. In bars one must never bring up either for fun/idle bicker was the rule I learned a while ago hahah... but religion does play into our politics very much.. even though there is separation of church & state... but I see now religion is under fire in the u.s.... but that is another topic.. so please, believe in what you will... we all feel more close to some idol or not at all.. and this isn't the topic for it... so religion aside if we can! *i do very much enjoy religious talks.. not as much "proof" is needed there heh*



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 01:13 AM
link   
The only one bit I want to compare Obama to Bush is.. the fact of the media. I may be wrong, but I think that the media is more on Obama being the good guy and not saying more about it. I haven't been watching a lot of comedy skits, but I remember that there was more programs making fun of Bush than Obama so far. Sure, Fox is against "Bob" more than not, but he has more media streams covering up for him than Bush ever did... I think. That has to have some sort of meaning behind all of this. Obama has some how used the media and controlled it a lot more than the Bush administration ever did.
Right now my carbon fiber (dating? i don't know the difference any longer) is so out of control... which is b.s.... ...

[edit on 12-12-2009 by Choiseul]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by yadda333


Then the president would be so busy going on trial every week that s/he couldn't get anything done!



Nice argument.

That's why all of our politicians should have single term limits. They should be forbidden to earn a profit outside of politics while in office and only their base salary while in office to live off of. Half of their salary should be held until the end of their term and the percentage paid on their end of term paycheck should be based on the consensus of their state or area constituents.

The reason our politicians don't accomplish anything right now is that they are too busy getting rich and getting reelected.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 01:48 AM
link   
added bonus for me if you'd like.. star and flag this if you think this is relevant for all of us ats'ers for debate? hah.. i sound like the govt... heheheh.. can use more s & f's ... lil guy here hahahah.. (going to go play diablo 2 for now.. 2 weeks till xmas and ps3 + demon's soul.... i know.. i am easy hehe... )



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 01:53 AM
link   
The entire concept of impeachment for maladministration is inconsistent with a republican form of government. A democratic republic vests its powers in elected leaders not simply because direct democracy is impractical (in fact it wasn't impractical at the time that republican government was conceived- government was a part-time affair for much of America's history). The intent of the republican model is to check the whimsical dynamics of large groups of people. The theory is that small groups or individuals are generally capable of greater consistency than large groups, which is sometimes necessary to reach any conclusion at all in the large scale challenges that nations confront. If we reject this theory, then it does become sensible to remove officials whenever we lose faith, but the structure of our government ceases to be sensible and a dramatic re-write of the entire constitution would have to at least be seriously considered.

In my way of thinking, a verdict of guilty in impeachment proceedings should probably carry a mandatory death sentence with it, and should only be used when an official has intentionally harmed the country. Lacking intentional harm, it is a matter of inability to discharge office and should be handled by the cabinet and VP under the 25th amendment. And in even less extreme cases a simple veto over-ride can do the trick in theory, although if that is the primary reasoning then it seems like the threshold for an override should be lower than that for impeachment (presently it actually takes more support to override a veto than it would to simply impeach the president and then pass the bill again).

(edit for grammar error)

[edit on Sun 13 Dec 2009 by The Vagabond]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 03:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Choiseul

Originally posted by Seiko
On what exact charges?

I couldn't seem to find an exact charge in your post.


Ah .. see I am still naive. I would think if a president is not doing a good job that you would have the ability to impeach him... not just because he did something obviously illegal.... If that is the main case for impeachment then that was my misunderstanding and I apologize.


OI !! HE got the nobel peace prize for.. Uhh.. for.. for..

hrmm..

Well he's new!

And he's .. uhh...

hrmm..

Who cares really, us Aussies have a dick of a PM to contend with. Have fun over there, be careful with that!




new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join