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.

 

Congressmen Walter Jones Starts Impeachment Process on Barack Obama 3/9/12

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I saw this back on Wednesday when it was proposed.

Im baffled by how people are perceiving this, i think it may be due to Alex Jones.

NO WHERE does it state that this has backwards effect, so it would not touch Obama, however would prevent him from doing it in the future.

So no one is getting impeached or proposing to impeach anyone.




posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joki42
First off, if they are trying to impeach him, it's a little too late unless he wins the next election; second, most bills die in comitee or are so drastically changed they will make no differance. I'm not really holding my breath on this one. He's managed to slip through the cracks for 4 years including snubing a court order to apear for eligability hearings to go play in Vegas.


Um that last part is wrong. He was actually going to the beach, not to play.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by blamethegreys
 



You all are so busy slinging insults back and forth (as usual) you aren't addressing the core of the issue:


Actually we are not, those are the shills, and they don´t count. Just skip them. They are here to filter the most gullible away, those with enough fluoride in their brains so that they are unable to see the truth in this thread, choosing instead to believe wheat the majority seems to say.

That is why they are hired, so they really don´t exist as a contributor to the thread. So just pretend they don´t exist. Saves alot of hassle, which really should be handled by the Mods on this site but... At least they keep threads going forwards, which is something they like, so they let them stay.

After awhile you will learn to detect them early.

edit on 11-3-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by WiseThinker
I saw this back on Wednesday when it was proposed.

Im baffled by how people are perceiving this, i think it may be due to Alex Jones.

NO WHERE does it state that this has backwards effect, so it would not touch Obama, however would prevent him from doing it in the future.

So no one is getting impeached or proposing to impeach anyone.



Um an Impeachment of Obama that has no effect on Obama? You know what a impeachment is right? Means he is FIRED!

Whatever you are smoking dude.... Not good for you.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Sorry but you're wrong.
This is not a bill to impeach Obama. This is a bill to make taking any offensive military action without congressional approval an impeachable offense; but only from the time it is passed. It does not apply to actions taken before it's passing. A President would have to take offensive military action without congressional approval after it's passing to face impeachment.

Deny ignorance.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by WiseThinker
I saw this back on Wednesday when it was proposed.

Im baffled by how people are perceiving this, i think it may be due to Alex Jones.

NO WHERE does it state that this has backwards effect, so it would not touch Obama, however would prevent him from doing it in the future.

So no one is getting impeached or proposing to impeach anyone.



Um an Impeachment of Obama that has no effect on Obama? You know what a impeachment is right? Means he is FIRED!

Whatever you are smoking dude.... Not good for you.


Do try and follow along here and I will make it as simple as possible. The Bill does not mention Obama. It is not a bill to start an impeachment. The bill wants to make it an impeachable offense for a President to use the military without congressional approval. The bill has the support of one guy. So it is not an impeachment of Obama. It also has no support. Simple enough?



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by WiseThinker
I saw this back on Wednesday when it was proposed.

Im baffled by how people are perceiving this, i think it may be due to Alex Jones.

NO WHERE does it state that this has backwards effect, so it would not touch Obama, however would prevent him from doing it in the future.

So no one is getting impeached or proposing to impeach anyone.



Um an Impeachment of Obama that has no effect on Obama? You know what a impeachment is right? Means he is FIRED!

Whatever you are smoking dude.... Not good for you.


Do try and follow along here and I will make it as simple as possible. The Bill does not mention Obama. It is not a bill to start an impeachment. The bill wants to make it an impeachable offense for a President to use the military without congressional approval. The bill has the support of one guy. So it is not an impeachment of Obama. It also has no support. Simple enough?


Um you seem to have somehow managed to completely sidestep the core issue here. I don´t know how you managed that, but unless fluoride is the culprit, you are probably a fresh grad from shillschool.

I am NOT talking about a bill! No bill is required. He has already broken the constitution, which he sweared to uphold, which is impeachable in itself. He is completely disregarding the congress in matters of war, which is forbidden in the constitution!! This means neither he or the U.S Army are serving the U.S People! They are just feeding of them to survive via taxes, but they completely disregard their interests, they might as well declare WAR on the U.S Civilians! They are bought by Rothschild long since, and the elections you watch on tv are bought as well! You just pay to watch the theater, but have no say! The perfect megalomaniac crime. Now lets see how you sidestep this one, that will surely shed some light on the answer to my ealier question about your reasons.

edit on 11-3-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)


There is really nothing to vote for in this bill, basically voting against it means you diregard the U.S Constitution, which means you are a traitor and due to get impeached yourself! It is plain as day! And you know what? If they vote no to this bill, they should be getting scooped up by the police for treason on the spot. And they know it!
edit on 11-3-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-3-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrSpad

The bill wants to make it an impeachable offense for a President to use the military without congressional approval. The bill has the support of one guy. So it is not an impeachment of Obama. It also has no support. Simple enough?


I'm surprised this thread has only 3 pages, this is a very serious matter for the people in the USA. How come the congress didn't say anything when Obama signed up for Libya? I am baffled because in Europe 'the congress' has the highest power and the president only listens to them and signs things already approved by the government. A president actually has no power whatsoever - in EU.

MrSpad says, this has no support but what kind of extra support do you need if the American constitution says so? I don't understand why they even need to vote and start this bill and everything if your constitutional law already has a specific rule that no president has the power to authorize a military action without the congress approval?

and btw. i really like this senator Jeff, never heard of him before but he seems smarter then 3 of your last presidents, no offense



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Sorry if you miss interpreted, i 100% agree he is impeachable at this point, however im just stating that this bill has got NOTHING to do with impeaching him, it only seeks to prevent what he did in Libya in the future, and as stated it has no support, so its irrelevant anyway.

It was just nagging me that every one, saw this as "The bill that will impeach Obama" as that is wrong.

And if America and the Fast and Furious scandal told us anything, its that the PotA can get away with anything, with the help of some perception management (MSM).
edit on 11/3/12 by WiseThinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Exitt
 


Are you Talking EU government, or a specific government ??

Because the EU parliament is basically not a voted body, and therefore is not really legitimate imo.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Well all of you are saying that its not an impeachment, but it most certainly will turn into one. Weather your for or against Obama we ALL know he will violate the constitution again sooner or later therefor making this bill effective. Obama isn't even legit a citizen seeing his father wasn't born in america. doesn't a president have to have family born in america therefore making him a citizen? lol IDK im not all into the whole Obama birth crap and really dont care. But he seems to violate a lot of things...



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by WiseThinker
reply to post by Exitt
 


Are you Talking EU government, or a specific government ??


I am talking about the most European country's and their governments. Even the Kingdoms like Belgium or Netherlands have a president, sometimes even a vice-president (premier) and then there is a coalition of party's - the equivalent of 'congress'. They are the ones who call the shots and get things done, a president is just a representative and it seems the law in the USA is the same but somehow your presidents get more power then they should have.
edit on 11-3-2012 by Exitt because: .



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Thisbseth
 


I've briefly looked into the whole birth certificate theory, and as far as i could tell then the problem isnt that his father is from Kenya,

Its that he may have been born in Kenya and then transferred to Hawaii hours to a few days after birth, and was registered in Hawaii, or not at all (As the birth certificate may be fake). And a US president HAS to be born on US soil.

Remember when they made a deal about McCain being born on a US army base in panama ? same story, however there would be no excuse if it turned out to be true that he was born in Kenya, then he cannot be the President.

Thats the theory as far as i read into it.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by WiseThinker
 


Yea, to bad we Americans will never find out. The Kenyans are laughing at all of us anyways lol. But this is besides the point. What is the point though is that he should def be impeached and i really hope he steps on the toes of congress again so he can. And did you watch the video in my thread about this same thing someone showed me. They basically said screw congress. pretty crazy. got some pretty big baseballs.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Exitt
 


There is an ultimate difference that you have failed to perceive.

There is no presidency in Belgium or The Netherlands, there is one in France however.

In the Netherlands and Belgium, you have a parliament, with ministers of different parts of government, much like the cabinet in America.
However in America the position of president is built as the place of supreme authority (Commander in Chief) Where as in the Netherlands it is a Prime Minister, meaning first of the minsters, whos position is to present the ideas of parliament to the "Commander in Chief" the King.
And the Netherlands by chance just like United Kingdoms still has royalty and therefore the Prime Minister is just that and not a President,

Where as in France there was a revolution leading to the abolishment of royalty hence they have presidency.

Therefore by design, then the Prime Minister does not have as much power, as he is just supposed to be a representative of the leading party and or coalition.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Coincidentally, a soldier just happened to go on a shooting spree in afghanistan and now conveniently distracts from the impeachment bill.
edit on 11-3-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by WiseThinker
 


You are right about the prime minister but it is only a name. Just like there is no actual congress or senate but there are similar things. I was just trying to point out there is a one man, one face representing a country but without the powers that an American president gets.
edit on 11-3-2012 by Exitt because: .



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by WiseThinker
I saw this back on Wednesday when it was proposed.

Im baffled by how people are perceiving this, i think it may be due to Alex Jones.

NO WHERE does it state that this has backwards effect, so it would not touch Obama, however would prevent him from doing it in the future.

So no one is getting impeached or proposing to impeach anyone.



Um an Impeachment of Obama that has no effect on Obama? You know what a impeachment is right? Means he is FIRED!

Whatever you are smoking dude.... Not good for you.


Do try and follow along here and I will make it as simple as possible. The Bill does not mention Obama. It is not a bill to start an impeachment. The bill wants to make it an impeachable offense for a President to use the military without congressional approval. The bill has the support of one guy. So it is not an impeachment of Obama. It also has no support. Simple enough?


Um you seem to have somehow managed to completely sidestep the core issue here. I don´t know how you managed that, but unless fluoride is the culprit, you are probably a fresh grad from shillschool.

I am NOT talking about a bill! No bill is required. He has already broken the constitution, which he sweared to uphold, which is impeachable in itself. He is completely disregarding the congress in matters of war, which is forbidden in the constitution!! This means neither he or the U.S Army are serving the U.S People! They are just feeding of them to survive via taxes, but they completely disregard their interests, they might as well declare WAR on the U.S Civilians! They are bought by Rothschild long since, and the elections you watch on tv are bought as well! You just pay to watch the theater, but have no say! The perfect megalomaniac crime. Now lets see how you sidestep this one, that will surely shed some light on the answer to my ealier question about your reasons.

edit on 11-3-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)


There is really nothing to vote for in this bill, basically voting against it means you diregard the U.S Constitution, which means you are a traitor and due to get impeached yourself! It is plain as day! And you know what? If they vote no to this bill, they should be getting scooped up by the police for treason on the spot. And they know it!
edit on 11-3-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-3-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)


Again you would have to take this up with American history as 125 times in our history a President has taken military action without congress as far back the 1840s although some would claim Adams going beyond what Congress allowed him to do in the quasi war with France started it all. And he was a founding father. It gets even worse when you consider the military operations against the native Americans taken by every President starting with Washington until they were all defeated, most with no approval from congress. It would seem the people who created the constitution saw things a bit differently then you.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Now WE ALL KNOW that an Impeachment STARTS with the House drafting an Articles of Impeachment. They are then presented to the Senate where a supermajority vote is required.

Could somebody, ANYBODY, give me a link to the current Articles of Impeachment against Obama! I think not!



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by oghamxx
 



Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
Looks like a little news has been generated by this story
DrudgeReport linked to the first two on the list:

Déjà Vu: Obama's Military Actions in Syria May Be Impeachable
www.thenewamerican.com...

Obama Impeachment Bill Now In Congress
www.wnd.com...

Igstarr
Obama impeachment bill now in Congress
lgstarr.blogspot.com...

The Impeachment of Barack Hussein Obama?
www.groundreport.com...

Congressman Walter Jones moves to impeach Obama
www.examiner.com...

Congressional Resolution: Impeachment of Barack Obama
frontporchpolitics.com...

I'm sure there are more I missed and hopefully more to come.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join