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.

 

Could there be a move to impeach Obama coming?

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogicGrind
reply to post by Vasa Croe
 


So you are saying Obama may be impeached because of the sequestration? The sequestration that Congress passed?

That seems like a bit of a stretch.

But besides that...there has been a move to impeach Obama since he took the Oath in 2009...so I am not surprised that someone thinks he should be impeached due to legislation that was passed Constitutionally.


Sequestration was thought up by the White House and ultimately put into effect by signed order of Obama, personally. It would be a point of debate perhaps ....if his own people hadn't reluctantly confirmed it.

White House finally admits, Obama admin created the sequester

Sperling Admits Obama Misled in Debate: The President Did Propose the Sequester

He did it. He owns it. Good or bad. It's all part of being the Leader of the Nation. It's past time he get used to that concept, IMO.




posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by LogicGrind
reply to post by Vasa Croe
 


So you are saying Obama may be impeached because of the sequestration? The sequestration that Congress passed?

That seems like a bit of a stretch.

But besides that...there has been a move to impeach Obama since he took the Oath in 2009...so I am not surprised that someone thinks he should be impeached due to legislation that was passed Constitutionally.


Sequestration was thought up by the White House and ultimately put into effect by signed order of Obama, personally. It would be a point of debate perhaps ....if his own people hadn't reluctantly confirmed it.

White House finally admits, Obama admin created the sequester

Sperling Admits Obama Misled in Debate: The President Did Propose the Sequester

He did it. He owns it. Good or bad. It's all part of being the Leader of the Nation. It's past time he get used to that concept, IMO.


Nice find. This is what I am talking about in regards to Obama being responsible ultimately.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 



He did it. He owns it. Good or bad. It's all part of being the Leader of the Nation. It's past time he get used to that concept, IMO.


Obama didn't "do" anything alone. Congress passed it, Obama signed it. The entire legislative and executive branch is responsible for the sequester, to try to claim that Obama is solely responsible and that it is grounds for impeachment is just more desperation from Republicans.

And the sequestration was never suppose to happen anyway, the only reason it did was because Congress, not Obama, failed to pass legislation that would make the required budget cuts to avoid the sequestration. Congress could not do this, hence the sequestration....nothing on Obama.

But the Republicans have been wanting to impeach Obama for all kinds of stupid reasons, so I am not surprised that people are still bringing up stupid reasons for Obama's impeachment. Just more drama from sore losers.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by LogicGrind
 


Logic why are you defending this man. Republican / Democrate.... I see neither. I see shady American trying to point blame back and forth. I say arrest them all.

He signed it didn't he? Doth that not make him accountable? Does he not have a responsibility to defend and protect this nation?

Your post not that I care, leads me to believe you think Obama is doing a " Ok " job and you support the shenanigans he's pulling.

I mean Really.... REALLY~!!! Come on! Serious? I'm about speechless~



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
If Obamas purpose was to be better than Bush, he failed miserably.

Bush was bad, but Obama takes the cake IMO.

Yes- they should both be held accountable for international criminal acts. Every single criminal act
that they have been caught doing, should all take forward in criminal and impeachment hearings.

If you ask me- that should be done not only on a national level, but an international one.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vasa Croe
I was just reading that Clapper is giving testimony on Worldwide Threats right now and it reminded me of his statements last month. The link to his statement is below:

Clapper Statement

A quote from the statement:



So let me now be blunt for you and for the American people – Sequestration forces the intelligence community to reduce all intelligence activities and functions without regard to impact on our mission. In my considered judgment as the nation's senior intelligence officer, sequestration jeopardizes our nation's safety and security, and this jeopardy will increase over time.


Now it may or may not be a big stretch to see this a a warning shot that if something happens then Obama will be held accountable.

I wonder if we will see anything come from the political community about this being a direct result of sequester and demanding for actions to be taken against the White House?


Sequester is like a drop in the ocean for the "intelligence" community! They have humongous black budgets, slush funds, and drug money!
As to Impeachment, if Herr Prez is impeached for the sequester anything he signed previously is still inforce. If he is impeached for his not being qualified to hold office because he is not an "Natural Born Citizen", then everything he signed is nullified.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by eXia7
 


You will heal. I thought for sure we'd all be dead if the people were dumb enough to elect GWB to a second term, and we're still here.



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogicGrind
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 



He did it. He owns it. Good or bad. It's all part of being the Leader of the Nation. It's past time he get used to that concept, IMO.


Obama didn't "do" anything alone. Congress passed it, Obama signed it. The entire legislative and executive branch is responsible for the sequester, to try to claim that Obama is solely responsible and that it is grounds for impeachment is just more desperation from Republicans.

And the sequestration was never suppose to happen anyway, the only reason it did was because Congress, not Obama, failed to pass legislation that would make the required budget cuts to avoid the sequestration. Congress could not do this, hence the sequestration....nothing on Obama.

But the Republicans have been wanting to impeach Obama for all kinds of stupid reasons, so I am not surprised that people are still bringing up stupid reasons for Obama's impeachment. Just more drama from sore losers.

I've come to know a good many Democrats in my time now in college and it's been an eye opening experience. Particularly with more than a couple being among faculty and highly educated people. It's been even more amazing to realize that, when not challenged to feel 100% defensive right from the start, they are as strong against Obama in their feelings as I am.

It's not Republican or Democrat on this individual man as our President. John F. Kennedy was a Democrat. Lyndon Johnson was a Democrat..even Carter was a Democrat. I strongly disagree with as much as I may find to say those men did well on, while always holding a degree of respect. Obama is no Democrat in the sense I know them in real life to call friends. He's a man and an individual who is out of control as a President with a power trip, in my humble opinion.



posted on Apr, 19 2013 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Common Good
If Obamas purpose was to be better than Bush, he failed miserably.

Bush was bad, but Obama takes the cake IMO.

Yes- they should both be held accountable for international criminal acts. Every single criminal act
that they have been caught doing, should all take forward in criminal and impeachment hearings.

If you ask me- that should be done not only on a national level, but an international one.



What takes the cake is sticking your head in the sand
about whose worse Obama or Bush..

That's not even trying.
Should I pull up the GNP graph?
Should I bring up a trillion with a "t" dollar war that was put on the credit card?
How's this?
Your guy Stock market 6547 The president 14,589
Come on.. No contest.

AND if the frigging tea party got out of the way, veterans could get jobs
and go to college like when that commie Eisenhower was in charge.

Not to mention green energy infrastructure etc etc..
The right wingnuts think they can just spew whatever nonsense
comes to mind and it's fact. But once out of the bubble they seem amazed
by the majority's reaction to the lies.
edit on 19-4-2013 by sealing because: Stockmarket



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 02:28 PM
link   
There's no way in hell Obama will be impeached. Unless he really did something crazy.

Impeaching the "First black president." would have people screaming racism.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   
I'm a little confused.

I understand you're questioning whether or not the president will be impeached etc...

I'm confused on the grounds or reasoning though. Are you suggesting that the sequestration was solely his idea and that he is to blame for the sequestration?

If so, why exactly do you feel this way?



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   
i sure hope so... he deserves to be dragged over-the-carpet


he is blatenly going counter to the Constitution & bill-of-rights when his administration brazenly holds Islam Jihadists in preference to any & all other religions ---


This is a direct slap to the clause of The Seperation of Church & State~ and the problem of recognizing one religion over others.


how so you ask...... well Obama had earlier instructed ALL government Agencies to EDIT all documents that calls or even alludes to Jihadists as Murderers of Infidels

he instructed all Agencies and Departments to sanitize all instructions & printed material to redact any mention of Jihadist Muslims as avowed Miltants or Terrorists, religious based causes or not. He has caused to be purged any & all earlier Bush assessments of these Jihadist killers through religious instruction as being bad-evil-primitive relics of barbarism...instead they are to be treated as law abiding & courteous of fellow men & women and just all around benevolent people that give you the shirt off their backs (? u mean like the boston bomber brothers)

but no other religion does he set aside to linguistically purify for political ideals


the avowed power that wishes to destroy western civilization...
'the Muslim Brotherhood' -- he showers with ultra modern arms and boatloads of money--- does that sound like 'Protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States'


the Globalist front man sitting in the Presidents chair needs IMpeached so he can humble himself for his misdeeds up to now...to remain a tarnished leader for all history

his actions are not altruistic ones...he is favoring Islan over other religions and bumping shoulders with anti-constitutional rebels , enemies, & others
edit on 23-4-2013 by St Udio because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-4-2013 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by spinalremain
I'm a little confused.

I understand you're questioning whether or not the president will be impeached etc...

I'm confused on the grounds or reasoning though. Are you suggesting that the sequestration was solely his idea and that he is to blame for the sequestration?

If so, why exactly do you feel this way?


While Sequestration was not solely his idea, the White House was under a lot of fire from the emails saying to make it as painful as possible. He signed the order and regardless of how many are involved he is ultimately the one in charge and should be held accountable for his actions.

Sequestration cuts made it possible for our nation to be attacked because we had inadequate resources to cover the intelligence reports that may have led to averting the bombing in Boston. I would say that he needs to at least address the concern and instead of trying to prove a point maybe he should try to do what is best instead of what the Democratic party wants.

In my opinion he is the most responsible party for any coming attacks on US soil because of his cuts to our infrastructure. After all....he is the President and ultimate decision maker. If we can't hold our boss accountable then why should he be there? If a business is failing or loses market integrity they find a new boss....one that will make changes that work and protect and grow the employees and business.



posted on Apr, 23 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by St Udio
well Obama had earlier instructed ALL government Agencies to EDIT all documents that calls or even alludes to Jihadists as Murderers of Infidels
he instructed all Agencies and Departments to sanitize all instructions & printed material to redact any mention of Jihadist Muslims as avowed Miltants or Terrorists, religious based causes or not


You can of course back that claim up....



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join