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.

 

Video (2007): Biden says Bush should be Impeached If He Attacks Iran Without Congressional Authority

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 12:39 AM
link   
This is yet another stellar performance by V.P. Joe Biden.

This time he plays a U.S. Senator in 2007 faced with a President who may attack a foreign country without approval from Congress.

Senator Joe Biden says he stands by his assertion that it would an impeachable offense !!

I wonder what he thinks today ?


Professor Biden on YouTube:

Partial Transcript: @5:25

Matthews: You said that if the President of the United States had launched an attack on Iran without congressional approval that would have been an impeachable offense. Do you want to review that comment you made? Well how do you stand on that now?

Biden:Yes I do. I want to stand by the comment I made. The reason I made the comment was as a warning. I don't say those things lightly, Chris, you've known me for a long time. I was chairman of the judiciary committee for 17 years or its ranking member. I teach separation of powers and constitutional law. This is something I know. So I got together and brought a group of constitutional scholars together to write a piece that I'm going to deliver to the whole United State Senate pointing out the President has no constitutional authority...to take this nation to war against a county of 70 million people unless we're attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked. And if he does, if he does, I would move to impeach him. The House obviously has to do that but I would lead an effort to impeach him. The reason for my doing that, I don't say it lightly, I don't say it lightly. I say it because they should understand that what they were threatening, what they were saying, what it was adding up to be, what it looked like to the rest of the world we were about to do would be the most disastrous thing that could be done in this moment in our history that I could think of.

Video: Biden Threatening to Impeach President If He Launches an Attack Without Congressional Authority

edit on Aug-28-2013 by xuenchen because:





posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 12:45 AM
link   
You gotta admit the cognitive dissonance coming out of the current administration is simply amazing.

If you bomb someone it is an 'ACT OF WAR' no matter how much lipstick they put on a pig it's still a pig.

The current administration has done the EXACT same things as they decried Bush for.

By Bidens own words Obama should be impeached.

Because it does not look like anything is going to stop a US attack on Syria.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 12:54 AM
link   
apples and oranges. The President can legally launch an offensive on a country as long as he nogified congress within 48 hours. And when UN resolutions are involved stating that the country in question is a threat, it's even more complicated.

The 2007 situation in Iran isn't comparable to anything going on today



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by aoxomoxoa
 


You are right this potus is getting us into something he has no proof who gassed who.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by aoxomoxoa
apples and oranges. The President can legally launch an offensive on a country as long as he nogified congress within 48 hours. And when UN resolutions are involved stating that the country in question is a threat, it's even more complicated.

The 2007 situation in Iran isn't comparable to anything going on today


You are right. It isn't comparable. There has been no attack in the US to validate us going to Syria. So why are we going? The UN? Oh I forgot I lived in the UN, not the US. .Apples and oranges? really ... just ... really. So it's okay if he decides to go as long as he INFORMS congress? Nope. Congress is supposed to decide, not the President. The President can only do this if the US is in danger of being attacked. I've heard nothing coming from the WH about us being in danger, other than the average fear porn that come out an a regular basis. Syria isn't a danger to us. Launch an offensive. Call it what it really is. WAR and Congress declares war, not the President.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by aoxomoxoa
apples and oranges. The President can legally launch an offensive on a country as long as he nogified congress within 48 hours. And when UN resolutions are involved stating that the country in question is a threat, it's even more complicated.

The 2007 situation in Iran isn't comparable to anything going on today


Pears and Bananas

The OP is about Biden's comments regarding impeachment - nobody is comparing anything here .

As for your prez - he is not the king of the world .... he can not just inform congress he is attacking a country and go through with it 48 hours later regardless of their response ... there would be no need to inform congress , that is a violent dictator with a thirst for blood .

And the UN only say a country is a threat when the U.S tells them to .... c'mon man.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by aoxomoxoa
apples and oranges. The President can legally launch an offensive on a country as long as he nogified congress within 48 hours. And when UN resolutions are involved stating that the country in question is a threat, it's even more complicated.

The 2007 situation in Iran isn't comparable to anything going on today


What about Libya ?.....and,

But But But But what about this masterpiece ?


I teach separation of powers and constitutional law.

This is something I know.

So I got together and brought a group of constitutional scholars together to write a piece that I'm going to deliver to the whole United State Senate pointing out the President has no constitutional authority..


Not just the Senate mind you, the WHOLE United States Senate




posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


I can't help to be entertained by this guy. He is beyond transparent only because he isn't good at lying and doesnt have much of a filter for what comes out. I actually think he is convicted about what he says most of the time but it rarely makes sense to me. Maybe he gets nervous and just can't articulate it well at times. In the end I'd rather see through it than to have someone be good at hiding it. When making this video about Iran I think he meant what he was saying (in spite of reading from a TelePrompTer). His opinion has been altered on these matters based on want I saw today. He gets caught up in the moment (knee jerk) - emotional responses IMO. But this isn't just him - its this whole administration. Its also the public in many cases.

Today he spoke to state more of what we have already been told - speaking very slowly and with care to repeat "they are guilty, we must hold them accountable, they are the only ones who have access to these weapons, they were directed at an area they are fighting against, etc.". Every couple of days they send someone else out to parrot everything - even though we know their stance on this matter. Why do I always feel like I'm being sold something by this administration?

What he was reading today was written with the purpose of reaching people's emotions and most basic reasoning abilities. Right or wrong ideals - it bothers me to so blatantly see psychological principles used in pushing agendas. It works though so why wouldn't they implement it. If it weren't for people on the Internet challenging these announcements things would be a lot worse. I think he gets just as caught up in it just as those in the public who form opinions based on emotions. Maybe this is why his stance on this has changed.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 01:52 AM
link   
There is clearly a great deal of hypocrisy going on here.

You won't see the anti-war folks for the same reason you won't see the women's rights groups protest Islamic atrocities against women. It is all a double standard born of partisan politics.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Metallicus
 


I am anti-war. Just stating the facts. The US is part of the UN security council. If a resolition is passed stating that the world community needs to act, then the prez can legally authorized action without preapproval from congress.

look it up



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 05:32 AM
link   
Tada! PROOF that what we are dealing with here is two heads of the same monster. Scumbags. ALL of them. So impeach Oblaba too then Biden, the SECOND he makes a move to strike Syria without congressional discussions and/or approval. Or would that be just too damn honest politics for your kind to handle? Of COURSE it would, damn hypocrite.


S&F for perfection.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   
Democrat hypocrisy? I've always preferred this example.

I've always been amazed at the low standard the Democrat party is held to by the media and their supporters.



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by vor78
Democrat hypocrisy? I've always preferred this example.

I've always been amazed at the low standard the Democrat party is held to by the media and their supporters.


Good Find ......

It was Clinton's fault back then




top topics



 
9

log in

join