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.

 

NSA slayer goes on Obama Impeachment Hunt

page: 1
40
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+21 more 
posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:35 AM
link   

NEW YORK – Fresh from winning a restraining order against the National Security Agency’s telephone surveillance, attorney Larry Klayman declared that the misdeeds of Richard Nixon, who resigned in disgrace, pale in comparison to President Obama’s.

“In Watergate, Richard Nixon faced impeachment for breaking into the offices of the chairman of the Democratic National Party,” Klayman told WND in an interview.

“Obama has broken into the homes of 300 million Americans.”

WND asked Klayman if he was calling for the impeachment of Obama.

“Yes,” Klayman responded. “The NSA and the Obama administration are engaging in criminal behavior, and both are lying.”

Most Outrageous Violation Of Constitutional Rights


I know some are skeptical of the source, but it would be nice if it's true.

Klayman charged that Obama’s criminal violations in the NSA case are more egregious than Nixon’s violations of law in Watergate.

“Nixon did not have Obama’s NSA,” Klayman said. “Both Nixon and Obama lied repeatedly to the American public after they got caught, but Nixon did not have Obama’s technology.”

Klayman also praised the courage of Judge Richard Leon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, who ordered injunctive relief in the case, staying the order only long enough to permit the government a timely appeal.


Just the other day we were having a discussion of Watergate VS. Obama and his laundry list of never ending scandals, so this grabbed my interest.
Of course, nothing will probably come of it but at least some one has the cahones to try go against Obama and the NSA.


What say you ATS?

Impeachable offenses or not?
Or do you even care?







edit on 18-12-2013 by snarky412 because: fix link

edit on 18-12-2013 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 

I'd say so. Won't see anything about an impeachment until the 2014 Senate elections are concluded. If the percentage of opponents is insufficient for trial ... and the trial will result in an acquittal, there's not much reason to put the country through a wringer.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 


Impeachable, the evidence suggests so. Will he be impeached? That's not likely. My crystal ball shows Mr. President skating through the rest of his term.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Snarl
reply to post by snarky412
 

I'd say so. Won't see anything about an impeachment until the 2014 Senate elections are concluded. If the percentage of opponents is insufficient for trial ... and the trial will result in an acquittal, there's not much reason to put the country through a wringer.



Hope he doesn't end up in a car crash or die of a heart attack any time soon


-------

ETA: If he does uncover credible intel that implicates Obama/Holder, I hope he keeps a record of it, places it in a safety deposit box with instructions to 'release to every MSM out there and let them air it' in case of an early death before he gets to finish the investigation




edit on 18-12-2013 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:43 AM
link   
I say Klayman's life expectancy has been grievously shortened.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:44 AM
link   

tamusan
reply to post by snarky412
 


Impeachable, the evidence suggests so. Will he be impeached? That's not likely. My crystal ball shows Mr. President skating through the rest of his term.


Yeah, probably so

Pretty bad that his poll numbers [disapprove] are lower than Bush's at this same time
Obama and his administration simply can't be trusted.

Transparent like mudd!!



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 





Transparent like mudd!!


Exactly. That's why I have little or no respect left for President Obama, and I'm one of the morans who voted for him. Twice
I had never voted democrat before. I can be certain to never do it again. I keep trying to maintain a positive attitude, but I can't force a delusion upon my own mind. The pipers music has lost effect.

I don't know where to start with my list of dissapointments. I'll poke at the ACA with a stick. One of my friends is smart enough to graduate from medical school, but that didn't make it easy for her to understand her new insurance options. I had to help her consider her options, because it wasn't easy for her to figure out which plan she should choose, and what it would cover.
edit on 18-12-2013 by tamusan because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   
I reckon a lot of things berrys been up to are damn near impeachable, but at the same time I'm not going to be the first to rally behind one.. Joe Biden as someone with power would not be a smart idea for anyone... and if he were to get impeached himself, John Boehners a shady charcter himself (and next in line after biden). I don't know, the futures not looking too bright no matter where this one goes



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   
May was well go for a three in a row record and put baby Bush on the list for impeachment (after the fact) since quite a bit of what's being complained about got started under his watch.

We'll then have Clinton, Bush, and Obama all in a row, and maybe we can make it into a tradition and impeach the next guy, or gal, whoever they are, just on principal, and after that just make it a requirement to be in office.






posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by AliceBleachWhite
 


I'll second that motion.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 03:29 AM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 





Pretty bad that his poll numbers [disapprove] are lower than Bush's at this same time
Obama and his administration simply can't be trusted.

Transparent like mudd!!


If Obama is impeached, Bush, Chaney & Rumsfeld should at least be tried for war crimes. To ignore a previous administrations impeachable offenses to go unpunished is not holding all elected officials to the same level of justice. The American public's political party affiliations and the media, continue to close an eye to political corruption and criminal activities engaged by both parties. Just because some elected officials no longer hold office, does not mean they should be free from prosecution. This is clearly an example of the elite and powerful being above the law.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   

WeRpeons
reply to post by snarky412
 





Pretty bad that his poll numbers [disapprove] are lower than Bush's at this same time
Obama and his administration simply can't be trusted.

Transparent like mudd!!


If Obama is impeached, Bush, Chaney & Rumsfeld should at least be tried for war crimes. To ignore a previous administrations impeachable offenses to go unpunished is not holding all elected officials to the same level of justice. The American public's political party affiliations and the media, continue to close an eye to political corruption and criminal activities engaged by both parties. Just because some elected officials no longer hold office, does not mean they should be free from prosecution. This is clearly an example of the elite and powerful being above the law.



Oh I agree.....and as I recall, similar threats were made about Bush.

Clinton's impeachment trial [Monica Lewinsky] I thought was far fetched.
Crude and tacky, but not worth wasting tax payers money over.

As I [we] stated already, nothing will come of this, it's just too complex and complicated.
To many layers to peel back.

But Obama has by far the most numerous scandals, which some may consider as bad if not worse than war crimes....which many believe Obama himself is guilty of with the drone attacks

Being as Obama is Commander in Chief , and this is happening under his watch, that is why his administration is being held responsible.

If he really doesn't know what's going on in his administration, then that is worse IMO
Maybe he needs to actually attend more cabinet meetings rather than getting them sent via
e-mail/blackberry
If he skips over memos like many posters skip comments in a thread, then I can see why he's not in the loop
Not the same thing as being there, feeling the mood and reading people's body language.

Yep, he gets the award for his 'laundry list' of fiasco's, cover-ups, half truths & flat out lies, but no, he'll never be impeached.
He will however, have this cloud hanging over his head, and if he keeps up with this blatant deception to the public, his legacy won't have a happy ending.



edit on 18-12-2013 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 05:02 AM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 


Hmmm.. Interesting on this one, OP! I was just talking to a favorite Aunt yesterday that had been very active with The Tea Party and she'd asked what I thought could ever come to impeachment. This hadn't even crossed my mind ... but, wait? Hold the phone? I think he's onto something here and ..wow... this might have legs nothing else can or will.

Everything else, including Benghazi, has little strings out that touch all kinds of other people that really work hard to insure those scandals die hard and quickly. The NSA? Awwww.... now that is a case in itself, isn't it? It's among the most secret organizations on Earth and absolutely within the United States. They're answerable to the Director of the NSA ...who is answerable to....?

Hey! The buck DOES stop somewhere here, doesn't it? Like no other issue. This buck stops right in the center of Obama's desk. Like a bad day that just won't end.
edit on 18-12-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 


If they didn't impeach George Dubya, they certainly won't impeach Obama.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 07:22 AM
link   
No impeachment.

Why?

Like professional wrestling, on stage, they (R's and D's) may be foes and battle continuously.

But behind the curtain?

They are all "good buds".



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Oh, my fellow Bunny...but ask yourself? When it comes down to who goes under the bus between U.S. Intelligence and a U.S. President? Who does history seem to suggest was chosen? It's ironic to see the situation come up quite how it is today, given the Anniversary and all, and this isn't the 60s for the way things were done back then....

Still... If the agency which basically has the dirt on everyone in ways that would have made J Edgar Hoover cry privacy violation is facing a Congressional chopping block? I think Obama gets shoved out to volunteer first. That would be impeachment, and perhaps the only way circumstances could ever fall together for that to happen.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


But the NSA is holding all the cards (dirt) on those that would potentially impeach Obama.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 07:53 AM
link   
if people with actual political and legislative power, are doing nothing to stop this, why would you think that the common man would risk his very existence to do the same. the German people during the 30's were smart enough to know what was going on, but their power to force change was quickly, and in most of the early 30's, quietly dealt with. after several demonstrations over the coming years, of the Nazi party's massive and ever-increasing brutal subjugation of the population, those who saw the writing on the wall got the hell out of Germany, the innocents that stayed behind paid the consequences.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 09:14 AM
link   


What say you ATS?

Impeachable offenses or not?

Impeachable offenses are whatever the House decides they are, but, there is no chance of the Senate picking up a 2/3 republican majority by the end of Obama's term, so no, this will not happen.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 


There is a difference.

Nixon did what he did with the help of my former neighbor hunt.

the nsa has been doing this since before Obama was in office.

and more than likely. Obama wasn't told or was under a need to know basis. plausible deniability.

so yeah the two cases are not the same. situations are different



new topics

top topics



 
40
<<   2 >>

log in

join