You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Obama Dares GOP: Go Ahead, 'Have a Vote on Whether What I'm Doing Is Legal--I Will Veto'
2015-02-27
[MRCTV.ORG] Pres. Obama is daring Republicans to vote on whether or not his executive actions are legal.

Discussing opposition to his executive amnesty orders at an immigration town hall Wednesday, Obama said he would veto the vote because his actions are "the right thing to do":

"So in the short term, if Mr. McConnell, the leader of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House, John It is not pronounced 'Boner!' Boehner
... the occasionally weepy leader of House Republicans...
, want to have a vote on whether what I'm doing is legal or not, they can have that vote. I will veto that vote, because I'm absolutely confident that what we're doing is the right thing to do."

Obama argued that he has merely "expanded my authorities" -- not broken any laws:

"What we've done is we've expanded my authorities under executive action and prosecutorial discretion as far as we can legally under the existing statute, the existing law. And so now the question is, how can we get a law passed."
Posted by:Fred

#14  The Bammer wants to see iff his GOP-DEM rivals will take the matter to the Fed Courts, i.e. Fed District Court, + ultimately the USSC as only the USSC can decide on the Contitutionality of Presidential Executive Privelege/Action.

IMO the Bammer doesn't care about any Capitol or Congressional vote - as long as his Admin are not taken before a Fed District Court or espec the USSC, HIS EXECUTIVE ACTIONS ARE LEGAL, + ARE CONSTITUTIONAL, HENCE HIS POLICIES + GUIDELINES ARE SUCH ALSO. AS LONG AS HIS ADMIN CAN SHOW THAT HIS EXECUTIVE ACTIONS DOESN'T VIOLATE "SEPARATION OF POWERS, CFR, US CONSTITUTION, ETC. LEGAL PRECEDENTS, THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH = FEDERAL AGENCIES WILL HAVE TO FOLLOW-N-OBEY HIS DECISIONS.

NO ANTI-BAMMER USSC DECISION = OBAMA + ANTI-US GLOBALISTS WIN.

POTUS Eisenhower followed US Law at the time + wasn't afraid to deport illegal immigrants ASAP or en masse' - didn't even think about it. NO such thing as waiting 10 or 20 years or entire Lifetimes to decide iff an illegal was an illegal.

Nowadays the Deadly Hollow-Points are for use agz Americans; while Amerikans + Domestic, Foreign Jihadis merit the Rubber Bullets + Tasers.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2015-02-27 22:11  

#13  
Posted by: Hupineger Glomomp52169   2015-02-27 20:21  

#12  It's like a bunch of suburban school boys found themselves in a Chicago back alley. They don't have a clue.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2015-02-27 13:46  

#11  I'd like to suggest that Republicans need to take the gloves off with this guy. It's nice to talk about remaining civil and respecting his office, but when he openly declares his contempt for such things, and the rule of law in general, then you have been handed a free license to fight dirty. Use it. Or lose.
Posted by: Iblis   2015-02-27 12:59  

#10  Republicans need to stop sending him money. They need to stop worrying about what the press will say if the government shuts down due to lack of funds. This is important enough that they need to stop worrying about whether or not they will get re-elected and do the right thing. I myself cannot keep voting Republican for exactly the opposite reason that many of them seem to fear. I want them the shut the damn thing down. But it seems they want amnesty just as much as Obama does so they won't do anything. I'm finished with them. The Republicans have lost me.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2015-02-27 12:25  

#9  Have a Vote on Whether What I'm Doing Is Legal

...except that the immunities of office disappear when rampant and blatant disregard of the law occur. Subjecting the individual to suits* and prosecution upon leaving office.

* remember o'Bill claimed immunity too. Didn't work out that way in the trial.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2015-02-27 12:22  

#8  In the past this would have been labelled a constitutional crisis and impeachment would have been the remedy. Unfortunately, our Dear (Loss) Leader is the equivalent of what the tort lawyers call "judgement proof", by virtue of his tan.
Posted by: Albert Pelosi2674   2015-02-27 12:09  

#7  Some things take time. This is going to be one of them. Among other things, to vote in people with the right attitude, who will eventually replace the current leadership.

The system was designed to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary, which is why at the the moment our senior politicians as a group are considerably more liberal than the voters. On the other hand, look how many of the most liberal have been voted out in recent years, replaced by conservative Republicans, many with military experience, persons of colour, females, etc.
Posted by: trailing wife   2015-02-27 11:44  

#6  So if he vetoes that vote, along with him going against what a judge rules on immigration, wouldn't that pretty much be saying that the whole checks and balances thing is over with?
Posted by: chris   2015-02-27 10:28  

#5  
No. We don't go there.
Posted by: DarthVader   2015-02-27 10:15  

#4  IMHO, the Republican electorate is comprised of intelligent and see-through-the-BS people but with incredibly inept leadership. The Democrats have the opposite set of circumstances.

So far, this has worked very well for the Dems.
Posted by: Blackbeard Elmereck7359   2015-02-27 09:15  

#3  FOAD
Posted by: newc   2015-02-27 00:38  

#2  Repubs leadership is gutless. McConnell especially is a d**kless wonder - he got folded over like an envelope.
Posted by: OldSpook   2015-02-27 00:26  

#1  Truth be told, I rather see this from the Bammer than for US GOP-Dem Politicos to keep voting or supporting Amnesty for illegals decade after decade, Admin after Admin, etc. while calling it everything or anything but Amnesty.

I HAVE TO RESPECT THE BAMMER FOR THAT.

Its what the Country gets or deserves for routinely re-electing Wafflers as National Leaders.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2015-02-27 00:18  

00:00