Hogwash. I hope he issues all those pardons and especially the 2 border guards (Campean & Ramos) wrongly tried and convicted of doing nothing more than their job.
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:14 PM, Doc Holliday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > Impeach Bush To Stop Pardons > http://www.democrats.com/pardon?cid=ZGVtczM2OTY0OWRlbXM= > > 9214 of 100000 people have signed – see totals by state and > Congressional District. > President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney stand accused of > 39 grave and impeachable offenses, including war crimes, torture, > warrantless wiretapping, and outing a covert CIA operative. > > Most of these offenses are felonies for which Bush and Cheney can be > criminally prosecuted after they leave office. But prosecutions will > be impossible if Bush issues blanket pre-emptive pardons for Dick > Cheney, Scooter Libby, other senior officials, and even himself. > > Can Bush do this? Absolutely. Gerald Ford set the precedent in 1974 > when he gave Richard Nixon a blanket pre-emptive pardon for any crime > he "may have committed." > > Presidential pardon power is nearly unlimited under the Constitution. > We support efforts in Congress to outlaw pre-emptive or self-pardons, > but even if a bill passes Congress before Bush leave office, Bush will > certainly veto it. So how can we stop Bush's pardons? > > The Founding Fathers clearly anticipated a corrupt President might > pardon his co-conspirators, and specified impeachment as the remedy. > > George Mason, the father of the Bill of Rights, argued at the > Constitutional Convention that the President might use his pardoning > power to "pardon crimes which were advised by himself" or, before > indictment or conviction, "to stop inquiry and prevent detection." > > James Madison, the father of the U.S. Constitution, added that "if the > President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and > there be grounds to believe he will shelter [pardon] him, the House of > Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty." > > As your constituent, I urge you to impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney > before they issue pardons. But if that fails, I urge you to impeach > George Bush and Dick Cheney afterwards for issuing pardons that > constitute obstruction of justice and abuse of power. > > A post-inaugural impeachment would prohibit those impeached from ever > holding federal office, either elected or appointed. Arguably, > impeachment would also nullify pre-impeachment pardons and permit > prosecutions. Finally, impeachment would tell future Presidents they > cannot abuse their pardon power to put themselves above the law. > > In 1776, Thomas Paine famously wrote, "in America, the law is King." > Congress must not allow a President to commit crimes with impunity, or > it makes the President a dictator - or a King. > > Peace, > Doc > > On Nov 13, 7:58 pm, Jim Willis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Since Obama abdicated honesty by claiming to be the tax slasher and > > defender of the universe apparently he, "and his ilk" are attempting > > to double down; gut shoot the inside straight and blanket themselves > > in constitutional credence. Honestly, this takes more cajones than an > > elephant about to mount Rosie O'Donnell. Gee, even that picture makes > > me somewhat ill. > > > > For those of us paying attention to the Obama instead of gushing > > homage we've noticed a call from the chosen one and his supporters to > > a return to the constitution and those founding principals abiding > > within the text. To the huddled masses chanting, "yes we can" this > > communal soliloquy might fly yet, for we in the top ten percent, > > firing over 90% of neurons along our synapsetic highway this is the > > epitome of lipstick on a pig. > > > > Conservatives read our constitution much as liberals read a wine list > > with pinky finger outstretched. We know it, we get it and we are > > consumed by it. We believe it to be sacrosanct and unassailable. To > > we, the people, it is an inspired document of divine genesis. For > > liberals it is merely two ply on a scroll. > > > > We have witnessed testimony, wherein posited profundities postulated > > that his holiest Barack conjoined with the ACLU, will end the > > transgression of Bush II and restore constitutionality to these amber > > waves of grain upon which God shed his grace. Oh really? > > > > The ACLU was founded by a Communist, with communist ideals, communist > > goals, and they continue to impose a Communist like agenda on America > > daily. The founder of the ACLU, Roger Baldwin stated clearly… "My > > chief aversion is the system of greed, private profit, privilege and > > violence which makes up the control of the world today, and which has > > brought it to the tragic crisis of unprecedented hunger and > > unemployment Therefore, I am for Socialism, disarmament and > > ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself, I seek the social > > ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole > > control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal." > > This revelation on its face would be, "in all intellectual circles" > > game, set and match. Yet, draw near and prepare to be dazzled with > > this soon to be award winning composition, for in this endeavor, with > > talent on loan from Rush, I draw inspiration from the almighty and > > have only just begun. > > Federal Judge Phyllis Hamilton, "a Clinton appointee" recently upheld > > a ruling requiring seventh-grade students to pretend they're Muslims, > > wear Islamic garb, memorize verses from the Quran, pray to Allah and > > even to play "jihad games" in California public schools.(WND) > > > > The ACLU has refused to comment on the ruling except to say they find, > > "nothing actionable" in the ruling. Translation: the ACLU doesn't have > > a problem with it. If California public schools were requiring > > students to memorize Bible verses the ACLU would have lawyers kicking > > down the school doors and would be all over local school boards like > > Rosie O'Donnell on a baked ham. You just know they would. > > > > In 1989 the ACLU began a crusade to remove the Mount Soledad Cross > > located in the center of a Korean War Memorial in San Diego, > > California. The Cross was erected in 1954. While continuing a battle > > to have the Cross removed they have defended Muslims who have > > demanded, "Foot Basins" in airports, football stadiums and other > > public places. Foot Basins are used by Muslims in preparation for > > prayer. "Why are we constructing places of worship for them inside our > > airports?" said an airport official who requested anonymity. "Why are > > we catering to their rituals? We don't do it for any other > > religion."(WND) As Christians, let's ask airport officials for a > > chapel and see how long it takes for the ACLU to come to our aid. > > Waiting……….waiting…….. > > > > While absolutely berating pharmacists, who, "because of religious > > convictions" have refused to sell "Levonelle", commonly referred to as > > the morning after pill. The ACLU defends Muslim taxi drivers who have > > refused to carry passengers who have been drinking alcohol or possess > > alcohol. The ACLU has even gone as far as to defend the rights of > > Muslim taxi drivers to refuse to carry blind patrons who avail > > themselves of a Seeing Eye dog. The Islamic religion considers dogs > > unclean. If Timmy's in the well does it matter if Lassie has had a > > bath? In a related case, it wasn't a surprise when the ACLU came to > > the defense of Muslims employed at Target stores who refused to scan > > pork products. Got Bacon? > > > > At this point I imagine liberal foreheads to be throbbing and I know > > just how to push them over the edge. Abortion, utter the word and > > liberals go running for a soapbox. In 1973 the United States Supreme > > Court found a right to privacy in the constitution where one did not > > exist. Since then over 40 million abortions have been performed. > > Abortion angers conservatives on two fronts. We believe abortion to be > > immoral and an adulteration of our constitution. > > > > The ACLU, "with a nod from the courts" has taken abortion out of the > > public debate, "or so they thought" and relegated this most important > > decision to nine justices and not to the people. Now, the ACLU is > > going after the tax exempt status of churches who dare speak out > > against abortion on moral grounds, calling such speech political. In > > 1987, the ACLU Foundation and the New York Civil Liberties Union filed > > an amicus brief in support of Abortion Rights Mobilization to secure > > standing in a suit challenging the tax exempt status of the Catholic > > Church. The Catholic Church was charged with violating its tax-exempt > > status by taking a stand against abortion. This is important and > > deserving of explanation. First the ACLU takes a pro-abortion stance > > and asks for judicial relief insomuch as abortion is a legal question > > to be removed from the political debate. After a Supreme Court > > affirmation of this argument the ACLU reverses itself and makes the > > wild claim that abortion is a political topic and those who would > > engage in the abortion debate are involved in political speech. That > > takes chutzpah folks. > > The evidence is overwhelming and I could continue to list it for days. > > The ACLU is anti-Christianity and anti-American. There can be no other > > conclusion and those who would argue differently are either an order > > of French fries short of a happy meal of need to have their > > medications refilled. > > > > Now; as to liberals suddenly drawing a bright red line as to > > constitutionality, this is just too damn easy, really it is. If you > > are a liberal with asthma, get your inhaler. If you're a leftist > > alcoholic, get your ripple. And, if you're Oprah, go shopping; you > > won't understand this. > > > > Article one, two and three provides for all federal powers allowed to > > our most benevolent government. {Sarcasm Mine} In little words, for > > you liberal little people those powers are these; provide for a common > > defense, negotiate international treaties and lastly, to settle > > disputes between the states in the arena of commerce. Period! To > > simplify; all of these sanctimonious social engineering programs > > exalted by Barry don't pass the smell test or any constitutional one. > > Sorry, you anti-Zionist Zombies, you lose. Better luck next time. But > > hey, thanks for playing. > > Conservative Springfield 13 Nov 08 > > > -- *~@):~{> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
