http://www.rightsidenews.com/2011060213722/editorial/us-opinion-and-editoria
l/forget-weinergate-obama-is-impeachable-over-libya.html?utm_source=Right+Si
de+News
<http://www.rightsidenews.com/2011060213722/editorial/us-opinion-and-editori
al/forget-weinergate-obama-is-impeachable-over-libya.html?utm_source=Right+S
ide+News&utm_campaign=ec12c75df2-daily-rss-newsletter&utm_medium=email>
&utm_campaign=ec12c75df2-daily-rss-newsletter&utm_medium=email

 

Forget Weinergate:  Obama is Impeachable Over Libya 

Thursday, 02 June 2011 18:26 Cliff Kincaid 

 
<http://www.rightsidenews.com/component/option,com_mailto/link,c2058e4a55ad5
eef25222e77cbc1ed36851d4740/tmpl,component/> E-mail
<http://www.rightsidenews.com/2011060213722/editorial/us-opinion-and-editori
al/forget-weinergate-obama-is-impeachable-over-libya/print.html> Print

If you want an indication of why Republicans may lose to Obama in 2012, look
at the pass they are giving him over his illegal war in Libya. Nothing is
more important than committing a nation to war. The military intervention
could be the basis of impeachment charges. But Republican leaders in the
House-and Republican Senator John McCain in the Senate-don't want to hold
Obama accountable.

We have pointed out
<http://www.aim.org/aim-column/washington-post-whitewashes-obama%E2%80%99s-i
llegal-war/>  that the war is illegal and that the media-and now the House
Republican leaders-have failed to acknowledge the facts..

On the other hand, there is growing media fascination with "Weinergate," in
which the Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner has obviously stonewalled about the
origin and distribution of a lewd photo sent to a coed..

In contrast to the Weiner affair, the facts about Obama's violations of the
law and the Constitution are clear..

If Weiner should be held accountable for an embarrassing sexual matter,
which may or may not result in his resignation, why not enforce the law and
the Constitution when the president goes to war?.

Columnist Ann Coulter jokes that the Weiner case should go to small claims
court. Obama's war in Libya is a matter of the highest constitutional
importance and not a joking matter..

House leaders could bring impeachment charges. Instead, they want to avoid
doing their duty.

The Wall Street Journal reports
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303657404576359913752442684.h
tml>  that "House Republican leaders on Wednesday abruptly canceled a vote
on a resolution forcing U.S. withdrawal from Libya amid signs" that it would
pass. House GOP leaders "fend off vote on Libya resolution," the Washington
Post proclaims..

"U.S. House leaders pulled a bill calling for the U.S. military to withdraw
from Libya after a group of liberals and conservatives said they back the
measure," UPI noted..

In the Senate, McCain, who has turned into an advocate for Al-Jazeera, has
been an enthusiastic supporter of the war, conducted with the approval of
the Arab League and the United Nations but not Congress. Al-Jazeera,
committed to the victory of the Muslim Brotherhood in the region, openly
backs the "pro-democracy fighters" in Libya, playing down their links to
al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups..

Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, once a prime sponsor of anti-American
terrorism, gave up his terrorist aims and nuclear program after the U.S.
invaded Iraq and removed Saddam Hussein in 2003. Gaddafi thought he might be
the next target. Little did he know that he would be targeted by a liberal
U.S. President enforcing a novel U.N. concept known as the "responsibility
to protect.".

The evidence is overwhelming, even though most of the media will not cover
it, that Obama's war in Libya is illegal and unconstitutional. Columnist
George Will got most of it right in a recent column, "Is Obama Above the
Law?
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-obama-above-the-law/2011/05/26/AG
L5zyCH_story.html> " The war is a violation of the War Powers Act, which
says the president can go to war on his own only if there is an imminent
threat to the U.S. and there is a 60-day deadline for the withdrawal of
forces..

Obama has violated both provisions of the law. There was no direct or
immediate threat to the U.S. from Libya and Obama has ignored the 60-day
deadline for approval from the Congress..

George Will notes that McCain has said that no president "has ever
recognized the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, and neither do I. So
I don't feel bound by any deadline.".

Will commented, "Oh? No law is actually a law if presidents and senators do
not 'recognize' it? Now, there is an interesting alternative to judicial
review, and an indicator of how executive aggrandizement and legislative
dereliction of duty degrade the rule of law.".

Rather than hold Obama accountable, the Journal says that "Republican
leaders are working to come up with alternatives that are less far-reaching
than the Kucinich provision to allow lawmakers to vent their displeasure.".

The Kucinich provision, named for Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), itself falls
short of the articles of impeachment that are required. It simply requires
the President to remove U.S. armed forces from Libya..

Known as House Concurrent Resolution 51, the text includes:.

"Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers
Resolution, to remove the United States Armed Forces from Libya..

"Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),.

"SECTION 1. REMOVAL OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM LIBYA..

"Pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(c)),
Congress directs the President to remove the United States Armed Forces from
Libya by not later than the date that is 15 days after the date of the
adoption of this concurrent resolution.".

Even with this attempt to give Obama more time to comply, Kucinich says that
Obama and House Republican leaders "feel the need to buy even more time to
shore up support for the War in Libya." He says they pulled the bill because
they realized it would pass..

He goes on, "The House Leadership has communicated to me via email that the
vote on Libya will be postponed 'in an effort to compel more information and
consultation' from the Administration. I have been asked to provide input
for the information which the House will seek from the Administration.".

So the House Republican leaders are content to beg for information from
Obama in order to avoid coming to grips with his violations of the law and
the Constitution..

Lawyer Bruce Fein drafted an article of impeachment
<http://www.politico.com/static/PPM186_articlesofimpeachment_040611.html> ,
noted by Politico shortly the war commenced, which contends, "In all of
this, President Barack Obama has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as
President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great
prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the
people of the United States.".

Joining liberal Democrat Kucinich in this effort is conservative Republican
Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana. He read the provisions
<http://burton.house.gov/posts/rep-dan-burton-s-statement-on-libya-at-foreig
n-affairs-committee-hearing>  of the law at a House Foreign Affairs
Committee hearing and declared that Obama was in violation of them..

In a March 28, 2011, statement
<http://burton.house.gov/posts/rep-dan-burton-responds-to-president-obamas-a
ddress-on-libya> , he said, "When President Obama addressed the American
people this evening to explain his decision to launch Operation Odyssey
Dawn, the American-led war in Libya, I was waiting for him to explain why
after three weeks of inaction the situation in Libya suddenly compelled the
President to attack Libya with little congressional consultation and zero
congressional approval; although he apparently had enough time to consult
and get approval from the United Nations and the Arab League..

"I'm still waiting for an answer. The whole northern tier of Africa, as well
as the Middle East is blowing up right now and I want to protect peoples'
lives, but what makes the Libyan crisis different from Yemen or Syria or
Darfur or Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge?".

He noted that back in 2007 then-Senator Obama loudly declared that "The
President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally
authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an
actual or imminent threat to the nation.".

Burton commented, "Libya does not and did not pose such a threat; and
nothing the President said tonight convinced me otherwise. Under the
circumstances, I wonder what 2007's Senator Obama would say to 2011's
President Obama if he had the chance?".

But the matter goes far beyond matters of hypocrisy to issues affecting the
law and the Constitution..

Out of deference to Obama and his Republican partners, the media won't dare
call it a constitutional crisis.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
discuss-os...@yahoogroups.com.
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
biso...@intellnet.org

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    osint-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
  Unsubscribe:  osint-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    osint-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
    osint-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    osint-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to