User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41

Thread: Obama Impeachment

  1. #31
    Points: 40,744, Level: 49
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 1,106
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered25000 Experience Points
    patrickt's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    9417
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    U. S. Citizien living in Oaxaca
    Posts
    9,084
    Points
    40,744
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    474
    Thanked 3,283x in 2,336 Posts
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    106
    JohnAdams:, it's been a little over three hours since your snotty and inaccurate message about impeachment. I'm still waiting for a rebuttal or some evidence you have to present to back up your idiocy.

    But, don't despair. I'm not holding my breath.

  2. #32
    Points: 11,211, Level: 25
    Level completed: 41%, Points required for next Level: 539
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    SocialOverdrive1 year registered10000 Experience Points
    truthmatters's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    -689
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,479
    Points
    11,211
    Level
    25
    Thanks Given
    324
    Thanked 125x in 113 Posts
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    did the American people just tell you they wanted Obama impeached?


    you people are blind

  3. #33
    Points: 2,141, Level: 10
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 109
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Social3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    JohnAdams's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    529
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    386
    Points
    2,141
    Level
    10
    Thanks Given
    23
    Thanked 173x in 109 Posts
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by patrickt View Post
    "In the House of Representatives
    • The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee will propose a Resolution calling for the Judiciary Committee to begin a formal inquiry into the issue of impeachment.
    • Based on their inquiry, the Judiciary Committee will send another Resolution to the full House stating that impeachment is warranted and why (the Articles of Impeachment), or that impeachment is not called for.
    • The Full House (probably operating under special floor rules set by the House Rules Committee) will debate and vote on each Article of Impeachment.
    • Should any one of the Articles of Impeachment be approved by a simple majority vote, the President will be "impeached." However, being impeached is sort of like being indicted of a crime. There still has to be a trial, which is where the US Senate comes in.
    In the Senate
    • The Articles of Impeachment are received from the House.
    • The Senate formulates rules and procedures for holding a trial.
    • A trial will be held. The President will be represented by his lawyers. A select group of House members will serve as "prosecutors." The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (currently John G. Roberts) will preside with all 100 Senators acting as the jury.
    • The Senate will meet in private session to debate a verdict.
    • The Senate, in open session, will vote on a verdict. A 2/3 vote of the Senate will result in a conviction.
    • The Senate will vote to remove the President from office.
    • The Senate may also vote (by a simple majority) to prohibit the President from holding any public office in the future."
    http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepre...mpeachment.htm

    The problem isn't with what we don't know but rather with what nitwits know that's wrong. You are a pompous little nitwit, JohnAdams.


    Yes I may be pompous, in fact I know I can at times be downright so.

    But at least I unlike you and your fellow liberals, knew better than to cast my vote for this assclown in the first place nitwit.

    In fact had the liberal nitwits of your caliber done the same, four Americans wouldn't be dead in Benghazi, innocent Americans would not be sitting imprisoned for no other crime than that of criticizing islam in the United States, this Nation wouldn't have been taken to war unconstitutionally, and oh yeah, we wouldn't have a defense secretary who thinks it's the U.N. and not the Congress of the United States which has the power to delcare war.

    Had nitwits of your caliber been pompous enough to see THE OBAMA for what THE OBAMA really is, we would not today be spending our great great great grandkids over the cliff.

    Rushing to destroy, the longest lived, greatest, free Republic to ever exist in human history.

    Pompous enough for ya there liberal jackass?
    Last edited by JohnAdams; 11-07-2012 at 01:36 PM.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religiouspeople. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. ~Still waiting to see one of you liberals demonstrate that "separation of church and state" is a concept that is actually enumerated in our Constitution.

    And not just a liberal activist, legislate from the bench, fabrication.

  4. #34
    Points: 2,141, Level: 10
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 109
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Social3 months registered1000 Experience Points
    JohnAdams's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    529
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    386
    Points
    2,141
    Level
    10
    Thanks Given
    23
    Thanked 173x in 109 Posts
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by truthmatters View Post
    did the American people just tell you they wanted Obama impeached?


    you people are blind
    Why should that matter?

    Did what the people want matter in 2008 when the American people through their vote, as evidenced by the fact that it's no longer speaker Pelosi but rather speaker Boehner, rejected Obammycare?

    No.

    Furthermore, whether the people "like" this President or not, is irrelevant.

    Whether he was just re-elected or not is irrelevant too.

    He has broken our laws, and violated our Constitution. Note the period. (and note ladies and gents, these libbers do not even dispute that fact on the facts. As evidenced by the fact that they instead are making what are purely emotionally driven arguments as to why THE OBAMA should not be impeached.)

    Why is it again he should be any different than any other citizen who breaks our laws?

    Oh, thats right, because he's The Obama, and walks on water right libbers?
    Last edited by JohnAdams; 11-07-2012 at 01:27 PM.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religiouspeople. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. ~Still waiting to see one of you liberals demonstrate that "separation of church and state" is a concept that is actually enumerated in our Constitution.

    And not just a liberal activist, legislate from the bench, fabrication.

  5. #35
    Points: 40,744, Level: 49
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 1,106
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered25000 Experience Points
    patrickt's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    9417
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    U. S. Citizien living in Oaxaca
    Posts
    9,084
    Points
    40,744
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    474
    Thanked 3,283x in 2,336 Posts
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    106
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnAdams View Post
    Once the charges are proffered by the HOUSE, to the Senate, contrary to your little liberal diatribe asshat, it's gone from the trial phase to the penalty phase. At that point the Senate must either censure him, or remove the President from office. Oh and while I may very well be pompous, at least I can comprehend what I read jackass.
    Sorry, JohnAdams, but I diidn't realize you're a developmentally disabled Obamabot. Good-bye.

  6. #36
    Points: 16,522, Level: 31
    Level completed: 8%, Points required for next Level: 928
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    Social1 year registered10000 Experience Points
    shaarona's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    2473
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Southeast, USA
    Posts
    4,315
    Points
    16,522
    Level
    31
    Thanks Given
    610
    Thanked 443x in 383 Posts
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    30
    If you slash funding for Embassy Security, you can hrdly blame the State Dept or Obama.

    the cuts sought by Congress have been steep since the new House sat in 2011.The Worldwide Security Protection program (WSP), which the government says provides "core funding for the protection of life, property, and information of the Department of State," and a separate embassy security and construction budget, which in part improves fortifications, have both been under fire.
    "In 2011 they came in and passed a continuing resolution for the remainder of that fiscal year. The House proposed $70 million cut in the WSP and they proposed a $204 million cut in Embassy security," says Mr. Lilly. "Then the next year, fiscal 2012, they cut worldwide security by $145 million and embassy security by $376 million. This year's bill is the same thing all over again. The House has cut the worldwide security budget $149 million below the request."
    Roughly 260 installations

    That's not the actual budget – simply the negotiating position of Congress. The Senate and the President have sought more money than the House for embassy security, but the horse-trading means that the State Department ends up with less than it requested. For instance, in the fiscal 2012 budget, the cuts over the State Departments' request were "whittled back by the Senate," he says, to $109 million for WSP and $131 million for embassy security.
    "We've got something like 260 embassies and consulates around the world, and there's a remarkable number of them that aren't anywhere close to Inman standards and are still particularly dangerous," says Lilly. "Inman standards" refers to the report written by Admiral Bobby Ray Inman on US building security abroad after the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut that left 241 US troops and 58 French soldiers dead.
    Nearly 30 years later, many US missions abroad don't meet the code.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backc...udget/(page)/2

  7. #37
    Points: 13,027, Level: 27
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 523
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second Class3 months registered10000 Experience Points
    coolwalker's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    2069
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Norfolk, Virginia
    Posts
    2,642
    Points
    13,027
    Level
    27
    Thanks Given
    713
    Thanked 663x in 504 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by shaarona View Post
    If you slash funding for Embassy Security, you can hrdly blame the State Dept or Obama.

    the cuts sought by Congress have been steep since the new House sat in 2011.The Worldwide Security Protection program (WSP), which the government says provides "core funding for the protection of life, property, and information of the Department of State," and a separate embassy security and construction budget, which in part improves fortifications, have both been under fire.
    "In 2011 they came in and passed a continuing resolution for the remainder of that fiscal year. The House proposed $70 million cut in the WSP and they proposed a $204 million cut in Embassy security," says Mr. Lilly. "Then the next year, fiscal 2012, they cut worldwide security by $145 million and embassy security by $376 million. This year's bill is the same thing all over again. The House has cut the worldwide security budget $149 million below the request."
    Roughly 260 installations

    That's not the actual budget – simply the negotiating position of Congress. The Senate and the President have sought more money than the House for embassy security, but the horse-trading means that the State Department ends up with less than it requested. For instance, in the fiscal 2012 budget, the cuts over the State Departments' request were "whittled back by the Senate," he says, to $109 million for WSP and $131 million for embassy security.
    "We've got something like 260 embassies and consulates around the world, and there's a remarkable number of them that aren't anywhere close to Inman standards and are still particularly dangerous," says Lilly. "Inman standards" refers to the report written by Admiral Bobby Ray Inman on US building security abroad after the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut that left 241 US troops and 58 French soldiers dead.
    Nearly 30 years later, many US missions abroad don't meet the code.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backc...udget/(page)/2
    When people are dying you don't look at a budget, you respond. There were men and weapons available to do the job...the job itself was ignored and hidden under a thin viel called budget.



  8. #38
    Points: 40,744, Level: 49
    Level completed: 35%, Points required for next Level: 1,106
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered25000 Experience Points
    patrickt's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    9417
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    U. S. Citizien living in Oaxaca
    Posts
    9,084
    Points
    40,744
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    474
    Thanked 3,283x in 2,336 Posts
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    106
    Shaarona, we are well aware that for some people you can never, ever, dare blame President Obama for anything.

  9. #39
    V.I.P
    Points: 82,319, Level: 69
    Level completed: 95%, Points required for next Level: 131
    Overall activity: 58.0%
    Achievements:
    Social1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Mainecoons's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    16526
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    15,428
    Points
    82,319
    Level
    69
    Thanks Given
    9,290
    Thanked 5,778x in 4,003 Posts
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    183
    Not going to happen, John. Too many remember how Clinton turned that on them.

  10. #40
    tPF Moderator
    Original Ranter
    V.I.P
    Points: 180,689, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.8%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Peter1469's Avatar Moderator Representative
    Karma
    39773
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    39,518
    Points
    180,689
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    16,840
    Thanked 11,971x in 8,744 Posts
    Mentioned
    836 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    440
    Obama may well be impeached over Benghazi- and he certainly should be. But the Senate would never convict him since the Senate is corrupt.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    roadmaster (11-07-2012)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Forum Topsite Critical Acclaim
Top Ron Paul Sites - Ranking the best Ron Paul related Freedom and Liberty Websites
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO