Comments on: Should Pres. Obama be Detained for Violating the NDAA?

By: Roberto Benitez

Roberto Benitez — Sun, 23 Sep 2012 08:48:40 +0000

@DanChristopher I can understand your concern for the Constitution. What I don’t understand is your disrespect of the Bible. It seems you have a hatred for those who are called the apple of God’s eye, the Jews. And please remember, Jesus was a Jew.

By: Roberto Benitez

Roberto Benitez — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 12:30:21 +0000

@WereAllScrewed @Roberto Benitez Please read the Constitution. The only way to remove the person occupying the presidency is through impeachment and conviction or voting the person out of office. There’re no other provisions in the Constitution for removal of a president.
This is further supported by an appellate ruling that only after the Electoral College has voted and before a winner takes office can that winner’s eligibility be challenged by Congress. It’s a bad ruling but it is what it is.
In addition, to convict and remove a president by the Senate it takes 66 votes. Hence I wrote that the Democrats would never vote for conviction of a fellow Democrat even if there was a murder at the WH.
That’s why we need an Amendment requiring proof of meeting eligibility requirements for any federal office for running for or being appointed to such. We also need an Amendment defining precisely what constitutes a natural born citizen and excluding anchor babies from automatic citizenship.
However, I hope you’re right about the change to the makeup of the Senate although I don’t see taking 66 seats there. Still, if Mr. (intentional) Obama is defeated, there’s little chance he’d be jailed for any crime although perhaps he should be if it were later proven in court he wasn’t a natural born US citizen. We’re not like a lot of other countries where there’re frequent jailings of the opposition and that’s as it should be. As it is, we have Obama using the IRS and SEC to intimidate the opposition.

By: Roberto Benitez

Roberto Benitez — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 12:29:28 +0000

@WereAllScrewed @Roberto Benitez Please read the Constitution. The only way to remove the person occupying the presidency is through impeachment and conviction or voting the person out of office. There’re no other provisions in the Constitution for removal of a president.

This is further supported by an appellate ruling that only after the Electoral College has voted and before a winner takes office can that winner’s eligibility be challenged by Congress. It’s a bad ruling but it is what it is.

In addition, to convict and remove a president by the Senate it takes 66 votes. Hence I wrote that the Democrats would never vote for conviction of a fellow Democrat even if there was a murder at the WH.

That’s why we need an Amendment requiring proof of meeting eligibility requirements for any federal office for running for or being appointed to such. We also need an Amendment defining precisely what constitutes a natural born citizen and excluding anchor babies from automatic citizenship.

However, I hope you’re right about the change to the makeup of the Senate although I don’t see taking 66 seats there. Still, if Mr. (intentional) Obama is defeated, there’s little chance he’d be jailed for any crime although perhaps he should be if it were later proven in court he wasn’t a natural born US citizen. We’re not like a lot of other countries where there’re frequent jailings of the opposition and that’s as it should be. As it is, we have Obama using the IRS and SEC to intimidate the opposition.

By: WereAllScrewed

WereAllScrewed — Thu, 20 Sep 2012 05:19:28 +0000

@Roberto Benitez You cannot IMPEACH OBAMA because he is not a “Legitimate President” (since he does not meet the Citizenship requirements he is a USURPER, impeachment only applies to legitimate office holders, he can however be imprisoned for what he has done) and OBTW the Democrat controlled Senate would never vote for impeachment anyway. I believe the makeup of the Senate will change after the Election, regardless of whether he gets the boot or re-elected he will be facing some very real problems.

By: DanChristopher

DanChristopher — Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:48:14 +0000

@Roberto Benitez Roberto…
Yes, you are correct. Besides, it would be the President who would “make the call”.
Further, w/ re: to the Legislature…Socialist and Neo-Con…they gave us ObamaCare, NDAA, HR 347, HR 645…I am shocked the 2nd Amend. still stands. Give then time!
Last night, I viewed: 2016 OBAMA’S AMERICA. Even for someone as informed, as I am… really frightening. We all know about the economy, the illegal wars, and the attacks against the Constitution…but, the reduction (of USA only!!!) of our nuclear weapons stock-pile…from 5,000 to 1,500…and plans to eliminate them completely!!!! He is making enemies throughout the world…and dis-arming us..simultaneously!!!! And yet…Romney speaks NOT (a) word about it!?!?!? Can you say, NEW WORLD ORDER???? They all, are treasonous maggots!

By: Roberto Benitez

Roberto Benitez — Tue, 21 Aug 2012 09:43:57 +0000

For an organization that purports to support the Constitution, posting the question, “Should Pres. Obama be Detained for Violating the NDAA?” is ludicrous. We can’t arrest and imprison a president without FIRST IMPEACHING him.

In addition, does anyone here really think that the Democrat controlled Senate would vote to convict Mr. (intentional) Obama for anything short or murder at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., and maybe not even then even if caught in flagrante delicto?

By: DanChristopher

DanChristopher — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:45:55 +0000

Forget all the side-shows. Read NDAA. It takes our rights! The elimination of the Constitution can NOT be intellectualized. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights ARE the foundation of our Liberties. Lose the Constitution…lose the Liberties. It is LIBERAL who intellectualize the Constitution. We CONSERVATIVES are to respect the FOUNDERS intent…and the actual words!! Quit being Neo-Con “sheeple”!!! End of story!

By: West Texan

West Texan — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:36:08 +0000

@DanChristopher
To put it politely, I wasn’t going to respond to your misinformed comment. But the question I had of you needed an answer. Have you ever served your country defending the Constitution of which you speak? If so, you have my personal gratitude and respect even though I thoroughly disagree with you. If not, don’t waste my time with your armchair “Truther” nonsense.

By: West Texan

West Texan — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:32:39 +0000

@DanChristopher
To put it politely, I wasn’t going to respond to your misinformed comment. But the question I had of you needed an answer. Have you every served your country defending the Constitution of which you speak? If so, you have my personal gratitude and respect even though I thoroughly disagree with you. If not, don’t waste my time with your armchair “Truther” nonsense.

By: DanChristopher

DanChristopher — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 03:59:30 +0000

@West Texan Then continue to vote for the NWO maggots (Romney or Obama). It’s due to sheeple like you, that America is doomed. The Constitution is our bed-rock. The refusal to adhere to the strictures of the Constitution is …the problem!!! I realize, expecting you to understand what DIDN’T happen on 9/11 would be too much for you. Let me leave you w/ this…to change the Constitution is a bad thing…can you understand that much? And please, stop watching the Jew Propaganda on the broadcast news….please!!!