See other Immigration Articles
Title: Obama Believes He Alone Is The Law In America
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Feb 27, 2015
Author: staff
Post Date: 2015-03-02 16:58:37 by BTP Holdings
Keywords: None
Views: 958
Comments: 66
Obama Believes He Alone Is The Law In America 02/27/2015 06:28 PM ET President Obama speaks during a town hall meeting on immigration, hosted Wednesday by Telemundo and MSNBC, at Florida International University in... President Obama speaks during a town hall meeting on immigration, hosted Wednesday by Telemundo and MSNBC, at Florida International University in... Rule Of Law: First, the president issues unlawful executive orders giving illegal immigrants amnesty. Then, he dares an equal branch of government to vote on his orders' legality so he can veto it. Is he establishing a monarchy? While speaking at a town hall meeting Wednesday night at Florida International University, President Obama clearly indicated that he believes he is the final authority on law in this country. He will not tolerate dissent. "If Mr. McConnell, the leader of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, 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," he told a group organized by Democratic Rep. Jose Diaz-Balart. In November, Obama announced a set of unilateral actions to change the immigration system. Government agencies were ordered not to enforce the law against up to 5 million illegal immigrants in the country. He also declared that they would not be subject to deportation and were to be handed green cards. There was no vote in Congress. No consultation with the House and Senate. No law cited that gave him the authority. Just his word. A month ago, we wondered if Obama was "so hellbent on amnesty for illegals he'll resort to nullifying and even breaking the law." Today, we know that he is. Not even a federal judge's ruling has stopped him from making and unmaking law as he sees fit. On Feb. 16, Southern Texas District Judge Andrew Hanen issued a temporary injunction against the administration's executive lawmaking. "No, Mr. President," said the George W. Bush appointee, "you and your party's long-term political agenda are not above the law." The administration wants Hanen's order lifted, but one should assume that even if the courts don't rule Obama's way, the White House will eventually do as it wishes and challenge the courts to stop it, just as it has taunted Congress. Several times during Obama's six years in office he has insisted he's not a king able to act alone. He said it right up until he began to overtly behave as one. House Speaker John Boehner's office counted 22 times that Obama said "he couldn't ignore or create his own immigration law." Yet at a time of his choosing, the president decided he could indeed create his own immigration law, just as he made changes to the Affordable Care Act as if it were his own set of commandments handed down from on high. Read More At Investor's Business Daily: news.investors.com/ibd-ed...he-isnt.htm#ixzz3TGfhZDh0 Poster Comment: Obummer is in no way the final word on what the law says. The Supreme Court has the final say. ;)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-25) not displayed.
.
.
.
#26. To: war (#24)
I hear that Yukon has come "out of the closet". Are you a regular on El Pee? ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
Stop with the deflective exercises in semantic smokescreening and hair-splitting. Obama himself refers sidesteppingly to his departmental "directives" in comparison to Military Orders of punitive "consequence" and whatnot in this video interview segment linked 2nd at Post #1: These immediately following article-comments cited there are summarily the relevant issues, which you have been at an apparent loss to substantively refute -- not others here per your supposed/imposed spin "incumbently": "ICE Agents take [an] oath of office [...]. The President cannot order anybody to 'ignore' the law. It is in it's self a 'unlawful' order." Rewording edits at 1st and last commenting sentences + punctuation. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
100% correct! "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
Thanks for your assistive redirect of focus here to that most pertinent reference-point. :)
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
You've been called out again, war. GreyMist has answered the bell EVERY time. YOU? Not so much; In fact, not at all :-( Gonna play "hide and seek" again this time? Have you two hit the skids again? :-( It's dead, Jim. (LP that is) Still dazed in the corner from Misty's constant pounding? Never mind the ice, you need an ambulance. Lemme toss in a white towel for you -- Geez, you're defenseless. Yes, I get it; It is much easier to just feign ignorance. Any chance that you can make it a bit clearer if not concise? I'll wait. Great. I'm willing to let the bong-action a chance to kick in. (Ready yet, Cheech??) Let me be crystal CLEAR. You seem to want to dwell on 0buma's weasel words (which are indicting enough); But what of all of his unconstitutional, Congress-ignoring actions, Ron Kuby Jr.?? And please refrain from the thousands of documented cases and points, ok? Thanks. I will say this -- I've always appreciated your sense of humor (if little else.)
Yup. Heckuva job, sir.... Agree. Backstabbing, unprincipled bastards who pretend they're on our side are worse than the enemy in chief. What WILL be left of "America" by 2016? And yeah, it could be because they have been blackmailed but bribed is more likely. And I agree completely with your sentiments on McConnell and Boehner. Yep. And don't forget global, America-Last "think tanks" like the CFR, Ford Foundation, Bilderbergs, etal. Here's what is overlooked by those who say BOTH parties are "the same." 100% of all Dem Senators are anti-America and subversive; But at least we can usually count on a good half of GOP Senators to do the right thing. Problem is, the RNC's control the Vichy GOP leadership through their RINO puppets-whores, who collaborate with the Dem-Rats. Second request: Can you link me to these EO's or provide the EO#s? Thanks... --Are you a *Jew*?
LP is no more...Goldie passed away and the site was closed a few weeks ago...all of them migrated to a site with a similar name but run by an even bigger pig nosed idiot - if you can believe it... FWIW, I was given the boot from LP in 2009 when Goldie accused me of being part of a *sleeper* cell that posts information on the internet in support of globalists like the Bilderberg's. I was *activated* when Obama was elected... Lucysmom and I were fellow travelers...but Lucy blew her cover before I did... Old Lubey here tho has never met a gay reference that he could resist...case in point: freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/re...ArtNum=174955&Disp=30#C30 --Are you a *Jew*?
I'm not going to apologize for the fact that *words* mean *something*. --Are you a *Jew*?
He's not my type, Lubey. Rumor has it that he has a penis. So, more your type... --Are you a *Jew*?
Here's a helpful hint for you...stringing random words topgether does not a coherent thought make. Focus less on penis and more on your keyboard. Thanks... --Are you a *Jew*?
A Presidential Directive is not an Executive Order. Reagan issued dozens of them...including what began Iran/Contra... --Are you a *Jew*?
Hey...I'm just trying to make it interesting for the reader...(;^D --Are you a *Jew*?
Oh, well, sorry to hear that about Goldie. Anyway, no big loss there. I was persona non grata on that site anyway. I wonder to where BAC has migrated? He was a real loser. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
BeAChooser...?!? Oh geezus...forgot about that guy...he'd argue with people who were agreeing with him because they weren't agreeing correctly... --Are you a *Jew*?
I'm not going to apologize for the fact that *words* mean *something*. Executive Orders are Presidential/Executive "Directives", so what's your point about them? That it's somehow ok for Execs to issue oath-breaking, unlawful edicts as long as those aren't in writing with that particular titling, numbering and signatured filing as such? Not so. No matter what weasel-words and paper-trail evasive actions by verbal fiat are used to categorize them otherwise, they're all just inter-office memos/departmental directions that never rise to the level of law or alteration of it -- not even when officially documented as EOs. Edited last sentence. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
There's little question that the country has taken a path far from its original Constitutional direction. The real question regarding the change from a Constitutional path and a socialist path is "how" it happened. In order for the Constitution to be viable it must be adhered completely. It's an all or nothing document that requires gold and silver coin for debt payment. Once this requirement was evaded through the FEDERAL RESERVE ACT and the people went along with it, and other socialist schemes such as Socialist Security the Constitution was set aside (by the people choosing to abide within the commercial paper system) and Commercial Law (call it what you will Law Merchant, Maritime, Marine Admiralty etc.,) took precedence. The CEO (Obama) is free to laugh at congress. Congress sold their Constitutional birthright for an unlimited check book through the FED RESERVE ... and no matter how strongly we feel about the Constitution we're either operating by using counterfeit currency that violates the Constitution or we're operating in a different jurisdiction under a different legal system altogether. It's that simple "We're all on death row, only the execution date is uncertain". Doug Scheidt 2015
wnd.com article 12/04/2014 with some under-reported Executive branch "directives" regarding illegal alien "policies": 2. an "immigration" policy/action implementation memo by DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson directing federal money to be spent that has not been appropriated by Congress. 3. Johnson’s Nov. 20 memorandum not filed in the Federal Register -- i.e. not available for public comment as required by federal law for federal administrative agencies seeking to engage in rulemaking. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
We no longer self govern? In order for the Constitution to be viable it must be adhered completely. It's an all or nothing document No it's not nor was it intended to be. It has always been a framework for future generations. Do you really *think* that Enlightened thinkers, cognizant of the progress of science and philosophy throughout world history, intended to create a system that would leave future generation moribund in a vision of previous generations? Truth be told, we, as a people, have far more rights, broader in scope, than anything that the Framers had. ...that requires gold and silver coin for debt payment. That is a prohibition that is put on the states to ensure that they do not create their own currencies. "No state shall...coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts..." -Article I Section 9 USCON... BTW and FWIW, I agree with you, in part, about the Fed. --Are you a *Jew*?
Some aspect of Immigration Policy and other policies, as well, are funded by the fees that they generate and not by appropriation. The amendment that was attached to DHS funding did not reduce the funding for immigration. What it did do, or attempt to do, was to forbid the use of fees to pay for the policy. --Are you a *Jew*?
States (all of them) take payment in FRNs for debt. However, these are corporate STATES (all caps) and exist outside of the Constitution and operate under commercial law. These STATES operate in a similar fashion as subsidiaries of the FED GOV or like counties do within to States. Any references to the Constitution by the scumbags in D.C. is simply a hoax for outward consumption of the gullible. "We're all on death row, only the execution date is uncertain". Doug Scheidt 2015
My *point* is that there are no executive orders here. So, to claim that Obama has issued *illegal* executive orders in this case is just plain wrong. --Are you a *Jew*?
In order for the Constitution to be viable it must be adhered completely. It's an all or nothing document that requires gold and silver coin for debt payment. Once this requirement was evaded through the FEDERAL RESERVE ACT and the people went along with it, and other socialist schemes such as Socialist Security the Constitution was set aside (by the people choosing to abide within the commercial paper system) and Commercial Law (call it what you will Law Merchant, Maritime, Marine Admiralty etc.,) took precedence. The CEO (Obama) is free to laugh at congress. Congress sold their Constitutional birthright for an unlimited check book through the FED RESERVE ... and no matter how strongly we feel about the Constitution we're either operating by using counterfeit currency that violates the Constitution or we're operating in a different jurisdiction under a different legal system altogether. It's that simple Congress isn't authorized to sell our Constitutional birthright. I was listening recently to a 1.5 hour+ video interview at YouTube of Dr. Edwin Vieira on Constitutional Homeland Security/Revitalizing State Militias (10-7-2008). At 54:46-56:43, he says that a State can choose to use whatever money it wants to in its own governmental transactions, so I set the 2nd link for that timestamp to start there. I think he probably meant governmental transactions other than Payment of Debt purposes wherein the States are to use only gold and silver that can't be coined by them. That's a problem we need to work on and way too much is called debt that really isn't, imo. We the People, though, aren't restricted like the States are monetarily/financially. Perhaps we could even coin our own form of societal silver money -- distinctly shaped and threaded together as Wampum beads, for example, which the States could accept and use for their transaction-Constitutionality requirements. What say you about that? ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
My *point* is that there are no executive orders here. So, to claim that Obama has issued *illegal* executive orders in this case is just plain wrong. Executive Orders per your documentation standards aren't even authorized by the Constitution nor is the Executive branch authorized to make or remake "immigration" policy. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
They most certainly are...read the first line of the first section of Article II. --Are you a *Jew*?
Of course he can *make* or *remake* immigration POLICY... --Are you a *Jew*?
Even if that includes violating existing LAW? To actually implement any policy, new or remade, it has to be fixed within the framework of the law. BTW, you do know that the stay that was issued by the District Judge in Texas was not based upon the directive as being violative of the immigration statute (Title 8 Section 212.5) but upon a law that was passed in the late 1940's? The Administrative Procedures Act. --Are you a *Jew*?
Where in the law does it say foreigners can ignore our borders, sneak in without identification, documentation, or passport, and be given carte blanche to do so by a president who chooses to decline to enforce existing laws?
Some aspect of Immigration Policy and other policies, as well, are funded by the fees that they generate and not by appropriation. The amendment that was attached to DHS funding did not reduce the funding for immigration. What it did do, or attempt to do, was to forbid the use of fees to pay for the policy. Are you trying not to say that those Congressional orders/directives were subverted? Reference pg. 1 lines 1-13 (similarly at pg. 4 lines 23-25 and pg. 5 lines 1-9): The Amendment you linked to did more than "attempt to" forbid the use of fees to pay for wrongful changings of the policy. It expressly did prohibit any Federal agency official from such usage of any fees, funding or resources, whether those provisions had been legislated in the current fiscal year or any other and no matter the form in which the said policy changes were set forth (memorandum, Executive order, regulation, directive, or by other action) to be wrongly carried out/implemented/administered/enforced. If you could also comment on this over-reaching "Welcome Wagon" project at pg. 4 lines 13-16, please do: And this, as well from the wnd.com article above at Post #49?: ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
You at #56: They most certainly are...read the first line of the first section of Article II. Me at #55: nor is the Executive branch authorized to make or remake "immigration" policy. You at #57: Of course he can *make* or *remake* immigration POLICY... Article II, Section 1, Clause 1, line 1: The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. Aside from the overarching Article II stipulations to even be a President of the United States of America where he hasn't quite properly complied with the requisites (as you seemingly take for granted simply because he's a Democrat or whatever other waiver you might think applies), your claimed point at #53 was that "there are no executive orders" involved here. Why? Because Obama doesn't want to call his directives that and officially document them so. He prefers comparing them to Military Orders instead with similar consequences for non-obedience of implementation by ICE and others who aren't Military personnel. Now you seem to be ping-ponging like the first line of the first section of Article II implies, without actually mentioning the phrase "Executive Orders", that Presidential directives (whether formally issued as EOs or informally not -- lawful or unlawful no matter) are all empowered as amounting to those, along with an over-ruling invested power to alter law and dictate "immigration" policies to Congress and the States. Make up your mind and don't try to insert the Necessary and Proper Clause into Article II where the Founders didn't. I don't have limitless time to debate this with someone who sounds so "shape-shiftingly" contrarian to America's rightful form of Constitutional government. Edited to expand the quote section + for spelling + comment sentence 4. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Title 8 US Code has several sections empowering DHS to *parole* any alien indefinitely... --Are you a *Jew*?
I used *attempted to* because it did not pass in to law. ...forbid the use of fees to pay for wrongful changings of the policy. You are conflating law and policy. It's not unusual for them to be at odds. --Are you a *Jew*?
I cannot find it in page form. Can you please just quote the lines? Thanks... ...a presidential proclamation creating a White House Task Force on New Americans Again...you're giving me no context... --Are you a *Jew*?
How does he do this? Megaphone? Telegraph? Smoke signals? You have recognized here that the POTUS has the power to execute laws...how does he do that? He does that through his department heads. How do the department heads *know* what to *do*? --Are you a *Jew*?
introduced to Yukon
#27. To: war (#23)
(Edited)
The most recent immigration action, which you all mistakenly call an *executive order*
"He compared it to the military where soldiers 'are expected to follow' orders given by their superiors. Isn't this the same excuse that Nazi's used after WWII, that they were not to blame for what they did, but were just being good soldiers and following orders."
#28. To: GreyLmist (#27)
"ICE Agents take [an] oath of office [...]. The President cannot order anybody to 'ignore' the law. It is in it's self a 'unlawful' order."
#29. To: BTP Holdings (#28)
#30. To: GreyLmist, war (#27)
(Edited)
Stop with the deflective exercises in semantic smokescreening and hair-splitting. 0bama himself refers sidesteppingly to his departmental "directives" in comparison to Military Orders of punitive "consequence" and whatnot in this video interview segment linked 2nd at Post #1:
#31. To: war (#24)
You really should be introduced to Yukon.
#32. To: BTP Holdings (#26)
Are you a regular on El Pee? ;)
#33. To: war, GreyLmist (#19)
Wha...huh?
#34. To: war (#20)
I have no idea what that mess with a question mark at the end of it is supposed to be asking.
#35. To: war (#21)
#36. To: GreyLmist (#17)
Capitalized - in accordance with their oath.
#37. To: James Deffenbach (#16)
I think it is worse than being stupid. I think they are traitors doing their best to help the Kenyan destroy what little is left of America.
#38. To: BTP Holdings (#25)
So, for the time being we shall assume that (Obama's) Executive Orders i
#39. To: BTP Holdings, Lucysmom (#26)
(Edited)
I hear that Yukon has come "out of the closet". Are you a regular on El Pee? ;)
#40. To: GreyLmist (#27)
Stop with the deflective exercises in semantic smokescreening and hair-splitting.
#41. To: Liberator (#31)
Have you two hit the skids again?
#42. To: Liberator (#33)
Still dazed in the corner from Misty's constant pounding?
#43. To: Liberator (#34)
Let me be crystal CLEAR. You seem to want to dwell on 0buma's weasel words
#44. To: Liberator (#35)
I will say this -- I've always appreciated your sense of humor (if little else.)
#45. To: war (#39)
LP is no more...Goldie passed away and the site was closed a few weeks ago...all of them migrated to a site with a similar name but run by an even bigger pig nosed idiot - if you can believe it...
#46. To: BTP Holdings (#45)
(Edited)
I wonder to where BAC has migrated?
#47. To: war (#40)
(Edited)
Stop with the deflective exercises in semantic smokescreening and hair-splitting.
#48. To: GreyLmist, war (#47)
#49. To: All (#47)
1. a presidential proclamation creating a White House Task Force on New Americans
#50. To: noone222 (#48)
(Edited)
There's little question that the country has taken a path far from its original Constitutional direction.
#51. To: GreyLmist (#49)
an "immigration" policy/action implementation memo by DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson directing federal money to be spent that has not been appropriated by Congress.
#52. To: war (#50)
make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts..."
#53. To: GreyLmist (#47)
Executive Orders are Presidential/Executive "Directives", so what's your point about them?
#54. To: noone222 (#48)
There's little question that the country has taken a path far from its original Constitutional direction. The real question regarding the change from a Constitutional path and a socialist path is "how" it happened.
#55. To: war (#53)
Executive Orders are Presidential/Executive "Directives", so what's your point about them?
#56. To: GreyLmist (#55)
Executive Orders per your documentation standards aren't even authorized by the Constitution...
#57. To: GreyLmist (#55)
...nor is the Executive branch authorized to make or remake "immigration" policy.
#58. To: war (#57)
Of course he can *make* or *remake* immigration POLICY...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#59. To: FormerLurker (#58)
(Edited)
Even if that includes violating existing LAW?
#60. To: war (#59)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#61. To: war (#51)
an "immigration" policy/action implementation memo by DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson directing federal money to be spent that has not been appropriated by Congress.
No funds, resources, or fees made available to the Secretary of Homeland Security, or to any other official of a Federal agency, by this Act or any other Act for any fiscal year, including any deposits into the ‘‘Immigration Examinations Fee Account’’ established under section 286(m) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356(m)), may be used to implement, administer, enforce, or carry out (including through the issuance of any regulations) any of the policy changes set forth in the following memoranda (or any substantially similar policy changes issued or taken on or after January 9, 2015, whether set forth in memorandum, Executive order, regulation, directive, or by other action)
The memorandum from the President entitled ‘‘Creating Welcoming Communities and Fully Integrating Immigrants and Refugees’’ dated November 21, 2014.
a presidential proclamation creating a White House Task Force on New Americans
#62. To: war (#57)
(Edited)
Me at #55: Executive Orders per your documentation standards aren't even authorized by the Constitution
vests the power to execute the instructions of Congress, which has the exclusive power to make laws
#63. To: FormerLurker (#60)
Where in the law does it say foreigners can ignore our borders, sneak in without identification, documentation, or passport, and be given carte blanche to do so by a president who chooses to decline to enforce existing laws?
#64. To: GreyLmist (#61)
(Edited)
The Amendment you linked to did more than "attempt to"...
#65. To: GreyLmist (#61)
If you could also comment on this over-reaching "Welcome Wagon" project at pg. 4 lines 13-16, please do:
#66. To: GreyLmist (#62)
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America...vests the power to execute the instructions (sic) of Congress...
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest