Skip to comments.
Question: Should President Romney Pardon Treasonist Barack Hussein Obama II, a.k.a. Barry Soetoro ?
Many Sources Linked In Article
| Oct 31, 2012
| Yosemitest
Posted on 10/31/2012 5:35:02 AM PDT by Yosemitest
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
To: servo1969
You're right on all the issues you mentioned.
And let's not forget:
41
posted on
10/31/2012 1:42:04 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: allmendream
And your proof of MacLAME McCain's Treason IS ..... ?
42
posted on
10/31/2012 1:45:17 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: arthurus
" Even criminalizing ACTUAL crimes is not good "
Huh ?
Do you think you could EXPLAIN THAT to the surviving family members ofChris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone S. Woods ?
Or .... could you EXPLAIN that to ANY military member or retiree?
Inquiring minds want to know.
43
posted on
10/31/2012 1:56:54 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: Yosemitest
If 0bama is guilty of treason for arming Libyan rebels, was not McCain for advancing the exact same policy?
Is it only treason when 0bama does it?
44
posted on
10/31/2012 2:07:02 PM PDT
by
allmendream
(Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
To: allmendream
45
posted on
10/31/2012 2:07:28 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: allmendream
" ... was not McCain for advancing arming Libyan rebels,"
I don't remember that.
Do you have a link?
P.S.
I can't stand the backstabber, McCain !
46
posted on
10/31/2012 2:12:00 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: allmendream
And advocating policy without the power to implement it, is NOT the same as the pResident IMPLEMENTING policy WITHOUT the consent and approval of the Senate.
47
posted on
10/31/2012 2:19:06 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: Yosemitest
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/06/in-the-senate-mccain-kerry-introduce-libya-resolution/ “The resolution authorizes force in Libya but specifies that the mission is limited in scope, with no U.S. ground troops. It grants President Obama authority for one year to advance U.S. national security interests as part of NATO’s efforts against Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi.”
McCain introduced the resolution alongside Kerry. Is this enough “consent and approval of the Senate” for your taste?
So is it only treason when 0bama does it?
Criminalizing policy differences with outgoing administrations is the domain of third world banana republics - and as I said before you went of half cocked - this wasn't even much of a policy difference.
48
posted on
10/31/2012 2:29:17 PM PDT
by
allmendream
(Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
To: allmendream
If McCain worked to get consent and approval of the Senate with language which "specifies that the mission is limited in scope, with no U.S. ground troops", then THAT becomes Official U.S. Foreign Policy.
It changes things.
But it does NOT justify Barack Obama denying backup support and abandoning Chris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone S. Woods.
The ILLEGAL ALIEN IN CHIEF still committed TREASON and got Americans killed, because of politics.
And he's going to turn against Israel, and help his Muslim Brothers nuke Israel;.
49
posted on
10/31/2012 2:46:15 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: Yosemitest
Nothing changed other than you became aware of something basic you should have been aware of before.
Not authorizing a rescue mission IN THIS INSTANCE was cowardly and a despicable lack of leadership - but it doesn't fit the definition of treason. Not even close.
Is it criminal? No. Otherwise no President who has men die under orders when a rescue could have conceivably helped them would be safe from such charges.
When I was in the Air Force it was explained that the loss of ten men rescuing a downed pilot was a justifiable cost, although eleven might be considered an unacceptable loss. But if they refuse to send in twenty men after they lose ten, are they guilty of murder for abandoning a downed pilot?
Now if you want to rant and rave without critical information (McCain's support for Libya and the Senate vote), instead of researching a little and making yourself aware of such critical information - go ahead with your bad self! But you aren't making yourself look rational or well informed by doing so.
50
posted on
10/31/2012 2:57:12 PM PDT
by
allmendream
(Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
To: Grampa Dave; Yosemitest
I don't want Barry pardoned, I want him jailed.
That said, since it seems unlikely anyone in Congress will do anything, what if Romney did pardon him and thereby convict him by implication?
51
posted on
10/31/2012 3:14:36 PM PDT
by
MileHi
( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
To: Yosemitest
If you want the next Democrat administration and Congress to throw all the Republicans in jail then go ahead, put the kenyan in prison for his crimes and your sense of righteousness. It will begin an unending and enormous tit for tat that will end any aspect of liberty and constitutionalism that yet remains because a ruling party must be just that, a ruling party and such do not relinquish power just because of some election. A ruling party will have to keep itself in power lest its members go to prison or get hung.
52
posted on
10/31/2012 6:13:34 PM PDT
by
arthurus
(Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson)
To: arthurus
Wow
Where did that come from?
Any house or senate member, or member of the exec branch, that breaks the law, needs to be prosecuted, regardless of political party affiliation, any one.
We do not have a ruling party, we have representatives, damn it.
It has to start somewhere. This forgiving the previous a holes is bull. Do the crime, do the time.
Reps need to be afraid of we the people, not the other political party.
53
posted on
10/31/2012 6:36:39 PM PDT
by
going hot
(Happiness is a momma deuce)
To: allmendream
I consider John McCain a Democrat.
I can't think of one good thing, he's done for Conservatives.
But that being said, he DID bring Sarah Palin to the forefront.
Now as far as
Barack Hussein Obama II,
(a.k.a. Barry Soetoro) committing TREASON, it couldn't be more clear that He's guilty.
If, as you say, "nothing changed" and Congressionally approved policy doesn't matter,
then ARMING the ENEMIES of the United States during a time of WAR, "the War on Terrorists", is still TREASON;
and funding with BILLIONS of U.S. Dollars, the enemies of the United States and our allies, is still TREASON;
and, as I read somewhere, "furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or CLASSIFIED INFORMATION
is still TREASON.
Now why is it that Obama says one thing , yet does another?
He's not that stupid. He intentionally set up his actions so that the exact opposite of what he SAYS he trying to do, happens.
I say again, Obama's arming our enemies, the Muslim terrorist, and he's offending our allies, every chance he gets.
Just the other day, Obama said that "our allies, China and Russia ...". Since WHEN did China and Russia become our allies ?
Listen, you're not the only one here with military time.
I sat on my butt, looked out windows, and ran my mouth for over 26 years in the USAF, and then continued doing the same thing for 5 years with the FAA.
I've met some pretty good people, and some really special, historical Aces, too.
They'd all tell you the same thing,
"Obama's a TRAITOR, plain and simple, and needs to be made an example of, in order to keep evil away for among us."http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2922499/posts?page=24#24br
54
posted on
10/31/2012 7:33:57 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: allmendream
I consider John McCain a Democrat.
I can't think of one good thing, he's done for Conservatives.
But that being said, he DID bring Sarah Palin to the forefront.
Now as far as
Barack Hussein Obama II,
(a.k.a. Barry Soetoro) committing TREASON, it couldn't be more clear that He's guilty.
If, as you say, "nothing changed" and Congressionally approved policy doesn't matter,
then ARMING the ENEMIES of the United States during a time of WAR, "the War on Terrorists", is still TREASON;
and funding with BILLIONS of U.S. Dollars, the enemies of the United States and our allies, is still TREASON;
and, as I read somewhere, "furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or CLASSIFIED INFORMATION
is still TREASON.
Now why is it that Obama says one thing , yet does another?
He's not that stupid. He intentionally set up his actions so that the exact opposite of what he SAYS he trying to do, happens.
I say again, Obama's arming our enemies, the Muslim terrorist, and he's offending our allies, every chance he gets.
Just the other day, Obama said that "our allies, China and Russia ...". Since WHEN did China and Russia become our allies ?
Listen, you're not the only one here with military time.
I sat on my butt, looked out windows, and ran my mouth for over 26 years in the USAF, and then continued doing the same thing for 5 years with the FAA.
I've met some pretty good people, and some really special, historical Aces, too.
They'd all tell you the same thing,
"Obama's a TRAITOR, plain and simple, and needs to be made an example of, in order to keep evil away for among us."
55
posted on
10/31/2012 7:35:05 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: Yosemitest; butterdezillion; All
Excellent thread, thanks! Bookmarked.
56
posted on
10/31/2012 7:44:56 PM PDT
by
Graewoulf
((Traitor John Roberts' Obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND the U.S. Constitution.))
To: Yosemitest
57
posted on
10/31/2012 7:46:38 PM PDT
by
1035rep
To: arthurus
Obama needs to be fined the maximum fine, stripped of any financial support for him, his wife and his children, sentenced to 5 years in prison at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, and THEN executed at a TRAITOR, on public television.
THAT is how you put EVIL ... FROM AMONG YOU.
Anyone that assist TREASONOUS Obama or supports him, is also guilty in
"principal". As stated on page 2 of the article published January 25, 1861,
Treason Against the United States :
"It is well known," says FOSTER, " that in the language of the law there are no accessories in high treason -- all are principals.
Every instance of incitement, aid, or protection, which in case of felony will render a man an accessory before or after the fact, in the case of high treason, whether it be treason at common law or by statute, will make him a principal in treason."
"The propriety of investing the National Government." says Mr. Justice STORY, in his Commentaries on the Constitution, "with authority to punish the crime of treason against the United States,
could never become a question with any persons who deemed the National Government worthy of creation or preservation.
If the power had not been expressly granted, it must have been implied, unless all the powers of the National Government might be put at defiance and prostrated with impunity.
Two motives probably concurred in introducing it as an express power.One was, not to leave it open to implicationwhether it was to be exclusively punished with death, according to the known rule of the common law, and with the barbarous accompaniments pointed out by it -- but to confide the punishment to the discretion of Congress.
The other was, to impose some limitation upon the nature and extent of the punishment,so that it should not work corruption of blood or forfeiture beyond the life of the offender."
Treason has ever been deemed the highest crime which can be committed in civil society;since its aim is an overthrow of the Government and a public resistance by force of its just powers,
its tendency is to create universal danger and alarm,and on this account it has often been visited with the deepest public resentment.
Hence, by the common law, the the punishment of high treason was accompanied by all the refinements in cruelty which were oftentimes literally and studiously executed.
But under the Constitution of the United States the power of punishing the crime of treason against the United States is exclusive in Congress;and the trial of the offence belongs exclusively to the Federal tribunals.
A State cannot take cognizance or punish the offence, whatever it may do in relation to the offence of treason committed exclusively against itself.
So anyone who assisted or supported Obama in his TREASON, is guilty, also, of TREASON Against the United States.
Anyone who has any time in the military has been well briefed on the legal headache of trying to figure out whether an order is a "LAWFUL ORDER" or not,
and the rock and the hard spot you're between when you follow an UNLAWFUL ORDER, or FAIL to follow a LAWFUL ORDER.
58
posted on
10/31/2012 8:43:33 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: 1035rep
That great, but I want to see chains on their legs, or individual chains attached to a large ball.
59
posted on
10/31/2012 8:45:46 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
To: Graewoulf
My pleasure, but you wouldn't believe how much time in research went into putting this thread together, and editing and formating time.
But I'm having fun, and the topic is real.
60
posted on
10/31/2012 8:48:39 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's simple. Fight ... or Die !)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson