Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pat Buchanan: Obama's Syrian Strike Would Be "Impeachable"
Real Clear Politics ^ | 30 Aug 2013 | Real Clear Politics

Posted on 08/30/2013 8:18:19 PM PDT by WilliamIII

Patrick J. Buchanan tells Newsmax if President Obama decides to attack Syria without Congressional authorization, he would be engaging in "what would clearly be an impeachable act."

"The key figure is Speaker of the House John Boehner, who should call the House of Representatives back into session on Monday and instruct the president directly: Mr. President, you have no authority and no right to launch acts of war against Syria against whom we have not declared or authorized any war.

(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 next last

1 posted on 08/30/2013 8:18:19 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

If only!!!!


2 posted on 08/30/2013 8:22:38 PM PDT by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

This might be over by Monday.

Boehner is overpaid and not strong enough to stand up to anyone in Washington.


3 posted on 08/30/2013 8:22:50 PM PDT by Finalapproach29er (luke 6:38)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

I listened to Ann Coulter on the Sean Hannity show and unfortunately Obama does have the Constitutional authority to strike. Congress can refuse to fund such an idiot adventure however.


4 posted on 08/30/2013 8:25:36 PM PDT by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
John Boehner, who should --

There is a very -- very -- long list of things that ought to follow those 4 words. But such ruminations are pointless.

5 posted on 08/30/2013 8:26:39 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (21st century. I'm not a fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lee martell

I’m so tired of hearing people like Buchanan and also recently Coburn say.. ah hah if he does this or that Obama could be impeached!

I’d like that as much as the next guy but it ain’t happening!

He has done PLENTY to be impeached already and the gop-e continues to kiss his ass.


6 posted on 08/30/2013 8:26:45 PM PDT by ConservativeMan55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
This whole Syria deal could really change the Clown's "calculus" eh?

Barry Dunham would effook a wet dr3am! What an idiot - he couldn't think himself out of a wet paper bag.

7 posted on 08/30/2013 8:26:53 PM PDT by atc23 (The Confederacy was the single greatest conservative resistance to federal authority ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

Barry wouldn’t be impeached if he killed a squad of girl scouts on the White House lawn with the cameras rolling and then barbecued them. Only 2017 or his passing away will rid us of him.


8 posted on 08/30/2013 8:27:08 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (I aim to raise a million plus for Gov. Palin. What'll you do?.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

I listened to Ann Coulter on the Sean Hannity show and unfortunately Obama does have the Constitutional authority to strike

So Coulter believes in absolute monarchy — one man rule?

Sorry, I stick with the Constitution, which gives Congress the authority to declare war. (And don’t tell me that bombing another country that hasn’t attacked us, and isn’t on the verge of , attacking us, is not an act of war)


9 posted on 08/30/2013 8:30:17 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

Ann Coulter is a Constitutional lawyer and a brilliant woman. I’ll stick with her on this. I don’t want a strike for those al Qaida rebels any more than you do; however, I recognize America elected an idiot (among other things) for President and we have to live with the consequences.


10 posted on 08/30/2013 8:34:05 PM PDT by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Barry wouldn’t be impeached if he killed a squad of girl scouts on the White House lawn

LOL! Unfortunately, murder on the White House lawn is not an impeachable offense.

11 posted on 08/30/2013 8:35:51 PM PDT by doc1019
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

ZZZZzzzzzzz...


12 posted on 08/30/2013 8:36:32 PM PDT by SaxxonWoods (....Let It Burn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

Ann Coulter is a Constitutional lawyer and a brilliant woman. I’ll stick with her on this

fine, I’ll stick with the Constitution.


13 posted on 08/30/2013 8:37:34 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

I could have misunderstood, and I’m sure someone will let me know if I did, but I was under the impression that the president could only circumvent Congress if the US was under attack. And then only for a certain amount of time.

Of course, Libya set precedent. No one said squat...therefore the insanity continues.


14 posted on 08/30/2013 8:39:39 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

As CIC., he can order the military to strike Syria. But he cannot declare war without an act of congress.

I’m sure the Founding Fathers would have tightened up the language a bit, had they ever envisioned the possibility of someone like Obama ever becoming president. Cant’ really blame them though; as recently as 2008, I was convinced that the electorate would reject an overtly anti-American Marxist.

I was wrong. Twice.


15 posted on 08/30/2013 8:41:31 PM PDT by kevao (Biblical Jesus: Give your money to the poor. Socialist Jesus: Give your neighbor's money to the poor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: All


Let's Put This Baby To Bed!!
Less Than $1.7k To Go Green!!
Please Help End This Quarter's FReepathon

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

16 posted on 08/30/2013 8:41:51 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: berdie

A pity “precedent” usurps the rule of LAW.


17 posted on 08/30/2013 8:42:45 PM PDT by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

Dennis Kucinick said pretty much the same thing tonight on some TV show - get enough on both the right and left saying it, and it just might gain speed.....


18 posted on 08/30/2013 8:43:28 PM PDT by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
He could be impeached on a number of counts.
However the senate which is the jury in this case would never convict him.

At this point the it may be to the republicans advantage to let Barry continue to soil himself at every occasion.
The real problem is not Obama. It's the misinformed, shallow, people that elected him.
If the majority continue to elect candidates like Obama, anything else that happens will be meaningless.

19 posted on 08/30/2013 8:44:37 PM PDT by oldbrowser (We have a rogue government in Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

yeah, and everything up to now hasn’t been?!?


20 posted on 08/30/2013 8:45:29 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
Obama doesn't have the constitutional authority to declare wars but he has the legal authority (allegedly) to start wars. get it?
21 posted on 08/30/2013 8:46:22 PM PDT by RC one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

I’m trying to recall what the response of the Republicans was when Bubba fired missiles at the aspirin factory and the camel’s Obama; is that when Republicans sought impeachment?


22 posted on 08/30/2013 8:47:24 PM PDT by Rembrandt (Part of the 51% who pay Federal taxes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

John Bolton agrees.


23 posted on 08/30/2013 8:48:01 PM PDT by hope (Whom the Son sets free is free indeed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kevao

As CIC., he can order the military to strike Syria. But he cannot declare war

He can start a war and not call it a war. In other words, he can defy the Constitution by using word games. Just because he did it before in Libya — and conservative monarchists like Coulter and Bolton are fine with it — doesn’t make unconstitutional actions constitutional.


24 posted on 08/30/2013 8:48:11 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

Every single President since WWII who has launched a military strike without a declaration of war has committed an impeachable offense. Pity this Nation doesn’t have the balls to do anything about it.


25 posted on 08/30/2013 8:49:02 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

BS. Syria does not present an imminent threat. Coulter should read the War Powers Act.


26 posted on 08/30/2013 8:50:17 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RC one

Obama doesn’t have the constitutional authority to declare wars but he has the legal authority (allegedly) to start wars. get it?

You’re like a liberal Supreme Court justice — twisting the constitution’s language to your liking. Congress was given authority to declare war, because — as Madison wrote in the Federalist papers — the president shouldn’t be allowed to launch wars (start wars, in your lingo) on his own. That’s what kings do, and the American Revolution and the Constitution were to free us from monarchy.


27 posted on 08/30/2013 8:50:49 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

Ann Coulter is a hack and a loose canon. I’m also not in the least impressed with her “intellect” I’ve known many a constitutional lawyer and was one myself as a Prosecutor arguing before SCOTUS, several Fed Courts and the VA Sup Ct.

The President lacks the Constitutional authority. However, we always let him do it so it really doesn’t matter.


28 posted on 08/30/2013 8:52:42 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: doc1019

Well, maybe if they had thin mints.


29 posted on 08/30/2013 8:53:11 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hope

John Bolton agrees.

So do McCain and Lindseed.


30 posted on 08/30/2013 8:53:13 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

It all goes back eventually to that pesky “natural born citizen” provision that Ann C. pooh poohs, along with notions of national sovereignty while championing tubby NJ governors.
The founders figured an American chief executive would be more likely to act in a manner that served our country’s best interests.
As opposed to a Muslim.


31 posted on 08/30/2013 8:54:26 PM PDT by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: All armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
I’m so tired of hearing people like Buchanan and also recently Coburn say.. ah hah if he does this or that Obama could be impeached!

I’d like that as much as the next guy but it ain’t happening!

He has done PLENTY to be impeached already and the gop-e continues to kiss his ass.

I'm with yoy. I'm so DAMN tired of all the pontificating and posturing... but NO ONE takes ANY action.

Fast & Furious, Benghazi, IRS, etc... NOT ONE INDICTMENT.

In reality there is NO Republic and NO ONE to protect what has now been pi$$ed away.

The turd is circling the bowl.

32 posted on 08/30/2013 8:54:58 PM PDT by VideoDoctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

I was being sarcastic. those are fighting words partner.


33 posted on 08/30/2013 8:56:01 PM PDT by RC one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

It is ironic then that many people currently pining for missile strikes against Assad’s admittedly heinous regime use the War Powers Act to justify their position. “He has 60 days to act without Congress,” they say. “He only has to notify Congress within 48 hours if he attacks,” they say. Both are true, but only in the case of a strike in retaliation for an attack against us. If we are attacked, the President can immediately respond, then must notify Congress within 48 hours and get a declaration or statutory authority if hostilities last more than 60 days. The President cannot order any military action on his own if we are not attacked. Period.

34 posted on 08/30/2013 8:56:06 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12
“Congress can refuse to fund such an idiot adventure however.”

After 60 days..

This is just more ineffective, incompetent, imbecilic rhetoric.

I'm not a fan of O but if the GOP controlled the Whitehouse only the Libertarians and the Dims would be complaining.

Then again I could be wrong..at one time being a Conservative was synonymous with putting the interest of the country first. Today it seems the synonym is isolation and pacifism

35 posted on 08/30/2013 8:59:55 PM PDT by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

Presidents have been doing this for 50 years. Every time they do it it’s a mistake. We can’t seem to learn this lesson.


36 posted on 08/30/2013 9:01:12 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

1. War Powers Act
2. Obama won’t be impeached - for anything
3. Pat Buchanan needs to retire


37 posted on 08/30/2013 9:04:33 PM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

isolation and pacifism

So if I don’t support each and every attack on another country that Obama favors, I’m an “isolationist” and a “pacifist?”? What a load of steaming crap.


38 posted on 08/30/2013 9:08:04 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

isolation and pacifism

So if I don’t support each and every attack on another country that Obama favors, I’m an “isolationist” and a “pacifist?”? What a load of steaming crap.


39 posted on 08/30/2013 9:08:04 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

1. War Powers Act only applies to responding to imminent threats. If it purported to allow the president to attack countries that don’t threaten us, it would be unconstitutional.


40 posted on 08/30/2013 9:09:24 PM PDT by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Finalapproach29er

All Bonehead is good for is standing up at a bar .


41 posted on 08/30/2013 9:09:40 PM PDT by sushiman ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

It appears that a military ‘strike’ is not necessarily an act of war until someone gets killed on one side and the other side strikes back.


42 posted on 08/30/2013 9:10:21 PM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

Before you go “sticking with Ann Coulter,” you might want to take time to read this:

http://www.libertyclassroom.com/warpowers/

Basically, to the extent that Presidents have “gotten away with violating the Constitution” as regards the War Powers, she’s sort of right. But as I read the analysis, it’s up to Congress to commit the use of our troops in an OFFENSIVE action, and if the Congress wants to assert itself, it will win. Now, probably won’t happen because of that limp dick, Boner!


43 posted on 08/30/2013 9:16:30 PM PDT by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

“As CIC...”

He’s CIC after Congress declares war. Not before or until. As CIC, he gets to prosecute a war. The title does not confer on him the power or authority to start one. Neither does the Constitution.


44 posted on 08/30/2013 9:20:17 PM PDT by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

“I’m an “isolationist” and a “pacifist?”?”

A Libertarian calling himself a Conservative is more accurate actually..


45 posted on 08/30/2013 9:22:53 PM PDT by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kabar
The President cannot order any military action on his own if we are not attacked. Period.

That is it exactly. It astounds me that people cannot grasp the simple truth of your statement.

Oh, and here's another thing. I'm tired of people quoting "Constitutional lawyers." The Constitution was written so that the average citizen could understand it. It means just what it says. I don't need, or want, some lawyer to interpret it for me.

46 posted on 08/30/2013 9:29:10 PM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I holding this lantern? I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

“....Speaker of the House John Boehner, who should call the House of Representatives back into session on Monday and instruct the president directly....”

.
When pigs fly on automatic pilot.


47 posted on 08/30/2013 9:34:34 PM PDT by 353FMG ( I do not say whether I am serious or sarcastic -- I respect FReepers too much.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
“The Constitution was written so that the average citizen could understand it. It means just what it says. I don't need, or want, some lawyer to interpret it for me.”

For those who think the Constitution was divinely inspired that is the case. Unfortunately John Marshall declared the constitution is what the SC say it is.

Marshall's view has prevailed for more than 225 years..so I'm doubtful our view carry’s much weight ...

48 posted on 08/30/2013 9:35:40 PM PDT by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

I don’t know what authority Ann Coulter could think that Obama had to start a war with Syria with no congressional authorization. As the commander in chief, the President has the authority to use the military to respond to an imminent threat. However, the President has no authority to launch a war on a country which has not attacked, planned to attack, or threatened to attack us.


49 posted on 08/30/2013 9:36:53 PM PDT by dschapin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RC one

That interpretation would render the Constitution meaningless and make the president a dictator with the U.S. military as little more than his own private army.


50 posted on 08/30/2013 9:39:01 PM PDT by dschapin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson