Pat Buchanan: Obama's Syrian Strike Would Be "Impeachable"

Real Clear Politics ^ | 30 Aug 2013 | Real Clear Politics

[RC one]

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

[Rembrandt]

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?

[hope]

John Bolton agrees.

[WilliamIII]

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.

[RIghtwardHo]

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.

[kabar]

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

[WilliamIII]

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.

[RIghtwardHo]

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.

[RIghtwardHo]

Well, maybe if they had thin mints.

[WilliamIII]

John Bolton agrees.

So do McCain and Lindseed.

[tumblindice]

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.

[VideoDoctor]

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.

[RC one]

I was being sarcastic. those are fighting words partner.

[kabar]

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.

[montanajoe]

“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

[DManA]

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.

[bigbob]

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

[WilliamIII]

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.

[WilliamIII]

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.

[WilliamIII]

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.