Skip to comments.
Obama signs Ted Cruz bill into law, but says he won't enforce it
The Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential ^
| April 18, 2014
| Joel Gehrke
Posted on 04/19/2014 5:53:38 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
To: 2ndDivisionVet
This bastard needs impeaching right now.
2
posted on
04/19/2014 5:54:20 PM PDT
by
chris37
(Heartless.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Yes, but he will send armored divisions to terrorize a rancher and his family to make them comply with a perfidious regulation, which, AFAICT, was not a law passed by Congress.
3
posted on
04/19/2014 5:58:09 PM PDT
by
Westbrook
(Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
To: chris37
and removal.
then a trial.
4
posted on
04/19/2014 5:59:26 PM PDT
by
Secret Agent Man
(Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
President Barry and his “law of the month club”.
5
posted on
04/19/2014 6:01:12 PM PDT
by
headstamp 2
(What would Scooby do?)
To: Westbrook
Yes, but he will send armored divisions to terrorize a rancher and his family to make them comply with a perfidious regulation, which, AFAICT, was not a law passed by Congress.Yep. He is a real piece of work isn't he?
6
posted on
04/19/2014 6:01:28 PM PDT
by
Mark17
(Chicago Blackhawks: Stanley Cup champions 2010, 2013. Vietnam Vet 70-71 Msgt US Air Force, retired)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Lawless bass turd. He and his ****bird, Eric the Holder, don’t enforce any of our laws. What a corrupt regime. He’s just like the other Hussein.
7
posted on
04/19/2014 6:01:28 PM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(Obama's smidgens are coming home to roost.)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
If he can pick and choose which laws he’s going to enforce, we can pick and choose which laws we’re going to obey. No?
8
posted on
04/19/2014 6:02:34 PM PDT
by
RichInOC
(Palin 2016: The Perfect Storm.)
From yesterday if anyone is interested in the comments thereon:
9
posted on
04/19/2014 6:02:37 PM PDT
by
deport
To: Westbrook
they only enforce the laws they want too, and then act surprised when we only obey the laws we want too...
10
posted on
04/19/2014 6:02:54 PM PDT
by
Chode
(Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
To: RichInOC
11
posted on
04/19/2014 6:04:54 PM PDT
by
2ndDivisionVet
(I will raise $2M for Cruz and/or Palin's next run, what will you do?)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Bush Jr used signing statements a lot. He would sign legislation but issue signing statements that he may not enforce parts of it for whatever reasons.
He never got seriously challenged for it, nor will Obama. Congess is generally too lazy, fat and happy to assert their authority
12
posted on
04/19/2014 6:05:10 PM PDT
by
be-baw
(still seeking)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
This arrogant jerk has violated the Presidential Oath of Office so many times it is hard to count.
He should be removed from office.
Frankly, I would not be surprised if he refuses to leave office.
13
posted on
04/19/2014 6:05:25 PM PDT
by
dforest
To: 2ndDivisionVet
If he didn’t think it was constitutional (I believe it isn’t), he shouldn’t have signed it. He does not have the moral or legal right to ignore parts of any law he disagrees with. In Clinton v. City of New York, the Supreme Court ruled the line item veto violates the Presentment Clause of the US Constitution in 1998. He isn’t called the chief executive for nothing. I’m thinking it might have something to do with his obligation to faithfully execute the law.
His failure to execute the law is grounds for impeachment of course, but the other law breakers in the US Senate and the Just Us Department have the chief lawbreaker’s back.
14
posted on
04/19/2014 6:08:12 PM PDT
by
CitizenUSA
(We can't have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it!)
To: chris37
15
posted on
04/19/2014 6:39:14 PM PDT
by
GeronL
(Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
To: Chode
> they only enforce the laws they want too, and then act
> surprised when we only obey the laws we want too...
Were the “grazing fees” passed by Congress?
16
posted on
04/19/2014 6:42:27 PM PDT
by
Westbrook
(Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
To: Westbrook
not that i'm aware of...
17
posted on
04/19/2014 6:47:29 PM PDT
by
Chode
(Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
To: Chode
> not that i’m aware of...
That’s what I thought.
In other words, the “grazing fees” are just another exercise of perfidy from an out of control agency inventing “law” out of nothing.
18
posted on
04/19/2014 6:53:10 PM PDT
by
Westbrook
(Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
To: Westbrook
true, but the thread is about signing a law he doesn't intend to enforce against letting a goathumper/terrorist into the country...
19
posted on
04/19/2014 7:01:20 PM PDT
by
Chode
(Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Bottom line: is the Iranian terrorist at whom this bill made law was aimed, now going to present his credentials to our Secy State & be declared persona grata in spite of it?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 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