Posted on 10/06/2023 8:51:05 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Rogues gallery.....
Each one did it all while constantly looking out for number one and setting aside the good of the American people.
We live in a nation with an insane amount of laws, rendering vast amounts of citizens as unwitting lawbreakers.i e is there one citizen that comprehends the entire tax code?
The system is immensely dependent upon discretion at all-levels.
A system where all are to be treated equally under the law yet is heavily reliant on discretion is a recipe for disaster.
Indeed.
“ By refusing to bring charges against Trump…”
This article makes no sense.
Mt. Rushless (as opposed to Rushmore).
I believe that it was Tacitus (check me on this) who stated something similar to “the more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the nation”.
The two biggest criminals to ever hold the office were Wilson and FDR. they both worked tirelessly to destroy the backbone of this country and its culture.
To begin with, the author doesn’t know what a declaration of war is.
The Constitution reserves the United States’ sovereign power to start a war to the Congress. The President doesn’t get to start a war. He also doesn’t get to end a war, except by the annihilation of the enemy. Absent the annihilation of one side, wars are ended by treaties. Only the Senate can enroll the United States in a treaty, and they can only do it when the President presents one to them. To make a treaty, the President needs senatorial consent.
In between the beginning and the end of a war, there’s very little the President can’t do.
War is a state of affairs between two sovereign powers, begun by one of them (ignoring non-state actors, at the simplest level). When one nation declares war on another, or, without a declaration of war, commits an act of war against another, both are at war. The attacked nation doesn’t get a choice. It was long customary to declare war back at one’s attacker, and this could be important as an expression of the national will. But it doesn’t alter the legal relationship between the nations.
Before George H. W. Bush sent American forces into battle against Iraq, he went to Congress, and asked permission to do exactly that. Congress explicitly gave him permission. I don’t know whether that was technically correct, but, to claim that the President usurped a Congressional power, when Congress just said he could do that exact thing, doesn’t pass the laugh test. GHW Bush was clean on this one. (Knocking over the government of Panama is another matter.)
When al-Qaeda attacked the United States, again and again, throughout the nineties, operating from Afghanistan, those were, strictly speaking, acts of war by Afghanistan against the United States. Nations are responsible to each other for acts of war launched from their territories. President Clinton’s sending strike teams into Afghanistan (and denying them permission to fire), and launching a missile salvo to try to target al-Qaeda there, was feckless, but, strictly speaking, justified. After the second world trade center attack, when the United States had a real president, the United States demanded that Afghanistan hand over bin Laden, to answer for his attack. If Afghanistan had handed him over, and repudiated his action, Afghanistan’s technical responsibility would have been overlooked. That’s how it’s done. When Afghanistan declared bin Laden under Afghanistan’s protection, Afghanistan’s act of war against the Untied States became overt. At that point, President Bush had the legal right to destroy Afghanistan. Congress has no say, when the Untied States is attacked.
Presidents Clinton and Obama did, indeed, invade and topple nations without the necessary Congressional authorization.
For President Trump to continue extant wars was not only legal, it was required by his office. When the United States is at war, it is the duty of the President to manage that war. He has no right to wait for permission from Congress, or anyone else. It’s all on him.
Also, warrantless surveillance of American citizens, is permitted by the Constitution and the law, when it is done for intelligence purposes. It is forbidden for law enforcement purposes, but not in general.
Mr. O’Keeffe’s other claims that presidents have committed crimes, that I have enough information to evaluate, aren’t correct either. This was not well-written.
What you say is true, “too many laws”. The subject though was laws Presidents actually broke. War is murder. You don’t go to war, force Americans to die or kill on a whim. Follow the law, declare war or stay home.
At this point in my life, the ONLY reason I would follow a law or government instruction is upon fear of death or imprisonment. They simply do not have my consent to govern any longer. I don’t even buy tabs for my car. Why should anyone else comply? IMO, they are stupid, but in the best case scenario they are just good citizens.
Why do we pay taxes? We are stupid. Claim maximum deductions and don’t file. Or claim exempt. People are afraid they will be alone, that is all. America is peopled by the weak.
At one point in time, we were the best. We were the GOAT, now we are a nation of sheep.
Judge Napolitano has written a good bit about this subject.
Before George H. W. Bush sent American forces into battle against Iraq, he went to Congress, and asked permission to do exactly that. Congress explicitly gave him permission.
They didn’t vote on it. A louder mumble by the crowd is not what the law calls for. What you wrote in the first paragraph above is a lie. Show me the declaration of war, it must be printed somewhere.
I agree that my post was not topical to the gravity of the article.
You make an excellent point about the dependence on compliance.
We’re obv not self-governed any longer. It seems the longer that goes on, compliance will most likely continue eroding.
You’re a trailblazer!
Thanks for the reply, I will keep a cot warm in the local lockup for others... Please Lord, let them not choose me for an example.
They didn’t declare war, but they did vote to authorize him to send US forces into battle against Iraq. I’m not sure that qualifies as following the forms, but Congress did authorize his action. What I wrote is the truth.
That the attackers were Saudi citizens is not relevant. They were operating out of Afghanistan. Bin Laden was in Afghanistan. President Clinton had sent a strike team into Afghanistan to get him. Reportedly, they had him in their sights, but President Clinton would not give them authorization to fire, so that came to nothing. He did fire a missile salvo at bin Laden’s training camps in Afghanistan, but he warned the Pakistani government in advance, and he knew that government leaked like a sieve. Bin Laden was warned in advance, and cleared his men out before the missiles struck, so that effort didn’t mean much.
Bin Laden was in Afghanistan after the 9-11 attacks. The Bush administration demanded they hand him over, but Afghanistan declared bin Laden to be under their protection. The 9-11 attacks were technically an act of war by Afghanistan against the United States, but, if Afghanistan had repudiated them, and handed bin Laden over as a criminal, their responsibility would have been considered null. When Afghanistan declared him under her protection, she also assumed responsibility for the attack on the United States. That was an assumption of a state of war. Once Afghanistan did that, President Bush had the legal right to do essentially anything he chose to do against Afghanistan.
Bin Laden fled to Pakistan later, after we went into Afghanistan.
However, ...
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 says:
"The Congress shall have Power ... To declare War,..."
Nowhere does it state "...Congress shall have the exclusive power to declare war...." Or that war may not be waged absent a declaration of war. Which means there is nothing unconstitutional OR illegal about the POTUS waging war unilaterally and/or undeclaredly.
And if there were such a clause, it by now would have had to be amended (or stricken) because when the document was written, all of the US's existential enemies would have had to take a weeks-long sea voyage in order to attack us. Now our enemies can strike at the very heart of the country without warning. It would be suicidally stupid not to grant POTUS the powers to defend and retaliate against these attacks without waiting on Congress to get off its lard asses and do their job.
But thanks for playing and don't forget to collect your consolation prize on your way out.
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.