Could impeachment be a possibility ?

Red Mule said:
Show me!

I wouldn't care if he was a purple communist. Wrong is wrong. Because someone else is a bully/crook/liar/rapist/fill in the blank for any crime you like, does not make it right.
If any other Justices are or have done the same thing, I would happily impeach them as well.

As I said, show me anyone else.
Click to expand...
do a google on 'federal judge ethics complaints' that will help you out.
 
NOVA said:
http://tinyurl.com/ok6gb9a

Justice Department Fights Release of Secret Court Opinion Finding Unconstitutional Surveillance

Could we survive the riots...........
Click to expand...
There won't be any riots because only liberals riot, and The Obama is their guy.

There won't be any impeachment because the Grand Old Party lacks the balls to do it.

Politicians in general lack the fortitude to impeach, never mind convict any of their own. This is why the grand experiment, the worlds greatest democracy, will ultimately fail.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that's very selective as well as exclusive. I guess appeals court judges are fly shit.
Click to expand...


The Supreme Court is very selective as well as exclusive. Appeals Court judges aren't fly shit, it's just that there are 180 of them (give or take) and they are intermediate appellate court judges and are less important.

Also, too, impeachment of federal judges and removal from office (or resignation) is pretty damned uncommon so you probably want to aim high if you're going to try it,
 
Dungheap said:
The Supreme Court is very selective as well as exclusive. Appeals Court judges aren't fly shit, it's just that there are 180 of them (give or take) and they are intermediate appellate court judges and are less important.

Also, too, impeachment of federal judges and removal from office (or resignation) is pretty damned uncommon so you probably want to aim high if you're going to try it,
Click to expand...

didn't a supreme court justice once say that 'policy is made at the appellate level'? how many cases are decided at that level that the supreme court doesn't care to touch? so no, I disagree that they are less important.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
didn't a supreme court justice once say that 'policy is made at the appellate level'? how many cases are decided at that level that the supreme court doesn't care to touch? so no, I disagree that they are less important.
Click to expand...


(1) Yes, policy is made at the appellate level (as opposed to at the trial court level). The appellate level includes the Supreme Court as well as the Circuit Courts of Appeals. Final policy is made at the Supreme Court level, not at the Circuit Court level.

(2) You could argue that, collectively, the Appeals Court judges may not be less important, but individually they are. 1/180 is less important than 1/9.
 
blackascoal said:
A. There would be no riots even if he was impeached .. that's just bullshit.

B. There is no way in Hell that Obama is going to be impeached for conducting George Bush's foreign policy.
Click to expand...

Domestic surveillance is not foreign policy. The IRS going after political opponents... also not foreign policy.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think he'll be impeached. I do however believe that these can be used to gain control over both houses of Congress.

There comes a time when saying, "They are attacking women" or "They just don't like 'that black guy'" when we speak against policy won't work any longer. It is the policy of this government, not Bush that we are talking about. The idea that people believe he would be impeached for continuing the war in Afghanistan is a straw man.
 
Damocles said:
Domestic surveillance is not foreign policy. The IRS going after political opponents... also not foreign policy.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think he'll be impeached. I do however believe that these can be used to gain control over both houses of Congress.

There comes a time when saying, "They are attacking women" or "They just don't like 'that black guy'" when we speak against policy won't work any longer. It is the policy of this government, not Bush that we are talking about. The idea that people believe he would be impeached for continuing the war in Afghanistan is a straw man.
Click to expand...


The IRS thing I can see as fodder for 2014, but not the NSA stuff. I mean, how exactly can Republicans credibly run against Obama for doing things they authorized him to do? Only 3 Republican Senators and 7 Republican Representatives voted against the FISA Reauthoization in December 2012.
 
Dungheap said:
The IRS thing I can see as fodder for 2014, but not the NSA stuff. I mean, how exactly can Republicans credibly run against Obama for doing things they authorized him to do? Only 3 Republican Senators and 7 Republican Representatives voted against the FISA Reauthoization in December 2012.
Click to expand...

The more they stand out there and try to make it "okay" by saying that they're not listening to your calls "as you make them", the more they try to say that this guy is a "traitor" and should be executed, the more they try to say that this is somehow a "good thing" and you need to give up freedom for safety...

They may have McCain on their side, but few others, and that sort of defending the indefensible comes back to bite you.
 
Damocles said:
The more they stand out there and try to make it "okay" by saying that they're not listening to your calls "as you make them", the more they try to say that this guy is a "traitor" and should be executed, the more they try to say that this is somehow a "good thing" and you need to give up freedom for safety...
Click to expand...

Can you just write like a normal person. I have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

Damocles said:
They may have McCain on their side, but few others, and that sort of defending the indefensible comes back to bite you.
Click to expand...

I don't know who "they" are, but I can tell you that you don't need to use your toes to count the number of Republican members of Congress who opposed the FISA reauthorization just a few months ago. Republican elected officials, generally speaking, have always supported this stuff and will continue to supoort it.
 
Damocles said:
The more they stand out there and try to make it "okay" by saying that they're not listening to your calls "as you make them", the more they try to say that this guy is a "traitor" and should be executed, the more they try to say that this is somehow a "good thing" and you need to give up freedom for safety...

They may have McCain on their side, but few others, and that sort of defending the indefensible comes back to bite you.
Click to expand...

Really, few others? Man you are such a partisan. Time to drop your blinders Damo:

House Speaker John Boehner, said he believes President Barack Obama has fully explained why the program is needed. He told ABC's "Good Morning America" Tuesday that "the disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk. It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are and it's a giant violation of the law." He called Snowden a "traitor."
 
Darla said:
Really, few others? Man you are such a partisan. Time to drop your blinders Damo:

House Speaker John Boehner, said he believes President Barack Obama has fully explained why the program is needed. He told ABC's "Good Morning America" Tuesday that "the disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk. It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are and it's a giant violation of the law." He called Snowden a "traitor."
Click to expand...

BTW, in case anyone is wondering? That will tell you everything you need to know. This is a continuation of Bush policy, Republicans are fully on board, impeachment?? LMAO You are kidding, yes?
 
Darla said:
Really, few others? Man you are such a partisan. Time to drop your blinders Damo:

House Speaker John Boehner, said he believes President Barack Obama has fully explained why the program is needed. He told ABC's "Good Morning America" Tuesday that "the disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk. It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are and it's a giant violation of the law." He called Snowden a "traitor."
Click to expand...

I'm glad to see someone sharing my view on this. Listening to normally sane liberals fall for the bs and go ballistic is disheartening.

The day we all think our country is against us and does not have our betterment in mind is the day we cease to exist as a nation.
 
Howey said:
I'm glad to see someone sharing my view on this. Listening to normally sane liberals fall for the bs and go ballistic is disheartening.

The day we all think our country is against us and does not have our betterment in mind is the day we cease to exist as a nation.
Click to expand...


I think you're kinda on your own on this one, Howey.
 
Howey said:
I'm glad to see someone sharing my view on this. Listening to normally sane liberals fall for the bs and go ballistic is disheartening.

The day we all think our country is against us and does not have our betterment in mind is the day we cease to exist as a nation.
Click to expand...

Yeah you misunderstand me Howey. You probably should read my posts on the Feinstien thread. I certainly do not support this.
 
Aren't we always being told how unlikely it is that we will be attacked by terrorists?

Now all of a sudden they have to root it all out by tracking our calls and our internets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top