OBAMA'S ABUSE OF THE US CONSTITUTION

[Harry Riley]

Obama’s Abuse of the Constitution

by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired
 

Any student of the Constitution, no matter how fleeting is stuck by the fact that it is a limiting document, which was the way the Founder’s intended it to be. That is, it limits the scope and power of government; and if a hammer was needed to drive home the point it was made by the Tenth Article of Amendment which states:

 

 “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

 

 “Big government” is most often meant to refer to efforts by leftists and RINOs to expand beyond the intended limits imposed by the Constitution and Amendments on the scope and power of the Federal Government. In the contemporary era the Federal Government has become so pervasive that it even has a website where fathers are given advice on how to “parent” at http://www.fatherhood.gov/ albeit fatherhood was not what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they affixed their signatures to the document which includes “…to promote the general welfare.” “Promoting the General Welfare” has been the lynchpin of virtually every leftist social program on the books.

 

It is well known Obama was an attorney admitted to the practice of law in the State of Illinois. He voluntarily retired from law practice according to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of Illinois Supreme Court. The website shows no disciplinary actions. http://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp?id=533503328. His legal resume includes teaching Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve years. This suggests that Obama is well aware of the Constitution and in fact swore to uphold and defend it to the best of his ability.

 

The Constitution Article I, Section 1 states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

 

It has been long a practice of the Congress to include waiver provisions in legislation to facilitate exceptions. Those exceptions are generally construed to accommodate specific qualified individual cases. Given that there are within U.S.C., Title 8, “Aliens and Nationality” numerous provisions for waivers, it is notable that Obama did not issue an Executive Order that effectively implements the provisions of the “Dream Act” (failed legislation that would allow minor children at the time of entry of illegal immigrants to apply for work and residency) but instead made a speech to implement provisions of the Dream Act as a matter of Executive policy.

 

Obama said, “Effective immediately, the Department of Homeland Security is taking steps to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people. Over the next few months, eligible individuals who do not present a risk to national security or public safety will be able to request temporary relief from deportation proceedings and apply for work authorization.

 

Now, let’s be clear. This is not amnesty. This is not immunity. This is not a path to citizenship. It’s not a permanent fix. This is a temporary, stopgap measure that lets us focus our resources wisely while giving a degree of relief and hope to talented, driven, patriotic young people.”

 

He did this despite having on multiple earlier occasions asserted that he did not have the authority to do precisely what he did in his speech.   And so by sleight of hand, that is by having the Department of Homeland Security unilaterally implement the policy he avoids issuing an Executive Order which would likely be unconstitutional on its face, and achieves what he earlier asserted he had no authority to do. It is undeniable that Obama is looking for Latino votes by the ploy, and that may be a good politics but it has sinister implications given its corrosive effect on Constitutional Government.

 

This is not the first time that a President has abused his power, of which this case is a clear example. There is an excellent paper titled, “Policy Analysis” #358, Executive Orders and National Emergencies How Presidents Have Come to “Run the Country” by Usurping Legislative Power, by William J. Olson and Alan Woll dated 28 October 1999 which provides an extensive analysis and discussion of Clinton’s and earlier Presidents’ abuse of Executive authority whose lead Obama is following in the present case.

 

In light of the fact that the Democrat controlled Senate is nothing more than a lapdog for Obama, no effort by the Republican controlled House to override the Policy will have any effect other than to bring it into the public arena. And, if anyone expects Attorney General Holder to lift a finger, forget it.

 

The ultimate question is, “how long do Americans wait before getting actively involved in restoring Constitutional Government?” It is evident that the Obama Administration has no regard for the Constitution, has openly said so and now overtly acts on that disrespect; and Obama would say, “so what?” It’s probably too late to impeach him although it might be possible, but it’s not too late to vote him into oblivion!

 

Would wanting a return to Constitutional Government qualify one as a right wing extremist? If so, in a phrase, “I’m all in.” Are you, your Senators and U.S. Representative “all in?”

 

Semper Fidelis
Bob Pappas
 
Follow Bob on Twitter @CheetahPappas
 
If you wish to send a comment, ask a question or added to mailing list please use: http://www.gulf1.com/columns/Mail_input/DMsg_Pappas.aspx
 
If you wish to  read PREVIOUS ARTICLES by Col Pappas, please see: http://www.gulf1.net/columns/Pappas.html

[2qubpiy7cyc82]

Careful Clois, in today's PC world, comments like this are considered to be seditious....no matter how right you might be.  Do not doubt for one second that this site is being monitored by big brother O.

[Harry Riley]

At this point Clois, it's the ballot box that must be unlocked and loaded with ballots that usher out the destroyer in Chief, Obama.  We're not going to fire the first shot and start a war in America until the ballot box is locked from our right to vote......at that point the US Constitution will have been trampled, burned, and disposed of by the domestic enemy.  Then all bets are  off.............

[Jean Turner]

You all have confirmed my piece.  NO IMPEACHMENT......ARREST FOR THE CRIMINAL ACTS!!!!

That is the ONLY way we are going to get a LEGITIMATE ending to this.  When you committ the acts they have committed, you go to jail.  PERIOD!!

Biden, as VP,  follows the criminal into the W.H.  That is the way the Constitution is written.  I don't like it either, but that's the way it is.  God only knows who the Dems would put on their ticket for election, but we will deal with that when it comes. 

SOMEHOW, we have to  get the LEGAL EAGLES in D.C. to do their job.  Like I wrote, I don't know D.C. that well, but that's where we have to go.   Jean

[Clois Beckwith]

Jean, when they arrest Obama, they have to arrest Biden and all the way down. All are complicit in the Usurpation of the Office of the pResident, and Vice pResident, both houses of Congress, the Czars, the two nominated Supreme Court Judges, all his unconstitutional laws, etc., etc., etc.....

[Clois Beckwith]

Harry we will see what happens at the election, but I have serious doubts where all the Executive Orders and the votes being counted in Spain, of all places... where it is all headed....frankly the PC world can kiss my ass. If they want me, they know where I live. I served my Country honorably and will die in the restoration of the Constitution and the rule of law.

[Harry Riley]

I hear you Clois......who could be comfortable with anything that's going on in political circles in America these days. You, me, and millions of others must lock arms, stand shoulder to shoulder without flinching in a bloodless attack on the enemy that sits in the White House...

I take a measure of confidence that America has "got it" and will check the correct box in November.  I also take a measure of confidence in what 2010 election demonstrated, what Wisconsin recall demonstrated, what the votes in California recently communicated, that Obama can't win.  I worry about digital ballot counting but there will be empirical evidence at poll stations across the nation to compare voter turnout and exit polls with counted results.

I think the only condition that will save Obama is some crisis that he can use to delay or postpone elections.  This would be so grave that it might be the catalyst for revolution...

My gut tells me we'll have a November election and Obama will be treated like the outcast he is, totally rejected to a lower state than Bill Clinton.

[Joe G Sanchez]

Hang in there Clois,they come after me and wha-la the MSM will have to write about it,but a little discretion goes a long way-United we will succeed i,m prepared as are many Vet 199th LIB.

[Ed Watts]

The Senate is part of Congress.  "Congress" is comprised of the Senate and the House of Representatives.  This is a common error, mostly due to people having been incorrectly taught -- much like referring to our system of government as "democracy", which it, sadly, has become; but it was not intended to be so.  The system described in The Constitution is a representative republic.

Remember: "Congress" is both houses.  Using the correct terms makes one's arguments much more forceful and relevant.

[Jean Turner]

Two of the preceeding pages have easy to understand pieces from me, about following the ARREST angle....NOT  IMPEACHMENT!!

But I DO NOT know how D.C. is set up.  Is there anyone out there who knows what their government system is like?  We need to SLAM whom ever is there to do the job.  Do they have a grand jury system?

I am definately being ignored.  Why?

We need to set up a 600 letter/day campaing to the D.A.....or the Sheriff's office......or where ever the starting point is.  THIS IS ABSOLUTELY A DOABLE PROJECT!!!!    PLEASE RESPOND!!!!   Jean Turner

[Ed Watts]

If the president is to be arrested, the arrest would be made by the Department of Justice under the direction of the House of Representatives and Senate.  The actual taking into custody would probably be performed by the FBI, but there is no Constitutional procedure for doing this without impeachment, nor is there any precedent.  The only Constitutional method to remove a president from office is through impeachment; this is because it never occurred to the Framers that anyone could/would usurp the presidency or serve illegally.

[Jean Turner]

I can understand impeachment for a crime against the government, but forgery, perjury, these are crimes against the people of the state of residence, in this case, D.C.  The framers did not cover it because they never had dealings with such low lifes and never expected such an uncouth, inept and criminal individual to be elected by the people of this country.   That's how DUMB certain segments of our populous actually are!

That said,  back to the charges.  Are the ONLY charges applicable to the President those of government?   Can he/she not be charged with the same crimes we might be charged with?  What about murder?   Surely, there would be a way to charge that.  Perjury is not murder, but it follows the same offices....the same for forgery.....forge a check, forge a Selective Service card. Etc., etc., etc.  

Is there a lawyer informed in Constitual Law attached to the "Tea Party"?  

We have a whole new animal here.  We have never seen an animal of this species before.  But that doesn't mean we can't deal with it.  I do not recall any place in the Constitution that "Crimes against the People" is mentioned because as I wrote above.  But that is probably not because they didn't THINK about it.  Maybe there is "wording" slipped in somewhere that just hasn't jumped out at us.  You KNOW how they worded stuff so fancy like!!!!   Jean

    

[Ed Watts]

"...high crimes and misdemeanors..." applies to any act(s) undertaken by the president while in office; no distinction is made in The Constitution with regard to the plaintiff(s), nor is there any definition of what, exactly these crimes might be, although Treason and Bribery are spelled out immediately prior to these words.  Perjury, would, no doubt, fit the definition, and that would also encompass the violation of an oath -- in particular, one's Oath of Office.  It would, therefore, seem to be incumbent upon the House to bring Articles of Impeachment against the president if he failed to uphold his Oath, especially the "...preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." part.

Sadly, nearly every one of those Representatives is also in violation of his own, similar Oath, having authored and voted for thousands of statutes with no Constitutional basis, leaving us with a "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone" situation.

Time to clean house, or, more correctly, "House".