• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tom Coburn: Obama 'Getting Perilously Close' To Standard For Impeachment

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) warned President Barack Obama is “getting perilously close” to the standard for impeachment.According to Tulsa World, Coburn referred to the president as “a personal friend of mine" before criticizing Obama's "lawless" administration while speaking during a Wednesday town hall meeting at Oklahoma's Muskogee Convention Center.
BuzzFeed reports Coburn said impeachment is "not something you take lightly, and you have to use a historical precedent of what that means," noting that he feels there is a great deal of "incompetence" in the Obama administration.
"I think there’s some intended violation of the law in this administration, but I also think there’s a ton of incompetence, of people who are making decisions," Coburn said.
"Those are serious things, but we’re in a serious time," Coburn continued. "I don’t have the legal background to know if that rises to high crimes and misdemeanor, but I think they’re getting perilously close.”

Tom Coburn: Obama 'Getting Perilously Close' To Standard For Impeachment

As a non lawyer, I agree with Sen. Coburn...I think that Obama is doing things that long ago should have been considered for action. So my question is, why do you think that he can get away with some of the clear violations he has, when if we were talking of a republican violating the constitution in the same way the calls for impeachment would be loud and steady....
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
33,654
Reaction score
39,182
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yawn!

You guys have talked of impeachment since January 21st 2009.

Somebody wake me up when it's not just Conservative Hysteria about the man.

The reason he won't be impeached is the same reason George Bush wasn't. even though they both deserved to be.

The silent consent of the masses.
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,554
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
As a non lawyer, I agree with Sen. Coburn...I think that Obama is doing things that long ago should have been considered for action. So my question is, why do you think that he can get away with some of the clear violations he has, when if we were talking of a republican violating the constitution in the same way the calls for impeachment would be loud and steady....

My guess? His skin color. If he were a white democrat, I expect he would have been treated with different standards.
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
God, even this has to get tarded up with race....
 

Simon W. Moon

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
27,130
Reaction score
11,163
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
As a non lawyer, I agree with Sen. Coburn...I think that Obama is doing things that long ago should have been considered for action. So my question is, why do you think that he can get away with some of the clear violations he has, when if we were talking of a republican violating the constitution in the same way the calls for impeachment would be loud and steady....
I don't think it has much to do with party.
I think it's because all of the hogs in DC eat from the same trough.

I would have liked to have seen impeachment over sending troops to Libya.
 

uncleray

Active member
Joined
Apr 17, 2011
Messages
290
Reaction score
133
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Hmmmm, so Sen. Coburn " ... I think there's some intended violation of the law",
"I don't have the legal back ground to know if that rises to high crimes and misdemeanor".
Incompetence? maybe. Impeachment? Unless he can site a specific example such as
starting a war on doctored data, outing a CIA operative then claim executive privilege, firing US Attorney's, Enron scandal, Halliburton no-bid contracts, ---no wait, sorry, wrong President.
"Oops!" credit for quote given to Rick Perry
 

AliHajiSheik

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
11,698
Reaction score
4,014
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Why do people discuss Impeachment as a judicial procedure? It isn't, it is a political procedure. If there are enough votes, the President stays in office, if there isn't, then he stays.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
94,200
Reaction score
46,633
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
As a non lawyer, I agree with Sen. Coburn...I think that Obama is doing things that long ago should have been considered for action. So my question is, why do you think that he can get away with some of the clear violations he has, when if we were talking of a republican violating the constitution in the same way the calls for impeachment would be loud and steady....
Name a thing. You talk about "clear violations" any yet didn't name a single one.

You can't just start a discussion like this on the premise that he's guilty.

Besides, "if it were a Republican" is a ridiculous argument because you people have been loudly and steadily calling for impeachment.
 
Last edited:

Hard Truth

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
9,122
Reaction score
3,751
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There are very few acts done by Obama that our legislators didn´t encourage or allow him to do. If there was a clear majority opposing any of his actions they could be stopped with legislation much more quickly than through an impeachment process.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
21,092
Reaction score
8,241
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Coburn's party controls the House. Instead of dozens of votes to repeal ACA, which are as meaningful as a hooker's kiss, all Boehner has to do is bring impeachment up for ONE vote...

I'd say Boehner won't because there isn't a chance in hell of the Senate voting guilty and We the People are pretty tired of meaningless crap done in the House.

Senator Coburn can opine all he wants, that and 4 fiddy gets him a cup of coffee at Starbucks...
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I don't disagree with those that say nothing will probably happen, but what does that say about us? Deuce brought up a good point that I failed to mention any impeachable offenses that should plague the Obama administration. Part of this is due to just how good the administration is at stonewalling investigations into such things, and part is due to the absolute lack of a spinal column in republicans like Boehner....

But, since Deuce was right, and I didn't name any, here you go....Just a few...

Article 2, Sec. 3 of the Constitution charges the President “shall take care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” It doesn’t say that he “should” execute the laws of the United States; it uses the imperative “shall.”
Nor does the Constitution say that the President can pick and choose to enforce some of the laws, or just the ones he likes.

Nor does the Constitution give the President the authority to create new laws. Article 1, Sec. 1 is clear on that point; “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.”

The editors at Investor’s Business Daily picked up on the issue, too. Following is what they call “just a small sampling” of a “Lengthy Legacy of Lawlessness.”

Aug. 14, 2013: The Obama administration delayed the provision in ObamaCare to cap out-of-pocket health care costs, picking and choosing parts of the law to enforce, which is to exceed its authority.

July 17, 2013: The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals joined the federal appeals courts in D.C. and Philadelphia in ruling President Obama’s National Labor Relations Board recess appointments — who by law must be approved by Congress — were unconstitutional. Thus far, the president has ignored the ruling.

July 1, 2013: The Obama administration unilaterally decided to delay the employer mandate provision of ObamaCare for a year, which is to provide information to the feds about the extent of an applicant’s insurance. Never mind that the law states the mandate must go into effect on Jan. 1, 2014 — they are now relying on the “honor system” from applicants to determine if they are qualified for subsidies.

June 25, 2013: The Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County v. Eric Holder that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is “unconstitutional” and that “the formula can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdiction to preclearance.” Instead of complying with the ruling, Holder filed suit to order Texas to submit to preclearance, in defiance of Congress’ authority to legislate and the Supreme Court’s authority to rule on the constitutionality of the law.

June 15, 2012: The Obama administration announced it will stop deporting illegal immigrants under the age of 30 in a “deferred action” policy to circumvent immigration laws. This comes after Congress rejected a similar measure about a year ago. Since then, more than 500,000 illegals have received the deferment and only 20,000 have been rejected. As for the law-abiding applicants who have been waiting in line, well, that’s Obama’s idea of “lawfulness.”

May 20, 2013: A Washington Post article revealed that Fox News reporter James Rosen was investigated by the DOJ, which subpoenaed his phone records and emails in direct contravention of the First Amendment under the pretense of a leak investigation.

Obama's 13 Impeachable Offenses
 

lizzie

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
28,580
Reaction score
31,554
Location
between two worlds
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So why not a white republican? To hear the Cons talk everyone hates a con....

It would depend on what that white republican did which merited impeachment. I wasn't referring to party differences, but differences in how different members of the same party may be treated. I'm not sure why that wasn't clear.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
21,092
Reaction score
8,241
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
It would depend on what that white republican did which merited impeachment. I wasn't referring to party differences, but differences in how different members of the same party may be treated. I'm not sure why that wasn't clear.

Why would the Republicans, who control the House and thus the start of any impeachment proceedings, care what race the Democrat President might be? The Democrats don't control the House. They have ZERO say in the impeachment proceedings.

It is very difficult for anyone to make the case that the House Republicans have been giving the current President a pass due to race, what makes you think they would start now? My answer is simple enough, if Congress didn't impeach BushII they are not going to try and impeach this president- black, white or striped...

But your first sentence is closest to the answer.... it depends on what the president did which would merit impeachment... not what race the president happens to be... Sen. Coburn is just wolf whistling because there is precious little he can do...

That the House is in NO WAY thinking of impeachment says everything we need to know.... last I heard they were going to engage in even more useful politics... another vote on the ACA... :roll:
 

head of joaquin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
12,029
Reaction score
3,530
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Republicans have made impeachment their SOP. I'm only disappointed with the Democrats for not impeaching Bush when they had the power to do so. There is only one way to deal with freaks like Republicans, attack attack and attack.
 

Anagram

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2011
Messages
8,897
Reaction score
5,457
Location
St. Louis MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
My guess? His skin color. If he were a white democrat, I expect he would have been treated with different standards.

I am going to have to completely disagree with this. If Obama were a white democrat many Republican lawmakers and pundits would be calling for his impeachment as they are now, and the majority of Democrats would stand by their president as they are now. I don't think his race changes the minds of more than a slight percentage of people across the country about whether or not they support impeachment.
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
40,296
Reaction score
11,692
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Why would the Republicans, who control the House and thus the start of any impeachment proceedings, care what race the Democrat President might be? The Democrats don't control the House. They have ZERO say in the impeachment proceedings.

It is very difficult for anyone to make the case that the House Republicans have been giving the current President a pass due to race, what makes you think they would start now? My answer is simple enough, if Congress didn't impeach BushII they are not going to try and impeach this president- black, white or striped...

But your first sentence is closest to the answer.... it depends on what the president did which would merit impeachment... not what race the president happens to be... Sen. Coburn is just wolf whistling because there is precious little he can do...

That the House is in NO WAY thinking of impeachment says everything we need to know.... last I heard they were going to engage in even more useful politics... another vote on the ACA... :roll:


Ever wonder why Harry Reid won't allow a single vote on any of those ACA bills sent up? Things that make you go hmmmmm.
 

ItAin'tFree

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 2, 2013
Messages
1,293
Reaction score
338
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sad time in American history when one of the best things about change from Dem to GOP in the senate would be forcing the president of the United States to finally start following the law.
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
74,458
Reaction score
43,708
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
My guess? His skin color. If he were a white democrat, I expect he would have been treated with different standards.

So what is the excuse for when the GOP dogged Clinton with pointless investigations for a very long time? skin?
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
21,092
Reaction score
8,241
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Sad time in American history when one of the best things about change from Dem to GOP in the senate would be forcing the president of the United States to finally start following the law.

Yes because a Republicant controlled House and Senate REALLY held BushII to strict adherence to the Constitution... :roll:
 

humbolt

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
27,908
Reaction score
18,380
Location
SW Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So what is the excuse for when the GOP dogged Clinton with pointless investigations for a very long time? skin?
Absolutely. Foreskin. It was just too, too prominent.
 
Top Bottom