Thread: Rule by Fiat

LAW BROKEN: CONGRESS NOT NOTIFIED OF GITMO SWAP

Bergdahl release arrangement could threaten the safety of Americans, Republicans say

By Karen Tumulty, Published: May 31

Amid jubilation Saturday over the release of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl from captivity by the Taliban, senior Republicans on Capitol Hill said they were troubled by the means by which it was accomplished, which was a deal to release five Afghan detainees from the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Top Republicans on the Senate and House armed services committees went so far as to accuse President Obama of having broken the law, which requires the administration to notify Congress before any transfers from Guantanamo are carried out.

“Trading five senior Taliban leaders from detention in Guantanamo Bay for Bergdahl’s release may have consequences for the rest of our forces and all Americans. Our terrorist adversaries now have a strong incentive to capture Americans. That incentive will put our forces in Afghanistan and around the world at even greater risk,” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. McKeon (R-Calif.) and the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, James M. Inhofe (Okla.), said in a joint statement.

Lawmakers were not notified of the Guantanamo detainees’ transfer until after it occurred.

The law requires the defense secretary to notify relevant congressional committees at least 30 days before making any transfers of prisoners, to explain the reason and to provide assurances that those released would not be in a position to reengage in activities that could threaten the United States or its interests.

Before the current law was enacted at the end of last year, the conditions were even more stringent. However, the administration and some Democrats had pressed for them to be loosened, in part to give them more flexibility to negotiate for Bergdahl’s release.

A senior administration official, agreeing to speak on the condition of anonymity to explain the timing of the congressional notification, acknowledged that the law was not followed. When he signed the law last year, Obama issued a signing statement contending that the notification requirement was an unconstitutional infringement on his powers as commander in chief and that he therefore could override it.

“Due to a near-term opportunity to save Sergeant Bergdahl’s life, we moved as quickly as possible,” the official said. “The administration determined that given these unique and exigent circumstances, such a transfer should go forward notwithstanding the notice requirement.”

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said that the detainees transferred from Guantanamo to Qatar, where they are to stay for at least a year, “are hardened terrorists who have the blood of Americans and countless Afghans on their hands. I am eager to learn what precise steps are being taken to ensure that these vicious and violent Taliban extremists never return to the fight against the United States and our partners or engage in any activities that can threaten the prospects for peace and security in Afghanistan.”

Beyond this individual instance, some raised the larger question of whether it is sound policy for the United States to have, in the words of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), “negotiated with terrorists.”

Rogers said the action marked a “fundamental shift in U.S. policy.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...bcf_print.html

Obama to create world's largest ocean preserve
Associated Press By JOSH LEDERMAN June 17, 2014 1:14 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) — Moving to protect fragile marine life, President Barack Obama announced plans Tuesday to create the largest ocean preserve in the world by banning drilling, fishing and other activities in a massive stretch of the Pacific Ocean.

Using presidential authority that doesn't require new action from Congress, Obama proposed to expand the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument, which President George W. Bush designated to protect unique species and rare geological formations. The waters are all considered U.S. territory because they surround an array of remote, mostly uninhabited islands that the U.S. controls between Hawaii and American Samoa.

Carbon pollution is making the world's oceans more acidic, pollution is threatening marine life and overfishing could wipe out entire species, Obama warned as he vowed to expand the sanctuary during an ocean conservation conference hosted by the State Department. "If we ignore these problems, if we drain our oceans of their resources, we won't just be squandering one of humanity's greatest treasures," Obama said in a recorded video message. "We'll be cutting off one of the world's major sources of food and economic growth, including for the United States. We cannot afford to let that happen."

Obama hasn't settled on the final boundaries for the preserve. The White House said Obama planned to solicit input from fishermen, scientists, politicians, experts in conservation and others before the new protections take effect. But conservation groups the potential reach could be massive.

Under maritime law, nations have exclusive economic control over waters that extends 200 nautical miles from its coast. Drawing on an geographic analysis of U.S. possessions in the region, the Pew Charitable Trusts determined that Obama could protect more than 780,000 square miles — almost nine times what Bush set aside when he created the monument. If Obama were to also protect all U.S. waters in the Pacific other than Hawaii, the sanctuary could grow to roughly 1.5 million square miles, Pew said.

The practical effect of the expanded marine sanctuary could be modest. At present, very little commercial fishing is conducted in the waters Obama is seeking to protect, and there are no signs that drilling in the waters is imminent. But conservation groups said it was crucial to take proactive steps to prevent those activities going forward. "Anywhere there are fish to be extracted or minerals or resources, these locations are under threat form commercial extraction," said Matt Rand, who runs Pew's global ocean legacy project.

The executive steps, first reported by The Washington Post, come as Obama is searching for ways to leave his second-term mark on the environment despite opposition from many Republicans in Congress.

Presidents have authority to phase out commercial fishing and other activities from U.S. waters under the 1906 Antiquities Act, the same law that allows for land-based national monuments to be created by executive order. Still, the moves could rankle some GOP lawmakers who say Obama is exceeding his authority by going around Congress to promote his agenda on issues like the environment, immigration and gay rights. Earlier this month Obama unveiled sweeping new pollution limits on U.S. power plants amid signs that Congress wouldn't act soon to combat climate change.

In a related environmental move, Obama also vowed to create a government program to combat black market fishing and seafood fraud, in which seafood products are mislabeled to hide their origin. The White House said 20 percent of the wild marine fish caught each year are part of the black market, at a cost of $23 billion to the legitimate fishing industry. "President Obama's announcement is a historic step forward in the fight against seafood fraud and illegal fishing worldwide," said Beth Lowell of the conservation group Oceana. "This initiative is a practical solution to an ugly problem and will forever change the way we think about our seafood."

Obama, in his public comments, indicated the significance was partially symbolic, but could spur the rest of the world to take action. "For this effort to succeed, it has to be bigger than any one country," Obama said.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-create-w...--finance.html

comments

I'm all for managed activities of the environment; as long as the presidents don't wipe out fishing families. BUT I want to know how they are going to stop the importation of illegal fish? Congress, the State Department, nor the last 3 presidents have had the nads to stand up to China; the biggest violator in the world of fishing rights and environmental pollution. The majority of air pollution on the west coast are pollutants carried by the wind from China. Then the people here are penalized by restrictions and higher fees on everything. Way to go you spineless mental midgets.

...

How will this keep other countries from fishing, drilling, ect in these "protected" waters ??

..

Why don't they try the opposite of what they are trying to accomplish and maybe something might actually get done. Why not spend the money on fisheries to create hatchlings and release them into the seas, start with endangered, then start with ones that people consume, have the larger countries do the same like China etc. this would surely help and slow down the over fishing. CO2, why don't we take the billion dollars that Obenaabee wants to commit annually to Climate change and plant a billion dollars worth of trees a year, Trees and plants are the earths natural filtration system for CO2, so increase the filters? Does this not make more sense than #$%$ away money on conferences and Al Gores private jets?

..

Yeah lets now waste time figuring out how to employee people, feed the kids growing hungry here in the US or worry about a failing infrastructure. These things do not matter, but a area that no one fishes, no one is drilling on, wow that is important and we better spend all of our time doing that while we fund Countries that are fighting us, feeding kids in foreign lands at a tune of 5 billion dollars because it is your pet project. But lets now worry about the US and the illegal immigrants that need to be run out of the country so each person here legally can find a job. The Government is a waste of air and taxpayers money anymore (wait that would be China's money since we borrow from them to run the Government).

A Defiant Obama Dares Congress To Stop Him, Says “Sue Me”
NTEB News Desk | July 1, 2014

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama defiantly dared congressional Republicans on Tuesday to try to block his efforts to act on his own and bypass a divided Congress that has thwarted his policy initiatives. http://news.yahoo.com/obama-vows-act...--finance.html

“So sue me,” he taunted on a sweltering day, as he pushed lawmakers to pay for road and bridge repairs. “I’m not going to apologize for trying to do something.”

Obama struck an aggressive tone in the face of a lawsuit threat from House Speaker John Boehner and in the wake of two defeats before the Supreme Court, including a unanimous decision from the court that he overreached when he appointed members of the National Labor Relations Board while the Senate was in recess.

His remarks came a day after Obama declared that he would act on his own to address weaknesses in the nation’s immigration system after Boehner informed him that the House would not take up an immigration overhaul this year.
.
He has already taken a series of executive actions, including an order requiring federal contractors to pay a higher minimum wage and initiating steps to lower carbon emissions in coal-fired power plants.

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=23077


Obama vows to act alone, taunts Republicans
By JIM KUHNHENN 5 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama defiantly dared congressional Republicans on Tuesday to try to block his efforts to act on his own and bypass a divided Congress that has thwarted his policy initiatives.

"So sue me," he taunted on a sweltering day, as he pushed lawmakers to pay for road and bridge repairs. "I'm not going to apologize for trying to do something."

Obama struck an aggressive tone in the face of a lawsuit threat from House Speaker John Boehner and in the wake of two defeats before the Supreme Court, including a unanimous decision from the court that he overreached when he appointed members of the National Labor Relations Board while the Senate was in recess.

His remarks came a day after Obama declared that he would act on his own to address weaknesses in the nation's immigration system after Boehner informed him that the House would not take up an immigration overhaul this year.

He has already taken a series of executive actions, including an order requiring federal contractors to pay a higher minimum wage and initiating steps to to lower carbon emissions in coal-fired power plants.

"So far this year, Republicans in Congress have blocked or voted down every serious idea to strengthen the middle class — not ideas that are unique to me," he said. "But the Republicans have said no to raising the minimum wage, have said no to fair pay. They've said no to extending unemployment insurance for over 3 million Americans looking for a new job."

Earlier Tuesday, Obama met with his Cabinet secretaries and urged them to "be creative about how we can make real progress" on issues where Congress won't act.

Obama said he would prefer that Congress act on issues such as immigration and infrastructure because laws are more sweeping than his own administrative actions.

"We're not always going to be able to get things through Congress, at least not this Congress," Obama said. "I want to make sure we emphasize not what we can't do, but what we can do in the coming months."

Speaking at Washington's Key Bridge, Obama in shirt sleeves and his tie undone made a pitch to fix the nation's bridges and highways.

He called on Congress to close tax loopholes and use the money on infrastructure projects, a long shot idea that has little if any support among congressional Republicans. "It's not crazy. It's not socialism," he said, mocking the criticism from some conservative quarters. "You know, it's not, you know, the imperial presidency or no laws are broken."

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-vows-act...--finance.html

comments

Didnt Obama say name calling and civlity needed to come back to Washington. Sure as long as it is directed towards the spoiled baby whiner Obama. He is like a little spoiled brat who when he doesnt get his way only, then he throws a fit and blames everyone else. This guy is really pathetic. A good leader would sit down works things out and COMPROMISE, not just his way or the highway This is Obama. If he doesnt get everything he wants he quits and attacks

Obma has no leader talent or ability to work wiht people of different ideas. He is so limited in what he can do , thats why our nation is suffering,becuase of him not Congress, he is the President and leader not the house


...

Obama is now going "pedal to the metal" in circumventing the US Constitution and/or Congress and/or the US Supreme Court. Now all that anger he's been harboring for a lifetime has been stoked by the resistance of the American people, the Congress and the Supreme Court to follow lock step his "leadership". He can't believe that he is not the "one we'd been waiting for!" That pent up anger is now bubbling up into a quite evident mental derangement. If you haven't been paying attention to him before, you'd better watch him now! He's acting like a trapped animal, and that's even more dangerous.

..

Obama should re-visit the arrogant insipid challenge Gary Hart taunted the press with during his attempted run at the presidency. He just may find the "in your face" threat will be his hubris and downfall. We have never had such arrogance, such ignorance, such stupidity, such solipsistic narcissist behavior in the office of the President - but that is probably because we have never had such an inexperienced, incapable man in that office where his only claim to fame is being a community organizer. America gambled and we have lost. We were warned - but too many, for petty reasons, did not vote. So now we feel the pain.

More Executive Orders: Obama to Address Transgender Employment
July 1, 2014 By Greg Campbell

In keeping with his “pen and a phone” theory of unilateral executive power, President Obama has announced that he intends to issue an executive order concerning federal protection of those who ascribe to a different “gender identity” than that assigned at birth.

The executive order will ban any discrimination by federal contractors on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The move is likely a nod to the homosexual and transgender communities during “LGBT pride month.”

In 2012, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that federal bans on discrimination also protected transgendered people. In April, Sarah Vestal, a man who identifies as a woman who works for the Treasury Department, told the Huffington Post, “It would help eliminate the structural discrimination. Transgender people in the federal government are pulling their hair out.”

The president has made broad use of his claimed power to issue executive orders on a wide range of issues. On Monday, the president also announced he would act unilaterally on immigration reform issues without the consent of Congress.

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/07/01/more-...er-employment/

Umm, sorry, you are not "assigned" anything at birth. You are born with a penis or a vagina.

"The Supreme Court took an outrageous step against the rights of America's women, setting a dangerous precedent that could permit for-profit corporations to pick and choose which laws to obey."

- House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Read more: http://yhoo.it/1iUabmi

Something only the POTUS gets to choose ??

Barack H. Obama is giving up on immigration reform. That’s right: instead of allowing immigration reform to succeed or fail in Congress (as the Constitution requires), Obama announced during a press conference on Monday that he would act alone and use executive orders to give amnesty to illegal aliens!

“Today I'm beginning a new effort to fix as much of the immigration system as I can on my own,” Obama proclaimed during a Rose Garden speech, “America cannot wait forever for them to act.”

http://www.conservative-daily.com/20...u-to-stop-him/

Pages : 13
Replies: 138
Views: 8,107

Steny Hoyer gives thumbs up to tyranny:
Obama can decide how to implement laws

Written by Allen West on July 31, 2014


Remember back earlier this year at President Obama’s State of the Union address when he said (threatened?) if Congress wouldn’t act, he would do so unilaterally, and all the Democrats stood and cheered?

Well, we should have right then given a “pink slip” to every member of the legislative branch who applauded. Why have them there and pay them if they prefer having the executive branch do their job? Democrat legislators just don’t seem to understand the Constitution and the system established delineating the roles and responsibilities of the respective branches — the theory of separation of powers, coequal branches, and checks and balances.

And now House Minority Whip, Steny Hoyer (D-Ma) has become the poster child for that lack of understanding – or is it purposeful dismissal?

As reported by CNS News, “House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said that President Obama “can’t legalize” the illegal aliens in the United States, but then added that the president “can implement the laws as he believes they should be implemented.”

So according to the Number Two Democrat in the US House of Representatives, the president of the United States is not charged to uphold the laws, but can just do as he feels or believes. That folks is called tyranny, and I guess it has the consent of Rep. Hoyer. Yep, the president can enact “selective enforcement” and become his own legislative branch according to this imbecilic and unconstitutional statement from Hoyer.

The U.S. Constitution states in Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 that “Congress shall have the power…To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization.” This power is not granted to the president, meaning Obama could not legally grant citizenship to illegal aliens apart from Congress via executive action.

So when CNS News queried Hoyer, “Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution states that Congress has the power to make laws governing naturalization. Given this, does President Obama have the unilateral power to legalize illegal aliens?”

Hoyer responded, “I don’t think he does,” Hoyer responded, “and I don’t think that’s what he’s going to do. You’re right. He can’t legalize them.”

“What the president can in fact do, however, is implement the laws as he believes they should be implemented,” Hoyer added. “And there have been a lot of scholars – and I’m not going to go through the quotes now – who have said the president clearly has broad authority to decide how he’s going to implement the law.” “But that does not mean he can legalize people. He can’t make them citizens,” he maintained. “Not according to the law.”

No Mr. Hoyer, the president, not this one or anyone, can implement laws as he believes they should be implemented. And this is exactly why no one trusts this current president because this is how liberal progressive socialists see the rule of law in America — as Obama would say, “flexible.” Even liberal Constitutional scholar and law professor Jonathan Turley has stated that Obama is overstepping his constitutional bounds with his constant unilateral actions.

Hoyer also said he’s “not going to speculate” on the possible outcome of President Obama’s usurpation of congressional authority in his executive actions on immigration. “The president is discussing [this] with his lawyers, and he’s made it very clear he wants to do that, which is in his authority. But he’s also made it very clear he wants to take such action as is appropriate legally, that is consistent with his responsibilities, in light of a refusal of the Congress to even consider fixing a broken system either through their [Republican] bills, or with our bills, or with Senate-passed bills. The continual refusal to act has put the president in this position,” Hoyer added.

Again, it seems Hoyer fails to understand the system of checks and balances as established in the Constitution. I don’t see Hoyer complaining about the stacks and stacks of legislation passed by the House of Representatives sitting on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s desk.

This all boils down to one simple thing: Democrats don’t want to govern, they want to rule — and our established rule of law, the Constitution, is an obstacle. Why would anyone trust a president about whom the Number Two Democrat in the House just said, “can implement the laws as he believes they should be implemented?” Steny Hoyer and his ilk are not deserving of the title U.S. Representative — but then who votes for these people?

Pure and simple, this is tyranny, and I dare Obama to wave a magic wand and make a bunch of illegal aliens American citizens. I will make it my mission in life to ensure liberal progressive socialists never, ever have a majority in the House or Senate or as president for as long as I live. And I ain’t going anywhere soon.

Go ahead Barack, make my day.

http://allenbwest.com/2014/07/steny-...mplement-laws/

MAD Magazine @MADmagazine

Obama's Latest Executive Order

http://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2014...xecutive-order …


11:27 AM - 4 Aug 2014

Obama Ignores Congress, Lifts Ban on Libyans Training in U.S. as Pilots, Nuke Scientists
AUGUST 13, 2014

Less than two years after four Americans got massacred in a terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission in Benghazi, Libya the Obama administration is disregarding congressional opposition to lift a decades-old ban on Libyans attending flight schools and training as nuclear scientists in the United States.

The ban was implemented in 1983 after a wave of terrorist incidents involving Libyans. The African nation continues to be a hotbed of terrorism and in fact, the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli was recently evacuated because violence between rival militias has created a deadly environment. Many other foreign governments have also shut down their embassies in Libya because the violence has spread throughout the entire country.

Nevertheless, President Obama has discounted congressional opposition to let Libyans train as pilots, airplane mechanics and nuclear scientists in the United States. Perhaps the commander-in-chief has somehow forgotten that many of the 9/11 hijackers—mostly Saudi nationals—received their training in American flights schools because our government allowed it. Have we not learned that it’s a really bad idea to help our enemies obtain skills that could later be used to attack us?

Official word of this senseless change comes via a final regulation approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). It lifts the longtime prohibition on Libyans coming to the U.S. to attend flight school, work in aviation maintenance or flight operations or to study or train in nuclear science. The Obama administration claims that the ban is no longer necessary because the “United States Government and the Government of Libya have normalized their relationship and most of the restrictions and sanctions imposed by the United States and the United Nations toward Libya have been lifted.”

The move comes just a few months after a congressional hearing addressed what was then the administration’s proposal to overturn the 30-year ban. Before actually reversing the longtime regulation, the administration was required to provide Congress with certain documents that were never provided, according to the heads of the House Judiciary Committee and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee considering the matter. In other words, the president has once again blown off Congress and this week the lawmakers involved in the process expressed outrage.

“The Obama Administration is turning a blind eye to real terrorist threats that exist in Libya today by carelessly forging ahead with its plan to allow Libyan pilots and nuclear scientists to study in the United States,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte. “The House Judiciary Committee has repeatedly sought information about the Administration’s policy reversal but political appointees at the Department of Homeland Security have stonewalled the Committee’s requests and have not articulated why it is in Americans’ best interests to change policy. Given the ongoing volatility in Libya, it is unconscionable and completely irresponsible that the Administration plans to lift a longstanding policy that protects Americans and our national security from threats in the region.”

At the congressional hearing earlier this year, a top Homeland Security official revealed that the Hillary Clinton State Department first requested the Libyan ban lift in 2010. Three years later, the official, Alan Bersin, told Congress, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano agreed to begin the process to amend the regulations relating to Libya. This illustrates that the administration started working to lift the ban long before the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi. Clearly, it was not enough to deter the administration from going forth with its dangerous plan.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/20...ke-scientists/

Obama Signs New Executive Order Restricting Religious Freedom
July 21, 2014 By Greg Campbell

It’s gone relatively unreported, but on Monday, President Obama signed yet another executive order- this time targeting the religious rights of Americans. The new executive edict issued by Obama prohibits federal contractors from discriminating against homosexuals and those who identify as a different gender than that which they were assigned at birth.

The move is sure to delight many on the left and even some on the right; however, the executive order is sure to rile those who value the Constitution’s separation of powers as the president is supposed to serve as a law enforcer, not a lawmaker. President Obama signed the executive order, bypassing Congress entirely, against the wishes of many religious institutions that argued that the order ought to maintain an exemption for religious institutions who have charged that the executive order could compel them to violate their religious tenets.

Obama hailed the executive order on Monday, saying,

Thanks to your passion and advocacy and the irrefutable rightness of your cause, our government – the government of the people, by the people and for the people – will become just a little bit fairer.”

Of course, despite the populist rhetoric of advancing the rights “of the people,” Obama’s fiat advances the agenda of homosexuals and transgenders at a cost of trampling the rights of those who wish to adhere to their religious beliefs.

Religious institutions that maintain federal contracts, such as religious universities, now must adhere to the policy of dubious legitimacy and disregard their religious beliefs in order to adopt the federal government’s agenda.

This is a problem. Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at the Family Research Council explained in a recent interview,

“If religious organizations cannot require that their employees conduct themselves in ways consistent with the teachings of their faith – then, essentially, those organizations are unable to operate in accordance with their faith.”

“This level of coercion is nothing less than viewpoint blackmail that bullies into silence every contractor and subcontractor who has moral objections to homosexual behavior,” Sprigg continued. “The mask is coming off of the homosexual movement’s agenda. They really do not believe in religious liberty. They want forced affirmation of homosexual and transgender conduct to trump every other consideration in the workplace – including religious liberty.”

Whether one agrees with fundamentalist teachings or not, there remains two large problems with the executive order:

1) The executive order is inherently illegitimate as laws governing the federal government’s relationships with federal contractors are generated from the deliberative body, not the executive branch.

2) With the recent Supreme Court ruling that held that employers are not compelled to provide contraceptives to employees if doing so violates their religious beliefs, one would think that the Obama Administration would be more sensitive to those who feel under attack by the federal government as the Obama Administration continues to try and replace religious understandings with secular, state-sanctions policies.

The Obama Administration is quite evidently committed to continuing their assault on the religious liberties of Americans. Whether one agrees with the religious doctrine of one group or another is irrelevant; the First Amendment protects a right of association as well as a right to exercise one’s religion freely.

If this “right” only extends to that of which the government approves, it is not a right at all. It’s unconscionable that as statists continue to augment the role that government plays in everyday life, they continue to set new rules by which Americans must live.

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/07/21/video...gious-freedom/


The problem I see is thus : I have a friend who is gay - stereotypical flamboyantly gay - and while I love him dearly, he has a BAD habit of failing to take responsibility for his own actions and blame consequences on the fact that he is "discriminated against". If he got a ticket - it's because the cops hate gay men - not that he was speeding. If he got written up at work, it isn't because he was constantly late; if he got a bad grade, it wasn't due to a badly written assignment... his kneejerk reaction is " ... it's because I'm GAY"