The Presidential Oath of Office

[tsuki]

Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Fourth Amendment of the Constitution:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Where is the confusion? There is none.

"If we had an honest Congress, we'd be looking into the possibility of impeachment." Rep. Jerry Nadler

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. If we had an honest Congress

the impeachment process would be under way.

[DoktorGno]

2. Survey Sez

The MSNBC Poll is still up, and with 126,341 votes counted, 85% of respondents declared "Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. Welcome :^D

[tsuki]

4. Welcome to DU.

[newyawker99]

11. Hi DoktorGno!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[mattclearing]

5. Recommended.

It really is that simple.

[tsuki]

7. Thanks. That's what I thought. It really is that simple.

[ThomWV]

6. If We Had An Honest Congress It Would Never Have Got This Bad

He would have been rejected in 2000 if we had an honest Congress.

[TahitiNut]

8. The reichbot 'argument' centers on "unreasonable."

In posing their 'argument' they completely bypass the contextual prescription that the very test of reasonableness is performed by the Judiciary and is affirmed by obtaining a warrant. This is the reason a 'warrant' is even mentioned in the very same sentence in the Fourth Amendment. Now, the case they cite has to do with a cop looking for a weapon in a car due to concern for safety. It seems clear, however, that the very immediacy (both in the sense of confrontation and time) of such a concern is totally absent in the regime's trampling of Fourth Amendment protections.

[tsuki]

9. You have a couple of sentences from the Constitution that lay

out the entire High Crime. No amount of spinning will spin away those sentences.

[TahitiNut]

10. If that were the (unarguable) case, lawyers wouldn't be paid so much.

Don't get me wrong ...I agree that Mortimer Smirk & Co. violated the Constitution and engaged in a criminal act. I not only want them impeached, I want them prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned for the rest of their miserable lives - the more miserable the better, short of inhumane treatment.

It does no good, however, to IGNORE the 'defenses' thrown up, no matter how specious.