Kucinich: Lack of Congressional Approval Could Make Obama’s Libya Attack "Impeachable Offense"

[L. Coyote]

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/4/1/rep_kucinich_lack_of_congressional_approval

Dennis Kucinich, U.S. Representative (D-Ohio)

Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio joins us to discuss why he thinks President Obama may have committed an "impeachable offense" by committing U.S. military forces to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya without congressional approval. "This president has assumed power that no president, not even President Bush, has assumed,” Kucinich says. “I think that we need to focus on this, not as a matter of whether we like President Obama or not, not as a matter of whether we are Democrats or not, but whether or not we understand the basic constitutional principles of the separation of power."

[SoCalNative]

1. theh Bush should have been impeached

eom

[babylonsister]

2. splash! off the deep end he goes! nt

[Adsos Letter]

6. Hey!

no swimming threads... :D :* :hug:

[babylonsister]

8. lol!

:hi: :hug:

[Arkana]

3. Dennis Kucinich is officially a member of the "I Don't Fucking Know When To Quit" club.

[Adsos Letter]

4. I thought he was operating within a 45 day legal window after informing Congress?

Could be wrong...certainly wouldn't be the first time.

[guruoo]

10. 60 days

The second part requires the President to consult with Congress before introducing U.S. armed forces into hostilities or situations where hostilities are imminent, and to continue such consultations as long as U.S. armed forces remain in such situations (50 USC Sec. 1542). The third part sets forth reporting requirements that the President must comply with any time he introduces U.S. armed forces into existing or imminent hostilities (50 USC Sec. 1543); section 1543(a)(1) is particularly significant because it can trigger a 60 day time limit on the use of U.S. forces under section 1544(b).

The fourth part of the law concerns Congressional actions and procedures. Of particular interest is Section 1544(b), which requires that U.S. forces be withdrawn from hostilities within 60 days of the time a report is submitted or is required to be submitted under Section 1543(a)(1), unless Congress acts to approve continued military action, or is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Section 1544(c) requires the President to remove U.S. armed forces that are engaged in hostilities "without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization" at any time if Congress so directs by a Concurrent Resolution (50 USC 1544).

Presidents have submitted a total of over 120 reports to Congress pursuant to the Resolution.

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/war-powers.php

[Luminous Animal]

18. You are wrong and so is guruoo. The Pres, does not have a free pass to engage the military at will.

He is constrained by both the Constitution & the War Powers Resolution.

The 60 day condition applies ONLY AFTER ONE OF THESE THREE CRITERIA ARE MET:

(c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/warpower.asp

[The Magistrate]

5. Probably Looking At His Last Year In Congress, Sir

And just as well, it would seem.

[DJ13]

7. How much longer is this long dead horse going to be beaten?

[opihimoimoi]

9. Get the HOOK ALREADY...this dude is gonna give the GOP the Oval yet

[Zorra]

11. He's saying that this issue needs to be clarified so some RW wacko

like Caribou Barbie or Michelle Bachmann doesn't become President and one day decide to attack Mexico or Canada simply because she is having a bad hair day.

After reading the Constitution, and the War Powers Resolution over and over, I also believe that House republicans MAY may may may attempt to impeach President Obama for committing forces to Libya without any apparent evidence that Libya was a threat to the people of the United States.

He said "may have committed an "impeachable offense". May. May is the operative word here.

Regardless of the fact that you may love Obama, Kucinich, or Lady Gaga, at least acknowledge the reality of what he is saying and why he is saying it.

Dumbasses like Reagan and Bush became President. People were stupid enough to elect Bush to a second term.

They just might be stupid enough to manage to elect Palin, Bachmann, or some other ignorant nutjob. I never thought Americans would be stupid enough to elect Reagan. But they did.

Please, be afraid. Be very afraid. Based on the precedent that President Obama has recently established, a total RW wacko could become President and really seriously fuck up our world on a mere whim.

Please try to wrap your head around this: This issue must be clarified.

[MuseRider]

15. Thank you!

To inquire about a post above about DK not knowing when to quit.....I thought we were sick and tired of Democrats who just gave up and gave in all the time creating problems for us? Is it only because it is something that needs to be looked into that Obama did?

You are correct, if someone does not attempt to clarify this and then the administration can act if it needs to the House will use this.

I too was stunned when Reagan was elected, then HW and then Dim Son. Nothing would surprise me anymore. Our country seems to have a fondness for stupid.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Maybe it's time to send it to the House Judiciary Committee to find out if it's impeachable.

If it isn't, so be it.

[former9thward]

13. Both Houses of Congress should have the guts to debate this Libyan war.

And then go on the record with a war resolution (or a military authorization resolution since we don't call it war anymore) either for or against.

[Catherina]

14. Thanks Dennis. Rec'd, if only for the Constitution Bush and friends trashed. n/t

[timtom]

16. Thanks, everyone

for helping to minimize and marginalize one of the few strong voices speaking truth to power.

It was all about Obama. Obama. Obama.

But, that didn't fare too well for many of us progressives.

We're still in Iraq. We're still in Afghanistan. We still have the Patriot Act and the TSA. Hoo, boy! Democratic Underground, indeed.

I hope we're all enjoying the slide down. I don't see us getting any of it back. Not in this present form, at any rate.

Meanwhile, DK is "off the deep end?" So who IS a voice of truth and reason and openness, peace and restrengthening America? Hillary? And how about that Fed?

Anyone?

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cliffordu]

19. Mebbe he needs a real job.

Haranguing the Prez at every turn doesn't seem to be working for him.

[Karmadillo]

20. Leave the Decider alone!!!!

nt