Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

This is a surprise? Legal Expert Confirms: Obama Could Be Facing Ten Years to Life for This Major Crime

+4
ZVUGKTUBM
2seaoat
Wordslinger
Markle
8 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Markle

Markle

No surprise here....

Legal Expert Confirms: Obama Could Be Facing Ten Years to Life for This Major Crime

Earlier this year, President Obama disregarded Congress and established law to unilaterally release five senior Taliban leaders from the Guantanamo Bay prison. In doing so, Obama “aided and abetted” the enemy by providing them with “material support“.

In fact, not only did Obama “replenish the enemy” by returning their captured leaders to them, there are also allegations that a large sum of cash was involved in the deal too, all in an effort to secure the return of captured soldier and likely deserter, Bowe Bergdahl.

The House has now opened an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the prisoner swap, as it is highly likely that laws were broken and crimes were committed, crimes that would land ordinary citizens in prison for years.

Fox News Senior Judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano says that even if Obama had asked Congress to authorize the exchange, it still would have been illegal, according to Western Journalism.

“The statute requiring the 30 days notice (to Congress) prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars, or federal funds, to pay for the removal of anybody from Gitmo, if the Congress hasn’t been given 30 days notice,” said the Judge, pointing out that Obama himself signed this particular statute into law.

Read more: http://conservativetribune.com/obama-could-face-ten-to-life-prison/


Guest


Guest

Random was asked for the two journalists that were beheaded too... I wonder what the distinction was in this case.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

If you creepy right wing whackos are sure Obama committed treason, why don't you file charges, instead of use it as another reason to continue your incessant whining?

2seaoat



In doing so, Obama “aided and abetted” the enemy by providing them with “material support“.

Fox News Senior Judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano....he has less understanding of constitutional issues than judge Judy. He is a Judicial analyst like Senator Butchmeup is spokesman for the NFL. The constitution is not that difficult to understand, nor are the court cases which have clearly defined the commander in chief powers. They are not to be abridged by congress while exercising line command......the cases are unequivocal but somebody would have to READ cases, and not be a talking head with a political agenda. Andrew's bluster is comical.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:In doing so, Obama “aided and abetted” the enemy by providing them with “material support“.

Fox News Senior Judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano....he has less understanding of constitutional issues than judge Judy.  He is a Judicial analyst like Senator Butchmeup is spokesman for the NFL.   The constitution is not that difficult to understand, nor are the court cases which have clearly defined the commander in chief powers.  They are not to be abridged by congress while exercising line command......the cases are unequivocal but somebody would have to READ cases, and not be a talking head with a political agenda.  Andrew's bluster is comical.

Sometimes when these junk threads appear, it is hard to separate the real facts from the Marklehooey.
Razz

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

gatorfan



2seaoat wrote:In doing so, Obama “aided and abetted” the enemy by providing them with “material support“.

Fox News Senior Judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano....he has less understanding of constitutional issues than judge Judy.  He is a Judicial analyst like Senator Butchmeup is spokesman for the NFL.   The constitution is not that difficult to understand, nor are the court cases which have clearly defined the commander in chief powers.  They are not to be abridged by congress while exercising line command......the cases are unequivocal but somebody would have to READ cases, and not be a talking head with a political agenda.  Andrew's bluster is comical.

Hate to bust your bubble but he did break two laws. I don't see any point in filing "charges" but Congress did slap him (including a couple dozen Dem's).

"The House voted Tuesday to formally condemn President Obama for releasing five Taliban warriors earlier this year in an exchange for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, with nearly two dozen Democrats joining Republicans in declaring the president broke the law by not giving Congress a heads-up.

Under two defense policy laws, Mr. Obama is required to give 30 days’ notice before releasing suspected terrorist detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, but he gave no notice before making the swap that sent the Taliban warriors to Qatar."


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/9/house-rebukes-obama-over-bergdahl-taliban-exchange/#ixzz3CvXdhcQB
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


This is a surprise?  Legal Expert Confirms: Obama Could Be Facing Ten Years to Life for This Major Crime HorseHockey2

no stress

no stress

There you go posting those darn pesky facts gatorfan. Now seaoat will have to post a ten paragraph rebuttal that will have absolutely nothing to do with this thread. Lmbo!

Guest


Guest

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/09/13/U-S-denies-threatening-Foley-family-over-raising-ransom.html

Sal

Sal

Poor woman. 


I saw her interviewed on TV the other night. 


She's a little nutty. 


Grief can do that to people. 

Guest


Guest

But it does seem contradictory. Why such extraordinary measures for one bad soldier... and disinterest in another?

2seaoat



Hate to bust your bubble but he did break two laws. I don't see any point in filing "charges" but Congress did slap him (including a couple dozen Dem's).

My bubble is intact. The constitution trumps an unconstitutional over reach by congress. Here is the deal. You bust my bubble when some fool tries to test that law in the courts. The Supreme Court has already addressed the issue, and as long as this was a line soldier under his direct command as commander in chief, he has the full power to exercise his constitutional powers. If congress wants to pass a constitutional amendment where the commander and chief powers are shared or qualified by Congress.....go for it. You need to read a little bit before cutting and pasting bluster. Where is the beef? Easy to prove me wrong.......have the Supreme Court change precedent and reverse a long line of cases and find him guilty of breaking that law.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum