DEVELOPING: Court Rules Obama is abusing Powers: Obama recess appointments unconstitutional, court (Kennedy, Saddam)

[HistorianDude]

Bush's Wiretaps Ruled Unconstitutional : NPR

Not an impeachable offense either.

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by chucksnee

You mean Bush made recess appointments when he could really make them....not when congress was in session?

Define recess appointments.

[Darkatt]

Originally Posted by Arus

and how many times did Bush circumvent the Constitution to declare war on three nations?

Bush had authorization from congress to bring our troops in. Obama and syria on the other hand, did not.

[chucksnee]

Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost

Define recess appointments.

Congress has not adjourned but is, instead, recessed.

[EinsteinsGhost]

We discussed this a year ago.

A Pro-forma session is needed only when congress is in recess.

[Nayabone]

Originally Posted by NoJiveMan

Bush did the same, so what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I think what you meant to say was, "What's good for the great president is good for the communist b@stard...!

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier

Not good for the President.

Not bad either, Courts overturn executive overreach quite regularly, that is why they are there. But please don't let me stand in the way of a good old "let's drum up impeachment/Obama the tyrant rant."

So have fun.

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by Nayabone

I think what you meant to say was, "What's good for the great president is good for the communist b@stard...!

... and terrible for fascist idiots.

[Earlyretired]

impeach

[gomexico]

Originally Posted by lycos679

What about the Bush recess appointments?

This was just one 3-judge panel. The matter will make its way to the Supreme Court ... in time. But you point-out that other Presidents, many other Presidents if I'm reading other sources correctly, have applied the recess appointments as did President Obama. So their actions, if his were not properly authorized, were similarly improper. I haven't looked at the panel of judges' backgrounds here, but we may have an instance where certain jurists are seeking to redefine the Constitutional application improperly themselves. A struggle between the Judiciary and the Executive. Anyhow, this will all be litigated and the girls who are drooling all over this discussion thread gleefully because they thing the "got" the corrent President on "something" are, once again, jumping to (maybe incorrect) conclusions.