Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: will Obama be impeached for the Sestak issue?
No- no impeachable offense was made 67 55.83%
No- he bribed Sestak, but the justice department will not act 26 21.67%
No- he bribed Sestak but the congress will vote for him 7 5.83%
Yes- he bribed Sestak and action will be taken 20 16.67%
Voters: 120. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-28-2010, 11:02 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,784,961 times
Reputation: 7118

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hombre57 View Post
Another bash Obama troll thread. When are they going to clean house here?
I guess you weren't around in 2006, 2007 and 2008?

Seriously, just ignore the threads you don't like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-28-2010, 11:09 PM
 
5,036 posts, read 5,117,028 times
Reputation: 2356
How cany anyone really say if the offense was impeachable or not, when we dont know all the facts? And why dont we know the facts? Because this admin and Sestak have been holding out the truth and will continue to do so. Even if there isnt an impeachable offense, its obvious they are hiding something.

For God's sake, I wish the liberal idiots would admit that much. You guys arent really THAT dumb are you, to believe the sudden bs response after months of silence?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 11:28 PM
 
5,719 posts, read 6,418,800 times
Reputation: 3646
GMAB!

Seriously? You know that Obama will not be impeached. Just like it was obvious Clinton would not be impeached. So why do this? Why waste time and money on this?

The teaparty would be up in arms I would think over the waste of taxpayer money :lol:
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 11:29 PM
 
5,719 posts, read 6,418,800 times
Reputation: 3646
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
I guess you weren't around in 2006, 2007 and 2008?

Seriously, just ignore the threads you don't like.
I disagree. I think it demeans our entire political system when we make it less classy and stoop to this level. Wouldn't we get so much more done if we looked for compromise instead of "DESTROY CLINTON/OBAMA AT ALL COSTS!!!!!"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 11:52 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
15,088 posts, read 13,388,040 times
Reputation: 14266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny-Days90 View Post
If it is proven that Obama was a part of this it will begin impeachment process right away.

This is no silly little crime, this is a major crime with severe penalties.
Really. Are you a lawyer? Do you know much in detail about the statutes of law, or are you just assuming this because it fits with your hottest fantasy of getting Obama out of office?

Real legal experts seem to say that this is not illegal. And it's been done by past presidents with some regularity. That said, it was a dumb move by Obama's team because even the perception of impropriety it creates carries heavy costs with it. They should have left this alone.

Here are a few people who actually know what the history in this country has been and what laws actually mean:

Michael Tomasky: The real lesson from this Sestak business | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Quote:
"It is completely unexceptional," said Dr. Russell Riley, associate professor and chair of the Miller Center's Presidential Oral History Program at the University of Virginia. "I read some place today that this is evidently illegal, which was shocking news to me. I don't know what the statutes are that would bear on this... it just doesn't seem to me to particularly rise to the level of being newsworthy in the first place and the fact that it's spun out into a scandal has been surprising."
Quote:
George Edwards, a Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Jordan Chair in Presidential Studies at Texas A&M University, says: "There is no question whatsoever that presidents have often offered people positions to encourage them not to do something or make it awkward for them to do it. Presidents have also offered people back-ups if they ran for an office and lost. All this is old news historically."
This last one everyone will freak out because it mentions Media Matters (which I really don't read), but it is still fact.
Quote:
The progressive watchdog group Media Matters, meanwhile, pointed out that President Reagan offered California Sen. S.I. Hayakawa a job in his administration if he dropped out of the Senate primary race in California -- an offer that Hayakawa, like Sestak, rejected.
So is it really like Nixon and Watergate? No, probably not. Nobody was looking to impeach Reagan for it.

Was it still a bad idea? Definitely yes. It's disappointing, because Obama said he was going to hold to a higher standard than "politics as usual" in Washington.

Last edited by ambient; 05-29-2010 at 12:01 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 11:55 PM
 
18,325 posts, read 18,903,953 times
Reputation: 15627
impeach obama? you guys don't mean to be funny but you are are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2010, 11:59 PM
 
8,762 posts, read 11,536,700 times
Reputation: 3398
Quote:
Originally Posted by hothulamaui View Post
impeach obama? you guys don't mean to be funny but you are are.
EXACTLY my thoughts.

This thread made my day. Just thinking of the righties grabbing on to their Bible or whatever religious text they want, looking at the sky salivating at the thought that maybe this is a sign Barack Obama will be impeached....oh I can't go on. I am laughing too much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 12:25 AM
 
Location: East Chicago, IN
3,100 posts, read 3,286,652 times
Reputation: 1697
Someone on a message board talking about how they have the right to impeach Obama is like that guy sitting at home with the huge ass beer gut watching the NBA playoffs and talking about how he needs to contact David Stern and have him fire Phil Jackson, and actually being convinced that his call would make a difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 02:03 AM
 
Location: SARASOTA, FLORIDA
11,486 posts, read 15,244,356 times
Reputation: 4894
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
Really. Are you a lawyer? Do you know much in detail about the statutes of law, or are you just assuming this because it fits with your hottest fantasy of getting Obama out of office?

Real legal experts seem to say that this is not illegal. And it's been done by past presidents with some regularity. That said, it was a dumb move by Obama's team because even the perception of impropriety it creates carries heavy costs with it. They should have left this alone.

Here are a few people who actually know what the history in this country has been and what laws actually mean:

Michael Tomasky: The real lesson from this Sestak business | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk



This last one everyone will freak out because it mentions Media Matters (which I really don't read), but it is still fact.


So is it really like Nixon and Watergate? No, probably not. Nobody was looking to impeach Reagan for it.

What did Reagan do and was it looked into and was he charged?

Nixon broke the law and paid the price for it.


Was it still a bad idea? Definitely yes. It's disappointing, because Obama said he was going to hold to a higher standard than "politics as usual" in Washington.
I have actually read the statutes and yes there are 3 that I have read that have been violated if in fact he was offered anything of value. If in fact someone offered him a JOB, which the word JOB was used then it is illegal and is a felony.

Who are the REAL legal experts you mention? Links and names please.

If they were doing no wrong then why did it take so long to get the answers out?

The past means zero unless there was a decision in a case that would be looked into. Since there was no case the past means nothing.

Using a UK paper I see, here we go again using a foreign source for information.

Something is very wrong with this and you know it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2010, 06:04 AM
 
Location: A safe distance from San Francisco
12,350 posts, read 9,632,160 times
Reputation: 13890
Of all the idiotic things one could think of to try to manufacture a major controversy about, this one takes the cake.

Just look at the supporting posts - pure blind partisanship that loses all perspective as to any real damage done to anyone. You continue to make today's "conservatives", or so self-described, a laughing stock. And that is why Obama was elected in the first place. When are you going to start to get it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:55 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top