Turley: Obama Accomplishes Nixonian Goals

[Kathianne]

Wow! MSM as lawyers come. Many here have been saying the same for eons, but shockingly don't have the megavoice of Turley:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/03/25/nixon-has-won-watergate/2019443/


Nixon has won Watergate: ColumnJonathan Turley 2:50p.m. EDT March 26, 2013

Barack Obama's imperial presidency is just what his controversial predecessor wanted....

From unilateral military actions to warrantless surveillance that were key parts of the basis for Nixon's impending impeachment, the painful fact is that Barack Obama is the president that Nixon always wanted to be.

Four decades ago, Nixon was halted in his determined effort to create an "imperial presidency" with unilateral powers and privileges. In 2013, Obama wields those very same powers openly and without serious opposition. The success of Obama in acquiring the long-denied powers of Nixon is one of his most remarkable, if ignoble, accomplishments. Consider a few examples:

...

[jimnyc]

Warrantless surveillance
Unilateral military action
Kill lists
Attacking whistle-blowers

Weren't these things the talk of the town and proof that Bush was the anti-Christ? A few people have continued the fight, but just like with the anti-war protestors, they all disappeared when Obama came into office.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Weren't these things the talk of the town and proof that Bush was the anti-Christ? A few people have continued the fight, but just like with the anti-war protestors, they all disappeared when Obama came into office.

They went their sorry asses into hiding as soon as their boy got into office.

Simply can not allow opposition within the dem party to a man presented to be a genius and a messiah.. Their fondest wish is for that false god they made to have the power of a dictator..-Tyr

[fj1200]

Wow! MSM as lawyers come. Many here have been saying the same for eons, but shockingly don't have the megavoice of Turley:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/03/25/nixon-has-won-watergate/2019443/

Members of Congress don't care about the institution anymore, just party.

[Kathianne]

Members of Congress don't care about the institution anymore, just party. and that has to do with Turley's article how? It was a takedown on Obama, not Congress.

[fj1200]

and that has to do with Turley's article how? It was a takedown on Obama, not Congress.

The lack of a Congressional check to balance. Could make the same argument about the press.

[Kathianne]

The lack of a Congressional check to balance. Could make the same argument about the press. So you are just high 5'ving that the courts and Congress no longer matter? That indeed, Obama is an imperialist.

[fj1200]

So you are just high 5'ving that the courts and Congress no longer matter? That indeed, Obama is an imperialist.

Just delving into the why of it all.

[Kathianne]

Just delving into the why of it all.

I'm sort of wondering if with recognition that he's done exactly that, established an imperial Presidency, if that's cool with the people or they will see it and wonder what they've lost?

[red states rule]

Members of Congress don't care about the institution anymore, just party.

So now it is the Republican's fault?

[fj1200]

I'm sort of wondering if with recognition that he's done exactly that, established an imperial Presidency, if that's cool with the people or they will see it and wonder what they've lost?

I think that overstates it but the people won't care.


So now it is the Republican's fault?

:rolleyes: Where did I blame (only) Republicans?

[revelarts]

I'm sort of wondering if with recognition that he's done exactly that, established an imperial Presidency, if that's cool with the people or they will see it and wonder what they've lost?


I wonder if the people who see it now on the right will at least try to elect some one who will divest themselves of these unconstitutional powers when in office.
Or will they suddenly be silent when a republican assumes the SAME powers? and claim at least it's not a Demoncrat.

Will there be new excuses why a Republican can -has to- use the power properly but a democrat is just an imperialist?

[Voted4Reagan]

Let's find a reason for Obama to resign...

Cant come fast enough.

[taft2012]

I disagree with his assessment of Nixon, but agree with his assessment of Obama.

Nixon was trying to create an imperial presidency? WTF is the basis for that?

[taft2012]

I wonder if the people who see it now on the right will at least try to elect some one who will divest themselves of these unconstitutional powers when in office.
Or will they suddenly be silent when a republican assumes the SAME powers? and claim at least it's not a Demoncrat.

Will there be new excuses why a Republican can -has to- use the power properly but a democrat is just an imperialist?

If you're talking about warrantless wiretaps, I supported it under both Bush and Obama. My only probably with Obama is the rank hypocrisy.

As the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, the US President has the ability to collect signal intelligence from the enemy. The notion that a judge signing a warrant figures somewhere into this equation is ludicrous.

If a judge denies a warrant request, and something catastrophic subsequently occurs, who is going to be held accountable? The judge or the Commander-in-Chief?

Please, don't worry. If something pops up on your weed dealer during a warrantless wiretap it will be inadmissible anyway. So your supply remains unthreatened.

[revelarts]

"When the president does , it that means it's not illegal."
Richard M. Nixon


"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
Henry A. Kissinger







U.S. Constitution
Section. 2.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;...
...
Amendment IV 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.





that was the law long before weed became illegal and it became the most important law on the books to some police.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'm sort of wondering if with recognition that he's done exactly that, established an imperial Presidency, if that's cool with the people or they will see it and wonder what they've lost?

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Kathianne again.

The ones that would care are the ones that obama identifies as the enemy and has engineered such opposition against. (patriots, returning veterans, Christians, etc.) as he divides and conquers!! -Tyr

[taft2012]

that was the law long before weed became illegal and it became the most important law on the books to some police.

As is often said; the US Constitution is not a suicide pact.

The Constitution excludes the judiciary from war actions. The liberals and pothead conservatives want to include them, because to this new crop of "libertarians" setting up a faux ideological camp to the right of traditional conservatives, legalized marijuana is their paramount issue.

The notion that the President has to approach a judge to get permission to wiretap people actively chatting with known enemy associates overseas, and request a warrant... is beyond ludicrous.

Historical reality: Nixon was unaware of the Watergate bugging. He was aware of the Pentagon Papers bugging, which investigated the leak of confidential military reports to the NY Times, which was within his authority as the Commander-in-Chief.

But here's a question: Why would it make you feel better if the government went and got a warrant prior to wiretapping these people chatting with Al Qaeda? Does it make you feel better that some wild-eyed libtard judge might deny a warrant and possibly endanger innocent Americans?

There's a really simple answer for you; Don't buy your weed from Al Qaeda associates.