Call Obama A War Criminal Already!

[Jeff]

Congress really does do something , well at least 33 of them



This is not enough: “Thirty-three House lawmakers have signed a letter urging President Barack Obama to call Congress back into session if he plans to use military force in Syria. Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.), who represents a coastal Virginia district rife with current and former military personnel, wrote in the letter that ‘engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United State exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution.’ Most signers are Republicans, according to Rigell’s office. Democratic Reps. Beto O’Rourke (Texas), Gene Green (Texas), Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), Peter DeFazio (Ore.), Kurt Schrader (Ore.) and Rush Holt (N.J.) have also signed on.”

http://lastresistance.com/3103/congress-gop-failure-call-obama-war-criminal-already/

[Kathianne]

I wouldn't go with 'war criminal,' but he may well be in for a rough ride:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/319127-55-house-members-say-obama-needs-approval-from-congress-in-syria-strikes


140 House members say Obama needs approval from Congress on Syria
By Rebecca Shabad - 08/29/13 03:01 PM ET


More than 100 lawmakers, including 21 Democrats, have signed a letter that says President Obama would violate the Constitution by striking Syria without first getting authorization from Congress.


A total of 140 lawmakers had signed the letter as of Thursday, highlighting bipartisan interest and growing momentum in ensuring a role for Congress in any decision to use force in Syria. The letter has yet to be sent to the White House.


“Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution,” states the letter, spearheaded by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.).

“I’m grateful and encouraged by the strong, bipartisan support this letter has received,” Rigell said in a statement this evening. “It’s a clear indication that this issue is not personal to the president, but rather represents common ground in Congress and a deep respect for the Constitution.”

...



http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/319481-house-dems-demand-congressional-debate-before-syria-action



House Dems demand congressional debate before Syria action
By Pete Kasperowicz - 08/29/13 03:12 PM ET


More than 50 House Democrats on Thursday called on President Obama to let Congress "fully debate" the issues involving Syria before any military action takes place.

Democrats let by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) said in a letter to Obama (http://lee.house.gov/sites/lee.house.gov/files/Lee%20Letter%20to%20President%20Obama_Syria.pdf) that Congress needs more time to discuss the various issues posed by an attack.


"Before weighing the use of military force, Congress must fully debate and consider the facts and every alternative, as well as determine how best to end the violence and protect civilians," they wrote.


"While we understand that as Commander in Chief you have a constitutional obligation to protect our national interests from direct attack, Congress has the constitutional obligation and power to approve military force, even if the United States or its direct interests (such as its embassies) have not been attacked or threatened with an attack," it added. "As such, we strongly urge you to seek an affirmative decision of Congress prior to committing any U.S. military engagement to this complex crisis."

The letter follows other letters from Republicans and Democrats calling on Obama to seek congressional approval. More than 100 members warned earlier in the week that the War Powers Resolution does not allow Obama to bomb Syria given that Syria poses no immediate threat to the United States.

The Democratic letter said that while human rights violations are "horrific," they "should not draw us into an unwise war."

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has called on Obama to answer more than a dozen questions about his strategy for Syria before any attack begins, and has said Obama needs to make a public case to the American people before any actions are taken.









and then there's this from the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/us/politics/obama-syria.html?_r=0


Obama Willing to Pursue Solo Syria Strikes, Aides Say<nyt_byline> By MARK LANDLER (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/l/mark_landler/index.html), DAVID E. SANGER (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/david_e_sanger/index.html), THOM SHANKER (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/thom_shanker/index.html) and MARK MAZZETTI (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/mark_mazzetti/index.html) </nyt_byline> Published: August 29, 2013
WASHINGTON — President Obama is prepared to move ahead with a limited military strike on Syria, administration officials said on Thursday, even with a rejection of such action by Britain’s Parliament, an increasingly restive Congress, and lacking an endorsement from the United Nations Security Council.


Although the officials cautioned that Mr. Obama had not made a final decision, all indications suggest that the strike could occur as soon as United Nations inspectors, who are investigating the Aug. 21 attack that killed hundreds of Syrians, leave the country. They are scheduled to depart Damascus, the capital, on Saturday.


The White House is to present its case for military action against Syria to Congressional leaders on Thursday night. Administration officials assert that the intelligence will show that forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad carried out the chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus.


The intelligence does not tie Mr. Assad directly to the attack, officials briefed on the presentation said, but the administration believes that it has enough evidence to carry out a limited strike that would deter the Syrian government from using these weapons again.


...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I call the bastard worse than that and damn sure mean it. Where was this magnificent caring man when Iran brutally crushed its true freedom fighters? He turn his back because they were going directly against a Sharia government! The American media turn its back because they were going against a dictatorial muslim government that is one of our biggest enemies. Now we have a false flag operation in Syria and Obama suddenly wants to use our military to aid our enemies---the rebel Al Qaeda terrorist fighters! Giving aid and comfort to our terrorist enemy is forbidden by U.S. law! Sorry forgot, Obama is above the damn law, right? -Tyr

[hjmick]

I would hope that Vice President Joe Biden would sign on that letter. I mean, he did suggest that he would push for the impeachment of then President Bush should he attack Iran without Congressional approval...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0A2BVjStKc



“The president has no authority to unilaterally attack Iran, and if he does, as Foreign Relations Committee chairman, I will move to impeach...”


I guess that means the same for Obama, right?

[Gaffer]

Want to see him impeached? Just let him act on his own and watch congress and the senate turn on him faster than harry reid can say wait a minute. The Narcissus is in up to his eyeballs all by himself and nobody's going to help him.

If it wasn't for the fact so much bad will follow a strike I would say let him do it and watch as he goes down to impeachment.

[fj1200]

I wouldn't go with 'war criminal,' but he may well be in for a rough ride:

While I doubt much will come of their protestations it is nice to see Congress finally starting to stick up for itself. Too bad it won't last.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

While I doubt much will come of their protestations it is nice to see Congress finally starting to stick up for itself. Too bad it won't last.

Yes, too bad for the entire nation! Also too bad that Obama has gotten away with as much as he has already!--Tyr

[aboutime]

We all know. NOTHING is going to happen to Obama, or anyone connected to his administration.

He has the nations supposed "TOP COP" in Holder, slobbering all over himself with lawsuits against many states over Immigration, and VOTER ID, not to mention the phony Obamacare Slime package.

The only way we get rid of Obama is AT THE POLLS.

Sad to say, but. There are so few HONEST politicians in Washington. In order to get an agreement for Impeachment would be like asking Hillary Clinton to Be Maid of Honor at Monica Lewinski's Wedding.

[Jeff]

Yes, too bad for the entire nation! Also too bad that Obama has gotten away with as much as he has already!--Tyr

I was thinking the same thing maybe while these 38 look at this they can look into Benghazi or all of the other Bull this guy has gotten away with

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I was thinking the same thing maybe while these 38 look at this they can look into Benghazi or all of the other Bull this guy has gotten away with See how a new eruption can hide the older one. Benghazi put Fast And Furious out of sight. Now Syria has put the spying on American, IRS and other scandals out of sight. Its called distraction, same thing great magicians use. Only its easier done to the American public All one needs is a very willing and slavish media , obamass has that! -Tyr

[aboutime]

Obama NEEDS this Syria CRISIS to continue, taking all of the other CRISIS' that he insisted, do not exist...off the front page.

Remember Rahm Emanuel's warning to Obama "Never let a Good Crisis Go to Waste!"

What would we call this?

Obama has no idea what he's doing, or going to do. And...the Lame Stream Press of Obama is NOT REPORTING on anything else.

How Odd is that????