[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

America Erupts… ICE Raids Takeover The Streets

AC/DC- Riff Raff + Go Down [VH1 Uncut, July 5, 1996]

Why is Peter Schiff calling Bitcoin a ‘giant cult’ and how does this impact market sentiment?

Esso Your Butt Buddy Horseshit jacks off to that shit

"The Addled Activist Mind"

"Don’t Stop with Harvard"

"Does the Biden Cover-Up Have Two Layers?"

"Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Reinstated by MLB, Eligible for HOF"

"'Major Breakthrough': Here Are the Details on the China Trade Deal"

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked

Hamas Torture Bodycam Footage: "These Monsters Filmed it All" | IDF Warfighter Doron Keidar, Ep. 225

EXPOSED: The Dark Truth About the Hostages in Gaza

New Task Force Ready To Expose Dark Secrets


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

New World Order
See other New World Order Articles

Title: Obama says, "Despite laws I can do what I want!!!
Source: The Daily Caller
URL Source: http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/15/o ... i-can-do-what-i-want-on-czars/
Published: Apr 17, 2011
Author: Johnathon Strong
Post Date: 2011-04-17 09:01:30 by CZ82
Keywords: None
Views: 11531
Comments: 20

In marked contrast to vows as a candidate not to use presidential signing statements as “an end run around Congress,” President Obama released a statement on the just-signed spending bill saying despite the law’s restrictions on “czars,” he will “construe” the law not to interfere with “presidential prerogatives.”

The move is an aggressive power play by Obama to gain an added advantage from the deal struck a week ago between the president, Republican House Speaker John Boehner and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to narrowly avert government shutdown.

The legislation prohibits government money being spent on four Obama “czars,” newly created positions with far-reaching sway over federal agencies but facing no confirmation vote in the Senate.

However, some of the czars banned in the bill have already stepped down, and it is unclear whether replacements will be appointed.

Obama in his signing statement says the provision in the legislation prohibiting funding for the salaries of the four czars runs afoul of the president’s “well-established authority to supervise and oversee the executive branch, and to obtain advice in furtherance of this supervisory authority.”

The signing statement vaguely refers to an constitutional line that might have been crossed.

“Legislative efforts that significantly impede the President’s ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities or to obtain the views of the appropriate senior advisers violate the separation of powers by undermining the President’s ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” the statement says.

“Therefore, the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these Presidential prerogatives,” the statement says.

A spokesman for Boehner, Michael Steel, said “It’s not surprising that the White House, having bypassed Congress to empower these ‘Czars’ is objecting to eliminating them.”

As a candidate for president in 2008, Obama blasted former President George W. Bush for his aggressive use of signing statements to alter how laws would be implemented after he signed them.

“Congress’s job is to pass legislation. The president can veto it, or he can sign it. But what George Bush has been trying to do as part of his effort to accumulate more power in the presidency, is he’s been saying ‘Well, I can basically change what Congress passed by attaching a letter saying, I don’t agree with this part, or I don’t agree with that part. I’m going to choose to interpret it this way or that way,’” Obama said.

“That’s not part of his power. But this is part of the whole theory of George Bush that he can make laws as he’s going along. I disagree with that. I taught the Constitution for ten years. I believe in the Constitution. And I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We’re not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end run around Congress,” Obama said.

The signing statement on the spending bill, H.R. 1473, also contains a long section on the law’s provisions on Guantanamo Bay, which generally ban Obama from closing the prison there.

Obama says in the statement the provisions could harm “national security” by interfering with “delicate negotiations.”

However, rather than assert presidential power to invalidate those parts of the law, the signing statement only says Obama will work to repeal them and will seek to “mitigate their effects.”

Statement by the President on H.R. 1473

Today I have signed into law H.R. 1473, the “Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 201183;.

Section 1112 of the Act bars the use of funds for the remainder of fiscal year 2011 to transfer Guantanamo detainees into the United States, and section 1113 bars the use of funds for the remainder of fiscal year 2011 to transfer detainees to the custody or effective control of foreign countries unless specified conditions are met. Section 1112 represents the continuation of a dangerous and unprecedented challenge to critical executive branch authority to determine when and where to prosecute Guantanamo detainees, based on the facts and the circumstances of each case and our national security interests. The prosecution of terrorists in Federal court is a powerful tool in our efforts to protect the Nation and must be among the options available to us. Any attempt to deprive the executive branch of that tool undermines our Nation’s counterterrorism efforts and has the potential to harm our national security.

With respect to section 1113 of the Act, the restrictions on the transfer of detainees to the custody or effective control of foreign countries interfere with the authority of the executive branch to make important and consequential foreign policy and national security determinations regarding whether and under what circumstances such transfers should occur in the context of an ongoing armed conflict. We must have the ability to act swiftly and to have broad flexibility in conducting our negotiations with foreign countries. The executive branch has sought and obtained from countries that are prospective recipients of Guantanamo detainees assurances that they will take or have taken measures reasonably designed to be effective in preventing, or ensuring against, returned detainees taking action to threaten the United States or engage in terrorist activities. Consistent with existing statutes, the executive branch has kept the Congress informed about these assurances and notified the Congress prior to transfers. Requiring the executive branch to certify to additional conditions would hinder the conduct of delicate negotiations with foreign countries and therefore the effort to conclude detainee transfers in accord with our national security.

Despite my continued strong objection to these provisions, I have signed this Act because of the importance of avoiding a lapse in appropriations for the Federal Government, including our military activities, for the remainder of fiscal year 2011.

Nevertheless, my Administration will work with the Congress to seek repeal of these restrictions, will seek to mitigate their effects, and will oppose any attempt to extend or expand them in the future.

Section 2262 of the Act would prohibit the use of funds for several positions that involve providing advice directly to the President. The President has well-established authority to supervise and oversee the executive branch, and to obtain advice in furtherance of this supervisory authority. The President also has the prerogative to obtain advice that will assist him in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities, and do so not only from executive branch officials and employees outside the White House, but also from advisers within it.

Legislative efforts that significantly impede the President’s ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities or to obtain the views of the appropriate senior advisers violate the separation of powers by undermining the President’s ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Therefore, the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these Presidential prerogatives.

BARACK OBAMA

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: CZ82 (#0)

As a candidate for president in 2008, Obama blasted former President George W. Bush for his aggressive use of signing statements to alter how laws would be implemented after he signed them.

“Congress’s job is to pass legislation. The president can veto it, or he can sign it. But what George Bush has been trying to do as part of his effort to accumulate more power in the presidency, is he’s been saying ‘Well, I can basically change what Congress passed by attaching a letter saying, I don’t agree with this part, or I don’t agree with that part. I’m going to choose to interpret it this way or that way,’” Obama said.

“That’s not part of his power. But this is part of the whole theory of George Bush that he can make laws as he’s going along. I disagree with that.

Signing statements are as dangerous and unconstitutional as the 'line item veto' power which some presidents have wanted but never acquired, so far that is.

The executive has no power or authority to make law. Signing statements are used, not only to do an end run around Congress, but to do an end run around the basic Constitutional concept of separation of powers.

We The People  posted on  2011-04-17   9:19:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: We The People (#1)

Signing statements are as dangerous and unconstitutional as the 'line item veto' power which some presidents have wanted but never acquired, so far that is.

Line item Veto, now there's a sore subject with a lot of people (kinda like a hemmorrhoid).....

In the right hands it's a good tool, in the wrong hands it would be a nightmare.. I personally don't think you will ever see it, but you never know. The only thing currently available to the president is just refusing to sign the bill until some things are taken out....

"I love the 45 caliber M1911, I respect the 9MM M9 Beretta but I only carry a CZ for my own personal protection". Quote courtesy of Lt Col John Dean Cooper, recognized as the Father of Modern Handgunning

CZ82  posted on  2011-04-17   9:40:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: CZ82, Brain S (#0)

Another impeachable offense pussyboy Brian S.

A K A Stone  posted on  2011-04-17   10:57:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: We The People (#1)

The executive has no power or authority to make law. Signing statements are used, not only to do an end run around Congress, but to do an end run around the basic Constitutional concept of separation of powers.

Don't EO's accomplish the same thing more or less?

#1. To: Goldi-Lox (#0) I used the wrong link. yukon posted on 2011-03-27 1:40:47 ET

Liberator  posted on  2011-04-17   15:47:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: CZ82 (#2)

In the right hands it's [line item veto' power] a good tool, in the wrong hands it would be a nightmare.. I personally don't think you will ever see it, but you never know.

During the last ten years we've already seen too many abuses of power by and from the goob that we've assumed weren't possible.

#1. To: Goldi-Lox (#0) I used the wrong link. yukon posted on 2011-03-27 1:40:47 ET

Liberator  posted on  2011-04-17   15:50:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Liberator (#4)

The executive has no power or authority to make law. Signing statements are used, not only to do an end run around Congress, but to do an end run around the basic Constitutional concept of separation of powers.

Don't EO's accomplish the same thing more or less?

They do. Great point.

We The People  posted on  2011-04-18   10:38:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: CZ82 (#2)

Line item Veto, now there's a sore subject with a lot of people (kinda like a hemmorrhoid).....

In the right hands it's a good tool, in the wrong hands it would be a nightmare.. I personally don't think you will ever see it, but you never know. The only thing currently available to the president is just refusing to sign the bill until some things are taken out....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-item_veto

the line item veto was struck down by the supreme court in 1998 in a 6 to 3 decision, the court held that the line-item veto law violates a constitutional requirement that legislation be passed by both houses of Congress and presented in its entirety to the president for signature or veto.

Thank God. Reagan wanted the line item veto, believe it or not.

We The People  posted on  2011-04-18   10:44:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: All (#7)

Correction: The line-item-veto legislation sponsored by Republicans in the 1990s — and briefly wielded by Clinton — was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional in 1998.

We The People  posted on  2011-04-18   10:48:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: CZ82 (#2)

Barack Obama seeks line-item veto

www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37711.html

So, on Monday, the Obama team proposed a line-item veto with a twist: The president would have a limited time after a bill is passed to submit a package of rescissions that must be considered by Congress in straight up or down votes.

Many Presidents would rather be King.

We The People  posted on  2011-04-18   10:51:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: We The People (#8)

The Supreme Court has become so politicized in the last few decades I cannot view their rulings in light of other circumstances. They have been brought into the political arena where before they were rightly and intentionally above the fray. Each faction of the unified party seek to end-run the Constitution by getting their people on the bench. That Latin thing most recently.

Actually, I feel sorry for you, yu-klown. Growing up with Sally as a mother would probably turn anyone queer.

Rudgear  posted on  2011-04-18   10:54:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: We The People (#6)

The executive has no power or authority to make law. Signing statements are used, not only to do an end run around Congress, but to do an end run around...

And then we have judges single-handedly overturning the will of the people, altering laws of sorts regarding Issue & Referenda.

This is yet another way the Left executes its "end run around," backdoors its agenda, and defies "laws" that The People vote for.

#1. To: Goldi-Lox (#0) I used the wrong link. yukon posted on 2011-03-27 1:40:47 ET

Liberator  posted on  2011-04-18   15:08:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: We The People (#7) (Edited)

Reagan wanted the line item veto, believe it or not.

I remember...

With the wrong President (Bubba/Bush/0bama) it's a license to steal - or as you rightly put it a few posts down, it makes them "Kings."

#1. To: Goldi-Lox (#0) I used the wrong link. yukon posted on 2011-03-27 1:40:47 ET

Liberator  posted on  2011-04-18   15:10:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Liberator (#11)

And then we have judges single-handedly overturning the will of the people

That's what judges are supposed to do when the will of the people conflicts with the constitution.

America...My Kind Of Place...

war  posted on  2011-04-18   15:10:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: war (#13)

That's what judges are supposed to do when the will of the people conflicts with the constitution.

Sound great in theory...But Gay/Leftist judges in California don't GAS about the Charmin, aka the "Constitution."

#1. To: Goldi-Lox (#0) I used the wrong link. yukon posted on 2011-03-27 1:40:47 ET

Liberator  posted on  2011-04-18   15:13:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Liberator (#14)

Sound great in theory...But Gay/Leftist judges in California don't GAS about the Charmin, aka the "Constitution."

Example?

America...My Kind Of Place...

war  posted on  2011-04-18   15:24:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: war (#15) (Edited)

Try on Proposition 8 for example (in Kaleefornia.)

#1. To: Goldi-Lox (#0) I used the wrong link. yukon posted on 2011-03-27 1:40:47 ET

Liberator  posted on  2011-04-18   15:33:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Liberator (#16)

Poor example for you.

The will of the people is to abridge the rights of others? Of COURSE that should be overturned.

America...My Kind Of Place...

war  posted on  2011-04-18   15:58:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: We The People (#7)

Thank God. Reagan wanted the line item veto, believe it or not.

He was fighting Liberal House and Senate so I can see why. If he would have had it, his budgets might not have been near as high, he would have cut out all the Libtard BS.....

"I love the 45 caliber M1911, I respect the 9MM M9 Beretta but I only carry a CZ for my own personal protection". Quote courtesy of Lt Col John Dean Cooper, recognized as the Father of Modern Handgunning

CZ82  posted on  2011-04-18   19:21:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: CZ82 (#18)

If he would have had it, his budgets might not have been near as high, he would have cut out all the Libtard BS.....

He also would have cut out the basic constitutional concept of separation of powers.

We The People  posted on  2011-04-19   13:20:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: We The People (#19)

He also would have cut out the basic constitutional concept of separation of powers.

Why???

"I love the 45 caliber M1911, I respect the 9MM M9 Beretta but I only carry a CZ for my own personal protection". Quote courtesy of Lt Col John Dean Cooper, recognized as the Father of Modern Handgunning

CZ82  posted on  2011-04-19   14:01:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com