You know he's in campaign mode, already to start making promises he fully intends to break after November.
~If it was never intended to be used -why the hard obamateam push to pass it?
January 1, 2012
Americans look upon this treacherous legislation, it it should first be remembered that the very bill President Obama threatened to veto was controversial due to the language the Obama White House pressured Congress to add to the bill, according to Sen. Carl Levin.
Second, Signing Statements are not law, and are not a Constitutional power granted to the executive branch; any reassuring (or troubling) language within has no binding status– though it may shed light on the character of the chief executive. However, the statement itself does not indicate any deviation of intent from the law as written and signed.
From Wikipedia: the Constitution does not authorize the President to use signing statements
to circumvent any validly enacted Congressional Laws, nor does it authorize him to declare he will disobey such laws (or parts thereof).
When a bill is presented to the President, the Constitution (Art. II) allows him only three choices: do nothing, sign the bill, or (if he disapproves of the bill) veto it in its entirety.
Obama’s use of signing statements has clearly shown his willingness to continue the George W. Bush legacy– not only of torture and illegal detainment, but in the dangerous trend of de facto rule by “executive fiat.”
Further, Barack Obama has continued to backslide on his campaign promise not to use signing statements and executive orders to circumnavigate legislation signed into law. RELATED (Feb. 2010): Obama Breaks Yet Another Key Campaign Promise on Executive Orders, Signing Statements
Tags: obama signs ndaa indefinite detention, ndaa indefinite detention, hussian obama regime, Hillary Clinton, democRATs
Location: United States (load item map)
Marked as: approved
Views: 2261 | Comments: 10 | Votes: 1 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
|Liveleak on Facebook|