Caveat:I don’t buy into this conspiracy horseshit but it’s a chance to educate myself (hopefully) with FACTS for a counter-argument.
A couple of friends and I were talking yesterday, bitching about the way things are and such as guys often do. One of them mentioned something about martial law under the guise of a national emergency and Obama cancelling the 2016 elections and remaining in power. Now, I always roll my eyes when this type of thing comes up and did so yesterday. My buddy looks at me and says “You think I’m joking?” I replied that the Constitutionally granted term in office ends for Shitstain on Jan. 20, 2017. He could not remain in office past that and a coup would likely remove him from power if he tried. My friends disagreed, saying the military has to support the Constitutional leader, and that martial law would mean he was indeed the legal POTUS.
I found myself wanting soooo much to show them that they were wrong about this (never mind the fact that it’s so farfetched as to be ridiculous). I maintain that there is nothing in the Constitution regarding martial law and it being the conduit by which someone remains in office indefinitely. I’ve never heard of the Constitution addressing martial law, so I guess that the lack of it means one cannot remain in power in such a way. My friends maintained that a national emergency being declared would be legal coverage for a power grab.
Some of you more scholarly law types care to chime in? Is there a mechanism by which someone can remain in power beyond their Constitutionally mandated term? If so, please cite said clause.
Your post got me reading. Since I don’t want to shamelessly quote Wikipedia, here is an interesting read on martial law in the United States (you may need to scroll down to the US section):
I don’t think the scenario you outlined is terribly likely, since a crisis sufficient for a martial law declaration would be terrible indeed (remember 9/11? Martial law wasn’t declared.) In addition, declaration of Martial Law doesn’t negate the Constitution. I think even emperor barry would have a significant uphill battle if he tried this.
I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed so take it for what it’s worth. I was also under the impression that FEMA also had the ability to suspend the Constitution in a state of emergency as well.
So from reading the links provided I see nowhere that a POTUS can unilaterally declare anything of the sort without agreement from Congress. Habeus Corpus was suspended by Lincoln but not the entire Constitution. A state of national emergency does not grant carte blanche power.
He has a pen, and he has a phone, but even those will only get you so far when trying to usurp authority. Ultimately you need many men with guns willing to say “yes.”
Barry is tired of being president. It’s too much like having a real job, which came as a shock since he has never had a real job. BHO wants to get back to running campaigns and making speeches. There is no way that he will go away quietly like either Bush did, and I expect him to make Bill Clinton look like a recluse.
Executive Order 13603. This is from a quick google search. Again, things can be interpreted different ways by different people. Will it happen? I hope not. Can it happen? I hope not.
Great Article, some really telling quotes from it.
Many presidents have pushed to expand their power beyond constitutional limits, particularly during crises. Issuing executive orders is the easiest way to do it. A president doesn’t have to propose an executive order, debate the issues, endure hearings or solicit votes. An executive order can be issued in a few minutes — behind closed doors and away from bright lights.
And
What about the Constitution? It describes presidential power broadly. There isn’t anything in the Constitution that authorizes an executive order or limits what a president can do with it.
Executive orders arise from “implied constitutional and statutory authority,” the Congressional Research Service reported. “If issued under a valid claim of authority and published in the Federal Register, executive orders may have the force and effect of law.”
To no small degree this is what is killing us with the two party system.
Now I will agree this is going way tight with the tin foil hat, but; if the Dem’s still held control of the Legislative branch, who would there be to stop him? What could cause such an emergency? An exchange of nuke and chem weaqpons in the Middle East? A Terrorist Strike on the Homeland?
Unlikely, but it would make a hell of a book, wouldn’t it?
Guys I don’t think it will happen and as I stated before it is so farfetched as to be ridiculous.
That said, I was looking to have an educated discussion on the aspect of CAN it be done, not that it’s even remotely likely. Some of the links provided are interesting indeed. Did not know, for instance, that executive orders are found nowhere in the Constitution. If you look at what Lincoln did during what can arguably be the greatest crisis to ever face this country (and surely qualifying as a “national emergency”) it is eye-opening. When you have an administration that doesn’t let “a crisis go to waste” it brings this subject into the modern era.
One other thing to keep in mind is that a POTUS (whoever, not necessarily Shitstain) can try anything they want. Sure, it may eventually be negated by the courts later but what about the here-and-now? i.e. what occurs during the interim? For example Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus in 1861 and it wasn’t until 1866----five years later!----that the SCOTUS ruled the move unconstitutional as the courts were still functioning during that time. So consider a similarly unconstitutional act by a POTUS and what damage could be done (and never be undone) until things were “sorted out” later on.
First more than anything I hope my thread didn’t go off of the rails for you.
Yes they can (with control of the legislative branch and by delaying review of the judical) run this gambit, to the best of my knowledge, as long as possible. After all, who would object?
Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states within seven years from the date of its submission to the states by the Congress.
Show me your best surprised face:
“ever since 1985, when Ronald Reagan was serving in his second term as president, there have been repeated attempts to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which limits each president to two terms.”[6] In addition, several congressmen, including Democrats Rep. Barney Frank, Rep. José Serrano,[7] Rep. Howard Berman, and Sen. Harry Reid,[8] and Republicans Rep. Guy Vander Jagt,[9] Rep. David Dreier[10] and Sen. Mitch McConnell[11] have introduced legislation to repeal the Twenty-second Amendment, but each resolution died before making it out of its respective committee.
If your question is as simple as, “does the Constitution specifically give the president the the power to declare martial law, suspend the Constitution, and stay in power after his term expires?” the answer is no. But…if there is one thing I think we can agree on is there is nothing simple when it comes to government. More from Wikipedia.
Pay specific attention to the sections, Emergency Power, Executive Privilege, and Constraints on Presidential Power.
The idea of a situation where this could occur seems ridiculous to you. That’s fine. Since Lincoln was used as a reference, do you think most Americans prior to the Civil War believed something like that would happen? Prior to 9/11 did most Americans believe something like that could happen? What if there were coordinated terrorist attacks in major cities across the U.S.? What if the race baiting liberal media finally fans the flames of a race war to the point of the Watts or Rodney King riots all over the country. What if the anti gun crowd succeeds and you’re asked to hand in your guns? Everything seems far fetched until it happens.
I never thought we would have a iranian lady running the white house with a muslim as the puppet who has done so much to damage this country and drive it so much further into debt and done so many illegal things with his elected justice dept and other depts like IRS to target his enemies and it just keeps going…
I do think as others think he wants to somehow be part of the NWO soros and others are wanting to push most likely using the UN and in that meantime till that is somehow pushed into authority he will be part of the UN of course if he had it his way he would be the spokesperson and face of the UN but cant see that happening as he is not a leader he is only a puppet and the people pulling the strings dont care about him and will switch puppets as needed
I think those who say no way have to remember quite a few on the left and some on the so called right dont like this country and are more globalist types and we should not have borders and we should follow a world law and that is the big goal of many in the WH today any way they can chip away and then take your rights they will
democrats have a history of starting wars and using power to control our country and the people in it
look at WWII and putting our American citizens into camps based on race alone so bad things have happened before
even in our country having our military being used against its own has happened with the bonus army after WWI
in some ways I can almost see them try it just to see if they could get away with it and to break down and learn how to do it better(permanent) next time they are in power