Feingold, Reid, Censure and Stupidity

First, one should ask themselves, "WHY?" and, "What are the motives?" I like what Wake Up America said, "Let's dance". I wasn't going to blog on this until I read her piece and then a friend emailed me the YouTube of Feingold making a COMPLETE AND TOTAL ASS of himself. Listen to the video...it is in my VODPOD, right next to the video where Reid said he didn't approve of the censure. Gee...I wonder why THAT is. One MAJOR embarrassment a month is more than Reid can handle. Can the Democratic Party survive another Mitch Slapping? Let's see if Reid will prove...AGAIN...that he is a liar.

We shall see, I suppose. I would put the YouTube videos in this post but they take too long to load. Please check in the video tool above.

Thanks.

What is "Censure?"

Although ill-defined, censure is a process of Congressional reprimand--the political equivalent of a strongly-worded letter. In 1834, a Whig Senate "censured" Democratic President Andrew Jackson in retaliation for his withholding documents. Three years later, a Democratic Senate "expunged" the censure from the record. However, that act of censure had no basis in either the Constitution or the Rules of the House and Senate. This remains true today. Ordinarily, Congressional disapproval of the President is relayed either through its legislative power including the veto override power or through impeachment.

Presumably, censure of the President would take the form of a resolution adopted by both the House and Senate and then publicly announced. Legally, the resolution would have no effect. Censure derives from the formal condemnation by either the House or the Senate in rebuke of a Member of their own body. After a majority vote, the Member is publicly denounced, but still retains the position of Representative or Senator. However, the House removes the offending Member from any leadership positions in committees or sub-committees.

Probable Censure Procedure [from C-SPAN]

1. A resolution censuring the President is not contemplated by the rules of the House. This means it has no inherent privilege; it is not a question of the privileges of the House, nor is it a matter of personal privilege. Thus, there is no framework for considering it.
   
2. A special rule from the House Rules Committee would be required for its floor consideration and to set debate parameters.
   
3. A censure resolution could be drafted, considered, and then reported from the House Judiciary Committee, or
   
4. A censure resolution could be introduced and taken up immediately under the auspices of a special rule from the House Rules Committee, or
   
5. A censure resolution could be introduced by an individual Member, and referred to the House Judiciary Committee for its consideration.
   
6. In the Senate, a censure resolution could be introduced and would be referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, or
   
7. The Senate Judiciary Committee could draft, consider and report out a censure resolution to the full Senate; or
   
8. A unanimous consent agreement could be worked out in advance to introduce a censure resolution by sending it to the desk and providing for its immediate consideration.
   
9. Floor debate and possible amendment of a censure resolution would most likely be governed by a unanimous consent agreement among all Senators.
   
10. If there is a single objection to a unanimous consent agreement, the Majority Leader could move to proceed to a censure resolution.
    
11. Adoption of a motion to proceed requires a majority vote, unless it is filibustered. In that case, a 3/5ths vote (60 or more) is required to end the filibuster.

Feingold wants to censure President Bush. He tried that last year and it didn't work. What this measure is, is the prelude to an impeachment. Seeing that there are NO constitutional violations perpetrated by President Bush or Vice-President Cheney, there are no grounds for the impeachment procedures. Another article is here. Feingold's retarded rhetoric is here.

Feingold whines about the "domestic spy program" (which it isn't) and the courts have said the "domestic spy program" (which it isn't) is legal; that issue is a debunked one. He goes on about the Attorney General which we all know is another Leftinistra Witch Hunt and is another non-issue.

We hear every day what "violations to the Constitution" were made by the sitting Administration yet no one has said anything specific. Bring it on. Let's dance.

Both of these "educated beyond their abilities to comprehend realities" idgits have said that GWB "has the label of the worse president we ever had" (snicker-snicker snort-snort). I guess in their estimations Carter and the other Clinton were the cat's meow? Good Lord. No wonder they are so dumb.

Anyway, Feingold's video is about 5 minutes and Reid's is about 2 minutes. Listen carefully and those of you that have had the training I have had, watch the bl.

A Call To Censure Murtha

I second that motion. Any "AYES" out there? As I have posted at least a dozen times on this blog and many more comments made on other blogs regarding Murtha, the whole issue had a stench of politicizing for political gain from the onset.

My posts on Murtha can be found here and here.

Hat Tip to Amy Proctor!!

A Marine being cleared of wrongdoing in the Haditha murders of Iraqi civilians wants John Murtha censured for saying he killed civilians “in cold blood”. Another Marine is suing. OORAH!

Other pieces by Amy Proctor:

RELATED POSTS:

A Suspicious Piece to the Haditha Puzzle

The Unraveling of Haditha-Part I

The Unraveling of Haditha-Part II

Amy Proctor has a video on this censure issue and I have placed it in my VODPOD above.

Murtha: a boil-a festering, infected boil on the ass of society...a Clear and Present Danger.

Call To Action...Support The Troops...Censure CONgress

In a previous post entitled Axis of Defeatists, I pointed out the sillyness of the Cut and Run rhetoric and others have pointed out that "redeployment" is a military term which means NOT what the current milquetoast CONgress Critters are implying it means. If you don't know what the term means, don't make up a meaning to suit your uneducated stupidity. Go look it up.

The Lame Stream Media has been outed upon several "events" and I am going to surmise one here and now. We Conservatives, especially the Reagan Era Conservatives, know for a FACT that there is Leftist Propaganda Machinations throughout the Lame Stream Media, in print and broadcast. It has been proven. Deny it all you want to...the facts remain.

In recent days, GWB and scads of CONgress Critters tried to get the Shamnesty Bill through and crammed down the Nation's throat. Democrat, Independent and Republican alike said, "Hell NO!". GWB and many CONgress Critters (D, R & I) and far-left Moonbat Brigades were upset with "us". The Media was having a Hay Day with it because it was PLAINLY obvious that the Executive and the Legislative branches were NOT listening to "us" and we were NOT buying into the crappola and all they could do was blame Bush. It was an opportunity to "show the world" how lame GWB was. Several Democrats even said as much. "We The People" were heard because the lame Stream Media saw a way to PROVE their "points" as dictated by their string pullers in the Camp of The Leftinistra.

Now, here we are, facing another "stab the troop in the back" episode with the lamest CONgress in the Nation's history, with an approval rating HALF of the approval rating of GWB, and we are to "believe" that the majority of Americans are WITH the lowest approved of CONgress in history. Does that seem even remotely feasible? The Lame Stream Media is using this as another opportunity to "show the world" that GWB is lame. And he is not. I may not agree with GWB ALL the time but he IS correct (mostly) on the GWOT. We fight them there so we don't fight them here. The problem with that has been amply discussed in other posts, namely, the ROE. Why aren't the majority being heard this time around?

This brings up an issue that the LAMEST CONgress in history will NOT address and it is way past time to continue to let them slide on it. This Nation is at war. PERIOD. The laws apply.

United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

Section 2382. Misprision of treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

Section 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war

(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or

Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or

willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).

(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.

And why won't "they" address it? Because "they" protect their own...in CLEAR violation of said law. There are bigger fish to fry...you and I. Clearly, MANY in CONgress have violated these LAWS yet, "they" are ABOVE the law. Yes? No? Maybe? Read them and decide. And they whine about Libby's commutation...smoke and mirrors.

Pelosi violated the Logan Act and cowards did nothing. All she did was to go on a Mission of Her Own Agenda, an unsanctioned trip to Israel and then Syria, an enemy Nation of the United States and Israel (our ALLY), which she BOTCHED so badly Israel was livid.

There are CONgress Critters and Lame Stream Media moguls and puppets thereof, running around committing seditious and subversive and treasonous acts all around us and COWARDS in CONgress do NOTHING? In a time of WAR?

The Censure rules need to be enforced as well.

This is a Call To Action, I suppose. Demand Justice Be Served on those bent on causing The United States harm, in the long run. Write, call, fax and email...FLOOD them like we did over the Shamnesty issue.

Don't our troops deserve better action on our part than that which we accomplished over Shamnesty?

Seditious leftinistra

Censure the Leftinistra

Censure the Leftinistra

Friday, April 06, 2007 11:10 PM

Put Up Or Shut Up!!

Where are ALL the men in DC? Out washing dishes or what? Are you men or mice? Squeak up!!!

Expulsion, Censure, Reprimand, and Fine: LegislativeDiscipline in the House of Representatives

Summary

The House of Representatives is expressly authorized within the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 5, clause 2) to discipline or “punish” its own Members. This authority of the institution of the House to discipline a Member for “disorderly Behaviour” is in addition to any criminal or civil liability that a Member of the House may incur for particular misconduct, and is a device or procedure designed not so much as merely a punishment of the individual Member, but rather ultimately as a measure to protect the institutional integrity of the House of Representatives, its proceedings and its reputation.

Congressional discipline of a Member by the House of Representatives is done by the House itself, without the necessity of Senate concurrence, and may take several forms. The most common forms of discipline in the House are now “expulsion,” “censure,” or “reprimand,” although the House may also discipline its Members in others ways, including fine or monetary restitution, loss of seniority, and suspension or loss of certain privileges. In addition to such sanctions imposed by the full House of Representatives, the standing committee in the House dealing with ethics and official conduct matters, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, is authorized by House Rules to issue a formal Committee reproach in the form of a “Letter of Reproval” for misconduct which does not rise to the level of consideration or sanction by the entire House of Representatives. Additionally, such Committee has also expressed its disapproval of conduct in informal letters and communications to Members.

The House may generally discipline its Members for violations of statutory law, including crimes; for violations of internal congressional rules; or for any conduct which the House of Representatives finds has reflected discredit upon the institution. Thus, each House of Congress has disciplined its own Members for conduct which has not necessarily violated any specific rule or law, but which was found to breach its privileges, demonstrate contempt for the institution, or which was found to discredit the House or Senate. When the most severe sanction of expulsion has been employed in the House, however, the conduct has historically involved either disloyalty to the United States Government, or the violation of a criminal law involving the abuse of one’s official position, such as bribery.