CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR SAYS IMPEACHMENT, THEN PROSECUTION
by Neil Turner
(Aug. 30, 2011) — As many of you know, there has been an ongoing discussion and disagreement by various patriots as to whether ‘impeachment’ is a valid action to be brought against the usurper in our White House. The main argument against it is taken from an article written by Dr. Edwin Viera in 2008, BEFORE the usurper was actually ‘certified’ by the Electoral College, and before he was ‘sworn in’ by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
…if Obama does become an usurper posturing as “the President,” Congress cannot even impeach him because, not being the actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (see Article II, Section 4).
Over three years have passed, and Dr. Vieira has now spoken up and used the dreaded and verboten ‘IMPEACHMENT’ word in his recent article of August 13, 2011, ‘FABLES OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT’:
Inasmuch as Article II, Section 3 the Constitution commands the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”—and inasmuch as one of those “Laws” is the Constitution itself—and inasmuch as Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly empowers Congress alone “to enforce” Section 4—it follows that any attempt by the President to usurp any or all of the powers “[t]o borrow Money”, “[t]o lay and collect Taxes”, or to emit fiat currency in order purportedly to enforce Section 4 would constitute a “high Crime[ ] and Misdemeanor[ ]” for which “Impeachment” and “Conviction” would be appropriate, followed by criminal prosecution of both himself and his accomplices. Compare U.S. Const. Article II, Section 4 with Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 and with 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242.
So it would appear that even the erudite Constitutional scholar, Dr. Edwin Vieira, has concluded that we must first impeach the usurper, so that he can then be prosecuted and tried for any and all of his ‘high Crimes’ committed while occupying a ‘high’ (elected) office – whether lawfully seated or not.
Here are excerpts from the article:
FABLES OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
The more I peruse the current public discourse about the application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the present quandary of public debt that confronts this country, the more I am convinced of the wisdom of the observation of the ancients that “Against human stupidity even the immortal gods contend in vain!”
The gist of the argument in favor of the Fourteenth Amendment’s positive application rests on the first sentence of Section 4 of the Amendment: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” Supposedly, this sentence grants a power to the President to borrow money in order to pay outstanding “public debt of the United States” as it comes due, even though Congress has not authorized such additional borrowing. Apparently the theory is that, if the President could not exercise this power, some of the debt would be unpaid at maturity, and therefore its “validity” would “be questioned”, in violation of the Amendment.
Read the rest of the article here.
And here is where he calls for impeachment:
….Inasmuch as Article II, Section 3 the Constitution commands the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”—and inasmuch as one of those “Laws” is the Constitution itself—and inasmuch as Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly empowers Congress alone “to enforce” Section 4—it follows that any attempt by the President to usurp any or all of the powers “[t]o borrow Money”, “[t]o lay and collect Taxes”, or to emit fiat currency in order purportedly to enforce Section 4 would constitute a “high Crime[ ] and Misdemeanor[ ]” for which “Impeachment” and “Conviction” would be appropriate, followed by criminal prosecution of both himself and his accomplices.
And his closing sentence is a real ‘doozy’:
One need not be an electrical engineer, therefore, to realize that the legal “bright bulbs” in the White House are running at far below their self-rated wattage.
From his biographical sketch:
Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).
For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.
So now you know. And now it’s time to put a little fear into the hides of those we have elected – that their job is on the line (the only thing they seem to care about) if they don’t START the IMPEACHMENT process – NOW!
112TH Congress-members! You start his IMPEACHMENT, or we start your REPLACEMENT!
Go here to be able to contact your elected representatives directly – without going through their website:
Neil B. Turner
Citizens for the Constitution
P.S. You can drop this URL (www.TinyURL.com/3ca8cbb) (linking to the Impeach or Replace poster above) into your email to your Senators and Representative – so they really get the message.
They aren’t very much worried about being recalled, but they certainly are concerned about being replaced in their cushy job paying over $14,000 per month – for LIFE!
Sharon Rondeau has operated The Post & Email since April 2010, focusing on the Obama birth certificate investigation and other government corruption news. She has reported prolifically on constitutional violations within Tennessee’s prison and judicial systems.