Skip to main content

Obama's Second Constitutional Crisis--And He's Not Even President Yet!!

The current "injury" is that Barack Obama may not meet Constitutional citizenship requirements for becoming President of the United States. To that we can now add an "insult". In a far more cut and dried case, Hillary Clinton cannot currently be appointed to serve as Secretary of State.

Darn it! That "[blankety-blank] piece of paper" is getting in the way again...

Hillary Clinton is a United States Senator. In her current term in the Senate,

Admittedly, it wouldn't be the first time that a president has used Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution to wipe his backside. Nixon did it, Carter did it, and Hillary's own husband did it. So, we can likely count on the Obama administration and its media patsies to pay about as much attention to this as they did to that little thing about the birth certificate.

the pay for the office of Secretary of State (among others) was raised. Senator Clinton is thereby disqualified from becoming Secretary of State--at least for now.

It's one of the clearest conflict-of-interest statements in the Constitution. Article I, Section 6 says:
No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.
Well, it does use the sexist term "he", so maybe Senator Clinton is exempted from this requirement...?

;-)

The "emoluments" of the office of Secretary of State were increased by executive order in January 2008, pursuant to the requirements of cost of living legislation. Well, at least now the Federal Reserve, with its inflationary tactics, has screwed someone else besides just us peons.

Senator

The "emoluments" of the office of Secretary of State were increased by executive order in January 2008, pursuant to the requirements of cost of living legislation. Well, at least now the Federal Reserve, with its inflationary tactics, has screwed someone else besides just us peons.

Clinton was first elected to the Senate in 2000. She was re-elected in 2006. Her current term lasts for four more years. Senator Clinton cannot, therefore, become Secretary of State until 2013 at the earliest.

Do Barack Obama and his transition team not know about these things? Or is the Constitution just as much a "[blankety-blank] piece of paper" to them as it is to George W. Bush?" And was it planned that way?

Admittedly, it wouldn't be the first time that a president has used Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution to wipe his backside. Nixon did it, Carter did it, and Hillary's own husband did it. So, we can likely count on the Obama administration and its media patsies to pay about as much attention to it as they did about that birth certificate thing.

Barack Obama has already been party to two Constitutional crises, and he's not even president yet. Holy cow! This is portending to be a long and bumpy ride.

Don't worry, though. You can go back to watching Dancing with the Stars.
Labels:

Comments

  1. Anonymous12/01/2008 02:42:00 PM

    So if she resigns her position in the Senate, is she then eligible? Is there a similar rule about a Senator serving as President during the time they were elected as a representative?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Scott Hinrichs12/01/2008 02:45:00 PM

    The phrase, "during the Time for which he was elected" kind of throws a monkey wrench into the mix. Although I have read the Constitution many times, this escaped my attention. It would seem that even if a senator or representative resigned his/her post prior to actually being appointed to fill an appointed executive position, he/she would yet be ineligible if the term to which he/she was elected had not yet expired.

    But don't expect the GOP to make much of a fuss about it, since they will want to reserve the right to engage in similar shenanigans in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  3. rmwarnick12/01/2008 04:16:00 PM

    Much has been made of Obama the Constitutional scholar, but I'm not impressed because he voted for the blatantly unconstitutional FISA amendments.

    Unlike Bush's violations of the Constitution, Hillary's appointment lacks criminal intent so it's probably not an impeachable offense.

    Keep trying, I expect the right wing to draw up articles of impeachment on January 21 at the latest!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jesse Harris12/01/2008 04:36:00 PM

    As sad as it is, there's enough of a precedent of this happening that it has its own name.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Frank Staheli12/01/2008 09:00:00 PM

    Richard,

    You're right--it's not impeachable. We didn't try hard enough, though, to remove Bush and Cheney for clearly impeachable offenses.

    Jesse,

    It's all just a good ole boy and girl network now anyway, which would make Madison and his contemporaries roll over in their graves. The better fix would be an amendment to the Constitution. Otherwise this becomes like a speeder complaining to the highway patrol officer--and getting off--because the officer didn't the other guy who was speeding just as fast.

    ReplyDelete
  6. rmwarnick12/03/2008 12:53:00 PM

    Looks like Congress can fix the problem simply by reducing the salary of the Secretary of State.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous12/05/2008 03:08:00 PM

    Yea, I actually saw an article about this in the NY times.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting. If you have a Google/Blogger account, to be apprised of ongoing comment activity on this article, please click the "Subscribe" link below.

Popular posts from this blog

School Vouchers: "The Bramble Memo"

$429 million? What? Where? The legislative fiscal analyst for the State of Utah calculated the costs to the public schools over the next 13 years if school vouchers are implemented. It said the costs would be $5.5M in the first year, and $71M in the 13th year. Suddenly, the number I have started seeing thrown around was $429 million, the total costs for vouchers over 13 years. Where did that number come from? Enter the mysterious "Bramble Memo". In the past few days several of us (Jeremy, Utah Taxpayer, Craig, Sara, Urban Koda, Jesse, and me) have (sometimes?) enjoyed a lively discussion about school vouchers in Utah . Jeremy clarified to me the costs of the venture by linking to a copy of the Utah Legislative Fiscal Analyst's Impartial Analysis (LFA) of the costs of Vouchers , found on "The Senate Site". In my previous voucher article, I quoted some of Lavar Webb's article from last Sunday's Deseret News, wherein he stated that those total costs ...
66 comments
Read more

Why Do Liberals Coddle the Radical Islamic Monster?

Many liberals and progressives in the United States and elsewhere support a radical Islamic fundamentalist movement which, if it came to power, would quickly wipe out their liberal progressive ideology. Why then, do so many liberals coddle the monster that would destroy them? The Answer lies in their long-stemmed hatred of Western liberty and free markets. Dick Morris' new revelation of Hillary Clinton's ties to Islamic fundamentalist terrorism provides an excellent backdrop for me to ask the question that Greg Allen of The Right Balance has been asking for quite some time, to wit: If many liberals stand for free sexuality, homosexuality, the use of drugs, binge drinking, and other mindless expressions of individuality, why do so many of them also look the other way when it comes to Islamic fundamentalism? Don't they know that Iran has put to death as many as 4,000 homosexuals? Don't they know that if Islamists come to power they will not only make sexual perversi...
52 comments
Read more

The Inhumanity of Bob Lonsberry: Waterboarding, Concentration Camps, and the the Bataan Death March

KNRS 570 radio talk show host Bob Lonsberry advocated waterboarding and other forms of torture during his show on April 21, 2009. More grotesquely, he was beaming with pride about his advocacy campaign. It's difficult to imagine then, that, by the same rationale, had Lonsberry been a German at the time of Hitler, or a Japanese during the Bataan Death March, that he would not have advocated torture of Jews in the concentration camps or the bayoneting and shooting of American soldiers on the Bataan trail. Torture, Torture, Everywhere! Nearly 80,000 American soldiers were captured by the Japanese in the To contemplate a discussion about whether or not torture is legal or whether it even works, it is first required to come to the conclusion that 'I am a child of God, but my adversary is a monkey'. Phillipines in 1942 and forced to march with no food and very little water for six days. If a man stumbled, if he didn't respond quickly to a command, or if he tried to get wat...
50 comments
Read more