Pelosi "Proud" of Obama for Ignoring Constitution

[imreallyperplexed]

Sorry, I think that you are wrong. McConnell is as sleazy as Reid. And GWB was treated no worse than Clinton was or Obama has been. Republicans do all the things that you decry Democrats for doing. (And I suspect that you know that is true.)

In any case, the courts will decide which side is correct and a precedent will be set.

Gotta disagree with you there.. Reid instituted proforma policy and Bush complied..Well when it comes time for the Obama to comply he said to hell with the Senate I am the Dicktater around here. The outcry now is nothing compared to what the pirhana feeding frenzy would have been had Bush decided to go ahead and make recess appointments during a proforma session.. You know this is true yet you defend the sleeze

 

[Friday13]

I'm with ya, OG.

 

[Friday13]

Oh, and then there's this from Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution: "[The President] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper." And a disagreement is exactly what happened: the Democratic Senate asked the Republican House to adjourn. The House declined and thus the cycle of pro forma sessions started. Thus the President can invoke this power. It exists in case Congress becomes too dysfunctional, like, you know, it is, thanks to the GOP. (Right now, this section is not the legal reasoning being put forth by the White House, which is simply asserting that the pro forma sessions do not mean Congress is in session.)

And if Obama is feeling particularly pissy, the Constitution actually says that he can keep the Congress adjourned as long as he damn well pleases.

The sad part is that Obama is doing this just because he wants to fulfill another clause of Article 2, Section 3. That says the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." Republicans were blocking nominees in these specific positions because it didn't want the laws that previous congresses had passed to be executed. Instead of attempting to overturn the laws through the, you know, legislative process, they were just obstructionist cocks. Once again, to get the merest of things done, President Obama had to slap those erect pricks out of his face and tell their owners that he was done sucking them off, and that the Republicans can go

themselves.

Right-Wingers and Obama's Recess Appointments: Now It's Imperial to Just Execute the Laws:

Courtesy of Yuri...

 

[Old Ridge Runner]

Yes, if it goes to court. Look how long it took the courts to come up with a definition on the second amendment. This will probably be in the USSC in 50 years or so if the country is still here by than.

 

[Friday13]

1. Nullification. Fights between Congress and the president over presidential appointments have gone on for decades. But Senate Republicans have taken the fight to a new level by using the power to deny appointments to require changes in the laws. The Dodd–Frank financial reform established the C.F.R.B., but Wall Street hates it, and Republicans openly vowed not to confirm any director unless Obama agreed to weaken the law.


This is an entirely new use of congressional power to block appointments. The normally mild-mannered James Fallows has called this “nullification,” and Republicans have begun using it to paralyze large swaths of the government. The normal presidential recourse against hardened opposition to an executive branch nominee is to make the appointment when Congress is out of session, but Republicans closed off that avenue as well, by holding pro forma sessions year-round. If it held up, this would give Congress enormous power over the president – allowing it to unilaterally halt any agency it likes in return for any demand at all. They have likewise refused to confirm any directors at all to the National Labor Relations Board, denying the agency a quorum and essentially halting the enforcement of federal labor law.

Strategy

A little more light...

This may come as a surprise, since throughout this year Republicans have been able to use pro forma sessions to never take Congress into recess, thereby blocking recess appointments. Indeed, that was the plan for this holiday break as well.

But the implications of what McConnell is saying here are that the pro forma sessions cannot hold back recess appointments through the entire holiday break. He knows that the change in calendar year means that one session of Congress must “end” with the other beginning in January. And even if that takes one second, it’s a recess, and in that gap the President can make recess appointments. So McConnell is clearly resigned to this, and he’s trying to use some leverage – in the form of 50 nominees, physical hostages in this case – to ensure that the recess appointments don’t come.

The stories about this get this wrong, as usual. It cannot be simultaneously correct that McConnell is looking for assurances on recess appointments and recess appointments are impossible because of the pro forma sessions. That defies logic. McConnell knows his goose is cooked; he’s trying to bluff the media and the President.

McConnell admits President could pull off recess appointmnts