Originally Posted by 04hemisportedt
Once upon a time, we didn't negotiate with terrorists.
Once upon a time, diserters were shot.
Once upon a time, swearing you'll defend and uphold the constitution meant you'd actually do that. (Not place executive orders, or create laws, that were ILLEGAL)
by the way, who says the president can't be arrested for breaking the law?
Adam, there is one ex judge that says he can go to jail.....
President Obama and his administration have traded five high-level, committed terrorists for one Army deserter who may have aided the enemy. Is what he did right? Many would, of course, argue that this was a disastrous, un-American move that is a slap in the face to every service member.
Was what he did legal? Absolutely not.
The president is not a king. When we considered revolt against the British, we had the option to remain subjects of a king. We chose not to. When we tried to erect a new government, fledgling American states had a very serious discussion about the need for a king. We discussed whether a nation could survive without a monarch.
We, again, chose to not have a king.
Now, we are saddled with a president who behaves more and more like a king and according to a top legal expert, his grandiose disdain for the confines of the executive branch could land him in prison.
Former judge and Fox News contributor Andrew Napolitano spoke with Shepard Smith on Monday and offered an opinion that is sure to infuriate diehard Obama apologists: the president not only violated the law when he refused to notify Congress of the swap, but may have even aided a terrorist organization- a crime punishable by up to ten years in prison.
Napolitano clearly stated that the president is guilty of violating a crystal-clear statute that prohibits the use of taxpayer money to transport prisoners from Guantanamo Bay unless Congress had been given 30 days notice. Of course, the president provided merely hours notices and the move is a violation of legally-passed law, regardless of whatever signing statements or exigent circumstances the Obama Administration wants o use to try and defend their actions.
However, the more-serious charge Napolitano discussed with Smith was the fact that by releasing these terrorists, the president, a Commander-in-Chief as well as a U.S. citizen, has provided material assistance to a terrorist organization.
Napolitano laid it out in crystal-clear, easily-followed terms:
“Fact: The Taliban has been declared by the Congress and the president to be a non-state terrorist organization. Fact: Federal statute makes it a crime, punishable by ten years in jail up to life in prison, for materially aiding a terrorist organization. Fact: the courts have ruled that any assistance, knowingly and intentionally provided to a terrorist organization by an American makes that American liable for prosecution under this statute.”
Smith asked if Napolitano was accusing the president of aiding and abetting the enemy, to which Napolitano exclaimed, “Yes! Yes! It’s pretty clear.”
I cannot profess to be a great legal expert, but I am capable of following a basic line of irrefutable logic. The president restocked the pool of terrorists that are looking to kill Americans. Plain and simple.
Remember: Nixon fled the White House for bugging an office and lying about it. Obama makes yesteryear’s scandals look quaint by comparison.