Obama on ISIS: "Baaaaa!" Should he stay or should he go?

"An army of sheep led by a lion is more to be feared than an army of lions led by a sheep" --Alexander the Great

President Obama, as some call him, has been waiting for a military muse to inspire him with a plan to defeat the Islamic State, also known as ISIS. 

The Islamic State has not been waiting for a strategy to defeat the non-Islamic world, they're going at it like an infidel on fire because they have a plan.

So what really gives here? 

Is Obama scared to commit to action? Is he afraid to show American strength against the terror threat? Or does he think America has no right to be the world's bully?

D. All of the above.

As Bill O'Reilly said on the matter, if Obama was merely the CEO of a company, he'd be fired in a heartbeat.

Many people (the ones who have the intelligence not to be liberals) on Twitter and other social media, believe that Obama should to be impeached. In order to know if this can be accomplished, before we all end up praying toward Mecca, we need to understand what it actually takes to impeach a sitting president (or one who doesn't sit but plays golf when he should be leading the country).

The Constitutional Rights Foundation discusses what must be considered to impeach a president, delineating the specific grounds for impeachment and how they are defined. 

In other words, the Constitution states that "treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors" can be sufficient grounds to remove a president from office. However, the House and Senate must find that the president has committed one of these acts.

Treason is defined in Article 3 Section 3 Clause 1: 

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

Simply put, we would need to actually catch Obama giving Aid and Comfort to the enemies of the United States. Thus, we need to ask ourselves, "Does allowing Iran to continue its nuclear program whereby they will likely develop a nuclear bomb qualify as giving aid to the enemy, since it is clear that Iran sees us as their enemy?" I believe it does, but there's more to make the case for impeachment.

The impeachment process starts in the House of Representatives and then goes to the Senate. First, the House Judiciary Committee holds hearings and prepares articles of impeachment if their findings merit that step.

If a majority votes to approve the articles of impeachment, the House votes on them after a vigorous debate, and if they vote to impeach Obama (in this case) he would have to stand trial in the Senate.

To get him out of office, two-thirds of the Senate must vote to convict him whereby he would immediately be removed from the presidency and may also be forbidden to hold government office again.

This process is a political process, not criminal, because Congress does not have the power to impose criminal penalties on Obama. However, criminal courts can take over if Obama is found to be guilty of having committed crimes.

Does the fact that Obama released the Taliban Five constitute treason? Did the release of these known terrorist leaders give aid and comfort to the Taliban? Is the Taliban considered to be the enemy of the United States? If yes to the enemy question, more than two witnesses have seen this take place--in fact, the entire nation is aware of the release.

Another set of questions: 

Was there a connection between the Muslim Brotherhood and the 911 attacks in 2001? 

Did President Obama meet with Muslim Brotherhood members in the White House? 

Did President Obama say: "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."? 

Does that quote directly oppose the First Amendment of the US Constitution which gives Americans freedom of speech and expression?

Is it the duty of the president to uphold the Constitution and to support our allies, particularly Israel at this time in history? Is that happening or is Obama supporting those leaders who would see the total destruction of Israel?

Anti-Zionists embrace

I think any fair-minded American would conclude that President Obama has not adequately performed the duties of the presidency as required and has even gone to the extent of being seditious, or treasonous. 

If nothing is done to stop ISIS (and sending 450 "trainers" is not really doing anything that will stop them), we will find ourselves confronting them on our own soil. They will not stop with the Middle East because they follow the Koran and believe that the world must submit to Islam. 

It feels like Obama would rather there be an attack on America than admit being wrong. 

That means Obama rules with his ego, not with America's security and interests in mind.


Tweet