House Speaker John says House plans to sue President Obama

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • MaxPower Eagle Mountain, UT
    June 28, 2014 8:53 p.m.


    Please, look at your history. Nixon was never impeached. He resigned before impeachment proceedings took place, and was pardoned by President Ford immediately.

    The only two Presidents to have been impeached were Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton; and both were acquitted by the Senate.

  • LiberalJimmy Salt Lake City, UT
    June 27, 2014 1:05 p.m.

    @RedShirt(s)...Well clearly you most have a personal relationship with D.N. online monitors because I'm continually unable to respond to your last comment and forced to strip down my retort. I wonder why? Regardless of the obvious partisan slant and the inability to retort regarding your plethora of nonsensical posts along with a different set of standards when it comes to us libs posting I will attempt one final time. You mentioned that I did not have an understanding of history. Well I will inform my instructors at Yale that they need to improve their class syllabus. Furthermore, I agree about keeping it simple. Especially on this forum. Please feel free to list and and all ACTUAL crimes that our President has supposedly committed. In closing, I direct you to "GaryO's" post in which he stated " Here in the land of reality, Obama has committed no crimes". May I offer you an invitation to join us anytime.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 26, 2014 5:05 p.m.

    lost -

    You're list of bogus crimes you attribute to Obama are just as invalid as the pretend scandals you "Conservatives" keep coming up with.

    Sorry man, but you're lost somewhere in Right Wing La La Land.

    Here in the land of reality, Obama has committed no crimes.

    He has been doing his job though, and that's what angers "Conservatives" who insist he cannot.

  • RedShirtCalTech Pasedena, CA
    June 26, 2014 2:17 p.m.

    To "Jimmytheliberal" since you don't know history very well, lets show you the parallels.

    Nixon had multiple articles of impeachment filed. From article 1 we find that he was using the CIA for illegal activities against his enemies, he lied or mislead investigators and the American Public, he used executive privelage to prevent information from being obtained in a criminal investigation.

    The Whitehouse has been loosely connected to the IRS scandal, Obama lied to the American public about gun running to Mexico and Benghazi and is witholding evidence of wrong doing via executive privelage.

    From Article 2 on Nixon we find that it contains a list of his abuses of power. Nixon and Obama administrations used the IRS to obtain information on their opponents and gave that information to their supporters. Both failed to uphold their oath to ensure that the US laws were being followed, both acted outside the limits of the constitution (Obama even brags about it and tell us that he is going to circumvent the constitution).

    From article 3 we hear how Nixon directed people to retain papers that showed criminal ativity. Where are all the emails on from the scandals that the WH is keeping?

  • Jimmytheliberal Salt Lake City, UT
    June 26, 2014 1:51 p.m.

    @RedShirt...Once again another comment posted prior to any factual research. My suggestion is to read and research exactly what crimes Nixon was charged. In closing, I do thank you for the usual laughter after reading yet another one of your highly nonsensical posts. Please keep up the good work!

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    June 26, 2014 1:43 p.m.

    BO has committed no criminal acts?

    BO's high crimes and misdemeanors include obstruction of justice, abuse of power, contempt of congress, selling guns to mexican cartels, and using the IRS to target political opponents.

    BO could sacrifice a child to Molech on live TV and you would defend him.

    Sorry you will never be able to see the difference

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 26, 2014 12:51 p.m.

    Hey Redshirt -

    "Liberals cheered when Nixon was impeached . . . "

    . . . As well they should. Nixon's high crimes and misdemeanors included Obstruction of Justice, Abuse of power, and Contempt of Congress.

    Obama on the other hand, has been charged with nothing.

    Why? . . . Because he has NO committed criminal acts.

    Do you see the difference now?

  • lket Bluffdale, UT
    June 26, 2014 12:23 p.m.

    siil repulican non action again.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    June 26, 2014 12:06 p.m.

    Others have said it before, but I will say it here.

    Liberals cheered when Nixon was impeached, and Nixon did less than Obama. If impeaching Nixon was good for the petty crimes he was charged with, why is it not to be spoken about Obama being impeached?

  • Badger55 Nibley, Ut
    June 26, 2014 11:22 a.m.

    Apparently it is not just Boehner that thinks the President is violating the law. The SCOTUS just ruled unanimously that Obama violated the law with his not-so recess appointments. It is amazing how some people can still defend Obama.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    June 26, 2014 9:35 a.m.

    No president is a king.

    We need checks, and balances.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    June 26, 2014 8:28 a.m.

    The title of this has a hidden meaning that should not have been published that way. It shows more than disrespect for the office of Speaker of the House.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    June 26, 2014 8:21 a.m.

    The golden rule, who has the gold makes the rules.

  • ordinaryfolks seattle, WA
    June 26, 2014 7:03 a.m.

    An election year stunt, pure and simple. This is designed to be a dog whistle to the extremist elements of the Republican Tea Party.

    The tactic will work, politically. However, legal shenanigans rarely work. Mostly likely this will backfire as did the government shut down.

    People expect the Congress to work together with the President to make the country run. Sooner or later this do-nothing element of the Republican Tea Party will be tossed into the trash bin of history.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    June 26, 2014 6:53 a.m.

    This President has an Attorney General whois very complicit in his responsibilities and both are attorneys with a White House full of them to push agendas. The House of Representatives is supposed to represent the nation from the powerful Executive officers and Senators since the beginning and especially 100 years ago when the process was changed for Senators being elected. Money is power and 6 years at a time is even more power.

    The problem with the President being impeached is who would become the President and who he would choose as Vice-President to succeed him and the potential for Mr. Biden to be elected in 2016 as an incumbent. The people elected the President fully knowing what he had done and will do in the future as a lame duck. President Clinton did quite a few things after President Bush was elected that got people unhappy and impacted his first year, especially with the process before 9/11 with the political appointees of agencies not coordinating information on terrorist activities.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    June 25, 2014 10:54 p.m.

    Trot out every sideshow you can. Do you have some tears too, John?

  • Ralph Salt Lake City, UT
    June 25, 2014 10:37 p.m.

    Well, Boehner isn't doing anything else of value, might as well sue the President.

    We welcome the drama, and we welcome even more ineffectual governing by our trustworthy Congress.

  • Darrel Eagle Mountain, UT
    June 25, 2014 10:14 p.m.


    I am in no way advocating for the President's impeachment; but this law suit is nothing short of silly.

    The Constitution provides a way for Congress to deal with a renegade President, so why is the Speaker seeking extra-constitutional measures? Unless...he is playing election year politics?

    The GOP has a majority in the House; the one body with the power to formally accuse the President of wrong doing. Why is he not seeking to excerise that power if he feels the President has gone rogue?

  • Aggie5 Kuna, ID
    June 25, 2014 8:04 p.m.

    Where's Johnny Cochran when we really need him. Oh yea..

  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    June 25, 2014 7:54 p.m.

    Legal action costs a lot of money.

    Just where will the money come from for this action?

    From what budget will it come from?

  • Darrel Eagle Mountain, UT
    June 25, 2014 7:47 p.m.

    Election year politics.

    If the President broke the law, the House (of which he is the Speaker) has the sole power of impeachment. No need "sue" and deal with issues of standing.

    If you feel he has violated his oath, move for impeachment. Otherwise this is just pure posturing.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    June 25, 2014 7:30 p.m.

    Is there a way we the American people can sue Boehner for shutting down our government and costing us billions?

    Can we sue congress for being the least productive congress in history?

    Just how much more time and money will be wasted on this?

    Can Boehner ever actually propose legislation? That's sorta his job. It seems like just a distant memory when congress actually tried to govern.

  • Mainly Me Werribee, 00
    June 25, 2014 7:28 p.m.

    It's about time, but impeachment would be a better idea.

  • silo Sandy, UT
    June 25, 2014 7:21 p.m.

    mg scott

    "The shame is that Obama is doing things with Presidential power that is illegal"

    Opinion and speculation. If it's actually true, then have your boys initiate the impeachment process and stop wasting time with pointless lawsuits. Either Boehner and clan have something, or they're posturing for votes.

    "Obama has gone way beyond other Presidents with this."

    Again, opinion and speculation. Every president since Washington has used executive orders, and the past 5 Presidents all used them more than Obama. You claim Obama's use is 'illegal' and 'unprecedented'. Fine...cite those numbers versus the previous Presidents. Don't just claim it as fact because you think it's so, walk the walk.

    "And I would like you to at least give an answer to my question. How will you be reacting if a Republican gets into office and does what Obama is doing?"

    Here's your answer. I think it's despicable that any president has the power to use signing statements and executive orders. But I think the hypocrisy and false outrage displayed by the likes of you and Boehner is worse.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    June 25, 2014 7:14 p.m.

    At last! Someone holding Obama accountable!

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    June 25, 2014 6:57 p.m.

    The congress has the right to take this action but they should be careful what they wish for a court of law only cares about what you can prove. The rhetoric plays well on AM radio but not so much in a court of law.

  • Utefan60 Salt Lake City, UT
    June 25, 2014 5:50 p.m.

    What a sad deal to attract attention! The Speaker of the House should be a better leader than this hog wash!

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 25, 2014 5:01 p.m.

    Silo -

    "Presidents use executive power to do legal things, but to NOT enforce laws"

    Uh . . . It is the DUTY of the executive branch to enforce the law, and our President is the head of the executive branch.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    June 25, 2014 3:43 p.m.

    The shame is that Obama is doing things with Presidential power that is illegal. Many Presidents use executive power to do legal things, but to NOT enforce laws, like immigration for instance, is not in keeping with the oath of office. Obama has gone way beyond other Presidents with this. You seem to believe that Congress has no right to oppose Presidents and fillabuster, or block appointments. That is their legal right to do so, and their duty when elected by people who oppose the President and his party. Welcome to democracy silo. And I would like you to at least give an answer to my question. How will you be reacting if a Republican gets into office and does what Obama is doing? You won't like it will you. If you think about it, Obama may be setting an unprecedented precedent for future Presidents. I for one want most power in the hands of the many in Congress, messy as that can be, rather than a dicatatorial one in the White House.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 25, 2014 2:46 p.m.

    "The fact that they are considering a taxpayer-funded lawsuit against the president of the United States for doing his job, I think, is the kind of step that most Americans wouldn't support . . ."

    Most Americans would not support it. But "Conservatives" certainly will support it.
    They like nothing better than wasting many BILLIONS of the taxpayers' money and the nation's credibility in senseless grandstanding . . . Government Shut Downs . . . Threats to not raise the debt ceiling . . . whatever strikes their fancy.

    And now a new low for Congress is in the making.
    No other Congress has lowered themselves to this extent. This Republican-dominated House of Representatives is crawling on its collective belly like a reptile . . . Like a sideshow geek at a cheap carnival . . . Saying “look at me!”

    It's really too bad "Conservatives" can't actually do anything good for the country though, isn't it?

    A lawsuit is certainly something new. I thought "Conservatives" felt Americans were too litigious. But it's a new day, and "Conservatives" have new and more interesting ways to waste money and demean America.

    You've got to give them credit for being creative though, you know?

  • silo Sandy, UT
    June 25, 2014 2:34 p.m.

    @m.g. scott - "You should be a little worried about unchecked Presidential power regardless of political party."

    Sage advice. Shame that you only suggest it with the current Democratic president, the one who's used 'unchecked Presidential power' fewer times than any of his living predecessors

    @Say No to BO - "Obama's problems go far beyond selective enforcement."

    And Republican's problems go far beyond selective memory.

    Obama has used executive orders and signing statements fewer times than any of the last 5 presidents. Obama's administration has seen more blocked appointments than any of the last 5 presidents.
    Obama's administration has seen more filibusters than the last 5 presidents combined.
    Republican legislators stated openly following his election that they would do whatever possible to oppose President Obama.

    These are verifiable, readily available facts.

    According to Boehner and Co, this is an issue with the current president. For those choose not to substitute their 'truth' for facts, we realize where the problems truly originate.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    June 25, 2014 2:25 p.m.

    Secret muslim, birth certificate, Bengahzi, many others I've forgotten and not enforcing Obamacare which you oppose anyway. Must be a slow week.

  • cavetroll SANDY, UT
    June 25, 2014 1:59 p.m.

    This is what's known as "Pandora's Box." Be careful when playing with fire, Mr. Boehner, you and your fellow Republicans just may also get burned.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    June 25, 2014 1:56 p.m.

    Wait, I thought conservatives were against frivolous lawsuits? I don't like Obama at all but this is the very definition of a frivolous lawsuit.

    Conservatives, are you really only against frivolous lawsuits until they go after a liberal or a liberal cause? Hypocrisy.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    June 25, 2014 1:16 p.m.

    Obama's problems go far beyond selective enforcement.
    He has circumvented the law by requiring a blanket review of 300,000 deportation orders.
    He has gone beyond his power by creating his DREAM Act by fiat.
    He lacks the authority to rewrite the ACA on the fly.
    This action is way past due.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    June 25, 2014 1:03 p.m.

    It's amazing it has come to this, but one does wonder where the line can be drawn when a President and his administratin admit openly that they will enforce laws not passed by Congress, and or ignore ones they have sworn to uphold. I'm not sure the great founding fathers could have ever imagined Presidential power like that. And if they did, I suppose they figured that the press would take down said President in due course, like they did with Nixon. I'm sure the founding fathers never figured a 4th estate press that would protect Presidential overreach of power for political purposes. Question to any and all who support Obama in this. Are you forsighted enough to imagine what it will be like in America if a Republican President comes in in 2017 and not only dismantles the Obama executive orders but then goes on a conservative rampage with his own executive orders? You should be a little worried about unchecked Presidential power regardless of political party.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    June 25, 2014 12:51 p.m.

    Election year poliitics. The left toys with raising the minimum wage while the right plays with attacking all things BO. Each is intended to rile up the base while the big issues of the day sit on the shelf.