Video: Nothing to see here: Obama is “Faithfully executing the laws”

posted at 6:31 pm on July 13, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

It’s always nice to wrap up the weekend on a high note, and I know a lot of you have been worried about the future of the country. Fear not, citizens. Congresswoman Donna Edwards of Maryland went on State of the Union today to reassure us that everything is just fine. When asked whether or not the President was doing his job of enforcing the laws of our nation, the response was definitive and unequivocal.

Representative Aaron Schock (R., Ill.) challenged his two Democratic colleagues on the panel, Donna Edwards of Maryland and Beto O’Rourke of Texas​, to go on the record to say whether President Obama is truly acting in good faith to execute the laws of the Congress.

​”You want a short answer to that?” Edwards responded. “Absolutely, we believe the president is faithfully executing the laws.”

See? You’ve been worried about nothing all of this time.

This does evoke some of the issues being raised in the pending lawsuit by John Boehner, though. (And ties into the last thread about impeachment after a fashion.) How far astray can a President go in terms of enforcing the laws before it’s too far? And what are the limits of executive power when exercising “options” in that area? The President has issued more than a few signing statements when bills make their way into law. (And before the usual suspects speak up, yes… I know that Bush had more of them than Obama, yada yada yada.) But this is a question which should apply to all presidents.

And what of making changes on the fly to laws without going through Congress, e.g. Obamacare? Are you still “enforcing the laws” which were passed in the legislative branch if you claim the ability to amend them on the fly? Doesn’t sound that way to me, but I’m sure there’s an army of lawyers in DC who will figure out a way to parse it and say otherwise.

In any event, I’ll leave this out there for you to chew over and come to your own conclusions. I doubt we’ll get a definitive answer from the courts in our lifetimes.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

what he wants.

TaraMaclay on July 13, 2014 at 7:49 PM

Yeh much better to have charges of racism go unanswered. That way the passerby will believe his rants.

Screw you.

CW on July 13, 2014 at 8:29 PM

Of course, if you enjoy living on the crumbs of government handouts and you Mom’s indulgence everything is OK until your mom passes and then you may have to worry about things like rent and video game money.

KW64 on July 13, 2014 at 8:21 PM

Nailed it.

CW on July 13, 2014 at 8:30 PM

nonpartisan has got to be the most effect troll on HA, bar none.

HiJack on July 13, 2014 at 8:28 PM

At least since the days of getalife, that’s for sure. And I’m pretty sure the same fate is in store, too.

ajacksonian on July 13, 2014 at 8:32 PM

​ “Absolutely, we believe the president is faithfully executing the laws.”

Edwards should save that line for her next performance at the Washington Press Club Foundation dinner.

She might actually get a few laughs.

lynncgb on July 13, 2014 at 8:34 PM

Most painful speech EVER.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/donna-edwards-speech-103238.html

lynncgb on July 13, 2014 at 8:36 PM

Mimzey on July 13, 2014 at 8:26 PM

The word “troll” has taken on a broader meaning than it originally had. I have done it and usually catch someone with the line I’ve thrown out.

Now people use it to describe anyone who simply disagrees with them.

Now, someone like Ned pepper is a real troll. He only says things to agitate and get responses whether he agrees with what he himself says or not. People like that usually will not respond to someone’s response of his/her comment and will not debate the issues.

nonp’s comments aren’t really of that type. He actually believes the stuff, he says and he says in an attempt to both convince others of his point of view or simply to disagree with someone else.

Another example is bluegill. coolrepublica started out a a true troll, but while she does still engage in some trolling, she now does make intelligent comments and debates her POV.

nonp is extremely annoying because he is such a blatant hypocrite. But a true troll? I think not.

davidk on July 13, 2014 at 8:37 PM

jazz, maybe I’m remembering incorrectly, but isn’t Obama merely enforcing the law that Bush passed (the law that stipulates a trail for nonmexican illegals)
nonpartisan on July 13, 2014 at 6:48 PM

While you’re on a remembering streak, perhaps you’d care to remind us exactly what it was that he signed? Hmm? Maybe something written by Diane Feinstein? Maybe something to combat child trafficking and sex trade? Like maybe when imported sex trade victims are discovered, instead of immediate deportation, the rule would give the victims a chance to break free of their bondholders? Hmm? So please enlighten us how them apples compare to these oranges? Oh yeah, blame Boooosh, while the same “perpetrators” remain in office and silent.

Anyhoo, let it all burn. There will be a race riot of epic proportions when the blacks and browns realize they’ve been usurped by the new black, illegals who will have more rights and higher employment than them. I fully expect the houseboys currently weilding power in congress will be rightfully pilloried once the old black wakes up and realize they’ve been bamboozled.

Gird up your loins.

AH_C on July 13, 2014 at 8:45 PM

Faithfully executing the laws?

Reminds me when John McKay was coaching the original Bucs.

A reporter asked him what he thought of the team’s execution.

McKay said “sounds like a good idea to me!”

itsspideyman on July 13, 2014 at 8:49 PM

AH_C on July 13, 2014 at 8:45 PM

There are already many problems in K-12 between black and brown that will explode in the next couple of years. That’s only going to grow as brown supplants black as the principal minority that the Democratics cater to, and the blacks take the brunt of the influx of brown re jobs, government aid, language of instruction, etc.

slickwillie2001 on July 13, 2014 at 8:51 PM

davidk on July 13, 2014 at 8:37 PM

I was with you all the way until that part about coolrepubica. She’s an annoying agitator.

bimmcorp on July 13, 2014 at 8:52 PM

those lil brown children…you make them sound like some animals

nonpartisan on July 13, 2014 at 7:06 PM

If you didn’t view them that way, you’d be the first to denounce and renounce this Children’s Crusade.

formwiz on July 13, 2014 at 8:52 PM

TaraMaclay on July 13, 2014 at 7:49 PM

You make a fair point. Ed always gives the same advice during every open registration.

To both newbies and veterans: the best way to prevent trolls from disrupting threads is to ignore them. Do not get into name-calling exchanges, because that’s exactly what they want to happen – to make the entire thread about them rather than the topic, and to get you in position to get banned as well. Do not take the bait.

Of course some commenters have their own reasons as to why they prefer to respond to the likes of nonp.
Try doing as I do and just skip over some of the “debate” as best you can.

lynncgb on July 13, 2014 at 8:58 PM

davidk on July 13, 2014 at 8:37 PM

I was with you all the way until that part about coolrepubica. She’s an annoying agitator.

bimmcorp on July 13, 2014 at 8:52 PM

Yeah. I don’t much read her posts. But it seems that some interact with her in an amiable sarcastic way.

The bottom line is, you don’t like someone, ignore them. While there are some I’d just as soon were not here, I’m not a big fan of banning, especially the all-of-a-sudden type.

Warn people, yeah. But a more laissez-faire attitude would be more appropriate for this forum. But that’s just me.

The people who run are certainly free to run it as they wish.

davidk on July 13, 2014 at 8:59 PM

And others really don’t like her:

Blah blah blah! It’s QOTD time!

coolrepublica on July 13, 2014 at 8:33 PM

I’m guessing you either think this is a cool line or a major irritant for others who comment here.

How about you grow up?

hawkdriver on July 13, 2014 at 8:48 PM

davidk on July 13, 2014 at 9:02 PM

Faithfully executing the laws?

Reminds me when John McKay was coaching the original Bucs.

A reporter asked him what he thought of the team’s execution.

McKay said “sounds like a good idea to me!”

itsspideyman on July 13, 2014 at 8:49 PM

Bravo!!! I remember that one(as a kid) it was a great quote!

Almost as good as the legendary Lombardi quote.

In the early 60′ Ed Sabol was a guy trying to sell his filming
of NFL games to the league. He had a great product, and the
NFL took him up on it, The rest, as they say, is History.
Anyway, after one of the seasons, he had Lombardi in to give
him a look at what he had put together for the Packers,
and their great season (no, I don’t remember which season)
So he asks Lombardi if anything should be “cut” from
the final product (the footage along with the commentary)
which was done by the legendary John Facenda.

Lombardi responded with “Yeah, the throat of the guy who wrote
this Crap”

ToddPA on July 13, 2014 at 9:04 PM

I’m ON my meds!

Tard on July 13, 2014 at 7:57 PM

We know you are. That’s why you’re so much fun at parties.

davidk on July 13, 2014 at 8:05 PM

That might explain something…. Ohoh

Tard on July 13, 2014 at 9:15 PM

ToddPA on July 13, 2014 at 9:04 PM

Great quote Todd. Ahhh the good old days of powerful tough intelligent men………..

itsspideyman on July 13, 2014 at 9:34 PM

The President has issued more than a few signing statements when bills make their way into law. (And before the usual suspects speak up, yes… I know that Bush had more of them than Obama, yada yada yada.)

But keep in mind that Senator Obama and Candidate Obama said signing statements were a bad thing and he wouldn’t use them.

ButterflyDragon on July 13, 2014 at 9:51 PM

Jazz Shaw:

And what of making changes on the fly to laws without going through Congress, e.g. Obamacare? Are you still “enforcing the laws” which were passed in the legislative branch if you claim the ability to amend them on the fly?

The president must enforce the law to achieve what Congress intended when they wrote the law. To do otherwise is blatantly anti-Constitutional.

A signing statement clarifies a president’s understanding of Congress’ intent and how he will enforce the law to achieve that intent.

Signing statements and (arguably) “prosecutorial discretion” give the president some latitude in enforcing the law, but does not give him the power to change/ignore the law.

Either way the law must be “faithfully” enforced so as to achieve what Congress intended.

Obama claims “prosecutorial discretion” gives him the power to make significant changes to law even though it violates the intent of Congress.

In implementing ACA, Obama cited “prosecutorial discretion” to effectively line item veto Congress’ intent and replace it with his own intent.

Line item veto was found unconstitutional a decade or two ago.

DrDeano on July 13, 2014 at 9:55 PM

Where did this non partisan go????????? I always get here late and I had some questions for it. Not sure what sex it is,,,, I am really curious what Hitlers great ideas were. This guy claims to be a PHD?? He sounds like Alfredo trying to convince his brother to get along with the 5 other families.

garydt on July 13, 2014 at 10:08 PM

Blah blah blah! It’s QOTD time!

coolrepublica on July 13, 2014 at 8:33 PM

…cleansing time?

JugEarsButtHurt on July 13, 2014 at 10:08 PM

why that’s just like the pot calling the kettle…er…uhh…well you know.

warmairfan on July 13, 2014 at 10:19 PM

and she tows the line just like candy Crowley.

Bambi on July 13, 2014 at 6:46 PM

May I nit pick? That’s Capitol C, big ASS.

rottenrobbie on July 13, 2014 at 11:57 PM

“We are not working on or drawing up articles of impeachment,” Goodlatte said. “The Constitution is very clear as to what constitutes grounds of impeachement for the President of the United States. He has not committed the kind of criminal acts that would call for that.”

Ned Pepper on July 13, 2014 at 6:40 PM

How far we have fallen….oh and f*ck you too.

StubbornGreenBurros on July 14, 2014 at 12:09 AM

Blacks are black FIRST. They stick together NO MATTER WHAT.

Example… I have looked and looked for the video but have never been able to find it. Back in 2009 or 2010, Wolf Blitzer was interviewing then RNC chair Michael Steele. Wolf asked some idiotic White House submitted question about the oh so scary and troublesome racism which runs deep in the repub party. I remember distinctly Steele stating that he “supported and VOTED for Barry” in 2008.

I remember this statement stuck out to me so much because at the time I was still naive enough to think that the chairman of the now defunct RNC would’ve been in OPPOSITION to an obvious snake oil salesman like Barry regardless of his skin tone.

As I said, blacks are black first. Above ALL else.

acetylene420 on July 14, 2014 at 5:10 AM

It’s not illegal if the a black President does it.
wytshus on July 13, 2014 at 6:58 PM
ain’t even going to try to hide your racism anymore huh
nonpartisan on July 13, 2014 at 7:00 PM

He’s modifying the Nixon quote you dunce. And it works because if Bush were doing the exact same things Zero was you’d be screaming impeachment–like Dimocrats actually did.

Nutstuyu on July 14, 2014 at 6:04 AM

Donna Edwards of Maryland and Beto O’Rourke of Texas are both liars, and they know it.

sadatoni on July 14, 2014 at 7:15 AM

WHY is it that Liberals always have to LIE to the American people to get away with what they do. Congresswoman Donna Edwards of Maryland is either STUPID and does not deserve to be a member of our Federal Government…OR…she is a partisan, lying PO$!

Congresswoman Edwards, nearly the 1st thing Obama did after he was elected in 2008 was to hold a press conference to declare his administration would NOT defend / endorse the DOMA. This, Congresswoman Edwards was both a violation and law. Obama may THINK he is a Dictator who can do anything, but he is not. After swearing an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and Rule of Law, Obama immediately betrayed that oath. No President has the authority to pick and choose what laws he will or will not enforce. The Constitution also states NO ENTITY other than Congress has the authority to change / modify legislation once it has been signed into law — Obama has violated both Constitution and Law more than 40 times by altering the ACA. In regards to HIS Illegal ‘invasion’, Obama has REFUSED to enforce US Immigration Law, has released hundreds of convicted violent Illegals into the US Populace, has created ‘rights’ that apply only to Illegals, has Federal Govt agencies engaged in Human Trafficking by bringing illegals into the country if stopped prior to making it across, & has ordered riot gear-clad ‘agents’ to FORCE local communities to accept criminal, disease-ridden illegals into their midst. Obama is DUMPING illegals into local communities without regisrtering them and without notifying the local / state governments.

Either way, whether stupid or criminally partisan, Edwards has demonstrated she has no business representing ANYONE in Washington.

easyt65 on July 14, 2014 at 8:34 AM

Another short answer for that – he hits me because he loves me.

RSbrewer on July 14, 2014 at 8:39 AM

There is an old saying: If you have to keep it secret, if you have to hide it, and/or if you have to lie about it, you probably shouldn’t be doing it.

Everything Obama said about the ACA was a LIE…
Obama is bussing illegals into state communities without notifying local/state community leaders…
The IRS hid/destroyed evidence and is not forthcoming about what they did…

EVERYTHING this administration has done has been in the shadows or a flar out lie – far from the ‘transparent’ administration Obama promised.

easyt65 on July 14, 2014 at 8:40 AM

“Absolutely, we believe the president is faithfully executing the laws.”

Then you obviously don’t have the same definition for “faithfully”, “execute”, or “law” that most of the rest of us do.

GWB on July 14, 2014 at 9:41 AM

“The Constitution is very clear as to what constitutes grounds of impeachement for the President of the United States. He has not committed the kind of criminal acts that would call for that.”

Ned Pepper on July 13, 2014 at 6:40 PM

Like treason (Fast and Furious)?

Article III Section 3 of the US Constitution defines treason as… “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. ”

President Obama aided Mexican drug cartels in obtaining assault rifles (just to use the liberal term against them), which were used in the murder/slaughter of hundreds of Mexican civilians.

The only way you can consider that non-treason is to regard the Mexican drug cartels as friendlies, and not enemies of our country. Good to know what side you’re on Mr. Mexican Drug Cartel Supporter! I bet all those hundreds of murders of Mexicans, especially the children, just warmed what remains of your cold stony heart!

dominigan on July 14, 2014 at 12:08 PM

ain’t even going to try to hide your racism anymore huh
nonpartisan on July 13, 2014 at 7:00 PM

White Power! White Power! nonpartisan on October 18, 2014 at 6:57 PM

Akzed on November 25, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Comment pages: 1 2