Dictator Obama violates his own Admn policies in recess appointments.

[Soul Crusher]

Unprecedented “Recess” Appointment Contradicts Obama Justice Department
http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?postid=273766


 

President Obama today made an unprecedented “recess” appointment even though the Senate is not in recess – “a sharp departure from a long-standing precedent that has limited the President to recess appointments only when the Senate is in a recess of 10 days or longer,” according to Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

It turns out that the action not only contradicts long-standing practice, but also the view of the administration itself. In 2010, Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal explained to the Supreme Court the Obama administration’s view that recess appointments are only permissible when Congress is in recess for more than three days. Here’s the exchange with Chief Justice John Roberts:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: And the recess appointment power doesn't work why?

MR. KATYAL: The -- the recess appointment power can work in -- in a recess. I think our office has opined the recess has to be longer than 3 days. And -- and so, it is potentially available to avert the future crisis that -- that could -- that could take place with respect to the board. If there are no other questions –

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, counsel.

[Soul Crusher]

Cordray's Recess Appointment Sure Doesn't Look Constitutional To Me (Written by a Cordray supporter)
The New Republic ^ | January 4, 2012 | Timothy Noah




I'm no lawyer, but:

As someone who strongly supported a recess appointment for Richard Cordray to run the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I'm confused as to why President Obama chose to act today. Had he appointed Cordray yesterday, during a brief period when the Senate was technically in recess, the action would have been supported by precedent. Apparently, though, that appointment would have lasted only through 2012. By appointing Cordray today, Obama can keep him at CFPB through 2013.

The trouble is that the Senate isn't in recess. For complicated reasons the Republicans have the ability to prevent the Senate from going into recess, and they have done so in order to maximize the difficulty of Obama making recess appointments. The White House maintains that keeping the Senate in pro forma session is a stupid gimmick, which is certainly true. It further maintains that because it is a stupid gimmick, that gives the president the right to act as though the Senate were in recess. That's the part I have trouble following.

Two high-ranking Justice department officials from the (George W.) Bush administration support the position Obama has taken on the grounds that the executive branch has always maintained a "common-sense view" that the Senate is not in session when nobody's there and it isn't doing anything. But they don't cite any court decisions to back this view up. Instead they rely on a 1905 report (cited on page 8 of this Congressional Research Service report) by the Senate judiciary committee that defines a Senate recess as


the period of the time when the Senate is not sitting in regular or extraordinary session as a branch of the Congress or in extraordinary session for the discharge of executive functions; when its members owe no duty of attendance; when its chamber is empty; when, because of its absence, it cannot receive communications from the President or participate as a body in making appointments....
The trouble with this definition is that it would define as a Senate recess just about every weekend of the year.

Maybe there's a stronger legal foundation to the president's decision that I don't know about. But based on what I've seen so far, I'm having trouble understanding how the recess appointment of Cordray can possibly withstand a legal challenge. And I'm really having trouble understanding why Obama didn't take advantage of his constitutional window yesterday, when the Senate was inarguably in recess. 

Something else I'm having trouble understanding is why, if Obama was going to cast caution to the wind, he didn't appoint Elizabeth Warren to head CFPB last year. Perhaps he decided she'd be of more use to him as a strong Senate candidate in Massachusetts. Cordray is a good choice, but Warren was a better one.

My fear is that, having beat the Republicans on the payroll tax issue, Obama is now looking for another fight. But--again, based on my limited knowledge thus far--this fight looks like an unnecessary one. I hope Obama hasn't traded his previous vice of timidity for a new vice of recklessness.

Update: 3:25: Brian Beutler of Talking Points Memo, who's done an excellent job reporting on all this, cites a newer CRS report issued in December. But I'm at a loss to find any legal justification for Obama's action in this report either. Nor am I reassured by this issue brief by Ian Millhiser of Think Progress. Millhiser makes a strong case that the level of Senate obstruction at present is unprecedented. But he makes no case at all for why the president should get to decide when the Senate is in recess and when it isn't.

I'm beginning to think that if there were a more solid justification for Obama's action someone would have made it by now.



________________________ ________________________ ________________________



Obama knows exactly what he is doing.   he is creating a crisis and choas so he can set up another fight with the congress to divert from his disastrous record of failure and collapse.   

[Soul Crusher]

Court fight over recess appointments 'almost certain,' Chamber says
By Peter Schroeder - 01/04/12 04:39 PM ET    


The recess appointments President Obama announced Wednesday are “almost certain” to be challenged in court, according to a top official with the nation’s largest business lobby.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has not decided whether it will file a legal challenge to the appointments, according to David Hirschmann, who heads the Chamber’s Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness. But he said he’s confident that Obama’s precedent-shattering move will land the administration in court.


"We've made no decisions ourselves," Hirschmann told The Hill. "What we do know is ... it's almost certain ultimately a court will decide if what the president did is legal or not."

Obama infuriated Republicans Wednesday by announcing the recess appointment of Richard Cordray to be the first director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Senate Republicans had blocked Cordray's nomination for months, so the president bypassed them with a recess appointment during the holiday break.

He followed that up later in the day with recess appointments for three members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), heading off another likely GOP filibuster.

The recess appointments broke with legal precedent, as they while the Senate is holding regular pro forma sessions. Republicans insist the Senate has not been in recess thanks to the seconds-long sessions held every few days, but White House attorneys determined the procedural move is a gimmick that can be ignored by the president.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) blasted the move as an "unprecedented power grab" and said he expects "the courts will find the appointment to be illegitimate."

The gambit puts the bureau in "uncertain legal territory," according to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

CFPB backers were eager to get Cordray in place in large part because the CFPB, created by the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, cannot fully realize its powers without a director in place.


However, one question a judge could need to answer is whether Cordray will actually be able to assume those powers since he has been recess-appointed. The text of the Dodd-Frank law states that those powers will not take effect until the CFPB director "is confirmed by the Senate."

Hirschmann said questions like that are the type of thing a court will need to consider.

"Clearly, there's new ground here," he said.

And while the Chamber is "not eager to litigate," he blasted the president for a move he said is primarily motivated by politics.

“It looks like the goal here is more the headlines and the confrontation and the politicization of this new agency rather than a substantive outcome," he said.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------









Obama again creating conflict and chaos.   

[Fury]

Dictator Obama does what he wants. The left must think a Republican will never be president again. Between this and the nuclear option Reid ran with a few weeks ago, they're in for a world of hurt when the tables eventually turn on them. Can't wait to see the tears flowing then. 

[Soul Crusher]

Dictator Obama does what he wants. The left must think a Republican will never be president again. Between this and the nuclear option Reid ran with a few weeks ago, they're in for a world of hurt when the tables eventually turn on them. Can't wait to see the tears flowing then. 

The democrats are the biggest hypocrites on the planet.   No budget, no house bills brought up for a vote, blame everyone else, etc.   

[Soul Crusher]

Obama recess appointment power is murky (It's not "murky", it's Unconstitutional)
Politico ^ | 1/4/2012 | By MANU RAJU and SCOTT WONG
Posted on January 4, 2012 9:12:12 PM EST by tobyhill

What happens when the president makes a recess appointment when the Senate is not technically on recess?

Nobody knows.

But President Barack Obama’s decision to jam the Senate and install three labor nominees and a consumer watchdog without a confirmation vote raises unsettled legal questions that could have a long-lasting impact past his presidency.

“This is not a nice, clear-cut area at all,” said Robert Dove, a former Senate parliamentarian, when asked about the implications of the president’s move.

Legal experts said Wednesday that there was no precedent for such recess appointments and that it would likely be put to the test in the courts by industry groups seeking to challenge regulations issued by the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, whose new head, Richard Cordray, received an appointment even though the chamber was technically in session every few days.

(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...

[Skip8282]

Cue the left to come in with - but, but...other Presidents have done it...

[Soul Crusher]

Cue the left to come in with - but, but...other Presidents have done it...

LOL.   One day back from vacation and Obama is back to business as usual.  A

[Soul Crusher]

Guest Post: President Obama, Demopublican
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/04/2012 - 14:51

Afghanistan ETC Federal Reserve Ford Gerald Ford Guest Post Iraq None President Obama Reality
There is literally no difference between Obama and a moderate Republican when it comes to the truly important policies governing the nation's insolvent finances, its predatory financial sector, its corrupt and fraudulent sickcare system or its sprawling Empire. Obama's policies have all aided and abetted existing Status Quo cartels and fiefdoms. He has changed absolutely nothing of import except further eroding civil liberties. President Obama can be charitably characterized as an ineffectual Demopublican. From those demanding more, then he can be accurately described as a well-meaning puppet of Wall Street and the rest of the Status Quo cartels and fiefdoms.



Via zerohedge.

[240 is Back]

Scott Brown Supports Obama Cordray Appointment

Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) is officially on board with President Obama’s recess appointment of Richard Cordray to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, sending reporters the following statement:

I support President Obama’s appointment today of Richard Cordray to head the CFPB. I believe he is the right person to lead the agency and help protect consumers from fraud and scams. While I would have strongly preferred that it go through the normal confirmation process, unfortunately the system is completely broken. If we’re going to make progress as a nation, both parties in Washington need to work together to end the procedural gridlock and hyper-partisanship.

[Soul Crusher]

What a joke.   Brown is getting trounced by that commie wenctch Warren and is pamdering.

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-05/obama-chooses-politics-over-principle-in-naming-consumer-bureau-head-view.html



Fuck Obama and every ghetto thg Marxist voting for him. 

[Fury]

It's funny, really. The GOP wanted a committee to run this bureau instead of delegating all the power to one man. Funny how Obama and the left seemed to have a massive problem with that. These people just love their authoritarianism and hypocrisy.

When the GOP eventually gets in a position to do this I hope they return the favor 10-fold just so that we can see the tears flowing from 240 and the left.

[Soul Crusher]

[Soul Crusher]

Is (Communist Dictator) Obama's appointment of Cordray illegal?
cbs ^ | 1/5/2012 | By Constantine von Hoffman





Yesterday President Obama named Richard Cordray director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CPFB) with what is called a "recess appointment" -- one made while Congress is in recess. He did this because Republican senators had blocked confirmation of Cordray, also a Republican and former attorney general of Ohio. They do not object to Cordray but to how the CPFB is organized. Its financing, for example, comes from the Federal Reserve, which means Congress can't exert pressure on the agency by controlling its budget.

While this type of recess appointment is a common action for presidents, this one is fuelling a lot of argument because the Senate was technically still in session. The GOP senators, fearing Mr. Obama would do this, had been holding pro-forma sessions (pretend sessions where the Senate is called into session but no work is done). Senate Democrats used the same tactic during President Bush's administration.

These "sessions" are held every third day because traditionally Congress has had to be out of session for at least that period of time before a president can make a recess appointment. Cordray's is the first such appointment during a Senate break of fewer than three days since 1949.


(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...

[240 is Back]

These are NORMAL as a result of party holding out.

Bush had 171 of these appointments.  Clinton had something like 120.

This is Obama's 32nd such appointment.

it's a normal part of the process... the opposing party puts it off as long as possible to jam up the other side's agenda.  Bush force appointed his guys when Pelosi and friends refused to vote on it.  Nothing wrong with it when he did it. 

[Soul Crusher]

These are NORMAL as a result of party holding out.

Bush had 171 of these appointments.  Clinton had something like 120.

This is Obama's 32nd such appointment.

it's a normal part of the process... the opposing party puts it off as long as possible to jam up the other side's agenda.  Bush force appointed his guys when Pelosi and friends refused to vote on it.  Nothing wrong with it when he did it. 

These "sessions" are held every third day because traditionally Congress has had to be out of session for at least that period of time before a president can make a recess appointment. Cordray's is the first such appointment during a Senate break of fewer than three days since 1949.

[240 is Back]

These "sessions" are held every third day because traditionally Congress has had to be out of session for at least that period of time before a president can make a recess appointment. Cordray's is the first such appointment during a Senate break of fewer than three days since 1949.

so youre NOT pissed he appointed someone without congressional approval...

youre just mad at the SPEED he did it?  he could have waited 48 more hours and you'd be cool with it?  sheesh.

[Dos Equis]

I heard these folks were only recently nominated, so they didn't even go through the Congressional vetting process?   

[Fury]

These are NORMAL as a result of party holding out.

Bush had 171 of these appointments.  Clinton had something like 120.

This is Obama's 32nd such appointment.

it's a normal part of the process... the opposing party puts it off as long as possible to jam up the other side's agenda.  Bush force appointed his guys when Pelosi and friends refused to vote on it.  Nothing wrong with it when he did it. 

Do you ever fucking read anything before you open that suckhole of yours? Bush chose not to do this. And as has been well documented, that c*nt of a senator Reid himself said that Bush couldn't do it as long as he kept the pro-forma sessions going. So, like the good little "prog" douche bag that you are, the world for you began on Obama's inauguration.

There's nothing "normal" about it. No other president has done this. Hope this helps.

[Shockwave]

Do you ever fucking read anything before you open that suckhole of yours? Bush chose not to do this. And as has been well documented, that c*nt of a senator Reid himself said that Bush couldn't do it as long as he kept the pro-forma sessions going. So, like the good little "prog" douche bag that you are, the world for you began on Obama's inauguration.

There's nothing "normal" about it. No other president has done this. Hope this helps.

Yep, cant let little things like "rules" or the " deeply flawed constitution" to dictate his actions, Obama does what he wants, when he wants, and fuck everyone that doesnt agree with him, weather they be the citizens that elected him, his advisors, or the politicians elected to be his checks and balances.

Its pretty bad when the man blatantly violates precedents and then flat out says he's not going to abide by anything that he decides he doesnt agree with, or that will stop him from what he feels is best for us.
Not to mention the fact that he always knows whats best, and that if anyone disagrees theyre either trying to gridlock him or theyre trying to destroy the middle class (but hes fighting to save it, lol). Epic.

[240 is Back]

ah, I didn't know they could open the senate for 30 seconds every other day (daily show just showed precisely how it worked) in order to keep obama from hiring a guy to run the consumer protection bureau... sitting empty since 2010.

makes perfect sense now.

[Soul Crusher]

Obama’s recess appointments are unconstitutional (Impeach the Communist Slimeball)
WASHINGTON POST ^ | 1/5/2012 | Edwin Meese III and Todd Gaziano
Posted on January 5, 2012 11:03:23 PM EST by tobyhill

President Obama’s attempt to unilaterally appoint three people to seats on the National Labor Relations Board and Richard Cordray to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (after the Senate blocked action on his nomination) is more than an unconstitutional attempt to circumvent the Senate’s advise-and-consent role. It is a breathtaking violation of the separation of powers and the duty of comity that the executive owes to Congress.

Yes, some prior recess appointments have been politically unpopular, and a few have even raised legal questions. But never before has a president purported to make a “recess” appointment when the Senate is demonstrably not in recess. That is a constitutional abuse of a high order.

As a former U.S. attorney general and a former Office of Legal Counsel lawyer who provided advice to presidents on recess appointment issues, we have defended and will continue to defend the lawful use of the recess appointment power. Although originally conceived by the Framers for a time when communicating with and summoning senators back to the Capitol might take weeks, it is still valid in a modern age — but only as long as the Senate is in recess. Not only was the Senate not in recess when these purported appointments were made, it constitutionally could not have been.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

‘The Man Is a Dictator’: Beck Blasts Obama’s Move to Circumvent Congress
The Blaze ^ | January 5, 2012 | Madeleine Morgenstern
Posted on January 6, 2012 12:25:01 AM EST by Mozilla

Glenn Beck on Thursday blasted President Barack Obama’s use of executive authority to make a recess appointment, calling him a dictator who views the American people as children.

On Wednesday, Obama announced he was appointing Richard Cordray the country’s chief consumer watchdog, making a recess appointment while the Senate was technically in session. The same day, he named three members to fill vacancies on the National Labor Relations Board. Explaining his decision before a crowd in Cleveland, Ohio, Obama said he has “an obligation to act on behalf of the American people” when Congress refuses and hurts the economy as a result.

[snip]

epublicans had stalled Cordray’s nomination, arguing the new agency — tasked with overseeing mortgage companies, payday lenders, and other financial companies — is too powerful and unaccountable.

“The arrogance of this man and the way he rewrites all of American history — all of American history — is astounding,” Beck said on his radio program. “Americans, hear what your president is saying: I’ll work within the system. But if they won’t move, then…I will dictate where we’re going.”

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

Bush and Clinton have made twice as many more recess appointments than Obama in a 4 year period....big whoop...


President's got to preside when shit isn't getting done