Geithner: 14th says govt cant default; Redstate: Time to impeach Obama

[Lief 🗽]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/30/tim-geithner-14th-amendment_n_887925.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I'm actually surprised why it took so long for an administration to state something that obvious.

[DrScholl]

Bring it on. I'd love to see them go through a bogus impeachment trial.

[CultureKing]

Ok Obama, time to finally play hardball with the Republicans. If they don't want to acknowledge that they are only 1/2 of one branch of the federal government then so be it.

Considering Obama's speech a few days ago on the subject I wouldn't be suprised if he has started using this option in an attempt to leverage the Republicans. Though honestly they may be smart enough to call the bluff because while I want Obama to go through with such a maneuver I don't think he has the balls to.

[Lulz]

I was thinking about this the other day.  If I were Obama I would just keep paying the already incurred debts of the United States.  I would tell the House Republicans to F' themselves.  I mean what are they going to do?  Impeach the president for making good on all our legally binding contracts?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If Obama were to try and incur debt above the debt ceiling, he should be impeached.  Any such debt would not be authorized by law, which is what the 14th Amendment refers to.

However, if the 14th is interpreted as a supremacy of the public debt clause, then it appears Obama would be obligated to impound funds from other appropriations to pay the interest and principle of the public debt, and in the absence of any guidance from Congress as what gets impounded first, he'd get to choose what gets cut.

[exopolitician]

The Democrats and Obama shouldn't risk it, why make things even more messy than it already is.

[Lulz]

The Democrats and Obama shouldn't risk it, why make things even more messy than it already is.

Well if the choice is defaulting or rubbing 1/2 of 1/3 of the government the wrong way... you know what my vote is

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The Democrats and Obama shouldn't risk it, why make things even more messy than it already is.

Well if the choice is defaulting or rubbing 1/2 of 1/3 of the government the wrong way... you know what my vote is

No I don't know.  Why should I know the views of a supposedly brand new poster, even if you have racked up 41 posts on your first day?

[King]

Boehner would never bring an impeachment to the floor.  He was kicked out of House Leadership the first time during the Clinton trial and such memories brings tears to his eyes.

[t_host1]

I doubt Republicans would bring up impeachment charges. They would more likely breathe a side of relief. Sweeps another issue they're afraid to take on under the rug.

Odds are better on a Obama resignation than impeachment. Intentional default by anyone will draw fire - why anyone would want to? don't know, there are assertions & actuation's...  I haven't seen anyone saying 'yep! that's the solution". ahh, I did hear Dennis Miller say "screw everybody we ain't pay'n"
Treasury will have to act, its just by what interest, who's rule & standards will it choose. ?'d principles currently being used by the Obama Adm. have come to a deadend.  the y 4 a resignation is most likely.

I just seen the treasury resignation post, the major fold is at its tipping point.

[exopolitician]

Thats cute.

[memphis]

Boehner would never bring an impeachment to the floor.  He was kicked out of House Leadership the first time during the Clinton trial and such memories brings tears to his eyes.

Is there anything that doesn't bring tears to that man's eyes? Can we get him some Paxil please? I'm sure mental health is covered under the gov't healthcare he enjoys but refuses to share with the rest of us.

[J. J.]

The key problem will be phrase "authorized by law."  There will be litigation, which has the potential of destroying the credit markets due to uncertainty.

[t_host1]

Thats cute.

yeah... stunning, to the point of being paralyzed.

[redcommander]

Boehner would never bring an impeachment to the floor.  He was kicked out of House Leadership the first time during the Clinton trial and such memories brings tears to his eyes.

Is there anything that doesn't bring tears to that man's eyes? Can we get him some Paxil please? I'm sure mental health is covered under the gov't healthcare he enjoys but refuses to share with the rest of us.

Did he cry recently because he seemed to be doing better after his breakdown on election night.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Boehner would never bring an impeachment to the floor.  He was kicked out of House Leadership the first time during the Clinton trial and such memories brings tears to his eyes.

Is there anything that doesn't bring tears to that man's eyes? Can we get him some Paxil please? I'm sure mental health is covered under the gov't healthcare he enjoys but refuses to share with the rest of us.

The intolerance of some on the Left for those who fail to live up to their standards of machismo is astounding.

[The Mikado]

So the upshot is the Geithner/Obama view is that Obama can unilaterally defund things in order to pay the interest on the debt if the ceiling isn't raised, because the Constitution forbids questioning the debt?

I can't decide if I'm  or .

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

Boehner would never bring an impeachment to the floor.  He was kicked out of House Leadership the first time during the Clinton trial and such memories brings tears to his eyes.

Is there anything that doesn't bring tears to that man's eyes? Can we get him some Paxil please? I'm sure mental health is covered under the gov't healthcare he enjoys but refuses to share with the rest of us.

The intolerance of some on the Left for those who fail to live up to their standards of machismo is astounding.

...

.....

.......considering how restricted gender roles under 'traditional family values' tend to get, I'm sorry, but I find this statement hilarious.

[t_host1]

So the upshot is the Geithner/Obama view is that Obama can unilaterally defund things in order to pay the interest on the debt if the ceiling isn't raised, because the Constitution forbids questioning the debt?

I can't decide if I'm  or .

well... first, the view of Geithner/Obama is subject to interpretation - second, unilateral governing is the Obama norm and as for as the constitution - it is the Obama's obstacle, citing it, is a diversion.

[memphis]

Boehner would never bring an impeachment to the floor.  He was kicked out of House Leadership the first time during the Clinton trial and such memories brings tears to his eyes.

Is there anything that doesn't bring tears to that man's eyes? Can we get him some Paxil please? I'm sure mental health is covered under the gov't healthcare he enjoys but refuses to share with the rest of us.

The intolerance of some on the Left for those who fail to live up to their standards of machismo is astounding.

It has nothing to do with politics or gender. It's wholly unprofessional and the frequency of his little breakdowns suggests a real chemical imbalance. Frankly, it'd be much worse for a woman. Can you even imagine the mocking if Nancy Pelosi were to cry on demand at every interview?

[Torie]

The default thing is really a red herring.  As bonds mature, you just replace them with new ones, which does not increase the debt level. So you only have interest carry, and with the US debt so short term these days, and really low short term interest rates, that it is no big deal to meet that obligation (for the moment).  But you will have to slash about 35% of spending to balance the cash flow.  It just might be an interesting exercise to just do it, and see what happens. We may be going in that direction (massive spending cuts) anyway, once interest rates bounce up.  It is odd that more politicians have not rung that alarm bell.  That is the real elephant in the room, yet it seems almost invisible despite its size. 

[anvi]

Hmmm, not raising the debt ceiling in this light seems such a good experimental idea, it's a wonder the Pubbie-controlled Congress never tried it under the last big-spender president.   

But, anyway, Geithner and the gang really shouldn't be circling the wagons about the 14th Amendment.  It seems that, when politicians don't want to negotiate, hollow threats from everyone are the second-to-last item on the menu.  The last item features two alternatives; short-term patches with meaningless long-term targets that nobody will honor, or landing the plane abruptly on its nose.

[opebo]

... once interest rates bounce up.

That won't be happening for a very, very long time. 

[Torie]

... once interest rates bounce up.

That won't be happening for a very, very long time. 

Well one of us will be proven wrong I guess. I hope it's me!