This Is a coup

[maindawg]

They are not going to raise the Debt ceiling we are going to default.They want anarchy. They want a constitutional crisis. This is a coup.
The president must use executive power to end this. They will then scream from the hilltops. Its time Reid changed the rules and takes the filibuster away from the children. Its time to play hardball.

[AlinPA]

1. It looks like they want a default for sure. Reopening the government won't happen for a long time.

[Coyotl]

63. There are forces who want to break up the USA and make off with the 50% public land and oil wealth

The unthinkable is going on. Treason is in the air.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

2. President should invoke the Fourteenth Amendment. nt.

[Thinkingabout]

3. Cruz is gunning to be America's first dictator, he has proven he can control the House GOP and the

Senate GOP and doesn't care about any scar tissue he leaves behind. I know lots of folks in Texas votes for the R but we do not this crazy guy. I get concerned Texas will start getting passed over because of unyielding Congress members. Sometimes we need and will need help in the future but they are killing other Congressional members to provide funding. In this instance I hope Obama and Reid do not blink, let us kill the thought of doing this again.

[Agnosticsherbet]

4. The President can not use executive power to raise the debt ceiling.

An argument put forward suggests the President could use the 14th amendment to authorize debt payments, but the President and his legal council are on record stating that it doesn't give him constitutional authority to do that. Only the Congress can authorize funding.

The block is in the House.

[dixiegrrrrl]

7. Can't say that often enough.

The HOUSE is not doing its job.

Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution:
All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.

'Course, that was written back in the day when it was ..."relevant".

[DissidentVoice]

17. OK, so I'll say it again!

The HOUSE is not doing its job!

[Agnosticsherbet]

21. Unless you want the President to emulate Yeltsin and roll tanks into Congress

It is irrelevant if Congress isn't doing its job. They alone have the Constitutional power to raise funds or to not raise funds. Yes, they are screwing us.

This is a full blown Constitutional Crises. There is no remedy in the Constitution or courts if the Congress decides not to pay its bills or fund the government. They are given that power in the Constitution.

And they are personally screwing my family, as my wife and I are federal workers.

[DissidentVoice]

24. Capitol Police?

Could he, conceivably, have the Capitol Police (if they haven't been furloughed!) seal the building off and say, "OK, you're acting like a bunch of two-year-olds. You're not getting out of here until you get your head out of your arse and DO something!"

[oldhippie]

25. That could be problematic, since .......

.... the Capital Police work for and are charged to protect the Congress. They don't report to the President. If anything, the Capitol Police would be resisting the entry of Executive Branch agents such as the White House Police or Federal Marshals.

The United States Capitol Police (USCP) is a federal law enforcement agency charged with protecting the United States Congress within the District of Columbia and throughout the United States and its territories. The USCP is the only full service federal law enforcement agency under the legislative branch of the U.S. government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Capitol_Police

[DissidentVoice]

26. Point taken n/t

[regnaD kciN]

36. It WOULD be emotionally-satisfying…

…but probably not a very good precedent for when the next Republican president is in office.

[Agnosticsherbet]

37. It would be a coup, and the United States as we know know it would end.

Of course, in my darkest moments I have wondered if that is the goal of the Tea Party Republicans, to permanently collapse the Federal Government.

[hooverville29]

56. That's silly & inaccurate. Yeltsin faced tanks to assure control when he already had a winner --

It had nothing to do with the merits of anything other than who ran the show. Once that was settled, he drifted into some kind of anesthesia and let the situations of ordinary citizens drift into chaos. I was there in the 1990s. I saw the disaster for ordinary people. I'll post a new thread about it, because I see it happening here. This is an American version of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Good luck, because the Russians were at least ready to live with and respond to Stalinist ham-handed brutality, so, in one small example, their neighbor being destitute simply because pension checks, earned by a lifetime of work and received regularly from the Soviet regime, simply disappeared, they were simply helped by their friends or neighbors or starved. I saw specific instances of that collapse in the Stavropol Krai of the Crimea. They stepped in and helped, just reacted to whatever responded to whatever could restore a little normality. But the social condition around them? Chaos.

Who will be our Putin? Get ready. You'd better be able to answer that question soon.

[Agnosticsherbet]

61. Taking tanks into Congress would have nothing to do with anything except

who ran the show. Same with any other calls to arrest them and charge them with treason, sedition or some other crime, which technically they have not done because they are acting within their constitutional powers. Our system requires compromise. That is as dirty a word on the left now as it is on the right, but as written it requires compromise between the branches of government.

Personally, I do not care to see President Obama give an inch and wold like to Republicans to give a mile. Realistically, the only way out of the impasse is going to be some form of compromise. That is the price of putting radicals in power in the House.

This is a Constitutional Crises. Congress could choose not to fund the government or raise the debt limit in what they perceive as a necessary solution to the problem of debt and spending that their ideology tells them is bad. Ultimately that wold collapse our government just as the old Soviet Union Collapsed. After that, the Constitution will be an interesting historical document fought over by any who wants to grab power.

[Silent3]

38. Since some Constitutional scholars do think the 14th amendment is sufficient...

...and there's even the cheesy but legal trick of minting a $1 trillion platinum coin, I'd say Obama should ignore the debt ceiling if no deal is reached, keep paying the bills, and let Congressional Republicans try to take him to court over it. They might not even be considered to have standing to sue him over it.

Sure that's a rocky road to travel, but no way it's worse than an actual default.

[Agnosticsherbet]

39. The administration is on record that neither their lawyers nor the President

think using the 14th is Constitutional. Apparently they have different legal scholars, including the one in the Oval Office.

As for the coin, the opinion of the President is that it wold be challenged in court and even if the SCOTUS took it up instantly it would likely take more time than we have to decide and the economy would crash and burn while we waited.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/10/president-nixes-trillion-dollar-coin.html

This is a Constitutional Crises, and the only easy way is for the House to raise the debt limit and pass a continuing resolution that the Senate will pass and the President will sign.

[Silent3]

40. But we may not get "the only easy way".

If we don't, I think it'll be a whole lot better for Obama to forget what his administration's last legal opinion was, and get a more convenient new opinion. Much better than simply letting the default happen. I don't care if that's not "easy", if that's controversial, if it's contrived, if it raises a stink.

If you think the GOP looks bad now, think of how much worse they'd look in court strenuously striving to make sure we don't pay our bills and insisting that we stop sending out Social Security payments and veteran's benefits.

[Agnosticsherbet]

42. As a recipient of Veterans benefits and a not being paid because of this shutdown

I don't give a rat's ass how the GOP looks. I am more concerned about my refrigerator and my roof.

I don't think they giver a rats ass about how they look arguing in court. They actually believe the swill that passes for an ideology. They are fanatical believers in some fantasy of small government and austerity. Problem is that most of them have the money to weather a shit storm.

[Silent3]

49. While they're looking bad in court (if it came to that), however...

...we wouldn't be defaulting. If the court case was won in Obama's favor, we'd never have to worry about defaulting again.

If Obama lost such a case, we'd be no worse off than for having tried, and at least while the wreckage of a default dragged on, the Republicans would have done themselves possibly irreparable harm. If we have to go through hell, at least we might get thorough destruction of the GOP as a consolation prize.

On the other hand, if we fail to raise the debt ceiling and Obama simply says, "I'm sorry, there's nothing I can do!", Republicans might still get the lion's share of the blame by public opinion, but not as big a share as they would if Obama shows he's willing to try every possible trick to save our economy.

[grasswire]

54. Bush was able to get any legal opinion he wanted.

Just hire the right lawyer for the job.

[Chan790]

43. Presuming that "the House (raising) the debt limit and pass a (CR)..." is never going to happen...

what's plan B?

Ultimately our choices are the fall of the Republic...or using conniving means to break the House such as the ones you and the President have rejected out of hand.

The House is never going to pass a CR or raise the debt-ceiling. Period. Full stop. No other conditionality applies. They're just not going to do either of these things. At all. Ever...or at-least before Jan 2015 and the seating of the 114^th Congress. Functionally that's the next Congress and thus saying this one won't ever do either of these things is still true.

I'm all for the 14^th solution. It strikes me as a better option than waiting for the populace to become enraged enough to burn the US Capitol down or waiting for the end of the 113^th Congress.

[Agnosticsherbet]

46. We will have to wait and see if the President will make that call.

It is a pity that no one has tried to take the law that sets the debt limit to court as an unconstitutional violation of the 14th. If that law were tossed by an activist court, well at least we would be able to borrow money to pay the debt.

Of course, that leaves the government shut down. Paying existing debts does not allow the President to incur new debts.

[joshcryer]

51. If it happens he has simply no choice in the matter.

And it really isn't about the 14th Amendment in this case, it's actually about the constitutional oath to " preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The 14th Amendment is a legal argument, the oath of the President is a political argument. He could even ignore the SCOTUS ruling if it ruled against him. We're talking constitutional crisis level stuff here.

[joshcryer]

45. The President can simply order bonds to be issued and debts paid.

The SCOTUS will of course be tasked with whether it is illegal or not.

US bonds will be risky because buyers won't know whether or not the SCOTUS will honor them.

If so they're a nice gamble, if not, those bonds are worthless.

The President can and will issue the Treasury to ignore the Public Debt Acts if it comes to that.

There's simply no other way.

[Agnosticsherbet]

48. You may be right about him doing that, though it would be grounds for

impeachment, which would be a slam dunk in the house though not upheld int he Senate.

And the government would still be shut down.

[joshcryer]

50. Yep, he would then be impeached.

And the world will go into chaos as the SCOTUS rules on the case, could be a week or more.

If the SCOTUS rules against the President, then the world would enter in a nightmare never before seen. It would make the Great Depression look like childs play.

If the SCOTUS rules in favor of the President those buying super high yield bonds in the intrim will make a shitload of money (the less trust your bonds have the higher the yield).

[Warpy]

5. I think they'll pay chicken until 11:59 PM on the 16th

They don't want to lose all their money so they'll scrape together something at the last minute that will make it look like they got something for their efforts while getting bupkus.

It's all about saving face at this point. They know they're completely finished if they cave without getting some useless tchotchke like a tax break for some pet billionaire or other they can crow about to the baggers back home. However, it really is over for them.

The difference between them and Obama is that I don't think he is that worried about losing his money, he's not defined by it.

Nor am I. Gawd knows I'm damned good at being poor.

[Laelth]

22. That's my expectation too.

But, no telling how it will play out, really.



-Laelth

[Agnosticsherbet]

44. Hope you are right. n/t

[IrishAyes]

6. The TPs want to drive us to martial law.

Then they'd really scream for President Obama to be hauled into the dock. I wish a sinkhole would open and swallow them up.

[Triana]

8. A coup. Sedition. Treason. Extortion. Illegal and immoral no matter what it's called.

Shouldn't be allowed and those behind it belong in prison.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. GOTV 2014

[Cha]

9. I knew they always wanted a default and all the koch bros, wall streeters,

and Chamber of Commerce people in the world aren't going to change their minds.

I think we have been playing hardball. Not giving in to extortion.

But yeah, I hear ya.. keep playing it.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

10. Obama is still in the Oval Office, all frederal agencies are under his authority

and no one is storming the WH gates.

[grantcart]

12. Legislative chaos but not a coup. A coup requires a change in the chief executive

and commander in chief.

Besides in a real coup you turn on your car radio and your favorite radio station is quiet until you find the FOX type station that is playing martial arts music and advises you that in an hour a spokesman for "The Committee to Restore National Unity and Safeguard the Country" will be making an update.

You call your best friend who tells you that his brother in law works for the communications ministry and they haven't been able to grab the Prime Minister and half of the cabinet and that the navy refuses to join the Army and the Air Force is undecided.

You make a quick stop at the grocery story and buy every can you can get a hold of and leave wondering what the hell you are going to do with 46 cans of sweetened milk and 12 cans of sweet potato.

Been in a few.

The most interesting was after we had just gotten a micro wave dish that gave us 20 international cable channels and we watched CNN New York take live phone calls updating the confrontation that was happening at the University, about 2 kilometers away.

Trust me a coup is much more organized and much more popular than this. This would be giving coup a bad name.

[melody]

31. I'm so glad you're here

You're the voice of reason and sanity.

[grantcart]

52. lol thanks

[MFrohike]

57. Yes and no

The essence of a coup is a change in who makes the decisions. If the GOP forces the president to bend to their will, what's the practical difference? If they play on his desire to actually do his job by refusing to do theirs, that gives them quite a bit of leverage. Gingrich tried something like this in the mid 90s. He clearly sought to make the Speakership equivalent to the presidency, so that he could dictate terms to Clinton. His failure is seen as overreaching, but maybe it was just the districts weren't concentrated enough and that his supporters weren't sufficiently radicalized.

I won't say that what I describe fits the Webster's definition of a coup, but it seems like roughly the same thing in effect. My point is that we shouldn't be distracted by form when the substance might be the same. It's just a thought.

[grantcart]

58. All coups differ in many respects but all have one common feature: control of the military.

You could make a case that the events in the 2000 election were a defacto judicial coup because it decided who would control the instruments of government including the commander in chief.

[MFrohike]

59. Usually, yes

That doesn't make it a prerequisite in a country with a quite legalistic culture and a cult of the "constitution."* If you don't like the word coup d'etat, that's fine. Another word or phrase can always be used, even though the effect really isn't measurably different. Perhaps calling it a soft coup?

The only virtue I see in calling the situation a coup or analogous to it is that it makes the central issue unavoidable. There is a clear effort by the GOP to dictate policy, regardless of their position in government.

*The "constitution" regularly invoked by Americans bears little resemblance to the document and accompanying law that makes up constitutional law.

[blkmusclmachine]

13. You betcha!

[Rebellious Republican]

14. Well, I think the 1 percenters who really run this Government will not allow this to happen.

[ffr]

15. And after they defund the ACA law, what's their plan?

They'll get to make their own Web site healthcare exchange to replace this one? That'll be great!

Don't give in. DO NOT!

[flamingdem]

16. No, Boner needs to call a vote

The President should not take the fall out of this mess.

[valerief]

18. It was a coup in 2000 by SCOTUS. nt

[hamsterjill]

19. Can someone please ask Bill Clinton what to do?

No offense to President Obama. In fact, I think it's one of his strong points that he seeks out advice. I'm just curious how Big Dawg would deal with Cruz.

[Auntie Bush]

32. That's a good idea. Wonder what his advice would be?

Edited to add. I bet he has already given his advice and recommends Obama stay strong and continues to do just what he's doing...never give in to ransom. The Big Dog always knows what's best.

[hamsterjill]

34. I bet the President and the former President are talking.

I think you're right, too. That Bill would advise staying strong.

Yes, Big Dawg always knows what's best, especially when it comes to crazy Republicans!

[Half-Century Man]

20. The Ultra-rich stop being ultra rich if we blow up the economy

If interest rates skyrocket, the derivatives markets implodes crushing the banks. Monies stored overseas might cease to exist as international banks collapse.

We are used to being poor.
The 1%'s ass is clenched tight.

[Laelth]

23. Spot on. n/t

-Laelth

[Auntie Bush]

33. So are you recommending default?

If we do default...I'll remember the 1-2% will really be hurting like the rest of us. We stand to lose thousands...They will lose millions and even billions....at least I hope they do.

[Half-Century Man]

35. No I'm saying the fear is greater for them

[joshcryer]

47. Their mindset is that if they destroy the semi-regulated economy...

...a new, ultra-unregulated economy will rise forth from the ashes.

It's Turner Diaries shit.

[polichick]

27. They want to bring on the end times too. How absurd that the U.S. is being...

brought down by delusional sociopaths - and yet hundreds of "leaders" in Congress and the WH don't feel they can stop them.

[Katashi_itto]

28. For those that say this isn't Sedition, just ask yourself if Teddy Roosevelt was president right now

and dealing with these terrorists What would he do?

[Adsos Letter]

29. Personally whup each and every GOP member of the House, starting with Cruz...

...and proceeding on in alphabetical order.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

30. This is just stupidity and yes it's time for Democrats to take the reins

[Cleita]

41. If they crash the government, it seems to me we no

longer need them. Maybe that could be a way to get rid of them. One can dream.

[hooverville29]

53. OK. So? What's the counter-coup, other than agree to nothing and let chaos begin?

[gopiscrap]

55. I agree

[maindawg]

60. 2000 was a judicial coup

so they have done it before. And no one made a stink. We all just tucked out collective tail between our weak knees and let an idiot and and his evil twin systematically destroy our economy loot our treasury and murder people all over the world with reckless abandon.
We suffered from it to this day.
We basically have the same court today. The same unbelievable warped fascist court. And they are the makers of this disaster. The ruling class are pissed. We out voted them. We did not allow them to install another idiot with an evil twin. They want to tear the entire system down. They will block any attempt to start up the Government. They want us to default.

The president has to use executive power. Then the military will have to be involved.
Now the military has long been controlled by the neo cons. We dont talk about that either. But the neo cons subverted our military 50 years ago and they have always been shining that apple. I think it is disgusting the disrespect they show to Presidents Clinton and Obama.
Our military is undisciplined and out of control. They siphon every tax dollar we can muster. They are like a virus that has spread all over the globe and takes whatever they want.
We have used them to murder innocent people many times. It is a dangerous machine and if they get involved, we are through.

Its time for Reid to change some rules. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/the-house-gop-s-little-rule-change-that-guaranteed-a-shutdown. The GOP changed a rule and rubed our nose in it. Its time for Harry to get to work.

[maindawg]

62. Im not crazy

http://aattp.org/eric-cantors-house-coup-detat-led-koch-funded-sleeper-cell-video/

[WinkyDink]

64. China awaits.