TALIBAN RELEASE RISES TO “HIGH CRIMES & MISDEMEANORS”:LEGAL AMMUNITION FOR IMPEACHMENT!Commentary By Adina Kutnicki


Right off the bat, it is intrinsic to note:though possessing a grounded education in political science – specifically, international relations/security studies, in tandem with criminal law/forensics – there is no claim to being a legal expert. In this regard, this site possesses more than its share of HIGHLY qualified legal eagles to call upon, if necessary. “It be” necessary.
With this in mind, a qualified legal evaluation given by former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy, regarding the recent ILLEGAL release of Taliban/Al-Qaeda prisoners from Guantanamo Bay, was read with great interest. He cited high crimes and misdemeanors as grounds for impeachment. Hmm. 
A depiction of the 1868 impeachment proceedings against President Andrew Johnson. The Senate's vote on the 11th Article of Impeachment fell one vote short of the twothirds majority needed to impeach Johnson. Two other articles were later defeated. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

A depiction of the 1868 impeachment proceedings against President Andrew Johnson. The Senate’s vote on the 11th Article of Impeachment fell one vote short of the two thirds majority needed to impeach Johnson. Two other articles were later defeated.
As to McCarthy, a no-nonsense prosecutor with a stellar track record, he is most well-known for a related terror investigation, one which, incidentally, this American-Israeli expounded upon via an op-ed at Israel National News.
The twists and turns.
Andrew C. McCarthy is an accomplished former federal prosecutor who convicted the infamous jihadist “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman for his role in orchestrating the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and planning other acts of jihad terror. McCarthy recounted this prosecution in Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad, which characterized the motivating Islamic ideology, goals, and methods of contemporary purveyors of violent jihad. He juxtaposed their openly declared jihad war campaign to the “conscious avoidance” of this threat by both America’s leadership elite and its masses in a game effort “to expose this suicide ethos as it pertained to maintaining our security against the terrorist threat.” But the alarming and depressing subject matter of Willful Blindness matter did not drain McCarthy of his own sanity-sparing sense of humor.  McCarthy recounts the following anecdote which captures Rahman’s — and his own — demeanor:

…he [Rahman] was genial enough, in his paltry English, to call me “Sheikh Andy, ” with a wry, resigned smirk that always sounded like, “Man, would this ever be a different game on my home court, insha Allah!”

In The Grand Jihad, McCarthy extended these previous observations, and focused upon the more pervasive threat of jihad’s non-violent manifestations…..

Not only that, upon (required) consultation with this site’s own legal resources, they too cited “high crimes and misdemeanors” as legally viable redress for the nation, atop all his other crimes against the citizens, several which also rise to the level of impeachment. They duly explained, as did McCarthy (in the article below), that said “political wrong” endangered soldiers on the battlefield, as well as U.S. citizens at large. And so much more….  
Even so, though not one to beat a dead horse (but others may debate this claim), this blogger has repeatedly cited the lawlessness of Obama Inc. So as the Executive Branch repeatedly vitiates its own laws (hence, charged as “legal outlaws”), plus violates the Constitution through bypassing Congress altogether – be it in relation to waging illegal wars (Libya), or enacting fiat after fiat without consulting Congress – Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s release of Taliban/Al-Qaeda terrorists raises their “legal outlaw” status exponentially. Moreover, the Executive Branch violated their own enacted law, enjoining that 30 days’ notice must be given to Congress, in order to release any Guantanamo prisoners! Obama Inc. operates as a real junta. Simple as that.  
As to the citations for impeachment, well, where to begin? Here and there.
Here and There One:
Back in Nov. 2012, two months after Benghazigate exploded, talk of impeachment started bubbling to the surface
Here and There Two:
However, Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s bloody footprints, leading to the slaughter of Americans in Libya, involved much more than appeared to the general public. His fires in the entire mid east were becoming increasingly obvious, especially to those who “take an interest” in said domains. Further rumblings were heard….    
Here and There Three:
And even though a disconcerting proportion of the (blissfully ignorant) citizenry appears unaware of said national meltdown – in addition to those who actually desire said outcome – well, an increased rallying cry for impeachment is becoming resonant, considering all the scandals bubbling to the fore!
Here and There Four:
Thus, as one always willing to settle a patriotic score (even though an expat), this site offers up a 36 page compendium to hurry up the process, whether as a “stand alone” charge or added onto an “overarching indictment” as an appendage. Six of one…half a dozen of another.
Obama’s POW Exchange Could Have Just Unleashed His Worst Nightmare
According to multiple experts, the Obama administration’s actions in facilitating the release of American prisoner of war Bowe Bergdahl was an obvious violation of law and could ultimately result in his impeachment proceedings. Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy has a new book in which he details the case of Obama’s impeachment. The recent deal with the Taliban to release five terrorist subjects for Bergdahl’s return, he explains, is yet another route that could lead to charges.

Republican leaders explain Obama himself signed a law last year requiring him to give Congress 30 days’ notice prior to releasing any Guantanamo Bay prisoner.

Aside from the fact that Bergdahl has since been accused of being an Army deserter who expressed his shame about being a soldier and an American, the administration’s handling of his return has become a controversy in itself. In a recent statement, Rep. Buck McKeon and Sen. Jim Inhofe – both ranking members of their respective armed services committees – explained that Obama not only violated the 30-day notice law but also failed “to explain how the threat posed by such terrorists has been substantially mitigated.” The Daily Mail cites a White House insider who was stunned by the public backlash against the move, noting administration officials expected “a January 1981 moment” of celebration, as with the release of 52 Americans being held hostage in Iran. White House sources contended that fears for Bergdahl’s health made his release a priority; however, Press Secretary Jay Carney would not confirm that assertion in a recent press conference. McCarthy is far more concerned about the release of five dangerous terrorist suspects than in the administration’s failure to give adequate notice to Congress. He said that “because high crimes and misdemeanors are not statutory offenses but political wrongs that endanger the United States, the return of senior terrorists to the Taliban while we still have soldiers in harm’s way is, in my view, a ‘high crime and misdemeanor.’” The latest scandal is just one more piece in a puzzle that adds up to a president deserving of impeachment, he explained. “If it was a stand alone, I would never impeach based solely on it,” he said; “but I would add it to a larger indictment.”

Now, considering that the Traitor-in-Chief’s act of treason is leading some military law experts to posit a possible firing squad for the released AWOL Bergdahl, well, hope springs eternal…a woman can dream…possibly attaching said punishment to his savior – Barack HUSSEIN Obama! Fair is fair.

Sgt. Bergdahl to the Firing Squad?

Retired Army Spc. Josh Fuller told Fox NewsWednesday that he was told to keep quiet about Bergdahl leaving his post and getting captured by the Taliban.

“We had all known that he had deserted his post and there was never anything about him getting captured or a POW until a little while later when it came down from the chain-of-command that we needed to keep quiet about it, not say anything and that we’re going with the narrative that he’s captured,” Fuller told Fox News.

Fuller, who stated that Bergdahl pretty much kept to himself and didn’t socialize with other soldiers, said that attacks on the base increased after Army sergeant left.

“Whenever he went and walked off the base, only stuff that we know, that we trained for, that the sports that we know on vehicles, how are moves are, stuff like that, they were getting hit very precisely,” Fuller explained to Fox News.

“And the ambushes we used, the certain tactics that we used, the Taliban was picking up on those things and the Haqqani network started using the same things as well.

“So they were very precise and very accurate. You could tell it was somebody on the inside that had that info.”

Since Bergdahl was exchanged for five high-level Taliban members who were detainees at Guantanamo Bay, reports have surfaced that at least six U.S. soldiers were killed searching for him.

Military law experts discuss possible desertion charges against recovered Taliban prisoner.

So in a nutshell, just as in a civil trial, whereby a preponderance of evidence is given the most weight, even if most of the Lawbreaker-in-Chief’s crimes could be “explained away”, the fact of the matter is that there is enough clear and convincing evidence related to his illegal release of top killers, the rest of his crimes can fall by the wayside. Of course, McCarthy understands that a “stand alone” is much harder to prosecute than an inclusive charge sheet. Hence, his preference for its addition to an “overarching indictment.” Whatever leads him (and surrogates) into handcuffs, landing him/them in jail, works on this end.

It makes no difference how it happens, as long as it does!  

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,394 other followers

%d bloggers like this: