Richard Milhouse Obama
Law prof Jonathan Turley compares them to explore the imperial presidency, how presidents override the checks and balances on power. Look who comes out worse:
Four decades ago, Nixon was halted in his determined effort to create an imperial presidency with unilateral powers and privileges. But in 2013, Obama wields those very same powers openly and without serious opposition.-Surveillance. Nixon's use of warrantless surveillance was cited as one of his greatest abuses and led to the creation of the special Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Obama, however, has expanded warrantless surveillance programs to a degree that dwarfs anything Nixon imagined, including initiating a program that captured communications of virtually every U.S. citizen.
-War. Nixon's impeachment included the charge that he evaded Congress' sole authority to declare war by invading Cambodia. Obama went even further in the Libyan war, declaring that he alone defines what is a "war" for the purposes of triggering the constitutional provisions on declarations of Congress. That position effectively converts the entire provision in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution ("Congress shall have power to ... declare War") into a discretionary power of the president.
-Kill lists. Nixon ordered a burglary to find evidence to use against Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers, and was accused of a secret plot to have the White House "plumbers" "incapacitate" him in a physical attack. People were outraged. Yet Obama has asserted the right to kill any U.S. citizen without a charge, let alone conviction, based on his sole authority. Internal documents state that he has a right to kill a citizen even when he lacks "clear evidence (of) a specific attack" being planned.
-Reporters/whistle-blowers. Nixon was known for his attacks on whistleblowers, using the Espionage Act of 1917 to bring a rare criminal case against Ellsberg. He was vilified for this abuse of the law, but Obama has brought twice as many such prosecutions as all prior presidents combined. Nixon was accused of putting a few reporters under surveillance. The Obama administration has admitted to putting Associated Press reporters, as well as a Fox reporter, under surveillance.
-Obstruction of Congress. Nixon was cited for various efforts to obstruct or mislead congressional investigators. The Obama administration has repeatedly refused to give evidence sought by oversight committees in a variety of scandals. In one case, Congress voted to move forward with criminal contempt charges against Attorney General Eric Holder, which Holder's own Justice Department blocked. In another case, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper lied before Congress on the surveillance programs, and later said that he offered the least untruthful statement he could think of. The Obama administration, however, refuses to investigate Clapper for perjury, let alone fire him. Recently, the administration was accused of searching Senate computers in an investigation of the CIA and trying to intimidate congressional investigators.
These examples are simply those connected with the growing internal security state. Other characteristics of an imperial presidency are equally evident, particularly in the repeated circumvention of Congress in ordering unilateral changes to federal law or suspending federal laws.
While many hail Obama for not taking "no" for an answer from Congress in areas such as health care and immigration reform, they may rue the day another president uses the same powers to negate environmental or anti-discrimination laws.








Obama, however, has expanded warrantless surveillance programs to a degree that dwarfs anything Nixon imagined
To be fair, the technology for today's surveillance didn't exist in Nixon's time. I was politically active when he was in office (Amy, I think you were a bit too young to be paying much attention at the time) and I have little doubt he'd have embraced it every bit as much as Obama has if the capability had been there.
Rex Little at May 20, 2014 11:38 PM
Oh, it's just going to get worse. Whoever the next President is, Dem or Rep, will take it all up another notch. Seems to be the trend.
NicoleK at May 20, 2014 11:44 PM
As usual, people will be pushed until they won't take any more. Then, the end will be ugly. The unobservant will be surprised, because "it can't happen here." Why not? The Declaration of Independence spelled out why it was time to get rid of the government we had. The Constitution limited the government we got. When the rules no longer apply, everyone is going to look out for number one.
MarkD at May 21, 2014 5:48 AM
Whoever the next President is, Dem or Rep, will take it all up another notch.
And why shouldn't they? there's no downside. None.
I R A Darth Aggie at May 21, 2014 6:27 AM
The left is now confident there will never be another republican president.
dee nile at May 21, 2014 10:59 AM
"The left is now confident there will never be another republican president."
With good reason.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 21, 2014 12:52 PM
And if you think that Jeb Bush would be an improvement compared to Hilary just look st the positions they hold.
Essentially the Republican party is the right wing of the Democratic party. They aren't conservative and don't truly want a smaller government.
Jim P. at May 21, 2014 4:34 PM
"The left is now confident there will never be another republican president."
More to the point, the totalitarians are sensing that victory is only a few more steps away. They are no longer hiding what they're about. We have confident predictions from both the Left and the nominal Right that Obamacare is now unrepealable. We have Congress doing nothing serious to oppose the usurpation of the legislative branch's powers, and we have the majority leader of the Senate introducing a bill to repeal the First Amendment. We have the FCC announcing that it has the power to regulate content on the Internet, and we have the EPA announcing that it has the power to regulate respiration and flatulence. And, last but not definitely least, we have universal sruveillence of the citizenry (and I doubt that what's been disclosed so far is the extent of it).
The "peace love and freedom" mask that the Left has worn since the '60s is now off. They no longer feel the need to disguise their ugly faces in public. And almost no one is reacting in any meaningful way.
Cousin Dave at May 22, 2014 5:28 AM
And almost no one is reacting in any meaningful way.
Why should they? After all they are on the side of the angels, this amassed power will never be used against them. Only evil conservatives.
lujlp at May 22, 2014 7:36 AM
Leave a comment