Should Harry Reid be charged with treason and removed from office?

Question

Harry Reid of Navada was elected to office in the senate by just one state, a state that ranks 35th in population, but now has it in his mind that his job is to save our country. In his zeal to seem important, he now wants to assume the roll of “commander in chief” and dictate to the military when, where, and how wars should be fought, overriding the authority granted by the constitution to the legitimate commander in chief, The President. Why should we wait until this quack is up for election to get him out of office and off the tax payers payroll?

In responce to PorkRoD
Already there protecting sorry cowards like your self.

Answer 1

reid already got away with his crooked land deals...everyone..please remember...defeatocrats have always been and will always be..."ABOVE THE LAW!!!"

Answer 2

We have a representative form of government. Polls of the American people show an over 70% negative opinion of the war in Iraq. I'd say Senator Reid is doing his job in trying to right the poor decisions, lack of planning, and overall subpar performance of the current commander in chief. The president in an elected official not a dictator whose word is never questioned. I know the Repubs are striving for, and hoping for a fascist dictatorship but thankfully they have not succedded.

Answer 3

Not if he hasn't violated the law against treason, and let me give you a clue... he hasn't. A basic definition of treason is an overt act born of an intent to betray the United States and lending aid and comfort to the enemy

"he now wants to assume the roll of “commander in chief” and dictate to the military" - I suspect you're just repeating something you've been told, and that's okay as a first step in learning something. But you need to look for something to back these assumptions before you repeat them.

Answer 4

The president of the US is indeed the commander in chief. The power to engage in war remains solely with him. Congress or any US citizen has the right to challenge the decision of the president. It would be treasonous for him to defy the wishes of his constituancy. Congress thru history has acted as check and balance to the presidents war powers. Judging by the polls Ried is representing the wishes of about 70% of the US people

Answer 5

because the law works in strange ways,would it be wise to have a Law that if a politician did something the people would not agree to do that we could call for an election in that state to vote people out,just thing how many people would not keep doing what they are doing now a days ,lie to get in and do what they want until the next election,accountability of the politicians what a law

Answer 6

Prosecutors bring charges against persons. Individuals or groups do not bring charges. There is a prosecutor in Spain who is bringing charges of crimes against humanity against Bush administration officials, including the former Attorney General of the United States. Vincent Bugliosi, former prosecutor from Los Angeles, wrote a book which advocates that murder charges be brought against former president Bush.

Answer 7

OMG! Did you just mention the President & someone else in the same sentence but refer to the OTHER person as the "quack"...?

OK, lets make a deal: We'll all call for Reid's removal from office and you can have your children enlist in your "legitimate commander in chief's" military and deploy to Iraq to fight the "war on terror".

Fair enough...?

Answer 8

So I take it that loyalty to Bush is more important than supporting the Constitution ? You have it all wrong.
Its called oversight. So far there is no legal justification for Bush' war. We need to hold this administration accountable and most Americans don't support Bush or his war.

Answer 9

reid is just an old bitter, confused man

Answer 10

ABSOLUTELY..TOTAL AGREEMENT AMEN ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON.