Quantcast

«

»

Jul 15 2013

No, Larry, the Military Won’t Overthrow Obama

Larry Klayman, the worst lawyer in America not named Mat Staver or Orly Taitz, has a column fantasizing about the American military following Egypt’s lead and overthrowing President Obama. Seriously, it reads as though he was typing it with one hand while fondling himself with the other.

That being said, the American people and the rest of the Western world should be rejoicing today. The people of Egypt have risen up valiantly and removed one of the biggest cancers in the Middle East – the Muslim Brotherhood. They did so by organizing mass demonstrations in the heart of Egypt’s capital, Cairo. The Egyptian people had the guts to do what thus far in this country we have not seen fit to do – demand the removal of a president who furthers his own subversive agendas at the expense of the people, most recently siccing the Internal Revenue Service and National Security Agency on the masses to keep them down and silent as he proceeds to refashion the nation through intimidation and threat, in his own Muslim, socialist image.

But President Obama is not only pushing the American people to the limit; he, like Morsi before his downfall, also has been playing with fire among the military. Indeed, to avoid violent revolution, it was the Egyptian military that removed Morsi to further the will of the Egyptian people who did not want to see their nation enslaved under Muslim Shariah law.

Fap, fap, fap, fap. Not gonna happen, Larry. Now why don’t you just go back to playing dress up with your “citizen grand juries” in Florida and let the adults talk?

20 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Gregory in Seattle

    I used to think that incitement to treason was a very serious federal offense in this country.

    Apparently not.

  2. 2
    Ben P

    In Egypt there were well over 500,000 protesters in Cairo, more than 100,000 in Alexandria, and tens of thousands more in other cities , for a total of more than a million across the country. This is in a country with a population of 84 million.

    If 4 million people were to show up to protest in DC, maybe Klayman wouldn’t be just talking out his ass.

  3. 3
    holytape

    You would think that a country as smart as America, they could have created some sort of process in which the people could have say in selecting who holds office, and made a procedure that insures a peaceful transfer of power. Maybe they could do it every, let’s say, four years. Instead of waiting for the inevitable military coup that seems to happen every time the leaves turn color here in America.

    Wait, I may not be thinking of America, but possibly Somalia. It’s so easy to get those two confused these days.

  4. 4
    Larry

    Greg, he’s not saying he wants the military to overthrow the constitutionally elected president, he’s just sayin’…

    Furthermore, like all RWNJs, he isn’t going to get his hands dirty. He’s asking for others to do the deed.

  5. 5
    parkjames

    This very much sounds like treason to me. I like the first amendment a lot, but inciting violence and encouraging the military overthrow of the POTUS doesn’t seem like it should be protected speech.

  6. 6
    Vicki, duly vaccinated tool of the feminist conspiracy

    It’s not just the first amendment: if anyone is still reading the constitution closely (and frankly, after what they’ve done to Bradley Manning and are trying to do to Snowden, I doubt it), it’s very hard to make a charge of treason stick.

  7. 7
    Gregory in Seattle

    @Larry #4 – “Furthermore, like all RWNJs, he isn’t going to get his hands dirty. He’s asking for others to do the deed.”

    Which is why I said incitement to treason. The actual name of the offense is Advocating overthrow of Government, §2385:

    Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or

    Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

    Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof –

    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

    If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction. (Emphasis added.)

    Apparently, though, the priorities of this administration is to ignore actual wrong-doing and instead aggressively pursue and prosecute anyone who dares to reveal that wrong-doing.

  8. 8
    Gregory in Seattle

    @parkjames #5 – The link I gave above includes the statutes regarding treason. While advocating for the overthrow of the government is a serious federal felony — when anyone bothers to actually prosecute it — it is not itself treason.

  9. 9
    criticaldragon1177

    Ed Brayton

    So basically he wants the military to overthrow our president who has not only been democratically elected twice, but is still supported by most Americans. He hasn’t pushed the American people to their limit. If he had, he wouldn’t have gotten reelected. His idea doesn’t sound like a rebirth of freedom in America to me. It sounds like the start of a military dictatorship which thankfully, like you pointed out, won’t happen.

  10. 10
    D. C. Sessions

    He hasn’t pushed the American people to their limit.

    Yes, he has. For appropriate values of “American People.”

  11. 11
    Abdul Alhazred

    @1 Some yahoo saying “gee I wish” is not incitement.

  12. 12
    slc1

    A military takeover ot the government is not quite as far fetched as it may appear. In the early 1930s, in the depths of the Depression, there was some talk amongst certain military quarters relative to a military coup d’etat. Of course, Seven Days in May is fiction.

  13. 13
    Modusoperandi

    Ooo! It’s “One Day in May”. It would be seven, but failure rarely takes a whole week:
     
    General Army: “Mister President, we’re here to remove you from power.”
    President Obama: “Stand down, General.”
    General Army: “Yes, sir, Mister President.”*
     
    * The same thing happened in Britain once, but the coup failed when the Prime Minister pointed out that the General failed to knock before entering his office (“A coup I can understand, but not knocking is simply rude!” the PM said later).

  14. 14
    parkjames

    @ gregory thanks for the info.

  15. 15
    whheydt

    Re: Modusoperandi @ #13

    When was that incident in the UK, and which PM? (Sounds like the sort of Disraeli or Gladstone might have said. Churchill would have been pithier.)

  16. 16
    pocketnerd

    Yeah. Right-wingers wave rebel flags, mutter darkly about how somebody should “take out the president,” and drool over the idea of a military coup against our lawfully elected president… and then have the gall to denounce liberals as traitors.

  17. 17
    democommie

    Just a guess on my part but I doubt that the Egyptian military was all that concerned about the welfare of the fellaheen or the factory workers in Cairo. Their intervention was, in all likelihood, self-serving.

  18. 18
  19. 19
    exdrone

    Given how much money the military has reliably received from all administrations from Reagan onward, what exactly would their motivation be to conduct a coup?

  20. 20
    dan4

    “Indeed, to avoid violent revolution, it was the Egyptian military that removed Morsi…”

    Interesting way of looking at things. So, in the future, if there is a planned violent revolution against a president that Klayman AGREES with, I’m sure he will still support the military overthrow of said individual; after all, you got to do what you got to do “to avoid violent revolution.”

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site