If you were ordered to remove Obama from office by the military, would you?

and do you think this has any implications for our National Security?

The second article kind of lost me when it asked "Was it not men of the “Devout Muslim Faith” that flew planes into U.S. buildings not too long ago?" The answer to that by the way is no. It was not devout Muslims who flew planes into the Twin Towers. It was very misguided people who will have to answer to God on the Day of Judgement for their sins. They used a perverted version of Islam to justify their actions. The doctrines of the Wahhabists were made so Saudi clerics could advance themselves politically and have nothing to do with the peaceful coexistence that the Quran dictates.

It is interesting to note that Mossad was one of the agencies giving ISIS weapons. Usually far right articles do not mention that. Support of the extremist organizations signals that Obama is not a true Muslim, because these people defile the name of Islam for their own personal economic and political gain. Arming and equipping extremist organizations is something that has been seen routinely throughout American history. In the middle east, Reagan gave the Taliban all kinds of dangerous weapons. Some of which may still be used against American soldiers today. Clinton refused to act on intelligence that could have killed bin Laden in the early days. Obama has been air dropping materials and supplies regardless of who gets them, I believe, because he is not interested in a peaceful conclusion to the Syrian civil war as much as he is interested in clearing out the Syrian presidential seat.

Taqiyya is not an Islamic principle either. It's more in line with Mossad's motto- "War through deception." It is very common for those who spend the majority of their lives working in South Asia or MENA posts to convert to Islam after truly learning Islam. This is nothing to be concerned about, but if Brennan is a Wahhabist then he is not a Muslim at all.

SSG (Join to see), It was devout Muslims that flew the planes into the twin towers. Have you read the Qu'ran? If what these guys did was not representative of Islam, then why were Muslims all over the world cheering the toppling of the Twin Towers? It is actually a perversion of Islam to be peaceful. Read their book. It's in there.

We can agree that a lot of mistakes were made on both sides of the aisle arming those who would be our enemies. And we both agree that Obama is not seeking to destroy ISIS, which is the greatest threat in that region right now. I believe Iran is a close 2nd. They have publicly stated their intentions of destroying Israel and wiping it off the map.

Taqiyya IS an Islamic principle. It comes from the Qu'ran. Does your Qu'ran not mention it? Wahabbi is a branch of Sunni Muslim, and they are a bit more extreme in their literal interpretation of the Qu'ran, and the jihad it advocates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Wahhabism

I would disagree that ISIS is the number one threat. AQ is still the number one threat in the region. Muslims all over the world were not cheering. Perhaps those that did not like the interventionist policies of the US were celebrating, but I assure that the whole Muslim was not celebrating, particularly not the Muslims in the US, Canada, UK, Mexico, Australia, and other countries we are allies with. I have read the Koran several times. The thing is, you cannot commit to war unless you are acting out of self defense. Other than that, you have to exhaust all other means of preserving peace. If you cherry pick any scripture of any religion, you can make it out to look bad. This can done with the Torah, Talmud, Bible, Hindu scriptures, even the Native American spiritual books.

Actually, the military has no jurisdiction even if he refuses to vacate. That would be Law Enforcement's job as directed by the Senate Sgt at Arms.

Exactly.

Immigration is a Federal Issue, but the Feds should not be able to force the States to accept refugees they don't want... which is exactly what they were doing when they were busing illegals from Mexico and covertly dropping them off at night in Red States.

Just going to what if here Sir. Have you seen the movie Gladiator? Do you remember when Senator Gracchus came to Maximus and asked for his help to unseat Commodus, the Caesar who was destroying Rome with his socially destructive policies. It wasn't a majority of the Senate, it was just a couple men who were concerned about the future of Rome.

Likewise, I guarantee you that the Socialists that call themselves Democrats would not be coming to you giving you this order, nor would the Establishment GOP bureaucrats that vote with the Democrats. It would be a small faction. Guys like Sen Jeff Sessions, Sen Ted Cruz, Sen Mike Bell, Congressman Trey Gowdy, Congressman Louie Gohmert, etc.

And for the sake of argument, let's say they laid it out and said, "Hey General, we need your help because this corruption has taken hold of 2/3 of Congress. We ask that you remove the President from office along with Valerie Jarrett, the Attorney General, two Supreme Court justices, four Senators, and six Congressmen that were the ringleaders. Both parties are involved in this. The Speaker of the House will assume the duties in the interim until a special election is held."

They then lay out before you clear evidence of all that the President has been doing in secret to undermine this country and its Constitution, and they provide you with the names of those in Congress who are in on it... on both sides of the aisle. Their purpose is simply to ferret out the corruption. Note that this is not an attempt to remove the other party. They feel that by getting rid of the ringleaders, that those they coerced will be able to return to their duties and resume their duties free of the threats used to coerce them and free of the fear of reprisal. They don't want the military to run the country; they just want help removing those individuals from office and to ensure that Security is in place while they investigate and bring said individuals to trial. They also request assistance in quelling any riots and public disturbances while this takes place and promise to hold elections immediately to replace those convicted. And let's say the evidence they present to you is rock solid and overwhelming. Would you help them?

NO. Although the oath says foreign and domestic, a few senators with overwhelming "evidence" cannot be the sole reason to become the law, the judge, the jury and executioner. It is a legal issue, not one for a military takeover.

Key word = functioning.

Roger that! The key word is functioning!

It isn't functioning when we have this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/13/13-reasons-why-this-is-the-worst-congress-ever/

Unfortunately, that is not the military's job. As long as Congress is functioning (and impeachment would definitely be a sign of that), the military needs to stay out of the political process. I would welcome seeing Congress get off its collective rear end and START taking their sworn oaths seriously -- so that they are motivated to rid government of corruption rather than selling out to the corrupt Special Interests that control Washington DC.

My question is more along the lines of: "Our elected government is so permeated with corruption [in all three branches!], that those we elect can't fight it. Instead, they get steamrolled by their corrupted colleagues who don't want to see the status quo changed from what it is, and the entire system is broken. As if that weren't bad enough, they are allowing outsiders to craft legislation which they don't bother to read and sign off on. Their personal ambitions and party interests trump America's best interest, which they are sworn to uphold. They have shirked their duty to rid government of corruption and they sit on their hands while those we elected shred the Constitution and reinterpret it to suit their fancy. Should we as the nation's military do something and intervene to rid Congress of those who are sold out, or do we sit on the sidelines and watch our country implode under the weight of its own corruption? Would military intervention be justified after all other means have failed to restore integrity in our leadership and get the nation back on track with the vision our Founding Fathers had for this nation?"

I simply see him as someone who committed fraud, bypassing the Constitutional vetting process, in order to get elected. As such I don't think he was ever fit to be this country's leader. He presented false credentials and lied about his past to gain office and since he has been in office the illegal activity has not stopped. If Congress was doing its job, we wouldn't be having this conversation.