High Treason: Obama and Pentagon Declare Congress Invalid 2012
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military, words which effectively declare Congress a ceremonial relic, have prompted Congressman Walter Jones to introduce a resolution that re-affirms such behavior as an “impeachable high crime and misdemeanor” under the Constitution.
During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.
Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”
The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”
Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.
Harold
ACGR's "News with Attitude" 
Your wrong. George W. Bush had permission from Congress to go into Iraq before sending any troops in there.
He did not have permission from the UN. Because they are not the ones to give permission for our president to send troops in anywhere.
I might introduce another question. Of course according to the Constitution only Congress can declare war. We left that premise during the Bush years and other Presidents as well in a smaller way. The President is responsible for the Defense of this nation and on that basis he can attack in self defense before approval by Congress. The Key here is “self defense as being under attack”. Lets say during Bush years we moved into a no man’s land of Constitutional authority.
That being the case there come a point of Presidential decision based of national security and cooperation with Foreign entities. Personally agree with George Washington we should stay out of foreign intrigue, but one must admit we have moved into a global situation where, in order to defend ourselves we look for foreign entities to join us.
Would that be considered foreign intrigue??? That need clarification arguing from George Washington point, but George never said foreign intrigue includes allies as in the revolution. What has changed is the global situation where not much time is available to prepare a defense, therefore the issue would be a matter of preparation. On this basis if we accept that it is wise to look for alliances to face a danger common to all members then the issue would be only one of coordination of strategies. Now Congress, there is no time here to describe a situation where Congress lost its authority, this Congress during Bush years, as stated, has allowed what they now call a breach of authority by the President. In facts this Congress based its decision not on the security of this Nation but to enter into “foreign intrigue” with a foreign entity that exposes us to attack that would surely lead to wars. Therefore, this Congress should be impeached for abuse of authority albeit by less direct means.
This Congress could be accused of not being reliable in terms of what is in our National Security. So are some Candidates now running. Their allegiace to foreign entities disqualifies them of making such a decision.