So, the Tea-liban wants to default, then impeach Obama because of it?

[regnaD kciN]

What about US impeaching the whole lot of THEM for causing it?

[abelenkpe]

1. Kinda suspected that was their plan all along

Guess we'll know for sure soon enough.

[leftyohiolib]

2. i dont see how. i know theyll try but on what grounds?

[regnaD kciN]

6. Violating the 14tg Amendment…

...by "allowing" the government to default.

[Blue Idaho]

8. But the House has to vote to impeach - so that's a stretch...

But I would be in favor of putting them all in a big cage and letting people throw shit at them.

No - literally "throw shit."

[leftyohiolib]

9. potus cant spend money only the house can so if the country defaults it's

the house that is to blame for not spending not potus. if potus used the 14th and ordered spending then potus would be violating the constitution .

[melody]

3. I guess they couldn't get him to cheat with some CIA bimbo

And save evidence on a dress.

[louis-t]

4. Sorry, you can't impeach a president cuz he didn't

do what you want him to. Sick bastards.

[regnaD kciN]

7. By their rationale, you can…

It's apparently the President's duty to keep the country running, even if Congress is refusing to allow him to do so.

[econoclast]

10. Default is unconstitutional

14th amendment


Section four of the fourteenth amendment REQUIRES that the existing debt be paid. Reading the historical background of section four clearly indicates that the amendment was designed to (1) extinguish forever all debts incurred by the Confederacy ... ie. if you loaned money to the Confederacy you were OFFICIALLY never getting paid. Period. (2) Guaranteeing that existing Federal (Union) debt HAD TO BE PAID. There was a fear that Senators/Congressmen from former Confederate States might try some "default" chicanery as retribution against the Union. So section 4 nipped that in the bud by Constitutionally GUARANTEEING the existing Federal debt.

So a default on the existing debt SHOULD be unconstitutional under section 4.

Re US treasuries held by SSTF
These SHOULDN'T be a problem. Why? Because if the SSTF has a cash shortfall they redeem some of their existing bonds. The act of redemption REDUCES the debt by the amount redeemed .... Thereby making some room under the debt ceiling and allowing the Treasury to issue a like amount of NEW bonds to raise the cash to give to the SSTF.

This process is debt-neutral. ie it doesn't end up increasing the outstanding debt so it could be done without breaching the debt ceiling.

Moreover, the debt held by the SSTF should be guaranteed by section 4 of the 14th amendment.