Obama: 'You Interpret a Statute Based On...Intent'

 The intent of Obamacare is clear, and the law "doesn't need fixing" President Obama told a news conference in Germany on Monday.

"There is no reason why the existing exchanges should be overturned through a court case," he insisted, just days before the Supreme Court is expected to rule on a case that could eliminate subsidies for people who fot their insurance through the federal exchange.

Obama, a former constitutional law professor, said laws should be interpreted based on their "intent":

"And under well-established statutory interpretation approaches that have been repeatedly employed, not just by liberal Democratic judges, but by conservative judges like some on the current Supreme Court, you interpret a statute based on what the intent and meaning and the overall structure of the statute provides for," Obama said.

"And so this should be an easy case. Frankly, it probably shouldn't even have been taken up. And, you know, since we're going to get a ruling pretty quick, I think it's important for us to go ahead and assume that the Supreme Court is going to do what most legal scholars who've looked at this would expect them to do."

The Supreme Court case focuses not on intent, but on the plain language of the Affordable Care Act.

The question is whether the Internal Revenue Service, by regulation, can extend tax credit subsidies to people who purchased health insurance on the federal exchange.

Four words in the law specify that only exchanges "established by the State" may offer subsidized health insurance. But most states let the federal government set up their exchanges for them.

read more:


Views: 406

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

waiting and waiting. have heard this story before.

That's right Barry you and your friend Mr. Gruber intended to lie and cheat the American people but you ended up screwing your self, never in American history has there been a bigger Ass Hole then you, O and your wife to !

can't imagine anything more stupid, then to say laws are based on intent.

And what happens when the next person finds the intent to be different,  and how does one deal with a law that isn't what is written, but is open for "intent"

And what happens when a law says that this plan will provide this that and the other thing, and it provides "none of the above".?? Can it even be considered a law if it was made with the intent to deceive people? If the way it was supposedly written, was not deceitful, then it must have been totally confusing which, in itself, should have negated the damned thing from ever becoming law. And the lack of time for voters in this issue, in and of itself, should have caused it to be thrown out, but of course Nancy "THE MOUTH" Pelosi made sure that the law was passed by stating her case and that "if you want to know what's in it, pass it and you will find out." That statement from her, when she made it, reminded me of a sleazy styled used car dealer selling a used vehicle to a consumer without ever allowing the buyer to even try it out first, and then when it turned out that the vehicle was ready for the junk yard the dealer used every excuse in the book to not have to fix it. This was the reason that the LEMON LAWS became law and now I wonder if the administration can be sued via a similar law due to misrepresentation??? Would that be the O Blemon Law???

I see the resemblence but Barney is a good guy .. his intensions were always good .. on the other hand the only good intent  Obama has is for himself ..

I agree. Barney is a good guy, even a Patriot. But we would need to "re-train" him on the Preamble to the Constitution.


Funny stuff!

What an ignorant, narcissist, incompetent. lying pos.


Secretive....he's out in the open here.....spineless selfish.....o Lord have mercies on us!


Sure run over to Germany to talk about the U.S.Sure is a great role model for Harvard. Did not learn much there.

I have doubt he ever really "went" to school there.  He may have been enrolled but I have doubt he ever graduated.  If he has a degree, where is the diploma?  If he was born, where is the birth certificate?  If he is what he claims, how come the best job he could find was community organizer (party planner) in Chicago.  I would think an attorney could find a position, no matter how low in a legal firm.  If he is actually a graduate of Harvard Law School, it is certainly a black mark on Harvard.   




Political Cartoons by Gary VarvelPolitical Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Pelosi Disaster!  95% Of Americans Tuned Out Impeachment Show Trials On Friday — Only The Second Day Of Testimony

Despite the constant hype Americans are already tuning out the sham impeachment trials.

On the second day of the public show trials 95% of Americans turned off the nonsense.

Americans are worn out by all of the fake news and hysteria.


Dan Gainor   @dangainor

Yawn: 95% of U.S. Adults Skipped Day 2 of Democrats' Impeachment Hearings 

Yawn: 95% of U.S. Adults Skipped Friday’s Impeachment Hearings

Americans aren’t exactly obsessed with the Democrats’ impeachment hearings, it seems. Friday’s second day of live, wall-to-wall coverage drew an average of 12.7 million viewers on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN,

Flashback: Horrible News For Shifty Schiff – Majority Of Americans Don’t Want Impeachment, 76% Don’t Trust Dems And Believe Media Is Pushing The Sham

No One in American Wants Impeachment except the Far-left Socialist Democrats and their Corrupt Media. They hate President Trump because he is a winner. He beat them and he’s making America great again as he said he would.

The Democrats and their corrupt media are totally blinded by their rage and they don’t realize that no one is in favor of impeachment.

We reported a week ago that FOX News released a poll where they stated that 49% of Americans were for Trump Impeachment. But their polling was flawed. The real extrapolated results of the poll using an accurate proportion of Republicans, Democrats and Independents showed that only 30% of Americans are in favor of Trump’s Impeachment and they’re all Democrats.

Next, a few days ago we reported on another poll that was consistent with the results of our extrapolated FOX News poll.

Nearly three quarters of all Americans have little or no trust in the way that Schifty Schiff is running the impeachment process –

Heritage Action   Heritage_Action

You won’t hear this in the mainstream media: Nearly three fourths of Americans have little to no trust in the House Democrats’ handling of their impeachment process. 🤔

Today another poll was released with similar results.

Most Americans believe that the corrupt media is trying to help get President Trump impeached. Three-quarter of Republicans, half of independents and even a third of Democrats believe this to be the case. No one trusts Schifty Shiff or the corrupt media pushing his impeachment sham.

IT Guy@ITGuy1959

1- "Seventy-six percent (76%) of Republicans and a plurality (48%) of voters not affiliated with either major political party say most reporters are trying to help impeach Trump, a view shared by only 36% of Democrats."

Let's recast that last phrase 

Rasmussen Reports @Rasmussen_Poll

Most Say Media Working With Democrats to Impeach Trump... 

This is perhaps the worst gaffe in modern political history.

This Schiff Show does not have a happy ending for the Democrats. Even with the support of the entire corrupt fake news media, it’s a total sham and everyone knows it!

Ranking Member Nunes breaks down House Democrats' fake impeachment inquiry

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service