Obama was president - it’s in the past tense. He is no longer in office and there wasn’t anything you could do about it. So please move forward with your life.
Never again.
>>Obama was president - it’s in the past tense. He is no longer in office and there wasn’t anything you could do about it. So please move forward with your life.
<<
His crimes remain. “That bank robbery was in the past. Let it go.”
I am sorry but you are wrong about the "Obama was President" comment. He has still not presented anyone with a legitimate copy of his birth certificate. According to the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three, he needed to prove his eligibility to Congress or they are instructed to name an interim President until such a time that someone "qualifies" for the office. A "President-Elect" does not exist until the election results have been authenticated and accepted by Congress. It is only then that someone is actually named as the President Elect.
Twentieth Amendment, Section 3: If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
Because in every instance that someone is chosen as President above, the term "shall have failed to qualify" portion of the twentieth Amendment, Section Three is applied thus it does not have anything at all to do with election results. The only thing left to "qualify" for are the constitutional requirements for being President. Congress is instructed to know whether this is true or false and then is instructed to act accordingly. If there has not been a "qualification", there cannot be a legal President because Article two, Section Five clearly starts out with "NO PERSON" except a natural born citizen or someone who is at least thirty five years of age can hold the office of President.
"Article II, Section 5: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
That Obama did not have a birth certificate at this time is a proven fact because there would never have been a question about his eligibility and someone would have presented it BEFORE the electronic abomination presented to all of us in April of that year. This means that Congress did not do it's duty to the Constitution and Obama was allowed to "act" as President. I say act because if he did not "qualify" to Congress as instructed by the Constitution, he could never have proved that he was a natural born citizen or that he was THIRTY FIVE years of age or older. The eligibility requirement wording is clear cut when it starts out with the term "No Person". It does not allow for someone who has failed to qualify to hold the office of President no matter if Congress acted properly or not. No Person. In this case, No Person equals "USURPER".
That BOTH parties allowed this to occur tells us that nothing will ever be done about it. That still doesn't make Obama a President.
There’s this little “history thing” that is still relevant. Someday people may be curious about what brought down the USA.
0bama is not a natural born citizen.
Jeff Epstein did not kill. Himself.
This mess will not be totally cleared up until the fraud who created it is exposed. Are you telling us to leave Obama alone?
No doubt that crimes that 0bola committed are not beyond the statute of limitations.
You think if criminals shouldn’t be charged with crimes if a couple of years have passed since the crimes were committed or something?