To: SSS Two
Statutes can't define eligibility for federal elective office. Read the statute. It's clear that she is LEGALLY ineligible to hold any federal office.
14 posted on
10/15/2016 2:04:33 PM PDT by
Windflier
(Pitchforks and torches ripen on the vine. Left too long, they become black rifles.)
To: Windflier
Lock-up this fat, sick, chronic liar criminal loser.
17 posted on
10/15/2016 2:06:35 PM PDT by
hal ogen
(First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?.)
To: Windflier
Read the statute. It's clear that she is LEGALLY ineligible to hold any federal office. The statute is unconstitutional if applied to the president. The only qualifications for president are contained within the four corners of the Constitution.
21 posted on
10/15/2016 2:08:20 PM PDT by
SSS Two
To: Windflier
The only way the statute would be applicable to her (or anyone else) is if they were charged and found guilty by a court of being in violation of the statute. Hillary still enjoys the legal presumption of innocence under the law, as should every American.
47 posted on
10/15/2016 2:40:50 PM PDT by
AustinBill
(consequence is what makes our choices real)
To: Windflier
That’s nice.
Meaningless, though.
Until she is convicted of a disqualifying statute, she didn’t do nuffin.
48 posted on
10/15/2016 2:41:16 PM PDT by
SaxxonWoods
(Ride To The Sound Of The Guns)
To: Windflier
Read the statute. It's clear that she is LEGALLY ineligible to hold any federal office. If she had been tried and convicted you might have an argument. But she wasn't.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson