Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nero Germanicus
Any state’s Chief Elections Officer can refuse to place on the state ballot a candidate who does not meet the requirements of Article II, Section 1.

The operative word here is "can". In a rational society, the word would be "shall", but we have once again been blessed by the courts with another example of their inherent stupidity when they ruled that State officials don't have to do their job. They can if they want to, but they cannot be compelled to do their job if they don't want to do so.

If forget which of the particular cases it was, but i'm sure you have it somewhere in that big list of cases you cite from time to time.

Nobody was “misled,” there were over 200 court rulings on Obama’s eligibility.

Notwithstanding the fact that virtually all of those court cases occurred *AFTER* the fact, those court cases do in fact mislead people. But it is not this particular misleading of people to which I refer. I am referring to the media and the talking head lawyers misleading everyone as to what the issue was, and what the facts of eligibility were.

The public was and has most certainly been misled by the Judiciary and Law schools since 1898.

335 posted on 12/19/2016 1:09:47 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

“The operative word here is “can”. In a rational society, the word would be “shall”, but we have once again been blessed by the courts with another example of their inherent stupidity when they ruled that State officials don’t have to do their job. They can if they want to, but they cannot be compelled to do their job if they don’t want to do so.”


There is no law in any state nor is there a federal law that requires a candidate to prove their identity and citizenship status via a birth certificate. Under federal law, primary evidence of citizenship and identity is best confirmed via a passport. Passports have better security features than fifty five year old birth certificates.

The reason that no criminal court procedure has gone forward regarding Barack Obama’s birth certificate is because the original, hard copy, vault edition has never been seen publicly. People have reacted to a third or fourth generation image that was scanned to pdf. That is an image, not a vital record of birth. The original remains in the office safe of the Hawaii Registrar where it has resided since 2011. The original can be made available for inspection via court order.


345 posted on 12/19/2016 2:16:47 PM PST by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson