To: Amityschild
There is no precedence for disqualifying a president AFTER he has been elected...
16 posted on
10/28/2008 5:53:01 AM PDT by
Tennessee Nana
(McCain/Palin Now that's a ticket that deserves a tagline)
To: Tennessee Nana
There is no precedence for disqualifying a president AFTER he has been elected... GOOD !!
Then the courts can't step out on a "stare decisis" prior ruling, and will have to rule based on the Original Intent.
32 posted on
10/28/2008 6:13:06 AM PDT by
brityank
(The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
To: Tennessee Nana
There is no precedence for disqualifying a president AFTER he has been electedThe "election" of the president is actually when the electors meet. Isn't that in December? As for disqualification, the US Constitution is the supreme law. What's to argue with that?
To: Tennessee Nana
There is no precedence for disqualifying a president AFTER he has been elected... True, but I believe the US Code on the Electoral College provides for "raising objections" when the electoral ballots are counted on January 6th. I'll try to find the exact wording.
43 posted on
10/28/2008 6:31:11 AM PDT by
RightField
(A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well,.)
To: Tennessee Nana
Actually he has to meet the criteria for eligibility to become the President (some of which are 35 years or older and a NATURAL born citizen of this Country)....if he doesn’t meet the criteria then the number two guy on the winning ticket becomes the President....
44 posted on
10/28/2008 6:31:56 AM PDT by
thingumbob
("Use your brain........vote McCain!" (Remember, dead terrorists don't make more terrorists!))
To: Tennessee Nana
There is no precedence for disqualifying a president AFTER he has been elected... If you read the decision by the judge that threw out Berg's lawsuit there is. Apparently it's the job of the electoral college to question and investigate eligibility. Or something along those lines.
51 posted on
10/28/2008 6:42:52 AM PDT by
BubbaBasher
(www.HypocriteLibs.org - Tracking the Slandering Liars in the MSM)
To: Tennessee Nana
There is no precedence for disqualifying a president AFTER he has been elected... Actually it's precedent, and the rules even for this are already laid out. The electors right to vote for the President in the December vote casting election is ABSOLUTE. After that then Presidential succession rules come into play.
If O does win the vote and then is disqualified in December, the Dem electors could theoretically vote for anyone they want including Hillary.
93 posted on
10/28/2008 9:07:00 AM PDT by
Centurion2000
(To protect and defend ... against all enemies, foreign and domestic .... by any means necessary.)
To: Tennessee Nana
You should read the law before you post.
256 posted on
10/28/2008 6:33:22 PM PDT by
The Doctor
(Kathleen Parker AND PEEGY NOONAN NOW need lipstick, Palin color.)
To: Tennessee Nana
There is no precedence for disqualifying a president AFTER he has been elected... Sure there is. It was done in 1861 and may have to be done again if a Kenyan or Indonesian citizen defrauds his way to the White House.
314 posted on
10/29/2008 10:48:39 AM PDT by
PeterFinn
(Sarah Palin for President in 2012.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson