Posted on 12/17/2008 10:05:48 AM PST by autumnraine
I read a post the other day that a Freeper got from Congressman John Linder, Georgia, stating that he would stand and object to Obama if he doesn't show proof of constitutional eligibility.
I emailed Mr. Linder and asked if he did indeed write that email and if he was serious about holding Obama to task on something as serious as this.
A few moments ago I received a phone call from Congressman Linder's office confirming that he intends to do exactly that and he is just as intent as us on verifying Obama's eligibility.
I told his staffer (very nice lady) that I was proud of him and that I appreciated his bravery as I know he is going against the tide with this.
She said that she herself was concerned as she had to show full, long form documentation to even work in the building for a Congressman and we shouldn't be told to just take someone's word for an office as important as POTUS.
Anyway, I just wanted to let everyone know that at least one Congressman is standing up to this, even if the SCOTUS doesn't have the nerve to examine what would seem to be a reasonable question.
“May I recommend another email offering to provide or direct his office to any supporting documents he may want? I know we (FReepers and others) have far more research time into this then his office could ever put in”
There has been some research done by FReeper Chief Engineer about the birth house in Oahu and the owners at the time in 1961, Orland Lefforge and Thelma Young
I got the email information!! Sorry I got so excited I didn’t scroll down when I saw the post!! :) Emailed him with lots of support and gratitude!!
He has my deepest thanks and appreciation. And thank you for verifying and posting this.
‘That is great news! I am hoping that we can also count on the following House members from the state of Florida. BillYoung; Gus Bilirakis; Adam Putnam;...... maybe other Florida Freepers can add to the list.’
The entire Republican Study Committee (RSC) should stand up and protest. Over 100 Conservative members in the House.
Notice the Kook Aid graphic he posted.
He is saying we are all stupid for wanting Obama to verify he is eligible to be POTUS. I guess if I lose my drivers license and need to get a new one, I should march in and say “You have to take my word for it, it was good enough for the President”.
You are so welcome!
Thanks, autumnraine.
Ping.
And the timing is interesting since the SCOTUS has placed Berg’s case on conference for January 9th!
Indeed! Do you know Berg’s docket #? I have notes everywhere and one place I’ve been checking is scotusblog.com (or org?), but I noticed that having the docket # helps.
I wish someone would post something that has a brief (please!) chron of events, including info such as docket #’s that we can use to email our personal lists.
Something like this...
Berg’s application to stay (docket #___) which was up for full conf on December ___ was denied.
Berg’s lawsuit ___ vs. ___ (docket # ___) is scheduled for full conf on ____
Keyes’ lawsuit: Being heard in CA Superior Ct on _____, then ____
Updates on other lawsuits (the top 2 or 3 at most).
GA Congressman Linder is keeping open the option to object at the Jan 8 session of congress when they count and certify the Electoral Votes.
Anywho, you get the picture. I’m really having to scramble to keep up with all the posts.
God bless America!
What is the procedure after the objection is signed and received (by the President of the Senate)? Is it read to the joint session? Is it thrown open for discussion and debate?
Some one already is
This is just awesome news! I am going to write the man to thank him ASAP. Now that this is on FR, I expect the media will be trying to crucify this good man soon. We need to be ready stand up with him when they do.
Basicly what happens is the Senators go back to the Senate where they then decide yes or no on the objection(s) and the House does the same thing. Then they meet again in the House chambers for a reading of the decisions.
Here is the rest of the code (if anyone can translate it please do):
Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received.
When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified.
If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State.
But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted.
When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted.
No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.
Oblahblah eligibility ping.
This is the kind of politician we need.
(Picking up where the last paragraph ended...)
When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified.
If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State.
But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted.
When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted.
No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.
After they repair their exploded heads, they'll deal with it, by ignoring it, and "moveon".
Sounds like the whole aim is to get to the last 2 words: disposed of.
Each house meets separately and debates and then votes on the objection. Then the two houses reconvene jointly to continue the count. Unless there is a majority vote of both houses of Congress to reject any electoral votes, the joint session must count them.
“No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.”
So, if the objection is made at the first mention of any vote or votes for B.O. the process must stop right there. Technically the overseer of the vote is the current Vice-President and that is Vice-President Dick Cheney. Where President Bush might waver at such a decision I can envision Dick Cheney with a mental smile in the back of his thoughts while he orders the proceedings to a halt until the shall have been finally disposed of requirement has been met.
Based upon the nature of the objection to the vote there is only one way to “finally dispose of” the objection.
Produce his REAL birth certificate, the one the Hawaiian “officials” have clearly stated is in a vault somewhere in the State of Hawaii.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.