Presumption of innocence is the tradition of prosecution, not of qualification. Qualification requires vetting. And just because our leaders have been indoctrinated by colleges to ignore truth doesn't mean that the entire nation is brainwashed.
When the Constitution enumerates a requirement of eligibility, I would say that means you must prove your eligibility. That prevents some unknown stranger from running. I would call Obama an unknown stranger who hides his past.
“The truth that you think you know is incorrect. The United States legal system since the founding of the republic has operated under the ancient legal doctrine of presumption of innocence.
Presumption of innocence is the tradition of prosecution, not of qualification. Qualification requires vetting. And just because our leaders have been indoctrinated by colleges to ignore truth doesn’t mean that the entire nation is brainwashed.
When the Constitution enumerates a requirement of eligibility, I would say that means you must prove your eligibility. That prevents some unknown stranger from running. I would call Obama an unknown stranger who hides his past.”
In Arizona, Obama had to sign a statement attesting to the fact that he is a “natural born citizen” in order to get on the ballot. I’m reasonably certain that he signed similar statements in other states. If those signed statements are false, he could be charged with election fraud in any jurisdiction where his name appeared on the ballot. To date, no jurisdiction has initiated a Grand Jury investigation for election fraud, forgery, fraud or tampering with official documents and there has been not one single call for a congressional investigation by any member of Congress.
Here’s a link to a scanned copy of the Candidate Nomination Paper for Arizona that Obama signed:
http://moniquemonicat.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/arizona-election-nomination-papers-barack-obama-signed-statement-he-is-a-natural-born-citizen2.pdf