Posted on 06/03/2012 6:44:12 PM PDT by Art in Idaho
Laugh and say I’m late to the party on this but my take on the whole eligibility thing is to approach it that Obama broke the law by refusing to submit to anyone his long form, as required, before being placed on the ballot in each state prior to the Nov, 08 election. Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the DNC intentionally withheld the Long Form Birth Certificate either because it didn’t exist; showed Obama wasn’t NBC, or it contained embarrassing data to Obama. Either way, he failed to qualify and broke the law by withholding the long form birth certificate from the people who were supposed to review it. It’s my understanding that Pelosi and the DNC just “stated” Obama qualified and pushed through getting him on the ballot in each of the states. What behind the scenes shenanigans took place, we’ll never know. Bottom line, he illegally got on each state ballot – unless they can prove otherwise.
So, if he failed to qualify by showing no one the long form, he broke the law. He knowingly and willingly took the oath of office knowing he failed to qualify. It’s almost as if forget NBC, forget where he was born, forget who his father was; he failed to qualify because he flunked the qualification standard - he did not produce a birth certificate.
If he failed to produce the LFBC, and also he, as Ed Vieira said, "If Obama took the Presidential “Oath or Affirmation” of office, knowing that he is not “a natural born Citizen,” he knowingly committed the crime of perjury or false swearing (see Article II, Section 1, Clause 7). For, being ineligible for “the Office of President, he cannot “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States,” or even execute it at all, to any degree. Thus, his very act of taking the “Oath or Affirmation” will be a violation thereof." The “failed to qualify” and NBC are two separate but very important issues.
Serious issues:
1. SCOTUS needs to review this acute issue – the “failed to qualify” problem – and make a determination soon, before the election season gets in full gear. And if they get the response, “we showed the short form, twice,” then it’s a “so what?” That was after the election. Regardless if they are fraudulent forgeries, (though that’s certainly important), the issue is What was Presented before the 2008 election to get on the ballot? As far as we know, nothing, hence the fraud and perjury charges. He illegally “snuck in” to get on the ballot. Prove us wrong Pelosi. Show us what you saw to get him on the ballots. If you saw, examined, reviewed, double sourced and triple checked the authenticity of Obama’s Long Form Birth Certificate, then we’ll apologize. I don’t think you saw it at all.
2. SCOTUS and Congress needs to address the NBC issue either by constitutional amendment or new law stating exactly what NBC entails and appoint a reviewing body to ensure each Presidential candidate meets the requirements of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5:
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
3. The Secretary of State of each state is bound by the same mandate, to ensure each Presidential candidate fulfills constitutional requirements. Documents reviewed, sourced, checked by three independent reviewing agencies and signed off.
4. The issue of anchor babies being allowed to be a candidate for president needs to be addressed, hopefully by # 2 above. Sooner or later, it will happen unless it is addressed. You want Ahmadinejad’s wife to fly to the USA, have her baby and eventually be eligible to run for President?
5. If Obama “failed to qualify,” then we are guided by US Constitution Amendment 20 (hat tip Flotsam_Jetsome):
“3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.”
Are we going to demand a national proof of qualification to be on the Presidential ballot in 2012, or are we going to take the DNC’s word for it and set the stage for another “failed to qualify” fraud? Will the American people accept that?
So where do we go from here to get this issue resolved? Petition? A legal court case based solely on the “failed to qualify” issue?
We voters don;t vote for a candidate, we vote for an elector, and essentially, we vote for a political party.
Anyway, that detail aside, your assumption is not a good one.
Plus, now we have the wide-open issue of definition of Natural Born Citizen, and nobody wants to touch it. 100% of Congress has opened the door to anchor-baby presidencies.
We the People want this 'touched.' How to get it done is another matter. A new president and congress is a start. Remember in November America.
If the paper trail exist, can't something be done? I've read many people are concerned about CW2 over this, but would it really come to that? Only one way to find out. .
Obama flubbed the “public” oath of office.
0bama opted for the oath of office, “take #2” in private.
Nobody can prove 0bama recited the oath of office
3. The Secretary of State of each state is bound by the same mandate, to ensure each Presidential candidate fulfills constitutional requirements. Documents reviewed, sourced, checked by three independent reviewing agencies and signed off.
This particular statement is timely. Each candidate has to “qualify” in each State. NJ Appellate Ct. tried to argue that having a mixture of qualifications in the 50 States is not good. They failed to realize that we don’t have federal elections. All our elections are State and each State allows or denies access to their ballots. What idiots.
I feel sorry for this country.
“The DNC drafted, signed and notarized TWO slightly different versions of their Official Certification of Nomination documents, not one,” he wrote. “One of those documents had complete legal language, and one of them was missing the text concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama."
“The version which is absent any certification of constitutional standing for the office of president is the version that was filed with every state in the country, and the one used by the DNC to elect Barack Obama president.”
-PJ
When the highest office in the land is occupied by one who broke the law to get it all compliance is “voluntary”.
Some have, some have not. I believe Eisenhower did, although I don't feel compelled to look it up again just now.
No previous presidential aspirant has had as many (still unanswered and highly pertinent) questions surrounding their life narrative though, and that is a fact. Come to think of it, I can't remember the last one to put up forged identity documents, either. Of course, asking this guy to present bona fides to establish his eligibility to hold the presidency would be raaaacist, right?
"Probably not. I was referring to the Constitutional mandate: 'No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.'
My assumption has always been some agency of government guaranteed this before the person was allowed to be placed on the ballot. If an idedpendent verification body does not exist, it certainly should be instituted."
Part of qualifying for the office is to meet the eligibility requirements for said office. For all we know, "Obama" may actually be able to qualify to hold the office that he currently enjoys. He just hasn't actually demonstrated that he does, since his status as a NBC is absolutely in much doubt.
IF "Obama" is telling us the truth about his origins, then he is not a Natural Born Citizen and is therefore ineligible due to potential divided loyalties to hold the presidency and cannot possibly qualify for office. Even if he is somehow capable of qualifying for office, he hasn't done so yet, meaning it would appear that technically, Biden is at the helm of USS BS.
The 20th Amendment: 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
It doesn't matter if the various Secretaries of State allowed him on their State's ballots, that the general voters and the Electoral College voted to award him the job or even that he's been allowed to exercise the levers of power of the Executive all this time. These do not trump the Constitution.
The man has failed to demonstrably qualify for the office he currently occupies.
Like you Art, I too assumed (see what happens?) that there was some established, uniform and legal mechanism by which each and every presidential aspirant provide as a matter of formality even, a standard set of legal credentials establishing their eligibility for office.
Instead, it's more akin to a ride at an amusement park where the sign says riders must be a certain height to board, and depending on the operator (legal controlling authorities), they can use any kind of subjective standard they wish in granting access to the attraction. Most sane operators would put the would-be fun goer up against a yardstick before allowing them on.
Pinging a few people better versed than I on the constitutional (and historical and other legal) aspects of NBC and eligibility.
#1 WHY ...and
#2 Why wasn't the media, the justice department, the FEC or the RNC interested?
Thank you for your cogent thoughts. The above sentence says it all. It's as if Obama doesn't have the $10 ticket to get into the movie. He "fails to qualify" to enter the theater. It's almost as simple as that. He may have the ticket but won't show it. You and I along with many others think he doesn't have the ticket and can't get one. If he "snuck in," can the theater owners, aka "We the People," kick him out?
Like you Art, I too assumed (see what happens?) that there was some established, uniform and legal mechanism by which each and every presidential aspirant provide as a matter of formality even, a standard set of legal credentials establishing their eligibility for office.
At the very least, the upshot of this mess will hopefully be the establishment of a uniform and legal mechanism to verify a Presidential candidate's eligibility to run for POTUS.
Pinging a few people better versed than I on the constitutional (and historical and other legal) aspects of NBC and eligibility.
Looking forward to their comments.
. . . . Checking in for a minute. See article, and comments through # 34.
Note SP showed up. Wasn't s/ he told to stay off Eligibility threads? Those people just can't help themselves. Either that, or they are paid operatives.
Good summary, Art in Idaho.
They are in panic mode because it is only if they keep control of congress and judges can they continue to perpetuate the fraud on the American people.
This is a much better issue then his blathering about the BC> It is something tangible that people can see and read for themselves.
The rest of us need to send both copies of the document to our congress critters, media contacts, email lists etc. with both of Bay's questions.
Better to question the DNC and be labeled “racists” then question BO.
Read the Twentieth Amendment once again.
"3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified."
A few notes.
1. There is no such position as a "President elect", legally, until such a time as Congress has accepted the results of the electoral college votes and a person is actually named as the "President elect". This means that the term "shall have qualified" refers to something other than the results of winning an election. There is only one place left in the Constitution having to do with "qualifications" for the office of President, that being the eligibility requirements from Article two.
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
2. Since it is the duty of Congress to name an interim President in the event of a President elect's "failure to qualify", they, Congress, must know whether or not to do so. This means that they, Congress, must be aware of whether or not a President elect meets the eligibility requirements from Article two. It is the burden of the President elect to "qualify" or "fail to qualify", thus NOT proving one is eligible under Article Two to Congress is the same thing as "failing to qualify." Congress avoiding its duty to uphold Section 3 results in the same "failure to qualify", something they may have done on purpose in this instance depending upon the reasons why. National security? Who knows at this point.
3. How was Obama's eligibility proven to Congress without a valid long form birth certificate? He apparently does not possess such a thing or we would have seen it a million times by now.
4. The eligibility requirements start out with two simple words which forever preclude anyone who "fails to qualify" from serving as a legal president, "No person". Someone who sneaks in because Congress failed to uphold it's responsibility to enforce the Twentieth Amendment, section 3 doesn't legally exist. The Constitution cannot be fooled just because Congress didn't act when it was supposed to. A President elect either qualifies or he cannot ever be President, period.
Thus it is that we have protection from someone who is ineligible to serve as President already written into the Constitution. Unfortunately, we also have a Congress that did not uphold it's oath to support the Constitution and a usurpation of the office of President is the result. We know he is illegal strictly on the basis that we don't know if he is eligible. If he "qualified", there would be no debating the subject. The fact that nobody in Congress is able to say whether or not he is eligible means that he never proved to them that he was and thus has "failed to qualify".
With mere months before the next election, I believe that the best we can hope for is an asterisk by his name in the history books.
It would probably be easier to just build my own space shuttle in the garage.
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.