Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: penelopesire; BP2; Fred Nerks

Bbq’ing today.

The reason for the picture is to show
Judge David O. Carter. Please pray for him
for tomorrow.

Here’s info that I found when I saw mention
of the 106th Congress. So I’ve been searching
for bills for that Congress and found this.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:H.R.10.PCS:

It doesn’t seem to relate, and there’s no section J, Item 12.

But searching again, I find this ... and it’s reserved for Pelosi ..

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:1:./temp/~bdYl7P:@@@K|/bss/111search.html|

and that references H.Res. 6 .. which is this:

H.RES.6

Title: Recognizing the significant contribution coaches make in the life of children who participate in organized sports and supporting the goals and ideals of National Coaches Appreciation Week.

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HE00006:|/bss/111search.html|
Sponsor: Rep McIntyre, Mike [NC-7] (introduced 1/6/2009) Cosponsors (29)
Related Bills: H.R.10
Latest Major Action: 3/6/2009 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities.

~~~~~~~~

Makes NO sense .. yet the Motion to Dismiss from DOJ references H.R.10 (j)(12)

OOOOps .. okay .. here we go .. went back to the Motion and found their reference in the text on pg. 13:

“The Constitution’s textual commitment of this responsibility is a responsibility that Congress has embraced. Both the House and Senate have standing committees with jurisdiction to decide questions relating to Presidential elections.

See S.R. 25.1n(1)(5) (the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration has jurisdiction over “proposed legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and other matters relating to . . . federal elections generally, including the election of the President, Vice President, and members of Congress, as well as “Presidential succession”)

(copy attached for Court’s convenience as Exhibit 1 hereto). See also H.R. 10(j)(12). (Copy attached as Exhibit 2).

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM124_birthersdismissbrf.html


522 posted on 09/07/2009 8:32:10 PM PDT by STARWISE (The Art & Science Institute of Chicago Politics NE Div: now open at the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies ]


To: STARWISE

That seems like a kind of stupid argument for the DOJ to even include. Just look at the election in 2000. Gore took the election to the courts(not the legislature) when the legitimate results did not suit him. The courts took the case..decided it ‘illegally’....so the Supremes had to step in.

????

Many prayers going out tonight for the Judge,Orly and our country. It occured to me tonight why so many ‘powers that be’ might not want this case to go forward at this time(the recession). In the 3 weeks following Nixon’s resignation, the stock market fell 15%. It was a full 8 years before the market fully recovered. Perhaps they don’t want to lower the BC boom on Obama until the stock market recovers enough to withstand another hit. Just a thought.


543 posted on 09/07/2009 9:09:56 PM PDT by penelopesire ("The only CHANGE you will get with the Democrats is the CHANGE left in your pocket")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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