Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Polarik

The courts’ dismissal of these suits for “lack of standing” of the filers to demand the upholding of the US Constitution- is at least as big a story as their claims

Note to all those who say “Move along, nothing to see here...”

None of the courts has found the complaints to be without merit.. They dismiss based on the “lack of standing” of citizens to demand action!

In Berg’s case, as a democrat donor, the judge in PA blew off his suit because he could not show significant enough personal damage if a fraudulent Presidential candidate was fielded by his party - and possibly elected!.


6 posted on 11/12/2008 4:53:36 AM PST by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: silverleaf

I believe that the “lack of standing” comes from the fact that we don’t directly elect the POTUS but instead we elect electors to select the president and vp. That said, I have heard that among the several lawsuits demanding the Obama prove his eligibility, some have managed to get some of the electoral college electors to sign in as plaintiffs.

Now, I don’t see how ANY judge could rule that the electors have a “lack of standing”.


35 posted on 11/12/2008 6:18:38 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Obama is the Antichrist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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