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

To: rolling_stone

It obviously applies to anyone familiar with how the law works. The fact that someone filed a suit in the past means nothing. The issue would be when a formal determination of ineligibility is made.


69 posted on 03/25/2010 11:07:31 AM PDT by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]


To: tired_old_conservative
It obviously applies to anyone familiar with how the law works.

I am familiar with the law, and the public has not acquiesced to Obama being eligible and it is not a procedural error but an error of substance and Constitutionality thus those basic principles deny the applicability of the doctrine. It is also not a procedural error of the court where nunc pro tunc could apply. Are you going to reward fraud upon this Nation by acquiescing to his acts as an usurper? Where is the law and equity? So someone steals millions by way of fraudulently acting when not eligible to act, according to you, you let them keep the ill gotten gains? I think not.

71 posted on 03/25/2010 11:30:47 AM PDT by rolling_stone (no more bailouts, the taxpayers are out of money!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | 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