Posted on 08/20/2013 1:39:34 PM PDT by Cold Case Posse Supporter
WASHINGTON – To hear Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, describe it, the difference between President Obama and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas – on the question of their eligibility for the highest office in the land – may be a case of comparing apples and oranges.
~
The congressman said with Cruz, it is a legal question of whether he is eligible to serve as president – whereas the issue with Obama is not really about where he was born, but whether his documentation is authentic.
~
Obama, on the other hand, is the subject of Stockman’s proposed legislation calling for a congressional investigation of both the president’s constitutional eligibility and the authenticity of the birth certificate he released to show he was born in Hawaii.
~
In an exclusive interview with WND, Stockman said, in the case of Obama, it is more of a question about the validity of the documentation as well as his forthrightness, whereas with Cruz, it is more of a matter for legal and constitutional scholars to decide.
~
The congressman said he doesn’t really know if Cruz is eligible for the presidency, but Cruz has been upfront and Obama was not.
~
Stockman mentioned another element that separates the case of Cruz and that of the president: the persistence of reports that Obama was listed as a foreign student in school and the fact he has yet to release records that would disprove that.
~
A News 4 report from Jacksonville noted that U.S. Rep. Ted Yoho has promised to back Texas Rep. Steve Stockman’s proposed bill to investigate the president’s birth certificate.
“So I called Steve up when I got back. He says, ‘Yeah, we’re doing it. You want to get on that?’” I says, ‘yeah,’” said Yoho.
(Excerpt) Read more at obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com ...
Interesting.
Mark for later....
Write him and Yoho and URGE them to continue peeling the stinking onion!
Rep. Steve Stockman
907 E. Houston St.
Cleveland City Hall
Cleveland, TX 77327
Rep. Steve Stockman
420 Green Avenue
Orange, TX 77630
Rep. Steve Stockman
8060 Spencer Hwy.
San Jacinto College
Building 1, Room 108
Pasadena, TX 77505
AND, handwritten notes to Yoho:
Rep. Ted Yoho
5000 NW 27th Court
Suite E
Gainesville, FL 32606
(Thanks, ColdCase!)
Faked Selective Service Registration and forged Birth Certificate..............I'm trying to understand why no one is tracking down the forgers and others that facilitated these deeds? There has to be a weak link..............
” - - - Faked Selective Service Registration and forged Birth Certificate..............I’m trying to understand why no one is tracking down the forgers and others that facilitated these deeds? There has to be a weak link.............. “
Try looking at www.Nachumlist.com 0bama dead pool - these kind who might talk - end up not being able to.
(I recall reading about someone who feared for her life due to something she inadvertently witnessed. Sure enough - she didnt last long thereafter ~
If I put myself in the position of the guy ordered to convince the world that I'd scanned some sort of a real birth certificate for Bork Obunga, the very last thing I'd ever do is post some six or seven part pdf file on the internet. I'd anticipate my own mother and grandmother calling me a lying SOB... The ONLY thing I'd ever post would be some pure bitmap image, either a bmp or tif image.
Moreover, any technically competent person that the Bork (Obunga) admin were to give that assignment to would have known that; you have to assume that whoever did that scan and post had to be a near computer illiterate.
Then you ask yourself why a near computer illiterate would have drawn that assignment, and the answer is not difficult. When Attila the Hun died, the Huns killed every member of the burial detail which had buried him so that his grave would never be found. When Genghis Khan died, same thing, to this day nobody has any clue as to where either Attila or Genghis Khan might be buried.
There are some assignments which nobody wants despite any glory which might be attached to them, simply because no amount of money would compensate for the occupational hazards attached to them and being the only person on Earth to know what exactly had been posted on the internet for the benefit of Bork Obunga's continued general recognition as a "natural born US citizen(TM)" is one of them.
My guess is that either Bork himself or some member of his immediate family posted that pdf file.
Can you link us up a bit on that? I certainly wish I could be confident of such a bold move from Stockman, et al.
There are two elements:
(1) The "creation" of the document
(2)What's in the document (s).
The fact that the document is a forgery really has little to do with the information presented by it, which IMO, cannot be proven or disproven. That's OK. The BC forgery is enough. And now that Reggie Love has said that "Barry found his real BC," it starts to get surreal.
In the related "Constitutional Eligibility" matter, it is important IMO, to point out that the SCOTUS has no power to remove a sitting President.
IOW, if the SCOTUS should:
(a) shift its haunches and decide to rule,
and (b) if they find the guy ineligible, (which ain't a slam-dunk)
it would still be up to Congress to use the info to impeach and convict him. Or not. Removal is Congress' call, and with a short-timer to deal with, it may well not be worth the effort and upheaval.
That is why I have turned into an annoying one-trick pony on the issue of the SCOTUS accepting an appeal on Art.II eligibility. For them to answer the question they have been so studiously avoiding places very little actual onus upon them. And, with a definition in hand, we could consider the eligibility of other candidates without a long drawn out distracting series of brawls, which IMO, would guarantee a Democrat victory.
Recycled post.
It's a "Failure to qualify" issue under the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three. If there is no valid birth certificate upon which to prove eligibility, Congress has allowed a usurpation to occur by FAILING to enforce this amendment. If we are dealing with a usurper, there is no impeachment needed as we do not have a President to impeach. We simply have a usurper to arrest.
All of this can be acted upon the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three not being obeyed and proving it hasn't been obeyed.
Of course it is. And it really has nothing to do with Obama. The SCOTUS needs to get 4 justices to agree to take an appeal and tell us what a "natural born Citizen" is.
They might well rule against what you desire. Or for it. After that, it is up to Congress to use that ruling, or not use it against Obama. What the SCOTUS doing its job would mean is the clarification of the issue for future candidates.
One might well accuse Congress of neglecting it's duty. However, they are just like us in that there are differing opinions on what that duty might be in this case. That's why we have a SCOTUS, to tell us what the COTUS means.
It's a "Failure to qualify" issue under the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three. If there is no valid birth certificate upon which to prove eligibility, Congress has allowed a usurpation to occur by FAILING to enforce this amendment.
Where does it say it has to be a Birth Certificate. What is the "proof of eligibility." the 20th is an Amendment ... a part of the COTUS. When there's a problem, it is the SCOTUS' constitutional duty to accept appeals that define the meaning of the Constitution.
Please note again that the courts cannot remove the President. Just as the Congress cannot ultimately define the Constitution.
I am not defending the pusillanimity of Congress in this matter, just that the SCOTUS' is more egregious.
There is no state in the union that requires submitting a birth certificate in order to qualify for the state ballot. The Arizona state legislature passed such a law but Governor Jan Brewer vetoed it in 2011.
The power to check qualifications for office is a state issue not a federal issue. Every states’ Chief Election Official (usually an elected Secretary of State) cleared Obama for the state’s ballot in 2008 and in 2012.
There are still two pending ballot challenges to Obama’s eligibility, in Alabama before the all Republican state Supreme Court and in Mississippi before a Reagan-appointed federal judge.
There were 50 lawsuits or state election board challenges filed in 22 states for the 2012 election cycle contesting Obama’s eligibility. There was no ruling of ineligibility.
Why were his lawyers fighting it?
His own words:
“The only people who don’t
want to disclose the truth are
people with something to hide.”
No federal money?
As in national Senate pay? (As well as Pres__dental pay)
Hmmmm, if the pay continues and the doc is fraudulent, then the statute of limitations is a moving object isn’t it?
Go Cruz and Stockman!
In the “trial on the merits” in Georgia, Obama’s lawyer refused to show up for the trial. The judge was going to enter a default judgement against Obama but the people suing him asked the judge to let the trial go on any way. The judge did that and then he ruled in Obama’s favor.
It wasn’t a trial. It was a administrative hearing.
I maintain that it is a constitutional issue and therby a federal issue.
AND
Now that a proven fraudulent document has been posted on an official government web site, it is also a Criminal issue.
Yes, it was an administrative hearing presided over by Georgia Administrative Law Judge Michael Mahili. But the plaintiffs did ask Judge Mahili to hear their evidence and witnesses and rule on the merits and the judge granted their request rather than issue a default judgement against Obama.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/georgia-judge-considered-default-against-obama/
Was the birth certificate examined in the hearing?
The problem is that no one has proven the document is fraudulent IN A COURT OF LAW. Until that happens, “fraudulent document” remains an accusation.
No state or local prosecutor in the nation seems interested in taking up this issue and pursuing it to a grand jury investigation. No one should expect federal law enforcement/prosecutors who are under the control of the Obama administration to have any interest.
The fact that there has been no "day in court" because of a corrupt judiciary and congress, can and does not erase the fact of wrong doing.
All it reveals is that the courts and legislature are not doing their Job.
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.