Roger Ailes and Murdock Supressing Obama Eligibility Story (Vanity)..And Elvis and JFK ZOT!!!

trust me, I know (Vanity) | JackofHearts

[jackofhearts]

I have it on impeccable authority but cannot disclose my source within the Fox Network. Rest assured that Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdock are sitting on the Obama eligibility/birth certficate story. Everyone else wants to jump all over it, including Sean Hannity.

I say storm the Ailes/Murdock fax machine/email servers--let them know (politely) we need this issue thoroughly.

Maybe someone has the email/fax numbers?

[GeronL]

Only when the final verdict is reached. Then it will be “Obama did nothing wrong, says court” or “Court says Obama BC needs released”

it will be a 1-day story in the lame media

[Danae]

No, not congress, at this point it would be SCOTUS, and not Impeachment I don’t think. Its not a legislative issue, I think SCOTUS is the body that rules on legalities, and if Obama isn’t legal.... yea.....

[celtic gal]

What do you suppose is the reason for this? Are they saving the story for a time when things get much much worse?
We have already suffered a bloodless coup de etat!
We are not about to be taxed into poverty. I was going to go through the closets and cupboards and donate to goodwill the things we don’t use often enough etc but...well now my donatin’ days are over..who knows how things will be in the next year or so..may not be able to replace those wine glasses we are not using at the moment...

[NorCoGOP]

Article I, Section 3

Clause 6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

[celtic gal]

That should say we are now not not.. about to be taxes fingeers and the cat helping type causes that error in type..sheesh.

[ScottinVA]

“Then again, Fox is now a leftwing channel..”

I don’t doubt there are some lib commentators on Fox, but “leftwing channel?” C’mon.

[teletech]

If your source KNOWS this to be true and this is coming from inside Fox News, why can’t your source provide the fax numbers?

[Non-Sequitur]

Then find out from your source what evidence they are sitting on and produce it here. Get it out in public somehow.

[Star Traveler]

Actually, we do have proof that Fox News was suppressing the birth certificate/eligibility issue story.

Ole Chief Editor Korir over at API (African Press International) tried to get Fox News to air the story before the election but failed... It was all “documented” by Chief Editor Korir before the election....

—

And, by the way, Phil Berg (you know, the one who is trying to get Obama... LOL...) was the lawyer for Chief Editor Korir (for a while, anyway...). And Ed Hale (of Plains Radio) was going to sue Chief Editor Korir for not letting him air the news, instead of trying to get Fox News to do it. As it turned out, Fox “outfoxed” them all and never aired it at all...

—

[ ... it’s the same old hoax... as usual... ]

[ChetNavVet]

ANY ACORN lawyer is no accetable president of mine, I don’t even care anymore.

I figure with all the fradulent/felonious/government teet suckers that voted for Obama, a ‘Constitutional’ lawyer, that seems hell bent on destroying the Constitution, I could go on, but you get the idea.

If you could prove without any doubt that this joker is not qualified to be POTUS, it still would not matter, so... if Fox/Murdock had it, they’d break it.

I digress. If they in fact have proof, break it, don’t be sissys(sp), at least it will cause “something else” to happen, whether it just be aggravation for him, I think it can’t possibly be worse than what we have now, which is a one way ticket to slippery slope he11.

[NorCoGOP]

Here's another source:

Investigating the President: the Supreme Court and the impeachment process

Martin H. Belsky, University of Akron School of Law

Abstract
The Constitutional procedure for investigating the President is relatively simple and straightforward. The process begins in the House of Representatives, “which shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.” As a matter of tradition, the House has employed its Judiciary Committee to investigate and report on charges made against the President. After their recommendation, the House, by majority vote, can refer any or all charges to the Senate for trial. The Senate “shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” The Chief Justice presides over the trial and conviction requires the vote of two-thirds of those senators present.

I wish you were right, but, unfortunately, Obama has the deck stacked in his favor until at least 2010, or a revolution, whichever comes first (the more I think about it, the more it appears to be a 50/50 prospect)...

[PMAS]

If he didn’t have a birth certificate before the election, you can bet your ass he has one now. I am sure the most powerful person in the world can get a piece of paper.

Stop wasting your mind on this, if it ever actually happened, you will know.

[bert]

When killing the king, you must kill. Wounding is very dangerous.

Patience is a virtue

[beckybea]

This is hard to believe. What a big story to suppress. Wouldn’t the ratings go through the roof if they broke the news that the U.S. President is in office illegally? I have to say, I wish this were true.

[nathanbedford]

I find the this apocryphal story plausible even credible. There is no business reason to embargo this story. Indeed, it should be a big money maker for a 24-hour news channel like Fox. It would not be particularly expensive to cover and it would go on and on which are the twin pillars of moneymaking stories for these 24-hour news venues.

Yet the story does not appear. It does not appear at all, it has been utterly shut down. It has been spiked! One would think that it would be mentioned at least in passing to maintain the illusion of journalistic credibility but that is not the case. One is compelled to wonder why?

It is possible, I suppose, to credit Murdoch with a patriotic concern that the story has the potential to cast the country into a constitutional crisis at a time when it is fighting two wars abroad, faces potential terrorist attacks at home, and is threatened by the gravest financial crisis at least since the Great Depression. I concede that it is plausible that a man like Maxwell simply might conclude that the country cannot afford to go through a Watergate again, especially at this time of crisis. This is not my view, I think the Constitution must prevail or the contrary is ultimately doomed.

Another possibility is that Murdoch, aware of the pressure brought by Obama's forces against media outlets that cut too close to the quick during the campaign, in fact, they were directly threatened, is intimidated. It could simply be that Murdoch is craven. But Murdoch is not alone, no other outlet has touched the story either. Rush Limbaugh has a great deal of editorial license and he has not touched the story to my knowledge. Why is the reluctance to open the story universal?

It could be that these gatekeepers of our news and opinion have concluded that it is counterproductive to the Republican cause to affiliate itself with a story which is considered by them to be something that can be discussed only when wearing a tinfoil hat. My problem with this is that fastidiousness is hardly the hallmark of media outlets. Indeed, respect for the truth has not always been the North Star for broadcasters such as Dan Rather. It is hard to believe that they would all unanimously shrink from the story because they think it is just bogus. These are hard-bitten men and they surely must understand that the Obama can end this story merely with the production of a $10 document, but he has spent $1 million to avoid doing so. These men must surely smell a rat. Why are they not personally curious?

I do not know the answers to these conundrums. I would be grateful to hear other opinions.

[mnehring]

Maybe that is his super duper top secret source?

[Las Vegas Ron]

How is it that you have impeccable sources at FOX?

I'm not doubting you but would like to know.

[Star Traveler]

I’ll guarantee you, there are those on Free Republic, who will tell you (in no uncertain terms) that they do *not* need an Impeachment process to get Obama out of office.

They will tell you that all that is needed, is for a judge to issue a court order for Obama to vacate his office (of President of the United States), and order a US Marshal to escort Obama out of the White House, and that’s all it will take (I’m *serious* — there are several FReepers who say that is all that is necessary).

FURTHERMORE, there are other FReepers who will tell you that if they can’t find *one judge* in the entire country to do the above — then — the U.S. Military will take things into their own hands — and surround the White House with tanks until they get Obama out of office (yes, I’m serious, there are Freepers who believe this...).

So, there you go... LOL...

[PGR88]

“...I have it on impeccable authority but cannot disclose my source within the Fox Network...”

Let me guess - Africa Press International

[UglyinLA]

****************************************8

If it turned out that Obama is not eligible and that Biden knew it all along... both of them would be gone... which would make Nancy Pelosi president.

I think we would be better off waiting until 2010 when we can regain the house (which will happen because Obama is tanking the country.)