You said — “Congress will be compelled to remove him from office.”
Now, that is the proper action, for the House to Impeach, and the Senate for Trial. I’m glad to hear that some people do know the process involved... :-)
It is questionable, though, if the House would Impeach, even if presented with something solid. Furthermore, having seen how solid the evidence was with Clinton (absolutely no question about it...), still, he was not convicted. So, it’s not all an “automatic given” — even then...
—
And then you said — “Anything Obama will have done in the past and into the future will be for not. The Military will not have to listen to his orders. Bills signed by Obama will lose to all court challenges. Executive Orders will be null and void. Get the picture.”
The military would not have to listen to his orders — *once* a conviction is obtained from the Senate, in a Trial, which would have been given to them by the House, having Impeached him.
But, prior to a conviction — Obama is not guilty — namely, he has to be *convicted* first, by the Senate, before he is removed from office. It’s just like Clinton — he still remained *President* with no lessening of his powers — even while they were *counting* the votes for conviction (or “failing to convict”).
Clinton never stopped being President — even though, theoretically — he might have been removed from office at a particular time.
The same thing would apply to Obama, too...
I said Congress would impeach Obama AFTER the Supreme Court found Obama NOT Constitutionally qualified to be President.
And If Congress refused to impeach the Usurper, they would get destroyed on election day. The "solid evidence" would be SCOTUS finding Obama not qualified. This issue is gravely more serious than the Clinton impeachment, no comparison. You would have a "President" occupying the White House without the power to execute his office. The Executive Branch would be in disarray. The US government frozen. Congress would have no choice but to remove him from office.
The military would not have to listen to his orders — *once* a conviction is obtained from the Senate, in a Trial, which would have been given to them by the House, having Impeached him.
But, prior to a conviction — Obama is not guilty — namely, he has to be *convicted* first, by the Senate, before he is removed from office. It’s just like Clinton — he still remained *President* with no lessening of his powers — even while they were *counting* the votes for conviction (or “failing to convict”).
No, Obama military orders would be in jeopardy if SCOTUS found him not Constitutionally qualified. Have you read the military oath of service? Read the very first line. You'll find the answer there.
Clinton never stopped being President — even though, theoretically — he might have been removed from office at a particular time.
Clinton was never convicted by the Senate but was impeached by the House. Of course Clinton never stopped being president. The Clinton issue was not about being an Unconstitutional President. Your point is a non sequitur and moot.
>Clinton never stopped being President — even though, theoretically — he might have been removed from office at a particular time.
>The same thing would apply to Obama, too...
Would it? If Obama is not Constitutionally qualified, then he NEVER WAS president. Period. Also, We The People, would have EVERY right to call “Foul!”/”Fraud!” and “Conspiracy!” (Bcause, how could such a thing be kept from the public light EXCEPT by conspiracy and a GROSS, CRIMINAL negligence of those in office whose job it is to verify such.)