You said you’re discussing the current one, but what I’m saying is that when the current one is qualified in the same way as the previous ones, then there’s nothing questionable about it.
And as far as supporting what *may be* the biggest fraud ever, well, you need a bit of perspective on that one.
For one thing, it was shown by Leo Donofrio (on his website) that the 21st President of the United States, Chester A. Arthur, was not qualified to be in office, and yet he was. So, if you’re talking about not being qualified to be in office — it’s happened before — so it’s not the “biggest thing ever” (especially if it’s happened before).
Then secondly, you say what *may be* the biggest fraud ever. Well, there’s that “may be” — in which no one knows, but people “speculate” and then on the basis of “speculation” they make it out to be a “fraud”...
That’s not good enough for me. If someone is committing fraud, then we better have some proof of it. If we need to get a “Special Counsel” out there to investigate, then the government needs to do that. But on the basis of “speculation” someone is going to be “convicted of fraud” (at least in the minds of people, if nothing else)... sorry, I don’t think that is the way to operate for anyone and/or any President.
Don't need the history lesson. Thanx anyway.
Don't really care if it's good enough for you. I was trying to point out the illogic of your posts and how you support ignoring the constitution and people ignoring their oaths of office.
The rest is yours. Good night.