[mlo]

"No one has enforced the constitution yet. If the courts don’t, it will rest on the military or the people."

No one has demonstrated that a violation of the constitution exists.

[nufsed]

The question the thread poses is to have the constitution enforced. Since no one has required the president to qualify, then someone has to take the oath to uphold the constitution seriously.

Is is not our obligation to prove he is unqualified. He is with holding that eveidence. Therefore, he has the burden of proof.

[OneWingedShark]

His actions regarding GM/Chrysler were illegal and contra-Constitutional; bonds are backed by a legal contract, which he essentially declared null & void in defiance of bankruptcy law (the establishment of which is to be done by Congress, and the execution of which is to be done by the judiciary).

[Star Traveler]

You said — No one has demonstrated that a violation of the constitution exists.

—

Yeah... a “little point” (or a major point... LOL...) that many seem to want to pretend doesn’t exists. Those of this persuasion seem to think that merely “thinking it” in their own heads is sufficient...

I gotta wonder if we’re talking about conservatives or liberals here... :-)

[calex59]

No one has demonstrated that a violation of the constitution exists.

A violation of the constitution has been on going since Bozo took office. I am not talking about the BC business, I am talking about the blatant take over of GM and Chrysler. That is unconstitutional, trying to pass national health care is unconstitutional. There is no mandate or authorization for the fed government to do any of those things, not to mention the myriad of other usurpation of powers that the feds have been doing even before Bozo was elected. I am talking most of our elected officials at the fed level. Certainly Bozo would be up for impeachment by now if we had an unbiased legislature that actually cared about the country and the constitution.

No violation of the constitution? Where have you been?