Posted on 04/20/2010 1:35:31 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Members from all three branches of the Federal government already know that Barack Hussein Obama is ineligible for the office of President. National leaders, to include members of the US Supreme Court, already know that Barack Hussein Obama is not a “natural born citizen” of the United States of America, and therefore, is ineligible for the office he currently holds.
What they don’t know is how long it will take for most Americans to figure it out, or what to do about it.
The diversionary search for an authentic birth certificate is ongoing and Obama has now spent in excess of $2 million in legal fees to keep that search alive.
Eric Holder’s Department of Justice continues to deploy taxpayer funded attorneys around the country to file dismissals on behalf of Obama, denying all American citizens access to the courts as a peaceful remedy, which only fuels the fire of discontent and the questions about Obama persist.
Michelle Obama states that Kenya is Barack’s “home country.” She knows, after twenty years with Barack. The Ambassador or Kenya has confirmed the same His family friends all know it, and are in fact quite proud of the fact that Americans had no hesitation in electing a “black man from Kenya” as President of the United States.
The US Supreme Court knows what the constitutional condition of “natural born citizen” means. Even the most far left member of that court, Justice Ginsberg, is on record proclaiming that a “natural born citizen” is a birth child of TWO legal US citizens.
Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi knows that Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible for the office of president, which is why she refused to certify the following language when certifying Obama as the DNC candidate for president in 2008.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
But the elections of November 2008 were for electors, not for Obama. Biden's election as VP was entirely free of fraud.
How could BIDEN be disqualified?
Then he is at the VERY least a dual-citizen because Barack himself stating having British Citizenship at birth. End of story. Like I said it doesn’t matter where he was born — Britain’s rules of citizenship make him theirs no matter where he is born (birth certificate or not, btw...).
Biden was chosen by Obama, and was elected as Vice-President under the assumption that Obama was eligible to act as President.
Here it is at Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/3930756/The-Law-of-Nations-Vattel
In addition to being 35 years of age and residing in the United States for a minimum of 14 years, you are correct. This claim that 2 citizen parents are required to bestow natural born citizenship is nothing more than a fictional device created by birthers to be a standard of eligibility that Obama could not possibly meet. It is complete and utter nonsense.
Then again, what is the demographics - whitie vs. blackie???
I hope that you are not asking me to defend and/or explain McCain...... LOLOLOLOL
He’s been on my “s” list for a long time....hold on, let me look, I think he may even be the charter member....LOLOLOL
McCain has only one redeeming attribute.......Sarah Palin....LOLOLOLOL
I don’t believe in conspiracy theories, too many Prima Donnas to get them all to work together in concert.....
But you may be right that McCain, once he realized he couldn’t possibly win folded completely ( I think it was right after he won the Repub. Nomination, and the MSM told him to go jump)....makes ya wonder why he ran at all doesn’t it? Not the Navy way.... which may go a long way to explaining why he is the first guy in his family to not reach Admiral.....
Do you really think that “mess” is that simple???
It is not uncommon for a new POTUS to sign a new Executive Order to revise or revoke a previous administration’s Executive Order on NARA’s maintenance and administration of current and former Presidential records under the Presidential Records Act. It was nothing out of the ordinary in Obama’s case, especially since he revised his policy to virtually match Reagan’s policy.
I thought that “Qou Warranto” was used to remove a sitting official?
could you clarify?
Or better, ask Adrea Mackries???
JB has told us this long time ago!!!
You’ve sidestepped my point entirely.
Most of us “birthers” are past arguing case law at this point. After nearly two years of discussing this issue and turning over every conceivable argument and fact, the consensus conclusion is that the Framers intended that all American presidents should be born to the soil and the blood of this country.
Period. End of story.
They drew their inspiration for this constitutional requirement from Vattel’s “Law of Nations” and other sources. John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was instrumental in ensuring that language which restricted the office of president to “Natural Born Citizens” was included in the US Constitution.
Argue court rulings, amendments to the Constitution, or statute law all you want, but this community has been through all of that for nearly two years now, and has fairly well risen above all of the minutiae of the issue.
What’s more important in the larger scope of things, is the common-sense understanding of what condition of allegiance our Commander in Chief should have, and that is without question, one who is born to the soil and the blood of this nation.
The Framers understood the importance of this, and so do we. It’s why most of us now demand that Obama prove that he meets this criterion, or relinquish the office.
You need to understand the difference between ‘citizen’ and ‘NATUAL BORN citizen’. There are many postings that tell the Founding Fathers knew the difference when they made ‘NATURAL BORN’ explicit in the Constitution.
You need to understand the difference between ‘citizen’ and ‘NATUAL BORN citizen’. There are many postings that tell the Founding Fathers knew the difference when they made ‘NATURAL BORN’ explicit in the Constitution.
Cool. I'm looking at one for the wife now. She loves it because the price is right .. LOL
IIRC, African-Americans make up about 13% of the population versus about 75% for European-Americans.
The law, as I understand it, is that If a candidate cannot be qualified the next qualified candidate is elected....Biden was never a candidate for president.....
Article II, Section I of the Constitution contained a deficiency where each elector voted two names on one ballot - one for President, and one for Vice President. The one with the most votes for President was POTUS, the one with the most votes for Vice President was VEEP.
But, this allowed for a tie, as happened to Burr and Jefferson - they both received the same number of votes for POTUS AND VEEP. The 12th Amendment corrected this deficiency - the Electoral College NOW votes for POTUS and VEEP separately.
However, the 12th Amendment DID NOT go far enough - since it DID NOT require the states to elect POTUS and VEEP separately in the general election. The states elect two candidates on a single slate of electors. That is, each ticket [DEM and GOP] has their own slate AND the winning slate is going to vote for TWO candidates. This is the same problem as what the Constitution originally had.
Now, lets assume that SCOTUS declares Obama to be ineligible.
If SCOTUS declares the Electoral College vote to be null and void - but refers the vote back to them, then Obama's electoral votes are disqualified [365]. But, McCain's [173] are not a majority. Per the 12th Amendment, if no one gets a majority, the House of Representatives then votes from a list of no more than three [3] who received electoral votes - Obama being excluded. Each state gets one vote and 26 are needed to win. Since McCain is the only one other than Obama on the list, he wins.
Now, here is where it gets tricky ...
If Obama's electoral votes are disqualified [365], are Biden's [since he ran as a ticket with Obama]? No one knows since the voters in the states cast a single vote for two people. Did they vote FOR Obama and NOT care who was #2 [so they tacitly approved of Biden] OR would they have NOT voted Biden for VEEP if he had run separately? SCOTUS would have to decide. If Biden was disqualified, then Palin's [173] are not a majority. Per the 12th Amendment, if no one gets a majority, the Senate then votes from a list of no more than two [2] who received electoral votes - Biden being excluded. Since Palin is the only one other than Biden on the list, she wins.
If SCOTUS does NOT refer back to the Electoral College - does the 25th Amendment [Presidential Succession] apply? IF SCOTUS says yes, again, they would have to determine Biden's status. If deemed ineligible, it would fall to the next in line [Pelosi].
Or, does SCOTUS order a new election?
This is MAJOR uncharted territory ...
The way to correc this ambiguity is for the voters in each state to vote for POTUS and VEEP separately - that way there is no question of the validity of each victor. If POTUS was subsequently deemed ineligible, only the 25th Amendment would apply and the VEEP could legitimately claim the new office.
“After nearly two years of discussing this issue and turning over every conceivable argument and fact, the consensus conclusion is that the Framers intended that all American presidents should be born to the soil and the blood of this country.”
Consensus among who? Internet lawyers? Self-proclaimed patriots?
That doesn’t cut it. Particularly when those self-proclaimed patriots feel free to attack anyone who comes to a different conclusion as Obama employees, or folks who hate the Constitution!
I spent 25 years in the military. The two kids I’ve got old enough to go into the military did so - daughter in the Marines, son in the Army. Both did tours in Iraq. And I’ve had birthers on this forum tell me that since I disagree with their interpretation of NBC, they pity my kids for having a traitor father.
If birthers - and I am NOT saying you behaved that way - act like that, they need hard evidence. They need an irrefutable case, not a ‘maybe this was meant’ case.
And they do not have it. Maybe Vittal - in the French - was accurate. Maybe Blackstone was. The Congress and Courts have said the latter is. But it is NOT a clear, open/shut case. And that won’t support overturning Obama’s election, nor will it support the rabid attacks made on this forum by [other] birthers.
I almost feel like I've let the country down. I've only bought one. Of course it was an AR-15. And I already had an SKS, an M-1 Carbine, a G-3 (on new semi-auto receiver) and two .45 ACP semi-autos. Plus two shotguns, one for "serious social purposes", and a .22 handgun and .22 rifle, both Rugers
Of course I also bought 750 rounds of .45 ACP, 1,550 rounds of 5.56, 4,000 rounds of .22 LR, and 1,000 rounds of .30 Carbine.
All that on top of what I already had a bit more .45, some 7.62x39, some 12 gauge (buck, slugs and birdshot) and what I have left from 1200 rds of 7.62 NATO :)
I'm still looking at pocket pistols, Ruger LCP, or KelTec PF-9 (the P3-AT is just too small for my hand)
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.