Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: catchem

> Why should we impose citizenship status on a presidential candidate? Hell, the only ones who’ll ever have to prove citizenship will be conservative candidates, and that will be just the jump.

There will be time enough when the next Conservative President gets into the White House to make diligent enquiry into His Excellency’s true birth status.

If he is found to be a Kenyan by birth, I imagine there will have been a few laws broken by the ex-President and his accomplices. He may become the first ex-President to go to gaol.

While it might have been satisfying to trip him up before he gets sworn in, he’d probably escape punishment on a no-harm-no-foul basis. It actually might be even more fun to wait until after his terms in office, when there may be more material to work with.


13 posted on 01/13/2009 8:06:49 AM PST by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: DieHard the Hunter

If he is found to be a Kenyan by birth, I imagine there will have been a few laws broken by the ex-President and his accomplices. He may become the first ex-President to go to gaol.”

There will be laws broken by NObama, as he already has done so, along with the DNC.

What is an even bigger elephant in the room is the fact that his lack of eligibility will negate any and all laws, treaties, commanding orders for the military, etc that NObama signs until the birth certificate issue is settled.


35 posted on 01/13/2009 12:24:01 PM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: DieHard the Hunter

You said — “There will be time enough when the next Conservative President gets into the White House to make diligent enquiry into His Excellency’s true birth status.”

I don’t know what’s wrong with the present President doing that very thing. In fact, I would say that he probably already has, given the news that I’ve read about the subject. I can’t see where President Bush has not checked on it already and (by his inaction) has found no violation of the Constitutional requirement for office of the President of the United States. I’ve stated the circumstances elsewhere, where he would have known, given some earlier circumstances — and thus one would have to say that Bush is either part of a conspiracy to cover it up, or there is no problem (from Bush’s investigation).

Now, since President Bush is sworn to uphold the Constitution, I believe that he would abide by that oath, and thus it indicates to me that President Bush has seen it’s not a problem...


38 posted on 01/13/2009 6:36:49 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson