Replies

I'm sorry, but I assume you are not an attorney in sticking to the “damages” issue

Think about it two ways.

First, you are confusing “Damages” and “Damage.”

“Damages” are a quantifiable amount of (usually) dollars that serve to compensate for “damage” done.

You can be “damaged” (hurt/endangered/jeopardized) without having a fixed set of “damages” that would be identifiable to right the wrong...

You can sue in court or mount an affirmative defense that you are taking / took the action you took to prevent yourself from being DAMAGED..... all (perhaps) so you will not have to sue for (monetary) DAMAGES later.

Secondly. It is Black Letter Law that you cannot make a contract to do an illegal thing.

For example, no matter how we word it, you and I cannot enter into an enforceable contract to rob a bank.

By extension, one cannot be required to do something by someone who does not have the standing to make you do it.

I stand corrected. I've been using 'damages' and 'injury' interchangably and I shouldn't have been. But what we can agree to, I hope, is that in order for Lt. Easterling to demonstrate standing then he needs to point out specifically how his legally protected interests have been harmed or injured in any way if Obama is shown to be constitutionally unqualified to be president. And I also hope that we can agree that these injuries have to be actual and not conjectural or hypothetical.

By extension, one cannot be required to do something by someone who does not have the standing to make you do it.

So we get back to the question, what is Obama forcing him to do?

Just wanted to jump in and interrupt here for a sec....

I really enjoy reading you. I learn so much. Thank you.

That’s all... carry on.