We The People Versus Our Lawless Elected Officials

We the People have a serious problem facing us. We have an out of control government hell-bent on further enslaving us at breakneck speed. This government displays a piece of paper every now and then called the Constitution, mostly at election time in an effort to comfort us into thinking that somehow it is being obeyed. We know differently, don't we?

We have a person pretending to be President who has yet to prove to me or to anyone else for that matter that he is actually eligible to serve under the provisions of Article two of the Constitution. Our elected officials, as you will see below, are REQUIRED to ensure that he is in fact eligible. It is our job as citizens to put the heat on them (our elected officials) to do their primary job as defined in the Constituion, to "support it". We have the legal case to do this and I'm going to post this so that EVERYONE who thinks we are powerless to do something about this understands how best to go about it. We need to find the legal remedy enabling us to charge our representatives with disobeying their oaths of office and start removing them one by one. Here is the case.

" ”3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President electshall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.”

Sec. 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act

”(a)(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President. “

Exhibit C: U. S. Constitution, Article Six Oath of Office for elected officials:

” The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

The process currently provides that someone “challenge” the electoral votes during a short, specified time frame while the Electoral College votes are opened and tabulated. This process does not cover challenges to "eligibility" qualifications. In fact, if this act pretends to do so in the manner in which it prescribes, it is unconstitutional. Any act of this sort that does not require that qualifications be presented by the President elect serves to undercut the provisions in the Constitution itself. No act that does not support the Constitution is constitutional. In order to change the requirements of the Twentieth amendment, one would need to pass another amendment. An “Act” doesn’t cut the mustard.

The portion in bold stating “or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify” in section three is particularly interesting in that it plainly seems to infer that a “qualification” of some sort must be made in order to serve as President. Certainly, one cannot argue that it does not require a qualification process for one to “qualify”. To infer that the lack of a “specified” qualification process means that stated eligibility “qualifications” for the office of president can be ignored is fallacious. The wording of this passage in the twentieth amendment clearly infers that a qualification is required, regardless of how this is done.

There is only one set of qualifications listed anywhere in the Constitution that are not health related and they are listed in Article two, section one.

” No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

To satisfy meeting the requirement of the twentieth amendment to “qualify”, a president elect must present evidence that he meets it’s requirements for eligibility to serve. This means that a proper birth certificate HAD to be presented by the president elect in order to serve as president. If this was done, where is that certificate and to whom was it presented? If this was done, why would we not have the right to verify and inspect it under the freedom of information act?

If it was NOT done, then under the provisions of the twentieth amendment, Barrack Obama has “failed to qualify” and should not be serving as president of the United States of America.

1. We currently have a vacancy at President because no one has yet “qualified” as required in the Twentieth amendment. The terms "The President elect shall have failed to qualify" clearly places this burden upon the President elect and not on someone raising their hand in objection.

2. Anyone serving in Congress (see “Congress” in bold in Exhibit A), or anyone who is currently serving under the oath of office in Article six has "standing" and can DEMAND that their oaths be met by receiving proper “qualifying” documentation from Mr. Obama. This charade at the time of counting the Electoral College votes does not limit their ability to do so at any time they so choose. The very fact that they are duty-bound by oath to "support" the Constitution REQUIRES them to respond to any and all attacks against it. No judge can deny any of them the standing to do so. It would ask them to break the law in their effort to enforce the law.

3. We need to start pressing legal charges against all of our local representatives and senators covered by the oath of office in Article six for disobeying their oaths to support the Constitution as it pertains to the language of section three of the Twentieth amendment. Put PRESSURE on them to represent the document that gives them their authority in the first place. We are looking into how best to do this down here. We all should be looking into this approach. NOW.

A posting from "mrmeangenes" from another thread:

"To satisfy meeting the requirement of the twentieth amendment to “qualify”, a president elect must present evidence that he meets it’s requirements for eligibility to serve. This means that a proper birth certificate HAD to be presented by the president elect in order to serve as president. If this was done, where is that certificate and to whom was it presented? If this was done, why would we not have the right to verify and inspect it under the freedom of information act?"

"Sorry, but where does it say that in the constitution ?

Your reasoning is -at best-ingenious.

Let me go back to my original remark: If you have evidence (other than suppositions, tweets and blog postings) the president is not a citizen, then PRESENT it !'

to which I replied:

Tell me, what do YOU think the term "or, if the President elect shall have failed to qualify" mean? Once again, in fairness to those who are arguing this point on the original thread (this thread), you should be arguing your case there (this thread). Sorry, but where does it say that in the constitution ? Your reasoning is -at best-ingenious. Let me go back to my original remark: If you have evidence (other than suppositions, tweets and blog postings) the president is not a citizen, then PRESENT it !

You are looking for a reboot.

I say the current occupants of our Congress have abdicated their authority. Obama is merely a symptom of the larger problem.

In 12-18 months, matters will come to a head, and the possibility of restoration will exist.

"If you have evidence (other than suppositions, tweets and blog postings) the president is not a citizen, then PRESENT it !'"

It's not my burden to prove that I am "qualified", or in other words, "eligible" to serve as President. This is CLEARLY the burden of the one seeking to occupy the office, the one referred to as the "President elect" in section three of the twentieth amendment.

The term "if the President elect" shall have failed to qualify is talking about an action by the "President elect" that "failed". It is quite specific and extremely CLEAR that it is the President elect who must "qualify", it is HIS burden, thus, to present his qualifying evidence. It is also quite clearly stated that it is the burden of Congress to ensure this is done because they are the ones who must enact the Presidential succession if it has not been.

"Matters are moving rapidly beyond the realm of legal maneuvers."

I agree to some extent. We would all benefit from continuing the legal pressure to the point of the "system" PROVING itself a fraud. Once this occurs, we ALL know what we are dealing with and our response would be better focused.

This case forces them to either ignore it and "cherry pick" which parts of the Constitution they want to obey (would result in their immediate loss of credibility, as the very document giving them their authority over us would become worthless) or they can obey it as written and do the right thing.

Fighting Communism all over the globe for most of the 20th century seems in retrospect like a wasted effort now we have a Communist usurper as President.

It gets worse, our troops are fighting for literally millions illegals aliens, that have no fear serving, or dying for the U.S., yet stay behind to reap all the benefits and freedoms in America.

Thanks for that Uncle Sam. My question is tho WHY will the Supreme Court not hear the cases already before them? Why have they chosen this when it is of the utmost importance? It is their ONLY mission to uphold the Constitution of the United States and they swear to do that before being seated on the Court.

I think your idea of peppering the Congress and Senate with this is good but everyone has dismissed it so far. I fear that a lot of folks don’t care if he’s an illegal alien President. The American public had such a suppository of hate up their A$$es against Pres. Bush that they were completely blinded. They wanted change, they got change but Terrible terrible change. The country will be changed alright but into something unrecognizable. CO

"As I read the open of this thread it appears to me that any attempt to subvert the constitution such as altering or evading the eligibility status of a candidate can be challenged at "any" time. IMHO, that means before, during or after the election process."

In my opinion, certainly anyone who is currently obligated by the Oath of office from Article six of the Constitution to "support this Constitution" is REQUIRED to ENFORCE it's provisions. This would include section three of the Twentieth amendment and the particular language which forces a "qualification" to be made by the President elect before being allowed to become President. Evasion of, non-enforcement of, or ignoring any part of the Constitution cannot be in any way, shape, or form defined as "supporting" it. Since supporting the Constitution is a 24 hour a day assignment, I would say that your elected officials at the state and Federal levels have the legal "standing" to do so whenever they wish.

"My question is tho WHY will the Supreme Court not hear the cases already before them?"

I think one reason is that the cases themselves were improperly constructed from a variety of angles, standing, case, etc. When I say "improper" I mean that the cases and plaintiffs involved, because of the case angle and who filed it, made it legally easy for judges to side step the issue.

I think the "standing" issue has been solved with using the Oath of office to "support" the Constitution requirement from the language of the Constitution itself. Anyone who is bound by this oath is thus REQUIRED by the Constitution to "support" the Constitution. Section three of the Twentieth amendment is currently being ignored, or non-enforced, or possibly complied with but we have no evidence to confirm this. If it has been complied with, we the people have a right to know this, who complied?, where is the compliance documentation?, etc. If it has not been complied with, our elected officials are REQUIRED to ensure that the Constitution be obeyed and ENFORCED. I don't see how a judge can deny this case. To do so would be asking someone who is Constitutionally required to enforce the Constitution to ignore parts of it. It is not a pick and choose document.

In the end, it might take all of us filing legal charges against those who pretend to represent our interest but instead are undermining our children's future.

"exactly, now all we need is a pubbie congress member to take all this on."

Read that oath from Article six.

U. S. Constitution, Article Six Oath of Office for elected officials:

This would include your STATE reprentatives and Senators at the state level as well. My point is, if they don't want to step up to the plate to do what they are required to do by the very document from which they derive their power to govern over us, then WE must legally go after them. All of them.

“We must keep the issue of Obama’s hiding his citizenship status — in plain sight of The United States Congress — alive!”

Well said! Until he provides access to all documents (BC, Passports, etc.) he should be forced to admit the truth, that he is hiding them from the people.

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.