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

To: jarofants
The previous posters that responded to your post appear to "have forgotten" to mentioned this large salient point.

Page 2. "Idem: Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss at 13, ll 1517. Where Congress has done absolutely nothing to investigate or prosecute a question, Defendants’ position appears to be that this very inaction or acquiescence by Congress creates a presumption of legitimacy. Apparently, Defendants would have this Court believe, hold, rule, and accept that utter and complete inaction, stony silence even by the Vice‐President of an opposing party sitting as President of the Senate during the certification of the electoral vote to Congress pursuant to 3 U.S.C. §15, is and must be sufficient to satisfy the people that the President has met the Constitutional qualifications for office. "

Cheney either forgot or intentionally missed to query Congress if they had any objections to Barack Obama becoming president. Cheney failed in his ministerial duties as prescribed by "3 United States Code §15." The omission by Cheney may come back to bite Obama in his @$$ since...

The thrust of Obama's and the government's Motion to Dismiss is that Congress and the Electoral process are the ones who vet presidential candidates and no one else. The government stepped in it here. As pointed out that they failed to follow procedure.

In the Governments Motion to Dismiss, they conveniently omitted the following passage as it is written statute 3 U.S.C. §15:

"Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof… "

Cheney left a big hole that may increase to the size of Meteor Crater, AZ in the governments argument, so conveniently not explained to you.

152 posted on 09/22/2009 1:19:52 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: Red Steel; jarofants
The previous posters that responded to your post appear to "have forgotten" to mentioned this large salient point.

(citing from the Brief): Defendants would have this Court believe, hold, rule, and accept that utter and complete inaction, stony silence even by the Vice‐President of an opposing party sitting as President of the Senate during the certification of the electoral vote to Congress pursuant to 3 U.S.C. §15, is and must be sufficient to satisfy the people that the President has met the Constitutional qualifications for office. "


Not exactly. But I suspect that the DOJ would have the court believe (and, thus, hold, rule, and/or accept) that
(a) the enabling statute requires any objections to be submitted in writing; and yet
(b) any such written objection would have been made part of the official Congressional Record; and,
(c) no Representative or Senator called for a point of order in order to properly lodge their objection; and
(d) no Representative or Senator has filed suit claiming that they filed (or wished to file but were prevented from doing so) a written objection that was not properly considered by the Vice President and/or Congress;

Therefore, there is no evidence to suggest that the Constitution was not followed in this respect.

Now, if Taitz (or any other lawyer pursuing the eligibility actions) could find even just one single representative or senator who could affirm that the Rep/Senator was not permitted to file an objection, that person would have standing to sue, and the case would be proceeding post haste.
154 posted on 09/22/2009 1:31:34 PM PDT by Sibre Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

To: Red Steel
Cheney left a big hole that may increase to the size of Meteor Crater, AZ in the governments argument, so conveniently not explained to you.

Gary Kreep had an entirely different argument in his Opposition to Motion to Dismiss, filed on 9/18.

His argument is that the Electoral College "lacks the power to make eligibility determinations." IOW, it has an essentially "ministerial" (i.e. clerical) function of counting the electoral votes, and any objections would be to the correct tallying/casting of votes -- not to qualifications of the those voted for.

It's an interesting interpretation, and worth reading. Here.

158 posted on 09/22/2009 1:56:31 PM PDT by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

To: jarofants
To be more clear here. Cheney did violated in accordance with title TITLE 3, CHAPTER 1 § 15.

Cheney, President of the Senate, failed in his task to ask for objections during the joint secession of Congress after reading "all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates [votes] of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented." If there were objections from any tandem of Congressman and Senator, the next step is for them to put their objections in writing. This is the correct procedure in accordance with the statute above.

It is besides the point that objections, if any, were not presented before or after the joint session of Congress. Cheney failed to do as prescribed by law. For Taitz to not enlighten judge Carter about the violation by the Senate President, would be negligence on her part to her Plaintiffs. As a matter of fact, Taitz has made it an important part of here opposition to the government's Motion to Dismiss by arguing it upfront on page 2 of her filing.

We will see on October 5th this or any other parts of her filing hold sway with judge Carter. No one here really knows for sure how this all is going to turn out.

From TITLE 3, CHAPTER 1 § 15:

-snip-

"...Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and said tellers, having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having been ascertained and counted according to the rules in this subchapter provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United States, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses. Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received...."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/3/usc_sec_03_00000015----000-.html

-end snip-

First, as you plainly see, Cheney should have complied with by calling congressman -"shall call" - for their objections.

And second, after he called on Congress to verbally object, put their objections in writing.

173 posted on 09/22/2009 8:20:57 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | 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