Posted on 02/25/2010 7:44:15 AM PST by capacommie
Bob Unruh says an attorney whose legal brief in a case challenging Barack Obama's eligibility revealed a Supreme Court can remove an ineligible chief executive now has released an analysis confirming that if Obama isn't eligible, he could be charged under a number of felony statutes.
And that's just on the federal level; any state charges would be in addition, as would charges against individuals who may have helped him in the commission of any of the acts, according to Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF).
Kreep has been involved in several of the cases that have raised challenges to Obama's occupancy of the Oval Office, including two in California. One is on appeal in the state court system and names California Secretary of State Debra Bowen as defendant. The other, in the federal court system, is on appeal before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Both make claims on behalf of individuals and political candidates in California over Obama's presence on the 2008 election ballot.
North Dakota Gov. Thomas Moodie, removed from office when the state Supreme Court found him ineligible
Kreep's legal research revealed two precedents he believes would be applicable in the Obama case. In one, state officials arbitrarily removed a candidate from an election ballot because it was not proven the candidate was qualified for office. In another, the North Dakota Supreme Court removed the sitting governor from office when it was documented he was not eligible under the state's requirements.
Now Kreep has released an analysis of the federal laws he believes could be applied should Obama ultimately be shown to be ineligible.
"If he is not eligible, he could be charged not only under with these crimes, but potentially with crimes in a number of states where he falsely represented that he was qualified to run, as well as people who helped him."
Further, there could be any number of challenges to virtually anything he did as president: his nominations, his executive orders and his signing of legislation.
"This is completely uncharted territory. It could all be challenged as invalid. There has to be a sitting president for [actions] to be valid. If he's not qualified, if he's not the president, it isn't valid."
USJF staff attorney Chris Tucker cites the statutes that could apply here (cursor down) . . .
A few questioned his place of birth. Donofrio showed this via newspaper records from the time. IIRC, nobody questioned the fact that his father was a foreign national when C.A. was born (I would assume because nobody knew his fathers status at the time or had reason to question it), who didn't become naturalized till C.A. was 14 y.o.
As far as why didn't they define the term then...that is a question for those around at the time. I would assume because the general public at large were unaware there were questions surrounding C.A. eligibility. Therefore, there was no need at the time.
Of course its easy.All you have to do is sit back and watch.
Unless you are working for the defence.
Unfortunately, the GOP has no plan. The way is ripe right now and they don’t have a clue as how to proceed. Obama is sleeping with Wall Street. America hates Wall Street, with good reason.
What does the GOP do? Try to crawl in the sack with Obama and Wall Street.
parsy, who remains dumbfounded
Of course, if he's found by SCOTUS (presumably) to not be a NBC of the US, then he is a usurper. Not a President. Therefore, it goes back to the question of, who could "remove" him them? The Constitution as we all know, grants the Congress the power to Impeach and Convict (and therefore "remove") a sitting President. The question becomes, how is a usurper removed? Perhaps, if not by his own "free will", by way of federal marshal's? FBI maybe? Who knows. Definitely uncharted territory and almost certainly one of the reasons why folks in a position of power (i.e. Congress, Judiciary, etc) have been so quite on this issue.
BHO, Jr. is not IMHO, a "Natural Born Citizen." However, what he is, is the de facto POTUS, the sitting President. As such, he is pretty much immune to prosecution on criminal or civil charges during his term of office, and that includes fraud, election fraud, arson, or GTA.
Yes, he can be Constitutionally removed ... but only by Congress. That's as unlikely as his resignation. The courts may rule against him, but under our Constitution, they cannot remove him, or even order his removal.
Even if and when the Writ of Quo Warranto from the Federal district court is served, the findings are appealed to the SCOTUS, and they rule him ineligible, it is still and only Congress that can remove him.
The previous election would be void ab initio because of fraud,ALL OF THE LAWS AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS OBAMA SIGNED WOULD BE RECINDED, VACATED.Thats what happens when fraud is committed in such circumstances.Justas it would if similar fraud happened in a corporation.
A corporation is bound by law enforceable by the entire range of civil authority. The Executive Branch is not.
ping.
1 Certified copy of original birth certificate
2 Columbia University transcripts
3 Columbia thesis paper
4 Campaign donor analysis requested by 7 major watchdog groups
5 Harvard University transcripts
6 Illinois State Senate records
7 Illinois State Senate schedule
8 Law practice client list and billing records/summary
9 Locations and names of all half-siblings and step-mother
10 Medical records (only the one page summary released so far)
11 Occidental College Transcripts
12 Parent’s marriage Certificate
13 Record of baptism
14 Selective Service registration records
(Did Obama Actually Register for Selective Service?
This supposed revelation of 0's SS records has been debunked here and here.)
15 Schedules for trips outside of the United States before 2007
16 Passport records for all passports
17 Scholarly articles
18 SAT and LSAT test scores
19 Access to his grandmother in Kenya
20 List of all campaign workers that are lobbyists
21 Punahou grade school records
22 Noelani Kindergarten records are oddly missing from the the State of Hawaii Department of Education.
23 Page 11 of Stanley Ann Dunham's divorce decree.
24 Why did Barack Obama resign from the Illinois bar and where are all of the relevant documents?
25 Why did Michelle Obama resign from the Illinois bar after only about four years of practice and where are all of the relevant documents?
Anyone who cares about their country would be very concerned that a POTUS had hidden every scrap of information of his life that he possibly could.
A FRAUDULENT POTUS IS NOT de facto POTUS .
I mean look at the crininal fraud cases in our nation. A fraud who is posing as a surgeon should be allowed to keep on operating? Ludicrous.
bump
>So, yeah, Obama loves Birthers until the 2012 elction and then he’ll lay the long form on them IMHO.
The problem though is that as President he could have official documents made...
Something tells me that uncovering a forgery made with all the official equipment would be more difficult.
maybe we are facing so much crap now because he is being blackmailed now by the libs
where is that troll spray
Marion Barry was the target of a high-profile 1990 arrest on drug charges, which precluded him from seeking reelection that year. After he was convicted of the charges, Barry served six months in a federal prison, but was elected to the D.C. city council in 1992 and ultimately returned to the mayoralty in 1994, serving from 1995 to 1999. Today, Barry again serves on the city council, representing Ward 8, which comprises Anacostia, Congress Heights, Washington Highlands, and other neighborhoods.
Alcee Lamar Hastings spent ten years as a federal judge (1979–1989), but was impeached and removed from office for corruption and perjury. He was the sixth federal judge to be impeached and removed from office in American history.
In 1988, the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives took up the case, and Hastings was impeached for bribery and perjury by a vote of 413-3. He was then convicted in 1989 by the United States Senate, becoming the sixth federal judge in the history of the United States to be removed from office by the Senate.
The vote on the first article was 69 for and 26 opposed, providing five votes more than the two-thirds of those present that were needed to convict. The first article accused the judge of conspiracy. Conviction on any single article was enough to remove the judge from office.
The Senate vote cut across party lines, with U.S. Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont voting to convict his fellow party member, and U.S. Senator Arlen Specter voting to acquit.
The Senate had the option to forbid Hastings from ever seeking federal office again, but did not do so.
Hastings was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 1992, representing Florida's 23rd district. After placing second in the initial Democratic primary for the post, he scored an upset victory over State Representative Lois J. Frankel in the runoff and went on to easily win election in the heavily-Democratic district.
From that point on he has yet to face a serious challenge for reelection.
He is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus and was elected President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe in July 2004.
Today, as a Senior Democratic Whip, Hastings is an influential member of the Democratic leadership. Congressman Hastings is also a member of the powerful House Rules Committee and is a senior Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI).
(All of the above are Wiki excerpts...confirm for yourself if you are so inclined.)
No Fraud in these guys, thet did not misrepresent who they were and were duly elected.
Yea it would be, IF you can find two witnesses to his giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, or making war upon the United States.
While he likely had given such aid and comfort, probably not a material enough way that any court and jury would find him guilty.
Oh, please, what little he did do, bombing Iraq, was merely "wag the dog" in an attempt to distract from his troubles with "that woman". He had his chance to take out Binnie Boo, and he chose not to. If nothing else, it would have decreased his negatives at that point.
So if it were proven he was only 34 years old, would you say the same thing? One eligibility criteria is no different from another. Some are just more clear cut and easier to prove.
He might very well be a US Citizen. But that of course is not the Constitutional requirement. It's "Natural Born Citizen", a bit higher standard, although one which most Amercians satisfy.
Why not? They are charged with judical power over all cases arising under the Constitution.
Besides, if Oh-One were found to not be a Natural Born Citizen, it would be The People who would force him out, along with anyone from the Congress who rose to his defense.
Nixon was not forced out by the impeachment process, he quit on his own, due to public pressure. His "crimes" were almost insignifigent compared to usurping the very Office of President itself.
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.