Posted on 04/22/2010 2:54:33 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
There is so much cross talk on this thread that I was uncertain if you were suggesting that (in Lakin's situation) exercising his right to invoke Article 138 would excuse him from the responsibility of complying with the deployment orders.
Yes it is.
12th Amendment
The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, ... which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;
The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, ...
Article 2, Section 1
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
And we know for a fact that none of those things were even CHECKED
No, you don't know that for a fact. You were not present when the Electoral College met. You were not present when the U.S. Congress certified the Electoral College vote. You were not present when Obama and Biden met with the Supreme Court. You were not present on inauguration day when Obama was sworn into office. You are not privy to any information that was (or wasn't) exchanged on any of those occasions.
Therein lies the problem with the other declarations of fact on your blog. You assert facts not in evidence.
I wasn't referring to Nancy Pelosi's certification of Obama as a presidential nominee for the State of Hawaii. But since you mention it, the laws of Hawaii require such wording in the certification. So Hawaii asked for an obtained the legal wording it required.
I did NOT say that in any form and shape, just that he has the right according to article 138 to complain about that order, right???
Really, we are NOT privy to any information?
Are we living in closed society, like Venezuela/Cuba??
It's very interesting to see that this is what you condone???
Your constant postings of shielding and protecting your beloved C-i-C is evident for your title mentioned earlier!!!
Pretty disgusting and oh so telling that the Traitor in the White House is allowing a true Patriot to be prosecuted all the while the Traitor in the White House essentially arranged for the murdering Muslim Traitor in Texas to basically go free.!! Yup, now that’s allegiance to everything NOT American.!! CO
You are not privy to any information that was (or wasn't) exchanged on any of those occasions.
Now honestly. As regards the contemptible Major Nidal Hasan, how exactly is being paralyzed from the waist down in custody while awaiting court martial for 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder equivalent to basically going free?
You’re forgetting the 20th Amendment, which says what is to happen “if the President elect shall have failed to qualify”. The only place where it talks about the qualifications to be president is in Article 2.
And later in the 20th Amendment it specifically speaks about nobody being allowed to be vice-president if they are not Constitutionally eligible to be president. It was important for them to say that about the vice-president (and not the president) because the very same portion that you cited regarding the mechanism for choosing the president ALSO says that nobody is eligible to even BE president if they don’t meet the qualifications.
So it’s clear from the context that in the 12th Amendment they are assuming that whoever would be chosen president MUST be eligible. They never say who is supposed to check or confirm eligibility.
The President of the Senate certifies nothing, but counts the certified votes to find out who the President-elect is. The Twentieth Amendment then clarifies what is to happen if the person elected fails to qualify (prove eligibility) by the time the term is supposed to begin. There is no certification that the person is the president. The one who gets enough certified votes is the person who SHALL BE president - that is, they are the president-ELECT . And the 20th Amendment clearly shows that someone can be certified as the president-ELECT and still fail to qualify to be the president.
The 12th Amendment also refers to a situation where “the Vice President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other CONSTITUTIONAL DISABILITY of the President”, which makes it clear that a person who has been chosen president may still be barred from acting as president because of a Constitutional issue with the one chosen as president.
Gotta run. It’s a very, very busy day and week for me, but I really don’t want those points to be lost.
Hawaii didn’t ask the DNC for anything. The Hawaii Democratic Party, which usually certified Constitutional eligibility of the candidate on their own after the DNC Convention was done and after the DNC had submitted their certification of candidacy, instead made their certification AT the DNC Convention before Pelosi signed any certifications, thus signalling to Pelosi that they REFUSED to certify Obama’s Consitutional eligibility. Because Hawaii requires the Consitutional eligibility to be certified, Pelosi was forced to perjure herself by swearing that she knew Obama was Constitutionally eligible.
The only way she could have known that was by having a judicial or administrative person or body go through the process that Hawaii requires for determining the facts of birth when an amended birth certificate is involved. You tell me what judge or administrative body Obama presented his documents to as evidence, and when they gave a ruling on his birth facts to Nancy Pelosi before she signed that certification of nomination and Constitutional eligibility.
Surely you must at least agree that if Pelosi actually went through that legal process there should be a record of it and there would be absolutely no need for Obama to argue before Judge Carter that he had already presented an online COLB and online birth announcements. If he had a judicial or administrative declaration of the facts of his birth, this whole fiasco in the courts was wilfull negligence on Obama’s part.
I said I was uncertain because of the cross talk.
The HDOH has confirmed that there were no UIPA requests made since January of 2008 by Joseph Sandler, Brian Schatz, William H. Gilardy, Nancy Pelosi, Alice Travis Germond, Howard Dean, Neil Abercrombie, Daniel Inouye, or Senator Akaka.
They have not seen Obama’s birth records. Pelosi and Germond, under the counsel of Sandler, signed an oath that Obama is Constitutionally eligible to be president without any of them even ASKING to look at his birth record.
Whoa. That was clear as mud. Hawaii required both the state and national party to certify who their candidate is, and certification (from either state or national party) that the chosen candidate is Constitutionally eligible for the position.
The Hawaii Democratic Party (HDP) normally waits until after the DNC Convention and then certifies that the person is the candidate of the state party and that the candidate is Constitutionally eligible to be president. They normally hand-deliver that certification to the Elections Office in Hawaii.
This time, they changed their certification of nomination so that it wouldn’t certify the Constitutional eligibility of Obama. They signed their certification that Obama is the HDP’s candidate at the DNC Convention - one day before Pelosi signed any of the DNC certifications of nomination. Normally the DNC does not certify the Constitutional eligibility of their candidate because they say that is the responsibility of the state party. The DNC claims to certify the national candidate in each of the individual states based on that state allowing the candidate to be on the ballot, which is supposed to mean that the state has verified that the person is eligible for the job.
But they ran into a problem with Hawaii because the HDP refused to certify Obama’s Constitutional eligibility. According to the DNC protocols that should have meant that the DNC wouldn’t certify Obama as their candidate in Hawaii, if at all. Instead, they made an exception and Nancy Pelosi signed the certification of eligibility without having done ANY verification at all. She knew she was perjuring herself by claiming to know he was eligible. And she had to have some idea why the HDP refused to certify eligibility. Those should all have been HUGE red flags to Pelosi.
There was no hurry. It wasn’t like in Texas, where they had to rush to get the certifications filed on time. There was plenty of time to deal with Hawaii. Pelosi could easily have asked to see the documentation before signing an oath regarding Obama. As I’ve said in a previous post, the HDOH has confirmed that NOBODY who signed those documents (and NOBODY in the DNC leadership) even asked to see Obama’s documentation anytime from 6 months before the DNC convention until now.
Pelosi perjured herself to get Obama on the November 2008 ballot. She did it because the HDP refused to certify Obama’s Constitutional eligibility. IOW - to this day, NOBODY has done even the most rudimentary check of Obama’s eligibility.
Hawaii "asked" for a certification of Barack Obama by legally requiring it pursuant to HRS §11-113.
The sworn application shall include:
- the names and addresses of each of the two candidates;
- a statement that each candidate is legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution; and
- a statement that candidates are duly chosen candidates of both the state and national party, giving time, place, and manner of selection (where applicable).
Please point me to any evidence that the Hawaii State Democratic Party refused to certify Barack Obama as their presidential nominee.
The only way she (Pelosi) could have known that was by having a judicial or administrative person or body go through the process that Hawaii requires for determining the facts of birth when an amended birth certificate is involved.
Again, you're assuming facts not in evidence. You're not privy to any information that was (or wasn't) exchanged between Obama and Pelosi or between Pelosi and any state or federal government agency regarding Obama's birth certificate.
(I'll address the 20th Amendment issues in a separate post.)
Disregard my request to point me to your evidence regarding the Hawaii State Democratic Party. I’ll read this post and respond.
You mean you don't know? Isn't it obvious? Obama didn't deny Major Nidal Hasan due process and then have him shot on site. So, he got off scott free. Duh! /sarc
Say who, YOU, - or your beloved C-i-C???
Goodnight, butterdezillion! You sound like a complete idiot. Do you realize that?
It was totally out of line. It was born of absolute frustration. I've read butterdezillion's blog. She is clearly not an idiot. She writes well. It's the conclusions that frustrate me.
B.T. is one of those so called “FReepers” or correctly (”FINO” = Freeper in name only) aka “AFTER-BIRTHERS” - who would gladly sell out his mother/grandmother in order to keep the usurper in office at any cost, and he has a few friends here, - the fifth column traitors - that he pings for help when it gets toooo warm in the kitchen. Remember when their mentor John sKerry went to Paris for a special meeting???
Justin Riggs posted (but has since taken down) the 2008 HDP and DNC certifications for Hawaii. I requested and received from the Hawaii Electoins Office the certifications from the HDP and DNC in the 2 elections before that - which is the farthest back that the Hawaii Elections Office has the records, from what the official told me when I called.
The HDP certifications from the other 2 elections both had the Constitutional eligibility certification included, they were both dated several weeks after the DNC Convention (in 2000 the DNC signed on Aug 17th and the HDP on Sept 8th; in 2004 the DNC signed on July 29th and the HDP on Aug 31st), and they had no letter of transmittal filed with them because they were hand-delivered to the Elections Office in Hawaii. That was the protocol according to the only records we have.
All of those protocols were ignored for Obama. They did EVERYTHING different.
The certification in 2008 was identical to the other years EXCEPT the Constitutional eligibility language was omitted. I asked the HDP representative on the phone who approved those changes and when; I was called a “birther”, told I was nuts, and was refused any information.
The HDP certification in 2008 was signed at the DNC Convention - one day before the DNC signed any of their certifications.
The HDP Certification was sent to the HI Elections Office by Joseph Sandler, Esq - together with the DNC certification (which had been printed up specially for Hawaii with the Constitutional eligibility language added) and a transmittal letter from Sandler’s law office. That is what the clerk told me when I called him. He also said that there were no letters of transmittal for the HDP certifications from 2000 and 2004 because they were hand-delivered.
If I had the scanner at my computer and knew how to use it I would scan this stuff in. I’ve thought of posting about this subject on the blog but have been very busy with other pursuits lately.
There’s so much to say and so little time to write it all up. My son’s confirmation is Sunday and I just found out yesterday that my in-laws are coming from Texas for it. My house is a pit because I’ve been spending so much time researching lately, as well as trying to undo the damage from inaccurate reporting by the MSM on the many eligibility articles lately.
But that’s some of the information I have on this subject. I also have the e-mail from the HDOH confirming that there were no UIPA requests from Joseph Sandler, Brian Schatz, William H. Gilardy, Nancy Pelosi, Alice Travis Germond, Howard Dean, Neil Abercrombie, Daniel Inouye, or Senator Akaka anytime from January of 2008 until February of 2010 (when my request was answered).
I defended her and applied that Cassius Clay champion title to you, yet you turned around and said the same about me, huh???
butterdezillion and Miss Tickly have done more research and exposed the Hawaiian corruption than anyone else here on F.R.!!!
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.