The sheer terror every legal platform has evidenced at the prospect of investigating this pretender’s status, is baffling.
What are courts for if not addressing something like this? Is this not a matter worthy of an effort to clear the air once and for all?
It doesn’t mean the court would remove Obama. It would only mean that the truth would then have to be addressed by the only legal bodies that could remove him.
This member of the military has every right to challenge this CIC. To deny a honest investigation is to deny every citizen access to the full truth.
We are being lied to. Why? Why is it so damned important to cover up for this eight year old pretender?
...”The sheer terror every legal platform has evidenced at the prospect of investigating this pretender’s status, is baffling.
What are courts for if not addressing something like this? Is this not a matter worthy of an effort to clear the air once and for all?
It doesn’t mean the court would remove Obama. It would only mean that the truth would then have to be addressed by the only legal bodies that could remove him.
This member of the military has every right to challenge this CIC. To deny a honest investigation is to deny every citizen access to the full truth.
We are being lied to. Why? Why is it so damned important to cover up for this eight year old pretender?”...
You ask great questions but your thoughts are way too deep, knowlegeable, sophisticated, rational and SANE to be heeded in the 21 Century in America. Reason is out, anti-reason is in. And, that will prove to be tragic for all..
you misunderstand. it’s not terror... it’s being complicate.
why do you think liberals have tried so hard over that last 40 years to make sure THEIR people are on the benches?
zerO’s ineligibility echoes all the way through the entire Federal structure. For instance: what is the legality of all of his appointments to the Federal bench? How many rulings would have to be thrown out/reheard if he is declared illegitimate? How many appointees would have to be dismissed? Apply that to every aspect of the bureaucracy and we have actual anarchy, instead of virtual dictatorship.
Everyone in a position of authority dependent upon the Federal system is in danger. If there is a popular revolt, they will all close ranks to authorize use of force.
A few weeks ago, we spent some time with some retired military folks. FWIW, the consensus was that in the event of a revolt, 45% of the enlisted troops would walk away with their arms. The thought expressed was that perhaps 10% of the High Command in the administration would refuse to follow orders and they could easily be replaced. Some went so far as to express anxiety that their own training would put them on *red lists* as *domestic terrorists*.
Yes, some of these folks could be considered tin-foilers, but consider the implications if they are correct, or even if they are only partially correct.
I am 67. Never in my life before this administration have I heard elected officials speak of *ruling*, as opposed to *governing* or *serving*. And I have noticed that they only use the term *govern* in a negative sense, as in :"America cannot be governed." Add to that they oft-expressed frustration of the progressives that they do not have a gangsta cowboy at the helm and how many of them fervently and publicly are wishing for a dictator.
Big boot; many necks.