Posted on 02/12/2011 8:34:33 AM PST by Uncle Sham
I believe that Pelosi satisfied the necessary Congressional requirement - although this might have been done fraudulently.
I’ve been saying all along that congress should be taken down along with the usurper and Pelosi. Combine that with the Supremes ‘evading’ it and what have you got? Not the nation created by our forefathers, that’s for sure.
Perhaps a mass mailing of this to every congresscritter, even the new kids on the block, would be in order. Someone needs to buck up and do their duty to the US, it’s constitution, and it’s citizens.
That N was another “suspcion” to me....why a do over is the question.
“By far the most frequently asked question in America since August 28, 2008, the closing day of the 2008 Democratic National Convention, is this: “Does Barack Hussein Obama meet the constitutional qualifications to serve as President of the United States?” With every reason to believe that he does not, the second most-asked question has been, “How could every single member of Congress… all 535 of them… fail in their constitutional obligation to properly vet Obama’s qualifications before certifying the vote of the 2008 Electoral College?” http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/the-congressional-research-office-agrees/
Remember, it was Cheney who failed to ask for objection or question of the electoral vote as required by the US Code of Federal Regulations. See at the 27 minute mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcGt8hQZzg4&feature=related
I can’t seem to find the US Code of Federal Regulations section number that requires the question. Anyone have it? It should be at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html but the search window won’t pull it up.
A third grader has better penmanship than that.
That N was another “suspcion” to me....why a do over is the question.
Warrants an investigation, don’t you think?
McLame was ineligible from day one and the GOP knew it. The RATS knew it. Everyone knew it - just as they knew Hussein is/was/and always will be ineligible. That's just one more point of proof showing to what lengths the GOP went to to throw the election in order to distance themselves from the economic disaster that was looming.
There is another course. Presidents and VPs are elected on the same ticket. If one party is determined ineligible, then that voids the entire ticket. If the elector submits in ineligible vote, then he wasted it. They, imo, have no other option than to go back to the general election to see what "eligible" ticket recieved the most votes. The ticket recieving the most votes after McCain/Palin was Nader/Gonzales but iirc, Gonzales doesn't meet the NBC (two US citizen parents) requirement. Next down the list was Barr/Root.
Smells like Barr should have standing in an eligibility case.
received!
McLame was ineligible from day one and the GOP knew it. The RATS knew it. Everyone knew it - just as they knew Hussein is/was/and always will be ineligible. That’s just one more point of proof showing to what lengths the GOP went to to throw the election in order to distance themselves from the economic disaster that was looming.
There is another course. Presidents and VPs are elected on the same ticket. If one party is determined ineligible, then that voids the entire ticket. If the elector submits in ineligible vote, then he wasted it. They, imo, have no other option than to go back to the general election to see what “eligible” ticket recieved the most votes. The ticket recieving the most votes after McCain/Palin was Nader/Gonzales but iirc, Gonzales doesn’t meet the NBC (two US citizen parents) requirement. Next down the list was Barr/Root.
Smells like Barr should have standing in an eligibility case.
Except he failed to ask for objections. That was the final rule that wasn't followed. The fix was in.
Except he failed to ask for objections. That was the final rule that wasn’t followed. The fix was in.
Please site the rule.
Please site the rule.
The votes that count under the twelfth amendment are those that come from the votes that are "transmitted and sealed" to the Congress which are votes of the designated electors. No one got "votes" as defined for President except John and Zero.
There is not authority for the proposition that a vote for an ineligible person voids the ballot and I tend to think that the Court would laugh at that argument--it isn't going to come down that way. That argument doesn't make any sense.
As to the "two parent argument", that is just another variation of the Vattel argument which has been eliminated by adoption of the 14th Amendment. I never heard of Gonzales; he didn't get any electoral votes; but if he had; and if he was born in the USA; he wins.
Equating the word “qualified” in the 20th Amendment, with the word “eligible” in Article II, section 1. This is a mistake. jbjd (whose posting privileges were suspended on FR is not able to personally correct the fiction Uncle Sham has posted there, disguised as fact)wrote about this fallacy some time back, in
http://jbjd.org/2010/12/31/qualified-%e2%89%a0-eligible/
I have heard that argument and I do not give it any weight. It is much like the argument in the opinion to the Republican's by the Harvard law professor and the hired lawyer that McCain was eligible.
The Carter opinion was written by a Perkins clerk on leave to work as a clerk for Carter for the purpose of massaging the result in the Carter case which Baer viewed as a real threat. It is just more self serving argument which isn't going to go anywhere in the real world if this ever gets to issue before the Supreme Court.
I do have some knowledge of handwriting , the left one appears to be wrote by a left-handed person. the right one was wrote by a right handed person. I best guess is that the “certification” document was not signed by Pelosi.
as far as the N issue goes , it is common when someone is attempting to write another person’s name to end up with what you call a”do over” . The person should have practiced more to make it not so apparent!!
I admit (and it’s obvious) that I am no lawyer. But after reading some of the valiant research by various freepers including but not limited to bushpilot1, rxsid, Red Steel (and others) it is clear to me that the founders entirely intended Natural Born Citizen to mean someone born on US soil from parents who were citizens.
Why are you so quick to dismiss the two parents?
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.