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

To: Uncle Sham

I love the work that you have done here. And I REALLY applaud your efforts. But as I just posted to you on the other thread saying that they needed to verify Obama back then rather than now for political reasons. I can also see what is arguably a legal reason. :(

You, I presume copied the law word for word. I expect no less from a FReeper :)

In that case, let’s look at the pertinent and relevant TIME this needs to be done.

“3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President,”

Your assertion is correct that “It clearly refers to that period AFTER Congress has ratified the Electoral College results” But It also would appear that after that time period, this is no longer an option.

So the beginning term would be what then? perhaps 1 year? 1 day? 1 month?
We really don’t know do we. But I would say that 2+ years may well be stretching it.

It would appear that they are breaking it down as you said in 4 different parts. But each is successive and each is fairly limited in it’s scope of time. Although there is no actual time set as to what the “beginning of the term of the President” is, it would appear that it is also a limited time. Something that was intended to be short and successive in nature as well.

Would you agree with that or do you have a different take on the meaning and intention?


106 posted on 03/02/2011 5:55:49 AM PST by Munz (All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Munz
"But It also would appear that after that time period, this is no longer an option."

Let us agree for the sake of arguing the point that Congress did not confirm the two status requirements written in section three. This would still not make a person who is ineligible to serve as President "eligible". The requirements in Article two are not confusing. They plainly state that No Person can serve as President who fails to meet the eligibility requirements for the position. I don't see how anyone who "fails to qualify" due to the negligence of Congress can ever say that such negligence equals "qualification". In my opinion, if Obama has not proven to Congress that he "qualifies", he is still not a legal President.

I also don't see a time limit for establishing his legitimacy because the beginning of a President's term can only begin with a Constitutionally legal President. The Constitution via Section Three says exactly this because it is a requirement demanded of Congress. Why have the requirement if someone can sneak by it? No sneaking allowed. Except for Usurpers. Usurpers can be arrested.

113 posted on 03/02/2011 8:58:56 PM PST by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | 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