Lets see, perhaps a refresher is in order.
Raider Sam Post 155
"All it does is say how Congress will appoint a new President if the current doesnt qualify. It does not mention who is responsible and it does not require Congress to ensure eligibility."
W R O N G
My Post 360, 365, 366, and 375 prove that Congress is indeed the ones who are REQUIRED by the language of the Constitution to ensure compliance with eligibility requirements. Post 375 shows that even the Obama legal team agrees with this. Your response to this? Silence.
Raider Sam Post 340
"There is nothing in the Constitution that allows you to remove the President if he hasnt been proven ineligible"
W R O N G
My post 340 and 360 prove that the burden of proof is on the President elect to prove that he/she is eligible and not as you assert on some other party proving he/she is ineligible. Your response to this? Silence.
Raider Sam Post 356
”What you linked to (which has been posted multiple times on this thread) does prove my point. The 20th Amendment shows how to act if the President is ineligible. It doesnt say that Congress gets to determine that.”
W R O N G
My post 360, 365, 366, and 375 prove Congress is responsible and named as such in the Constitution. Your response to this? Silence.
Raider Sam Post 357
”Your “burden of proof” is something you fabricated by cherrypicking parts of sentences that dont actually back what you claim.
W R O N G
My post 340, 360, 365, 366, and 375 prove that the burden of proof is on the one seeking the office . Your response to this? Denial without substantiation in your post 357 and otherwise, silence.
Raider Sam Post 363
”I never said Congress was not involved in Presidential succession. They are, if both Pres and VP are ineligible. As for your question, it does say how to act without saying who is responsible for verifying.”
W R O N G
My post 340, 360, 365, 366, and 375 prove that Congress is responsible and named as such in the Constitution. Your response to this? Continual denial without substantiation in your post 357 and 363 and otherwise, silence.
Raider Sam Post 367
”It doesnt say that at all.”
W R O N G
My post 340, 360, 365, 366, and 375 prove that Congress is responsible and named as such in the Constitution. Your response to this? Continual denial without substantiation in your post 357 and 363 and otherwise, silence.
Raider Sam Post 408
”Ive addressed everything I need to with you.”
W R O N G
None of your postings are substantiated with facts. When presented with facts, you have avoided addressing them and have continued to assert PROVEN INCORRECT assertions. Your opinions are not facts. Facts are facts. Fact is you are wrong a lot and don't seem to mind displaying it.
Then, after all of this, you still have the nerve to post more stupidity.
Raider Sam Post 410
"What statements have been proven wrong? What assertions have I made that are not true?"
This post should do the trick. Read it slowly if you have to.
Maybe you should re-read the 20th and find something that says Congress determines the President’s eligibility, which it doesnt.
You make a lot of assumptions that are not found in the language of the document. But if you wish to treat the Constitution as a living, breathing document that you can add to, feel free.