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

To: Kevmo

>>> maybe Obama has overstepped here and could piss off the SCOTUS, who might decide to take a look at that eligibility thing after all.

My point was just the opposite.

The chance for SCOTUS to act on clear evidence of fraud and forgery has long since come and gone...
Besides... to suggest that our highest court in the land would apply the law selectively in a tit-for-tat is a worse charge against them than the one I was making.

My guess is that whatever Obama used in that backdoor meeting to keep them and the lower courts under wraps illustrates a form of control that our president is NOT supposed to have, and is most likely also being used to defend Obamacare...

So the point is... If you are a Supreme Court Justice, and you have been successfully pigeon-holed by the president over a clear and obvious miscarriage of the election laws via individual fraud, how much easier would it be to pigeon-hole you over a law passed by both houses of Congress?


32 posted on 03/17/2012 2:02:58 AM PDT by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


To: Safrguns

Frankly any and all Federal Employees in black robes being hand picked and approved by the same folk that most directly weld the power “they claim” to be in final constitutional judgement of. Is itself a farce on face value as it has proven itself to be over our history.

Federal courts have always been disinclined to rule against federal power. This is particularly the case sense our States were robed of their representational in the senate by the 17th amendment. But even before the 17th amendment it was weak as Hamilton insisted the senate be a kind of self-serving nobility only standing for election every 6 years.

The point is wether or not they are specifically in Obama’s pocket matters little. Federal courts ARE in Washington’s pocket, always have been and structurally always will be being handed picked & empowered employees of the same.

Impartiality in cases between the Federal government and either the people or their States is as utterly implausible for the Federal courts, as your best friend would be presiding over a dispute between the two of us.

As for what Obama could say to his federal employees to further influence them It seems likely given the nature of many of his Chicago friends that he might suggest that should they not go his way some of his supporters might try to kill them leaving him(Obama) to appoint their replacement. An unnecessary threat in the long run for a “court” already structurally inclined support and advance federal power inevitable at the expense of individual liberty and control over their own states.

But of course Obama may simply be too impatient to wait for the lawless Federal “courts”


33 posted on 03/17/2012 2:23:16 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: Safrguns

Besides... to suggest that our highest court in the land would apply the law selectively in a tit-for-tat is a worse charge against them than the one I was making.
***I own up to it, that is what I am suggesting. I have lost respect for the SCOTUS.


41 posted on 03/17/2012 9:27:17 PM PDT by Kevmo (If you can define a man by the depravity of his enemies, Rick Santorum must be a noble soul indeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | 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