Mark Levin Eviscerates the Obamacare Ruling

The Mark Levin show ^ | June 27,2012 | Mark Levin

[Hojczyk]

“This decision I would go as far to say is lawless. Absolutely lawless!” Listen to his First Segment from June 28’s Show

[Bshaw]

“Levin has zero credibility due to his inaction on the usurper issue. This is a fact.”

While Mark Levin hasn’t beat the issue to death, he did proffer the opinion that at the point Obama was sworn in by a Supreme Court Justice, the ONLY constitutional means for removal is impeachment, trial and removal, (paraphrasing).

Who runs the senate?

[Tunehead54]

"I’m praying hard. Don’t know what else to do. Prayer is always good."

---

Prayer is always good but if you have some time on your hands let's work to get the Senate back.

The House will be fine and the presidency will depend on lots of things; gaffes, debates, F&F, etc. but with 50% of the US getting a check from Uncle Sam I think a landslide is unlikely for Romney despite Obama's weaknesses.

Lots of other reasons of course, like one side's well-practiced and widespread vote stealing efforts, politics of destruction, LSM support etc., etc.

To summarize, I think our best efforts would be praying for all but focusing on taking back the Senate.

Here in Florida we need to back Connie Mack the younger over Dim extraordinaire Bill Nelson. We could end up with two pubbie senators.

That's my plan anyway. Anyone else? Nite! ;-)

[Uncle Sham]

"While Mark Levin hasn’t beat the issue to death, he did proffer the opinion that at the point Obama was sworn in by a Supreme Court Justice, the ONLY constitutional means for removal is impeachment, trial and removal, (paraphrasing)."

Levin is ignoring the Twentieth Amendment, Section 3, as well as the first two words of the eligibility requirements in Article two.

The Twentieth Amendment Section Three:

"3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified."

A few notes. 1. There is no such position as a "President elect", legally, until such a time as Congress has accepted the results of the electoral college votes and a person is actually named as the "President elect". This means that the term "shall have qualified" refers to something other than the results of winning an election. There is only one place left in the Constitution having to do with "qualifications" for the office of President, that being the eligibility requirements from Article two.

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

2. Since it is the duty of Congress to name an interim President in the event of a President elect's "failure to qualify", they, Congress, must know whether or not to do so. This means that they, Congress, must be aware of whether or not a President elect meets the eligibility requirements from Article two. It is the burden of the President elect to "qualify" or "fail to qualify", thus NOT proving one is eligible under Article Two to Congress is the same thing as "failing to qualify." Congress avoiding its duty to uphold Section 3 results in the same "failure to qualify", something they may have done on purpose in this instance depending upon the reasons why. National security? Who knows at this point.

3. How was Obama's eligibility proven to Congress without a valid long form birth certificate? He apparently does not possess such a thing or we would have seen it a million times by now.

4. The eligibility requirements start out with two simple words which forever preclude anyone who "fails to qualify" from serving as a legal president, "No person". Someone who sneaks in because Congress failed to uphold it's responsibility to enforce the Twentieth Amendment, section 3 doesn't legally exist. The Constitution cannot be fooled just because Congress didn't act when it was supposed to. A President elect either qualifies or he cannot ever be President, period.

Thus it is that we have protection from someone who is ineligible to serve as President already written into the Constitution. Unfortunately, we also have a Congress that did not uphold it's oath to support the Constitution and a usurpation of the office of President is the result. We know he is illegal strictly on the basis that we don't know if he is eligible. If he "qualified", there would be no debating the subject. The fact that nobody in Congress is able to say whether or not he is eligible means that he never proved to them that he was and thus has "failed to qualify".

Levin is WRONG about the ability to remove a USURPER. Someone who cannot legally hold the office of President can NEVER be President. They can be apprehended and arrested. My case rest entirely within the Constitution that Levin supposedly is an expert on. He is a coward by ignoring it.