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

To: cycle of discernment; All

Remember that this case was not about the BC.

However, I am starting to realize that the SCOTUS doesn’t want to act as an investigative body. Therefore, the whole issue of a BC becomes moot because no one can compel Obama to produce a BC except a court; which none will do....even the SCOTUS. So, without compeling evidence (a BC) the SCOTUS won’t hear the case....but it takes the SCOTUS or other court to force the release of the BC to provide compleing evidence.

If ever there was a Catch 22 this is it!!!!!


124 posted on 12/08/2008 7:43:59 AM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Sola Veritas
However, I am starting to realize that the SCOTUS doesn’t want to act as an investigative body....

There job is not to investigate, that is the job of the accuser; to bring the evidence before them.

156 posted on 12/08/2008 7:56:00 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies ]

To: Sola Veritas

Article II states the criteria pretty clearly, but as far as I know, (not very far) there’s no mechanism to assure compliance. Or to prove eligibility. I don’t think that there’s any law to compel anyone to present any kind of evidence at all. This presents a ton of trouble to anyone trying to make a case, and it isn’t the SC’s job to sort it out for the plaintiff. We’re on the honor system here, and if something sneaks past we’re screwed. Am I nuts? That’s what this looks like to me.


213 posted on 12/08/2008 8:19:16 AM PST by Skid Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | 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