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

To: mlo
I never doubted the eligibility of previous presidents. Just like I assumed we'd never be attacked by terrorists. The world has changed. Gov 101... how does one abide by the constitution? Take the word of the dnc? HA, take the word of anyone? NOT! Not anymore.... it needs to be transparent.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html

No person except:

How does one establish eligibilty as required by the constitution?

Who is in charge of vetting the presidential candidates?

107 posted on 09/28/2009 12:50:33 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8 (I am Jim Thompson............................Please pray for our troops....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]


To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Who is in charge of vetting the presidential candidates?

Let us know when you find out.

108 posted on 09/28/2009 12:51:36 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~

The constitution requires that a president BE certain things, but it doesn’t specify a procedure for proving those things, or establish penalties, or anything else.

Except, that it also establishes the procedure for electing the president, with roles for electors and the congress. So we can assume it is their job to make sure someone is eligible before electing them. But to do so, there’s no requirement that a candidate produce a birth certificate, or any other particular proof. If the electors and the congress decide the person is eligible, then that decision is all that’s needed.

To have a hope of a legal case, beyond the issues of standing, the birthers needed to cough up some proof that the facts really are contrary to the constitutional requirements. Not that they suspect it. Not that they aren’t satisfied. Proof that as a matter of *fact*, Obama was born somewhere else. Then it might be concievable that a court could hear and rule on the eligibility question.


125 posted on 09/28/2009 1:38:02 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~

Who is in charge of vetting the presidential candidates?


That is the major determination that needs to be defined imo. It isn’t defined in the Constitution or by federal statute to my knowledge. The Constitution leaves somethings vague or without detailed direction. It provides for the process of electing a President and the roles played by the states, the electoral college and congress but doesn’t provide specific direction as to determining how a candidate is vetted to meet the Constitutional requirements that you enumerated.

States could require specific infomation before approving a candidate’s position on the ballot, Congress could demand specific information before approving the Electoral College vote or the Constitution could be amended to provide a method of proof. But as you say who has the responsibilty today.


134 posted on 09/28/2009 1:54:08 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~; mlo
"Who is in charge of vetting the presidential candidates?"

As we have all found out...it's the "Honor" system.

Guess that means our politicians and political parties are all honorable. Therefore, "We the people" must simply trust them.

We must all get back to work now (assuming you have a j.o.b.) because our honorable politicians require more of our money.

/s

143 posted on 09/28/2009 2:15:57 PM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~

The national parties, secretaries of state, members of congress, and the courts if asked.


163 posted on 09/28/2009 3:08:51 PM PDT by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | 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