Posted on 10/07/2009 11:23:53 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
Is it?
Let me know when the motion to dismiss is denied.
I'll have to look again, but I'm fairly confident Dr. Viera isn't on the Supreme Court.
But, do you know who is on the Supreme Court? Six of the eight justices that, in the 1995 case of Ryder v United States, joined Chief Justice Rehnquist when he authored the opinion for the unanimous court. And, in that unanimous opinion Rehnquist wrote...
"The de facto officer doctrine confers validity upon acts performed by a person acting under the color of official title even though it is later discovered that the legality of that person's appointment or election to office is deficient. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 440 (1886). "The de facto doctrine springs from the fear of the chaos that would result from multiple and repetitious suits challenging every action taken by every official whose claim to office could be open to question, and seeks to protect the public by insuring the orderly functioning of the government despite technical defects in title to office." 63A Am. Jur. 2d, Public Officers and Employees § 578, pp. 1080-1081 (1984) (footnote omitted). The doctrine has been relied upon by this Court in several cases involving challenges by criminal defendants to the authority of a judge who participated in some part of the proceedings leading to their conviction and sentence."
So, you're suggesting that six sitting Supreme Court Justices are going to overturn themselves? Good luck with that.
“Any law he signed, any executive order, any presidential appointment (including the cabinet secretaries), any military order as commander-in-chief, would all be completely and utterly invalid. They would all have to be redone from scratch.”
Abe, I realize you’re getting up there in age, plus you have that gaping hole in your head, but if you get a chance, look up “de facto officer doctrine”. There’s been some relevant case law since you went over the rainbow.’
don’t follow your logic, friend.
NObama not being eligible in the first place puts anything he has signed into the NULL & VOID trashcan.
No different than a person forging a signature on your business checks and paying for their rent. They did not have the authority to do such a thing in the first place.
The judge should have kept the tentative dates then. It just sows confusion.
With the cowardice the judiciary has displayed on this issue, I really wouldn’t doubt that six would overturn themselves in order to avoid a hard decision.
Olddi*khead, you sound really upset about something. Are you and the boys over at DOJ feeling a little under the bus today?
Nope. Cowards all.
If you haven’t seen this clip from Conan O’Brien, it’s worth taking a break to watch it. I promise it will make you smile.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/99370/the-tonight-show-with-conan-obrien-sesame-street-does-health-care
Oh, I doubt if I have to tell you if MTD gets granted or denied.
I have yet to see anything that indicates Judge Carter has amde any statement other than the OCT 5th issuance ... so far, nothing indicates he has made any ruling on mTD so assuming something about the Monday issuance which happened before the hearing on MTD is premature, IMHO.
False, Joe was nominated by the Convention. He is not disqualified because Urkle suggested him.
Because it never happened.
Not every military base around the world in those days had it’s own hospital.
A local hospital where births occurred were declared to be ‘Military bases’ to cover such instances.
I have no uncertainty about McCain’s status to be eligible to be President based upon his birth.
As a law professor once said to me, "There's nothing logical about it. It's the law.".
See post 262, just above. This is well settled law.
“Dr. Edwin Viera said the same thing. On his blog. He has a BA, MA, JD and PhD from Harvard - not on the affirmative action track wither. Anything the usurper signed is null and void if he is bounced.”
Frantzie, you must not confuse olddi*khead with something like facts.
The US Marshal's Service would march in and arrest him for perjury and fraud:
Edwin Vieira: ""at the inauguration. . he's aware he's not a citizen, then it's a perjured oath."
"Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading." United States v Prudder, 424 F. 2d 1021(5thCir. 1970),cert. denied, 400 U.S. 831 (1970)
End of story. .
There is no constitutional provision for Special elections. It would not happen.
Being born on base probably doesn't matter, one way or the other. Vattel and Blackstone both make exceptions for those born while their citizen/subject parents are outside the country in the service of the country/state.
So it is your position that neither Obama or McCain are eligible?”
NOOOOOO. sorry if I got you confused.
I don’t think NObama was EVER eligible. NEVER. I don’t think he was born in Hawaii.
I think he took advantage of our Foreign Aid to Students policies. I think he traveled the world on an Indonesian Passport.
I can list lots of other reasons I don’t think he is eligible.
It all boils down to where he was born.
I think he was born in Mombassa, Kenya. I think Stanley Ann went to Kenya for her husband to show her off, and that Pan Am refused to let her fly back just short days before NObama’s birth due to her very advanced stage of pregnancy. That was common in those days. I think NObama was born in Kenya, and that Stanley Ann came back and filed for a COLB in Hawaii.
I particularly distrust the COLB because there is ablolutely too much missing information- name of hospital is just one item.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.