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

To: colorado tanker
If he is not Constitutionally qualified for office at this point there is one remedy for that - for the Congress to institute impeachment proceedings.

The constitution provides that the *President* may be impeached for bribery, treason and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Two questions: Which is of those is "not eligible"? How can someone not eligible *be* President. The question for the courts, civilian or military, is "is he eligible? If he's not, he can't be impeached, because he is not President. If he is, there is nothing to impeach him for.. well expect Treason, Bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors.

112 posted on 06/10/2010 11:41:23 AM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]


To: El Gato

The constitution provides that the *President* may be impeached for bribery, treason and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Two questions: Which is of those is “not eligible”? How can someone not eligible *be* President. The question for the courts, civilian or military, is “is he eligible? If he’s not, he can’t be impeached, because he is not President. If he is, there is nothing to impeach him for.. well expect Treason, Bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors.


Eligibility should be determined BEFORE the swearing in ceremony. There are many opportunities to determine eligibility: during the primary election season, via each state’s chief election official and finally at the joint session of Congress convened to certify the vote of the Electoral College. Remember that only one Congressman and one Senator needed to submit a written objection in order to launch a mandatory investigation in each House of Congress. Obama had announced his candidacy for president on February 10, 2007. That’s more than two years before Inauguration Day.

From Article II of the Constitution: “The person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President” and “Before he enter on the Execution of his office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:...”

And “The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

I believe that the election laws of every state allow for challenges to a candidate’s election within a specified time frame. None of those challenges to Obama’s eligibility were upheld by state courts. In my home state of California, there was a legal challenge to Obama’s eligibility that was dismissed by a US District Court Judge (Lightfoot v Bowen). That lawsuit went all the way to the US Supreme Court where it was denied. Such eligibility lawsuits also happened in quite a few other states. THe problem of legal standing to sue could have been solved by having a person with a reasonable chance of attaining the contested office to be the plaintiff. That would have been Senator John Sidney McCain, the only other candidate to receive electoral college votes and the only person directly harmed by Obama’s election.

When Obama’s electoral votes were certified and when he was sworn in, he became the President (de jure) under the law and in fact. The way to remove a President is via impeachment, trial and conviction.

Two recent presidents both had impeachment charges drawn up for perjury and obstruction of justice (Nixon and Clinton). If Obama is found to be truly ineligible, those two “high crime” charges seem appropriate yet again. Andrew Johnson was impeached in 1868 for “Violation of the Tenure of Office Act.”

The truth is that Congress can impeach a President for just about anything but getting an actual conviction in the Senate has proven to be impossible, to date.


121 posted on 06/10/2010 12:22:47 PM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]

To: El Gato
In my opinion, if a President takes office knowing he is not Constitutionally qualified that would be a form of fraud qualifying as a "high crime or misdemeanor."

Am I right? Who knows? This situation has never happened before to my knowledge. Some high powered law professors argued during the Clinton administration that perjury is not a "high crime or misdemeanor" and the courts have never defined it in our Constitutional context.

Bottom line is this controversy is going nowhere and the real remedy is the American voters throwing this guy out when they next have the chance.

123 posted on 06/10/2010 12:43:20 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | 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