Posted on 01/08/2012 3:49:48 PM PST by Snoopers-868th
I dont care!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We cannot let mob mentality overturn the rule of law for the REST OF US
How infuriating eh? You don’t have standing to challenge him before the inauguration, but after the inauguration it’s too late! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
I wouldn’t think Hillary, but Darcy Richardson, http://www.darcy2012.com/ is doing what it takes to get there, and New Hampshire is next on his campaign site after his party let him down in Iowa by voting for Ron Paul instead of voting uncommitted.
You know what would be a killer? What if a State decided Obama is not eligible and it was referred to the USSC, and the USSC declined to hear it. POW! (We know that won’t happen though.)
Customarily traitors are hung, not merely imprisoned.
Pakistan was certainly not inclined--on the basis of any US travel advisory, at least--to turn away an American that may have legitimate business, friends and/or relatives there.
Thus your logic is errant, even if he did use a British or Indonesian passport.
Remember there was a State Department contractor shot and killed. Shortly before that, a rumor circulated that no US passport had ever been issued to a 'Barack Obama' prior to the issuance of Barry's US Senate passport and that there are no court records of a name change to 'Barack Obama' or naturalization after his stint in Indonesia where.school records affirmed his Indonesian citizenship.
FR's American Expat (now in Indonesia) has noted several shenanigans with regard to Barry's records there, indicating an official claimed certain of Barry's records WERE EATEN!!!
HF
You are of correct. In this case, it appears that the Court has given citizens standing to challenge eligibility. I think that for the Court to be able to make a decision, that the SOS must give the court positive proof that Obama is eligible. If the SOS cannot give credible proof of eligibility, this is going to go nuclear if the Court decides for the people.
History is not what you see on the so-called ‘History Channel’, and not what you seen in the newspapers and on the idiot box. Whether or not there are grand conspiracies, the masons and the build-a-burgers, there is plenty going on behind the scenes that we never hear about to give you a pause.
Calls are going today from D.C. to Ala to the judge with vague but meaningful promises of federal judgeship, Harvard scholarships for kids, membership sponsorship in COSTCO, pre-IPO shares in Facebook, etc, that will one way or another affect the outcome of this case.
It passed by "unanimous consent" so I don't know if he signed it, but it he did not object. It does say "citizenS", plural.
The Georgia looks like the best shot, but there will be others all over the country.
That's why a deal would be offered first, so as to avoid a nasty fight.
Remember when just a short time ago the left cheered as a lower Court Judge went way out of bounds of judicial authority and threw a monkey wrench into Governor Walkers plan to impose restrictions on the unions? Strange, I don't hear much cheering from the left right now.
Drat. LOL. I think you are right!
Yeah. I posted this to a troll way back when:
Thu Apr 15 08:40:26 2010 · 249 of 402
Interesting.
Before the primaries we made the case.
Trolls like you said it wasn’t the right time because he wasn’t actually his party’s candidate.
Before the main election we made the case.
Trolls like you said it wasn’t the right time because he wasn’t actually the president elect.
Before the electoral college vote we made the case.
Trolls like you said it wasn’t the right time because he hadn’t actually been elected until the electoral college said so.
Before the congress accepted the electoral college vote we made the case.
Trolls like you said it wasn’t the right time because he hadn’t actually been approved until the congress accepted the electoral college vote.
Before was sworn in we made the case.
Trolls like you said it wasn’t the right time because he hadn’t actually violated the constitution until he became president.
Now that he is president, trolls like you say it’s too late, you should have said something sooner!
Excellent!
" A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. .. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.
Double check...this is not accurate. Pakistan was on the warning (recommending against travel) list, not the "no travel" list.
That’s disgusting. And probably 100% correct.
In the Bush v Gore matter, the election had already occurred. In New Jersey, the election had not happened yet (although I can't recall if early voting had already started).
So I don't think is a foregone conclusion that it is a federal matter, and that the SCOTUS will intervene before an election occurs.
Furthermore, Article I Section 4 (Legislature elections) says:
"The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof;"
Article II Section I says (Executive elections):
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors...
So, there is plenty of evidence in the Constitution that federal elections were meant to be state-by-state matters. SCOTUS should tread lightly here.
-PJ
My logic about what? All I said is that there was no travel prohibition then. That's not an opinion that is a statement of fact.
Hahahahahahahahahahha...........breath.....hahahahahahahahah
I would hope that your scenario is more accurate than mine. But I hold no hope that Alabama is going to keep him off the primary ballot.
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.