If a judge denies standing and SCOTUS refuses to take the appeal, how the heck does even a “top candidate” “not put up with a challenge to their standing”?
Phil Berg filed his lawsuit against Obama’s eligibility - unofficially on Hillary’s behalf. There’s a reason that Hillary had to have a surrogate file the suit for her. People close to the Hillary campaign said that the Clintons always intended to bring up Obama’s eligibility problem at the DNC convention, if necessary. The plan within the last weeks before the convention was to have Bill Clinton’s good friend - head of the Arkansas Democratic Party, Bill Gwatney - challenge the first vote so a 2nd vote would be forced, thus enabling delegates to change their votes to Hillary. And then they were going to present the bombshell evidence that Obama was not eligible and Hillary was going to become the candidate.
Unfortunately for Hillary, Gwatney was killed within days of agreeing to bring on the 2nd round of voting - supposedly the victim of a random shooting, with the perp killed by the cops. And then about a week later, right after Stephanie Tubbs agreed to bring on the 2nd round of voting - she suffered what was called an “aneurysm” (one of the covert ways of getting rid of people) and died. The Hillary people have said that what finally stopped the Clintons was a threat that if they pursued the eligibility issue Chelsea would be killed.
Within a day or two of Tubbs’ death Hillary supporter Phil Berg filed his lawsuit, since Hillary couldn’t do it. The DNC Convention was within the next week or so, IIRC, and there was a LOT of thuggery going on there, to silence the Hillary people.
The judge in Berg’s lawsuit initially acted like he took it seriously. Obama failed to produce required documents and Berg filed to have it legally recognized that Obama had conceded the point that he is ineligible. Then the judge suddenly did a 180-degree turnaround and said that Berg lacked standing - it wasn’t his business, he had no right as a DNC donor to make sure that the DNC followed their own by-laws requiring an ELIGIBLE candidate. (Bear in mind that the state SOS’s claim that they HAVE to put on the ballot whoever the DNC nominates, eligibility be damned).
Now - given all that - what makes you so sure that the same thing could not happen to ANYBODY, regardless of how big-name they are?
2008 was a coup, complete with murders and threats of murder. EVERY judicial, Congressional, and media (including “conservative”) entity claimed that it is NOBODY’S BUSINESS to make sure that the Constitution, basic documentation requirements, due process, etc are followed. In October of 2008 the media companies were threatened by Soros, Rahm Emanuel, and David Axelrod with annihilation if they addressed Obama’s ineligibility and Muslim leanings.
Rush Limbaugh did not poo-pooh this question. He knows that it no longer works to say, “It could never happen here.” When people are threatened and killed it’s a totally different ballgame. And that is what this regime does. Period.
Unless you’ve been in the place of having your family’s lives threatened and seeing physical harm come to them, you have no idea what these “high profile” people are dealing with. You have no idea what it’s like to call the regime’s bluff and watch your loved ones suffer because of it. And as long as you keep buying into the idea that “it could never happen here” you’ll never face that scenario because you pose no threat to this regime. That scenario will fall to the people with the stubbornness and tenacity to face the ridicule and face the mafia by simply finding out and pointing out the truth - people who will never be able to feel good about doing so because they know what it cost their families.
That’s where we’re at, and the sooner we ALL recognize that and deal with it, the more of a fighting chance this nation has. Because ultimately it comes down to Obama bringing a gun to a knife fight, as he said in his own words. Until we recognize the criminal that he is, and how his Islamist puppet-masters took the entire system hostage, we will never have the determination and sense to bring a cannon to Obama’s gun fight. That’s the only way we can defeat the enemies of this nation who now have “Al Qaeda” “inside the building”...
There were four people with perfect standing under Article III of the Constitution to challenge Obama’s eligibility. They were the only other people who received Electoral votes and who could show DIRECT injury from an ineligible candidate being elected: John McCain, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.
None of them filed suit, however.
You're giving judges too much power, and not giving Senators/Governors/Presidential candidates enough. You keep citing minor players to make your point against top candidates.
You can't transfer the experiences of these minor characters to top-tier candidates during the campaign season.
Why can't you imagine a public outcry if a governor-candidate were to be rebuffed on the flimsiest of excuses? Why can't you imagine that someone running for the "leader of the free world" wouldn't push back? Why can't you imagine that the situation is different for 22nd amendment term limits? This is not "established by the state" language.
-PJ