Rahm took care of that in December.
***Probably. The good news in such a scenario is that would just mean that zer0bama is putting out obstacles as a delay tactic. The longer this scandal sits in loony land, the better are zer0bama’s chances of his presidency surviving it.
Here’s one of my posts from earlier this evening.
Barack Obama: Will the Controversy Over the Birthplace of the U.S. President End?
Saturday, August 01, 2009 10:39:53 PM · 12 of 43
Kevmo to 2ndDivisionVet
Here’s my theory of what zer0bama’s strategy is going to be:
He will say tha t he is qualified to hold office because the SCOTUS swore him into office and it was their duty to investigate if there were any questions towards the 3 or 4 simple elements of eligibility. They had a perfectly valid lawsuit, Berg v Obama, right in front of them and they could have easily hung their hats on that if they so chose. But they didn’t, and that makes him de facto qualified.
It’s a great legal strategy and it will fly well with the press. But it’s the end of the story for this pursuit, unfortunately for us birthers.
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies
Does the hand on the bible or saying ‘so help me God’
matter at all or not? I’m thinking of the 2nd swearing
in.
It’s a great legal strategy and it will fly well with the press. But it’s the end of the story for this pursuit, unfortunately for us birthers.
____________
I disagree. If he is found to have been a liar, even if they refuse to remove hims people will demand it. He will be illegitimate and even if he poaches there, he is done.
Obama: Dammit Rahm, you left a loose end!
This is just the tip of the Iceburg. There is plenty of other things in Obamas past.
Yeah, I robbed that bank, but you guys didn't figure it out, so there's nothing you can do about it now. I win - you lose.
Er... don't think so. That'll never fly. A million pissed off Americans would storm the White House to drag the fraud out by his heels if he tried such a thing.
The fact that the SC didn't hear Berg vs Obama does NOT make him "de facto qualified". That's ludicrous.
also the end of his mandate as well as any shot at a second term should you be correct. he’d have no ability to push through any legislation but best of all will be several states pushing through laws requiring proof of NBC status to be on the ballot.
They had a perfectly valid lawsuit, Berg v Obama, right in front of them and they could have easily hung their hats on that if they so chose. But they didn’t, and that makes him de facto qualified..."
From Wikipedia (which does occasionally have it's usefulness):
De facto is a Latin expression that means "from [the] fact". In law, it is meant to mean "in practice but not necessarily ordained by law" or "in practice or actuality, but without being officially established".
Makes the muffed oath and private repitition (which we must take on His Most Truthful and Transparent Word) come a bit more into focus, doesn't it?
JG
So fine, let’s impeach and convict him for fraud by signing forms in states saying he was “constitutionally eligible”.
He can resign without jail or he can be removed with jail time.
“He will say tha t he is qualified to hold office because the SCOTUS swore him into office and it was their duty to investigate if there were any questions towards the 3 or 4 simple elements of eligibility. They had a perfectly valid lawsuit, Berg v Obama, right in front of them and they could have easily hung their hats on that if they so chose. But they didn’t, and that makes him de facto qualified.
It’s a great legal strategy and it will fly well with the press. But it’s the end of the story for this pursuit, unfortunately for us birthers.”
Maybe end of story for now — but it can destroy his re-electon chances in 2012.
when someone swear to uphold the Constitution and is really trampling the Constitution, that is not a legal defense. Just like if someone swears to tell the truth under Oath and then perjures himself, he/she is guilty of perjury.