Skip to comments.Obama eligibility case still very much alive in Alabama Supreme Court
Posted on 12/22/2013 9:23:06 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
The McInnish-Goode case, no # 1120465, against former Alabama Secretary of State Beth Chapman has definitely NOT been quietly dismissed according to a spokesperson for the Alabama Supreme Court. Its still pending, the court clerk told CiR on Thursday, December 19, at 3:06 p.m. EST. She said the case has not been dismissed, stating, I dont know where they get the information that case was tossed. CiR was checking web reports that on the very day Attorney Larry Klayman won his blockbuster NSA spy scandal case against the Obama administration, his other big case concerning the Obama Birth Certificate forgery and authentication was dismissed.
Attorney Klayman is plaintiffs counsel for Hugh McInnish and Virgil Goode, two Alabama Republican party officials who are challenging former Alabama Secretary of State Beth Chapmans decision to allow Obama and other candidates to appear on that states 2012 presidential election ballots without first fully vetting them...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Yeah—I have great confidence in Larry Klayman/not—but I will give him E for effort, as nobody else seems to be doing anything.
I want to see justice done. If Obama is inelligible, I’d like to see him go down in shame and everyone involved in prison.
And I’d like to see a process in place prior to elections, that America should never have to wonder if it’s President was eligible again.
This whole Birth Cert thing is just odd. There is something seriously wrong with all of it, and the truth simply will not suffice.
The truth must be so damning as it get him jailed for fraud, or executed for treason.
WHERE’S THE REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE. Not the AFFIRMATIVE ACTION COPY.
My guess is it shows his race as Arab or Asian.
Every one already knows his father wasn't an American citizen making him non NBC compliant.
Eight Democrats have proposed a bill that would take the death penalty off the table for a variety of serious federal crimes, including espionage, treason and assassinating federal politicians.
Comment after article: “Hmmm, looks like Obama’s supporters see the handwriting on the wall. They’re trying to protect him from the death penalty when he is tried and convicted of treasonous actions against the American people, breaking his oath of office to defend and uphold The Constitution.”
Says it ALL, huh?
It’s a little known fact that 0bama’s hot and heavy for passage of an immigration bill is so that HE GETS OFF THE HOOK for his own ineligibility problems.
“or executed for treason.”
Execution would make him immortal; a liberal god. Please no. Alive, he’s just an ongoing embarrassment, a tanned Jimmy Carter, another rich foundation running Clinton. But dead, he’d be infinitely more powerful, a symbol to rally around.
They’re trying to protect themselves.
Nothing that’s against hussein stays alive for long. This case may be peddling but it’s on a stationary bike.
For what it’s worth my take on this is he was born in Hawaii but claimed to be a foreigner for probably what he saw as the glamour and the financial scams in school and also the distinction as a author.
But there is something he doesn’t want us to see - probably who his father really is. But if that were the case why would the African Obama family accept him?
This person has told so many lies to try to construct a faux identity I wonder if even he knows who he is.
Birthers still doing the things Obama Supporter Anti-Birthers won’t
Too many folks attack Birthers...guess they really support Obama
The Founding Fathers never intended for the U.S. Constitution to be used to protect voters, representing the Will of the People, from themselves. The U.S. Constitution was written to protect the States from the Federal Government.
The Founding Fathers considered using the popular vote as a means of determining the President of the United States, but rejected that idea and chose an Electoral College with Electors from the various states voting for the President. The theory was that faithless electors could intervene and vote their conscious if they determined it was necessary.
Various states have rules and regulations which adversely impact a faithless elector, but they cannot prevent a faithless elector’s vote from being counted. Taken to the extreme, it’s plausible an ineligible President could be elected regardless of state ballot access laws.
Consequently, The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution. The Bill of Rights protects the individual from an ineligible President. The eligibility clause of Article II is used by the individual after an ineligible President has been elected. An individual has standing to sue the U.S. Federal Government if they allege a direct and particular harm due to the actions of an ineligible President.
The individual who objects to an ineligible President being sworn in cannot thwart the Will of the People. An individual cannot have a sitting President removed or obtain an injunction against the ineligible President on behalf of the nation. The individual can only object to the laws, regulations and appointments of an ineligible President after they have suffered a direct impact due to the actions of the ineligible President and can only obtain an injunction for themselves.
For example, an ineligible President signs a trade agreement with foreign nation and I lose my job because to the flood of new imports into the U.S. Most people are thrilled with trade agreement signed by the ineligible President because it increases supply and drives down prices. I have standing to sue because I have suffered a direct impact due to the action of an ineligible. I cannot have the President thrown out of office or the trade agreement nullified. I can object to an ineligible President and demand compensation for injury suffered due the action of an ineligible President.
The opening post calling this an “Obama eligibility case” and Klayman’s “other big case concerning the Obama Birth Certificate forgery” is misleading. The only question presented is whether under Alabama law the Secretary of State has a duty to verify a candidate’s eligibility. The question of Obama’s eligibility is not directly at issue. Neither is the birth certificate (apart from it being referenced in some of the amicus briefs, though the Court need not consider those).
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.