Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge Carter, 3 sheets to the wind..
American Grand Jury ^ | December 29th, 2009 | Bob Campbell

Posted on 01/01/2010 6:27:46 AM PST by USALiberty

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-199 last
To: Canadian Outrage

Grow up.


151 posted on 01/02/2010 7:32:04 PM PST by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Rapscallion
Even the President, once he is sworn in, is entitled to due process

"Swearing in" does not make one President. You have to be qualified, win the majority of the electoral vote, take the oath, and wait until noon on January 20th following the elections. If you don't satisfy all of the above, you aren't President.

The Constitution doesn't even require a "swearing in" ceremony, let alone say who shall conduct it. I could take the oath right now, by writing it out on the back of old pin-up calender, and signing it. Would that make me President? I don't think so.

Yes, the occupant of the oval office is entitled to due process, but only a President, or other legitimate office holder, can be impeached.

152 posted on 01/02/2010 9:58:44 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: The Man
Could a liberal Clinton appointee to the District Court in California have decided that President Bush was not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States in 2002 and unilaterally order him removed from office?

Not arbitrarily, if he/she expected to be upheld by higher courts. But the eligibilty criteria are pretty black and white, and very few in number. If Bush did not satisfy one of those, then yes, a judge could and should, have ruled him ineligible. But of course Bush does meet the criteria. He was born in the US of US citizen parents. He was 35 or older and had lived in the US for 14 years. What basis would there have been for ruling him ineligible?

It was the Congress’ job and the State Board of Elections jobs to examine Obama’s constitutional qualifications.

And where is that written in the Constitution? The Constitution lays out the eligibility requirements. It does not say who is to enforce them. The answer is supposed to be "everyone". But as usually when something is everyone's job, no one did it.

That doesn't make an inligible person suddenly eligible.

153 posted on 01/02/2010 10:17:40 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jackv
A: There are only three possibilities. 1) He traveled with a U.S. . Passport, 2) He traveled with a British passport, or 3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.

He could also have traveled on a Kenyan passport, since Kenyan British Subjects became Kenyan citizens upon independence of Kenya from the UK.

154 posted on 01/02/2010 10:22:41 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: danamco
If you immigrate to a foreign country, whether minor or not, you have to follow that country’s supreme laws, NOT the laws of the U.S. Period!!!

No you must follow both. The other country may consider you their citizen, but that does not affect what the US considers you to be. Each country is sovereign. Yes you must obey the foreign laws, even if you are just visiting, but in general that means nothing under US laws.

Put another way, it doesn't matter what citizneship status Kenya, Indonesia, or the UK considered BHO to have at birth. Since his father was not a US citizen, he can at best be a native or birth citizen, not a natural born citizen, regardless of where he was born. Under US law, other countries laws be damned, if he not born in the US, then due to his mother's lack of US residence for 5 years after her 14th birthday at the time he was born, he wasn't born a US citizen at all. If his parents were not legally married, then he probably was, again under US law.

155 posted on 01/02/2010 10:39:04 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Candor7
Dubyah would be president again until a new election was held to replace our “designer” so called president.

Don't think so. The Constitution clearly states that the outgoing President's term ends at noon on January 20th. Unfortunately, my read of the Constitution, including the relevant amendments, indicates that Joe Biden would *act* as President, until a President shall have qualified. But due to the rules on who can qualify, I think it would be John McCain, since he is the only one to get any electoral votes for President, other than Obama.

That might not have been the "intended" result of the appropriate amendments, but it is what I believe the effect of them would be, if enforced as written.

156 posted on 01/02/2010 10:46:03 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Or maybe he's heard all the lame Birther arguments and decided that Obama does qualify under Article II? Ever think of that?

There is nothing about his actual qualifications in Judge Carter's ruling. It never got that far.

157 posted on 01/02/2010 10:49:20 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

Have you ever lived in a foreign country???


158 posted on 01/03/2010 5:49:21 AM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
He could also have traveled on a Kenyan passport, since Kenyan British Subjects became Kenyan citizens upon independence of Kenya from the UK.

When and how would he have gotten one?

159 posted on 01/03/2010 6:11:38 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
The Constitution doesn't even require a "swearing in" ceremony

Wrong Of course it does. See Article II Section 1. The last paragraph even specifies the words of the oath. I sense that you may not be credible talking about the US Constitution if you do not know that...

160 posted on 01/03/2010 7:05:13 AM PST by Rapscallion (They really did pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. How now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Yes, the occupant of the oval office is entitled to due process, but only a President, or other legitimate office holder, can be impeached.

So. actually you admit what I wrote is correct.

And you are wrong about only a President being vulnerable to impeachment. Many federal judges have been impeached by the US Congress. The only penalty if convicted in an impeachment is removal from office. Once removed though, other charges may be made by prosecutors.

161 posted on 01/03/2010 7:11:14 AM PST by Rapscallion (They really did pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. How now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
"Swearing in" does not make one President. You have to be qualified, win the majority of the electoral vote, take the oath, and wait until noon on January 20th following the elections. If you don't satisfy all of the above, you aren't President.

See de facto officer doctrine.

162 posted on 01/03/2010 8:12:42 AM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
But due to the rules on who can qualify, I think it would be John McCain, since he is the only one to get any electoral votes for President, other than Obama.

You also wrote:

"Swearing in" does not make one President. You have to be qualified, win the majority of the electoral vote, take the oath, and wait until noon on January 20th following the elections. If you don't satisfy all of the above, you aren't President.

So then, according to you, McCain would be president even though he doesn't meet the "majority of the electoral vote" requirement which, also according to you, must be met to be president.

163 posted on 01/03/2010 8:19:04 AM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
So, if someone commits fraud and it isn't proven, because the case was never tried, then it didn't happen?

It is not the function of the courts to investigate.

164 posted on 01/03/2010 8:31:18 AM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom
So then, according to you, McCain would be president even though he doesn't meet the "majority of the electoral vote" requirement which, also according to you, must be met to be president.

See XIIth and XXth amendments. He would have the majority of the electoral votes cast for eligible candidates. The rest would have been wasted/invalid.

The "majority of the electoral votes" statement was somewhat of an oversimplification and a bit of a misstatement. The Constitution provides for the case where no one gets a majority.

From Amendments XII.

The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

And from Amendment XX:

. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified

165 posted on 01/03/2010 9:34:45 AM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: danamco
Have you ever lived in a foreign country???

No, but that doesn't mean that I can't read the law, State Department manuals, etc.

To clarify, one must obey the laws while in a foreign country. But citizenship status under US law is not, necessarily, affected by those foreign laws. Actions taken by the individual under those foreign laws might.

But in Obummer's case, US law specifically provides that minors cannot renounce their citizenship, nor can their parents do it for them. Actually some minors can, but it must be done at a US embassy or consulate, and the consular officer must be convinced that the minor is acting of their own free will. They must be at least 16 in any event, so Obummer could not have renounced his US citizenship, for purposed of US law, during the period he lived in Indonesia. As an adult he could have, and the methods of doing so are less restrictive. Certain acts can do it. Traveling on a foreign passport probably would not do it, unless one traveled to the US on it. Accepting a scholarship as a foreign student? Maybe, maybe not.

166 posted on 01/03/2010 9:50:34 AM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
The Constitution clearly states that the outgoing President's term ends at noon on January 20th.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I disagree. Because of fraud, the current presidential term never began.We have no president,and have not had one since the so called "inauguration."

And the pretender's actions have verified this fact.

We would be back to Bush until a new election could be held ASAP.

All of the Obama laws and executove orders would be deemed null and void ab initio.

167 posted on 01/03/2010 9:54:05 AM PST by Candor7 ((The effective weapons Against Fascism are ridicule, derision , truth (.Member NRA))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
When and how would he have gotten one?

Kenyan embassy? I said he could have, not that he did. By that I meant that at one time, he was eligible for one. He or the campaign admitted that he was a Kenyan citizen, at least until age 21, IIRC.

168 posted on 01/03/2010 10:06:19 AM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom
It is not the function of the courts to investigate.

But it is their function to hear evidence, and to order additional evidence produced, if the early evidence meets the low standard of probable cause to believe...

They haven't heard any evidence, nor have they granted access to any other evidence that would be relevant to the case. What you are saying is that absolute proof is required. These have been civil cases where the actual standard should be preponderance of the evidence. But that's for final judgment, the standard for discovery is much lower.

169 posted on 01/03/2010 10:12:08 AM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Candor7
I disagree. Because of fraud, the current presidential term never began.We have no president,and have not had one since the so called "inauguration."

That may very well be, but it does not then follow that Bush is still President.

What follows is that we have a mell of a hess.

170 posted on 01/03/2010 10:14:37 AM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
I said he could have, not that he did.

But could he? He didn't live in Kenya and had never lived in Kenya, and had had no connection with the country for what, 15 years or more before he had traveled to Pakistan? Why would Kenya give him a passport? Why would he want one when a U.S. passport would have been easier to get?

171 posted on 01/03/2010 10:30:33 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
What follows is that we have a mell of a hess.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

ROTFLMAO!

And if we don't get to cleaning it up, the mess will become bloody as our soldiers die abroad and civilians at home die at jihadist hands, both pursuant to this things radical politically correct ideology which is just so much foolish daydreaming.

IMHO , people have no idea about the cost America is about to pay in blood and lives as never before , both at home and abroad.As a result, Obama will attempt to lead us into a period of islolationism and totalitarian control as a result. Its already started, and now Obama is attacking the Rasmussen Pollsters because they are telling the truth?

If we are not rid of these idiots soon, blood will flow in buckets and even then the measure of the lefts resolve will result in them saying sub rosa that it is good for conservative patriot soldiers to die so they won't have to deal with them at home.We have some very sick people in charge of our government and in the higher echelons of our military command.We need to rid ourselves of them.

The Obama Junta is actually full of sociopaths.Few people realize this yet.

We will have a mell of a hess, or the alternative is unthinkable. So far we are headed for the worst case scenario.

172 posted on 01/03/2010 10:52:14 AM PST by Candor7 ((The effective weapons Against Fascism are ridicule, derision , truth (.Member NRA))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom
It is not the function of the courts to investigate.

So, what's your point?
173 posted on 01/03/2010 11:13:54 AM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for Obama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom

“It is not the function of the courts to investigate.”

Very well and succinctly put.


174 posted on 01/03/2010 3:15:34 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
Her point is what has been said repeatedly. The courts aren't some King Solomon or other Oracle there to solve whatever is troubling you. You can't just go to them and say “I have a lot of suspicions about some stuff without any actual evidence, and I want you to determine if there is any evidence.” Basically, you have to define an actionable issue with (1) sufficient documentation to demonstrate that cause and purported harm cross the threshold of certain minimum standards, and (2) a definition that fits into the allowable categories the legal process has. To date, no one has done this, which is why all these cases have been dismissed.
175 posted on 01/03/2010 3:22:51 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative
To date, no one has done this, which is why all these cases have been dismissed.

WRONG!
176 posted on 01/03/2010 3:30:20 PM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for Obama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Doug Loss
But the law does not say what you seem to be implying it says.

The section you quote refers to obtaining actual citizenship as an adult. That is to say, the intentional and successful completion of obtaining a different citizenship, not showing some kind of intent to do so.

On an unrelated note, it apparently isn't unusual for US citizens who do hold dual citizenship to travel on different passports. US law seems to only require they use their US passport when entering or leaving the US.

Article on the subject: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/business/20dual.html

177 posted on 01/03/2010 4:46:52 PM PST by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
WRONG!

Then why do you think they've all been dismissed?

178 posted on 01/03/2010 5:21:38 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
And that would be wrong how?

Numerous cases have been dismissed. The documented opinions as to why they have been dismissed are conventional and to be expected by anyone competent in legal processes. The suits to date have been simply barking up the wrong tree, and pretty obviously so.

I know everyone is all excited about quo warranto now, but don't be stunned if that goes nowhere, too.

179 posted on 01/03/2010 5:28:28 PM PST by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

LOL Just turned 65 in September. Frankly, I am grown up mister. I’m not the one defending finding out WHO Obama is and WHY the hell he is where he is. Make not mistake, voter fraud, put this creep over the top. He is not so popular with “normal” America that he could have won without the ACORN criminal enterprise behind him. Go call names to someone else. I care and I really care, what happens to my American relatives and many friends. AND sir/madam, I do have some experience in life. I have lived for 65 years now, raised children and have wonderful grandchildren who I am extremely concered about. I don’t WANT to see everything go to hell now which is what I see happening. YOU on on the other hand seem to want to let “nature” (man’s evil nature”) take it’s course. There we part ways. There is a legitimate court case here. I’m married to Lawyer, I have worked with him and other Lawyers FOR 23 years (so in the law) I know that certain things cannot be overlooked. For instance, your Constitution. In Canada, it would be the laws of the land plus our Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms. To say that “We the People or more importantly, the Military, doesn’t have standing?” Sorry, not buying it. So please save the “grow up” stuff, doesn’t apply. IF we ever met in person we would likely be friends but as I told you before, I don’t care for the way you come off. You obviously don’t care for my opinion either but that’s the way it is. CO


180 posted on 01/03/2010 9:31:55 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (Conservatism is to a country what medicine is to a wound - HEALING!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth

I sure agree, May God MIGHTLY BLESS these Lawyers that are attempting to get at the truth against SUCH astonishing odds. CO


181 posted on 01/03/2010 10:09:31 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (Conservatism is to a country what medicine is to a wound - HEALING!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator

Sorry Administrator. Wasn’t “trying” to be offensive. I LIKE danamaco. Have no problem with that poster at all unless you are meaning that we both name called someone else. I did get a freepmail from poster who was offend by my post to him/him. I answered them privately, will try to “cool” it. Passion is a hard thing to control. But have been around long enough to know the rules. Again, sorry. LOL. CO


182 posted on 01/03/2010 10:15:31 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (Conservatism is to a country what medicine is to a wound - HEALING!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage

“Grow up” had nothing to do with your age or ability to raise children and be proud of your grandchildren. It does, however, apply to your level of maturity in conversation. Why bother replying to my post #100 in the first place? Did you have a point? No.

Regardless of your relationships with attorneys, you don’t seem to have a grasp on the legal issue of standing. Your comments are based in emotional rhetoric not legal opinion. You may think and feel that “We The People” and “military personnel” SHOULD have standing, but that doesn’t make it so. Our rules of civil procedure dictate how standing is applied. Those rules are not based on emotion. You would seem to prefer that we abandon our rules just to move forward on the eligibility lawsuits. Sorry, the American legal system doesn’t work that way. Ask your attorney friends.

Additionally, your comments about voter fraud and ACORN prove to me just how caught up you are in group think. If you had taken 10 minutes to research my position on that subject, which is based on personal experience during the 2008 primary caucuses, you would feel no need to make such points with me. You’d realize that I know ALL about the ACORN voter fraud because I experienced it, up close and personal, during Operation Chaos. I was one of 200 people to file a legal affidavit with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign regarding what I witnessed. After speaking with me about what I witnessed, her legal team asked me to testify to it and prepared the affidavit. So don’t lecture me about ACORN voter fraud because you know NOTHING about the details.

No, I don’t care for your opinion because it’s based on emotions and group think.


183 posted on 01/04/2010 7:24:51 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
He would have the majority of the electoral votes cast for eligible candidates. The rest would have been wasted/invalid.

Biden is qualified and received a majority of electoral votes, more than McCain or Palin.

What is the role of a vice president? Isn't it to assume the office of the president if the president is removed from office or dies? Doesn't that mean that Biden has already been elected in the electoral college, in his own right, as Obama's replacement if that should become necessary?

The idea that the first runner-up in a presidential election could become president if the office became vacant, was scrapped pretty early in our history.

184 posted on 01/04/2010 8:41:20 AM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Candor7
I disagree. Because of fraud, the current presidential term never began.We have no president,and have not had one since the so called "inauguration."

See de facto officer doctrine.

185 posted on 01/04/2010 8:44:17 AM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
But it is their function to hear evidence, and to order additional evidence produced, if the early evidence meets the low standard of probable cause to believe...

First, the issue of standing must be determined. You can't just walk into court and ask for your neighbors financial records, for instance, just because you think he's up to something illegal.

186 posted on 01/04/2010 8:57:00 AM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom
First, the issue of standing must be determined. You can't just walk into court and ask for your neighbors financial records, for instance, just because you think he's up to something illegal.

Standing in civil court means you have (allegedly) suffered some injury. If we have an ineligible President, we've all suffered, so we should all have standing.

Next you must have sufficient evidence to so that there is probable cause to believe that you really did suffer the injury and the plaintiff caused it. Not proof, just some indication/probable cause to believe

Then you can get the court to grant access to more and better evidence.

But these cases have never got beyond the standing issue and into the evidence. The standing issue has been used to block access to the hearing and presentation of evidence. Evidence has been submitted, but in effect the courts never looked at it.

In your example, you might have some indications, more than mere "thinking", such as sudden change in lifestyle with no visible change in legitimate income. That sort of "evidence" is used all the time to obtain more detailed records. If you were alleging the money was hacked out of your (and others) accounts, then that increase in lifestyle, along with a simultaneous "leaking" of money from your and others' accounts would be sufficient to obtain the records of his account activity. Now it might be that your neighbor just inherited a pile from a maiden Aunt you didn't know about. Fine, he was wasn't convicted, and that evidence served to exonerate him. OTOH, there could be mysterious "deposits" into his accounts, which matched the "withdrawals" from the others, and then he'd be in trouble, wouldn't he?

187 posted on 01/04/2010 3:39:57 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom
Biden is qualified and received a majority of electoral votes, more than McCain or Palin. What is the role of a vice president? Isn't it to assume the office of the president if the president is removed from office or dies? Doesn't that mean that Biden has already been elected in the electoral college, in his own right, as Obama's replacement if that should become necessary?

The thing is, if Obama is not eligible, then he is not President, and thus cannot be "removed" by the usual House Impeachement/Senate trial process Therefore if he were declared to be ineligible, the process laid out by the 12th and 20th amendments would have to be followed.The 20th amendment clearly says that if a President shall not have qaulified, the VP shall ACT as President, until a President shall have qualified. The 12th amendment gives the process for that.

The idea that the first runner-up in a presidential election could become president if the office became vacant, was scrapped pretty early in our history.

What was discarded early on, by the 12th amendment in fact, was that the runner up would become VP. Biden was elected VP, not President. The VP becomes President if the President dies or is impeached and removed. That would not be the case for an ineligible usurper.

188 posted on 01/04/2010 3:52:00 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Why would Kenya give him a passport?

Because hew was a citizen and thus entitled to one.

Why would he want one when a U.S. passport would have been easier to get? Might be advantageous in some parts of the world, to have an "Other than Western" passport. The additionally difficulty would not be all that much, if it existed at all.

189 posted on 01/04/2010 3:54:37 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Because hew was a citizen and thus entitled to one.

Even though he never lived there and had no connection with the country since the age of 3?

Might be advantageous in some parts of the world, to have an "Other than Western" passport. The additionally difficulty would not be all that much, if it existed at all.

And the fact that there is absolutely no evidence of any kind that Obama had a Kenyan passport doesn't deter you in the least, does it?

190 posted on 01/04/2010 4:57:07 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

I think you’re confusing civil and criminal proceedings.


191 posted on 01/04/2010 5:59:14 PM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
The thing is, if Obama is not eligible, then he is not President, and thus cannot be "removed" by the usual House Impeachement/Senate trial process...

You are putting the cart before the horse. Congress is the only body that has the Constitutional authority to indict (impeach), investigate, and bring the president to trial once he has been elected and sworn in. Until the president resigns or in found guilty in the Senate, he IS the president. Again, see de facto officer doctrine.

Biden was elected VP, not President. The VP becomes President if the President dies or is impeached and removed. That would not be the case for an ineligible usurper.

Either you can back that up with more than just your intuition, or you're making it up.

192 posted on 01/04/2010 6:38:03 PM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: lucysmom
Congress is the only body that has the Constitutional authority to indict (impeach), investigate, and bring the president to trial once he has been elected and sworn in.

Nope, you are. Trying to impeach someone who isn't a legitimate office holder.

I'll say it again, merely being sworn in does not a President make. It's takes eligibility(NBC, 35+ y/o, 14 years a US resident) , winning the electoral college (with a majority or being selected by the House from the top 3 vote getters if no one gets a majority), swearing the oath of office, and for the clock to reach noon on January 4th. If any of those are not satisfied, then the dude isn't President.

193 posted on 01/04/2010 8:14:11 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Even though he never lived there and had no connection with the country since the age of 3?

That's my understanding. That's the way it would be for a US citizen. For example if a child had been born of two US citizen parents in a foreign land, or any number of other circumstances where the child had US Citizenship at birth, but had not lived here, since age 3, or ever.

And the fact that there is absolutely no evidence of any kind that Obama had a Kenyan passport doesn't deter you in the least, does it?

If you'll check, I never said he had one, I said he could have had one. He was eligible for one, at least until he turned 21. His own campaign said he was a Kenyan citizen but lost it at age 21. This alleged travel was prior to his 21st birthday, IIRC.

194 posted on 01/04/2010 8:20:36 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: All

JB Williams
Canada Free Press

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12999

(snip)
Every member of the Supreme Court, every member of congress, every member of the Joint Chiefs, most members of the DOD, CIA, FBI, Secret Service and state run media, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, MSNBC, Fox and print news, knows that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II – Section I constitutional requirements for the office he holds. By his own biography, there is NO way he can pass the test. The hard evidence is so far beyond overwhelming, it is ridiculous.

(snip)
But not ONE member of America’s most powerful people will dare confront Obama and his anti-American cabal on the subject. The Constitution does NOT stand.

(snip)
Half of the people you expect to stop this insanity are quiet co-conspirators in the silent coup. The other half is paralyzed by fear, motivated only by political self-preservation.

(Snip)
Americans keep asking what they can do because they see that none of their leaders are doing anything to stop the demise of their beloved country. It’s the right question, because those leaders are NOT going to stop this thing.

(Snip)
WHO WILL SAVE FREEDOM?
A brave few… This is how it was in the beginning, how it has always been and how it will be.

(Snip)
DR. ORLY TAITZ, Phil Berg and Gary Kreep, ALL OF WHOM HAVE MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP.

(Snip)
A PRECIOUS FEW, BUT THEY EXIST… and the walls are indeed closing in on Obama and his evil cabal. IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FAIL TO GET BEHIND THESE BRAVE FEW WHO ARE SEEKING PEACEFUL REDRESS, ALL THE PEACEFUL OPTIONS WILL EVAPORATE AS IF THEY NEVER EXISTED. WE WILL RETURN TO A PRE-1776 AMERICA OVERNIGHT..

Do YOU fear Obama?
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12999

___________________________________

A precious few, indeed. Lets get behind those few brave patriots who are out there in the trenches every day working to prove Obama’s inelgibility:

Dr. Orly has put her life’s blood into this fight. SHE HAS MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP FROM COWARDLY REPUBLICANS AND THE SCOTUS.

Dr. Orly is the ONLY one out there in the trenches EVERY day hitting Obama on multiple fronts and trying to bring him down. It is reported that she is more than $8,000 in debt from using her own funds for expenses in her flights across the U.S for interviews, speeches, serving papers and meeting with officials.

She has even gone to Isreal and Russia to spread the message about Obama’s inelgibility!

She states the case expertly, including the bc and natural born citizen aspect, when not abused by the U.S. state-controlled media. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132880

Sure, Dr. Orly makes mistakes. We all do. But Dr. Orly is no dummy. How many of us could go to a foreign country, learn 5 languages, establish a successful dental practice, a successful real estate business AND pass the California state bar- one of the hardest in the U.S. to pass?
She may be a ‘mail order’ attorney and not a Harvard lawyer, but she IS an attorney with all the rights and privilages of a Harvard lawyer nevertheless!
The point is; she has the passion, the zeal, the courage of her convictions and the love of America and its freedoms (unlike many of our ‘great’ attorneys and ‘patriots’ who criticize her) that will not let her give up!
She is exhausted. She is nervous. She is frustrated. It is reported that she gets by on 4-5 hours of sleep per night, and her family is very worried about her health- as well as her safety.
She makes mistakes. But she will NOT give up. She will keep on until she gets it right.

So let’s get behind this great little Russian refugee and great American patriot.
Stop tearing her apart. The Obots on FR don’t need our help.
The obots are scared to death of this little lady and her determination. That’s why they come out in droves all over the net on forums, chat rooms and even the national news to attack and ridicule.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcChG5pRTOE&feature=player_embedded


195 posted on 01/05/2010 6:27:39 AM PST by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
I'll say it again, merely being sworn in does not a President make. It's takes eligibility(NBC, 35+ y/o, 14 years a US resident) , winning the electoral college (with a majority or being selected by the House from the top 3 vote getters if no one gets a majority), swearing the oath of office, and for the clock to reach noon on January 4th. If any of those are not satisfied, then the dude isn't President.

Again, you put the cart before the horse. Obama IS the legitimate president until he is proven illegitimate. The Constitution provides a method for charging, investigating and removing an illegitimate president and those means must be followed if our Constitution is to be upheld.

The de facto officer doctrine confers validity upon acts performed by a person acting under the color of official title even though it is later discovered that the legality of that person's appointment or election to office is deficient. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 440 (1886).

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-431.ZO.html

196 posted on 01/05/2010 8:31:34 AM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: All

JB Williams
Canada Free Press

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12999

(snip)
Every member of the Supreme Court, every member of congress, every member of the Joint Chiefs, most members of the DOD, CIA, FBI, Secret Service and state run media, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, MSNBC, Fox and print news, knows that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II – Section I constitutional requirements for the office he holds. By his own biography, there is NO way he can pass the test. The hard evidence is so far beyond overwhelming, it is ridiculous.

(snip)
But not ONE member of America’s most powerful people will dare confront Obama and his anti-American cabal on the subject. The Constitution does NOT stand.

(snip)
Half of the people you expect to stop this insanity are quiet co-conspirators in the silent coup. The other half is paralyzed by fear, motivated only by political self-preservation.

(Snip)
Americans keep asking what they can do because they see that none of their leaders are doing anything to stop the demise of their beloved country. It’s the right question, because those leaders are NOT going to stop this thing.

(Snip)
WHO WILL SAVE FREEDOM?
A brave few… This is how it was in the beginning, how it has always been and how it will be.

(Snip)
DR. ORLY TAITZ, Phil Berg and Gary Kreep, ALL OF WHOM HAVE MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP.

(Snip)
A PRECIOUS FEW, BUT THEY EXIST… and the walls are indeed closing in on Obama and his evil cabal. IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FAIL TO GET BEHIND THESE BRAVE FEW WHO ARE SEEKING PEACEFUL REDRESS, ALL THE PEACEFUL OPTIONS WILL EVAPORATE AS IF THEY NEVER EXISTED. WE WILL RETURN TO A PRE-1776 AMERICA OVERNIGHT..

Do YOU fear Obama?
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12999

___________________________________

A precious few, indeed. Lets get behind those few brave patriots who are out there in the trenches every day working to prove Obama’s inelgibility:

Dr. Orly has put her life’s blood into this fight. SHE HAS MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP FROM COWARDLY REPUBLICANS AND THE SCOTUS.

Dr. Orly is the ONLY one out there in the trenches EVERY day hitting Obama on multiple fronts and trying to bring him down. It is reported that she is more than $8,000 in debt from using her own funds for expenses in her flights across the U.S for interviews, speeches, serving papers and meeting with officials.

She has even gone to Isreal and Russia to spread the message about Obama’s inelgibility!

She states the case expertly, including the bc and natural born citizen aspect, when not abused by the U.S. state-controlled media. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132880

Sure, Dr. Orly makes mistakes. We all do. But Dr. Orly is no dummy. How many of us could go to a foreign country, learn 5 languages, establish a successful dental practice, a successful real estate business AND pass the California state bar- one of the hardest in the U.S. to pass?
She may be a ‘mail order’ attorney and not a Harvard lawyer, but she IS an attorney with all the rights and privilages of a Harvard lawyer nevertheless!
The point is; she has the passion, the zeal, the courage of her convictions and the love of America and its freedoms (unlike many of our ‘great’ attorneys and ‘patriots’ who criticize her) that will not let her give up!
She is exhausted. She is nervous. She is frustrated. It is reported that she gets by on 4-5 hours of sleep per night, and her family is very worried about her health- as well as her safety.
She makes mistakes. But she will NOT give up. She will keep on until she gets it right.

So let’s get behind this great little Russian refugee and great American patriot.
Stop tearing her apart. The Obots on FR don’t need our help.
The obots are scared to death of this little lady and her determination. That’s why they come out in droves all over the net on forums, chat rooms and even the national news to attack and ridicule.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcChG5pRTOE&feature=player_embedded


197 posted on 01/09/2010 6:24:32 AM PST by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; SvenMagnussen

Not true NS, stop spewing your BS. It says ANY of the below and #5 says nothing about having to be 18. Sven knows what the hell he is talking about, you can count on that. He will chew you up and spit you out bud.

(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State;


198 posted on 02/12/2010 1:44:13 AM PST by mojitojoe (“Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism.” - Vladimir Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe
Not true NS, stop spewing your BS. It says ANY of the below and #5 says nothing about having to be 18. Sven knows what the hell he is talking about, you can count on that. He will chew you up and spit you out bud.

What the hell are you babbling about?

199 posted on 02/12/2010 4:05:05 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-199 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson