Posted on 10/15/2016 1:53:04 PM PDT by Windflier
“I don’t know about Clinton, but bathroom Barry certainly wasn’t eligible, and that made no difference whatsoever.”
This isn’t about constitutional eligibility.
As a government officer, Hillary Clinton violated the provisions of part (a) of the statute posted upthread.
That she did so, is not in question.
Therefore, she is subject to the provisions in part (b) of the statute, which states that she can never hold federal office again.
That is LEGAL ineligibility.
True but until there is due process & a conviction. Its just “interesting news”.
“The difference between obama and hitlery is we didn’t know obama was so corrupt when he ran for POTUS. With hitlery we know it as fact.
It’s unthinkable she is even on the ticket.”
I think you’ve just pointed out the elephant in the room. Great summation.
Great! Wait up, though . . . aren’t Kenyan citizens ALSO ineligible to be President?
Welcome to the Banana Republic that used to be the USA.
Welcome to the Banana Republic that used to be the USA.
“True but until there is due process & a conviction. Its just “interesting news”.”
No, it’s a truly effective weapon, if properly deployed by the Trump campaign.
Throwing this statute in the Clinton camp’s faces would put them on defense, and prompt the American people to join the debate.
So what, if the other side makes the same argument you’re making? Who cares? The point is to make them defend the idea that laws don’t apply to her, which is how that argument comes off — especially since the Director of the FBI has already stated that she committed the acts which are proscribed by the statute at issue.
You must imagine how a successful prosecution in the court of public opinion will look to the voters. That is ALL that matters at this point.
The statute is clear. But we are dealing with Clintons. Who will hold them accountable and declare her ineligible for office? The fifty states’ SOS? No way. Enjoy your head-banging.
” . . . aren’t Kenyan citizens ALSO ineligible to be President?”
This isn’t about constitutional eligibility.
It’s about forcing the Clinton camp to explain to the American people why the clear cut statute law does not apply to Hillary.
Put them on defense, and let us fight this in the court of public opinion. Put her on trial in the people’s court, and she’ll lose.
That’s fighting it in the “court of public opinion” and I agree with Trump doing that! I want actual due process in a court and justice done. The only way that happens is if Trump wins, and say a Giuliani is AG. I wasn’t dismissing it as unimportant when I said “interesting news” , however he loses and that’s what it will be. Interesting and quickly forgotten news!
“The statute is clear. But we are dealing with Clintons. Who will hold them accountable and declare her ineligible for office? The fifty states’ SOS?”
Of course not.
This is something that has to be fought in the court of public opinion. The only way that’s going to happen, is if Trump begins citing this statute at every opportunity. He has to raise such a stink, that the public begins debating it, just like we’re doing now.
Trump already said in the last debate, that she shouldn’t be running, but should be in jail. This statute from the U.S. Code backs his contention up 100%.
All he needs to do, is bring it up every chance he gets, and Clinton will be forced to go on defense. No matter what lawyerspeak she uses to wriggle free, she’s going to look guilty in the eyes of the public.
Trump’s job, from now until election day, is to tell the people that she’s a felon, and an illegitimate candidate for the office.
Hillary is an old socialist, a Stalinist, trapped in a philosophy that has been proven over and over again not to work, solely because it has to govern by force and “take things” (money) from you for the “common good.”
I’d be willing to bet that 95% of the American people are completely unaware of the referenced statute.
If Trump brings it up in a big way, and continues to cite the law, that percentage will go way up, very fast.
I can guarantee you that millions of voters will be rocked back on their heels, just by being made aware that such a law exists. Even further, many of them will conclude, after having read provisions (a) and (b), that Hillary should be barred from becoming president.
I think we agree, just expressed differently!
Don’t mean to be argumentative, but 0bama’s birth status was also put up for the court of public opinion . . . and until Hillary is convicted she can not fall unto this legal test.
“This seems akin to Zero’s birth issue. There is no one who will take the authority to enforce. Congress won’t do it, comey won’t do it. It’s up to the electorate.”
Precisely.
It’s the people who must adjudicate this matter, and what a perfect opportunity to do so.
Trump should begin every rally by reading the text of the statute out loud to the assembled. He should then tell them all to copy and paste it from his website and flood social media with it.
Force Hillary and her minions to defend her illegal run for office. Make them explain to to the American people that part (b) of the statute doesn’t apply to her, even though James Comey said that she violated every word of part (a).
Trump already said in the last debate that she should be in jail. Well, here’s the exact letter of the law that he can use to fight this in the court of public opinion.
“Don’t mean to be argumentative, but 0bama’s birth status was also put up for the court of public opinion...”
Yes it was, and as you recall, Obama produced a document that satisfied enough people, that the matter was put to rest before election day.
Later, it was discovered that there were all sorts of problems with the document, but by that time it was too late. He’d gotten away with it.
The case with Hillary violating the law concerning prtection of sensitive government information, is very different. Comey got up in front of the American people and admitted that she violated every word of part (a) of the statute.
It doesn’t matter what he said thereafter, because part (b) of the statute says that any government employee who violates it, is subject to part (b).
Now people can argue that this needs to be adjudicated in a court of law to find her guilty, but that’s not true. The people themselves are completely capable of reviewing the facts, and deciding that she should not hold public office again.
The key to this is getting the conversation started. Trump can do that by reading the text of the statute at every rally, and asking his supporters to flood social media with it.
I’m all for it. How to we get the word to DJT? Which Freeper has his ear?
And I believe that this is, in fact, what is occurring. The American media may not be interested in the crimes and misdemeanors of Hillary Clinton, but the American people surely are. This is why we are seeing reports of upwards or more of a million democrats have come to Trump.
I am confident that this election is going to be much different than the way the media is portraying it.
Trump should lead off with this at the third debate.
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.