Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Smokin' Joe

“(having produced no documentation to prove he is)”

Nobody (with the authority to demand this) has ever said that he has to. There is no process established to verify eligibility in this matter, that is a function of Congress or the courts.


9 posted on 07/29/2009 5:33:29 PM PDT by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: buwaya
How about "We the People", or have you forgottent his a$$clown works for us.

My God, disbelievers, if you hired this guy based on his college degree, then some doubt came up about it, would you not ask for the official transcripts???

If you hired someone to add an addition to your home and you asked for Bond papers and he showed you only a receipt that he paid for it, would you not ask for the bond papers???

Again, he works for us and we have questions and concerns...answer or be fired.

15 posted on 07/29/2009 5:40:11 PM PDT by IrishPennant (We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. ~Aesop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: buwaya
When Mc Cain's Constitutional eligibility was questioned, he produced the documents to prove his status.

Obama has not produced anything.

I am all in favor of remedying the problem by having individual states require that citizenship status be proven to the Secy of State of the respective state prior to permitting the name to be on the ballot. That would solve this problem once and for all.

As it stands, though the SCOTUS has refused standing to citizens, standing has been refused in other courts even to competing candidates, and the orders of a military officer were changed to avoid his deployment (and his clearance yanked, costing him is job) so he did not have standing.

Well, maybe he has not had a demand from anyone with the authority to do so, but the list is getting shorter, and the shenanigans used to avoid it more extensive.

Pray tell, why would that be if there is nothing to hide?

My great grandchild will have to produce a birth certificate to get into kindergarden, but he skates into the White House?

17 posted on 07/29/2009 5:40:54 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: buwaya
"There is no process established to verify eligibility in this matter, that is a function of Congress or the courts." W R O N G !

I'm going to post this so that EVERYONE who thinks we are powerless to do something about this understands how best to go about it. We need to find the legal remedy enabling us to charge our representatives with disobeying their oaths of office and start removing them one by one. Here is the case.

Exhibit A, The Twentieth Amendment, Section 3 reads as follows:

" ”3. 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; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

Exhibit B U. S. Code, CITE: 3USC19

TITLE 3--THE PRESIDENT, CHAPTER 1- PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AND VACANCIES

Sec. 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act

”(a)(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President. “

Exhibit C: U. S. Constitution, Article Six Oath of Office for elected officials:

” The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

Exhibit D: The Electoral Vote Counting Act of 1877:

The process currently provides that someone “challenge” the electoral votes during a short, specified time frame while the Electoral College votes are opened and tabulated. This process does not cover challenges to "eligibility" qualifications. In fact, if this act pretends to do so in the manner in which it prescribes, it is unconstitutional. Any act of this sort that does not require that qualifications be presented by the President elect serves to undercut the provisions in the Constitution itself. No act that does not support the Constitution is constitutional. In order to change the requirements of the Twentieth amendment, one would need to pass another amendment. An “Act” doesn’t cut the mustard.

The portion in bold stating “or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify” in section three is particularly interesting in that it plainly seems to infer that a “qualification” of some sort must be made in order to serve as President. Certainly, one cannot argue that it does not require a qualification process for one to “qualify”. To infer that the lack of a “specified” qualification process means that stated eligibility “qualifications” for the office of president can be ignored is fallacious. The wording of this passage in the twentieth amendment clearly infers that a qualification is required, regardless of how this is done.

There is only one set of qualifications listed anywhere in the Constitution that are not health related and they are listed in Article two, section one.

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

To satisfy meeting the requirement of the twentieth amendment to “qualify”, a president elect must present evidence that he meets it’s requirements for eligibility to serve. This means that a proper birth certificate HAD to be presented by the president elect in order to serve as president. In fact, without establishing whether or not the President elect is "qualified", Congress would not know whether or not to step in and name a temporary replacement as the Amendment requires. Certainly, this means that the proof of "qualifications" must be presented to Congress.

If it was NOT done, then under the provisions of the twentieth amendment, Barrack Obama has “failed to qualify” and should not be serving as president of the United States of America.

Based upon the above, I conclude that:

1. We currently have a vacancy at President because no one has yet “qualified” as required in the Twentieth amendment. The terms "The President elect shall have failed to qualify" clearly places this burden upon the President elect and not on someone raising their hand in objection.

2. Anyone serving in Congress (see “Congress” in bold in Exhibit A), or anyone who is currently serving under the oath of office in Article six has "standing" and can DEMAND that their oaths be met by receiving proper “qualifying” documentation from Mr. Obama. This charade at the time of counting the Electoral College votes does not limit their ability to do so at any time they so choose. The very fact that they are duty-bound by oath to "support" the Constitution REQUIRES them to respond to any and all attacks against it. No judge can deny any of them the standing to do so. It would ask them to break the law in their effort to enforce the law.

3. We need to start pressing legal charges against all of our local representatives and senators covered by the oath of office in Article six for disobeying their oaths to support the Constitution as it pertains to the language of section three of the Twentieth amendment. Put PRESSURE on them to represent the document that gives them their authority in the first place. We are looking into how best to do this down here. We all should be looking into this approach. NOW.

29 posted on 07/29/2009 5:52:43 PM PDT by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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