Skip to comments.If Obama's presidency illegal, are the things he has signed or instilled legal?
Posted on 11/21/2010 11:04:11 PM PST by righttackle44
There seem to be some hints that press and other kinds of investigations into the legality of Obama's presidency because of a foreign birth are continuing. What if someone discovers that Obama has been serving unconsitutionally and illegally? Do the legislation, executive orders and so forth that he has signed off on remain legally in effect?
Does not seem to me that there is any precedent for determining the status of such things
We know the MSM et al are attempting to intimidate those who are carrying out these investigations.
But what if . . .
I like it.
Sorry—I forgot the vanity designation.
sometimes there’s Reagan for a change of pace.
That doesn’t make sense. If he is eligible; how can anything he does be eligible?
Normally fraud undercuts all subsequent acts, with few exceptions.
This would blow up the US government if it came to light.
It will for that reason never come to light, barring ‘regime change’ which preceded investigation and revelation.
Some one ask me this very question the other day!
I said “we already know the was not born here”.
So what next? What happens when we prove it?
If he is ineligible, then all he has signed and done is fraudulent. If push comes to shove, this is where the true revolution begins. Do you believe in the rule of law or tyranny?
In order for a Bill to become law, it must be signed by the President. Ditto an Executive Order. If the maid signed it, it would not be law. If he is proven ineligible, he cannot be POTUS, he could not have been POTUS, and nothing he signed could have the weight of law any more than if the maid had signed it.
Do you believe in the rule of law or tyranny?
The majority believe in the power of tyranny.
That is why they play it safe. Millions submitted to roundups for the death camps in WWII. Only a few hundred, perhaps as many as a thousand, resisted in the Warsaw ghetto.
Don't hold your breath on any exposure of BamBamKennedy's records. And there is nothing that will change the fact that we are in debt up to our eyeballs. I find it amusing how many on the so called 'right' shake in their undies over even questioning BamBamKennedy's legal status... They all willingly ignore that it was out of Hillry's campaign that birthed the birther movement... We have a bunch of cowards that turned their backs on their own oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of these United States.
Law of precedence is now what governs US, and right now almost anything goes.
It was the media that got BamBamKennedy elected in projecting his image as the second coming. They are what keeps him on high and they will collectively be the last to admit their part. That is the base of liberalism, never ever admit a wrong. Time will tell just how 'strong' the new House of Representatives will be as they now must wade through the sewer liberals have generated.
From the hysterical reactions of the MSM and the various other organs of government — including the Supreme Court — I do not see any agency other than the House of Representatives pushing this question.
If it is indeed revealed that he was not born in the United States and thus, strictly under the law, ineligible, I think that the they will argue that the point is moot because he has already been sworn in and that there is no way, save conviction via impeachment, to remove a sitting President.
At that point, it will all die because there is no way you would get sufficient votes to convict in the Senate.
“When the SCOTUS finds that a law passed by Congress is Unconstitutional, the effect is that it never was a law, and all actions taken under that law are null and voidretroactively. The same principle would apply to any supposedly official acts of Obamathey would be null and void, retroactively, as though they had never occurred. “
Bills he signed into law should go through a new vote by Congress and be signed or not by a new president. Executive orders an illegitimate president made on his own would by logic become null and void. Supreme Court justices seems to pose a stickier issue, because the Congress confirmed the suggested person after the president nominated them.
I don't want to be Pollyanna here; but the very suggestion that "the press" may be involved in investigating Barry's legitimacy (no pun intended) could be the key to salvation.
In this universe it just might be that the "people", the "machine", "government", and military are all equally incapable of realistic action. After all, "the people" have asked these questions repeatedly and been stonewalled repeatedly.
After all the support they've given him, after all the bias they've demonstrated (and denied), and their bone headed adherence to ideology, it just might be that the press (media) is the only means left to derail this freight train.
The Constitution grants no power to the Congress to approve a nominee not nominated by a President.
I agree with you 100%. It’s getting old!
you know it could be possible that Soros so fed up his puppet could actually come in thru the back door and unleash the fraudulency himself ;in effect blowing the whistle on one of his own......hmmmmmm now that sounds interesting
Only a few hundred, perhaps as many as a thousand, resisted in the Warsaw ghetto.<<<<<
The choice was “die now or die later” of course they were
not Americans and they were not armed sufficiently to succsessfully resist! We have that very history to warn us!The 2nd amendment may yet prove to be essential!
Your right, even if he is found not eligible to be President, and all of the laws he sighed made null and voided won’t bring back all the money that was lost, or wasted.
However, fairly obviously the armament needed to "successfully resist" the Wehrmacht was that of the American or Red Army. The entire Polish Army lasted only a few days.
My point is that if the inhabitants of the ghetto had been Americans armed to the teeth they could not possibly have "resisted successully." They could have killed a lot more Germans, which is not to be sneezed at, but they would still not have won.
Which is an excellent argument for not allowing your country to get into a situation where the only variable is how many of the enemy you can take with you.
Ten days after presentation of the bill to the President, if the president does not veto the bill, the bill becomes law.
So, no, the President doesn't have to sign it.
How does the court deal with a fraudulent President?
It may be that, say, the Health Care bill is deemed to have never been signed by a legitimate president and so became law after ten days.
There is no judge in America who is ever going to rule the sitting "president" ineligible.
Zer0 bamboozled millions... gave us the old 'okee doke.'
I say we find a team of 800 or so Army Rangers and send them into the Public Hall of Records in Hawaii, rip the place apart and find his Kenyan BC.
Would the General who took action to prove the foreign occupier is a felon not be an American hero and proudly lead his battalion's victory parade down Pennsylvania Ave in DC after the impeachment. I think the answer is yes. The minorities would crap in the streets, but the sooner its done and over with the sooner we have a chance to save the nation.
....just dreaming out loud....
I believe the Bill has to be presented so the President has the opportunity to veto it. If there is no President, that has not been done and the conditions are not met. Handing the Bill to the maid would not have been sufficient.
Probably the Boss’ doing.
Personally, I like it and hope it stays, festering like an open wound and waiting for Romney to declare so everyone will click on them to learn and be reminded what a self serving whore he really is.
IMO, in order to keep the entire government from becoming a cluster f$%k, any *official* questions/remedies regarding his eligibility will be resolved after his presidency is over, Not before.
In the mean time, the states shall and will pass laws to protect against this ever happening again.
OK. WE HAVE GOTTEN THE POINT ON ROMNEY, I FOR ONE AM A LITTLE TIRED OF SEEING HIS MUG ON EVERY THREAD
Agreed. Enough is enough. Who is responsible for plastering these Romney rants on all political related articles? I expect to see this type of foul worded emotional obsession on DU. And, trust me, there is absolutely nothing about Romney that I support.
The Thinker is right once sworn in it’s a done deal funny how congress never changed that rule or is it.
What rule? Believe me it can be done.
“After all the support they’ve given him, after all the bias they’ve demonstrated (and denied), and their bone headed adherence to ideology, it just might be that the press (media) is the only means left to derail this freight train”.
Just look at the media, unexpectedly turning on the switch this week as a chorus drumming up anger against the additional search procedures of the TSA.
You trembled the mountains!