NOTICE - No Lincoln's bible for this one!
Posted on 11/30/2011 5:43:25 AM PST by IbJensen
Our Dictator May Be In Deep Trouble...with Chief Justice John Roberts, U.S. Supreme Court.
According to sources who watch the inner workings of the federal government, a smack-down of Barack Obama by the U.S. Supreme Court may be inevitable.
Ever since Obama assumed the office of President, critics have hammered him on a number of Constitutional issues. Critics have complained that much, if not all of Obama's major initiatives run headlong into Constitutional roadblocks on the power of the federal government. Obama certainly did not help himself in the eyes of the Court when he used the venue of the State of the Union address early in the year to publicly flog the Court over its ruling that the First Amendment grants the right to various organizations to run political ads during the time of an election.
The tongue-lashing clearly did not sit well with the Court, as demonstrated by Justice Sam Alito, who publicly shook his head and stated under his breath, 'That's not true,' when Obama told a flat-out lie concerning the Court's ruling.
As it has turned out, this was a watershed moment in the relationship between the executive and the judicial branches of the federal government. Obama publicly declared war on the court , even as he blatantly continued to propose legislation that flies in the face of every known Constitutional principle upon which this nation has stood for over 200 years.
Obama has even identified Chief Justice John Roberts as his number one enemy, that is, apart from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and so on... And it is no accident that the one swing-vote on the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy, stated recently that he has no intention of retiring until 'Obama is gone.' Apparently, the Court has had enough.
The Roberts Court has signaled, in a very subtle manner, of course, that it intends to address the issues about which Obama critics have been screaming to high heaven. A ruling against Obama on any one of these important issues could potentially cripple the Administration. Such a thing would be long overdue.
First, there is ObamaCare, which violates the Constitutional principle barring the federal government from forcing citizens to purchase something. And no, this is not the same thing as states requiring drivers to purchase car insurance, as some of the intellectually-impaired claim. The Constitution limits FEDERAL government, not state governments, from such things, and further, not everyone has to drive, and thus, a citizen could opt not to purchase car insurance by simply deciding not to drive a vehicle. In the ObamaCare world, however, no citizen can 'opt out.'
Second, sources state that the Roberts court has quietly accepted information concerning discrepancies in Obama's history that raise serious questions about his eligibility for the office of President. The charge goes far beyond the birth certificate issue. This information involves possible fraudulent use of a Social Security number in Connecticut, while Obama was a high school student in Hawaii, double citizenship, natural born...and others.
And that is only the tip of the iceberg.
Third, several cases involving possible criminal activity, conflicts of interest, and pay-for-play cronyism could potentially land many Administration officials, if not Obama himself, in hot water with the Court. Frankly, in the years this writer has observed politics, nothing comes close to comparing with the rampant corruption of this Administration, not even during the Nixon years. Nixon and the Watergate conspirators look like choirboys compared to the jokers that populate this Administration.
In addition, the Court will eventually be forced to rule on the dreadful decision of the Obama DOJ suing the state of Arizona. That, too, could send the Obama doctrine of open borders to an early grave, given that the Administration refuses to enforce federal law on illegal aliens.
And finally, the biggie that could potentially send the entire house of cards tumbling in a free-fall is the latest revelation concerning the Obama-Holder Department of Justice and its refusal to pursue the New Black Panther Party. The group was caught on tape committing felonies by attempting to intimidate Caucasian voters into staying away from the polls. A whistle-blower who resigned from the DOJ is now charging Holder with the deliberate refusal to pursue cases against Blacks, particularly those who are involved in radical hate-groups, such as the New Black Panthers, who have been caught on tape calling for the murder of white people and their babies. This one is a biggie that could send the entire Administration crumbling--that is, if the Justices have the guts to draw a line in the sand at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And also the ATF and DOJ and the gun sales under Fast and Furious.
Source? I guess I missed that statement, which is surprising as I'd peg it at magnitude 6.8.
...against all enemies foreign and domestic.
NOTICE - No Lincoln's bible for this one!
Please give a creditable source before you post something like this, else FR and its readers can justifiably be criticized for using the information in the post.
Yes, keep breathing. This is an opinionated email.
Tick...tick...tick...
I have read snippets of this information elsewhere, including a large article posted some time ago on FR. If you’ll read the material in the article you’ll see that it refers to events that have occurred and are about to hit the fan as far as Chief Justice Roberts is concerned.
I, for one, would be quite entertained to see a H0lder frog-march.
Is it true he has the power to force Kagan to recuse herself? I keep hearing conflicting info on that matter.
I would like some sourcing for all of this material...it is encouraging to believe the Court is sick of Hussein and this regime’s hatred for the Constitution...but I want some evidence beyond an email.
Also, where did this happen: “...And it is no accident that the one swing-vote on the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy, stated recently that he has no intention of retiring until ‘Obama is gone.’”
So many other factors (Executive Orders and Administrative/Regulatory mandates by un-elected Czars) will go un-challenged, and we are stuck with them forever.
*************************************************************
I thought an executive order imposed by one president can be overturned by another.Is this not the case?
Hennessy lives in South Florida.
Here’s info on Hennessy which I posted to another Freeper who queried me.
http://www.meetup.com/CC-912-Project/members/14121038/
I’ll post a link to various segments of the material as I find them, but they have been in the news before. Perhaps you missed them.
Events that occurred mean nothing until a case is brought and winds it's way through the lower courts, and then is accepted by the USSC. Are any of these mentioned, except the obamacare mandate, even on the USSC docket?
Here’s another link to SC-Obozo squabble.
There’s nothing in the email from Hennessy that isn’t correct, but I believe you already know that and are nit-picking for some undefinable reason.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/06/nation/la-na-court-roberts-obama-20100706
Apparently you haven’t completed your ‘recovering’ phase.
Would it have made any difference to the few nit-pickers here if I had indicated that Mr. Hennessy’s email was in fact an editorial. It is an editorial that is substantiated by news stories that have been trickled throughout this past year.
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.