Tomorrow, Enforce the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three and OBAMA is GONE
. . . . ?
.
Posted on 01/14/2013 7:58:24 PM PST by Uncle Sham
The Constitution does not allow someone who does not meet the eligibility requirements for President to legally serve no matter what the election results are. It's right there in the Constitution under the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three:
"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."
A few notes.
1. There is no such position as a "President elect", legally, until such a time as Congress has accepted the results of the electoral college votes and a person is actually named as the "President elect". This means that the term "shall have qualified" refers to something other than the results of winning an election. There is only one place left in the Constitution having to do with "qualifications" for the office of President, that being the eligibility requirements from Article two.
"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."
2. Since it is the duty of Congress to name an interim President in the event of a President elect's "failure to qualify", they, Congress, must know whether or not to do so. This means that they, Congress, must be aware of whether or not a President elect meets the eligibility requirements from Article two. It is the burden of the President elect to "qualify" or "fail to qualify", thus NOT proving one is eligible under Article Two to Congress is the same thing as "failing to qualify." Congress avoiding its duty to uphold Section 3 results in the same "failure to qualify".
3. How was Obama's eligibility proven to Congress without a valid long form birth certificate? He apparently does not possess such a thing or we would have seen it a million times by now.
4. The eligibility requirements start out with two simple words which forever preclude anyone who "fails to qualify" from serving as a legal president, "No person". Someone who sneaks in because Congress failed to uphold it's responsibility to enforce the Twentieth Amendment, Section 3 doesn't legally exist. The Constitution cannot be fooled just because Congress didn't act when it was supposed to. A President elect either qualifies or he cannot ever be President, period.
Thus it is that we have protection from someone who is ineligible to serve as President already written into the Constitution. Unfortunately, we also have a Congress that did not uphold it's oath to support the Constitution and a usurpation of the office of President is the result. We know he is illegal strictly on the basis that we don't know if he is eligible. If he "qualified", there would be no debating the subject. The fact that nobody in Congress is able to say whether or not he is eligible means that he never proved to them that he was and thus has "failed to qualify".
Now, as to who has "standing". Any elected official at the state or federal level who took the oath of office in Article Six has standing, to demand that the Constitution be obeyed. This means that no judge can deny them the enforcement of their oath to "support the Constitution" if they have a question about whether or not any portion of that Constitution has not been adhered to. In this case, the Twentieth Amendment, Section 3 has clearly been IGNORED by the primary party instructed to act under it, Congress.
Tomorrow, January 15th, they get another shot at upholding their oaths of office or committing treason by ignoring the Twentieth Amendment, Section three. Perhaps someone will finally have the courage to do what is right.
Tomorrow, Enforce the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three and OBAMA is GONE
. . . . ?
.
On this issue, don’t turn blue.
All eyes are on OUR rights to own arms, unfettered. Without OUR 2A rights, the First Ammendment will fall. We can protest nothing at all, certainly not his eligibility.
This is not about protesting someone's eligibility but rather about the Constitutional REQUIREMENT that someone prove eligibility to Congress before being allowed to occupy the office of President. It's his job to prove, not our job to protest. If he offers no proof, he has failed to qualify. period. Anything past this point, you blame Congress. They, along with a complicite media are responsible for what has been allowed to transpire during the past four years.
There aren’t any. We have our Hitler and the entire parliament is silent.
Just one thing I would add to what you’ve said, and that is this: Hawaii state registrar Alvin Onaka has certified a letter of verification to AZ SOS Ken Bennett confirming that Obama’s Hawaii BC is legally non-valid and the long-form and short-form BC’s are forgeries to hide that fact. Obama has no legally-determined birth facts. It’s not just that he hasn’t proven to Congress that he is eligible; it’s that nobody can lawfully SAY he is eligible, without his non-valid BC being presented as evidence to a judicial or administrative official or body and had the Federal Rules of Evidence applied to all his vital record and citizenship records.
Right now the legal presumption is that his birth facts are NOT that he was born in Hawaii on Aug 4, 1961, etc.... because if he had been, there would be no reason for him to have a non-valid record.
And Onaka’s verification that Obama’s BC# is 10641 tells us something more: the HDOH gave Obama a different number than he could ever have had in 1961 - and the only legal authorization to do that is if a new, totally fabricated BC is created by the HDOH because law enforcement claims it is necessary in order to protect the registrant’s life. There are at least 3 other Aug 1961 BC’s that have BC#’s that could not have been on those BC’s in 1961, so the HDOH has been swapping a BUNCH of BC#’s for Obama’s sake. What this also tells us is that the BC at the HDOH office, that the White House information “matches”, is a total fabrication. It says what Eric Holder says it has to say. Has nothing to do with truth whatsoever.
Every Republican member of Congress was sent a fax explaining this, and every secretary threw the letter away or sent it to Adrian Smith or Mike Johanns. These people have pissed on the Constitution, justice, and truth from Day One and will go to hell pissing on it (most likely). The fate of Sodom and Gomorrah awaits them all.
While there is no question that BHO is NOT “natural born” because of the self-admitted fact his father was not a US citizen at the time of his birth (wherever that was), the same holds true for Marco Rubio. Neither of his parents were US citizens at the time of his birth.
once a precedent has been set, it is much harder to argue against it
Once a president has been set, it is much harder to remove him from office, even with clearer precedent that he is NOT and has never been eligible for office. We’re at the mercy of the will of the Congress and Judiciary who refuse to uphold the real precedent that was set in Minor and the overall rule of law. The Constitution has been effectively undermined and delegitamized.
Patriots, Patriots... aren’t they the guys in the blue and white with the tight pants who lost to the Giants last season?
Because that’s the only Patriots the Sheeple will ever pay attention to.
Does this mean we’ll have to put up with birther stories until Jan 20, 2017 or will you end this foolish nonsense when Obama’s sworn-in again Monday?
This is great! Have you sent it to Rush? I don’t think Rush Limbaugh even knows we have a Constitution!
Send it to Romney immediately; he probably didn’t know about it because he couldn’t afford to hire any lawyers for his campaign!
Well, even if Romney can’t work it out, at least this means we’ll have Joe Biden for president and that will be a huge improvement.
/sarcasm
This isn't a "Birther" story at all. It's a "Constitution" FACT. The "FACTS" within the Constitution have protected both you and I from tyranny for over 200 years. Unfortunately, the present Federal government believes that the Constitution is just a "story".
Unfortunately, mountains of evidences of bozo ineligibility, the Constitution, the laws don’t mean a thing now, because Congress, justice system, gov officials at all levels, and the media all turn a blind eye on the issue!
Even many people who are supposedly on our side fail to see this as a constitutional issue - they simply call this a ‘birther’ nonsense. When We the people don’t care enough (even the tea party leaders and many ‘conservatives’ ) to demand this issue be addressed, we help to bury this issue.
That is the sad fact.
If they had enforced the Constitution’s ‘natural born citizen’ requirement for the presidency, obama would never have ascended to the Oval Office!
It is a sad fact - the US Constitution has been shredded.
Thanks for the ping; post.
“Everything about socialism is sham and affectation.” - 23.11 Ch23 Evil; Economic Harmonies; Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850
“Above all, if you wish to be strong, begin by rooting out every particle of socialism that may have crept into your legislation.” - The Law; Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850
http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Socialists.png
They have breached the constitution. Witness the continuing treason...
Is there a copy of the letter cited from Onaka to Bennett anywhere on the Internet?
Counting the first campaign, we’ve had 5 years of crickets and I expect the same for the next 4 years to infinity and beyond on this.
How anyone could look at this letter and declare it "confirming that Obama’s Hawaii BC is legally non-valid and the long-form and short-form BC’s are forgeries to hide that fact" is beyond me.
Seriously, this letter, which is quite plain in its verification of Obama's birthplace is the "smoking gun."
None of this CONSTITUTIONAL argument matters, as Obama is an NBC and if we could just stop flogging this dead horse, we might be able to turn toward the work of fixing this country.
Well said, Uncle Sham. The dreadful "irony" (if you can call it that) is that, come January 20, a man whose very presence in the office of President of the United States is a violation of the "natural born Citizen" clause of Article II of will again be taking an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Needless to say, it's an oath he has no intention whatsoever of keeping.
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.
