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

Skip to comments.

Kerry, Constitutionally Unqualified For President!
14th Amendment of the United States Constitution ^ | 09/18/04 | Zakker500

Posted on 09/18/2004 9:50:53 AM PDT by zakker500

I will try to keep this as brief as possible. There has been much speculation about John F. Kerry being "Unfit for Command", but it actually appears that he is constitutionally unqualified for command. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution states that; "No person shall be a Senator ... Representitive ... President ... Vice President, or hold any office, ... who, having previously taken an oath ... as an officer of the United States ... to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof ... " If this doesn't describe the Democratic nominee for President, then what does? Kerry is unqualified to hold his current position, much less the one he is seeking since, by his own admission to Congress in April of 1971, he met with the communists of North Viet Nam! These meetings took place in May of 1970, in Paris, while he was still an officer in the United States Navy. The mere fact that these unauthorized meetings occurred is, in of itself, giving aid and comfort to the enemy, in addition to violating various other U.S. law.

Zak


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 14thamendment; constitution; hanoijohn; kerry; newbie; paris; president

1 posted on 09/18/2004 9:50:53 AM PDT by zakker500
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: zakker500
That would apply to the scumbag klintoon also but Rats do not read the Constitution.
2 posted on 09/18/2004 9:53:50 AM PDT by Fast1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500
That old chestnut?


3 posted on 09/18/2004 9:53:58 AM PDT by Lunatic Fringe (http://www.drunkenbuffoonery.com/mboards/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

True, but America is not going to give it any play except on November 2.


4 posted on 09/18/2004 9:55:02 AM PDT by demlosers (The FreeRepublic Pajama Press!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fast1
But...isn't the Constitution a "living, breathing document", expandable and elastic at the whims and interpretations of today's liberal judiciary?????????? /SARCASM
5 posted on 09/18/2004 9:58:53 AM PDT by soozla ("I used to think I was indecisive, but now I'm not too sure............"-John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

Shhh! We don't want them to switch candidates now!


6 posted on 09/18/2004 9:59:15 AM PDT by proudpapa (of three.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

I first heard the topic on Hugh Hewitt's show yesterday. It was brought up by a caller and Hugh (too quickly?) dismissed the idea. I think people should know this as even Hugh (a Constitutional scholar) was unaware. Thanks for posting.

Newbie here too :).


7 posted on 09/18/2004 9:59:25 AM PDT by RGT (Loose lips sink ships.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500
I have posted this in our weekend edition at www.Christian-news-in-maine.com Plese ping me if you get any legal opinions.

Thanks

8 posted on 09/18/2004 10:02:31 AM PDT by newsgatherer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RGT

Since he is running to be OUR president, don't we ALL have legal standing to bring this to court?


9 posted on 09/18/2004 10:04:30 AM PDT by cookcounty (Kerry: He began by trashing the VN Vets. He ends by trashing the NG. Such class is rarely seen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

The Constitution is only for Republicans. demonrats, liberals and socialists have complete disregard for it.


10 posted on 09/18/2004 10:06:09 AM PDT by mom-7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

Our Supreme Law of the land like people like Kerry so it would not even get a hearing before them.


11 posted on 09/18/2004 10:06:53 AM PDT by taxesareforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

He's constitutionally unqualified to be a postman.


12 posted on 09/18/2004 10:07:43 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (What did Dan Rather know, and when did he know it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

Your on track!

Go to patriotpetitions.com (The Federalist a highly regarded conservative website).

157,000+ signers so far and eventually to be sent to Senate President Richard Cheney, Senate Majority
Leader Bill Frist and Attorney General John Ashcroft. The results are forwarded to the media, addressees, and
organizations.

Their petition is titled: Kerry should be Prosecuted, Denied Qualification for National Office [Resign Senate seat ]

Their justification, in part ..."A well-documented history of providing "aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of war -- particularly in the case of North Vietnam. By his own account, Kerry violated the UCMJ, the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Code while serving as a Navy officer, and he further stands in violation of Article three, Section three of the U.S. Constitution which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare. Thus, in accordance with the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof," We, the People of the United States, demand that Kerry be prosecuted and disqualified from public office....(There's more at site)

Tell your contacts about the site and encourage them to do the same!


13 posted on 09/18/2004 10:08:17 AM PDT by AWestCoaster (FACTS are stubborn things. Your entitled to your own opinion, but not entitled to your own facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

The law only applies to the Unites States Constitution and would not hold up to the liberal logic smell test unless of course it was a conservative running. Than it would be correct, that the person would not be able to run. Remember, liberal logic trumps all logic, if we allow it.


14 posted on 09/18/2004 10:12:01 AM PDT by rineaux (hardcore for W04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty

This should be sent to all the media.


15 posted on 09/18/2004 10:13:06 AM PDT by sweetiepiezer (We have to stop Kerry for our grandkids sake!!!!!!!! GO W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

It will never happen. The Congress would have to be the adjudicator. Unfortunately, there are too "Party Uber Alles" types and too many who place collegiality over principle. We have to depend on the collective wisdom of the American people on Nov 3rd.


16 posted on 09/18/2004 10:17:16 AM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

I'd like to see a political ad wherein someone reads this section of the Constitution over a video of Kerry meeting with the North Vietnamese in Paris, his testimony before Congress, then finally the words of POWs that his testimony was used against them.


17 posted on 09/18/2004 10:17:40 AM PDT by wiley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wiley
I'd like to see a political ad wherein someone reads this section of the Constitution over a video of Kerry meeting with the North Vietnamese in Paris, his testimony before Congress, then finally the words of POWs that his testimony was used against them.

Me too! This bears repeating!

az

18 posted on 09/18/2004 10:21:55 AM PDT by Arizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: zakker500
You forgot a "constitution" in your link.

Clink to article at beginning of the post

The Ammendment to the Constitution is interesting in that it is related to the US Civil War or War between the States.

What would be really interesting is if some Republican Wag, sighted the Constitutional Ammendment on the floor of the Senate and then introduced a bill to allow John F'n Kerry to run for President (not for Senate) and then it died in a vote for lack of enough votes. That would bring the whole thing public put it in a national debate and give the MSM talking heads something to talk about focusing on John's anti-war activism and talks with the N VC in Paris.

I like it.

19 posted on 09/18/2004 10:25:03 AM PDT by Robert357 (Dan Rather's evening newscast finished dead last Tuesday night, finished behind a Simpson's rerun!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
I don't believe Congress would have anything to do with it. According to the 5th Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;...

Coupled with the 10th Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

All anyone needs to do is hire a lawyer and file a complaint in Federal court. It would then be up to a Grand Jury to determine if their is enough merit and evidence to sent it to trial. They in turn would provide an indictment and a trial date would be set.

My two cents worth. I personally would love to see him rot in a tiger cage.

God bless our troops wherever they may be.

20 posted on 09/18/2004 10:28:08 AM PDT by JusticeTalion (Vulcans never bluff.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

This has been discussed several times here on FR over the past several months (FR is ALWAYS on the leading edge!!).

Unfortunately Kerry MUST be charged, tried, and convicted of having done so before the prohibitions contained in the 14th Amendment can be invoked. Charges will NEVER be brought, and even if they were, it is too late for this election cycle.


21 posted on 09/18/2004 10:29:04 AM PDT by An.American.Expatriate (A vote for JF'nK is a vote for Peace in our Time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

War against the VC revolutionaries was never declared by an Act of Congress. So, I think that trying to build a legal case against Kerry on this issue is a waste of time. Inform the voting public about his activities in Paris and Hanoi, and let them decide at the polls. JMHO.


22 posted on 09/18/2004 10:29:49 AM PDT by oblomov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

Did we actually declare war against Vietnam. That may be the biggest sticking point.


23 posted on 09/18/2004 10:31:59 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500
Kerry is a TOTAL FRAUD - EXPOSE HIM NOW!

FReepers are key in getting the word out about the Swiftees who are EXPOSING KERRY'S FRAUD!

These Swiftee stickers get the word out to the driving public and displays your public support for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth! It even displays their website address!

Swiftee sticker thread! Freep mail for details on how to get yours!

24 posted on 09/18/2004 10:33:52 AM PDT by Chieftain (Support the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and expose Hanoi John's FRAUD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

If you don't indict him, he walks.


25 posted on 09/18/2004 10:38:35 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wiley
I'd like to see a political ad wherein someone reads this section of the Constitution over a video of Kerry meeting with the North Vietnamese in Paris, his testimony before Congress, then finally the words of POWs that his testimony was used against them.

Wouldn't the Swiftboat Vets for Truth be the ideal people to do this? They have the moral ground, the background, and the wherewithall to do it. How about it, Swifties?

26 posted on 09/18/2004 10:42:33 AM PDT by VRWCer (Everything that is hidden will be found out, and every secret will be known. Luke 12:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: AWestCoaster

Kerry is a "war hero"--for the Commies of Vietnam. He is considered a hero by the unrepentant communist regime. There is a memorial dedicated to him in Hanoi as one of those who helped "liberate" S. Vietnam. That's all you need to know about Kerry.


27 posted on 09/18/2004 10:44:18 AM PDT by attiladhun2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

BTTT


28 posted on 09/18/2004 10:45:15 AM PDT by Fiddlstix (This Tagline for sale. (Presented by TagLines R US))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wiley

That would be devastating!


29 posted on 09/18/2004 10:45:17 AM PDT by meatloaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

IMO, Kerry is unqualified to be an American!


30 posted on 09/18/2004 10:47:11 AM PDT by vladog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arizona; wiley
"I'd like to see a political ad wherein someone reads this section of the Constitution over a video of Kerry meeting with the North Vietnamese in Paris, his testimony before Congress, then finally the words of POWs that his testimony was used against them.

This should be a SWIFT BOAT VETS ad!!! This is a great idea, send it to them.

31 posted on 09/18/2004 10:59:43 AM PDT by holyscroller (Actions speak louder than bumperstickers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

I read somewhere that Jimmy Carter issued aome sort of blanket pardon to Vietnam draft-dodgers. Not sure if it extended to all anti-war activities, but I think that may be why legal types like Hugh Hewitt aren't biting.


32 posted on 09/18/2004 11:01:03 AM PDT by GeorgiaYankee (Coming Soon, Dan Rather Stars in "DEAD MAN TYPING!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zakker500

Can someone find the text of this case defining "engaged in rebellion?": United States v. Powell, 27 Fed. Cas. 605 (C.C.D.N.C. 1871) (No. 16,079)

It does not appear that a conviction is necessary since it applied in a blanket way to many thousands of people automatically after the Civil War:

Section. 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Findlaw (Annotated Constitution Amendment 14 Sec. 3)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/37.html#1

SECTIONS 3. DISQUALIFICATION

The right to remove disabilities imposed by this section was exercised by Congress at different times on behalf of enumerated individuals. [footnote 71] In 1872, the disabilities were removed, by a blanket act, from all persons ''except Senators and Representatives of the Thirty-sixth and Thirty-seventh Congresses, officers in the judicial, military and naval service of the United States, heads of departments, and foreign ministers of the United States.'' [footnote 72] Twenty-six years later, Congress enacted that ''the disability imposed by section 3 . . . incurred heretofore, is hereby removed.'' [footnote 73]

[Footnote 71] E.g., and notably, the Private Act of December 14, 1869, ch.1, 16 Stat. 607.

[Footnote 72] Ch. 193, 17 Stat. 142.

[Footnote 73] Act of June 6, 1898, ch. 389, 30 Stat. 432. Legislation by Congress providing for removal was necessary to give effect to the prohibition of Sec. 3, and until removed in pursuance of such legislation persons in office before promulgation of the Fourteenth Amendment continued to exercise their functions lawfully. Griffin's Case, 11 Fed. Cas. 7 (C.C.D.Va. 1869) (No. 5815). Nor were persons who had taken part in the Civil War and had been pardoned by the President before the adoption of this Amendment precluded by this section from again holding office under the United States. 18 Op. Att'y Gen. 149 (1885). On the construction of ''engaged in rebellion,'' see United States v. Powell, 27 Fed. Cas. 605 (C.C.D.N.C. 1871) (No. 16,079).


33 posted on 09/18/2004 11:15:07 AM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

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