Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DNC Failed to Certify Obama as Eligible in MOST States!
CFP ^ | 9/25/09 | JB Williams

Posted on 09/25/2009 10:05:29 PM PDT by pissant

When I first became aware that the Democratic National Committee prepared, signed and notarized two slightly different Certification of Nomination documents for the Obama-Biden ticket in the 2008 election, I was shocked and after verifying both documents as real, I wrote about it in The Theory is Now a Conspiracy and Facts Don’t Lie released on September 10, 2009.

The question was obvious – Why TWO different DNC Obama certification documents, and why did one have proper certification of constitutional eligibility in it, while the other had that certification deleted?

The Obama camp had been using the defense that the DNC had properly vetted and certified Obama’s eligibility for months. Judge after judge had used that claim and the fact that Obama’s COLB (Certification of Live Birth) had been “Snoped – FactChecked – blogged and twittered” as “legal proof” that Obama was eligible for office, despite the very real fact that Obama has never released any authenticated proof on the subject.

Then we find out that the DNC did NOT certify Obama as eligible under Article II – Section I of the Constitution, in 49 of 50 states. The DNC had only filed such certification in the state of Hawaii, Obama’s alleged birth place. The other 49 states received a Certification of Nomination which did NOT certify Obama as constitutionally eligible for office.

This story caused a firestorm of interest, comment and speculation across the web, leading Bob Unruh at World Net Daily to ask, What does Pelosi know about Obama’s eligibility?

(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: bcrepository; birther; certification; certifigate; certifigte; communistcoup; eligible; glennbeck; healthcare; islam; larrysinclairslover; military; obama; obamacare; palin; pelosi; politics; states; veterans
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-189 next last
To: pissant

Thanks for staying on this. Eventually we’ll find the bottom of the hole and what Obunghole has hidden there.

It’s fun watching the trolls too.


81 posted on 09/26/2009 7:32:17 AM PDT by AZ .44 MAG (A society that doesn't protect its children doesn't deserve to survive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA
No LAW can overturn the Constitution. If the Dems want to amend the Constitution, it would have to pass not only in the Congress but with 2/3 of the states’ legislatures.

3/4 of the states' legislatures.

That means that only 13 states have to say "no".

82 posted on 09/26/2009 7:37:21 AM PDT by justlurking (The only remedy for a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: KMG365; Kevmo

Amended:

You hope and wish that nothing will come of it.

But it will, the tide is turning, the wind has changed, the stars alignment is moving, and your boy will be removed when the fraud and crimes and corruption is revealed.


83 posted on 09/26/2009 7:42:15 AM PDT by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: pissant

I’m not a “birther” in the sense that I follow this closely, but by golly I’m convinced that there is something on BO’s birth certificate that he doesn’t want made public. Just like everything else in his shady life that he keeps under lock and key.


84 posted on 09/26/2009 7:42:21 AM PDT by Malesherbes (Sauve Qui Peut)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sourcery; All

“Given such a ruling by the SCOTUS, the US military would have the final de facto say regarding who is, or is not, POTUS. Based on past history, they would probably back the SCOTUS. They probably wouldn’t have to do anything other than state that, based on the SCOTUS ruling, they no longer recognize Obama as Commander in Chief. Were that to happen, the debate would be over (with apologies to Al Gore.)”

Even though I privately (never openly in public in my name) question the constitutional eligibility of POTUS Obama (in my “opinion” being the son of an alien is enough to disqualify). I must tell you that a SCOTUS decision would be a step in the right direction to depose a sitting POTUS. However, as a member of the military, reservist in my case, I would NOT support (nor participate in) deposing a POTUS until the congress properly impeaches him in the House and convicts him in the Senate. The SCOUS has no power to remove any POTUS, only to rule on the Constitution. If the Congress fails to properly act on that SCOTUS decision, I (IMHO) cannot act. For me to do so would be unconstitutional. I cannot violate the constitution to uphold it. Also, this is NOT a banana republic. The military cannot take sides, it is too dangerous a precident. The military take orders from the CINC and the chain-of-command flowing down from that office. Until that person is constitutionally removed, regardless of personal feelings of like or dislike, the sitting POTUS is in charge.....anything else is dangerous anarchy. You don’t want this to happen.


85 posted on 09/26/2009 7:44:35 AM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

bukp


86 posted on 09/26/2009 7:47:53 AM PDT by ExGeeEye (Keep your powder dry, and your iron hidden.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta

Buck up! That’s what these naysayers and doomngloomers need to do. They’re either purposeful “demoralize the troops” trolls or people who need to change their attitude, because that attitude is guaranteed to bring about failure.


87 posted on 09/26/2009 7:51:09 AM PDT by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Biggest question remaining for me is this, by what means do we physically remove the Usurper? Does the Military have to find its balls and go in and do it? Or can the GOP FIND its nuts and DEMAND it in every possible venue available to them?

The criminal should not spend one more instant in MY house. He should be in Levenworth.


88 posted on 09/26/2009 7:56:16 AM PDT by Danae (No political party should pick candidates. That's the voters job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IllumiNaughtyByNature; KMG365; Churchjack; pissant
Let me see if I get this straight. Both of you click on a link that "doesn't interest you" and make comments derogatory to the position of the original poster and said linked article?

Just a very boring sleeper-troll-puppet show. Perhaps zotworthy, but otherwise of little value.

89 posted on 09/26/2009 7:56:19 AM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Churchjack; Kevmo

“...makes us look ridiculous...”


“Who” do “us” look ridiculous TO?

Key phrase - when someone says that “birther” stuff makes conservatives aka “us” - look ridiculous, it’s a giveaway that the person is a troll.

Leftists already hate conservatives, Democrats hate conservatives, RINOS and “Moderates” hate conservatives, the MSM ala SRM (state run media) hate conservatives - so who is it we’re supposed to worry about looking ridiculous to again? Whose opinion are we supposed to worry about?

I don’t want the left/MSM etc to like conservatives, I want the left to FEAR conservatives!


90 posted on 09/26/2009 7:56:32 AM PDT by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Or he should be sent back to his native country of which he is most likely a citizen, shackled.

In Leavenworth we pay for his meals.


91 posted on 09/26/2009 8:01:58 AM PDT by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
IMHO, as one who took the same oath as I assume you did, it would merely be necessary for SCOTUS to rule the DFPOTUS (de facto POTUS) constitutionally unqualified; he is instantly no longer POTUS and need not-- indeed, cannot-- be impeached. He is simply a person-- perhaps an illegal alien!-- inhabiting a building at 1600 PA Ave.

(I would hope that in so ruling, the SCOTUS would rule on who is and has been the legal POTUS since 1/20/09.)

Any law officer, military member, any citizen who had sworn to uphold the COTUS would then be able, d--d near obligated, to go arrest that man and at the very least expel him from the office and the house.

92 posted on 09/26/2009 8:03:36 AM PDT by ExGeeEye (Keep your powder dry, and your iron hidden.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: TheThinker

He is being blackmailed by a whole bumch of people. He didn’t get to DC by accident, Obama is a living quid pro quo. He is a shell of a human, he is push pulled in every imaginable direction by whom ever has the greatest interest in a given outcome at the time. Why do you think he is taking MONTHS to decide a course in Afghanistan? His owners have not decided yet what is in America’s worse interest, when they finally figure that out, they will then do what ever will hurt us most and leave Obambi to explain it all away with hopee and changee.

It would be funny if it weren’t for the fact that its REAL and people are dying because of it.


93 posted on 09/26/2009 8:03:58 AM PDT by Danae (No political party should pick candidates. That's the voters job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Churchjack; pissant
The conservative movement really needs to abandon this paranoia and address the issues, established facts, and ideas on the ground.

How does something come to be an "established fact"? What is the process by which something goes from "unthought of" to "posited" to "likely" to "established"?
94 posted on 09/26/2009 8:08:48 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Apple Blossom; theKid51; ourusa; BabyBMW

ping


95 posted on 09/26/2009 8:08:55 AM PDT by bmwcyle (We need more Joe Wilson's. OBAMA is ACORN ACORN is OBAMA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Indecision IS what’s in America’s worst interests.


96 posted on 09/26/2009 8:09:52 AM PDT by Beach555
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

But we will get to taunt him better here!

Seriously, I don’t give a rat’s a$$ what happens to him. Kick his crap to the curb and leave him to the citizens of the United States, lets see how far he gets hitchhiking out of DC. I don’t care, I just want him OUT of MY house.

Then we go for Nancy and the rest who covered up the bastards litterbox for him.

I am pissed off. In case anyone was wondering.


97 posted on 09/26/2009 8:11:21 AM PDT by Danae (No political party should pick candidates. That's the voters job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Beach555

Certainly that is right up there on the top ten list.


98 posted on 09/26/2009 8:13:33 AM PDT by Danae (No political party should pick candidates. That's the voters job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA
No law can overturn the Constitution, but the democrat criminal enterprise has figured out that they can just ignore the parts of the contract they don't want to abide by and the pirate John Roberts will give them a pass with a smile on his treacherous face. The Constitution has been abrogated, it's just that we the people have yet to realize we are no longer the sovereigns of this federal oligarchy the DNC has arranged.
99 posted on 09/26/2009 8:16:32 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Dems, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Churchjack

The supposition that there is a BC is a typical leftist lie floated at FR regularly now. If you’re implying some CoLB imgae on the Internet, why wouldn’t you specify that? You’re trying to be evasive and play misdirection to serve your little affirmative action fraud, that’s why.


100 posted on 09/26/2009 8:20:33 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Dems, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-189 next last

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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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