The Court and Congress Expected the Other to Resolve the
Obama Eligibility Question
Obama Eligibility Question
"A Place to Ask Questions to Get the Right Answers" blog has an interesting analysis on the April 15, 2010 testimony before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on the issue of the composition of the United States Supreme Court by Justice Clarence Thomas.
An excerpt from Mario Apuzzo, Esq. analysis:
Frankly, I'm not sure I agree with Mr. Apuzzo's analysis. All that can be gained from my perspective would be that we will have a school yard type volly of "it's your fault" ... "no it's not, it's your fault" until the usurping poe currently soiling the People's House continues to dismantle the USA and make enemies of the rest of the world.
During the 2008 campaign when the first lawsuits began to be filed in August, all one could hear over the din was how the Constitution does not disqualify anyone from RUNNING for POTUS, but only from SERVING as POTUS. We were told he must first win the election before there would be standing to file a lawsuit.
When he was proclaimed the winner of the election in November we were told the election had not been certified by the electors, therefore he had not officially been declared POTUS, thus the “president-elect” title was used for the following 2.5 months. Consequently, there were no valid reasons to object to his election.
Electors met in December to select the president and vice president. The electors sign, seal and certify packages of electoral votes and immediately send one set of votes to the President of the Senate. However, we were told unless and until the electoral votes are certified by a joint session of CONgre$$ there is no official winner of the election.
In January electoral votes are counted and tabulated before a joint session of both houses of CONgre$$, after which it is officially declared who has been elected President and Vice President of the United States of America. It is here that objections may be raised by members. Out of 435 criminals, not one SINator nor one (non-)representative had the … ummm … ahhh … errr…GUTS to object or question the eligibility of the poe. Consequently, on January 8, 2009 the poe and his side-kick were “officially” declared elected. But…but…but…he hasn’t actually been sworn in yet, so it is not official and he is not yet SERVING as potus became the battle cry for the next delay.
Then on January 14th, obama/biden paid a visit to the supreme court. Considering there were cases in the pipeline challenging obama’s constitutional eligibility to SERVE as president, this little “visit” remains highly suspect, IMHO, and our fate was sealed.
January 20, 2009 the biggest fraud in the history of the world was perpetrated not only on the USA, but the world.
SO -- now the illegal, ineligible poe is the SERVING potus. Many lawsuits have been filed only to now be told they have no standing.
What the hell does that mean? No standing? I am an American citizen -- a natural born American citizen -- as well as a taxpayer. Why do I not have standing? How is it that ONE person has standing to get prayer removed from schools? ONE person has standing to all but abolish Christmas in our schools and public forums? ONE person has standing to challenge “In God We Trust” on our currency or “One nation under God” in our pledge of allegiance, but NO ONE seems to have standing to challenge the constitutionality of an unconstitutional, illegal, ineligible person residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in Washington, D.C.?
And we sit here and bitch and regurgitate ad nauseam all the information we have had for two years while the poe systematically destroys the USA and every ally we have ever had, while bowing and scraping at the feet of our enemies.
I think I’ll just go back to bed and cover up my head. Perhaps tomorrow I’ll awake to a sane world once again.
An excerpt from Mario Apuzzo, Esq. analysis:
Rep. Serrano did not like Justice Thomas blaming Congress for the mishandling of the matter so he shoots back at Justice Thomas by telling him the Court failed to answer the Obama eligibility question when it should have but now is answering the question of whether someone who is not born in the United States can sit on the U.S. Supreme Court. From this comment we can conclude that Congress did not believe that it was its job to answer the question of whether Obama is eligible to be President and expected the judicial branch of government to answer that question.
Frankly, I'm not sure I agree with Mr. Apuzzo's analysis. All that can be gained from my perspective would be that we will have a school yard type volly of "it's your fault" ... "no it's not, it's your fault" until the usurping poe currently soiling the People's House continues to dismantle the USA and make enemies of the rest of the world.
During the 2008 campaign when the first lawsuits began to be filed in August, all one could hear over the din was how the Constitution does not disqualify anyone from RUNNING for POTUS, but only from SERVING as POTUS. We were told he must first win the election before there would be standing to file a lawsuit.
When he was proclaimed the winner of the election in November we were told the election had not been certified by the electors, therefore he had not officially been declared POTUS, thus the “president-elect” title was used for the following 2.5 months. Consequently, there were no valid reasons to object to his election.
Electors met in December to select the president and vice president. The electors sign, seal and certify packages of electoral votes and immediately send one set of votes to the President of the Senate. However, we were told unless and until the electoral votes are certified by a joint session of CONgre$$ there is no official winner of the election.
In January electoral votes are counted and tabulated before a joint session of both houses of CONgre$$, after which it is officially declared who has been elected President and Vice President of the United States of America. It is here that objections may be raised by members. Out of 435 criminals, not one SINator nor one (non-)representative had the … ummm … ahhh … errr…GUTS to object or question the eligibility of the poe. Consequently, on January 8, 2009 the poe and his side-kick were “officially” declared elected. But…but…but…he hasn’t actually been sworn in yet, so it is not official and he is not yet SERVING as potus became the battle cry for the next delay.
Then on January 14th, obama/biden paid a visit to the supreme court. Considering there were cases in the pipeline challenging obama’s constitutional eligibility to SERVE as president, this little “visit” remains highly suspect, IMHO, and our fate was sealed.
January 20, 2009 the biggest fraud in the history of the world was perpetrated not only on the USA, but the world.
SO -- now the illegal, ineligible poe is the SERVING potus. Many lawsuits have been filed only to now be told they have no standing.
What the hell does that mean? No standing? I am an American citizen -- a natural born American citizen -- as well as a taxpayer. Why do I not have standing? How is it that ONE person has standing to get prayer removed from schools? ONE person has standing to all but abolish Christmas in our schools and public forums? ONE person has standing to challenge “In God We Trust” on our currency or “One nation under God” in our pledge of allegiance, but NO ONE seems to have standing to challenge the constitutionality of an unconstitutional, illegal, ineligible person residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in Washington, D.C.?
And we sit here and bitch and regurgitate ad nauseam all the information we have had for two years while the poe systematically destroys the USA and every ally we have ever had, while bowing and scraping at the feet of our enemies.
I think I’ll just go back to bed and cover up my head. Perhaps tomorrow I’ll awake to a sane world once again.
Labels: illegal, Ineligible, Justice Thomas, lack of standing, Obama, SCOTUS, standing, unconstitutional
posted by Peanut | 9:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home