Wednesday, February 1, 2012


Hard to believe that as American Citizens, we would see the day that our Commander-in-Chief would deliberately disregard the law.

One has to wonder if there are reasons beyond a simple disregard for the law.

More to the point, could there be reasons to not appear in a court case that is essentially, mute - meaning that plans might be underway and in progress that will cause the legal system to be, in effect - null and void.

Yes - We're talking about Martial Law.

Read Entire Article

1 comment:

  1. According to the U.S. Constitution, Obama cannot EVER become president. THAT means past, present or future. Therefore, he is NOT president.

    The Constitution offers no provision to remove such an usurper by way of impeachment. The only remedy for doing that is found in Section 3 of the 20th Amendment; which, states…

    “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 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.”

    Note the words “if the President elect shall have failed to qualify…”

    Obama ran for president, was elected, and sworn in; however, he was then is now, and always will be in a state of “failure to qualify.” Therefore, Amendment 20, section 3 perfectly fits the situation at hand and is the proper remedy for removing Obama from the office he has improperly usurped.

    Since, relative to the office of president, the Constitution only provides for impeachment proceedings to be initiated against a legal sitting president, taking that route would only serve to legitimize the false notion that Obama is in fact a legal president.

    Therefore, even the mere suggestion that Obama be impeached also tends to legitimize him.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.