WHAT HAPPENED AT OBAMA-NO-SHOW TRIAL
Georgia citizens today delivered sworn testimony to a court that Barack Obama is slam-dunk disqualified from having his name on the 2012 presidential ballot in the state, because his father never was a U.S. citizen, which prevents him from qualifying as a “natural-born citizen” as the U.S. Constitution requires for a president.
The historic hearing was the first time that a court has accepted arguments on the merits of the controversy over Obama’s status. His critics say he never met the constitutional requirements to occupy the Oval Office, and the states and Congress failed in their obligations to make sure only a qualified president is inaugurated. His supporters, meanwhile, argue he won the 2008 election and therefore was “vetted” by America.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
2 comments:
Is this one of those circumstances where the judiciary really has no authority, but the ruling is fine because it supports your point of view?
That seems to happen a lot with you.
The court can rule, but it is not up to the court to remove Obama from the ballot. A ruling alone can't do that. The court's opinion would then be considered by the Secretary of State of Georgia, and if the Secretary of State agrees with the ruling of the court, based on respect of the court's legal understanding of this issue, then the Secretary of State can remove Obama from the ballot. In other words, the courts opinion does not make it happen, but would be considered strongly in the decision making process. The Judiciary has no authority to force Obama off the ballot. That is up to the Secretary of State. Your ignorance is astounding, Tom, which is why I normally do not entertain your poorly thought out comments. But, at least you are reading my site. Maybe you'll learn something. Ignorance, after all, is simply the state of not knowing. Then again, I must remember, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Post a Comment