Posted on | October 27, 2009 | 1 Comment
| Eric, NY |
Submitted on 2009/10/27 at 10:01pm
Article 1 sec 3 p7 7. Judgement in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgement and punishment, according to law. Definitions by Merriam Webster dictionary. To make void the double jeopardy clause. It would also seem to make the case that a court can and does have jurisdiction over those who might be impeached, including the president. It doesn’t say there must be impeachment before a court can try any elected official. p6 only states that to try a president in the senate is for impeachment only, no other crimes are tried there. art 1 sec6 p1 regarding the legislature only; They shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place. Even they are not above the law for the crimes listed. Why should the president be any more privileged to commit treason, felony or breach of the peace? |
Comments
One Response to “”












29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy, 
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld 

October 28th, 2009 @ 12:20 am
This is why I keep saying Obama just needs to be sued for fraud!
The place to bring a civil suit against Obama for fraud is in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
File civil for fraud! Don’t worry about trying to get the court to remove him from office. Sue for damages claiming $10 million, or $50 million or whatever and force him to expose his records to defend himnself against the fraud he committed!
By merely EXPOSING his fraud through the court will cause the fraud to be exposed and everything else will fall like a house of cards!