from reader Michael
Posted on | July 28, 2010 | 4 Comments
Michael |
Submitted on 2010/07/27 at 4:49pm
Every public official in the United States takes the same oath, to support and defend the U.S. Constitution. From the local level on up. They all have a legal and moral duty to do so. It has been said, “ignorance of the law is no excuse.” If the Constitution is the supreme Law of the Land, as Article VI says it is, then they have no excuse for failing to take real action when confronted with the factual evidence. Maybe if citizen across this nation had a succinct packet of documents detailing this evidence they could confront their local City and Town officials and demand that they take action. They too swore to support the Constitution and we the People have a right to answers. We could video tape them being presented with these documents and then upload that to the internet for all to see. They either honor their oath or they don’t, but at lest we can make a public record of it and wake up the people in mass. Question, is Section 3. of Article XIV self-enacting? When a public Official rebels against the supreme Law of the Land, by refusing to defend and support it after being confronted with evidence that it is being violated, are they not guilty of willful neglect of official duty? Just some thoughts, keep up the fight shame them with the light of TRUTH ! |
Another day past by, the clerks of the Supreme court still didn’t docket my resubmission to Justice Alito |
Comments
4 Responses to “from reader Michael”
Leave a Reply
July 28th, 2010 @ 3:22 pm
Yeah, there is that pesky little requirement of actual factual evidence.
What factual evidence exists?
I am sure this will not be posted, because I am asking a question Orly cannot answer.
July 29th, 2010 @ 7:08 am
technical correction – you obviously meant to refer to Section 3 of the AMENDMENT XIV
July 29th, 2010 @ 8:26 am
It’s simple, Julia.
Obama readily admits his father was never a U.S. Citizen……Conclusion, he cannot meet the “Natural born Citizen requirement.”
Authority,that fails to validate its “Authority” is of no authority at all. It is null and void and of no “legal” force or effect. Just because they Act contrary to the Constitution, doesn’t mean they act with Authority.
Also, Photo shop documents do not qualify as “factual evidence” and the burden of proof is on he who asserts the claim. Since it is Obama that asserts he meets the “Constitutional requirements to qualify for the position, then it is up to him, the asserting party to provide verifiable proof.
But, then again, we already know he cannot do that, because he has already admitted his birth father was NEVER a U.S. Citizen.
July 29th, 2010 @ 10:33 am
I stand corrected, Lenny.
Thank you.