Now that the Obama-socialist-democrat-dominated House and Senate has had a log thrown in its tracks, and is in disarray, it is an opportune moment to review and regroup in ferreting out the strategies to remove Obama based on his lack of eligibility. Having lost his first layer of protection, and potentially his NWO backing, Obama’s eligibility shield has cracks that can only get larger, if we widen them effectively.
Make no mistake, we are facing a corrupt judiciary, one which has scorned this constitutional question and laughed at avoiding it. We understand that the entire Congress willfully ignored their oath of office while others actively committed fraud against the American people and the 50 states. The fraud is deep and widespread, which means that we the people are going to have to enforce the constitution, and make them enforce it.
A variety of methods have been discussed to remove Obama, all of them Constitutional. The major criteria for for evaluating any of these options should include:
- which option provides for the invalidation of all of his actions, appointments and laws signed?
- which option provides for immediate relief?
- which option will provide for a definition of ‘natural born citizen’, or provide a pathway to a definition?
- is there any option that would prevent prosecution of Obama for the numerous crimes committed during his candidacy and occupation of the White House?
The Supreme Court
The Kerchner versus Obama & Congress Case. A petition for writ of certiorari has been docketed in the Supreme Court, and a decision on whether to accept, reject, or delay a decision based on the Justice Department’s request for more time was due on Wednesday, November 3. Because the Supreme Court operates on paper for this type of proceeding, the decision either way should be known by Friday at the earliest.
Recall that Kerchner and Apuzzo have produced the most extensive historical record on the meaning of ‘natural born citizen’, and have articulated that material within their briefs as this case has moved through the court system. In contrast, Obama has argued a straw man case on standing and court jurisdiction–a pattern, I might add, in most of the Justice department cases right now. Obama has not submitted any substantive material to defend himself. Obama’s and the Court’s silence is tacit admission that the facts presented are true.
Taking the case will allow for the definition of natural born citizen, and, in my opinion, would either directly result in the removal of Obama or indirectly through subsequent action of Congress, if directed by the Court to apply its definition and investigate. This is also an option that could produce an immediate resignation by Obama for other reasons than the exposure of his background. If he is removed pursuant to a Supreme Court decision, Congress would be obliged to review and rescind all executive actions and laws signed.
I doubt that the definition of ‘natural born citizen’ will be remanded back to the Federal Appeals court, or to Congress but the investigation may be. Any appeals court or Congressional definition would of necessity be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
Thus, a Supreme Court review of the Kerchner case meets most of the criteria identified above: it produces a definition of ‘natural born citizen’, it forces the removal of Obama and allows for the review and rescinding of his actions and laws signed. Is it immediate relief? Not if the usurper is allowed to serve while the Supreme Court is reviewing his case. Is the removal of Obama immediate in this option? It could be if it was taken seriously by the Court.
Prosecution after removal from office, including the crime of fraudulently holding the office of the President, remain unconstrained by the statute of limitations. Even if he resigns to escape a Supreme Court review
Additional thoughts on the Supremes
The uncomfortable position of the Supremes right now make the Kerchner case THE test of how far the corruption/infiltration and takeover has gone. Chief ‘Justice’ John Roberts did not flub the oath by accident, nor did Obama. Like children, they couldn’t believe they were getting away with it. Then what followed was at least one additional swearing in ceremony without a bible and out of the public view.
In addition, Obama compromised the Justices when he visited them on January 14, 2009; all but Justice Alito were in the room.
The decision of the Supreme Court to take the case or not, in my view, also involves Obama’s ‘protection’ –whether it is the diminished democrats, his financiers, the CIA, the european banksters, or some combination. And where I make the leap with the Supreme Court is to assume that at least one if not several Justices are part of, serving, or bought by these NWO types. In my opinion, if the agenda of the NWO is too exposed or in jeopardy by Obama’s incompetence, his protection is lost and the Supreme Court will take the case.
And, it is always possible that they will take the case because they understand their duty to uphold the constitution, and suddenly find their courage and honor.
But what if they don’t grant the petition? How angry are millions of us going to be? Is this why Obama is skedaddling out of the country?
Several factors and more than a few rumors suggest that resignation is an immediate option for Obama. Any number of factors could produce a resignation:
- Trying to avoid prosecution for high crimes and misdemeanors, eligibility, or impeachment;
- A subpoena from the House requiring a birth certificate or resignation by a date certain
- Forced by his handlers to resign for ‘personal’ or ‘health’ reasons
- A move by his Cabinet or the Democrats to remove him
- The Supreme Court takes the Kerchner case
Timing of any resignation is important to meeting the criterion of a solution which allows the repeal of every action he has taken. For example if he resigns before the Supreme Court hears the Kerchner case, will the case still be heard and definition of NBC determined? And can or will Congress review and repeal his actions? Resignation will not result in a definition of natural born citizen if all the cases are dropped.
Resignation for health or mental duress reasons could potentially complicate further investigations of Obama; but ‘insanity’ is ruled out by this author because of his narcissism; it is only a possibility if his handlers decide so or Obama’s underlying mental illness takes over from his controlled drugged state.
According this report, the chaos in the White House is even worse than reported by the ‘insider’ stories of the last few weeks. It reports that
President Obama was urged by the few White House insiders from whom he still takes advice to leave the country on his ten-day Asian trip, his longest trip abroad since becoming president, in order to not inflict any more damage to the Democratic Party in the wake of one of the worst electoral defeats for the party of an incumbent president in recent history.
I’m not sure about that, but other statements in this report are interesting in that they point out an effort to get Obama to overreact in public so the ground is laid for removal of Obama.
The 25th Amendment
There has been much recent discussion of the use of the 25th Amendment to remove Obama. Section 4 of the Amendment requires the Vice President and a majority of the cabinet to make the declaration to the President Pro-Tempore of the Senate (Dan Inoyue, D-Hi) and Speaker of the House that the President is unable to discharge his duties. The Vice President immediately acts as President. What happens after the invoking of the 25th Amendment provides more insight into who, and how a decision would be made on the next President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
The fundamental disability which prevents Obama from discharging his duties, in my opinion, is that he is illegally occupying the White House. Using that disability to remove Obama under the 25th Amendment, however, exposes the entire Cabinet and all the succeeding officials to charges of fraud–they have all served under him and supported him for two years.
The public call by LaRouche to invoke the 25th Amendment under the rubric of mental disability is enhanced by the ‘insider’ reports on the chaos in the White House and Obama’s instability. Most recently Wayne Madsen reports confirm the ‘insider’ information:
Top Democrats are still reeling from Obama’s bizarre behavior at a $7500-a-plate fundraiser at a stately mansion at Brown University in Rhode Island on October 25. The fundraiser, organized by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, was supposed to highlight Democratic Party unity…Obama briefly appeared at the fundraiser at Brown University, where Democratic loyalists paid $7500 to hear Obama speak, but departed after only twenty minutes, telling the assembled guests that he had to go back to the White House to “tuck in my daughters, walk the dog, and ‘scoop the poop.'” The Democratic faithful were appalled and shocked at Obama’s quick departure and one of the three reasons he gave for it: to scoop up dog turds as if the President of the United States actually performs such tasks with a phalanx of White House staff and Secret Service agents at his disposal.
Madsen reports that ex-CIA agents are scouring the globe for information and will release it selectively so as to provoke a response from Obama that would lay the foundation in American minds that Obama is not fit to serve. Madsen:
However, Biden and other Democratic and administration do believe that if Obama were to display some of the same reckless behavior publicly as many White House personnel have witnessed privately, there may be wide support for enactment of the provisions of the 25th Amendment. Such a public display by Obama that could trigger succession action might involve a public outburst, including the use of foul language or a statement that Obama believes there is a conspiracy against him.
The disability of the 25th Amendment was almost invoked in 1987 when President Reagan showed the first signs of Alzheimers.
Does the 25th Amendment Meet the Criteria?
Removing Obama through the 25th Amendment involves either using (a) his ineligibility for the office, or (b) his mental incapacity. Certainly the eligibility issue, and perhaps
a definition an affirmation of natural born citizen will be resolved, and all legislation, actions, and directions of Obama would be null and void after a full Congressional hearing and action. But hundreds of people go down if they all suddenly admit he is not eligible…no “I didn’t know” excuse will pass muster.
Do any of them have the courage to face their complicity?
If removed by the 25th Amendment by reason of mental disability, and absent any other pathway (e.g., the Supreme Court), Obama’s onerous acts would not necessarily be null and void…each would have to be steadily repealed by an increasingly American-dominated Congress.
A President can be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, including violating his duties like enforcing immigration laws, with impeachment proceedings initiated in the House, and then either convicted or acquitted in the Senate. Clinton was impeached but not convicted; Nixon resigned before he could be impeached.
The trail of investigations on Obama would be bound to lead to impeachment, but, as we all have stated here, impeachment is for real presidents. Obama is a usurper. Congress would love to drag out investigations as ‘pay back’, and frankly to continue to keep their positions and posture for 2012, leaving Obama to squirm. Congress should not be allowed to waste time, and should be cognizant that as long as the democrats still control the senate he will not be convicted.
Important research of Mario Apuzzo uncovered the Congressional Research Service ‘talking points’ delivered to Congress instructing how to respond to the public’s questions about eligibility. Which ever member of Congress requested that paper should be identified, and we all need to let Congress know that we know. Give them a copy of their own memo, and see how they respond. They know Obama is ineligible, so don’t waste time on hearings that may or may not lead to impeachment.
Impeachment proceedings would meet none of the criteria above, especially identifying Obama as a usurper, the definition of natural born citizen, and the nullification of all his actions.
Impeachment proceedings could be applied to Supreme Court Justices, however, and leaders of Congress not only for their regular crimes, but for the crime of enabling Obama to seize the White House.
Removal by Arrest
There are several scenarios that I envision could lead to his arrest, which would remove him from office but not define natural born citizen nor necessarily nullify Obama’s actions while occupying the White House. These include:
- Espionage. I can’t imagine the National Security Agency doesn’t also have his blackberry and other communications monitored; nor that a secret service agent hasn’t overheard something; or that another country is not aware of Obama’s foreign status. He could be caught in the act and arrested on the spot.
- The mail fraud, impersonation, social security/identity theft, and campaign cash fraud would result in his arrest, if it ever got to a court that would hear it, and if so, Obama would have left office to defend himself from the charges, paying for his own attorney.
- Failure to follow a Supreme Court or Congressional order to vacate the office. The ghost of Honduras bad-mouthing returns– Obama would have to be arrested and with military assistance.
A Must Do
The removal of Obama must be a top priority along with our efforts to rebuild a constitutional congress and to clean the house and senate of anti-American members.
The danger of not addressing eligibility is the precedent it sets, and with scoundrels like Orrin Hatch in the Senate, we would see Bobby Jindhal or Schwartzenegger as the 2012 republican nominee. Allowing Obama to remain in office without a peep on eligibility is amending the Constitution by fiat.
Not on my watch.