I recently called Bill O’Reilly of Fox a Coward for his remarks about Orly Taitz. I called O’Reilly a coward for the manner in which he made his statements, for his lack of knowledge about the eligibility issues and for not covering the eligibility issues surrounding Obama.
Ex Marine or no ex Marine, Judge David O. Carter, is there any reason I should not refer to you as a coward for taking the easy way out and with using flawed logic and understanding of the US Constitution to join the ranks of those giving the usurper Barack Obama a free ride.
Today, october 29, 2009, Judge David O. Carter dismissed the case brought against Obama by Captain Pamela Barnett, et al. The lawsuit alleges that Obama is not a natural born citizen.
There is a preponderance of evidence that Obama is not a natural born citizen, from his father being Kenyan and a British citizen, to absolutely no evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii.
Here is the crux of Judge Carter’s decision:
“Interpreting the Constitution is a serious and crucial task with which the federal courts of this nation have been entrusted under Article III. However, that very same Constitution puts limits on the reach of the federal courts. One of those limits is that the Constitution defines processes through which the President can be removed from office. The Constitution does not include a role for the Court in that process. Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by We the People‚ sixty-nine million of the people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.”
I posted the following on this blog earlier:
“There is at least one critical flaw in Judge Carter’s logic and ruling.
“One of those limits is that the Constitution defines processes through which the President can be
removed from office. The Constitution does not include a role for the Court in that process.”
The statement above is true.
However, only as it applies to the POTUS.
And, to be POTUS, one has to be eligible.
Winning the popular vote.
Winning the electoral college vote.
Getting the approval of Congress.
Being sworn in by a Supreme Court justice.
None of the above alone makes one POTUS.
First and foremost, one must be constitutionally eligible.
Therefore, Carter’s rational is incorrect.
Obama, as an illegal usurper, traitor and possible illegal alien
can be removed and arrested.”
Judge Carter is wrong. He could issue an order today for discovery to ascertain whether or not Obama is a usurper. Upon finding Obama ineligible, Judge Carter could issue an order for Obama’s arrest.
Judge Carter, are you a coward?
Is there some other excuse?
You might respond with “State election officials or party officials could have vetted Obama.”
They did not. That is why we have a system of checks and balances.
You might ask, “Who are you to question a judge?”
A natural born citizen of the US.
An expert by training and many years of practice in logic.
I have prepared a motion, filed the motion, opposed an attorney and won.
Besides that, this is not rocket science.
Obama is not POTUS.
No magic incantation,
Judge David O. Carter, you have the power and the constitutional obligation to ascertain if Obama is eligible.
If not eligible, you have the power and obligation to remove him.