© Miri WTPOTUS January 4, 2013
Today is the day that the Electoral College votes will be counted. Today is the day that we will see if anybody objects to the failure of Barack Hussein Obama II to “qualify” for the presidency.
Here‘s a short explanation of what will happen:
In a ceremony that starts today at 1 p.m. in the House Chamber, tradition dictates Senate pages carry boxes with votes from the states into the Senate, where they’re then passed from hand to hand. The Senate Parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, presents the votes to the secretary of the Senate, Nancy Erickson, who passes the results to House Parliamentarian Thomas J. Wickham Jr., who hands them to Vice President Biden. All members of Congress – both from the House of Representatives and the Senate – are expected be present for the ceremony.
Biden will give the results to tellers, who verify their authenticity and record each vote.
At the end of it all, Biden will read the results and have them recorded for posterity. Most likely the vice president will tell us what we already know – that he and Obama have been reelected.
The only possible disruption to this process would be if both a House or Senate member submitted a challenge to a state’s vote tally in writing. That would trigger each chamber to consider and vote on the objection.
From the U.S. Code:
Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision …
From Amendment 20 of the U.S. Constitution:
3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
Notice that if one reads carefully, it appears that the onus is upon the President elect to QUALIFY for the office. When does one become President elect? After the election or after the electoral votes are counted and “recorded for posterity?”
If the latter, then it seems to me that there is still a period of time between the counting of the electoral votes and the swearing in during which a President elect can FAIL to qualify. Whatever the case, the ONUS clearly is upon the person wanting to become president to prove that he or she qualifies. Otherwise, how can one “fail” to qualify? There’s a test and the person passes or fails. There’s no presumption that any person IS qualified until others prove that he or she is NOT qualified. The onus is upon the person to prove his or her qualifications.
You can watch the farce live on C-SPAN at 1:00 P.M. Eastern time.
In related news, it should come as no surprise that Orly Taitz was frustrated in her latest quest to prove Obama’s ineligibility:
A federal judge has rejected a challenge by so-called “birthers” seeking to halt Friday’s scheduled counting of Electoral College votes for President Barack Obama in their latest attempt to overturn Obama’s presidency.
In a courtroom packed with supporters of the birther movement, U.S. District Court Judge Morrison C. England rejected the petition for a temporary restraining order filed by Orly Taitz, a California dentist and attorney who has lost challenges in several states seeking to prove that Obama is not a U.S. citizen.
The judge ruled Thursday that the petition did not meet the basic requirements for a restraining order, including that attorneys prove their case is likely to succeed at a trial, and said the plaintiffs lacked standing, failed to submit legal documents on time and had made unsupported claims.
“The state of Hawaii has already certified all of this to be not true,” the judge said. …
England rejected Taitz’s pleas to allow a man from Florida to testify about what she said are inconsistencies in the typeface on the birth certificate Obama released, which she said would “prove beyond a reasonable shadow of a doubt that the documents are forgeries.”
The judge said he had only approved oral arguments during a “courtesy hearing,” which was not legally required, to “show that this court would look at the arguments presented.” …
“Even if this is all true in their wildest hopes … they haven’t presented any evidence to show that he is not a natural born citizen,” [Taitz’s opponent Assistant U.S. Attorney Edward] Olsen added.
Here’s another story that continues in the Alinsky ridicule vein.
Taitz sought to introduce evidence from witnesses about the font size of the type on the president’s birth certificate, as well as from an investigation launched by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona’s Maricopa County.
Obama staffers had long ignored the claims, but finally addressed them in the latest campaign when Donald Trump began to raise the issue. A copy of the president’s birth certificate from Hawaii was posted on the White House website in an effort to put the matter to an end.
Mention of that by Assistant U.S. Attorney Edward Olsen, who was representing the federal government in court Thursday, brought derisive chuckles from the courtroom audience.
It’s interesting that Olsen didn’t bother to bring to court a CERTIFIED copy of “the president’s birth certificate from Hawaii.” It’s interesting that the judge allowed no evidence to be introduced.
How much simpler it would be to put the issue to rest by presenting this judge (and the world) with proof that Obama is eligible, by admitting into evidence the “proof” (the birth certificate) that Obama and Olsen want us to believe exists. If Hawaii truly certified that Obama is eligible by producing an authentic, certified birth certificate for Obama’s lawyers, then what’s the problem with presenting it to a court of law?
Upon WHAT does this judge base his conclusion that Hawaii has certified Obama’s eligibility, if there’s no evidence presented to the court?
As you can see, Assistant U.S. Attorney Olsen seems rather unfamiliar with the Constitution, which puts the onus upon the candidate “to qualify” and not upon objectors to PROVE that the person “is not a natural born citizen.”
To accept all comers as presumed qualified for the most powerful office in the world until proven unqualified defies logic and common sense. And yet that’s exactly what Obama supporters want everyone to believe.
Some “obots” even cry, “innocent until proven guilty,” when someone questions Obama’s eligibility, as if failing to qualify for the presidency is a crime. It’s not.
No more than failing to qualify for any other JOB is a crime.
No employer assumes that every job applicant is qualified. Job applicants must prove their qualifications to their employers.
No person is OWED a particular job. No law demands that a person be given the job, unless the employer can PROVE that the person does not qualify. That’s insane.
But then again, we’re talking about obots, who prefer to accuse us of being racist bigots instead of simply looking at our arguments rationally. We would be as opposed to any other candidate who refuses to prove that he or she is qualified UNDER THE CONSTITUTION for the presidency.
The votes are to be counted very shortly. Let the circus begin.
Mark’s Profile from 2008….
But CAN you FAKE a Birth Certificate? IS Pelosi PHOTOSHOPPING!
The article is about that “new” photo of Barry and Biden discussing the situation in Benghazi, but not in the Situation Room and also about Pelosi’s adventures in photoshopping, among other things.
” … Inconsistencies like this one, which asks, “If the attack began at 3:30 p.m. (D.C. time), 9:30 p.m. (Benghazi) – then what was happening at 7:30 p.m. when this picture was taken? Obviously POTUS was not situationally aware. Was this the ‘first’ notification of the crisis? Yet it is a full four hours after the attack began. … [About Pelosi’s photo] All this prompted writer and graphic artist Oleg Atbashian, a Ukrainian émigré, to mock the image with one of his own.
The creator of the satirical website ThePeoplesCube.com, accompanied the image with this bit of cloaked wisdom: “You see, photography is not meant to record history, but rather communicate the truths the party seeks to communicate to the people. The party must alter photographs and even documents in order to teach the people how to correctly think about history and present circumstances.””
This man lived in Ukraine, presumably in the former SOVIET UNION, so he probably knows first hand how communist propaganda works. Notice how he included “documents” in his quote. Yes, the Soviets altered documents in order to TEACH people how to think “correctly” about BOGUS “history”. Just like Winston in 1984.
Okay. Alex Jones can come off as a nutter, but he was clearly a man on a mission.
BTW, Zen…that’s the first thing that came to mind. They aren’t ashamed or afraid of anything anymore. Four more years without brakes. God help us all.
Yikes!!!…. Yes Post~Mortem….. Rock Bottom…..
Prof says Newtown involved ‘crisis actors’. OK, try to get past the rug on the prof’s head and the lead in in sentence about him being known for conspiracy theories. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-fau-prof-newtown-20130107,0,4267958.story
What A Hoot: I saw this early this morning and was composing a post about it when you posted this. The post is up now.
Look at the poll #’s. Most people believe him. He is going to get fired. No doubt.
UH OH. http://redflagnews.com/headlines/mystery-highly-popular-youtube-gun-channel-owner-found-shot-dead-on-rural-georgia-road
“Keith Ratliff, who was a business partner at FPSRussia, YouTube’s ninth most popular channel with more than three million active subscribers and a combined half billion views, was discovered on a rural road in Carnesville, Georgia.
Ratliff had a single gunshot wound the head and police are treating his death as a homicide.
When authorities made the grisly discovery on Thursday, they noticed there were several guns near Ratliff, according to a local radio station report.
‘For him not to pull out that gun and try to defend himself, he had to feel comfortable around somebody. Either that or he was ambushed,’ said Ratliff’s heartbroken widow, Amanda.”
Mysterious? Maybe, maybe not so mysterious, considering the current climate and pogrom against gun owners.
Remember that this is just a conference on Feb. 15 to determine if the Supremes will hear this case. It has to be approved by 3 or 4 Supremes to determine if they will hear the case. I can’t remember how many votes of the Supremes it takes. We have seen several cases get to Conference and then not be chosen as a case they want to undertake. Thus far the Supremes have chosen to evade the subject and issue.
from A G’s above… part II… very interesting stuff …. LET’S ROLL!!!