The VP Landscape: Hurry Up And Wait

Jack Ames

By continuing to run for President Obama continues to ignore the Constitution of the U.S.A.

HE IS NOT A U.S. CITIZEN; HE IS NOT A NATURALIZED CITIZEN; NOR IS HE "NATURAL BORN. "THESE ARE THE THE MOST FLAGRANT ACTS POSSIBLE....AND HE HAS TAKEN CONSTITUTIOAL LAW. HE IS A CITIZEN OF KENYA TO PUT THE FROSTING ON THE CAKE.

THE FOLLOWING FROM HAWAII'S ATTORNRY GENERAL IS MOST SPECIFIC,,,,

"In the federal system, the states are given duties. Holding elections is one of the duties they are given, including federal elections, including president. They have to see that all laws are enforced in those elections, including what is specified in the U.S. Constitution. Because Hawaii has the b.c. of Barack Obama according to Obama’s web site, it falls to Hawaii to check the b.c.
This is an obligation it has under the U.S. Constitution as an election administrator, and under federal supremacy, and under the Constitution directly to see that Obama meets the requirements written in the U.S. Constitution. When state officials take an oath to the Constitution of the United States, they take on that obligation to make sure that anyone running for president of the United States meets all qualifications in the U.S. Constitution.
Because Hawaii is the alleged holder of the Obama b.c., it has the obligation to check its original. It has that obligation since its own officials have determined that Obama has posted a b.c. on his web page lacking the seal and signature. Hawaii has that duty as a direct duty under the U.S. Constitution. That preempts state law on b.c. privacy.
Others have standing to sue in federal court to get Hawaii to disclose the b.c. based on all the above if Hawaii doesn’t spontaneously investigate this itself. Hawaii should do so. It has the right to and the duty to. That comes directly from the U.S. Constitution. That preempts state law.
Obama by posting a fake b.c. may have engaged in some form of electoral fraud. This accrues as more information is posted. This accrues as his campaign knows the state of Hawaii has stated that the b.c. on the Obama web page lacks the seal and signature. The Obama campaign now has notice that the b.c. on the Obama web page lacks the seal and signature and that the state of Hawaii has said that.
That is additional evidence for the state of Hawaii to act. Its additional evidence for state and federal courts to act. Other state courts have jurisdiction to require Obama to give them a valid Hawaii b.c. So do other state electoral officials. Any state electoral official, local or state, has standing now to challenge Obama on the ballot because the state of Hawaii has said the b.c. on the Obama web page lacks the seal and signature.
Each state of the United States has an obligation to remove Obama from its ballot. This is an obligation under the U.S. Constitution on each state.
Moreover, Obama is not entitled to his delegates at the Democratic National Convention because he is using a b.c. on his web page that the state of Hawaii says lacks the seal and signature. Delegates pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States and most have sworn allegiance to the U.S. Constitution. They have an obligation to deny Obama the nomination while he is using a b.c. determined by the state of Hawaii to lack the seal and signature on his web page.
==
In fighting fraud, it obviously makes no sense to say only the person engaging in possible fraud can request an investigation of the possible fraud. If a state has any information from any source that indicates possible error, fraud, or harm to 3rd parties, that gives it standing to investigate.
A law designed to prevent fraud can not be used to perpetuate a fraud. The law against giving b.c.’s to others is to prevent their using it for fraud. But here the issue is that Obama’s web page may be harming others by error or fraud.
There need not be fraud. The same arguments apply to error. Innocent parties that may be harmed by error have standing to seek correction or confirmation. That is a right they have in state and federal court. The state of Hawaii has a direct obligation under the U.S. Constitution to avoid error or fraud in this case.
The state of Hawaii, other states, and federal courts and agencies have an obligation to weight the costs and harms. The harm of allowing a b.c. that the state of Hawaii has said lacks the signature and seal to be accepted when posted on a candidate’s web page is huge. That undermines the public trust in all b.c.’s everywhere for all purposes. It undermines the rule of law in elections. It perpetuates that candidates are not accountable to the laws before, while and after elected.
Obama has an obligation himself as an elected official and candidate to see that the laws are upheld by his campaign. Using a b.c. that the state of Hawaii has said lacks the seal and signature on his web page is a failure by him. It disqualifies him from being president on a moral level."

OBAMA SHOULD GRACEFULLY BOW OUT OF HIS RUNING FOR OFFICE AND PERHAPS RUN FOR HIS LIFE.