Wednesday, 27 January 2016

My Final Word (On The NBC Issue)

Re the NBC issue:

You can change the term, to say, its definition, arbitrarily all you want.  But to change the eligibility requirement ITSELF - i.e. the constitutional essence, the constitutional meaning; the ‘original intent’ meaning - would require a constitutional amendment.  Absent that, the requirement itself still stands; no matter how much finagling - or outright bamboozling - may be done, over the years, with the term, and its definition, arbitrarily given it.

It’s the same sort of game that is being played with the term and definition of ‘marriage’; although that term, and the original intent of that term, is not encoded in the constitutional law, as the NBC eligibility requirement for the office of the presidency is - and as extended, logically, to the office of the vice presidency as well (by constitutional amendment, it should be noted), given the terms of the constitutional contract for succession to the presidential office under certain circumstances.  

So: as to that set of offices (and that set only; as indication of their special nature): All of the above is by way of saying that Ted Cruz is not eligible for the presidential office.  Nor is Marco Rubio, for that matter.  And oh yes - neither, then, is Barry ’Barack'  Soetoro Obama.  Who, then, ‘simply’ needs to be removed from the office.  No impeachment process necessary, for he is not legally occupying it.

And, he can’t be made legally there, either, by an ex post facto law, because that is barred by the Constitution as well.  

Nation wreckers - erstwhile nation wreckers, that is - therefore, with all of their shenanigans, have come up against the rule of law.  And the rule of law trumps their best-laid schemes.

Their bad.

P.S. And just why are they doing this particular thing?
     I’ve got an idea.  How about: Because they are setting the country up for foreign influences and loyalties and allegiances.  ( = UN control; = the NWO.)  And they can’t very well do that if said foreign influences and loyalties and allegiances are specifically denied to the very top office in the nation, now can they??  Plus, think how this scenario goes along with foreign/Islamic law now in and increasingly in our court system...
     I rest my case.

See you in the springtime.

No comments: