As I reported yesterday, one by one, Senator after Senator stood up on the Senate floor to blast the administration for siding against the Honduran’s for constitutionally ousting a “Tyrant of a President”:
(snips from Atlas Shrugs): The Honduran constitution, enacted in 1982, has 378 articles. 6 of these articles are “cast in stone”, meaning that they can NOT be changed. These 6 articles deal with defining the type of government, territory claims, and presidential term limits.
– Article 42, Section 5 says that anyone who is found to “incite, promote, or aid in the continuation or re-election of the President” would face loss of citizenship.
Any changes to the constitution have to be initiated by the legislative branch. The congress has to convene a constituent assembly. That’s basically a group of people selected by the congress to analyze any proposed changes and form those ideas into the new constitution. After the proposed changes are formulated, the congress would approve them to be put to a national referendum. The executive branch (the President) has nothing to do with that process. Zeyala didn’t think that the congress would go along with his ideas of staying in power so he decided he’d call his own referendum. He doesn’t have the authority to do that – remember that constitutional changes can only be done by the legislature AND the term limits are one of the articles cast in stone – but he goes ahead and calls one anyway.
The Honduran Supreme Court says “Sorry Zeyala, you can’t do a rereferendum. That’s not within your power as president”. Damn those people on the Supreme Court! They figured out the ruse! They ruled unanimously that regardless of what you call it, if it acts like a rereferendum the president can’t do it. Zeyala continues to talk of doing the poll on June 28 regardless of the Supreme Court. The Congress looks at the poll that Zeyala wants to do and gives an opinion that the poll would be illegal and they will not support it. Zeyala’s own political party is in control of the congress.
The Attorney General says that the President has committed treason and asks for him to be removed from office. The Congress created a commission to examine Zelaya’s actions and determines removal from office is appropriate.
Once Zeyala had been removed, the President of the Congress (Roberto Micheletti) was sworn in as the new President of Honduras. This was exactly the person that is indicated by the constitution. It was a proper and legal succession of the presidency. The first thing that Micheletti did was confirm that the regularly scheduled elections would be held in November. His post is temporary until the new President was duly elected.
Now, how dare those Honduran citizens and government officials be so brash as to follow their Constitution? How dare they?!!! According to our Commander in Thief, all those Hondurans in support of upholding their Constitution and Rule of Law are traitors to their country:
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release June 28, 2009
Statement from President on the situation in Honduras
“I am deeply concerned by reports coming out of Honduras regarding the detention and expulsion of President Mel Zelaya. As the Organization of American States did on Friday, I call on all political and social actors in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Any existing tensions and disputes must be resolved peacefully through dialogue free from any outside interference.”
uh-huh Mr Commander in Thief, would you just verify for me which rule of law you are referring to here, the Honduras Constitution or the illegitimate laws of your dictator friends? For if it is the Rule of Law under the Honduran Constitution, I think we need to sit down and take a deeper look at that law degree you say is legit, because you seem to be confused as to what the definition of “rule of law” means. But then, maybe AT has a scenerio that explains your actions quite clearly for us:
(now snips from AT): Take this hypothetical: imagine that Barack Obama announced that he was going to hold a referendum on legalizing a third term for himself. Imagine that even his attorney general, Eric Holder, advised him that it was illegal. Imagine that the Supreme Court ruled that holding the referendum was unconstitutional. In spite of that, let’s imagine that Obama coerced the FEC into holding the referendum anyway. Then – let’s further imagine — we found out that Venezuelan strongman Chávez (who has pulled off a similar power grab in his own country) was financing the referendum. What should the Joint Chiefs do in such a case? And if they removed Obama from office, would they be destroying the Constitution or preserving it?
Actually, this is in play. Watch for another backdoor illegal change to the constitution much like the ones that formed the illegal fed reserve and the illegal income tax laws that Wilson apologized for:
January 9, 2009 ~ 111th CONGRESS ~ H. J. RES. 5 ~ Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.
Kind of reminds me of that pesky “natural born citizen” requirement in Article II, Section I, Clause V of our Constitution that they have been trying to get rid of for the past 9 years:
H.J.Res. 88: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to make eligible for the Office of President a person who has been a United States citizen for twenty years.
It doesn’t take a college degree, let alone a law degree to know that there is substantial circumstantial evidence that we US citizens may be in for a “coup d’etat” of our own if the general public does not get with the program and take their heads out of the sand and start educating themselves about the threats already in place, threats that we may face right here at home.
(again from AT): In a press conference on June 23, Obamasaid: “I’ve made it clear that the United States respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering with Iran’s affairs.” He never called upon the Iranian mullahs to “respect democratic norms.” On the contrary, he ostentatiously refuses to “meddle” in Iran…
On Tuesday, U.N. General Assembly piled on, condemning the “coup” in Honduras and demanding that Zelaya be returned to office. It passed – by acclamation – a resolution calling upon all member states not to recognize the new government.Obama and the U.N. passed up an opportunity to recognize the will of Honduran people and the sanctity of their Constitution. It has been widely reported in the Spanish-language press, but not here in the United States, that the anti-Zelaya demonstrations in Tegucigalpa are huge, demonstrating that the Honduran people support the actions of their Congress and Supreme Court in removing Zelaya from office.
The new president of Honduras, Roberto Micheletti, said Thursday: “I am concerned that President Obama – for whom we have a great deal of respect and admiration, as we do for his people – should shun us without having heard our explanation” for the removal of Zelaya. He added: “However, of Señor Chávez we can expect anything: he has already threatened to invade the country. This is a lack of respect.” Former U.S. diplomat and democracy advocate Martin Barillas noted that in an interview Thursday, “Micheletti said that 80 percent of his compatriots support his presidency, a claim that has been bolstered by the throngs of supporters appearing on the streets of Tegucigalpa, the capital city. Some protesters in the Honduran capital brandished placards telling President Obama, in English, that they too have a dream of democracy.”
Obama, yet again, on the side of evil.
While this may come as a surprise to many new readers, it is of absolutely “NO” surprise to me. Nothing this new administration does differs from any of the findings/facts of the background research I have been doing for nearly a year now. Facts I warned voters to consider before going to the ballot box last November.
And thankfully, many who now have severe buyers remorse and are no longer calling me a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist and though I am as eager as ever to keep on educating those who still don’t quite “get it”, I’ve learned not to be so outspoken in bringing up politics at every chance. Instead I wait for the opening, then I “GO TO TOWN”!
So, whileI have along way to go, if and when any of those fore mentioned resolutions comes out to alter our constitution and the qualifications and terms limits of our US Presidency, I will have already gained the respect of those who once naysayers and be able to help educate them so they make informed and constitutional votes at the ballot box from here on in.
UPDATE: Here we go, the campaign to cover-up for the Commander in Thief’s agenda begins. It’s called “Get rid of the Evidence”:
(just in this afternoon from Beckwith): Fight The Smears Disappears Barack Obamais now hiding his short form Certification of Live Birth. It appears that Obama has taken down his “Fight the Smears” website. As the public groundswell surrounding Obama’s birth certificate grows, Obamahas removed his phony Certification of Live Birth from the Internet. The one at the link in the “share the fact” box is also gone. What’s really strange is the archived copies in the WayBackMachine, the Internet Archive, are also gone. Removing those copies required additional steps to remove and should be beyond Obama’s reach — but I guess not.
But guess what? Obama’s published lies are in my cache. I learned a long time ago that anything Obama sensitive has to be cached, because Obama and the Obots will take it down. What I never noticed before, is the damning statement in the window in the left column, under the legend, “Share the Facts Copy the text below and paste it into your email.” It is also in the banner at the top of the page. The statement reads (cursor down), “The fact is Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America.” A “native born citizen” is not the same as a “natural born citizen.” A “native born citizen” is any person born in the mainland US. Anchor babies are “native born citizens.” A “natural born citizen” must be born in the mainland US and must have TWO US citizen parents. Obama knows he had only one US parent. The man knows he is occupying the Oval Office in violation of the requirements of the US Constitution and applicable Supreme Court caselaw.
By the way, this page, at the bottom, also contains Obama’sadmission that he was, “at birth,” a citizen of Kenya and a British subject.
Take notice also that the birth certification form shown here is the short form certification that has “NO” official Hawaiian state seal on it. It is the photo copy that all Senators and Congressman referred us to as proof of Obama’s eligibility, including none other than Senator Johnson’s office who ripped me for using the internet for my research:
quoting from the letter of response I received from Sen Johnson office requesting that they investigate and urging the Senate “NOT” confirm the electoral votes, Sen Johnson’s office replies:
Dated December 4, 2008: “Thank you for contacting me regarding internet rumors.”(I used information from long standing reputable international news sites such as the Times of London, etc)
Sen Johnson then goes on to say: “Please be aware that I am prohibited from using my official Senate office to discuss political campaigns.” (Again, I remind you that this is a response to a letter I sent immediately AFTER the election)
Now let’s get to the meat of this letter. Johnson( in all actuality, probably one of his progressive lib staffers) in ripping me for using the internet to research, closes by saying: “To address your particular allegations of forgery, it should be noted that Senator Obama has released the birth certificate issued by the State of Hawaii, showing he was born in that state. It has been widely available on the internet for months, and everyone and anyone who wants to review it can visit any number of websites, including http://www.newsweek.com/id/154599 or http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html.”
The most infuriating thing here is in my initial letter to Johnson’s office, I refer to the factcheck site and Obama’s admission of having dual citizenship at birth. I not only ask him to vote against Obama’s electoral votes, I also asked him to not confirm any for McCain. The copy of the reply letter I sent has mysteriously been scrubbed from SCRIBD. I will get it reloaded soon.
Will anyone in Congress have the spine to finally address this issue? I won’t be holding my breath, but it never hurts to hold on to the faith that they might.
OK, that was easy, hit it on the 1st try:
BTW..I NEVER got a response to this letter from Johnson or Herseth-Sandlin, only Thune and his reply was just as lame as Johnson’s intitial one.