DECIDE...IS AN OATH AN OATH OR JUST WORDS TO BE PARROTED?

Submitted by" Walter J Fitzpatrick

ASSERTIONS OF A LIBERAL - REBUTTAL BY A CONSERVATIVE

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 12:31 PM, JB Williams <jb.uspu@gmail.com> wrote:

Sadly, this is not true. It is a view from a fantasy world that does not actually exist.

The moment before a soldier takes his oath, he is a civilian. The moment after the oath is administered, the individual is a soldier, even before they attend boot camp.

Likewise, the trigger point of what is a "legitimate president" is the oath of office. Yes, Obama was an illegal candidate and an illegal president-elect. But then he was issued the oath of office and he sits in the Oval Office as the acting president of the United States. The oath is the trigger for official capacity.

A sitting president has constitutional immunity from criminal or civil prosecution and for good reason, even though this protection is damaging to the republic concerning the Obama regime, essentially protecting the enemy within.


Those who want to understand why we CANNOT take impeachment off the table must read related law on what can and cannot be done in dealing with a sitting president, no matter who or what that individual is or how they arrived at the moment of the oath of office.

http://law.onecle.com/constitution/article-2/47-presidential-immunity.html

PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY FROM JUDICIAL DIRECTION

By the decision of the Court in Mississippi v. Johnson,⁷²⁴ in 1867, the President was placed beyond the reach of judicial direction, either affirmative or restraining, in the exercise of his powers, whether constitutional or statutory, political or otherwise, save perhaps for what must be a small class of powers that are purely ministerial.⁷²⁵ An application for an injunction to forbid President Johnson to enforce the Reconstruction Acts, on the ground of their unconstitutionality, was answered by Attorney General Stanberg, who argued, inter alia, the absolute immunity of the President from judicial process.⁷²⁶The Court refused to permit the filing, using language construable as meaning that the President was not reachable by judicial process but which more fully paraded the horrible consequences were the Court to act. First noting the limited meaning of the term “ministerial,” the Court observed that “[v]ery different is the duty of the President in the exercise of the power to see that the laws are faithfully executed, and among these laws the acts named in the bill.... The duty thus imposed on the President is in no just sense ministerial. It is purely executive and political.”

MUCH MORE... 

http://law.onecle.com/constitution/article-2/47-presidential-immunity.html

We simply MUST stop the fantasy land dreaming about how Obama must be removed from office. Before he can be charged with a crime, including treason, he must first be removed from office.

Those who disagree must STOP TALKING and START DOING! Take your prosecutor and head to Washington DC. I will agree with your concepts when I see you and your prosecutor march Obama out of tyhe White House in handcuffs. Until then, you cannot afford to take impeachment off the table.

JB

Mr. Williams,

You are wrong on this point. DEADLY WRONG!

A perjured oath is no oath at all.

Persons not eligible to take an oath of office, knowing they are disqualified from legally holding that office, are called infiltrators, or traitors.

Persons who knowingly take an oath, when at the time swearing that oath knowingly they never intend to obey their oath find no comfort or protection from the oath once discovered as infiltrators, or traitors.

Even those who lawfully and in good faith take an oath, who later turn against that oath, they then forfeit any protections they may have otherwise enjoyed under their oath.

No one--I SAY AGAIN, NO ONE--is immunized from being held to a criminal consequence having been found guilty in TREASON against the United States of America.

Barring Mr. OBAMA from enjoying the protection our Constitution offers regardingIMPEACHMENT does not vacate or weaken the process of IMPEACHMENT, but rather confers upon the process of IMPEACHMENT the proper legitimacy and sanctity and integrity the process of IMPEACHMENT must otherwise command.

Mr OBAMA is charged with the crime of TREASON for over two years now. Mr. OBAMAaccepts the accusation as correct by way of his silence.

Mr. OBAMA can be "perp-walked" out of the Whitehouse with an overcoat covering his handcuffs, and walked into a federal courthouse to face a jury of his peers on the change of TREASON, just like any other person owing allegiance to the United States of America.

Mr. OBAMA enjoys no special protection! 

To suggest that OBAMA somehow stands outside our fundamental laws is to argue in favor of the disconnection from, and the destruction of our United States Constitution.

Under the Constitution I pledged my oath to, 
NO MAN STANDS ABOVE THE LAW!

Best regards,
/s/Walt Fitzpatrick