Tea Party says that Palin can legally remove Obama and step in to the Oval Office

[Jumping John]

There is some crazy stuff posted on that site:

Depending upon the proof of just one (1) crucial fact that is almost too close to tell at first glance, the energetic Mrs. Sarah Palin could, actually, file what is known as a "quo warranto" action in the federal courts, to legally claim and take the U.S. Presidency away from our illustrious Sellout-In-Chief, Mr. Obama, and she could have her attorneys do that without any further delay, i.e., tomorrow morning, or the next business day...

Alternatively, any one or more United States citizens who voted in the 2008 election could file on behalf of themselves, on behalf of Mrs. Palin, on behalf of the Nation itself, or on behalf of any combination thereof, using legal devices such as "next friend of", "ex relatione", and so forth, to still force Obama out of office, and install Sarah as new temporary President until the next (2012) election, whether she had originated the move to Pennsylvania Avenue or not... but, ONLY if that one critical fact proved to be in her positive favor.

What is that all-important fact?? It is whether or not Sarah could reasonably claim, during the final months, weeks, and days leading up to the 2008 Election, that her public approval ratings were in at least a statistical dead-heat with opposing Vice-Presidential candidate, Mr. Joseph R. Biden, if not even marginally higher at any one or more points in time. I believe she can reasonably claim that, and therefore, in these circumstances, she also just happens to be legally entitled to claim the Presidency away from Obama, and takeover the helm of the United States, until she is either re-elected in 2012, or replaced by the next winner moving into the White House during January of 2013.

WHAT? How's that work, you say? OK, it's actually very simple. It's a two-fold claim, first that she is the legally rightful Vice President, having been the VP candidate most likely to win, independently, in a head-to-head competition amongst all running 2008 VP candidates, because that is exactly what the 12th Amendment actually requires: *separate* balloting and *separate* voting for VP candidates, i.e., *separate* from the various Presidential candidates. Yea, modern elections for Prez and VP have not been done lawfully since approximately the 1870s. They are still supposed to be voted on separately, allowing citizens the best choices of candidates for both offices. They are supposed to run separately from the Presidential candidates, be on separate ballots (not on the same ballots as any Presidential candidate), and be voted on separately by the electoral college. This is all very clear language of the 12th Amendment, and directly translates into the obvious requisite fact that the voters get to vote on separate ballots for their individual choices for President, and for Vice-President. The voters do NOT have to vote for the same party in Prez and VP candidates, by law - in fact, it is "cannot" be tied together as "running mates", by law...



http://www.teapartynation.com/forum/topics/why-sarah-palin-can-legally


~~~~~~

I'm sorry mods. I will do better in the future.

Tnanks

[SDuderstadt]

1. Even though this appears to be the work of...

just one teaparty member, this should become the poster child for just how out of tune the teaparty is in general.

[damntexdem]

2. Just more idiocy from teabaggers.

For one thing, the vote is for electors, who then elect a president and vice-president. Although true democracy would have the voters elect the prez and VP, there was never any provision for public opinion polls to make the selection.

For another thing, the 12th Amendment clarifies how the prez and VP are to be elected by the electors. But it's understandable why teabaggers would not be up on an amendment ratified as recently as 1804. The 12th:

"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

[formercia]

3. Luckily

Most teabaggers will haze out after about the second paragraph.

[monmouth]

5. I know I did..LOL....n/t

[Dawgs]

4. K&R for a good laugh.

:hi:

[maxrandb]

6. Does that mean we get VP Kerry

instead of Cheney????

I'll take it!

[Vidar]

7. They're obviously not disturbed by any troublesome concepts, such as reality.

[creeksneakers2]

8. The quo warranto

was tried by Orly Taitz and failed.

[jmowreader]

9. Ask President Thomas Dewey how that went

I assume the way they're working this is: Sarah Palin had public opinion polling higher than Joe Biden at some point in the 2008 campaign. She can take this to a court and prove that she is entitled to be vice president. She would then use paragraph 4 of the 25th Amendment, which states "Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President." and remove President Obama from office.

Unfortunately for them, this is how the shit works:

The vice president, PLUS a majority of the Cabinet secretaries (all of whom are Obama loyalists, having all been selected by him, hence the odds of them doing it are slightly lower than the odds of finding a grain of brain in Michele Bachmann's head), would have to generate a written declaration that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. This would make Palin "temporary president."

Obama, of course, would transmit a written declaration to Congress that he is fully capable of discharging the powers and duties of his office and would get it back.

Within four days, Palin would have to transmit another written statement that Obama can't discharge the powers and duties of his office. The Congress would then take up this issue. Two-thirds of both houses would have to agree Obama can't discharge the powers and duties of his office to get him completely removed.

I am sorry, teabaggers, but the Constitution does NOT outline any way to conduct a coup in this country, which is what you are suggesting.

I don't know about y'all, but Article III, Section 3 (Treason) seems to cover this "Palin can kick Obama to the curb" theory.

Besides, the only public opinion poll that counts here is the one taken on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2008, and Palin lost that one.

[Puzzler]

11. By that logic... they should have supported Gore in 2000

[yurbud]

12. no shit. It would kind of undermine their voter suppression scams.

[bemildred]

10. One wonders why something so simple is not done more frequently.

:sarcasm:

[BR_Parkway]

13. "next friend of" is a legal device? I can't wait for the next major lawsuit winner

I am so going to file a "next friend of" that person and claim half of what the jury gives them.