Author Topic: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.  (Read 795 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rockbilly

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3367
Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« on: January 30, 2009, 04:48:43 AM »
Mr Rodearmel is to be commended for his actions.  Wouldn't it be great if the courts agree with him?

Lawsuit challenges Clinton eligibility
State department officer claims Constitution bars Obama appointee from serving

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 30, 2009
12:20 am Eastern


By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily



Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
 
A State Department employee has filed a lawsuit today in federal court against newly sworn-in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claiming she is constitutionally ineligible to serve.

Judicial Watch, a public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it is pursuing the complaint in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C, on behalf of U.S. Foreign Service Officer and State Department employee David C. Rodearmel.

Rodearmel, a resident of Virginia, maintains Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as secretary of state and that he cannot serve under her because doing so would go against the oath he took as a foreign service officer in 1991 to "support and defend" and "bear true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution of the United States.

"This is not a partisan, political or personal issue," Rodearmel said in a statement. "I have faithfully served under six prior Secretaries of State of both parties, and under eight Presidents since first taking the oath to uphold the Constitution as a young Army officer cadet. … As a commissioned State Department Foreign Service Officer, a retired Army Reserve Judge Advocate Officer, and as a lawyer, I consider it my Constitutional duty to bring this case to the courts."

The constitutional quandary arises from a clause that forbids members of the Senate from being appointed to civil office, such as the secretary of state, if the "emoluments," or salary and benefits, of the office were increased during the senator's term.

The second clause of Article 1, Section 6, of the Constitution reads, "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office."

(Story continues below)

      


As WND has reported, James Madison's notes on the debates that formed the Constitution explain the reason for the clause. Madison himself argued against "the evils" of corrupt governments where legislators created salaried positions – or increased the salary of positions – and then secured appointments to the comfortable jobs they just created. Others agreed that such tactics were evident in Colonial and British government, and they wrote Article 1, Section 6 to prevent the practice.

According to the lawsuit, the "emoluments" of the office of secretary of state increased as many as three times since Clinton began her second, six-year Senate term in January 2007. On Jan. 1, 2007, the secretary of state's salary increased to $186,600. In 2008, it increased to $191,300, and on Jan. 1, 2009, it increased again to $196,700.

The complaint states, the court has exclusive jurisdiction over the case under Public Law No. 110-455, 122 Stat. 5036, allowing anyone aggrieved by an action of the U.S. Secretary of State to contest "the constitutionality of the appointment and continuance in office of the Secretary of State on the grounds that such appointment and continuance in office is in violation of article I, section 6, clause 2, of the U.S. Constitution."

The lawsuit acknowledges that Congress tried to shirk the constitutional exclusion with a "Saxbe fix," reducing the Clinton's salary to the level in effect before Jan. 1, but it states that the legislation "does not and cannot change the historical fact that the 'compensation and other emoluments' of the office of the U.S. Secretary of State increased during Defendant Clinton's tenure in the U.S. Senate. …"

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said he hopes the lawsuit will send a loud and clear message to Republicans and Democrats.

"This historic legal challenge should remind politicians of both parties that the U.S. Constitution is not to be trifled with," he said. "Mrs. Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as the U.S. Secretary of State until at least 2013, when her second term in the U.S. Senate expires. We hope the courts will put a stop to these end runs around the Constitution and affirm the rule of law."


Offline Graybeard

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (69)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26944
  • Gender: Male
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2009, 06:41:35 AM »
SO!

The yo-yo who appointed her is not Constitutionally eligible for the office he holds either but he's sitting there and the courts refused to listen to the argument or make him prove he was eligible. The entire obama administration is illegal.


Bill aka the Graybeard
President, Graybeard Outdoor Enterprises
256-435-1125

I am not a lawyer and do not give legal advice.

Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life anyone who believes in Him will have everlasting life!

Offline Spanky

  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (96)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
  • Gender: Male
  • USMC Semper Fidelis
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2009, 06:52:56 AM »
Sounds like business as usual for the dems. :-\



Spanky

Offline Guy Pike

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
  • Gender: Male
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #3 on: January 30, 2009, 07:09:11 AM »
GB is right on and it is time to tear it down and start over. The framework is still solid, just need all new people who understand that it isn't for their own personal agenda and will represent the people who elect them, not the ones who pay them off!
You can't beat a Cerberus!

Offline lrs

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 672
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #4 on: January 30, 2009, 07:16:42 AM »
Legitimate or not, they ARE in power.  
There is no check or balance in effect, and apparently, they can do whatever they want.
Just out of curiousity:
What is the executive order count up to? 
" we are screwed "

Offline Heather

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1471
  • Gender: Female
    • mymartialartsplus.com
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2009, 07:46:53 AM »
The really sad thing about this post is that most of us weren't surprised or shocked when we read it. To us it is just business as usual in Washington.  I can just hope and pray that we as citizens get fed up soon enough to make difference.

Heather
Strive for complete serenity in all aspects of life.
www.mymartialartsplus.com

A closed mind is often closed to the truth!

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and loose both...Ben Franklin

Offline SHOOTALL

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23836
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2009, 08:05:44 AM »
GB and Heather good points , shame ain't it !
The next election will in fact prove the course we are taking !
If ya can see it ya can hit it !

Offline Questor

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7075
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2009, 08:45:48 AM »
Constitution schmonstituion! They use copies of it as toilet paper in Washington these days.
Safety first

Offline Troyboy

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (41)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1220
  • Gender: Male
  • Work more talk less
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2009, 11:57:13 AM »
They can do whatever they want in washington and their gonna prove it. Oh they have shown us long before now. They are just being more blatent
.204 .22lr .22wm .25acp .223 5.56 .243 .25-06 6.5x55  .308  .300wbymag  7.5x54  7.62x25 7.62x39  338-06  9x19 .38spl  9x18 .45acp . 45-70 .500s&w 12rfl 12smb 20smb  .45lc 410smb .22hornet .280AI    Ask not what your country can do for you BUT what can YOU do for your country

Offline Graybeard

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (69)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26944
  • Gender: Male
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2009, 12:39:52 PM »
We need a complete 100% turn over in DC right down the supremes also. I dunno if there is even a legal means to make it happen other than at the polls and quite honestly I do not think it can be done there. Even if there were enough votes to do it I do not think those in charge would allow the votes to be counted. Most counts are done via computer these days and everyone knows a good hacker can make a computer say anything you want it to.

I do not believe the counts were accurate this last time around and there was so much fraud in voter registration and with the black panthers keeping folks from voting their convictions that even if it has been accurate it still didn't reflect the true wishes of the country.

Add to that the fact the man never even showed himself eligible to be running in the first place and you have an illegal government in place that needs to be removed but some means. Since voting won't likely do it I'm not sure there is a legal means available. Is there a recall procedure?

There is a move afoot I'm unsure how far it will get to have states seceede from the union and strike out on their own. I'm all for it personally and think it's likely the only legal way to pull off replacing the who kit and kaboodle of them. If it was legal for the 13 colonies to do it then it's legal for states to do it. That issue wasn't settled by the Civil War it merely showed which side was the strongest militarily. Who knows this time around there might not be a war as the rest of the world has a stake in this too.

But it has to be the folks running the state governments that do it not some bunch of wild eyed rabble shouting that they represent the people it has to be the elected state officials to do it to make it legal.


Bill aka the Graybeard
President, Graybeard Outdoor Enterprises
256-435-1125

I am not a lawyer and do not give legal advice.

Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life anyone who believes in Him will have everlasting life!

Offline mcwoodduck

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7983
  • Gender: Male
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2009, 01:02:49 PM »
Quick question.
If Clinton has been replaced as a Senator and she is found not to be able to hold the office of Secratary of State would she be out of office completly?  Not to give the new president credit but do you think this may have been his way of getting rid of Hillary?  he has had others thrown off ballots in order to win his first ellection.  Again is this payback for all the kind words the Clinton said about him in the primary and with Clinton being power blind not see the potential problems.
I am really suprised at him appointing all of his past foes to office and those people would push him out of the way of a camera if the secret service would let them.  Again this may be his way of getting his past foes out of the spot light and he can then have it all to him self.

Offline crustaceous

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 348
  • Gender: Male
  • back for a limited engagement
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2009, 02:19:10 PM »
Q: Who do you think signed the bill that lowered the Secretary of States pay so Hillary could take the position?
A: George Bush

Interesting isn't it

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/bush-approves-bill-reducing-secretary-of-states-pay/

December 19, 2008, 2:41 pm
Bush Approves Bill Reducing Secretary of State’s Pay
By Michael Falcone
Though Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton still faces a confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill, President Bush removed one hurdle on her path to the State Department on Friday.

Mr. Bush signed a bill reducing by several thousand dollars the salary of the secretary of state. It was a crucial step in Mrs. Clinton’s confirmation process because of a clause in the Constitution that forbids a member of Congress from being appointed to a government position which was either created or given a compensation increase during the lawmaker’s current term.

The bill cuts the secretary of state’s salary from $191,300 to $186,600, its level in January 2007 when Mrs. Clinton began her second term in the Senate.

When Congress passed the bill last week, Judicial Watch, a conservative group that had raised the issue of Mrs. Clinton’s eligibility for the cabinet position, said that the salary change was not enough. At the time Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, called it an “end-run around the Constitution.”

Offline lrs

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 672
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #12 on: January 31, 2009, 04:05:17 AM »
Wow, that is huge. 
IMHO, that pretty much tells the story.
" we are screwed "

Offline Heather

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1471
  • Gender: Female
    • mymartialartsplus.com
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #13 on: January 31, 2009, 04:14:26 AM »
Bush signing the bill makes perfect sense to me. THEY ALL PLAY FOR THE SAME TEAM, AND ITS NOT OUR TEAM!

Heather
Strive for complete serenity in all aspects of life.
www.mymartialartsplus.com

A closed mind is often closed to the truth!

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and loose both...Ben Franklin

Offline lrs

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 672
Re: Hillary Clinton constitutionally ineligble to serve.
« Reply #14 on: January 31, 2009, 04:22:17 AM »
So who are the coaches, who are the owners, who are the players, and who are they playing for???????
" we are screwed "