Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seems your tin foil hat is not big enough for your head.
No one can suspend elections. Not even the President of the United States.
Maybe you should read that document you like to try and protect but have no clue what it says: The US Constitution.
Maybe you should give some consideration of the fact once he declares martial law because of riots etc he is in charge with his army. I think that many of you people could be very surprised to learn what can happen once they have ignored the Constitution enough times and need to do so one more time.
Maybe you should give some consideration of the fact once he declares martial law because of riots etc he is in charge with his army. I think that many of you people could be very surprised to learn what can happen once they have ignored the Constitution enough times and need to do so one more time.
Of course there will. Only paranoid nut-burgers fear otherwise.
What time of year will that election be done if he declares martial law on say October 15? I don't think you are looking with much reality at what Could, happen.
He got into office without proving citizenship and surely he could do what I suggest if he were in complete control with martial law. I guess you are like so many of your buddies here who don't think that the riots of spring, kind of like the Arab Spring, just couldn't cause The Won to declare martial law. I very much hope you people are right but will have to see it happen before I agree with you.
Actually... no. They didn't "rule" that. They simply mentioned it in dicta.
A dicta is a legal opinion, used to create a ruling for a case they are hearing so yes.. it is a ruling because without it, the legal ruling wouldnt hold legal authority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
But certainly, you wouldn't argue that such a person would not be a citizen.
Would you?
Considering the legal argument was originally made over 100 years ago, I cant speak for what was going on in their head. I do think its an issue that needs to be resolved though.
Maybe you should give some consideration of the fact once he declares martial law because of riots etc he is in charge with his army.
Maybe you need to change that tin foil hat, not get a bigger one.
You should look at that document I told you to read (The US Constitution). Its seems you're unfamiliar with it.
BTW, we were under "martial" law in the 40's. Little thing called World War II happened.
We still had elections.
And it seems you're not familiar with how "martial law" is declared in the United States. You may want to pick up a history book while you're trying to find a copy of the US Constitution to read.
What time of year will that election be done if he declares martial law on say October 15? I don't think you are looking with much reality at what Could, happen.
Says who? You?
Quote:
He got into office without proving citizenship and surely he could do what I suggest if he were in complete control with martial law.
Lie. He proved his citizenship when he provided his COLB to the press in August of 2008.
What time of year will that election be done if he declares martial law on say October 15?
November 1, 2016.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
I don't think you are looking with much reality at what Could, happen.
My irony meter just exploded.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.