An interesting constitutional question is baing raised over the probable appointment of Hillary as Sec State .

Article One, Section Six of the U.S. Constitution says:

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.

Emoluments being salary. The pay raise for Sec State was raised during her current term in the Senate.

The past remedy for this has been to lower the pay for the position to what it was and in almost all cases there was no issue and Congress has not objected . However when Congress gets in a mood to be contrary they have raised the issue. In 1973, at the height of Watergate, President Nixon nominated William Saxbe to be Attorney General and the issue was raised because Saxbe was in the Senate when the Attorney General’s pay was raised.

In that instance, Congress lowered the pay for the AG, allowing the appointment to proceed. Democratic Senators complained, however, and 10 senators actually voted against it on constitutional grounds. At the time, Sen. Robert KKK Byrd said it was clearly unconstitutional saying we should not delude the American people into thinking a way can be found around the constitutional obstacle.The Saxbe fix ;as it came to be called ,set the compensation to the point before its raise, which allowed Congress to ignore the Constitutional bar .
But Byrd's point was that the fix to the problem bypassed the constitutional issue that the language of the section clearly is absolute No Senator or Representative...

No doubt Congress will approve Evita's appointment .But if she does something that is objectable to someone with standing ;it is possible that her eligibility would be challenged outside of Congress for SCOTUS to decide.

What difference does it make if she is legally eligible or not? O is going to have her in that position of Secretary of State. He's been able to side step his birth certificate stuff, so why should something like the US Constitution stand in the way of his "dream team"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

What difference does it make if she is legally eligible or not? O is going to have her in that position of Secretary of State. He's been able to side step his birth certificate stuff, so why should something like the US Constitution stand in the way of his "dream team"?

---

C'mon doodle. Are you still going on about that birth certificate stuff. Dare I say just another 'stupid' post from you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skell

C'mon doodle. Are you still going on about that birth certificate stuff. Dare i say just another 'stupid' post from you.

---

Excuse me... but the birth certificate stuff is far from stupid. How can you possibly say that this is stupid? Why have over 100,000 people signed a peitition that would REQUIRE BO to show his original birth certificate? He does not legally qualify to be POTUS. According to our US Constitution he must prove his eligibility. The fact he keeps hiding his true birth place and birth certificate is unreal and illegal. How would you like it if someone came to Australia and ran for Prime Minister and was elected without proving citizenship?

Enough already ! His mom is American . Article II of the Constitution says, "No Person except a natural born citizen, or a Citizen of the United States ... shall be eligible to the Office of President."
Acts of Congress in 1790 and 1795 clarify that "the children of citizens of the United States ... shall be considered as natural born citizens."
At the time Obama was born, the law stated that a person would be considered a "natural born citizen" if either parent was a citizen who had lived at least 10 years in the U.S. including five years after the age of 14—in other words, 19.

His mom was three months shy of her 19th birthday when Obama was born. But subsequent acts of Congress relaxed the requirement to five years in the U.S. including just two years after the age of 14, meaning his mom could have been 16 and still qualified even if Obama was born in another country. Congress made the law retroactive to 1952, doubly covering Obama.
So it does not matter where he was born. True the transparency issue is troubling but not disqualifiying .

Obama is about to put Evita 4th in line of succession to the Presidency. That means just 3 people in her crosshairs. For the Clintons ,that's nothing .

Well I guess it is official . The quid pro quo has been revealed .

Just for the record... here is a blast from the recent past :

“What exactly is this foreign policy expertise?” ....“Was she negotiating treaties? Was she handling crises? The answer is no.”

“It's what's wrong with politics today. Hillary Clinton will say anything to get elected,” ...“Hillary Clinton. She'll say anything and change nothing.”

“Barack Obama doesn't need lectures in political courage from someone who followed George Bush to war in Iraq,”

“Real change isn't voting for George Bush's war in Iraq and then telling the American people it was actually voting for more diplomacy,”

“The question is, what kind of judgment will you exercise when you pick up that phone,” ... “In fact, we've had a red-phone moment. It was the decision to invade Iraq. Sen. Clinton gave the wrong answer.”

(all comments by Obama or his campaign within the last year about Evita's foreign policy judgement )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

Why have over 100,000 people signed a peitition that would REQUIRE BO to show his original birth certificate? He does not legally qualify to be POTUS. According to our US Constitution he must prove his eligibility.

---

Hello twink:

I read the Constitution, and I couldn't find the part that requires Obama to prove anything.

Why did 100,000 people sign a petition that meant nothing?? Got me.

excon

OB1 appoints Evita as Sec State and now is taking steps to minimize her.

1. He announced that UN ambassador Susan Rice will have a cabinet seat . This is a ridiculous elevation of the job aimed to have her report directly to POTUS instead of the traditional boss at State.

2. He will appoint Daniel Kurtzer as his special envoy to the Middle East. Kurtzer will be reporting directly to him rather than Evita;infringe on her influence and prestige in the area.