Rovingpatrol's Blog

Obama Commits Yet ANOTHER Crime

Posted in politics by roving on January 25, 2009

Obama commits another crime and once again as usual, nothing. Why do even the republicans let Obama  get away with crimes against the United States?  Even the so called fair and balanced Fox News skips over crimes Obama commits. Could it be because of who now owns a piece of Fox News and was able to force the news channel to drop the the banner Muslim riots during the riots in France. ?

In that, it is noted that Barack Obama had to take the oath of office twice. As the oath was administered, it is legal precedent that he was not President nor Prime Minister. The seriousness of this in legal court challenges is the fact when he then sat down and signed 3 executive orders as has been done since Ronald Reagan, he was not President nor Prime Minister of the United States.
Those official papers are null and void and as they have not been resigned before the public, Mr. Obama concerning those executive orders is operating not in the full authority of the Office of the President of the United States.
At the very least in legalities, Mr. Obama committed fraud as he signed those papers as President when he was not. The event was recorded and witnessed by millions of people. This is a legal matter which along with other legal matters has made Barack Hussein Obama an international war criminal, surpassing the charges leveled at George W. Bush.
For more, visit  Lame Cherry:

What happen to the lawyer who told WND back in November he’s organizing plans to challenge, even after the inauguration, every order, every proposal, every piece of paperwork generated by Obama.

“We will file lawsuits on his actions, every time. As long as we have money , we will keep filing lawsuits until we get a decision as to his citizenship status”

If he was serious, he better hurry because he’s falling behind.


11 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. ladyblug said, on January 25, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    You are a nutball!

  2. filibusted said, on January 25, 2009 at 2:36 pm

    @ ladyblug: lmao

    @ author

    The 20th amendment of the constitution makes the transition of power clear. The oath is not mandatory. Here it is:

    Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

    The oath is still performed so as to not create any controversy or legal battles, but the 20th amendment makes it very clear when President Obama became President. At noon on the 20th of January, regardless of when he was sworn in.

  3. cindyinatl said, on January 25, 2009 at 3:00 pm

    filibusted, thanks for saving me the effort of providing Rovingpatrol with the information he needed in order to understand that this post is crazy! I am astounded at how many people don’t know the difference between tradition and constitutional law.

  4. gayle said, on January 25, 2009 at 4:10 pm

    Well whether or no the lawyer said he was gooing to challenge every order signed by Obama. He better get busy because he is falling behind
    As far as calling Rovingpatrol names….I think that is uncalled for and have never seen him being disrespectful to anyone else

  5. roving said, on January 25, 2009 at 5:08 pm

    It takes both parents to be natural born so regardless, Obama is STILL not qualified.

    Funny how the Obama people are silent on that part of the constitution isnt it?

  6. roving said, on January 25, 2009 at 5:10 pm

    You should also go to Lame cherry and read what other laws Obama has broken since being in office.

  7. roving said, on January 25, 2009 at 5:19 pm

    Gale, it doesn’t bother me. They can call me all the names they want. Its not their fault. Liberals are full of hate and name calling is hardwired in them

  8. stophate said, on January 27, 2009 at 6:06 am

    Don’t you think Hillary Clinton or the Republicans would have raised this issue if there was a grain of truth to it ? The people that are promoting this story are hucksters and the people that believe it lack common sense.

  9. Mike said, on January 29, 2009 at 11:00 am

    It takes both parents to be natural born so regardless, Obama is STILL not qualified.

    Funny how the Obama people are silent on that part of the constitution isnt it?

    Whereabouts in Article II does it say that? Because I’m pretty sure it doesn’t; furthermore, any cases from the SCOTUS touching on the subject, such as Perkins v. Elg, Wong Kim Ark etc., seem to say that being born in the US makes one a natural-born citizen. Obama was born in Hawaii, thus is a natural-born citizen, your unsupported theories on immigration notwithstanding.

  10. Heibretab said, on February 15, 2009 at 5:49 pm

    Your site does not correctly work in safari browser

  11. Absesiabahlix said, on February 17, 2009 at 1:22 am

    Your are Great. And so is your site! Awesome content. Good job guys! Interesting article, adding it to my favourites!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: