He wasn't eligible to begin with due to his British citizenship via Kenya (prior to independence). However, there is some gray area which theoretically allows a non-natural born citizen or even former President to serve as VP and "acting President", but if you just challenge everything these criminals do you are likely to get them on something eventually. Nearly everything they do is unlawful. It is unlikely that neither Harris nor Barrack can actually be sworn in as POTUS and they are both ineligible to be C-I-C due to treason.
This is Constitutionally correct and logical. Activist judges (traitors) are interpreting a gray area due to some different or nonexistent language pertaining the VP in order to allow foreign agents to do their thing unlawfully. I am just repeating their BS. I agree with you.
If POTUS and CIC roles have been split, then it gets interesting. If POTUS formerly was CEO of a foreign-owned Corporation outside of the Constitution, then this probably explains how a British citizen (Obama) was selected by the owner of the Corporation (ostensibly the British Crown) to be its CEO. Legal, but not lawful. Act of 1871 which established foreign-owned, DC-based, US Corp has likely been undone by now, imo. So we revert to 1861 Constitution or 1788 Constitution.
Yes. Could be either:
Big Mike/HRC temporarily then becomes #2 after Big Mike outed publicly?
HRC/Barrack (this is dream villain ticket for Trump)
Barack is not eligible due to having already served as president for 2 terms.
He wasn't eligible to begin with due to his British citizenship via Kenya (prior to independence). However, there is some gray area which theoretically allows a non-natural born citizen or even former President to serve as VP and "acting President", but if you just challenge everything these criminals do you are likely to get them on something eventually. Nearly everything they do is unlawful. It is unlikely that neither Harris nor Barrack can actually be sworn in as POTUS and they are both ineligible to be C-I-C due to treason.
VP must meet all of the same eligibility requirements as the president.
This is Constitutionally correct and logical. Activist judges (traitors) are interpreting a gray area due to some different or nonexistent language pertaining the VP in order to allow foreign agents to do their thing unlawfully. I am just repeating their BS. I agree with you.
If POTUS and CIC roles have been split, then it gets interesting. If POTUS formerly was CEO of a foreign-owned Corporation outside of the Constitution, then this probably explains how a British citizen (Obama) was selected by the owner of the Corporation (ostensibly the British Crown) to be its CEO. Legal, but not lawful. Act of 1871 which established foreign-owned, DC-based, US Corp has likely been undone by now, imo. So we revert to 1861 Constitution or 1788 Constitution.