Court Filing: Kamala Harris, Merrick Garland Violate US Code, Have No Oath of Office on File

[Elderberry]

National File by Frankie Stockes April 16, 2023

https://nationalfile.com/court-filing-kamala-harris-merrick-garland-violate-us-code-have-no-oath-of-office-on-file/

Kamala Harris, Merrick Garland, and other leading Democrats are in violation of US Code and have no sworn oath to the US Constitution on file as required by law, a new court filing reveals.

A new court filing reveals that Kamala Harris, Merrick Garland, and other leading Democrats in the Biden Administration, including Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandra Mayorkis, and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, have no oath of loyalty to the US Constitution on file, as required by law.

A writ of quo warranto filed in Washington, DC asserts that oaths of office for high-ranking members of Joe Biden’s cabinet are nowhere to be found, in blatant violation of the US Code that requires all elected officials to keep a sworn affidavit of their oath on file, proving their sworn continued allegiance to the United States and the US Constitution.

Filed by attorneys on behalf of petitioner Lisa McGee, the court motion is asking the US Attorney in the District of Columbia to require that a laundry list of elected and appointed Biden Administration officials produce their oath affidavits within 10 days, to prove that they’ve actually met the constitutional and legal requirements to hold office.

McGee had previously sought access to the oaths of office in question through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, but received nothing back, calling the lawfulness of the entire Biden Administration into question.

A press release from Ferguson Law, one of the firms acting on behalf of McGee, explains the gravity of the situation and reaffirms the sentiments of the legal filing.

The apparent non-existence of oath affidavits for high-ranking Biden officials “nullifies, or at a minimum, calls into question the legitimacy of their appointments or positions,” the statement reads.

Read the full press release and a list of Biden officials with missing oath affidavits HERE

[Cyber Liberty]

Huh?

[Bigun]

I'm not surprised in the least.

[libertybele]

So the people with the highest positions in our government have no oath of office.  Who is going to hold them accountable?  Who can hold the accountable??

As always; No One!

[Elderberry]

http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/8980819007.html

Ms. McGee previously sought the required affidavits via the Freedom of Information Act requests (FOIA); and not one of the aforesaid appointees have produced a compliant affidavit consistent with the statute. Either the affidavit(s) are nonexistent, wanting, or the appointee has failed or refused to provide the mandated affidavit to hold their respective offices.

This lack of Constitutional and statutory requirement thereby nullifies, or at a minimum, calls into question the legitimacy of their appointments or positions. The absence of these mandatory Oath of Office affidavits shifts the burden to the appointees to prove to Ms. McGee and the US Attorney their bona fides. The production of these statutorily required affidavits is also required by law.

Missing Oaths of Office will render a majority of the Biden Administration Cabinet unlawful and their official acts from the date of appointment void. Failure to produce the affidavit(s) to the US Attorney will provide the necessary jurisdiction to the Federal District Court of Washington D.C. to issue said Writ Quo Warranto.

[Bigun]

So the people with the highest positions in our government have no oath of office.  Who is going to hold them accountable?  Who can hold the accountable??

As always; No One!

There are plenty of people who could but not one who will.

[Fishrrman]

Another "Fishrrman really dumb question™":

If someone has not taken the oath of office, is that person not "finalized" (or authorized) to hold such position (yet)?

Hmmm....
kamala sutra has no oath of office on record?
If true, would that mean she is not "the vice president"?
If true, does that "get rid" of her?

(askin' for a friend...)