There is some crazy stuff posted on that site:
Depending upon the proof of just one (1) crucial fact that is almost too close to tell at first glance, the energetic Mrs. Sarah Palin could, actually, file what is known as a "quo warranto" action in the federal courts, to legally claim and take the U.S. Presidency away from our illustrious Sellout-In-Chief, Mr. Obama, and she could have her attorneys do that without any further delay, i.e., tomorrow morning, or the next business day...
Alternatively, any one or more United States citizens who voted in the 2008 election could file on behalf of themselves, on behalf of Mrs. Palin, on behalf of the Nation itself, or on behalf of any combination thereof, using legal devices such as "next friend of", "ex relatione", and so forth, to still force Obama out of office, and install Sarah as new temporary President until the next (2012) election, whether she had originated the move to Pennsylvania Avenue or not... but, ONLY if that one critical fact proved to be in her positive favor.
What is that all-important fact?? It is whether or not Sarah could reasonably claim, during the final months, weeks, and days leading up to the 2008 Election, that her public approval ratings were in at least a statistical dead-heat with opposing Vice-Presidential candidate, Mr. Joseph R. Biden, if not even marginally higher at any one or more points in time. I believe she can reasonably claim that, and therefore, in these circumstances, she also just happens to be legally entitled to claim the Presidency away from Obama, and takeover the helm of the United States, until she is either re-elected in 2012, or replaced by the next winner moving into the White House during January of 2013.
WHAT? How's that work, you say? OK, it's actually very simple. It's a two-fold claim, first that she is the legally rightful Vice President, having been the VP candidate most likely to win, independently, in a head-to-head competition amongst all running 2008 VP candidates, because that is exactly what the 12th Amendment actually requires: *separate* balloting and *separate* voting for VP candidates, i.e., *separate* from the various Presidential candidates. Yea, modern elections for Prez and VP have not been done lawfully since approximately the 1870s. They are still supposed to be voted on separately, allowing citizens the best choices of candidates for both offices. They are supposed to run separately from the Presidential candidates, be on separate ballots (not on the same ballots as any Presidential candidate), and be voted on separately by the electoral college. This is all very clear language of the 12th Amendment, and directly translates into the obvious requisite fact that the voters get to vote on separate ballots for their individual choices for President, and for Vice-President. The voters do NOT have to vote for the same party in Prez and VP candidates, by law - in fact, it is "cannot" be tied together as "running mates", by law...
http://www.teapartynation.com/forum/topics/why-sarah-palin-can-legally~~~~~~
I'm sorry mods. I will do better in the future.
Tnanks