Posted on 11/13/2008 3:42:08 AM PST by gaggs
This info on Wiki indicates that Calero has been on the ticket more than once and so has someone else who was not eligible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B3ger_Calero
I wonder how many more would sign this, if they were not scared to death of what a corrupt Socialist would do to those on this list? I am serious.
Very interesting write up about the time line of what has happened. So who would be pressuring the Clerk to act in such a manner?
Very simple. If the Courts should decide that someone has standing to hear the issue, then the first subpoena goes out to the appropriate Hawaiian state official to produce appropriate records, along with subpoenas to the hospital where he was born.
Submitting forged evidence under a subpoena under such circumstances would be too obvious and would be jail time for someone.
Sometimes, you have to stand-up for what you believe in. The Democrats went through “Joe The Plumber’s” private info, but we are all still standing. I signed it proudly:
http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244
It is very unlikely than any info came from a single justice's "clerk" ( personal assistant).
Much more likely that the writer means former General William SUTER (not Justice David SOUTER), who is the "CLERK" (top official) of the entire Supreme Court, and who would sign orders and communicate with litigants.
This may shed some light on the accuracy of the remainder of the post.
Has a court ever ruled on McC’s eligibility based on his having been born in the Panama Canal Zone? Didn’t the Dems raise that issue well before the questions about BHO’s bc came up? Just wondering ..... In any event, the BHO bc is a faint hope but a hope nonetheless.
SCOTUS link http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm
Absolutely and unequivocably UNTRUE.
The defendantss must simply respond to the court concerning the writ. They will respond in the same manner of the previous case, "motion to dismiss on grounds of standing".
If it turns out Obama wasnt born an American citizen... we have just been undoubtedly Trojan horsed.
Kenyan children sing praises.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08iomNFrzU4
Just that Hussein is spending tons of money to not show his B.C. and I would like to know why.
Yes, per the 20th Amendment. Biden is the vice-president elect.
And would the other democrat candidate, the one that lost the nomination to the various means that Obama used to prevent her from being nominated then claim that she was denied her place on the ballot because of the methods Obama used to secure it????
I believe the term for that is "winning the most delegates." And I can't imagine what case she could make.
1) Rule that electors can not vote for Obama
2) Rule that any results from the current college are tainted by the fraud and that new electors must be appointed
3) Rule that Obama can't be President and that Congress must follow the letter of the 12th. Since they have to vote only for the candidates that received electoral votes, only McCain would be the remaining option (however, Biden would be the VP)
4) Rule that the current electors remain but can't vote for Obama but can vote for any candidate (Hillary option)
5) Rule that the votes that were to go for Obama now go to Biden who becomes the President and then appoints his desired VP
... and I'm sure that there are other options out as well
Father: Unknown.
Father: Malcolm X.
Birthplace: Mumbassa, Kenya.
signed it!
jail time-
Look how many idiots WILLINGY went to jail for Clinton!
Observe how much more brainwashed Obama’s followers are vs. those of Clinton. He’d have no problem finding someone willing to go to prison for him if necessary! No problem. Besides, I think he has so many minions in high places that they’d declare the fake to be real.
Clinton got away with lying under oath. Obama would easily get away with it as well since he has an even bigger, more fanatical following who would riot and burn down every building in this country if he was indeed found to be inelligible to be POTUS. Who the Hell will impeach him?
But that having been said, I find it odd that they would hear the Cert at all~!? It is unusual to say the least to have the Cert docketed at all if they have no issue to determine. Now I wouldn't read too much into this (like they are about to make an earth-shattering decision) but it is curious to say the least.
The only reason I can imagine that they are reviewing it is to make a final decision on standing. They aren't really bound by precedent, and the mechanism of electing the President is so different than when the Constitution was written they could consider the role of the voter to have more standing (?) I know I'm reaching here, but does anyone else have a clue why they SCOTUS would review this decision?
That having been said, I don't appreciate whoever originally started this frivolous rumor about having to produce a birth certificate. I had an email exchange with Berg and it definitely wasn't him or his people. You will notice that after my email with him he had it put up on obamacrimes.com that this rumor was patently false. Let's get out the popcorn and see what the SCOTUS does.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.