Posted on 11/26/2008 4:54:53 PM PST by unspun
Why are so many in conservative media so wilfully ignorant regarding the most significant challenge(s) to Barack Obama's status as a presidential candidate? The question keeps getting asked and perhaps there are numerous answers. Here are the answers right out of the horse's mouth, from one conservative pundit.
I'll post below a running email conversation I've had with a conservative talk radio host, since I let him know about the "Ron Polarik, PhD." allegations about the Obama BC and about Leo Donofrio. He is a local broadcaster, somewhere in the United States. I'll call him "Chip Program."
It is astounding enough to see how brainwashed, hypnotized, cultish (you choose the word you like) are Obama supporters. How much more stunning is it to see Obama's (and the establishment's) sway over the minds of outspoken conservatives. What makes them so vulnerable? Is theirs the weak conservatism of the staus quo? Enquring minds wish to know.
My comments will be in black. Chip's will be in dark red and blockquoted. Here we go....
Arlen on my blog I linked two newspapers that announced Barack Obama's birth in August of 1961. Two Honolulu newspapers. Copies of these have been found by numerous news organizations. This isn't real Arlen. Get over it.
Arlen, just a bit more FYI. Yes, Taranto is a conservative.
Thanks Chip. It seems that many conservatives are worried about being labeled "on the fringe." If Taranto wants to continue down that self-conscious, inoffensive-to-the-opposition path, maybe he will become a U.S. Senator.some day ;-) He uses the Berg case as a red herring for the Donofrio case, however Donofrio is a thoroughly different case.
Arlen,
The whole notion of this “allegiance to another nation” only came up after the notion that he wasn’t born in the U.S. didn’t fly. It was a plan B. This is fringe stuff Arlen; how much did Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, etc. talk about this? The easiest way for conservatives to get on a long losing streak the way liberals did is to wallow in this stuff. That’s why I rail against it.
Impassioned means nothing Arlen. The people who think Bush/Cheney perpetrated 9/11 (Phillip Berg among them) are impassioned too. I’m railing against fantasy Arlen, nothing less, and sadly, nothing more.
I have reviewed it Arlen, delusional people often believe rational people are intelligent enough to construe their delusions. It’s a common symptom.
No Arlen, I merely assert your belief system on this issue is delusional. Have a great Thanksgiving.
It appears that you probably need to start by gaining an elementary understanding of natural law. After you do, let me know what the founders mean by natural and what St. George is saying as it regards a person born in the United States by a father who is a citizen of a different nation. Take your time (but in your interest, I advise you not to speak on the air of these matters until you learn).
Again Arlen, Happy Thanksgiving, make sure to check the turkey for explosives C
I wasn’t going to leave it at that. The bold print is for this thread…
Natural law specifies identity, rights, and legal holdings imparted by one's father. I tell you what Arlen, If the Supreme Court takes the seriously, I’ll be the first to apologize to you. My point is they, won’t, so you shouldn’t. Get on with your life Arlen. He won. There will be no do overs. You are correct about his President elect status. What I said was SCOTUS will ignore any question of his validity Arlen. If they don't, I'll apologize. They will, so should you. Yes, he won, get over it Arlen.
Now, tell me what a "natural born citizen" is as opposed to merely a "born citizen."
What part of this is difficult for you to understand?
That has no bearing upon whether he is a valid candidate, even if it does mean that he has tentatively "won" (which he has not). Even if the SCOTUS decides he is not eligible after he has taken the oath of office, he would immediately be unrecognized as president.
BTW, is not "President-Elect Obama" as the media improperly state, though he could be called presumptive president-elect.
When people act outside of law, it is incumbent upon the Judical Branch to correct them, not to bend to them.
Last I checked, Clarence Thomas was a Supreme Court justice and his view of the Constitution was very similar to three other justices -- and not completely dissimilar form a fifth of the nine. I hope you can stand the singing of your personal fat lady between now and about December 8. In the mean time, yes, have a good Thanksgiving (and please stop picking on fellow conservatives who seek Constitutional elections of presidents).
Arlen
And that is where it presently stands with Chip Program, as the clock ticks and Supreme Court Justices and their staffs are doing the research necessary to prepare for the December 5 conference….
Conservative or conventionalist?
I’ve reported. You decide.
He was born in Hawaii? Were you there? Get a clue. All we have gotten is two forged documents that were very cheezy forgeries. A COLB and a Sel Svc doc. The rest of his records are sealed. Remember he is the candidate who got his opponents smeared, disqualified or robbed like Hillary got mugged and robbed.
I agree. Conservative talk radio is being exposed. Except for Savage and some smaller guys, they’ve all punted. All it takes is an examination of the facts at hand.
I have lost a lot of respect for these so called ‘leaders’.
Thanks for this unspun.
If he propped himself on the ADMITTED dual citizenship of Kenya until age 21, would that have been his justification for not registering at 18?
If he was a citizen of the United States at the time, he was still required to register, as far as I am able to tell.
Unspun,
I have to admit I feel a little guilty, reading along as you take Drew68 to the woodshed. It’s really not a fair fight, given the nature of the dispute. The point is, either we are a republic of laws or we aren’t.
What makes the situation so remarkable is that someone was able to get so far without being vetted. This is the badge of shame our media and Democratic party should wear, by rights. Unfortunately, it’s my personal belief that they’ll never have to face any sort of reckoning (i’ll leave it at that).
Obama was born in Hawaii.....
Do you have proof? Did you actually see the vault copy??
Or are you a fool who goes along with what the media tells you?
Thanks!
IF you were to actually read the Donofrio case you might begin to understand that even IF Obama were ‘declared’ natural born, any prior birth status would be relinquished when his Indonesian father adopted him for his schooling there.
Drew68, you should really understand the nature of Donofrio’s case before commenting on it. Not only is he questioning Obama’s status as a candidate, he’s also questioning McCain’s and Calero’s. He voted for Ron Paul!
I believe the case is based in part on a 1948 British law that says a British father automatically confers British citizenship on any of his children born anywhere in the world. Kenya was part of the British empire in 1961. Certainly legal questions can be raised. And the fact remains — why hasn’t Obama furnished his birth certificate? McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone, knew his citizenship might be an issue and dealt with it publicly.
GO TO YOUR LIBRARY TO OR SUITABLE PLACE (LEST YOU WANT TO STICK WHERE YOU ARE} USE OTHER CPU AS THE PLAINS RADIO FORUM DISPLAYS IP AND POST INTO PLAINS RADIO FORUM REQUESTING THAT ED HALE / PLAINS RADIO BURIES THE HATCHET AND TRANSMITS THESE INTERVIEW TAPES TO FOXNEWS AS SO REQUESTED BY FOXNEWS.
http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/2442810129/ for above forum page
LEO DONFRIO APPEARS TO BE FINE [Turkey day slight update]
http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/2442810129/show/940488
A very few I emailed and I made one single post comment [now update]: What the hell am I [was] listening to [lapping late Weds eve to early Thurs AM] ? A rebroadcast of what sounds like Wednesday Nov 26 [had to be Tues Nov 25 ] Plainsradio “listen live”. Leo Donofrio is speaking via phone hookup to someone via phone hookup to a JD who is obviously a lawyer asking him in straight prepared questions.
Leo states he has NOT been threatened. HE WAS SLEEPING FOR A COUPLE DAYS. Then another fellow who asks if other material ( passports, student applications) can be entered.. LD seems negative on this. But LD DOES say “this” AM “Court’s Case” [CW- I thought they were using changed name] ( via Connecticut action) did get docketed today in the US SUPREME COURT. [to USSC docket No. 08A46]
Steve, a young admirer calls in, who had emailed LD w/ LD acknowledging Then another fellow calls in from NY, an man of some age. …
http://www.plainsradio.com/chat.html
http://www.plainsradio.com/show.html
The Caren & Ed’s Friday show button at lower left Nov 21 breaks off after break. HERE [I’m 90% sure it was here) ED HALE SAYS HE HAS SNUBBED FOX NEWS REQUEST FOR TAPES OF THE SHOWS. EH expresses great chagrin as Fox didn’t want to have anything to do with plainsradio requests to Fox earlier. I’ve posted into forum message board polite but ardent request he drop the snub of Fox, that this has to get out!
REPEAT: GO TO YOUR LIBRARY TO OR SUITABLE PLACE (LEST YOU WANT TO STICK WHERE YOU ARE} USE OTHER CPU AS THE PLAINS RADIO FORUM DISPLAYS IP AND POST INTO PLAINS RADIO FORUM REQUESTING THAT ED HALE / PLAINS RADIO BURIES THE HATCHET AND TRANSMITS THESE INTERVIEW TAPES TO FOXNEWS AS SO REQUESTED BY FOXNEWS.
They’ve made their point already.
http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/2442810129/ for above forum page
So yes- following links etc (while wonderful smells coming from kitchen)
Donofrio has himself posted here:
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=1216
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz: Clerk Bickell Allegedly Obstructing Justice on Another Emergency Stay Application
November 26th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Today, Leo Donofrio, Plaintiff in Donofrio v. Wells, reported on Mr. Cort Wrotnowski’s emergency stay case from Connecticut. He says that Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS) Clerk Danny Bickell is again denying Mr. Wrotnsowski’s motion in similar fashion as he did to Mr. Donofrio’s (see that whole saga here).
Media alert: Wrotnowski and Donofrio will be interviewed by Bob Vernon on the Plains radio Network at 10:30PM EST; Mr. Donofrio was also on the Scott Hennen show today (MP3). This was the first main stream media exposure of the case. Please see the link and look for an audio file at this blog to be uploaded soon.
SCOTUS Docket: 08a469
A full posting is available below.
PDF document: Connecticut Supreme Court order of Chief Justic Chase Rogers.
TREASON AT SCOTUS? BICKELL OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE AGAIN IN WROTNOWSKI V. CONNECTICUT SECRETARY OF STATE
- Wrotnowski and Donofrio will be interviewed by Bob Vernon on the Plains radio Network at 10:30PM EST.
- Mr. Donofrio was also on the Scott Hennenshow today. This was the first main stream media exposure of the case. Please see the link and look for an audio file at this blog to be uploaded soon.
US Supreme Court stay clerk Danny Bickell is guilty of obstruction of justice for the second time. Yesterday, Cort Wrotnowski filed an emergency stay application in the case WROTNOWSKI V. BYSIEWICZ, CONNECTICUT SECRETARY OF STATE, which is coming directly from a Connecticut Supreme Court order of Chief Justic Chase Rogers.
Mr. Wrotnowski was informed by Danny Bickellthat Mr. Bickell denied Cort’s motion based on Rule 23.3, the same grounds Mr. Bickell had illegally improperly relied on to obstructDonofrio v. Wells [docket], the same case which is now going before the entire Supreme Court for Conference of Dec. 5th and to which Donofrio has pointed out Mr. Bickell was guilty of attemping to overturn Justice Powell’s holding in McCarthy v. Briscoe 429 U.S. 1317 n.1 (1976) and Justice O’Connerin Western Airlines, Inc. v. Teamsters, 480 U.S. 1301 (1987).
Furthermore, the issue was fully briefed - in the application submitted to the SCOTUS yesterday by Mr. Wrotnowski based on Donofrio’sresearch, and Donofrio’s fear that Bickell would try to pull the same obstruction of justice again.
Furthermore, Mr. Bickell is fully aware that the Supreme Court is hearing this issue in full conference despite Bickell’s best attempts to stop that from happening.
Donofrio (me) believes Mr. Wrotnowski’s case is at least as strong as his own, if not stronger. And Donofrio warned Wrotnowski that Bickellwas going to try the same tactic again.
Donofrio was right. Today, Bickell informed Wrotnowski that he was refusing to pass the emergency stay application on to Justice Ginsberg.
In a follow up phone call, Mr. Wrotnowski pointed out to Mr. Bickell that the issues he raised were properly briefed in the application and that it was the job of a Supreme Court Justices to make decisions of substantive law, not Mr. Bickell. Bickell then berated with mocking insults.
Mr. Wrotnowski has been through two lower courts and is now using our US Supreme Court rules to properly petition our Supreme Court for relief. This is outrageous and Mr. Bickell needs to be fired immediately and brought up on criminal charges for obstruction of justice, and possibly treason.
Courageously, Mr. Wrotnowski refused to back down and eventually Bickell said he would, reluctantly, docket the case.
As of 12:38 PM the case has not been docketed.
If you think that justice has been obstructed then please voice your opinions to the appropriate authorities. This is a very urgent issue which is now causing out entire system of justice to be overturned by a single clerk.
Mr. Wrotnowski
[UPDATE. WROTNOWSKI V. BYSIEWICZ, CONNECTICUT SECRETARY OF STATE…
…has been docketed, despite having initially been denied process by the SCOTUS stay clerk, Danny Bickell. Wrotnowski’s case has been submitted to the Honorable Associate Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Circuit Justice for the 2nd Circuit (includes Connecticut).
POSTED BY NATURAL BORN CITIZEN AT 9:12 AM
Below link to a nice picture of Cort- who saw Connecticut trot out some HEAVY lawyerly big guns for the little less-than-an-hour obfuscation finally at hands of State Supreme Court Head “Judge”:
http://americamustknow.com/connecticutcase.aspx
If Fox News is going this far, I would expect them to interview Leo D. directly!
Just to correct you, this forum is WONDERFUL and is in the top 5 for consevitive websites.
Here’s the deal:
At this point, even if one has concluded that Obama most certainly is qualified to be President, or that there is not sufficient evidence to conclude otherwise, it still remains true that, while our Constitution requires an individual to be a “natural born citizen” to be President and Vice President-—
1. No one actually is sure what, given all the available fact permutations, a “natural born citizen” is. IOW, this precise question-—that goes not just to citizenship, but to *qualification to be President*-—is not settled law.
2. Through this public discussion on the qualifications of the candidates (yes, the Left also strongly questions McCain’s status as a “natural born citizen” since he was born in the Republic of Panama, albeit to two U.S. citizens), we have learned that *no one* is charged with actually verifying a President-elect’s eligibility to serve, much less candidate’s eligibility.
Even in states where Secretaries of States have various statutory duties, many have responded to this issue by saying they interpret their duties as “ministerial” only; IOW, they state that “it’s not my job” to figure out if a candidate is constitutional qualified.
While it may be implied that the electors in the Electoral College, or congressmembers can and should verify eligibility, there is no specific responsibility, procedure or other mechanism for doing so. Nor is there, then, any straightforward way for a citizen to have standing to challege the electors or congresscritters for NOT doing what is NOT their explicit duty.
So, at this point, there are many reasons why it would be useful for the Supreme Court to weigh in on this matter, regardless if the nominees were qualified. Even if they refuse cert., at least then citizens will know it is imperative to get better legislative processes to vouchsafe the constitutional requirements.
Viewing this solely as about some attempt to oust Obama is way too myopic. Those chips will lie where they fall.
In the meantime, there are many legal and procedural issues that will only become more frequent in the future, and this is one of the few times in history (maybe the only time) where a candidate about whom there was a citizenship controversy actually won the election. Therefore, it is a unique opportunity for the Court to either settle the law or at least give some helpful guidance on how these questions should be handled.
P.S. In constitutional law, the fact that a legal question or fact pattern is “convoluted” (as you said) usually indicates that there may be some “there” actually there, not the opposite, as you argue.
Radio talk show hosts, however, don’t do “convoluted” because, well, they’re radio talk show hosts. I applaud them for generally not jawboning about issues of constitutional law that they can’t possibly do justice in their format and which even constitutional lawyers are not in agreement on.
Do you think that calling a theory “crack-pot” makes it so?
You do not give the impression of being rational by such name calling. We would suspect that you cannot put forth a rational observation that justifies such criticism of the possibility that very clear language in the Constitution has been ignored in what, if it has been, is obviously a deception that is long-standing.
By such name-calling you give the impression of not being the least bit interested in rational debate. If that is the case you would not seem to be on this forum for the same reason as most who participate in it.
I agree with your analysis, except that radio show hosts are not excused from discussing all matters in their purview and discussing them cogently — including gaining input from various sources on the air, if they wish not to be responsible for their own research and judgment.
...and Chip Program apparently said he is railing against those who wish to bring the process to account through the only means available (SCOTUS).
That’s not avoiding “taking a side” about something he doesn’t know enough about.
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.