Posted on 12/08/2008 5:44:49 PM PST by Hang'emAll
All you new folks posting, need to get up to speed before you post, you look terribly foolish to those of us that have been following this since June.
Obama has released nothing. He is a British citizen by birth, Indonesian by adoption, and nothing else. Until he releases documentation to the contrary he is ineligible to be POTUS, and most likely Senator.
The Justices did not comment on the why. The case that Donofrio brought was flawed as it tried to create the 'born a citizen but not a natural born citizen' class of citizen that doesn't exist. I predicted that it would fail for that reason. Perhaps I was right. The Berg case had flaws as well, although it addresses the citizenship issue due to Obama possibly being born in Kenya correctly (IMO) it also makes claims about Obama's mother surrendering his US citizenship while he was a minor that have no bearing. I think Berg also sued the wrong person (Obama). Obama cannot be presumed by the Court to have done anything wrong yet, until an actual discrepancy is officially uncovered. That can only happen if the right parties are forced to do their jobs and determine his eligibility. Berg should have sued electors, Congress members, even VP Cheney, or gotten some of them to sue each other, so as to force a determination of who has the actual responsibility to qualify a President. All of those people are Constitutionally involved in the next phase. However, the SC denied his appeal of the dismissal of his case by a lower court for lack of standing or something like that, not the case itself. There are other, and I believe, better cases out there - by Electors, against Electors, by Candidates - involving people that participate in the next part of the election process. This isn't even close to over.
All of that being said, I am not a lawyer, I don't play one on TV, and I did NOT sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
The qualification phase, I believe, occurs after the EC votes are counted, because the person that wins the popular vote doesn't actually get elected until the EC votes are counted and so is not the President-elect until then, and the COTUS provides for a case where the 'President-elect shall have failed to qualify' at the time for the new term to start. It is that point, when the EVs are counted, that seems to me to be the most appropriate for any eligibility challenges. So email and snailmail your Representatives and Senators to get them to consider challenges to Obama's EVs if he won't produce the BC.
I think there is plenty to this story. As far as it going anywhere, that's where I'm a skeptic. SCOTUS doesn't want to decide another election. Media uninterested in this story. Most people unaware of this.
Obama spent $800,000 over a $10 Birth Certificate - You Tube
What part of divided loyalty don’t you understand? And I’m not sure where he was born. Why is he fighting showing a legal birth certificate? Even Hawaii doesn’t recognise a Certification of Live Birth as legal.
..... add the case from Connecticut, possibly from California, several others and the U.S. Supreme Court could be very busy over the Obama non-citizenship challenge.
http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244
It is beyond comprehension that any freeper would think someone with dual citizenship is qualified.
Well, that part is actually true, but don't tell that to Dr. Neal Krawetz who is revered by himself and the clueless masses as being an "actual expert" in computer graphics.
So, it's not my fault that nobody else on this planet know as much as I do about the paper COLB itself, the images and photographs that can can cannot be made from it, and also know how the forgeries posted online were created.
If they gave a Nobel Prize for this stuff, you'd see me in Stockholm one day.
I didn’t miss it, I just don’t believe it.
Know what I mean, Vern? ;-)
I must have missed the court case that proved that
His findings were never reviewed by any actual experts."
Actually they were, but it was done informally, and the people who did support my conclusions did not go off pimping their own research, like someone you may have heard about. He fancies himself, and is "revered" by the clueless masses, a "real expert" in computer graphics, so, that part is actually true. Just don't tell that to Dr. Neal Krawetz. I already have, and it's a good thing that I posted a copy here because he pulled the original that I posted on his website, claiming that I "violated his blog's Code of Conduct."
In my post, I violated him, and not his Code. Awhile back, I posted on here what I called my "COLB Quick Quiz" designed to screen out the pretenders from the contenders. Anyone who did not answer, "None of the above," is most definitely "NOT" anyone qualified to criticize my research.
So, it's not my fault (although it is) that nobody else on this planet knows even remotely as much as I do about the paper COLB itself, how Hawaii makes it, certifies it, and distributes it, what are the images and photographs that can and cannot be made from it, and also how the images and photographs posted online were created and forged.
Who else in the world spent the last four months doing empirical research on this bogus birth certificate? Nada. Zip. Zero. Throwing together some hastily-prepared rebuttals is not the same as conducting original, experimentally-controlled research. In a fraction of the time it took for the span of 30 minutes, I ripped his "expert" opinions to shreds.
Which is why I take particular exception to "Dr. K" calling what I did "Bad Science" and blowing me off as someone who "does not even understand even the basics of image graphics," -- that's a quote from his "Bad Science - Part I."
If they gave a Nobel Prize for COLB research, I'd be making my travel plans now.
Has Obama and the DNC even hinted, in any of their many injunctions to prevent his original birth certificate from being seen, that the image posted online is "a genuine copy of Obama's original birth certificate?"
Are you kidding me? Bring it on! I LIVE for the day that would ever happen...but, DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH! This would be adding perjury to his list of crimes, so take it as etched in stone, that Obama and everyone else connected with his birth certificate conspiracy, would never say anything about what is posted online." You might as well ask him to slit his own throat.
Now, where, Calenel, do they come up with this stuff? I'm anonymous? If I was "anonymous," then I'd sign my posts, "Anonymous." When people take the necessary steps to protect their job and their family, they are not being "anonymous," but doing what any, clear-headed individual would do, in light of the unusual circumstances i which they find themselves.
You certainly aren’t citing this You Tube clip as evidence, are you?
The original poster asked where the figure came from. I answered. Dead horse meet stick.
Look, I think this is a side issue. It doesn’t really matter. In September or October, there were several threads about the Berg case and Obama’s team of 3 law firms. I remember one lawyer was of questionable repute. If you really want to know who it is, there is a list on the forum “certifigate” and birthcertificate” in the popular keywords list. Also you could click the link in the You Tube vid, go to their site and ask them their source for the $800,000 figure. I don’t think this is central to presidential qualifications.
I agree. It is a side issue. And I also note your original response to njusa. Point taken.
But it is a legitimate point of contention because it goes to the issue of credibility. I have no idea where the figure of $800,000 comes from (although, after researching the issue, I have an idea).
As you note, the “three law firms and millions of dollars” has been brought up as well.
One poster responded to my request for attribution and gave me the name of Joe Sandler of Sandler, Reiff and Young, a law firm that represents the DNC.
This is an important distinction. The DNC would certainly be expected to represent its interests in all these cases, and those interests certainly coincide with Obama’s interests. Please note the use of the word “represent” rather than “fight”...again, an important distinction.
I am certain the DNC has several law firms under retainer, and I’m sure the final figures would top out in the millions.
But again, if, and I say if, this is the case, it is an important distinction.
But at that, even if it is a side issue, it goes to the credibility of posters and FR. Dumb posts, racist posts, ignorant comments, manipulated or unvetted data, make all of us look bad.
I have made the following comment several times on this issue. The failure of some of the more respected FR posters to weigh in on the matter speaks volumes to me.
You made me curious so I've been searching too. It seems it was WND but I can't find it. I wanted to see if they named a source but no luck.
On the lawyer issue, I think that I remember there being outrage that one of the lawyers worked for CAIR. Can't find that either. lol
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.