Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS To Discuss Obama Birth Certificate Case on January 9
The Patriot Room ^ | December 20, 2008 | Bill Dupray

Posted on 12/20/2008 1:21:22 PM PST by Bill Dupray

It’s Philip Berg’s case and it is a meeting to discuss whether to grant certiorari.

More . . .

(Excerpt) Read more at patriotroom.com ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: 911truthers; berg; bho2008; birthcertificate; birthers; blackhelicopters; certificate; certifigate; conspiracytheories; crackpots; democrats; fraud; obama; obamabots; obamagate; obamatransitionfile; obamatruthfile; phony; rinobullies; supremecourt; tinfoilhats
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-97 next last

1 posted on 12/20/2008 1:21:23 PM PST by Bill Dupray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray
Of interesting note is that Mr. Berg has had tooth and nail to get his case heard.

SCOTUS probably knows the score, but the d@mn fools refuse to acknowledge the truth before the American taxpayers.

That's why we the PEASANTS have to constantly resist the communists and other democrats that are planning the iron-fisted rule of our Nation.

God Bless Mr. Berg for his efforts!

2 posted on 12/20/2008 1:25:02 PM PST by Prole (Please pray for the families of Chris and Channon. May God always watch over them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray
It only takes 4 Justices to vote to accept the case for argument. Hmmm, I wonder if I can think of 4 conservative Justices who might do something like that . . .

Roberts

Scalia

Thomas

Alito

And once again these four conservative and strict constructionist Justices will deny to hear the case.

Before you know it, Phil Berg will be back to pushing his 9/11 was an Inside Job theory.

3 posted on 12/20/2008 1:26:18 PM PST by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at I00 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz
And once again these four conservative and strict constructionist Justices will deny to hear the case.

On what basis, trumandogz? Because it would hurt your feelings, if they did? It was past time to let those childhood dreams of being President go, anyway.

4 posted on 12/20/2008 1:32:32 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray

Kenya gags Obama’s extended family

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2152032/posts

“The Kenyan government has blocked members of President-elect Barack Obama’s extended family from talking to the media.

Www.allafrica.com reports that the Kenyan government told family members that they would have to ask for official permission before issuing any statement concerning Obama. It said the government would also vet all those seeking information about the family. “


5 posted on 12/20/2008 1:35:14 PM PST by FocusNexus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

So, lets see.

Electoral College has made Senator Obama’s win official on 16 December 2008. He is now the President-Elect.

Should the USSC agree to hear, it will be sometime in 2009 after the 20 January inauguration.

If they should they declare him ineligible as not a natural born citizen. He is in office.

The USSC can not remove him as they have no enforcement authority. The Executive Branch is the enforcement authority.

Will they? I think not.

Will Congress impeach? I think not.

We may be saddled with an illegitimate president for 4 years.

Will the people in 4 years vote him out of office? That is a big unknown. If they did that would mean the Constitution and the country matter to 50+%.

Quite a scenario. No real answers, only conjecture at this point.


6 posted on 12/20/2008 1:35:28 PM PST by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas
"Electoral College has made Senator Obama’s win official on 16 December 2008. He is now the President-Elect."

Actually that is not true. He is not officially President-elect until the President of the Senate certifies the votes of the Electors.
7 posted on 12/20/2008 1:37:26 PM PST by joseph20 (...to ourselves and our Posterity...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray

Interesting how they picked jan 9 unless I’m missing something about procedure. That’s the day -after- the electoral college votes are counted, isn’t it?


8 posted on 12/20/2008 1:39:38 PM PST by nominal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joseph20

I guess we’ll get to see that silly SNL prop of a sign for a little while longer.


9 posted on 12/20/2008 1:40:38 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray

Come on Roberts, go to it Thomas, yoo hoo Scalia, and give ‘em hell the new guy. Make the Kenyan squirm.


10 posted on 12/20/2008 1:41:28 PM PST by BlueStateBlues (Blue State for business, Red State at heart..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joseph20

And he’s not president until a judge swears him in. If the Supremes ask for a restraining order towards every judge in the land, I guess he’ll have to import a judge from, well, maybe Kenya?


11 posted on 12/20/2008 1:42:49 PM PST by BlueStateBlues (Blue State for business, Red State at heart..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Prole

12 posted on 12/20/2008 1:54:34 PM PST by billorites
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray
And they will deny it, because the case is absurd.

Don't waste bandwidth posting any crap that supposedly "proves" this case has merit. I'm done arguing with birthers. The experience reminds of my attempts at having conversations with mental patients back when I volunteered at a mental hospital when I was in high school.

I'm just going to amuse myself posting drive-by snarks, and sending people to this website:

www.obamaconspiracy.com.

I'm confident any responable person, after reviewing it, will conclude these allegations about Obama not being a ntural born citizen are tinfoil hat nonsense.

Have a nice day.

13 posted on 12/20/2008 1:54:34 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites
Th at image is great! Where did you get it?
14 posted on 12/20/2008 1:54:57 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: joseph20

It’s a foregone conclusion. The Constitution process is moving along as it should. I realize it will not be complete until Congress tallies the outcome of Monday’s Electoral College vote at a joint session scheduled for Jan. 6.

The USSC will not make any change in the process and the Senate will complete the deed. We will have placed into the highest office in the land a man who has not been truthful and forthcoming on one of the most basic of issues ... his birth.

No one else is or has even been allowed to skirt this issue (providing a birth certificate) and receive whatever they sought.


15 posted on 12/20/2008 1:57:01 PM PST by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Because the Berg case has no merit and Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Aliro will refuse this case, just as they refused the previous cases.


16 posted on 12/20/2008 2:00:56 PM PST by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at I00 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: curiosity
"...these allegations about Obama not being a natural born citizen are tinfoil hat nonsense."

Actually, he wasn't "born" in Hawaii, but rather hatched there.

Only God knows where that scary wife of his comes from...

17 posted on 12/20/2008 2:01:36 PM PST by billorites
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

The Court hereby declares Mr. Obama to constitute three-fifths of a President...


18 posted on 12/20/2008 2:06:12 PM PST by billorites
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray
Headline, 10 Jan. 2009:

Court rejects Berg. Obama bailout?
Some Are Too Big To Risk Failing Constitution Test: SCOTUS
"Little people still subject to microscopic scrutiny," says Court spokesman.

. . . .

My birth certificate which I have had to provide on several occasions lists the address of the hospital/institution or in my case the street address of birth. It's signed by a physician who witnessed the birth.

I realize that a manger has no address but couldn't Obama at least provide the county road address of the stable?

19 posted on 12/20/2008 2:08:39 PM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites
Photobucket
Hatched indeed
20 posted on 12/20/2008 2:11:11 PM PST by Canedawg ("The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: billorites
SCOTUS:


21 posted on 12/20/2008 2:11:30 PM PST by Prole (Please pray for the families of Chris and Channon. May God always watch over them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

“Because the Berg case has no merit and Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Aliro will refuse this case, just as they refused the previous cases.”

They haven’t actually refused any cases yet, just interim stays.


22 posted on 12/20/2008 2:14:01 PM PST by Nipfan (The desire to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it - H L Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: curiosity
RE: "I'm done arguing with birthers. The experience reminds of my attempts at having conversations with mental patients back when I volunteered at a mental hospital when I was in high school."

Nice contumely!

Some of the best condescension I've ever experienced. Thanks!

With great timidity I humbly offer my opinion of the issue.

My birth certificate which I have had to provide on several occasions lists the address of the hospital/institution or in my case the street address of birth. It's signed by a physician who witnessed the birth.

Why do some soar above law and our tradition as a nation of laws not men? Why do the "little people" have to prove and some not?

Some have their cute little excuse that there's no controlling legal authority to compel them to for example show a complete birth certificate. Why?

If the Constitution ain't law I don't know what the hell is -- controlling legal authority or not.

23 posted on 12/20/2008 2:21:35 PM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Prole

I remember when Clinton raped that woman; but no one would talk about it until they semi impeached the rotten you know what.


24 posted on 12/20/2008 2:35:53 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: freekitty
Exactly right.

Isn't it just amazing how defiant our government is to handling the truth about things like this?

Blago and Rezko are really our best shots at embarrassing Obama right now on the world stage, because I seldom see anyone out there in the MSM playing the truth about Obama.

I give credit to the Talk Radio and internet circuits as well.

I fear that Blago and Rezko are gonna end up like the DC Madam.

25 posted on 12/20/2008 2:49:59 PM PST by Prole (Please pray for the families of Chris and Channon. May God always watch over them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

You are missing the point, entirely.

BO could have been born in Podunk in front of 20 witnesses who all stand up and swear to it. It doesn’t matter.

The request has been made to provide what is considered normal proof of birth. This is a legitimate request for information specifically required by the Constitution.

When I got my DL in KY, nothing short of my BC was sufficient. Regardless of how many people I could have gotten to swear as to my birth. That, my friend is the point.

It is not WHAT is on the BC that (at least at this point) is the issue. It is his REFUSAL to present the BC.


26 posted on 12/20/2008 2:51:03 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s........you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

“I’m comfortable that leftist koolaid drinker, after reviewing it, will conclude these allegations about 0bama not being a natural born citizen don’t mean anything because he is god incarnate and whatever rules he might bend don’t matter. Plus his thugs will be after those who disagree”.

And curiosity’s source for defeating the “tinfoil hat nonsense” are Fight the Smears, Fact Check, and Media Matters - 0bama/leftist garbage.

Thanks for playing, curiosity!

You’ve been punk3d, btw!


27 posted on 12/20/2008 3:01:15 PM PST by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray

I have a research question about the Obama birth certificate and the lawsuits.

The Alan Keyes lawsuit has this in it: “Box 7C of the vault Certificate of Live Birth contains a question, whether the birth was in Hawaii or another State or Country.”

Philip Berg’s does not.

Who first came up with this mistake (box 7c is the Mother’s usual residence, not the place of birth)? Was it Keyes or did he get from somewhere else?

If anybody knows, drop by obamaconspiracy.org and leave them a note via the Contact link.

Thanks.


28 posted on 12/20/2008 3:09:45 PM PST by kwdavids (You can't fool all of the people all of the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: curiosity; All

“when I volunteered at a mental hospital when I was in high school”

That explains you...overdosed on some patient’s anti-psychiotic and you haven’t been rational since.

Fella or Gal...granted the whole business with the birth certicate might be a collosal waste of time without any merit. However, why doesn’t Mr. Obama just produce the originals and end the speculation? What does he have to hide? If he wasn’t foreign born, did his mom have a venereal disease that is indicated on the BC or some other such embarassing thing? If so, this is 2008, and that stuff just doesn’t matter anymore. So, he should fully reveal everything and end speculation and concern.

More importantly, in my thinking at least, is why doesn’t the SCOTUS just review the documents themselves and make a ruling? That would satisfy any doubts I might have. I’m certain the same would be true for most others.


29 posted on 12/20/2008 3:18:00 PM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: billorites
Good one!

If liberals (black and white) can throw Oreos at conservative blacks then how can they complain if we poke a little fun at liberal blacks?

(The liberals will complain of course and scream "Racist!" It's what they do.)

30 posted on 12/20/2008 3:21:20 PM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kwdavids

Look at box 6d. If the “No” box is check “give judicial district,” which means somewhere else.


31 posted on 12/20/2008 3:22:10 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray

I would think the key would be that if he was not born in Hawaii, one would have to prove where he WAS born.


32 posted on 12/20/2008 3:26:38 PM PST by Sacajaweau (I'm planting corn...Have to feed my car...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray
Hot from the Checkout line


33 posted on 12/20/2008 3:37:47 PM PST by ThreePuttinDude (-)....Election 2008, the year Affirmative Action won the Presidential race....(-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prole

It’s sad they appear to be so one sided.


34 posted on 12/20/2008 3:52:11 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas

Basically, you’re asking the SCOTUS to properly vett him on this issue. It makes total sense since no one else has done it, which is why it probably wont occur. ;-)

Of course, i’d love to see them remand the case back to the lower court with the order that the BC be produced, which is the more usual procedure.

But they are the top court in the land and they can do what they want- even make new law and change the standing requirements, if they believe that that barrier should be removed from cases like this.


35 posted on 12/20/2008 3:54:24 PM PST by Canedawg ("The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

It is the responsibility fot he candidate for the job to provide proof of eligibility. The Constitution stipulates three points for eligibility. The one which requires the candidate be a natural born citizen is ambiguous to the point of needing the SCOTUS to dig into the history of the term as used by the framers writing the Constitution. It may well be that Barry Obama did not have American citizen parents (plural) and he would be ineligible because of his admitted British subject father passing British citizenship to him at birth regardless of where he was born. It is not the responsibility of We The People to find and present evidence that he is lying, defrauding, or ineligible. Besides, Barry Soetoro Obama has had an army of attorneys and detectives seal from any view the relevant documentation of his adult life so that searching for evidence would be fruitless.


36 posted on 12/20/2008 4:06:32 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Ah yes, stick to the latest Axelrod talking points ... ‘Berg’s a kook truther conspricay nut’. Your butties are making sure the point is raised often this weekend. Are you enjoying the ridicule game as much as it appears you are?


37 posted on 12/20/2008 4:09:15 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bill Dupray

If so, then big deal. Congress meets on the 6th to vote him in.


38 posted on 12/20/2008 4:13:39 PM PST by CodeToad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
I am sorry however, once someone states that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should be prosecuted for 9/11 Crimes, I no longer take their view on anything seriously.
39 posted on 12/20/2008 4:13:48 PM PST by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at I00 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Yeah that approach to dismissing the issue of ineligibility works about as well as another Axelrod lie, that ‘Ayers and Obama must have met casually sometime since their kids attend the same schools’. LOL


40 posted on 12/20/2008 4:22:27 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

Try to keep up ... the relevant date is the 8th of January, 2009.


41 posted on 12/20/2008 4:23:26 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Try to keep up...the point is the court is whitewashing this issue. Being snotty is immature.


42 posted on 12/20/2008 4:24:54 PM PST by CodeToad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

With all the dissonance the obamanoids are spittling around at FR, it is difficult to keep up with the actual dates and facts. Not being snide to you. If it came across that way, you have my unabashed apology.


43 posted on 12/20/2008 4:26:31 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Here is exactly what Berg wrote:

Philip J. Berg, Esquire stated in a letter to the nations throughout the world:

“It is time for the nations of the world to come forth and take the leadership because of the failure of the United States Government and the States where crimes were committed on 09/11/01, where no thorough investigation and indictments occurred, to investigate, arrest and prosecute the people responsible for the murders on 9/11/01, specifically including George W. Bush and Richard Cheney. ”

Berg continued there is overwhelming evidence that:

“Bush and his cronies made 9/11 happen or let it happen. And, if they let it happen, then they made it happen. Either way, they are responsible; and more important, they have completely and unequivocally covered-it-up!”

http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/philip-berg-seeking-the-truth-of-911


44 posted on 12/20/2008 4:27:05 PM PST by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at I00 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Federal law states that Congress shall meet on the 6th of January, so it took as that.


45 posted on 12/20/2008 4:29:09 PM PST by CodeToad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

NIce misdirection. Berg is not the issue, the obamanoid spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid presenting any documentation to a court where it could be authenticated IS the issue. But that’s a nice touch to offer a diversion to run off on Berg for readers. Ridicule, condescension, deceit, diversion, misdirection, and changing the subject; how very ... liberal of you.


46 posted on 12/20/2008 4:30:30 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Berg-Once a Nut Job Always a Nut Job.

Saying that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were responsible for the 9/11 attacks in not something Berg can ever be forgiven.


47 posted on 12/20/2008 4:36:58 PM PST by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at I00 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

Why don’t you do a thread on the issues. That would be a fun thread ... I’m sure we can team up and eviscerate Phil. But that won’t change the issues in the Obamanoid affirmative action case.


48 posted on 12/20/2008 4:38:16 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Prole
That's why we the PEASANTS have to constantly resist the communists and other democrats (IE the republicans*) that are planning the iron-fisted rule of our Nation.

***(Sappy Commercial music)***.....Republicans....... the other Democrats....

49 posted on 12/20/2008 5:04:41 PM PST by rawcatslyentist (2nd assistant bookeeper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; little jeremiah; LucyT; pissant; Calpernia; Polarik; Ernest_at_the_Beach; SunkenCiv; ...

Berg is not the issue, the obamanoid spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid presenting any documentation to a court where it could be authenticated IS the issue.
***We should just start cataloguing all these talking points so that when we see them, we just put the link in and cursorily dismiss it for what it is. I nominate the Readers Digest thread for that purpose.

Readers Digest Version of Obama Qualifications Issue (Vanity)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2144460/posts
12/07/2008 8:03:41 AM PST · by nufsed · 109 replies · 1,972+ views


50 posted on 12/20/2008 5:08:34 PM PST by Kevmo ( It's all over for this Country as a Constitutional Republic. ~Leo Donofrio, 12/14/08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-97 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson