Skip to comments.Obama eligibility challenge distributed by Chief Justice Roberts for conference before Supreme Court
Posted on 01/12/2013 10:07:42 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
A news release from Attorney Orly Taitz reveals Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has distributed for a February 15th conference of the Court, Taitzs Obama eligibility challenge of Noonan et al v Bowen. (5) The conference of the Court is intended to decide the merits of Ms. Taitzs challenge to Obamas eligibility to hold the office of President. The filed action will present evidence of the following:
1. Barack Obama used a last name not legally his
2. Obama permitted the use of a forged Selective Service application
3. Obama permitted the use of forged long form and short form birth certificates
4. Obama used a Connecticut social security number which was never assigned to him according to E-Verify and SSNUS (4)
Approximately 1 1/2 million INVALID California voter Registration forms are also featured in the...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Here’s some links to a couple of prior threads on this:
Roberts and SCOTUS will not actually comment in any manner. They are conplict as are Reps and Senate(both sides). They will find a way to dismiss without comment.
Finally the truth comes out.
There’s also this news from Orly’s site:
Breaking News! Fifth Circuit court of Appeals to hear the petition by Attorney Taitz to expedite default judgment against the Commissioner of Social Security Michael Astrue and release of SS-5 application for CT SSN 042-68-4425 fraudulently used by Obama.
You’re right, they won’t do anything. Thomas admitted a while back that they’re “evading” the issue so don’t expect anything to change today.
I hope Traitor John had a gay old time this summer in Europe without his family.
Traitor Roberts: "America and its Constitution and Law are 'last Century'.
It is time to bow to Mecca and Kenya and all tyrants.
In this fight, the odds are long and the enemies many, arrogant and determined, but the cause is righteous and just and the oath to support and defend, once taken, has no expiration.
This is our watch and our duty is clear. How far have we fallen that a Russian comes to our Constitution's defense instead?
if they know what's good for them and their family
This is the saddest example of the failure of the United States justice system to hear a legitimate claim.
Every person who runs for a local, state or national office must be a citizen, and no one has given a hearing to the multiple claims of this man’s ineligibility to hold office.
What is Justin Beeber ran for President? He obviously does not meet the age requirements set forth in the Constitution (35). The available information on Obama (Soetero) raises all sorts of red flags and probable cause to look into his not being a “natural born citizen” as that term has been judicially defined.
He may or may not have bene born in Hawaii at a time when his mother was too young to count as a parent citizen, and his alleged father was clearly not a citizen. He was clearly “adopted” in Indonesia by a person of that citizenry, and when he came back here he registered as a foreign student, probably flying in on an Indonesian Passport. You lose any vestige of USA citizenship in that event.
His whole life is a lie, but no one can get the goods. Dr Jerome Corsi has come close, but no media will help. No court will help where they should. No public official will cooperate (except Sheriff Joe). No public employee will blow the whistle.
Orly is also calling for protests in DC next weekend, including one in front of the White House on Sunday and in front of the Supreme Court on inauguration day itself, to draw attention to the eligibility questions.
The law school that gave Orly her degree should be stripped of its accreditation, and its professors required to re-take the bar exam.
That red face he has says health problems to me that the 0-Regiem might have been able to blackmail him on He does have known health problems and he looks bizarre in that photo. (to me at least)
If they evade this issue it is the end of lawful United States of America
Isn’t there something obvious that is going on?
Obama is simply a convenient idiot. When everything is obvious to us there has got to be another reason this guy is allowed to be president.
The scandals are outrageous and the actual election is suspect. There has been a serious shift our country since Obama has taken the helm, and I seriously doubt that he is in charge - it just doesn’t make sense. Libs are rubes so making them the cheerleaders makes sense - they typically are “for” anything - they are just against status quo.
If change is going to be permanent Obama needed a second term - and so it was. I’m not a black helicopter guy but coordinating all the aspects of the media to shape these events at the expense of making a boatload of cash is pretty amazing.
Life in the modern world is kind of like surfing, you just have to find a good wave to ride and don't get too hung up on the "rules" of success. Most of those were invented to separate you from as much of the fruits of your labor as possible.
anyone have ANY confidence in the Supremes? this punk ass president? how about congress or the senate?
Think I’m starting to root for the other side whatever the hell that is.
Edward Noonan, et al., Applicants
Deborah Bowen, California Secretary of State
Docketed: December 13, 2012
Lower Ct: Supreme Court of California
Case Nos.: (S207078)
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dec 11 2012 Application (12A606) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
Dec 13 2012 Application (12A606) denied by Justice Kennedy.
Dec 26 2012 Application (12A606) refiled and submitted to The Chief Justice.
Jan 9 2013 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 15, 2013.
Jan 9 2013 Application (12A606) referred to the Court.
~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioner:
Orly Taitz 29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy (949) 683-5411
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
Party name: Edward Noonan, et al.
Attorneys for Respondent:
Kamala Harris Attorney General (916) 445-9555
P. O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
Party name: Deborah Bowen, California Secretary of State
I think they are reading a headline that says the republicans are going to stand tough on taxes, or spending ...or gun control ... or...
” You will find that despite all of their leftist slogans they never cross the central bankers.”
Good point - never noticed - I should of though
And I know you are correct about riding a wave - but it does make one feel like you are are wasting time on sites like this, if you think about it.
What I swear we may have to have in the future is an artificial intelligence judge, yes a computer, one that cannot be re-programmed, bribed or threatened.
Human weaknesses and fear is being exploited by the progressive entities working so hard to transform America into a workers paradise.
Perhaps a judge can read the writing on the wall, perhaps one person can prevent the deaths of millions by performing the proper sworn duties, if Obama is allowed to remain in office we WILL see a Second Revolution or Civil War.
Hello, Mike. This is a very good documentary from 1996 describing who controls our money supply. It is long but very illuminating.
Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America.
The Money Masters is a 1996 American documentary film produced by attorney Patrick S. J. Carmack and directed and narrated by William T. Still. It discusses the concepts of money, debt and taxes, and describes their development from biblical times onward. It covers the history of fractional-reserve banking, central banking, monetary policy, the bond market, and the private ‘Federal’ Reserve System in the United States.
“Understand your enemy and understand the weapons they use so you may then use those same weapons in reverse.
The money system is the head of the snake. Cut the head off the snake and the rest of it will whither and die.
The time for talk is over and the time has come for action. It is now time for the people of the world to stop complying with the system.” ~ Max Igan.
This system makes some people very, very rich, while at the same time keeping others in poverty.
That video is over a year ago and I do remember the doomsayers that say we are heading to a crash - I’m not a believer.
My interest in understanding the “Money Masters” is not that they are the “enemy” and to fight them, but to understand what they are doing / or trying to do.
Obama certainly doesn’t have a track of accomplishments - he seems more like play-doh and has more teflon on him than Clinton. The Supreme court is even acting out of character.
So if there is “guidance” it would be interesting as to what it is. (I doubt a crash would serve anyone’s purpose)
We have no president, He is the emperor.
While the film talks about "the big crash" yet to come, I concluded that its main points were actually about recovering sovereignty by: a. abolishing the Federal Reserve, and b. establishing the U.S. Treasury Dept as issuer of currency and controller of the money supply, and c. avoiding adoption of the gold standard.
I happen to agree with those three things. Accomplishing this is the most important thing that Congress should now be doing.
There was a closed-door agreement between the two major political parties regarding Obama's eligibility. The fix was in since 2008.
Supreme Court cases that cite natural born Citizen as one born on U.S. soil to citizen parents:
The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says: The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina. There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782. Whether she was of age during this time does not appear. If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina. If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her? Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As society cannot perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their parents, and succeed to all their rights.' Again: 'I say, to be of the country, it is necessary to be born of a person who is a citizen; for if he be born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. . . .
Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939),
Was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a child born in the United States to naturalized parents on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen and that the child's natural born citizenship is not lost if the child is taken to and raised in the country of the parents' origin, provided that upon attaining the age of majority, the child elects to retain U.S. citizenship "and to return to the United States to assume its duties." Not only did the court rule that she did not lose her native born Citizenship but it upheld the lower courts decision that she is a "natural born Citizen of the United States" because she was born in the USA to two naturalized U.S. Citizens.
But the Secretary of State, according to the allegation of the bill of complaint, had refused to issue a passport to Miss Elg 'solely on the ground that she had lost her native born American citizenship.' The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants [307 U.S. 325, 350] (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227 , 57 S.Ct. 461, 108 A.L.R. 1000), declared Miss Elg 'to be a natural born citizen of the United States' (99 F.2d 414) and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. The decree in that sense would in no way interfere with the exercise of the Secretary's discretion with respect to the issue of a passport but would simply preclude the denial of a passport on the sole ground that Miss Elg had lost her American citizenship."
The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term natural born citizen to any other category than those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof.
“While the film talks about “the big crash” yet to come,”
Scooter - I don’t buy the crash scenario, and I certainly don’t want politicians in charge of the money supply.
It’s bad enough that we have s pseudo-ideologue in charge of the Fed right now. Normally the Fed is not partial and in charge of the Monetary policy (money supply & interest rates)of the nation and the Feds are suppose to regulate the Fiscal Policy (tax and spend). With those two things being separate the debt typically countered by the Fed controlling interest rates. But since the Fed is holding rates down and flooding the market with dollars Obama can spend all he wants.
I think it will be unwound without a crash, but I think some wicked inflation is a foregone conclusion.
The Fed has the ability to lower or raise inflation. THEY have caused past recessions by tinkering with the money supply. If inflation is in the best interests of the Fed (a privately owned cartel), then they will cause inflation. You need to read the amazing, "The Creature from Jekyll Island", by G.Edward Griffin. It changed my world view and my view of the Fed. One of the few books I've read in 65 years that really affected me.....well, besides the Bible.
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.