Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USDOJ: Office of Solicitor General AND SCOTUS! (re: Taitz, Obama lawsuit)
Defend Our Freedoms ^ | 3/24/2009 | rxsid

Posted on 03/24/2009 12:41:30 PM PDT by rxsid

USDOJ: Office of Solicitor General AND SCOTUS!

Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. just received a phone call from Karen Thornton at the Department of Justice. She stated that all of Orly's documents and filings have been forwarded to the Office of Solicitor General, Elena Kagan. That includes all three Dossiers, the Quo Warranto Easterling v. Obama aka Soetoro. Please show your support that we want these matters and investigations looked into immediately, 202-514-2203.

Coincidently, after Dr. Taitz called me with that update, she received another call from Officer Giaccino at the Supreme Court. Officer Giaccino stated both pleadings have been received and being analyzed now. Also, Justice Roberts must be back because the Officer also stated that all the documents that were given to Chief Justice Roberts at Iowan University are now at the Supreme Court and are also being analyzed. We will be notified tomorrow after 1:00pm EST as to whether they will be on the docket at the Supreme Court.

http://defendourfreedoms.us/2009/03/24/usdoj--office-of-solicitor-general-and-scotus.aspx


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: barackobama; bctrollsarescared; berg; bho2008; bho2009; bho44; bhodoj; birthcertificate; birtherrebirth; birthers; british; certifigate; citizenship; colb; constitution; coverup; democrats; democratscandals; donofrio; doublestandard; eligibility; hawaii; ineligible; kenya; lightfoot; naturalborn; naturalborncitizen; obama; obamanoncitizenissue; obamatruthfile; orly; orlytaitz; scotus; taitz; tinfoilhatalert; truthers; uslurplers; usurper
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-154 next last
To: rxsid; MarkT

Yes Mark, you are right. That is why a Quo Warranto was filed. (three times) And it is one of the documents that is being reviewed.

Quo Warranto for review:

http://defendourfreedoms.us/2009/03/16/quo-warranto-sent-to-the-us-att-for-dc-jeffrey-taylor.aspx
Quo warranto sent to the US att for DC Jeffrey Taylor


51 posted on 03/24/2009 1:37:22 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Fine. It was your mistake. I was responding to #28.


52 posted on 03/24/2009 1:37:43 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE
"Praying the good Chief Justice remembers that his absolute loyalty is to and protection of the Constitution, not to politics or political correctness, and is guided accordingly. Complete truth and clarity on this issue once and for all .. that’s all most of us want."

Dito that!

53 posted on 03/24/2009 1:38:04 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: rxsid; MarkT

Actually that link did have the actual Quo Warranto. That was a letter about it.

Go to this one:

http://defendourfreedoms.us/2009/03/02/prelitigation-quo-warranto-letter-to-attorney-general-holder.aspx
Pre-Litigation Quo Warranto Letter to Attorney General Holder


54 posted on 03/24/2009 1:38:55 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Does any one know if Danny Bickel still work at the SC? I thought I remembered something about his name having been removed from the clerk list a few days ago


55 posted on 03/24/2009 1:40:54 PM PDT by YellowRoseofTx (Evil is not the opposite of God; it's the absence of God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

No, you responded to 45, that is me.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2213668/posts?page=45#45


56 posted on 03/24/2009 1:41:12 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Tic toc tic toc.... time is starting to run short on Obama and his trolls.


57 posted on 03/24/2009 1:41:22 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rxsid
Dr. Orly Taitz, Esquire

Just how does one obtain the honorific Esquire?

58 posted on 03/24/2009 1:42:12 PM PDT by sportutegrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Aaaahh, thanks Cal. I wasn’t sure of the order of her meeting th justices.

So any word on the paperwork to Roberts then? Or is this it?

Hopefully under the watchful eye of the SCOTUS, the DOJ won’t play too many games.


59 posted on 03/24/2009 1:42:17 PM PDT by autumnraine (Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose- Kris Kristoferrson VIVA LA REVOLUTION!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: YellowRoseofTx

Really? Do you remember where you heard that? Link?

Thanks!


60 posted on 03/24/2009 1:43:25 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine

>>>So any word on the paperwork to Roberts then? Or is this it?

Only what I posted. Officer Giaccino reported they have the filings and are reviewing them. We get more information tomorrow after 1:00pm EST.


61 posted on 03/24/2009 1:44:57 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl
"Just how does one obtain the honorific Esquire?"

By passing the BAR exam and becoming a licensed attorney.

In the United States the suffix "Esq." is most commonly encountered in use among individuals licensed to practice law. This usage applies to both male and female lawyers. The term "Esquire" is assumed by the legal profession, and has not been awarded to it by any government or authority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esquire

62 posted on 03/24/2009 1:52:33 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
No I don't remember, but it seems it was in something from Orly's site that was posted in here. But I could be wrong, that's why I asked. It seems it was shortly after she confronted Justice Scalia maybe.

Do you know the web site for the SC? I've wanted to look there, but not really sure where to look either.

63 posted on 03/24/2009 1:53:24 PM PDT by YellowRoseofTx (Evil is not the opposite of God; it's the absence of God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

BUMP ! Good news — I pray the Justices are true to the Constitution.


64 posted on 03/24/2009 1:57:26 PM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Thanks, Calpernia. I appreciate that. :)

I’ve been keeping all of you working on these cases in my prayers, and I’ll definitely keep doing so. Thank you for everything you’ve done to help Dr. Taitz - and all of us, really! I don’t think any of us will ever forget it. :)


65 posted on 03/24/2009 2:00:44 PM PDT by LibertyRocks ( http://LibertyRocks.wordpress.com ~ ANTI-OBAMA STUFF : http://cafepress.com/NO_ObamaBiden08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Aack-So many unbelievable links and ties in O’s inner circle of buds.


66 posted on 03/24/2009 2:02:26 PM PDT by Freedom2specul8 (Please pray for our troops.... http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks

History will not forget the ‘new’ Patriots that saved (hopefully) our Constitution!


67 posted on 03/24/2009 2:05:34 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: YellowRoseofTx
In particular, the Lightfoot v Bowen docket can be found here:

http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a524.htm

Currently:

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dec 12 2008 Application (08A524) for a stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
Dec 17 2008 Application (08A524) denied by Justice Kennedy.
Dec 29 2008 Application (08A524) refiled and submitted to The Chief Justice.
Jan 7 2009 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 23, 2009.
Jan 7 2009 Application (08A524) referred to the Court.
Jan 13 2009 Suggestion for recusal received from applicant.
Jan 22 2009 Supplemental brief of applicant Gail Lightfoot, et al. filed. (Distributed)
Jan 26 2009 Application (08A524) denied by the Court.

68 posted on 03/24/2009 2:07:48 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

“People will be climbing all over the band wagon looking for an excuse to get rid of the Obama presidency.”

I agree with you. Early on, SCOTUS was/is reluctant to take up this case. There are matters of perception by the general public that, in my opinion, have resulted in virtually everyone in the US lacking standing on this constitutional question (an unlikely situation, though the courts seem to believe it so far).

At some point (and this is becoming more obvious, even in the last week), it will become apparent that the current POTUS is not up to the task, and is becoming an embarrassment. At that point, as things begin to get ugly, SCOTUS will have to take it up as a legal method of removal for the problem. A legal, politically acceptable method of dealing with the problem is ever to be preferred, and legal solutions are what SCOTUS is all about.

When SCOTUS has the opportunity to be viewed as a solution to a nationally perceived problem, is the point at which they will take up the question (in my opinion). I believe that they would rather do this, than do it too soon and be perceived as partisan (though we all know that they are).


69 posted on 03/24/2009 2:09:21 PM PDT by Habibi ("We gladly feast on those who would subdue us". Not just pretty words........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: YellowRoseofTx

Maybe it was on a comment I didn’t see. But I know we didn’t post anything like that in article format.


70 posted on 03/24/2009 2:09:24 PM PDT by Calpernia (Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: All

Dr. Orly addresses Roberts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9O9usBeg9Y


71 posted on 03/24/2009 2:09:43 PM PDT by patriot08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Thanks. I’ve been searching some sites for the SC about the clerks, but so far all I’m finding are the clerks assigned to each Justice. Aren’t there some who do various specific jobs there? Are only the ones listed for each Justice the only ones there?


72 posted on 03/24/2009 2:11:20 PM PDT by YellowRoseofTx (Evil is not the opposite of God; it's the absence of God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

No, it wasn’t an article itself, just a comment or a comment copied from Orly’s site.


73 posted on 03/24/2009 2:12:21 PM PDT by YellowRoseofTx (Evil is not the opposite of God; it's the absence of God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: All
. DR. ORLY TAITZ Image and video hosting by TinyPic_____________________________________________________________________________________________________ This lovely little Russian refugee is working herself to exhaustion to save YOUR country. It is reported that she is surviving on 3-4 hours sleep per night and is bearing much of the expense of her lawsuits herself. Please go to Dr. Orly's website http://defendourfreedoms.us/ and help her. She is asking for researchers and volunteers.
74 posted on 03/24/2009 2:13:23 PM PDT by patriot08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

.

Dr. Orly’s website:
http://defendourfreedoms.us/

.


75 posted on 03/24/2009 2:14:48 PM PDT by patriot08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Habibi
"When SCOTUS has the opportunity to be viewed as a solution to a nationally perceived problem, is the point at which they will take up the question (in my opinion). I believe that they would rather do this, than do it too soon and be perceived as partisan (though we all know that they are)."

A good opinion (IMO). haha. The issue would have been waaayyy too much of a hot potato to touch early on. Now that things are changing (pun intended), it may not be so 'difficult' to address.

Doesn't make it right in light of defending our Constitution...but I can see how that 'argument' would be so.

On the other hand, if some/most of these cases, briefs, etc where never seen by the justices because of (alleged) subversion, then that's a whole different ball game (IMO).

76 posted on 03/24/2009 2:20:19 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

Her fight to save our Constitution hasn’t gone ‘unnoticed’ by me.


77 posted on 03/24/2009 2:21:59 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Isn’t it amazing to think that that our country may be saved by a
Russian refugee?
God bless her and keep her safe


78 posted on 03/24/2009 2:27:29 PM PDT by patriot08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Thanks for keeping us updated on this. It’s moving along, although ever so slowly. Will keep praying.


79 posted on 03/24/2009 2:29:30 PM PDT by Marmolade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Habibi

It might be easier for SCOTUS to invalidate Obama’s election and deal with the fraud rampant in the Democrat Party than to sit through hearing after hearing of Constiutionality cases regarding the laws he has passed and WANTS to pass!

Congress has overstepped it’s bounds. It’s time for SCOTUS to deliver the checkmate.


80 posted on 03/24/2009 2:34:19 PM PDT by LibertyRocks ( http://LibertyRocks.wordpress.com ~ ANTI-OBAMA STUFF : http://cafepress.com/NO_ObamaBiden08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

She gave them to the SECRET SERVICE guys...she did have the choice - did they even give them to the judges?


81 posted on 03/24/2009 2:35:15 PM PDT by American Dream 246
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: sarah p

I have no hope that this will go anywhere. Our country has been stolen from us, right under our noses.
***I share your dim view. However, I won’t get in the way of those who still try to move this thing forward, unlike many freepers over the last few months.


82 posted on 03/24/2009 2:36:19 PM PDT by Kevmo ( It's all over for this Country as a Constitutional Republic. ~Leo Donofrio, 12/14/08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

I would be interested in seeing a listing/presentation on this alleged “subversion”. Apparently, I’m well behind the power curve on this aspect, and need to catch up (understand that I would not be surprised that it is/was occurring). I would be interested in seeing a listing/presentation on these alleged allegations. If such information exists, could someone point me in the right direction?

Regards to all!


83 posted on 03/24/2009 2:40:58 PM PDT by Habibi ("We gladly feast on those who would subdue us". Not just pretty words........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Info Ping


84 posted on 03/24/2009 3:02:26 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks

Good luck with your husband’s work situation, LibertyRocks.


85 posted on 03/24/2009 3:04:46 PM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA

Thank you so much for the kind thoughts. We’re taking it as a “refining” test from God. Working on letting go, and letting God as well as anger and forgiveness issues when it comes to our Congress and Obama (and our neighbors)! It sure isn’t going to be easy — but it’s not going to be easy for any of us. We’ll each have our portion to share in one way or another, unfortunately!!! :) His boss says he wants to bring him back ASAP, so that’s a good thing. He was told, “you’d be hard to replace” so that’s a GOOD THING to know, in the midst of the bad...


86 posted on 03/24/2009 3:12:54 PM PDT by LibertyRocks ( http://LibertyRocks.wordpress.com ~ ANTI-OBAMA STUFF : http://cafepress.com/NO_ObamaBiden08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842
"The fact that a great deal of legal effort is being expended to prevent that is very, very telling."

But what does it tell? That he's ineligible to be POTUS, or that his BC contains some embarrassing information? My money is on the latter.

Is his name different than thought? What if his birth name is "Barry?" Is his father different than thought? What if Mr. Marshall is his dad? Perhaps his name really is "Barry Soetero."

87 posted on 03/24/2009 3:21:33 PM PDT by cookcounty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

YAY!


88 posted on 03/24/2009 3:23:59 PM PDT by Darwin Fish (God invented evolution. Man invented religeon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
trigger happy

Fire for effect. (doing the happy dance)

89 posted on 03/24/2009 3:34:07 PM PDT by WhirlwindAttack (I'm just a computer cowboy riding my trackball into the sunset, Yipee kai yay MF'ers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
" But what does it tell? That he's ineligible to be POTUS, or that his BC contains some embarrassing information? My money is on the latter.

Is his name different than thought? What if his birth name is "Barry?" Is his father different than thought? What if Mr. Marshall is his dad? Perhaps his name really is "Barry Soetero."

If that is the case (re different info on his actual BC), then could he be charged with altering a government document? Why did he (his campaign) post a known forgery on his site then?

If his name is really something different...then he set himself up for election fraud because he signed BHO on all his election documents. Not to mention his Illinois state bar app, he stated he's never been known by any other name.

He then gets removed for the various frauds committed.

90 posted on 03/24/2009 3:34:10 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl
Just how does one obtain the honorific Esquire?

By passing the Bar exam and becoming a licensed Attorney.

91 posted on 03/24/2009 3:54:25 PM PDT by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

I thought she was a dentist.


92 posted on 03/24/2009 3:55:14 PM PDT by sportutegrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl
"I thought she was a dentist."

She is, and is an attorney as well.

Definitely a smart lady!

She's talked about her kids in honors classes, and one is in an Ivy league school I believe. Smart (and w/o connections apparently)!

93 posted on 03/24/2009 3:57:58 PM PDT by rxsid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Biden’s ‘joke’ was pure elitist in-your-face arrogance, in effect saying ‘we won, and we will do as we please while these idiots scurry about trying to catch us.


94 posted on 03/24/2009 4:01:43 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty

I think that could be more likely also. It certainly would blow a hole in the entire carefully crafted “Dreams from my Father” story.

But I bet the media would spin it into “those old racist Republicans are picking on him” theme. The focus would be on the personal pain it caused Obama, his family, and his supporters, and the underhanded and intrusive methods used against him, not the fact that he lied. And of course they would continue to rummage through the personal lives of the Palins at the same time, without even a hint of irony.


95 posted on 03/24/2009 4:07:37 PM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

I was under the impression that she gave her documents to him while she meet him at Idaho University in Moscow ID?

You almost got it right. It was at the University of Idaho in Moscow Idaho.


96 posted on 03/24/2009 4:12:38 PM PDT by IM2MAD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rxsid
Hope springs eternal. Hope and Change, however, has been a bit rough on Hope lately... Ultimately, this is all in G-d’s hands.
97 posted on 03/24/2009 4:30:42 PM PDT by April Lexington (Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #98 Removed by Moderator

To: rxsid
You asked, "Why did he (his campaign) post a known forgery on his site then?" The answer is becoming more and more obvious, 'because he knew he could get away with it since DemocRATS held the House and Senate, because he could play the race card to the max, and because he had an army of fraud merchants already working to push his numbers over the top.

It is not uncommon for an obamanoid to post on these BC threads that if the evidence showed he was ineligible the clintoons would have outed him. They never answer when asked if Hillary could have won without the black vote ... and you can be certain that 95% of the black vote would have ignored Hilalry if she outed their socialist affirmative action messiah.

As it was--with a clintoon supporter trying to get the exposure of the BC (Berg)-- had upChuck Schumer not outed Indymac when he did, the economy might have foundered along without tanking in time to get the democrats polling numbers up. The reality is, America has placed an affirmative action shuck and jive fraud in the Oval Office and the demcorat party to a man is ecstatic about it because they can now flush this nation into the socialist toilet they've been dreaming about!

The Democrat party is morally bankrupt--built their empowerment upon the slaughter of alive unborna nd just born alive human children, too many of whom have been black babies slaughtered in demonic rites of democrat party passage, communist in their ideology, and now plunging this nation into final destruction of the Constitutional Republic. Democrat voters are too stupid to see the looming chaos and too lazy to learn. And the democrap party oligarchs are counting on that remianing long enough for them to institute their 'change'. May God have mercy upon US.

99 posted on 03/24/2009 4:31:27 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: rxsid
"J Williams wrote: I just called 202-514-2203 and an aide answered. I proceeded to ask him to let the Solicitor General know how concerned I was about Obama's eligibility to be POTUS. The man told me he could not pass on this information and that he would transfer me to the operator and then she would transfer me to the Solicitor Generals "comment line". I left my comment on that line. I just wanted to let anyone know that might be calling that this is what happened."

WHAT! You mean the alleged "president" doesn't want his people talking directly to those who pay his salary? The nerve...

100 posted on 03/24/2009 4:32:37 PM PDT by April Lexington (Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-154 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
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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