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

To: penelopesire; seekthetruth; television is just wrong; jcsjcm; BP2; Pablo Mac; April Lexington; ...

“Here is the stunner.. the Judge is truly preaching to the liberal loonies when he made this statement:

“There may very well be a legitimate role for the judiciary to interpret whether the natural born citizen requirement has been satisfied in the case of a presidential candidate who has not already won the election and taken office.

However, on the day that President Obama took the presidential oath and was sworn in, he became president of the United States.

Any removal of him from the presidency must be accomplished through the Constitution’s mechanisms for the removal of a president, either through impeachment or the succession process set forth in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment.”

The Judge forgot to mention the fact that Obama committed FRAUD when taking office. Obama knowingly defrauded the public when he placed his name on the ballot and again when he the took the Oath of Office. Obama is a USURPER, not a legal President. The Constitution is VERY CLEAR, no man can serve or be elected to the Office of the Presidency unless he is a “natural born” citizen. The election is basically “null and void.”

Judge Carter can preach till he is blue in the face about Obama being sworn in and now it’s too late. NO SIR, it is never to late to convict Obama for election fraud, even treason. Obama can be removed just as quickly as he took office.

All it takes is a criminal prosecution and the Secret Service can march this lying sack of humanity right out of the White House into a 5×8 cell where he so prominently belongs.


2 posted on 01/01/2010 6:32:47 AM PST by STARWISE (They (LIBS-STILL) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war- Richard Miniter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: STARWISE

Great catch Star, IMHO someone got to him.


6 posted on 01/01/2010 6:41:36 AM PST by rodguy911 (HOME OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE--GO SARAHCUDA !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE; LucyT

Happy New Year Ping!

White washing and judicial “punting” before 4th down by a veteran Marine you would expect would defend and uphold the Constitution against an enemy “WITHIN,” unlike his fellow Marines defending our Constitution from battles overseas!!!


9 posted on 01/01/2010 6:55:31 AM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

The judge ruled correctly. If Obama committed fraud in gaining office then the remedy is to impeach him. The election has been certified and cannot be overturned, just as the 2000 election of Bush could not have been overturned if it were proved he was fraudulantly elected. Once the toothpaste is out of the tube it is hard to get it back in. Obama could possibly be prohibited from running again if he can be shown to be ineligible.


28 posted on 01/01/2010 8:02:18 AM PST by mono
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

IOW, “The King Can Do No Wrong” philosophy.


31 posted on 01/01/2010 8:10:01 AM PST by little jeremiah (Asato Ma Sad Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
“The Judge forgot to mention the fact that Obama committed FRAUD when taking office. Obama knowingly defrauded the public when he placed his name on the ballot and again when he the took the Oath of Office. Obama is a USURPER, not a legal President. The Constitution is VERY CLEAR, no man can serve or be elected to the Office of the Presidency unless he is a “natural born” citizen. The election is basically “null and void.”

Now that Obama has been sworn in, the case described above is a quo warranto, which Taitz even admitted. Judge Carter, per statute, has no jurisdiction over quo warranto, which can only be brought in the DC Circuit, if indeed it even applies to a POTUS (not yet determined by SCOTUS).

Fraud is criminal, but the case that Judge Carter had before him was civil, not criminal and there was no evidence meeting the FRE presented under the FRCP sufficient to justify a fraud trial in his court or criminal referral by the judge.

Judge Carter had to examine whether he had the right plaintiff in the right court with a cause of action that his court could remedy. Judge Carter decided that the cases, as presented by Kreep and Taitz for all plaintiffs required him to dismiss all the complaints.

As disappointing as this was to me personally, I believe Judge Carter acted well within the requirements of the law. Carter referred Taitz and Kreep to the DC Circuit for their quo warranto claim questioning Obama’s NBC status (dual citizen issue and birth location issue). The DC Circuit is the court that by Taitz and Kreep’s own admission was the correct court for that claim. Judge Carter can hardly be faulted for booting the case on this issue.

On the issue of whether the candidate plaintiffs such as Keyes, had standing to to challenge a winning but potentially ineligible candidate Obama prior to the inauguration, the facts before Judge Carter showed that Taitz and Kreep had failed to “perfect” their filing of the case on a timely basis, which includes failure to properly serve the defendants before the inauguration, which they did not.

Taitz and Kreep also failed to state a monetary claim that the court could actually remedy without violating constitutional separation of power to directly remove the POTUS.

Judge Carter's dismissal order was clarified to be “with prejudice” (don't come back) but Taitz and Kreep might still be able to file a new monetary damages claim in Judge Carter's court that was missing from the prior filing, but they could only do that for their candidate plaintiffs, not the military ones who were in the wrong court altogether.

50 posted on 01/01/2010 9:39:37 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
The Judge forgot to mention the fact that Obama committed FRAUD when taking office.

No, he didn't forget to mention fraud for the simple reason that fraud wasn't proved.

Orly, herself, doesn't have proof of fraud - she only makes accusations. Praise God, that isn't the way our system works.

103 posted on 01/01/2010 7:11:42 PM PST by lucysmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

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