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

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court to hear case on Obama's alleged forged documents (Photos)
Examiner.com ^ | Jan 10, 2012 | Marc Dumon

Posted on 01/11/2013 4:44:07 AM PST by voicereason

On Wednesday, Chief Justice John Roberts of the Supreme Court scheduled a birther case brought on by Orly Taitz which calls into question Barack Hussein Obama's eligibility to be president of the United States. Dr. Taitz, a lawyer from Santa Margarita, Calif., also made the announcement on her website on Jan. 9. As of this writing, major news networks such as ABC, Fox News, CBS, and NBC have yet to report on the high court's decision to review Barack Hussein Obama's eligibility to hold political office in the United States or any of its territories. The case is identified as Edward Noonan, et al., v. Deborah Bowen, California Secretary of State. On Feb. 15, all nine justices will hear arguments on whether Obama used forged government documents and fake identification in order to get elected as commander-in-chief. Edward Noonan, et al., contend that if Obama had been ineligible to run in 2008, other Democratic candidates should have replaced him on the presidential ballot. Additionally, electoral votes from states such as California that went towards Obama should have been deemed null and void. Continued at source....

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


TOPICS: Conspiracy
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; naturalborncitizen; obama; orly; orlytaitz; taitz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-182 next last
Not seeing this reported anywhere else., nor on any of the news blogs....too good to be true?
1 posted on 01/11/2013 4:44:15 AM PST by voicereason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: voicereason

It is posted on the Supreme Court’s schedule:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/12a606.htm

No. 12A606
Title:
Edward Noonan, et al., Applicants
v.
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


2 posted on 01/11/2013 4:49:30 AM PST by voicereason (The RNC is the "One-night stand" you wish you could forget.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

Is this a shot across obama’s bow?

If Obama is willing to violate the constitution and cause mass chaos with an executive order on gun control. The USSC can take him out on eligibility.

They have been playing politics by not hearing the case. - to avoid chaos?

Perhaps they see this as the easier choice now.


3 posted on 01/11/2013 5:06:59 AM PST by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

Wow. If nothing else I have to give huge props to Orly for being persistent in spite of being demonized by both the Left AND the Right.


4 posted on 01/11/2013 5:11:47 AM PST by VeniVidiVici (Bathhouse Barry wants YOU to bend over for another four years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Triple
I hope Orly has lots of body guards. The tribal chief with the purple lips will not take kindly to this. You have to wonder what Roberts will be threatended with.
5 posted on 01/11/2013 5:13:20 AM PST by Flavious_Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2976497/posts


6 posted on 01/11/2013 5:13:20 AM PST by goldi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

7 posted on 01/11/2013 5:13:38 AM PST by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet - Mater tua caligas exercitus gerit ;-{)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

In before the Hate-Tatiz crowd!


8 posted on 01/11/2013 5:29:57 AM PST by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

The fact we have had so called “conservatives” like Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, and others, attack those questioning Obama Eligibility.....supporting Obama on the issue....this appearance on the SCOTUS docket is huge. Of course, the FraudCons will do their utmost to avoid discussing this

We know CJSCOTUS Roberts supported Obama on ObamaCare.....so it would be no surprise if he supports Obama on the Eligibility issue....and the Liberal PhonyCons will cheerlead the decision I


9 posted on 01/11/2013 5:31:26 AM PST by SeminoleCounty (Fiscal Conservatives are Neither)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

sfl


10 posted on 01/11/2013 5:36:11 AM PST by phockthis (http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/index.htm ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: voicereason
Interesting. Very interesting. I'm not going to get my hopes up, especially considering this is John Robers' SCOTUS and he's the man who made obamacare constitutional.

Still...at least an eligibility case finally made it to the SC.

I wonder what data, poll numbers or ? they are looking at to move this forward now after ignoring it and the many court challenges around the country these last 4 or 5 years.

Do they fear the next few years as much as many of the rest of us do and are slowing things down with the rule of Constitutional law?

Or, are they planning to accelerate our slide into the abyss with some more Constitution shredding like with their obamacare ruling?

11 posted on 01/11/2013 5:39:21 AM PST by GBA (Here in the Matrix, life is but a dream.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GBA

Roberts will slam Orly as directed to protect his own shady South American adoptions, and whatever else they have on him.

Hussein’s handlers want to finally close the books on his pesky eligibility problem in time for Hussein’s Second Coming.

Many here at FR will gleefully support the result against Taitz.


12 posted on 01/11/2013 5:48:55 AM PST by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

All they have to do is subpoena the so-called “birth certificate” and have it analyzed by forgery experts.


13 posted on 01/11/2013 5:57:40 AM PST by eCSMaster (Palin was correct!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: treetopsandroofs

Yup. The only reason they are taking the case is to put it to bed.


14 posted on 01/11/2013 6:03:42 AM PST by cableguymn (The founding fathers would be shooting by now..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

Roberts has been blackmailed. The case will end with the following judgement: “Obama is entitled to be President, and in fact, we hereby rule that he is eligible for more terms. We officially dissolve the 22nd Amendment.”


15 posted on 01/11/2013 6:05:54 AM PST by Lazamataz (LAZ'S LAW: As an argument with liberals goes on, the probability of being called racist approaches 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2976497/posts

I posted one thread. Its hard to find, since it got retitled and moved from Announcements to bloggers.


16 posted on 01/11/2013 6:09:05 AM PST by Elderberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voicereason
Are you people this naive, this stupid about Supreme Court procedures to believe there is anything significant about the mere conferencing of this case? Nearly every one of the thousands of petitions for certiorori (requests to the SCOTUS to hear a case) that are filed each year are "considered" by the nine justices at their weekly conference. At these conferences, the justices summarily reject the overwhelming vast majority of cases without discussion.

To put this in prospective, in an average year, the SCOTUS receives about 10,000 petitons for certiorori, nearly all of the petitions are docketed for conference, nearly all of the cases that are docketed for conference are summarily denied based upon the staff recommendation, and the SCOTUS agrees to hear only about 75 - 80 petitions (less that 1%) of the 10,000 it receives.

17 posted on 01/11/2013 6:09:09 AM PST by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeminoleCounty

“The fact we have had so called “conservatives” like Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, and others, attack those questioning Obama Eligibility.....supporting Obama on the issue....this appearance on the SCOTUS docket is huge.”

I wonder if they really belive he is eligible? I never have understood the high profile “Malkin, Coulter, Rush, Beck ect.” brushing off people who ask that question as being out there or nuts. The evidence in a court of law seems to actually side with the prosecution if you can get past the corruption and coverup. Could be the Alinski treatment that has been applied to the whole subject scares them off. Upon mention of the subject you are immediately written off as a right wing idiot, which worked just the way it was intended.


18 posted on 01/11/2013 6:09:19 AM PST by selfdefense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

I have got to meet Dr. Orly Taitz, she has more balls than any male member of Congress, the courts or the SS.

I have got to meet this lady.


19 posted on 01/11/2013 6:09:33 AM PST by Matthew10 (You can't use what you don't know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeminoleCounty

it would be no surprise if he supports Obama on the Eligibility issue....
*************************************
Not getting my hopes up ,,, but WHY would Roberts NOT take out Obama ,, does he enjoy being blackmailed?


20 posted on 01/11/2013 6:09:37 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

Reberts?????
Well...........
THE
FIX
IS
IN!


21 posted on 01/11/2013 6:18:55 AM PST by Flintlock (PARANOIA--means having all the facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

Thanks for the “reality” perspective. It was truly needed.

The SCOTUS will not undo the will of the voters. Roberts has already made that clear in the ObamaCare decision.

In Roberts’ mind, an election can alter, amend or negate any or all of the US Constitution.


22 posted on 01/11/2013 6:36:20 AM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Bread and Circuses; Everyone to the Coliseum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Matthew10
I have got to meet this lady.

I like her as well, and admire her to sticking to principle even after so many failed hearings. I watched her presentation in Atlanta ... she is a terrible trial lawyer. Her presentation could have been bested by any high school student. She desperately needs to seek help in order to gain some trial skills.

23 posted on 01/11/2013 6:37:07 AM PST by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Flavious_Maximus

That is the thing about blackmail - you can spend it, but then you still have it.

I am going to give away the blackmail on Roberts...

IMO, pictures on the internet show that he has had several gay relationships.

There, now everyone knows...


24 posted on 01/11/2013 6:43:35 AM PST by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Roberts has been pwned since at least 2005 when the NYT went quiet after supposedly investigating his South American adoptions.

I’m wondering which other cases he’s mishandled.


25 posted on 01/11/2013 6:45:37 AM PST by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

something to pray for


26 posted on 01/11/2013 6:47:06 AM PST by The Wizard (Madam President is my President now and in the future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: treetopsandroofs
I wish you were wrong about that, but the momentum seems to support your prediction.

None the less, I remain somewhat optimistic. We'll just have to wait and see how it plays out.

Interesting times...

27 posted on 01/11/2013 6:52:49 AM PST by GBA (Here in the Matrix, life is but a dream.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: selfdefense

The Alinsky tactic only works BECAUSE the “conservatives” mock the issue. Which is why Soros threatened the conservative media into first ignoring the issue (in October of 2008 and again within the first few months after the election) and later (when the issue could no longer be ignored) into mocking it. There’s documentation that threats have been made against anybody who would report credibly on Obama’s ineligibility. Mike Zullo of the Cold Case Posse confirmed to me that one of Doug Hagmann’s sources left the country in fear for her life.

The day that Arpaio had his first press conference, everybody was instead reporting on the death of Andrew Breitbart - who dropped dead to the ground less than 5 hours after calling Arpaio to ask about his evidence and telling Arpaio that his evidence was good (Breitbart had previously refused to report on the eligibility issue because he said the evidence was not good enough). The initial reports had Breitbart’s father-in-law saying he knew of no heart problems, and the coroner’s office (after having looked at his medical records) initially said he had not seen a doctor within the past year. Then the stories started changing, with colleagues claiming he had had a massive heart attack 6 months ago and had been in the hospital for 2 weeks. And yet the coroner’s report found no medicines within his system. The coroner’s office - in which one of the workers got violently sick the day before the Breitbart autopsy was due to come out, and died of what police suspected to be arsenic poisoning the actual day the autopsy came out - did not check for the only sign of a potassium chloride “assassination” dart - a small red entry hole that could appear anywhere on the body.

Also on the day of Arpaio’s first press conference, Rush Limbaugh received what his office treated as a bomb threat - a package alluding to 2 famous assassinations.

Limbaugh and Breitbart are the 2 voices either independent (Breitbart) or too large to be totally silenced by the (Clear Channel) company that had been threatened regarding Obama’s eligibility, and BOTH were hit on the day of Arpaio’s press conference - one with a package alluding to assassinations that shook him up, and the other with instant death.

Strangely enough (sarc), none of the “mainstream” media nor so-called “conservatives” reported on the evidence cited by Arpaio in his press conference announcing probable cause for forgery and the commencement of a criminal investigation of the issue.

2008 was literally a coup, complete with crimes - including the death threats and assassinations - that a coup requires.

Right now I have a criminal case against DNC Counsel Bob Bauer, who was informed by Attorney Larry Klayman (4 days before the DNC Convention began) that HI registrar Alvin Onaka had issued a certified verification to AZ SOS Ken Bennett in which he was required to verify any submitted birth fact that he can lawfully say was the way the event happened - and in which Onaka verified NONE of Obama’s birth facts. The only lawful reason for this to be the case is if the HI BC itself is not legally valid. Because there is no legally-valid HI BC, Obama has no legally-established birth facts and NOBODY can lawfully (without committing perjury and/or fraud) certify that he is qualified/eligible to be POTUS. Bauer ignored that and counseled Villagairosa and Germond to sign what Bauer knew to be a fraudulent/perjurious Official Certification of Nomination. That’s subornation of perjury. And Bauer submitted that perjurious OCON to almost every state SOS in order to get Obama’s name on the ballot. That’s election fraud. My criminal complaint accuses Bauer of subornation of perjury and of election fraud.

I informed the offices of every Republican member of Congress that every electoral vote Obama got is legally acknowledged as being the result of fraud. I informed them of Onaka’s disclosure that Obama’s HI BC is legally non-valid.

EVERY COTTON-PICKING SECRETARY either forwarded my fax to my 2 legislators (Rep Adrian Smith and/or Mike Johanns) or else threw it away. IOW, unless every state has somebody like me who works full-time on investigating this issue (while maintaining 2 part-time jobs and a family of 6), the other Congress-critters just have no choice but to be ignorant a$$holes.

I wonder if I had sent a fax notifying every Republican Congressman that there was going to be a bomb at the Capitol on Jan 6th, whether the fax would be taken seriously, or whether it would thrown out and/or forwarded to Smith and Johanns’ office since I am their constituent. I bet you they would scurry to defend their own fat a$$es. When it’s the whole country that is being held at knife-point, it’s not worth worrying about - pass the buck to 2 Congress-critters. And that is why I have no respect for ANY of them. None. They care about one thing and one thing only: themselves. Period.

The death of America is blood on their hands.


28 posted on 01/11/2013 6:59:02 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

Yes, they are that stupid. That is why they follow Orly Taitz. Then again, I could almost see the Supreme Court taking the case for the sheer laugh-factor...the thought of Orly Taitz arguing a case in front of Scalia boggles the mind!


29 posted on 01/11/2013 7:03:02 AM PST by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

Are you people this naive, this stupid about Supreme Court procedures to believe there is anything significant about the mere conferencing of this case? Nearly every one of the thousands of petitions for certiorori (requests to the SCOTUS to hear a case) that are filed each year are “considered” by the nine justices at their weekly conference. At these conferences, the justices summarily reject the overwhelming vast majority of cases without discussion....


So how do the SC justices WHICH cases to consider? They must have some type of impact or weight on our legal system/constitution then to be considered.

Would you not consider a case dealing with the eligibility of the highest public office in the land to merit consideration over thousands of other cases?


30 posted on 01/11/2013 7:03:02 AM PST by Hotlanta Mike ("Governing a great nation is like cooking a small fish - too much handling will spoil it." Lao Tzu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Triple

I like your reasoning on this and pray your are correct.


31 posted on 01/11/2013 7:09:31 AM PST by jersey117
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion
I wonder how many threats the Supreme Court judges are getting for even considering this case.

Someone said on the other thread, it only takes four judges to decide to take the case. Even though this is probably a setup to deny Orly her petition, at least Orly made it all the way to the Supreme Court. Good for her.

I've never figured out why the so called conservative talk show hosts and newspapers dismissed the possibility that Obama has been hiding his real birth certificate, when there is plenty of evidence that he is doing just that.

32 posted on 01/11/2013 7:17:41 AM PST by FR_addict
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

To: Labyrinthos

>>and the SCOTUS agrees to hear only about 75 - 80 petitions (less that 1%) of the 10,000 it receives.<<

Do they all involve the pResident?


34 posted on 01/11/2013 7:21:15 AM PST by ILS21R (Everything is a conspiracy. No? You're living in one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hotlanta Mike

Unfortunately, they’ve shown time and time again that they do not consider this to be a matter worthy of their attention.


35 posted on 01/11/2013 7:21:52 AM PST by Behind the Blue Wall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: FR_addict

Now you know: threats. From people who have claimed the authority to assassinate US citizens without any accountability, who have long had the capability of making an assassination look like a heart attack, aneurysm, etc, and who now have access to the medical records of every person in this country.

And these people could have carried out that very thing in full view of everyone in the case of Andrew Breitbart just hours after he approved of Arpario’s evidence of forgery from the White House. The initial stories and coroner’s results don’t fit any of the stories we were later told, and the coroner’s office ended up not even checking for the methods of assassination that would have been employed.

I believe there are now 2 affidavits from witnesses who were told that Bill Gwatney and Stephanie Tubbs were each killed in succession within a couple weeks of the 2008 DNC Convention, when they each in turn agreed to present a petition at the Convention challenging Obama’s eligibility. Gwatney by a supposedly-random shooter who ended up killed by police, and Tubbs by an “aneurysm”. And ultimately Hillary herself did not present the petition because she and Bill were told that Chelsea would be killed if they did.

2008 was literally a coup.


36 posted on 01/11/2013 7:29:14 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
“Yes, they are that stupid. That is why they follow Orly Taitz. Then again, I could almost see the Supreme Court taking the case for the sheer laugh-factor...the thought of Orly Taitz arguing a case in front of Scalia boggles the mind!”

My cut and paste didn't work correctly last time.

But the though is the same. No one really cares what you think.

37 posted on 01/11/2013 7:29:14 AM PST by FR_addict
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

If this judge takes the case and makes the correct patriotic judgement then they will be national heros for saving millions of peoples lives.

Because we are on the eve of the Second revolution, people are not willing to wait for the gun grabbers and are in superior numbers.

We have a superior numerical advantage.

And we are pissed.

Remove the usurper or America will have its Revolution.


38 posted on 01/11/2013 7:33:31 AM PST by Eye of Unk (AR2 2013 is the American Revolution part 2 of 2013)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Triple

You wrote: “Is this a shot across obama’s bow? If Obama is willing to violate the constitution and cause mass chaos with an executive order on gun control. The USSC can take him out on eligibility. They have been playing politics by not hearing the case. - to avoid chaos? Perhaps they see this as the easier choice now.”

For the record, I am a “Proud Birther” and have been since June 8, 2008 when the first forged “Certification of Live Birth” was presented by the Obama myrmidons.

I will be VERY surprised if the case goes to the full court for arguments. I pray it does.

Freepers, correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the process here is that the Justices get a copy of the suit, read it and then “conference” and vote to bring it to the full Court for arguments. I have read previously that the “Rule of Four” for a “Writ of Certiorari” to bring it to the full Court is the requirement. That is, at least four Justices have to vote to hear the case in the full Court.

Two items to consider: 1. Justice Roberts has either been “bought” or is being blackmailed.

And, 2. The Supreme Court, I believe, will not go down the path of removing the first sitting black pResident.

The major cities would burn: Boston, New York City, Newark, Philly, Baltimore, DC, Atlanta, Miami, New Orleans, Detroit, Chicago, and LA, and on and on. Think about that. This is why I have always consider Obama to be THE current National Security Threat. We as a Nation are being held hostage by this Chicago Thug.

I, sadly, have been resigned to the fact that we have Obama for the duration.


39 posted on 01/11/2013 7:43:03 AM PST by Joe Marine 76 ("It's The Natural Born Citizenship, Stupid!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FR_addict

And no one cares what Orly Taitz thinks, which is why this case won’t go anywhere. She’s a loon, and the justices are not going to vote to listen to her rantings.


40 posted on 01/11/2013 7:44:47 AM PST by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

This brings something else to mind. Remember when “Lucas Smith” sent via certified mail affidavits to all the members of Congress containing the particular proofs he offered up of having gotten Obama’s birth certificate from a hospital in Mombasa?

According to the assistant at Rep Adrian Smith’s office, the House has a rule that anything from a non-constituent has to be forwarded to that person’s representative.

IOW, all the certified mail that “Lucas Smith” sent ended up in the offices of 3 people - the 2 senators and one representative who represent him.

Thousands of dollars’ worth. None of them would even look at it. The ONLY way the House rules allow these critters to get information is by the threatened media. The rules establish a monopoly, because if you or I tried to tell OUR critters about “Lucas Smith” and his evidence, they would dismiss it as “mere hearsay”. Every state would have to have somebody go to Kenya and bribe the hospital worker into getting a copy of a birth certificate, in order for our critters to even HEAR about any of this.

I haven’t seen “Lucas Smith”’s affidavit so I have no idea of the credibility of his claims. But the idea that the information cannot even get through to these people is suicidal for this country. The system is rigged to ensure that the critters are controlled by the Soros-owned media.


41 posted on 01/11/2013 7:45:04 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: FR_addict

“at least Orly made it all the way to the Supreme Court”

No. Anyone can file, but there is no chance they will accept her case. She hasn’t made it to the Supreme Court, nor will she. She doesn’t have a case...


42 posted on 01/11/2013 7:47:41 AM PST by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel
Thanks for the “reality” perspective. It was truly needed. The SCOTUS will not undo the will of the voters. Roberts has already made that clear in the ObamaCare decision. In Roberts’ mind, an election can alter, amend or negate any or all of the US Constitution.

Your "will of the voters" comment actually hits the proverbial nail on the head. Beginning 210 years ago in Marbury v. Madison the SCOTUS has avoided certain controversies by invoking the "political question doctrine" that has it's roots in the concept of "separation of powers." What this basically means is that the SCOTUS will not get involved in controversies that are best left to the political process to resolve.

For example, the SCOTUS will not rule on the legality of the internal rules and processes of the House or the Senate unless those rules or processes violate a fundamental constitutional mandate such as equal protection under the law. The SCOTUS will generally avoid review of executive orders unless the order clearly goes beyond the internal administration of executive departments or usurps the powers and authority that the Constitution delegates to the House and Senate. And while the Constitution sets certain eligibility requirements for POTUS, I can make an argument for the SCOTUS to avoid the controversy under the political question doctrine on the grounds that the political process should determine whether the eligibility requirements have been met. In other words, let the voters, Electoral College, and elected representatives at the state and federal level set the standards and procedures for determining whether a candidate has met the constitutional eligibility requirements for POTUS.

43 posted on 01/11/2013 8:16:47 AM PST by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Joe Marine 76

They have dismissed other similar cases without conference.

Which chaos would the justices rather have?

One driven by rule of law that shows fraud on the part of a powerful and popular leader - coupled with inner city rioting.

Or

One driven by the federal branch acting outside its authority that has tens of thousands of armed citizens striking back at the illegal actions of a federal government, that is likely to fight back.

In my view, one chaos is contained and self-inflicted, likely to have limited duration and be controllable.

The other is very open ended.

It looks like the choice could very well be in the hands of the USSC. I know which way I would pick. (Assuming they are aware of the coming Obama EO on guns.)


44 posted on 01/11/2013 8:16:47 AM PST by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

This case involves forgery of government documents and fraud.

No mention is made of eligibility, natural born citizenship.

The crimes at issue are important, but they are enabling crimes for the great crime of ineligibility. They don’t want to touch eligibility because the political establishment has their fingerprints all over it. From Pelosi, state Democrat committees, SOSs, and judges (the Georgia Supreme Court, or more recently “Miracle on 34th St” judge Carroll - all of whom should be disbarred), there is enormous complicity.

If the case is heard I hope Taitz has the sense to enlist others and does not attempt to go it alone.


45 posted on 01/11/2013 8:19:09 AM PST by Ray76 (Do you reject Obama? And all his works? And all his empty promises?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voicereason

If this case is summarily dismissed, we are a nation of the personality cult, rather than a nation of laws.


46 posted on 01/11/2013 8:22:31 AM PST by The_Media_never_lie (Actually, they lie when it suits them! The crooked MS media must be defeated any way it can be done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

One very serious flaw in that has now been exposed: The Hawaii state registrar has legally confirmed that Obama has no legally-established birth facts, and Hawaii law requires the birth facts claimed on Obama’s legally non-valid Hawaii BC to be legally determined in an administrative or judicial procedure.

IOW, the judicial system says this is best decided by the political process, but Hawaii statutes say it can ONLY be decided by a legal process presided over by a judge.

There is NO WAY that this even CAN be a “political question”, by the judicial definition of “political”.


47 posted on 01/11/2013 8:25:12 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Hotlanta Mike
Would you not consider a case dealing with the eligibility of the highest public office in the land to merit consideration over thousands of other cases?

Not necessarily. See comment no. 43, below.

48 posted on 01/11/2013 8:28:02 AM PST by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Triple

Good points Triple.

In either case, I’m continuing to “stock up.”


49 posted on 01/11/2013 8:31:16 AM PST by Joe Marine 76 ("It's The Natural Born Citizenship, Stupid!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Triple

Good points Triple.

In either case, I’m continuing to “stock up.”


50 posted on 01/11/2013 8:31:26 AM PST by Joe Marine 76 ("It's The Natural Born Citizenship, Stupid!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-182 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