What do these plates have that Barry doesn't?
Give up?
A Certificate of Authenticity!!!!
Posted on 01/12/2009 10:21:48 AM PST by Jack Black
Pennsylvania attorney Phil Berg, who filed the first lawsuit on whether President-Elect Barack Obama meets the constitutional qualifications for president, had had two requests pending in the U.S. Supreme Court, both called Berg v Obama. On January 12, the U.S. Supreme Court again denied Berg’s request for injunctive relief. Berg’s alternate request, that the Court take the case for full review, is on the January 16 conference. Odds are extremely high that it will also be denied, but that won’t be known until January 21. The Court is closed on January 19 and January 20.
Will likely be denied again. Unfortunately, the evidence is on the people saying he isn’t a U.S. citizen. I don’t like it either and do question his citizenship myself. But, that’s how it works.
When you put it like that, it is a ‘show me your papers comrade’ case.
What a farce!
Just one question,,, Who was the attending physician at his birth?
Bumper Sticker: An Obama + Our Nation = Abomination!
Kinda left out this part:
08-570 BERG, PHILIP J. V. OBAMA, BARACK, ET AL.
The motion of Bill Anderson for leave to file a brief as
amicus curiae is granted.
Bill Andersons’ brief here:
http://wthrockmorton.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/joyce_anderson-amicus-final.pdf
The local Kenyan witch doctor .
And you skipped right by this part:
"The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is denied."
The Supreme Court will not consider the case until the lower courts have done their work. Berg's case was dismissed in the Pennsylvania District Court because he lacked standing. The next step is the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals and not the Supreme Court.
Maybe the quisling supremes are scared of death threats and riots.
Gee, this is such a surprise. God forbid that the SCOTUS actually do the job that the American taxpayers are paying them to do!!
I knew that they would deny the case. Before they ever decide that maybe they should have heard one of these cases, the First Fraud will have completed his first (and, hopefully, ONLY) term in office.
I suppose we’re all innocent until proven guilty.
That was pretty much in the original article already...
“The next step is the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals and not the Supreme Court.”
Is that where they’ll hear Bill Andersons’ brief as well?
08-570 BERG, PHILIP J. V. OBAMA, BARACK, ET AL.
The motion of Bill Anderson for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is denied.
Who is Bill Anderson?
They've already read Anderson's brief. The rules of the Supreme Court require that all parties have 10 days advanced notice before an amicus brief is filed. When he filed his brief, Anderson requested that the rule be waived in this case. "The motion of Bill Anderson for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted" means that the Court agreed to waive the deadline and accept his brief. "The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is denied" means it didn't make any difference. The court will not hear the matter. Not until lower court appeals are exhausted.
Arizona elector who filed his amicus brief in support of Berg's case.
They are. The fact that you may not agree with their decisions doesn't change that.
I see. Thanks.
The SCOTUS is not a political body, or isn’t supposed to be one at least, but letting this issue work its way through the courts is a great political idea.
OK, so this finally gets MSM attention when some circuit judge in PA demands that Obama produce the birth certificate. He doesn’t, but just fights the matter procedurally, and tries to use the COLB. The water heats up a bit.
The matter gets appealed to subsequently higher courts, while Obama spends more money being creative but still doesn’t offer proof.
By the time it reaches the SCOTUS, there is now a national groundswell, “President Obama, just produce your birth certificate.” Now, the MSM can’t stop the media juggernaut, and the fraud is exposed. Sure, the blacks will riot, but it will only be them. The liberals will be shamed, as will the students and the latte-sippers in New York and LA. Also, the Dems will be ruined for a generation — their “hope and change” President was a fraud and lied to the American people.
No, they aren't. They have denied every challenge to Obama's eligibility to be POTUS. This is a fundamental constitutional issue that is the substance of their function. If they deny these cases, for ANY reason, without verifying that Obama meets the minimum requirements, they have adbicated their responibility.
Their entire function is to interpret law based on the Constitution. If they don't/won't hear any of these challenges to Obama's eligibility based on his birth certificate, they aren't doing what we pay them for.
What do these plates have that Barry doesn't?
Give up?
A Certificate of Authenticity!!!!
If Obama is legitimate, then they could help him by actually hearing this case and having Hawaii send the Birth Certificate. Not doing so just says they know he isn't eligible, but by sticking their fingers in their ears, pinching their noses and shutting their eyes, the boogey man will hopefully go away. They are afraid of mob violence. They are weak and now our Constitution is weak. It is a sad day for our Republic.
So they just need to call you and find out how to do their jobs?
That's just because they haven't had you to tell them what to do. Imagine the nerve of them to think that they know how the Constitution and the judicial system should work.
Odds are....no one dares question The One about anything.
Yup.
The Justices will “Conference” on January 16 (as stated) and again January 23 over this Obama non-citizenship issue.
With who?
What I can’t understand is the total blackout of even a discussion by our conservative icons on the whole subject . . . I just don’t get it. This is monumental . . . horribly important and so controversial . . . what gives?
Where are Rush, Hannity, FoxNews, NewsMax, Weekly Standard, Mark Levin, Ann Coulter, Bill Bennett, etc. etc. etc.
It’s like we’re whistling in the wind. Not even a whimper or even a mention . . . what the hell is going on?
Absolutely amazing . . . Absolutely bizarre!
“Where are they? They could be in line for a bail out. Fox is supposedly being bought (partially) by the Saudis “
That still doesn’t answer why there’s been a total conservative blackout both on the radio, tv, and newsprint . . . After all, Ann Coulter (and I love her dearly) is supposedly a Constitutional lawyer . . . why NO COMMENT WHATSOEVER anywhere, anyplace, at any time.
All the other controversial crap about Obama was thrashed so thoroughly these past couple years, but NOTHING ABOUT THIS! NOTHING! Apparently, Rush, Levin, and Hannity (et al) are screening ALL CALLS to eliminate anything about this attack on our constitution. I don’t get it!
Sounds like it should be a SLAM DUNK! Do they know something that we don’t?
“Sounds like it should be a SLAM DUNK! Do they know something that we don’t?”
Maybe they believe President-Elect Obama meets all the constitutional qualifications to be president. And this stuff is Tinfoil Hat territory.......Just saying.
Ref.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2163242/posts
33 posted on Monday, January 12, 2009 9:42:00 PM by laweeks
The only explanation I’ve heard for the conserv pundits to ignore this issue is that they have come to recognize that
certain events had to take place in order to hold BO to rights.
No efforts to put this issue forth prior to the election got any traction.
And pushing the issue was against the “kid glove” republican approach to this election.
[this is much more a condemnation of the RNC and McCain than it is the conserv media in that said media was given nothing to work with. The evidence was not well digested at this point. And very few wanted the tin hat label without some cover (or at least acknowledgement) by the RNC/conservative leaders]
After the election, realize the following had to take place in order to establish plaintiffs (those hurt) and defendants(BO et al)...
- The electors have to certify BO and Plugs. In spite of efforts to educate, the electors as a group, blindly accepted the tainted evidence of eligibility.
- The congress had to certify the elector votes. Again, in spite of efforts to recruit honorable reps and sens to legitimately question, NO HONORABLE REPS OR SENS WERE FOUND!
This is probably the most disturbing logical conclusion.
Meanwhile several lawsuits were brought, denied, rejected, appealed and BO’s phantom position was represented in at least some by expensive law firms. And many rightly question why this tactic would be taken rather than simply producing a $10.00 document.
Still no food for the conservative pundits to hang on at this point.
Now....
We have multiple cases before the supreme court in various stages and with various dates of consideration.
Each case has some merit - if you have followed this issue. But none contend that they have solid evidence of wrongdoing. All require the production of back documentation of BO’s legitimacy (cause NO ONE knows who this clown really is!!!)
Getting the documentation “right now” doesn’t disqualify BO simply because there must be a court debate about both the evidence and the constitutional presidential requirements.
However, BO knows there are constitutional issues involved(he claims expertise in this area) and realizes that he could be forced to produce documentation at some point.
So, BO can...
1. Withdraw now under some silly excuse.
2. Release everything and hope for the best.
3. Persist, be sworn in, and hope for no exposure - ever.
4. Persist, be sworn in, and perjure himself.
And there are a couple of other possibilities....
1. All discovered documentation is complete, valid,
and completely aboveboard.
2. All discovered documentation has been swept clean
and cannot be exposed for years or ever.
Judge Roberts is forcing the issue.
He will swear in Obama on Jan. 20. Why not?
He knows, as do the other justices, the issues and the ramifications - but not necessarily all the facts.
He knows that Obama’s inauguration will either be valid or perjured.
If, upon consideration of the cases filed and to be filed, Obama is “clean”, all has been done properly under the constitution.
If, any filed cases should cause the release of information that causes eligibility to be REJECTED, Obama has committed perjury and BO as POTUS is invalid.
If Obama has committed perjury/fraud, his standing is invalid and, in essence, he never
became president. Some submit that certain circumstances would result in his expulsion as an illegal alien – but that is dependant on documentation not yet available.
If Obama has not committed perjury, then his fraud can continue just subject to random
citizen cases claiming he was never eligible in the first place.
BIG NOTE…
Obama only commits perjury if he accepts the oath of office from Judge Roberts!
(provided of course that he is indeed the fraud that many rightly contend)
Therefore, it is a good thing to hail the inauguration and wish well blah, blah, blah.
And enjoy the precise mechanizations of the Supreme Court aka Judge Roberts.
TO THE ORIGINAL QUESTION….
“Where are they? They could be in line for a bail out. Fox is supposedly being bought (partially) by the Saudis “
That still doesn’t answer why there’s been a total conservative blackout both on the radio, tv, and newsprint . . . After all, Ann Coulter (and I love her dearly) is supposedly a Constitutional lawyer . . . why NO COMMENT WHATSOEVER anywhere, anyplace, at any time.
All the other controversial crap about Obama was thrashed so thoroughly these past couple years, but NOTHING ABOUT THIS! NOTHING! Apparently, Rush, Levin, and Hannity (et al) are screening ALL CALLS to eliminate anything about this attack on our constitution. I don’t get it!
Sounds like it should be a SLAM DUNK! Do they know something that we don’t?
33 posted on Monday, January 12, 2009 9:42:00 PM by laweeks
Bottom line is that Rush/Hannity/Beck and others don’t do investigative journalism. Their business is fronting known facts and issues to their audience – plus commentary.
As some would say…
They got no ammo in their magazines.
It’s kinda unfair to blame them for the lack of facts surrounding
Barack’s tremendous farce.
The Supreme Court is fixin’ to load those mags.
It will then be up to our favorite commentators to
lock, load,
aim, and fire.
Have faith.
Like my Dad told me….
“they always get theirs in the end”
Kinda simple but (in my experience) true.
I would bet that if a true long form Birth certificate exists anywhere, it would be in a vault in Indonesia where Barry was formally adopted by Lolo Soetoro. If he ever came back formally to Hawaii and re-upped his U.S. citizenship, then the documents from Indonesia would also be in the HI vault attached to the original birth cert from probably Kenya. Anything in Kenay or Indonesia cannot be trusted for provinance since mooselimbs and commies infest both cultures, as well as totally corrupt politicians. [Which remnds me, I ownder if sinkEmperor got intel from Riady connections shwoing Barry is not a U.S. citizen even.]
Was none. His momma had a Kenyan mid-wife. Was that a trick question?
Jim, why does this sort of baiting crap continue to be tolerated?
BTW, a great piece of analysis!
Very good analysis!
“Bumper Sticker: An Obama + Our Nation = Abomination!”
Soros=Obama=Socialism!
Because merely producing a birth certificate wouldn't end it. Just read the threads on FR: some people are claiming that Obama planted a forged Birth Certificate in the Hawaii archives; some claim that he was actually born in Canada but his mother spirited him back to Hawaii in time to get a birth certicate there; some argue that even if he was born in Hawaii he lost his citizenship later; and so on. If Obama for one minute admitted that courts have some role in certifying his eligibility, he would be in litigation for the next 20 years. Instead, he has argued that courts have no role in this process, and has won in every court so far. Meanwhile, Congress certified the electoral vote without a single objection.
You said — “Will likely be denied again. Unfortunately, the evidence is on the people saying he isn’t a U.S. citizen. I don’t like it either and do question his citizenship myself. But, that’s how it works.”
Well, it does appear to me that it will go nowhere, in the end, with these cases. I say that because they don’t have the authenticated evidence that proves anything one way or another — and it appears the Supreme Court is not going to accept “evidence” that has not been decided upon by a lower court, first.
It sort of amazed me that many people thought that the Supreme Court was going to validate evidence in these cases, as if that’s what they do.
I did write a couple of things in other threads that indicate to me that those *in power* and with the ability to *know* and *do something* about this Obama Qualification issue, apparently know that there isn’t any problem or else they would have done something a long while back.
You can see the following for some of that rationale...
The following came from —
Obama’s Intelligence Adviser Involved in Security Breach (”cauterized” O’s passport info)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2163590/posts
You said — “Yes, where is the FBI and where the you know what is the Supreme Court?”
This thing happened way back when — “During a State Department briefing on March 21, 2008, McCormack confirmed that the contractor had accessed the passport files of presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John McCain, and that the inspector general had launched an investigation.”
It’s been investigated and we’ve got Secretary of State Rice involved (”Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice phoned Obama and personally apologized for the breach. ‘I told him that I myself would be very disturbed if I learned that somebody had looked into my passport file,’ Rice told reporters.”), the State Department Inspector General (OIG) issuing a 104-page report on the breach last July, and the State Department (in general, saying “The State Department chalked up the passport file snooping discovered in March 2008 to ‘imprudent curiosity’ by contract employees hired to help process passport applications”), and Acting Assistant secretary for administration William H. Moser sent a six-page reply in regards to the recommendations for correcting this type of breach.
Now, with all those people and agencies and investigations going on, it would seem *very apparent* that if there is a violation of the Constitutional requirements for the office of President of the United States (which would be clear from the passport), this item would be known by all those people, and it goes right back to George Bush.
Bush is sworn to uphold the Constitution, and obviously since he doesn’t see a problem there (and is in a position *to know* for sure, and “especially so” with Secretary of State Rice, being involved in this and being directly under President Bush) — that this is fairly clear evidence that there isn’t a problem. If there was, President Bush would be *duty-bound* to uphold the Constitution.
Of course, there are people like Berg, who think that Bush was involved in the attack of 9/11, too. And I suppose..., there will be people here who will say Bush is also “involved” in the conspiracy to hide the information about Obama not being qualified under the Constitutional requirements...
It’s amazing what conspiracy theorists will come up with, it seems...
And then the following, also...
Will Chief Justice Roberts Really Swear in a Complete Fraud?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2163073/posts
The article said — “At this moment in history, one man has the power to stop this monumental fraud and uphold the Constitution.”
Well, I disagree with the choice of the “one man” that they are talking about. I do think that there *is* — definitely — “one man” who does have the power and the ability to stop any kind of violation of the Constitutional requirements for the office of President of the United States — and who is *sworn* by his official duties to uphold that same Constitution.
That one man is President George Bush.
He has the power and the ability to not merely *know* all the facts, by mere commanding it from the Office of the President (having many agencies at his disposal, plus all sorts of covert ops at his disposal, plus secret agencies at his disposal) — he also has the *power* to put a complete stop to it, if there is a violation of the Constitutional requirements for office of the President of the United States.
But, by the fact that he is not doing so and will not do so — brings me to one of two possible positions — he refuses to do so, because he knows there’s not an issue with the Constitutional requirements (i.e., Obama is qualified), or he is “conspiring” with those who want to put Obama in office and will ignore the qualifications issue (i.e., Obama is not qualified).
Now, it’s possible that some may argue that Bush may not “know”, but that’s sort of ridiculous since it’s been to the Supreme Court and it would be saying that Bush doesn’t know what the Supreme Court is deciding on... LOL...
Maybe one might say that Bush doesn’t want to know, so he’s ignoring it. But, that’s saying that he’s intentionally ignoring his Constitutional duties. I suppose some may say that’s true. And if that’s true, then I put that in the “conspiracy area”, up above, that I just mentioned.
Of those possibilities, I would say that Bush obviously knows (and has the full power of the government, secretly and not secretly, to *know* without a doubt) that Obama is qualified under the Constitution.
I guess there are others, here — however — that will say Bush is involved in the conspiracy. Well, there is Berg, who also says that Bush is involved in the conspiracy involving the attack on 9/11, since Berg says that in his 9/11 Truther case...
I agree they are following the letter of the law. And for something like this they better. Clarence Thomas has all the information regarding this case, and has circulated it amongst the rest. Every single one of them knows all the issues. Berg supposedly has taped evidence from Obama’s mother, stating he was born in Kenya.
This is a procedural error on Berg’s part, in a rush for justice. I hope I don’t eat my words when Berg’s finally makes it back to the SCOTUS. Obama will already be in by then.
Supposedly. According to Berg's affidavits the interview with her was conducted in a language that she doesn't speak and in an ancestoral village she's never lived in. So it could be that Berg's writ was turned down because of Rule 10: "A petition for a writ of certiorari is rarely granted when the asserted error consists of erroneous factual findings or the misapplication of a properly stated rule of law."
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.
