Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama has struck all pending eligibility cases OFF SCOTUS docket
plains radio ^

Posted on 01/22/2009 7:01:08 AM PST by dascallie

How is this possible? Orly Taitz has a scheduled conference hearing for Jan23, by Justice Roberts...it has disappeared from the docket.

posted by Shestheone

IP: 72.224.141.133

Jan 22nd, 2009 - 7:38 AM Re: America's finest ! Dr Orly Taitz- Just sent lots of subpeona 's out _ I hope she sees my future

Ah, but her cases are no longer on the docket - bo has struck. All elgibility cases have disappeared. Please call and write to our Supreme Court and demand that they put the elgibility cases back on the docket. Visit scotusblog.feedback@gmail.com too and leave feedback.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 911truthers; birthcertifigate; birthers; blackhelicopters; certifigate; constitution; coverup; dictatorship; eligibility; fear; fearthis; judicialtyranny; scotus; tinfoilhats; tyrants
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-200 next last
To: dascallie

I have no idea, this is just a guess.. the only reason I can suspect IF it was an honorable intention (that is a BIG IF) was that he was protecting the privacy act of 74 by not creating a precedent. I know, big stretch assuming there where honorable intentions...

In reality, IF it was legit Hawaii birth, maybe it showed his parent’s weren’t married? Didn’t want bastard jokes?

All wild guesses.


61 posted on 01/22/2009 7:54:58 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: RushIsMyTeddyBear
“Pssst, Roberts? You can have a do-over if you wipe that docket for me. Deal?”

Yep, I knew the O would get to him!

62 posted on 01/22/2009 7:58:47 AM PST by SweetCaroline (Dear GOD help us save your babies from the Abortionist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY; mnehrling; Eye of Unk
Sorry about that. Didn't think anyone would take it seriously.

"it is for the good of this country that I do this". /sarc

There. Fixed. :-)

63 posted on 01/22/2009 7:59:56 AM PST by Evil Slayer (Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Evil Slayer

lol.. the funny thing, with Bambi, I wouldn’t put it past him..


64 posted on 01/22/2009 8:00:57 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: dascallie

It may be happening as we speak in state court near Austin. There is a case in front of a state court judge filed by a young lady named Jody. Orly Taitz flew in last night from California to help her. All it takes is one case and one judge.


65 posted on 01/22/2009 8:06:14 AM PST by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: dascallie

I find it odd that with 31 cases about Zero’s birth certificate out there, many made it to the supreme court.

Then Roberts is asked to recluse himself from giving the oath to this possible unqualified zero.

The first oath was then flubbed by transposing a word.

The second oath was not taken on a bible.

Could it be that Roberts knows what he’s doing and he has NOT made Zero the president by these two mistakes made on giving the oath?

During confirmation hearings we saw Roberts sit there and answer all questions they could throw at him without any notes or documentation in front of him. He answered every one of those questions perfectly, and he didn’t make any mistakes.

So does Roberts goof up twice on the oath of president, or does he instead not allow him to become president because of two very slight technicalities? Also, Roberts did this in the full light of day with everyone watching.


66 posted on 01/22/2009 8:08:55 AM PST by mtngrandpa (Fighting the Insurgency at Home)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: mtngrandpa

The Bible isn’t Constitutionally required for the swearing in re the second oath. It was interesting that it wasn’t used unless it simply was a spur of the moment thing.


67 posted on 01/22/2009 8:10:51 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

If you find a copy of that segment anywhere, would you give me a ping, please? :) Would love to see it.


68 posted on 01/22/2009 8:11:20 AM PST by RushIsMyTeddyBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RushIsMyTeddyBear

scotus cares enough to do over the oath, to make sure obama is actually “the president”, yet they appear to not care enough to check his BC to make sure he is “eligible” to be president.


69 posted on 01/22/2009 8:16:02 AM PST by machogirl (not one of Rush's top-ten gal names)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

his dad was already married, so BO was in effect a “b”.
marriage wasn’t legal.


70 posted on 01/22/2009 8:20:43 AM PST by machogirl (not one of Rush's top-ten gal names)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Evil Slayer; All

“Didn’t think anyone would take it seriously.”

Two days ago you might have been right. But two days ago, I NEVER would have imagined something so outrageous as the subject of this thread would happen so SOON!

(Is it still too early to start shooting?)


71 posted on 01/22/2009 8:21:49 AM PST by ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY ( The Constitution needs No interpreting, only APPLICATION!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: machogirl

That’s what we know now, I am curious what the BC says officially. IE, was he legally documented a bastard? :->


72 posted on 01/22/2009 8:23:43 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
Nope. If he was never eligible then he is not President. If found to be ineligible, the whole thing was a fraud. Claiming ignorance to eligibility status will not be a defense.

If it was a fraud, then the constitutional procedure for undoing that fraud and removing him from office is the impeachment process. The courts have no jurisdiction at this point in removing Obama from the White House. That is solely the constitutional prerogative of the Congress.

Or don't you believe in the Constitution?

73 posted on 01/22/2009 8:26:28 AM PST by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

It’s still on the docket according to this.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2169320/posts?page=15#15


74 posted on 01/22/2009 8:33:39 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

The court cannot remove the president.

They can merely rule his acts are not binding because he does not meet the qualifications- when presented with a suit seeking such relief of course.

what a potential mess.


75 posted on 01/22/2009 8:33:39 AM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Alan Keyes needs to be drumrolled out of the conservative movement—that bloody idiot gave us Obama...

If Jack Ryan had toughed it out and stayed in the race, he would have cleaned Barack’s clock—and he’d still be hustling race baiting in Hyde Park and diddling around with Bill Ayers over Illinois education... Remeber, that senate seat was in Republican hands before Barack Obama took it..


76 posted on 01/22/2009 8:34:25 AM PST by Schwaeky (The Republic--Shall be reorganized into the first American EMPIRE, for a safe and secure Society!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RushIsMyTeddyBear

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miauPAog1Wo

My god it is worse than that quote..she goes on to say it was free...first thing I think...is..we have black president..it’s free!

I think later she tries to claim it was given to all platform guests...maybe she was one of them.


77 posted on 01/22/2009 8:35:25 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
"Does Alan Keyes have any means of judicial relief at this point?"

I've just followed the constitutional issues of this, not particulars of the cases.

78 posted on 01/22/2009 8:36:53 AM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

By the way, Barbara Walters has freely admitted for years that she has stolen stuff from the white house ..
Like here:

http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2009/01/13/the-view-talking-about-the-president-and-stealing-huh-stealing/?wpcf7=json


79 posted on 01/22/2009 8:41:26 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: mtngrandpa
"I find it odd that with 31 cases about Zero’s birth certificate out there, many made it to the supreme court."

None made it to the Supreme Court. They were all denied.

80 posted on 01/22/2009 8:41:41 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-200 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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