Posted on 02/03/2009 1:14:11 AM PST by rxsid
\ Dismissal, like with all birther lawsuits.
LOL! I thought someone might do that, just to stir things up!
Pretty bad when any of us can tell you exactly what is going to be said......Parrots! Squaaaaack! Squaaaaack! Waste of time! Squaaaaaack! Move on Squaaaaack!
Well I think McCain and Graham by comparision are pretty clean. Pelosi, Dodd and Frank are crooked. At least half of the Senate should be in chains.
McCain and Graham are RINOs.
I admire McCain’s service to the country in the U.S. Navy but he is a RINO. The Amnesty was a bridge too far for me. McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance also gave us O.
I just got an email from McCain (as a donor - can I have my money back) to sign a petition against the pork “stimulus” so maybe there is a little hope. We conservative have held out the olive branch too many times. Sad but true.
Took much longer then I thought - But I bet on the Cardinals too...oh well
LOL! Yeah they have a template response. I am proudly wearing my “Certified Birther” badge.
I guess they dropped the “factcheck.org BC proof” because Obama’s attorneys are using it in the footnotes. I am still stunned that his attorneys used that.
I am an appellate lawyer, and I can translate this into English:
The district court dismissed Berg's case. He asked the Supreme Court to hear his appeal immediately (instead of first going to the regional Court of Appeals, which is the usual procedure), and they said no. Berg then filed a brief with the Court of Appeals asking that court to reverse the trial court's dismissal.
At this point, the normal procedure would be for the defendants to file their brief, and the case would then go to a "merits panel" (a randomly-selected group of 3 judges of the Court of Appeals) which would read the briefs, hear oral argument from the lawyers if the judges wanted to (they can decide without argument if they want) and then render a decision (either affirming or reversing the trial court's order of dismissal).
But that didn't happen: instead, the FEC (one of the defendants) filed a motion for "summary affirmance." That is a request to the Court to immediately throw out the appeal because, in essence, the district court's dismissal is so obviously right that there's no point in even talking about it any more.
The docket sheet shows that the motion (and Berg's response to the motion) have been sent to a merits panel.
One of 2 things will now happen: either the panel will grant the motion, which means that Berg's case is over (although he could still ask the Court of Appeals to reconsider or ask the Supreme Court, again, to take the case up, though either of those things is discretionary with the courts); or the merits panel will deny the motion (which means that the defendants will file a brief and the case will go forward in the Court of Appeals as per the normal procedure.
I certainly hope you are correct about the days being numbered for Frank, Pelosi, and Dodd in Congress! There are a bunch more that I hope join them, including all the RINOS!
I also voted for John McCain, but my respect for him has vanished. He knew all along that Barack Hussien Mohammed Obama aka Barry Soetoro from Indonesia was not constitutionally qualified to be President. The reason McCain said NOTHING about it was because he knew that he ALSO did not meet the “natural born” requirement to hold the office of President. Shows just how much he is wanting to uphold the Constitution he swore on several occasions to uphold!!
I’m proud of you for working on the Oklahoma law. It is needed in each state. However, these cases are not over yet. Berg’s original case has now taken the step setting it up for oral argument. Oral Argument WILL follow. For oral argument to take place, discovery must take place. In discovery the BC will be obtained....BO will try to delay this from happening, any delay in this process will again send it to the SC who will insist that these steps be taken.....
It is not just the content of this case that they care about, as it is as much that the process be kept in tack, our entire judicial system.
Yes, the wheel of justice run slowly. But, they do move.
Then might I suggest that unobtrusively observing, rather than interfering with your subjects, would be much more scientific?
Discovery happens in the trial court, not in the Court of Appeals. There was no discovery in this case because Berg's case was dismissed at the outset. If Berg wins in the Court of Appeals, they will send the case back to the trial court for discovery.
When will the AZ amicae be triggered?”
The Amicus brief was asking the Supreme Court to hear the case. The Supreme Court accepted the brief, but then decided not to hear the case. So the Amicus brief is of no effect any more. The same amicus can ask to file a new amicus brief in the Court of Appeals if they want to, but, according to the docket sheet, they haven't as of yet.
Anderson Brief is there waiting to be tied to Best Case with Standing. My bet is that it will be one of Orly’s Cases that no one knows about yet.
Not accurate-- see above.
I didn’t say I was an anthropologist... :-)
[... if I were doing a scientific study of this syndrome, then that would be true; however, I’ll leave that up to another...]
It is Berg’s “Motion for summary action”)
They try to ridicule our doggedness on this issue because they know in their black little left-wing hearts that being dogged is exactly how liberals have gotten most of their agenda accomplished. They’re used to conservatives giving up a fight and it’s driving them nuts that we won’t quit this one.
Not necessarily-see above.
Oral Argument WILL follow.
Not necessarily. Even if the motion for summary affirmance is denied, the 3d Circuit hears oral argument only in about half of their cases. The rest are decided on the briefs without argument.
For oral argument to take place, discovery must take place. In discovery the BC will be obtained....
There is no discovery in the Court of Appeals. If Berg wins in the Court of Appeals, they will send the case back to the district court for discovery.
BO will try to delay this from happening, any delay in this process will again send it to the SC who will insist that these steps be taken.....
If Berg loses in the Court of Appeals, he can ask the Supreme Court to hear the case, but they decline most cases without comment and, so far, they have not seemd interested in Obama eligibility cases.
Wrong: "Motion filed by Appellee Fed Election Comm to summarily affirm."
"Affirm" means to uphold the trial court (which dismissed Berg's suit). "Summarily" means "wihout opposing briefs or oral argument."
Well, one of these days, I hope y’all get over this “troll” and “Obot” bit... LOL...
Ya know..., on other subject areas, I encounter people who almost violently disagree with me (say, for example, in certain Christian doctrine, as one particular area...). But, I can’t think of one time where I’ve ever called them a troll or whatever. I do identify a particular methodology of Christian thinking and do recognize where they are coming from, even though I’ll disagree with it.
Another area (and a bit related to Christianity) is the creation/evolution threads. Again, I’ve never called one of those opposing my thinking, even when they are absolutely vehement about it, a trolls or someone from the DU (although I would expect that many at the DU would hold to some of that type of thinking).
And I can come up with several other topic areas and even though people do disagree, I can’t think of one where the “conspiracy mindedness” comes out of people like this one... And on top of that, it’s amazing how some conservatives can abandon some of the basic Constitutional provisions in law and procedures when dealing with Obama.
All I can say is that one must consider “obsessive/compulsive” as part of that explanation, of which this represents a subset.
Hey, although one might think I’m trying to be nasty or something here, I’m really not — not doing anything more than being “amazed” at the type of thinking that goes on...
Mark Steyn is waxing eloquent about Obama while subbing for Rush today: “Obama’s honeymoon with the rest of the world is already over,” “reality has reduced Obama from a messianic figure to just another guy who will soon occupy a similar position as Warren Harding and Chester Arthur.”(it’s curious that Steyn picked those two: one was rumored to have African ancestry; the other to not be a natural born citizen)
LOL!
Details, details....
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.