Skip to comments.KEYES v OBAMA OPPOSITION to MOTION to Dismiss Case ; AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Posted on 09/21/2009 10:11:47 PM PDT by Red Steel
PLAINTIFFS PRELIMINARY RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO
DISMISS, to be supplemented by filing Plaintiffs Second
Amended Complaint on or before October 2, 2009
Come now the Plaintiffs with this their Preliminary
Response toDefendants September 4, 2009, Document 56
Motion to Dismiss (with reservation of rights to Respond
further by filing Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint
on or before Friday, October 2, 2009).
POLITICAL RELATIVITY vs. CONSTITUTIONAL ABSOLUTES: IS THE
POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE VIABLE AS A MEANS TO
EVADECOMPLIANCE WITH UNVARIABLE STANDARDS?
Fundamentally, this case comes down to a single
bifurcated question question: (1A) does the constitution
mean what it says when it lays down absolute parameters,
such as the age and citizenship qualifications to be
President, and (1B) to whom does the investigation and
enforcement of this constitutional provision: to the
Congress, the People, or can the President get by merely
asserting his qualifications without presenting evidence
which would be competent as Summary Judgment
(admissible) evidence under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure? The Plaintiffs have brought their
complaint as a matter of first impression to ask this
Court to determine, find, hold, and rule that the
investigation and enforcement of this right belongs to
the people, even members of a discrete and insular
minority of the people, even if this group lacks
majoritarian political power. Plaintiffs respond to the
Defendants Motion to Dismiss and ask this Court to
rule, pursuant to the First and Ninth Amendments that
they may sue to enforce constitutional absolutes, such
as the constitutional requirements for President of the
United States. Plaintiffs assert an inalienable,
reserved right to sue for Constitutional conformity in
this case even though they concede that the Defendants
have shown that primary, first line actions could and
should have been taken by members of Congress or the
Electoral College, pursuant to the Twelfth and
Twentieth Amendments for instance. Case
8:09cv00082DOCAN,Document 56, Filed 09/04/2009, Page 2o
of 32: Defendants Motion to Dismiss at 13, ll. 114. Of
course, what Congress must do in the case of obvious
electoral deadlocks or recognized and admitted problems
with qualification for office is not at all the point
raised by Plaintiffs complaint and evidence.
Plaintiffscomplaint and evidence allege and confirm
that the Presidency in 2008 was taken by fraud, and not
even by fraud in the counting of votes, but by fraud in
the traditional common law sense of a material
misrepresentation of an important fact upon which
Plaintiffs could be reasonably expected to rely to their
detriment, and to the detriment of constitutional
government. The Constitutions textual commitment of
this responsibility is a responsibility that Congress
has embraced. Both the House and the Sentate have
standing committees with jurisdiction to decide
questions relating to Presidential elections. Idem:
Defendants Motion to Dismiss at 13, ll 1517. Where
Congress has done absolutely nothing to investigate or
prosecute a question, Defendants position appears to be
that this very inaction or acquiescence by Congress
creates a presumption of legitimacy. Apparently,
Defendants would have this Court believe, hold, rule,
and accept that utter and complete inaction, stony
silence even by the Vice‐President of an opposing party
sitting as President of the Senate during the
certification of the electoral vote to Congress pursuant
to 3 U.S.C. §15, is and must be sufficient to satisfy
the people that the President has met the Constitutional
qualifications for office. Idem: Motion to Dismiss at
Excerpted, more here: KEYES-v-OBAMA-69-OPPOSITION-to-MOTION-to-Dismiss-Case-AND-MEMORANDUM-OF-POINTS-AND-AUTHORITIES-IN-SUPPORT-OF-MOTION-56-filed-by-Plaintiff-Pamela
Hell ... a LOT of us knew those TWO trips just prior to the "election" were dark ops of SOME kind.
I was duly reprimanded here when I stated that zero had gone to see (to it that) gra'maw died before she could make any trouble. I had no proof, it was all speculation.
Then ... I just read about this guy that was shot in his car ... and another guy died of an aspirin overdose ......
Fingers crossed and prayers continue. Hoping for good news after another long day of driving.
Welcome to FR.
“Judge Carter may be getting heat but he lived through Khe Sanh which should make Chicgao thugs look like a walk in the park.”
You joined FR to post this drivel?
Well Done, Orly.
Does your mother know you’re still an @$$hole?
In a nutshell, the response is saying that Congress and the Electoral College failed in its duty to determine the eligibility of Obama to be POTUS and that because they failed in their duty, the people have the right to demand that the zero’s qualifications be presented for public examination.
See my post #95.
Get lost, O-sniffer
Thanks for the ping!
DTG 221555Z SEP 09
T O P S E C R E T VIKINGKITTEN
SUBJ: NUKE IN PROGRESS
RE: POST 85
1. FR MOD COMMAND HAS EXECUTED COMMAND-DIRECTED ZORCH-ON-TARGET (Z.O.T.). THIS IS A ZOT IN PROGRESS REPEAT THIS IS A ZOT IN PROGRESS, WITH DETONATION YIELD ESTIMATED AT LEVEL NOMINAL UBER-KINETIC EXPLOSION (N.U.K.E.).
2. ALL ELEMENTS ARE DIRECTED TO EXECUTE OPTION DOGPILE UPON RECEIPT OF THIS MESSAGE. WEAPONS-FREE, ENGAGE ON CONTACT. LOCATION REF. 1 IS NOW DESIGNATED A FREE-FIRE ZONE.
3. ALL ELEMENTS ARE DIRECTED TO RALLY POINT URSULA FOR AUTHORIZED LINE DANCE UPON TROLL REMAINS. CONSUMPTION OF ADULT BEVERAGES IS FURTHER ENCOURAGED.
4. ADMIN NOTE: INTERESTED PARTIES MAY BE INCLUDED IN, OR REMOVED FROM, THE VIKING KITTIES TROLL-WATCH ALERT ROSTER BY FREEPMAILING THE WATCH NCOIC, CODENAME OLD SARGE, SUBJECT: ALERT ROSTER.
5. CHALLENGE/PASSWORD: TOAST-CRUNCH.
EOM EOM EOM
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.