Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: Seizethecarp

The Chrysler dealers should get with Leo to write up a quo warranto action.

182 posted on 09/23/2009 8:23:00 AM PDT by Frantzie (Do we want ACORN running America's healthcare?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies ]

To: Frantzie
Leo Donofrio is in the process of obtaining is DC District Court license for the apparent purpose of bringing a quo warranto action. He said he would only do this if a client came to him with standing and he previously hinted that the closed-down Chrysler dealers would be most welcome to contact him. I suspect some have! Here is what Leo has said in editorial comments ("Ed.") about this in the past few days:

September 21, 2009 at 8:47 am:

[Ed. I'm admitted in the 3rd Circuit District Court and the State of NJ. I have been invited to join the DC Bar and Circuit because of my multi state bar exam score. I am preparing my application as we speak. But I do not have to take the DC Bar Exam. Thank God for that. Bar Exams are not fun.]

Referring to Leo's discovery suit in HI of ammendment of Obama's BC (though I, an immodest CPA and not a lawyer disagree with Leo that DOJ has agreed that Obama can be removed in quo warranto, but the opposite...I will post rebuttal later), September 21, 2009 at 8:16 pm:

[Ed. This isn't about removing the President. It's about shedding light on the situation. But you are wrong. Go read the position of the DOJ adopted in their motion to dismiss in the Barnett suit. As I reported months ago, the POTUS eligibility and removal can be handled by the DC DIstrict Court under the Quo warranto statute. The DOJ is on record in the Barnett case having argued that Orly's case is improperly venued and that a Quo Warranto must be brought in the DC District Court. The DOJ agrees that the POTUS can be removed via Quo Warranto and they are representing him.]

September 22, 2009 at 7:42 am:

[Ed. Hey RCL, welcome to the nbc blog. You should familiarize yourself with my legal brief on the federal Quo Warranto statute, a three part report. In that statute Congress authorized one single court to hear issues regarding the eligibility of all US National Officers and those Government officials specifically located in DC. The statute includes all US national govt officers, no exceptions.

The DOJ has already agreed that the POTUS eligibility can be reviewed and revoked in their recent court filings in one of Orly's cases where the DOJ represents President Obama.

You need to read the DOJ motion to dismiss in the Barnett case, specifically page 16:

The authorizing statute for the District ofColumbia sets forth a number of requirements, including a requirement that any quo warranto action be heard by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. See D.C. Code Sections 16-3501 through 16-3503. Indeed, Plaintiffs acknowledge this requirement in their pleading, but seek to have this Court ignore it because of their apparent dissatisfaction with the precedents in the District of Columbia. See FAC at 35-36.

I have maintained that any judicial review of the President's eligibility must come through the DC District Court and the Quo Warranto statute. The DOJ agrees and has put that in an actual court document defending the President. Eventually, the President's eligibility will be challenged in the DC District Court.]

187 posted on 09/23/2009 10:45:11 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

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