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

Skip to comments.

OBAMA ELIGIBILITY HEARING TO BE STREAMED LIVE STARTING AT 0900 EST
Article II SUPERPAC ^ | 01/26/2012 | Article II SUPERPAC

Posted on 01/26/2012 5:55:04 AM PST by RaceBannon

Article II SUPERPAC streaming live video and audio at this link


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2012; 2012ballot; barry; bc; birthcertificate; certifigate; corruption; eligibility; fraud; ga; identitytheft; livegeorgiahearing; media; mittromney; naturalborncitizen; nbc; obama; sarahpalin; socialsecurity; teaparty; usurper
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540 ... 1,461-1,473 next last
To: philman_36

Excellent! Well played, sir!


501 posted on 01/26/2012 9:35:13 AM PST by null and void (Day 1101 of America's ObamaVacation from reality [Heroes aren't made, Frank, they're cornered...])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Yep sure did.

I actually knew a guy that knew Charles Manson. Had a picture of him and Charlie standing with their arms around each others shoulders.

Could have passed for Manson’s twin brother.

Gave me such a case of the butt puckers I couldn’t let him ride in the back seat while I was driving.


502 posted on 01/26/2012 9:36:29 AM PST by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 476 | View Replies]

To: philman_36

It’s already happening. There’s a link here in the thread to an Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter’s blog at their site, who was in the courtroom, and all he does is talk about Taitz. I nicely gave him a hard time about it in the comments.


503 posted on 01/26/2012 9:38:05 AM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: SvenMagnussen; Red Steel

What do you think about Sven’s comments, Red?


Minor v. Happersett is a SCOTUS opinion about states rights as it pertains to the privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution. The SCOTUS opinion mentions in dicta, or conversation about the case, a native born with two citizen parents is undoubtedly a Natural-born citizen. It also states there are other scenarios where a person would be considered a Natural-born citizen, but the Court chose not to address the specific issues.

The Judge refused to enter Obama’s Indonesian school record, while allowing Plaintiffs to enter copies of Obama’s COLB and long form BC as authenticated and certified documents of his birth record.

Anyone who thinks Judge Malihi will rule Obama is not qualified based on this is kidding themselves. It’s a set up.


504 posted on 01/26/2012 9:38:13 AM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 484 | View Replies]

To: MrB

I thought she was giving permission so I did

lol


505 posted on 01/26/2012 9:38:27 AM PST by advertising guy (piss on the media like a Marine !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]

To: SvenMagnussen
Minor v. Happersett is a SCOTUS opinion about states rights as it pertains to the privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution. The SCOTUS opinion mentions in dicta, or conversation about the case, a native born with two citizen parents is undoubtedly a Natural-born citizen.

That is incorrect! In WKA, the court cites Minor as deciding that Minor was a US citizen based on the fact that she was born in the country of citizen parents. That is what the Minor court called 'natural born citizens'!

This is from the Wong kim Ark opinion -
Minor v. Happersett (1874), 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote, the right to the elective franchise not being essential to citizenship.


Nowhere in Wong does the court declare Wong an NBC. To the contrary the court declares Wong 'as much a citizen as a natural born child of a citizen'. The court clearly stated that Wong WAS NOT a natural born citizen, and was a citizen born in the US of alien parents.

The Wong court clearly added to the Minor decision my continuing where the Minor court left off when it said -
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.


The Minor court did not need to determine if children born in the US were citizens 'without reference to the citizenship of their parents', but the Wong court did. So it started with the definition that Minor started, and finished it. In Wong the court decided that Wong was a citizen, it NEVER stated that he was a 'natural born citizen'.
506 posted on 01/26/2012 9:39:02 AM PST by MMaschin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 484 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Thanks for playing.


507 posted on 01/26/2012 9:39:15 AM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | View Replies]

To: SvenMagnussen
The Judge refused to enter Obama’s Indonesian school record, while allowing Plaintiffs to enter copies of Obama’s COLB and long form BC as authenticated and certified documents of his birth record.

I didn't follow the entire proceedings, but at the beginning the birth certificate was entered into evidence as being downloaded from the White House website. That's hardly authenticated and certified.

508 posted on 01/26/2012 9:40:08 AM PST by justlurking (The only remedy for a bad guy with a gun is a good WOMAN (Sgt. Kimberly Munley) with a gun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 484 | View Replies]

To: null and void

I don’t know which was first, but both had the same idea.


509 posted on 01/26/2012 9:42:39 AM PST by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 486 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

It has been relatively quiet in the Fogbow website since (I would say) Monday evening when it became apparent that Jablonski had not filed a motion to reconsider denying the motion to quash the Obama subpoena. The overall quality of the commentary seems to be rather low and studded with vulgarities and pejoratives— more heat than light much of the time IMHO.

I think a sizable number of the Fogbow lawyers might have gone into lurk mode at that time, just waiting and hoping that some good news for them would drop out of the sky... :-)


510 posted on 01/26/2012 9:43:28 AM PST by SteveH (First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: justlurking
That's hardly authenticated and certified.
You can only present what you've been given to date.
And it was presented to the public at large as such by the defendant.
511 posted on 01/26/2012 9:44:43 AM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: justlurking
That's hardly authenticated and certified.
You can only present what you've been given to date.
And it was presented to the public at large as such by the defendant.
512 posted on 01/26/2012 9:45:26 AM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: MMaschin

This just in from the CBS media:

Judge Considers Whether To Keep Obama On The Ballot

http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/16607410/judge-considers-whether-to-keep-obama-on-ballot

The article mentions no word of the Attorneys arguing Minor v Happersetts definition of a natural born Citizen at all nor does the article mention that Obama’s father was born in Kenya and was a British Citizen. The article never mentions any of that but the CBS article chose to mention the fact that Mitt Romneys dad was born in Mexico and the Santorums dad was born in Italy. How about that spin? You can’t say CBS is not in the tank for Obama, they are with this deceptive story minutes after the court proceedings was over. Here is the article:

ATLANTA (CBS ATLANTA)

... Similar complaints have been filed in other states. None have been successful.

Jablonski said Obama has long made his birth certificate and other documents proving his citizenship available to the public.

The Georgia complaint wants to keep Obama’s name off the state’s presidential primary ballot in March.

Similarly, Mitt Romney’s father was born in Mexico and Rick Santorum’s father was born in Italy.

No one has filed a complaint about either of those candidates’ eligibility.

Also, attorney Orly Taitz, one of the prime movers in the birther movement, called a witness who claimed the President’s social security number appeared to be fraudulent, saying the number was for someone born in 1890 not 1961, the year the President was born.

Taitz put herself on the stand. She claims the president was born in Indonesia and went under different names as a young student during his time in Indonesia.

Taitz claims the president committed fraud and forgery on his birth certificate and social security number. She asked the judge to find the president in contempt for failing to show up in court.


513 posted on 01/26/2012 9:46:41 AM PST by Obama Exposer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 506 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky

Going out with war/riots/fire? How will you survive out there with all your fears? Taking a dog with you?


514 posted on 01/26/2012 9:47:48 AM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350

And sure it is they have that, race war, as one of their master plans. Or “mastermind” plan to borrow an older wise torn of phrase recently revitalized by Mark Levin.

Yet they, the SDS and SDS-phile academic, professional and bureaucratic radicals are exactly like many white-topia honkies of a insulated and conservative bent. They often live in the paralleled places and life flows. The same kind of materialistic asperations, the same kind of vacations, jobs, etc.

Down in the nitty gritty of life where the races and classes truly intermingle every day, and even in the blackest of black places, there is no race war. There are the idiots born of single moms in neighborhoods full of welfare takers and mostly single mommies, as adolescent males absent strong males in their lives they band together using any easy commonality as a joint, that is often race, but even more often group-membership, gang-that-is.

Feral groups of them will be black hitting on whites or chicanos, or asians — but there is not one Chaka Khan among them, they are not tribal warriors. They are feral gangs of young men and even girls, they do not organize up at all.

There will be no race war.
are not the


515 posted on 01/26/2012 9:48:11 AM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

The left can get limited power without violence, but they cannot get and keep absolute power without violence.

A free people will not become slaves of the state without a fight.


516 posted on 01/26/2012 9:48:38 AM PST by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 488 | View Replies]

To: advertising guy

that’ll learn me...


517 posted on 01/26/2012 9:50:21 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 505 | View Replies]

To: SvenMagnussen
Minor v. Happersett is a SCOTUS opinion about states rights as it pertains to the privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution. The SCOTUS opinion mentions in dicta, or conversation about the case, a native born with two citizen parents is undoubtedly a Natural-born citizen.

That is incorrect! In WKA, the court cites Minor as deciding that Minor was a US citizen based on the fact that she was born in the country of citizen parents. That is what the Minor court called 'natural born citizens'!

This is from the Wong kim Ark opinion -
Minor v. Happersett (1874), 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote, the right to the elective franchise not being essential to citizenship.


Nowhere in Wong does the court declare Wong an NBC. To the contrary the court declares Wong 'as much a citizen as a natural born child of a citizen'. The court clearly stated that Wong WAS NOT a natural born citizen, and was a citizen born in the US of alien parents.

The Wong court clearly added to the Minor decision my continuing where the Minor court left off when it said -
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.


The Minor court did not need to determine if children born in the US were citizens 'without reference to the citizenship of their parents', but the Wong court did. So it started with the definition that Minor started, and finished it. In Wong the court decided that Wong was a citizen, it NEVER stated that he was a 'natural born citizen'.
518 posted on 01/26/2012 9:51:24 AM PST by MMaschin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 484 | View Replies]

To: Obama Exposer

I just noticed something from the CBS article. It claims Taitz said Obama was born in Indonesia. I don’t remember her stating that in Court. In fact I have never heard her make that claim. Have any of you?


519 posted on 01/26/2012 9:51:51 AM PST by Obama Exposer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]

To: justlurking

The Judge asked the non-Orly Plaintiffs if was an objection to entering the COLB and Long Form BC downloaded and copied from the web as authenticated and certified documents and they did not object. The documents were entered as undisputed fact.

All the Judge knows is that Obama was born in Hawai’i. He disallowed the evidence of Obama’s Indonesian school record. As far as the Judge is concerned, Obama was born an American and stay an American is whole life.

Plaintiff’s are basing their entire argument on the fact Obama’s father was not born in the US, so Obama can’t be eligible. It’s a set up.


520 posted on 01/26/2012 9:51:55 AM PST by SvenMagnussen (PSALMS 37:28 For the LORD loves justice and does not abandon the faithful.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540 ... 1,461-1,473 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