Posted on 04/17/2010 2:34:13 PM PDT by STARWISE
On Thursday, April 15, 2010, Hon. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was giving testimony before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on the issue of the composition of the United States Supreme Court.
The hearing was broadcast on C-Span. Subcommittee Chairman, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-NY (now the most senior Member of Congress of Puerto Rican descent), and he were having a pleasant exchange.
Rep. Serrano was explaining to Justice Thomas how he feels “a little uneasy” despite much of the dismay of his friends on the “left” about having a hearing for the Supreme Court because of the respect that he has for the Court.
He added that it was “humbling” but that the public understood the importance of what the Court does and the impact that it has on the future of our country.
Justice Thomas thanked Rep. Serrano for his words. Rep. Serrano then jumped in and commented on Justice Thomas’ view on who can sit on the Supreme Court. The following exchange occurred:
Rep. Serrano: I’m glad to hear that you don’t think that there has to be a judge on the Court because I am not a judge. I have never been a judge.
Justice Thomas: And you don’t have to be born in the United States. So you never have to ask, answer that question (smiling).
Rep. Serrano: Oh, really?
Justice Thomas: Yeah (the audience laughing).
Rep. Serrano: So, you haven’t answered the one whether I can serve as (Justice Thomas interjecting) President but you answered this one (smiling).
Justice Thomas: We’re evading that one (laughter from Justice Thomas and the audience). We are giving you another option (more laughter from Justice Thomas and the audience).
Rep. Serrano: Thanks a lot.
Justice Thomas: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Rep. Serrano: Mrs. Emerson.
Mrs. Emerson, Ranking Members, then starts to address Justice Thomas as he continues to laugh.
The YouTube video may be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7qEH-tKoXA&feature=player_embedded. A biography on Rep. Serrano may be found at http://serrano.house.gov/Biography.aspx.
What does all of this mean in relation to Obama’s eligibility question? What is the message behind all the joking, laughter, and body language that can be viewed on the video?
From Justice Thomas’ first mentioning that one does not have to be born in the United States to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court, it appears that Justice Thomas is telling Congress that the Court is angry with Congress for allowing Obama to sit as President even though there is a reasonable doubt as to whether he was born in the United States.
Rep. Serrano read the real message of Justice Clarence’s statement and let him know about it, saying “Oh, really.”
Rep. Serrano did not like Justice Thomas blaming Congress for the mishandling of the matter so he shoots back at Justice Thomas by telling him the Court failed to answer the Obama eligibility question when it should have but now is answering the question of whether someone who is not born in the United States can sit on the U.S. Supreme Court.
From this comment we can conclude that Congress did not believe that it was its job to answer the question of whether Obama is eligible to be President and expected the judicial branch of government to answer that question.
This is borne out by the many letters that Congressmen wrote to concerned Americans on the question of what was being done to address the issue of whether Obama was eligible for the Presidency.
Justice Thomas then answered that the Court is “evading that one” and giving Congress “another option.” Here we can see that the Court is telling Congress that it avoided addressing the Obama eligibility issue so Congress could resolve it through the political process, giving Congress some other unknown “option” to resolve the crisis.
We can only speculate what that other “option” is at this point.
Needless to say, it appears that both Congress and the Court are angry at each other for the constitutional crisis that each accuses the other to have caused regarding the Obama eligibility question.
The Obama eligibility issue has run its course through the political process. We can reasonably expect Obama to run for a second term. We surely do not want to repeat during Obama’s second run for President what occurred during his first.
We cannot reasonably expect to resolve the question of whether Obama was born in Hawaii and the meaning of the “natural born Citizen” clause by way of Americans voting at the polls.
This issue is not going away. It is dividing our nation and needs to be decided as soon as possible. There is now no other way to resolve the question of Obama’s eligibility other than through the legal process.
As Chief Justice John Marshall so well taught in many of his important U.S. Supreme Court decisions, there is no doubt that the judicial branch of government is well equipped and capable of deciding this critical issue of constitutional law and by doing so will not interfere in the work of the other two branches of government.
The Kerchner et al v. Obama/Congress et al case which is now pending in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia with a tentative merits hearing date of June 29, 2010 gives the judicial branch of government the prime opportunity to put this constitutional crisis finally to rest one way or the other.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq. April 17, 2010 http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
~~~
Regarding the hearing,listening to it for the 7th or 8th time, I'm not sure I come away with the same impression as the article that this exchange was subtle but pointed jibing about the 0 eligibility issue; and, I, of course, could very well be wrong. This was the exchange I transcribed from about the 1:13:00 mark.
Serrano: So, we always thank you for your service and all the other 7, we do the same
Thomas: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s always an honor being here. You and I have been at this together for a decade and a half
Serrano: I’m glad to hear you don’t think there has to be a judge on the court up here ‘cause I’m not a judge
Thomas: And you don’t have to be born in the United States, so you never have to answer that question.
Serrano: On really? So you haven’t answered the question if I can serve as president, but you’re answering this one ?
Thomas: We’re evading that one .. we’re giving you another option ..
Laughter
Laughter
Open to interpretation, I guess.
~~PING!
“Open to interpretation, I guess.”
Stick with your instincts. The best interpretation comes from watching the video. This was not a hostile exchange, else there wouldn’t have been so much laughter involved. It was pure banter. Justice Thomas did not send (nor did Serrano receive) a “hidden” message about BHO’s NBC status. Thomas references to “you” clearly were to Serrano himself not to Congress in general.
This is the kind of ludicrous cherry-picking of evidence that leads people down the path of believing 9-11 was a GWB-led conspiracy to expand the power of the president. One can sustain such out-of-touch theories only by conveniently ignoring all the countervailing evidence.
After all, he got 53% of the vote so we have no right to voice our complaint's let alone outrage that our beloved Constitution is being used by the White House and the Congress so we just better sit down and shut up lest we be labeled as racist wing nuts. Osama's mama her self could give birth to a child that one day that could become POTUS, as long as the child was born on US soil and was elected by an ignorant, uninformed people.
Besides, being called names really hurts my feelings
Do I need a sarcasm tag?
Used = trashed.
I hate when I screw up a rant.
You should have put Orly’s name in here somewhere, this thread would be crawling with posts by now :)
From the article:
“From this comment we can conclude that Congress did not believe that it was its job to answer the question of whether Obama is eligible to be President and expected the judicial branch of government to answer that question.”
Congress could only believe that if it also believed it was somehow relieved of its oath to defend the Constitution when it certified O as President at its Jan 2009 Joint Session.
Fortunately, Apuzzo set out 3 USC 15 in his Kerchner pleadings. That statute describes the steps by Congress during the Session to confirm O’s eligibility.
Attn: Rep Serrano.
You and every other member of Congress, including the Republican “leadership”, ignored your oaths of office, sat on your hands during the Session and took no action!
The usurper wont be running in 2012...he will need a birth certificate.
Egads. Buy a dictionary. "Evading" and "avoiding" mean two totally different things. Thomas didn't say they were skipping (avoiding) around the issue, he basically said they knew there was a huge problem and were being sneaky and deceptive (evading) to the people in not solving the problem. Many here think Thomas is on our side. I don't. He admitted they were intentionally playing hot potato with it and we will be stuck with an evil doer in the WH until he decides it's time to step down.
Hahahahahahaha! And you think there will be free elections in 2010.
If we've learned anything it's that we can't trust government to take care of us, we have to take care of ourselves. Some states are already starting legislation to provide proof of elgibility before a candidate can be on the state ballot. Should be every state in the Union.
If Obama can't qualify for 2012, then he can't run plain and simple.
These unknown happenings of civil unrest and riots are nothing compared to the civil unrest and riots when this usurper gets finished with us.
“The usurper wont be running in 2012...he will need a birth certificate.”
Most of us certainly hope that is the case. However, there are two concerns.
1. He may indeed present a “BC”. Thus, it would only be acceptable if he authorized the State of Hawaii to release his BC.
2. The possibility of suspending elections due to some catastrophic event.
From an earlier post:
Per a July 11, 2004 Reuters article:
“DeForest Soaries (the chairman of the new U.S. Election Assistance Commission) claimed ‘the federal government has no agency that has the statutory authority to cancel and reschedule a federal election.’
“Soaries wanted Ridge (then Homeland Security Secretary) to ask Congress to pass legislation. It appears Ridge then asked the Justice Department to review what legal steps would be needed to delay the election…”
Fast forward: O has stacked “his” Justice Department and it could be expected to reach whatever position he wished. Imagine if it were to advise him that no legislation by Congress was required for him to suspend presidential elections.
In this regard, I often wonder the amount of time between the last moment the USSR believed the Berlin Wall was secure and the moment the guards took no action while folks were demolishing it.
Outside the country too. Foreigners who may believe Obama to be not legitimate, can challenge the totality of his administration as illegitimate if they want to, including ALL its actions, for some advantage to themselves.
The potential for chaos and disruption of US policy and foreign political and fiancial relations is infinite, and so there is understandable relutance to set the issue free. The fact that a high official of the US has challengable, doubtful credentials is and has been a major issue of national security and challenges all branches of govt., both political parties and the states themselves for allowing such a candidacy in the first place. Both political parties allowed the candidacy to occur...go figure. Why?
Maybe I am just guessing (and perhaps hoping).....but is Justice Thomas giving us a “heads up”? Is he dropping a hint?
From what I understand, the Supreme Court cannot, or at least procedurally does not initiate actions without an appeal or a petition being submitted. They probably know a lot more than they would be comfortable to admit.
And don’t forget, Obama pissed them off during the State of the Union Address. Is Justice Thomas showing his cards?
Stay tuned?
This "other option" was a lighthearted suggestion of a new career for the Congressman, it had nothing to do with Congress or the eligibility issue.
It's stuff like this that makes birthers look like conspiracy theory loonies.
Beat, drum. Beat!
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.