Skip to comments.Seattle Homemaker Fined $13,000 For Doing Background Check On Obama
Posted on 01/28/2013 11:33:35 AM PST by ethical
On January 10, 2013 the Washington State Supreme Court fined Linda Jordan almost $13,000 because she legally challenged Barack Obama's use of forged identity documents: A fake birth certificate and phony Social Security Number.
Jordan wanted the original records to be produced for comparison. Why did Jordan want to see Obamas real ID?
The Maricopa County Sheriff Department has presented credible evidence that the birth certificate Barack Obama posted on the White House website on April 27, 2011 was forged. (Maricopa County Sheriff Department 602.876.1801) Jordans own research confirmed that Hawaii law requires signatures on birth certificates to be in permanent ink. The signature of Obamas mother, on his purported 1961 birth certificate, is partly ink and partly a computer created signature. This compilation means the signature was forged. Ohio Private Investigator Susan Daniels has confirmed that the Social Security Number Obama is using was previously issued to someone else. SSNs are NEVER re-issued.
Obama used this fake ID to prove he was eligible to be President. It got him on the ballot and into the White House. This is fraud in the least, treason at worst.
I filed the lawsuit because I fear for Americas future. A serious crime has been committed right in front of us and federal agents turned a blind eye to it. There is substantial evidence that Barack Obama is using fraudulent identity documents. The court ignored this evidence and sanctioned me with almost $13,000 in fines for exercising my right to request an evidentiary hearing. They labeled my concerns "frivolous". Surely Americans have the right to confirm if Obama used fake ID to gain access to the White House. Linda Jordan
At last!!!!!!! Someone dared to check him out!
Now, a question for all:
Last Saturday someone forwarded to me a photocopy of BHO’s student ID from Columbia with his photo on it. On the ID it said “foreign student”.
Does anyone know if this a real one or a fake one being passed around on the internet?
This will be sure to tick off a lot of alleged freepers today....
“NO, discuss anything BUT the birth certificate” the Hussein Head faux conservatives love to shout.
Put up an Internet link to Obama’s ‘foreign student’ ID.
so Herr Leader wanted to have the advantages of registering as a foreign student and then morph into a citizen when it suited him. that’s why his college records must stay undercover. im shocked I tell you, shocked!
Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/studentid.asp) claims that the digital type of photo ID was not introduced at Columbia until 1996, well after the time that Obama would have been there.
Makes some sense. Bar codes were still rather rare in 1981.
This is pure thuggery by the judiciary. They did the same thing to Leo Donofrio. He vowed not to practice law again
(Orly Taitz deserved the sanctions she received for her repeated waste of the court’s time with her incompetence and attention-whore antics.)
This woman has more patriotism and cajones than the entire GOP.
Unfortunately I am not adept at copying and pasting something from FB over here to FR. Here’s what it looks like best as I can describe it:
IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK
81 PHOTO ID HERE
(print is in purple)
” Bar codes were still rather rare in 1981.”
Not really, I owned a supermarket with register scanners in
1981. All grocery products had bar codes then.
Probably is a fake because in 1981 I believe Barry was Occidental at that time.
Background checks on ALL gun buyers, but a check on MorroccoBomber...? TO THE HIGH TOWER, WITH HER...!
And here’s something else:
Most dictators have prominent enemies; parties, poets, artists, film-makers, rebel commanders....
The really CREEPY dictators have enemies who are plumbers, housewives....GayMuzzie has no style at all.
Arrogant Communist Tyrant Hussein Obama Second Reich Information File.
A persistent PING for TRUTH!
C A Jones is a Homebuilder if you would take the time to do a google search. Not sure why that is relevant... ;)
No it wouldn't. Since the 1st Amendment was itself amended (by popular vote & lack of media/congressional/judicial attention) to exclude any questioning of Barry Seotoro.
She’s getting smacked around by the “standing” issue. She has no inherent right to demand a legal investigation of anyone, and unless she can show specific harm done to her personally and directly, she has no standing to file the suit.
Yup. That’s EXACTLY it. Someone forwarded it to my FB account on Saturday. Probably is false because in 1981 Barry was at Occidental.
Doesn’t she now have “STANDING” to appeal this to the higher courts ? If a fedreal judge were to rule in her favor then it could perhaps force the bamster to put up the docs finally .
“purports” shows the reluctance on his part. Plaintiff did without question file the suit using the RCW in question. Very few cases have acknowledged the plaintiff as having standing.
It means drawers (like in a desk or dresser) in at least one Spanish speaking country.
It's missing the accent mark though.
And yet my first DL issued by the state of Texas in 1980 had one, as well as my Universtiy of Houston student ID card issued in the fall of 1982. And there were readers all over campus for entry into labs, use of the library, and all the admissions and administrative offices. IIRC, even the praking decals had that barcode on them. Heck, I even remember calling it our student surveilence card when they started using it to take attendance in the fall of 1983.
Maybe we should ask Wayne Allen Root if he had one with a barcode at CUNYC.
A few questions/observations about that picture:
1. Obama's hair looks shorter in that picture than in any other pictures I've seen of him in college. Looks older, too. As though it is a post-college photo inserted into someone else's ID.
2. Did Columbia use this sort of ID in 1981? With a bar code?
3. Does/did Columbia note which students were "Foreign Students" on their university-issued IDs? I've never heard of any university doing so. Visiting students, yes, but not foreign students.
You are correct ethical:
"Most were dismissed on standing grounds; a question not directly at issue in this case because plaintiff purports to bring this case under RCW 29A.68.011, subparts 1 and 3, which confers standing on any elector."
Reading the rest of the courts "opinion" and decision is pretty stunning.
That doesn’t say she had standing, that said that the issue of standing was irrelevant — I’d have to see more full context to understand exactly why the case was dismissed. It’s patently ludicrous to assert the the judge declared she had standing and then fined her for filing a frivolous suit, though.
I think fake.
She offers as evidence the musings of the infamous Arizona sheriff Joe Arpiao, supported by the report by a part-time computer programmer last employed in May 2007, who examined a copy of the pdf image of President Obamas birth certificate and concluded that the original was forged. She offers the affidavit of a private investigator who opines that President Obama is fraudulently using the social security number of another person who was born in 18904 and was issued the social security number in 1977. The investigator is not able to identify the person and does not offer any insight as to why this hypothetical person waited until he or she was 87 years old before applying for and receiving a social security number. The rest of plaintiffs evidence is the standard fare of the blogosphere that has been floating around since 2008.
It's clear, the lefties have successfully stigmatized the issue...and unfortunately too many on the right have sided with them.
How about providing us with a copy of what you received?
I began this explanation of my decision with some history of the birther movement, and I conclude with some more history.
No predisposed belief there...naw, none. So much for justice being blind.
Please refer to post #32
It does appear to be fake .
Yes it does.
It means several things, including (in context) "large wooden box," "large cardboard box," occasionally a "large travel chest," and in some latin countries, "drawers," as in a chest of.
Basically, the state's lawyers didn't even need to go to the matter of standing.
The fine, by the way, wasn't for using e-verify (although that may have been an illegal use), but for filing a frivolous appeal, which the court rejected, awarding costs to the state. The $13,000 is basically for two lawyers billing a total of 52 hours.
No need to. There is already one posted here. It’s the same one that was sent to my FB account.
I've shown you up-thread, that the judge acknowledge the plaintiff had standing. Her complaint was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction:
2. I conclude that this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. The primacy of congress to resolve issues of a candidates qualifications to serve as president is established in the U.S. Constitution
She was fined, by reading the tone of the decision, because the judge clearly doesn't like "birthers" even though the esteemed judge doesn't define what a "birther" is:
The birther movement has been a subplot on the fringe of the political spectrum in the U.S. for about five years.
I began this explanation of my decision with some history of the birther movement, and I conclude with some more history.
Let's not get silly here.
No part of the Bill of Rights (which themselves are Amendments) or any part of the original ratified Constitution can be amended by Executive Order.
Thanks for the link to that decision. I would like this prick of a judge to tell me how the Constitution gives the responsibility for Congress to determine eligibility of a President elect in the instance where there are no legally-determined birth facts and HI state law says that the birth record that’s been presented must have its probative (legal evidentiary) value determined when it is presented as evidence to a JUDICIAL OR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL OR BODY. Congress is legislative; there is no way it can lawfully determine the probative value of Obama’s non-valid Hawaii birth certificate. How, then, could Congress resolve this eligibility issue, since he specifically claims that the Constitution does not allow the courts to deal with Presidential eligibility.
(And how the HECK does he get away with blowing off the 20th Amendment, which says that a President elect (who can’t even be a President elect until Congress is all done with what the Constitution allows them to do with Presidential elections) can still fail to qualify before Jan. 20th? Who has the power to act on Presidential qualification once Congress has done their part - if not the courts? Sheesh. This guy is a MORON!)
Furthermore, the Congressional Research Service rightly noted in its advisory opinions to members of Congress that Presidential elections are run by the STATES according to the Constitution. That is the reason that Congress has ducked out of doing anything on this issue for the past 4 years. This judge contradicts the CRS, so maybe he should give his reasons as to why the CRS is just a bunch of internet “flakes”.
Furthermore, this judge should be sued for libel, presuming to say that Jordan filed this lawsuit just to add to the internet “noise”.
Abuse of power under color of authority is the short version.
A neverending list of abuses, usurpations and fraudulent taxes and illegal laws(not one cent more in taxes.)
The fact that Congress and state governments fail to challenge something does not make it Constitutional.
Legal and Constitutional are not interchangeable.
Every working, non governmental working American has standing.
I fail to find, in that article, the specific reason for the fine. When a legal matter is brought before a court, and it lacks standing, it is merely rejected. If fines were legal, no legal procedures would ever proceed, given large enough fines.
Justice has a blindfold and scales, but no pockets.
Uh, Michael Corleone is Eyetalian!
I would say fake (even though I believe it’s accurate). The picture is too nice for a quick-shot ID card.
I also believe that things like this are being released by the Administration itself, so that they can be discredited later on.
Geez, talk about silly.
Actually, Cajones does mean something in Spanish. Un cajon is a wooden box, often used as a percussion instrument.
It looks to be as original as obiOne's layered birth certificate.
I went to a much smaller school than Columbia. We had the digital ID with Bar Code by 1981. Not sure when it started.
And also a percussion instrument used in flamenco and in Afro Caribbean music.
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.