Posted on 09/25/2008 4:32:09 AM PDT by Revski
DEFENDANT DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEES AND DEFENDANT SENATOR BARACK OBAMAS MOTION TO DISMISS Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), defendants Democratic National Committee and Senator Barack Obama respectfully move the Court for an order dismissing the Complaint on the grounds that this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the claim asserted and that the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1, accompanying this Motion is a Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss and a proposed Order.
The Motion has not been Granted by the Court.
http://www.flds.ws/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/obama-motion-to-dismiss.pdf
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
One would think when you file for President you would need to provide it.
That would be the easiest thing to do. Kinda makes one think that there is a problem.
Can you imagine if there was even a hint that Palin was born in Canada? Every show and paper would be pounding relentlessly.
Maybe people should start that rumor to see how the MSM would handle it :-)
What is it with the democcrats and documentation? They won’t show their thesis, military records, or birth certificates. Are we supposed to take them at their word?
Can one or more states refuse to put him on their ballots? Based on failure to produce a birth cert.
Now that would start a $h!tstorm for sure.I would love to see that happen.
Faced with the lawsuit, the Obama camp had 2 options:
1. Produce the required documentation establishing and proving that Obama is a “natural born” citizen, and that his citizenship was never relinquished and/or was re-established after he had moved with his mother to Indonesia. Doing so would put this issue to rest in Pennsylvania, plus all of the other states and jurisdictions where this is being monitored; or ...
2. File motions, obfuscate, advance obscure legal theories, push for dismissal, etc.
If the facts were on your side, which would you do?
why number 2 of course.
Exactly. Just send all the lawyers home and show us the paper.
If this court has no jurisdiction, then who does? If we have a rule, someone must be able to enforce it.
What a bunch of weasels.
Please take note, from our argument earlier that they did NOT claim that Berg did not have standing to bring the law suit. Though, I have to admit that the standing argument is better than trying to say the federal court has no subject matter jurisdiction!? If the federal court has no subject matter jurisdiction than who does?
Not stating a claim upon which relief can be granted is a boilerplate affirmative defense. I think this is also a nothing argument. Quite frankly I’m shocked that they have not presented proof to the other side.
But since Nobama is doing as well as he is in the polls, one has to wonder if Berg will withdraw the suit. He is a Democrat.
“What is it with the democcrats and documentation?”
Documentation just leads to things like ‘evidence’, and ‘proof’, and can end up leading to jail.
” They won’t show their thesis, military records, or birth certificates.”
Man, those are just the window-dressing on the establishment. They are the way the MAN keeps us down. Up with the people, man, up with the people.
That’s been the plan for 150 years. So why is everybody asking questions now?
“why number 2 of course.”
Obama is a big pile of number 2.
The Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction?
Why, because the Court might be smarter than what Obama thinks of the general public? Who WAS provided with Obama’s “birth certificate” via Kos?
Apparently, Obama thinks this is just another case of “no controlling legal authority”.
When did Bush and Kerry and Gore produce their's?
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.