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

Skip to comments.

Judge savagely ridicules Orly Taitz in Jan 3rd hearing.
American Resistance Party ^ | 1-3-2013 | Edward C. Noonan

Posted on 01/04/2013 1:34:11 AM PST by ednoonan7

For Immediate Release Jan 3, 2013: Federal Judge England's "non-stop ridicule" of Attorney Orly Taitz offended Courtroom Visitors!

By Plaintiff: Edward C. Noonan

There is only one term that can describe Sacramento’s Chief Federal Judge Morrison C. England Jr. And that term is a Cesspool bottom-feeder. I have nothing but contempt for this unprofessional pig.

I sat at the Plaintiff’s table with Orly Taitz and I was filled with outrage at the way this scum-bag was treating my attorney. And, of course, while he was ridiculing my attorney, he was likewise ridiculing me.

At the beginning, anyone with at least two brain cells in their head, could tell that England was bent on making the hearing a mockery of justice and had no impartiality in the matter before him...NONE! He declared that OBAMA WAS THE PRESIDENT AND THE MATTER HAD ALREADY BEEN CERTIFIED BY THE HAWAIIAN HEALTH DIRECTOR. Orly tried to tell him that this so-called "birth certificate" had been proven to be a forgery and Sheriff Apario had declared the document to be fraudulent, but England did not want any facts to be presented to him…he already had his mind made up.

He chided Orly for being sanctioned by other courts throughout the United States. He acted as if all of Orly's cases had been given a fair hearing and the cases were lost by poor evidence and poor witnesses. Orly told the scumbag judge that not a single judge in the United States had given her an honest chance for DISCOVERY and a fair hearing.

But at least it was easy to tell when England was lying! Whenever his lips moved and words came out of his mouth it was ANOTHER LIE! Not a single word he said had the slightest appearance of truth. For instance, he rebuked Orly for not giving the Federal government “proper service.” But Orly was slapped down when she attempted to testify that a private process service had provided the service (for $500). He did not want to hear any of our challenges concerning the illegal alien, SOETORO. It was his firm desire to ignore all the crimes concerning Soetoro’s bogus and felonious birth certificate, selective service registration and bogus social security number(s). England wanted to shut his eyes to these reports of crimes and refused hear any of Orly’s charges of these felonies being committed by the illegal alien scum-bag in the White House. England happily became a conspirator of the crimes of Soetoro and likewise became a collaborator in the felonys of the law-breaker-in-chief.

England offended me every time words came out of his lying mouth, and I continuously sat shaking my head directly at him showing him I did not agree with him. I was hoping he would address me so I could give him a piece of my mind but he was too much of a chicken poop to confront me as a plaintiff. The Federal Marshals were more concerned at my silent angry body-language as I glared at this ridiculing bozo on the bench.

The Sacramento Bee gave a somewhat accurate hearsay version of the court proceedings. You can read their leftist version at: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/01/03/5091099/orly-taitzs-obama-birther-claims.html#storylink=cpy

The Bee version got it somewhat correct and that is concerning the dissatisfaction of most of the packed crowd in the courtroom. They report, "The reaction from courtroom watchers was unmistakable. "Mockery," one man shouted as he stormed out, followed by another who was holding his nose.

"That really stinks," he proclaimed.

The Federal Marshals were visibly concerned and scared of a possible riot of the crowd and quickly ordered all 70-80 of us out of the courtroom (after the cesspool judge denied the TRO.) So we all retired out into the hallway and then while we were clapping for Orly for the fantastic job she did in the slug fest with this corrupt Federal Judge, the Marshals ordered us out of the building. They said we were to remove ourselves to the outside of the building - - implying that we were not welcome in their FEDERAL COURT BUILDING.

I wonder what career promises were made to England in exchange for the circus he provided today? I am sure England’s bank account will soon show an increase and Soetoro (aka BHO) will forever be in his debt.

Plaintiff: Edward C. Noonan Founder - National Committee Chairman American Resistance Party

Sacramento Bee photo

Some other LEFTIST 1/3/13 writeups:

http://www.lodinews.com/ap/state/article_49be0d7e-560a-11e2-914f-0017a4aa4fba.html

http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2013/jan/03/judge-rejects-birther-challenge-to-electoral-count/

http://www.vcstar.com/news/2013/jan/03/judge-rejects-birther-challenge-to-electoral/?print=1


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: afterbirfturds; birferbutthurt; eligibility; naturalborncitizen; nwo; whackamole
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-187 next last
To: suijuris
If Obama's father was in fact Barrak Sr. as Barry claims, then Barry is definitely NOT a natural born citizen.

Should an important constitutional issue be decided on the basis of what a candidate says somebody else told him, particularly when it concerns an event (conception) to which he could not have been a witness? If his status as a natural born citizen is dependent upon the identity of his father, shouldn't a court require proof of paternity before deciding the NBC issue?

What should happen in a case where paternity is unknown or impossible to prove?

101 posted on 01/04/2013 9:14:05 AM PST by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: the anti-mahdi

the law does not recognize this third form of citizen. It only recognizes two. Naturalized and those born in the united states (regardless of parents).

The immigration law has changed substantially since the foundings. States no longer control. In the 1930’s limitations were put in place.

Subsequent reforms have even limited claims of birthright citizenship to “must live in the USA (military and territories count) for 10 continous years BEFORE the child is born”. The reason Taitz is a joke is because she continues to screw up basic law. It is similar to anti-second amendment types who focus on the “militia” language rather than the actual law/language/constitution.

If a third form of citizenship needs to be created, then create it by operation of the law.

sources http://www.uscis.gov


102 posted on 01/04/2013 9:23:38 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: ednoonan7
For the "at least she's doing something" crowd.

This is our genius legislators "doing something"...

It's called unintended consequences, and no matter Orly's intentions, she's a traveling circus clown doing absolutely nothing to advance conservatism.

And those of us without birther myopia can plainly see that she's leaving a trail of legal precedence cementing the Prez as NBC.

103 posted on 01/04/2013 9:31:44 AM PST by Tex-Con-Man (<-------currently working through post-election anger issues.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

Orly Taitz is an incompetent attention whore who couldn’t properly interpret the law if the Founding Fathers explained it to her in Russian.


104 posted on 01/04/2013 9:43:08 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: palmer; Godebert
In a nutshell you mistakenly changed "or" to "and". A NBC is a person born on US soil or born to two citizen parents.

Absolutely incorrect. Those born overseas to two citizen parents are citizens by statute but are not necessarily natural born citizens under the Constitution and therefore eligible to the presidency. The courts have never ruled on the matter. So says the State Department's Foreign Affairs manual.

105 posted on 01/04/2013 10:03:22 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
Occam's razor suggests #1, but I suppose Occam was in on the conspiracy too, huh?

Depends on just what is the real conspiracy. It makes sense to me that his father was in fact Marshall Davis, but Barry has been telling everyone for years that Barrack Sr. was his father. That would make Barry a natural born citizen and disgusting liar for political gain. It would explain the expartaie meeting with the supreme court prior to his swearing in 2009 and the reason no other courts will touch the legitimate questions being raised. Also, there are some very real problems with his birth certificate, draft registration etc., etc.

Under those circumstances I can agree with your Occam's razor comment. However, natural born or not, something stinks!

Of course it also brings up a whole set of other issues such as who funded his education? Why are his transcripts withheld from the public? Is he a communist like his father Marshall Davis, etc?

106 posted on 01/04/2013 11:17:17 AM PST by suijuris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: ednoonan7

Whatever happened to the stuff Sheriff Arpaio was to release around Dec 15?


107 posted on 01/04/2013 12:19:42 PM PST by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ednoonan7
Your post of much interest to me, although being a non-citizen. I remember much about Kenya from the 1950's, while living in England. A lot of work to be done yet on the status of a child born of a British subject in the United States. Perhaps it has, if so I stand corrected.

A judge surely should deal with the facts presented and not the personality of the presenter. That being said (love that phrase), This whole business often smacks of the old saw of simply:

Kill the messenger

Orly may take em' down yet.

108 posted on 01/04/2013 12:28:13 PM PST by Peter Libra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: suijuris
However, natural born or not, something stinks!

Maybe you're right, but there's no need to go digging into secrets to find things that stink about Obama. His disastrous policies are no secret -- what's the point of revealing his college transcripts?

So what if his father was Marshall Davis? What was this supposed to tell us about "the real Obama" that we didn't see in four years of presidency? It made sense in 2008 to frame Obama as some kind of unknown figure, but by 2012, he was a well-known public figure. In fact, for me, one of the most stunning things about 2012 is that the nation did know Barack Obama and they still re-elected him. I think a lot of us are still stunned by that.

109 posted on 01/04/2013 12:29:06 PM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Tex-Con-Man

Mr. (or Ms.) Con-man... Could this be said of you as well, that you’re “a traveling circus clown doing absolutely nothing to advance conservatism?” Please explain what you have done today to promote Conservatism today?


110 posted on 01/04/2013 12:53:57 PM PST by ednoonan7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: exit82

Hey, E. Thank you for your good wishes. A Happy New Year to you also.

I am sorry for my late reply. I just seem to have all my energy drained out of me with all the awful things that are happening in our USA. I am sure many of you good people who live in the U.S. feel the same way. I don’t think a few boxes of Girl Scout Cookies right now could make me feel better…At least not for long.

“I no longer wonder how Germany tolerated the rise of Hitler 80 years ago.

“What is worse in our case, is the Germans had no Hitler example previously to learn from—so what is our excuse?”

You are so correct! I don’t understand it either.

Panama got rid of its Hitler back in ’89 with the help of the U.S.

By the way, Noriega is more dead than alive in a jail in Panama. He will be joining Chavez and Fidel soon. Noriega has had at least a couple good strokes.

Anyway, I am thankful everything is going great in Panama. I have no complaints.

For the last 3 days, dry season is beginning to settle in. The season lasts for about 3 months. There will be some rare rains but not often. The grass will be turning brown soon until the rains start up again. With the exceptions for gardens it is not customary or encouraged to water lawns. Therefore, they will remain brown until the first rains. Within the first 36 hours or before, when the first rains begin, the lawns will start to turn green again.

I love rainy season.

Take care of yourself. Be on the alert.


111 posted on 01/04/2013 2:00:34 PM PST by Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer) (uuue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)

Thanks for your note ,M, it cheered me up some.

Glad you are doing well down Panama way.

Make room—you may some boarders soon. LOL!


112 posted on 01/04/2013 2:26:10 PM PST by exit82 ("The Taliban is on the inside of the building" E. Nordstrom 10-10-12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All; suijuris; Tau Food

Apparently MKIA simply does not know much of anything since he repeats the dem/lib talking points verbatim.

No, Biden would not become president nor any other cabinet members nor Reid nor Pelosi since they all have a hann d in this fraud. NBC is a unique requirement only for us pres/vp whereby either born here when us constitution ratified OR both parents are US citizens at time of birth.

No, I’m not holding my breath that this fraud will be exposed any time soon nor his most likely use of foriegn/minority status to attend prestigious universities.

If one does not listen to both sides of an argument, is it not like the sound of one hand clapping?


113 posted on 01/04/2013 2:38:52 PM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

More difficult than you think.
A US citizen is not necessarily a natural citizen. They are distinct categories of citizenship.
If one is born to a US citizen over the age of consent one is an American citizen. If both parents are over the age of consent and are US citizens the baby is a natural born citizen. Only a natural born citizen, the child of US citizen parents, is able to hold the office of POTUS.
Since one is not considered a citizen until reaching the age of consent it is not possible to transfer citizenship to a child. That is, one must first be a citizen by virtue of reaching at least the legal age of consent to transfer citizenship to one’s offspring. Obama’s mother was a child in the eyes of the law and thus the victim of statutory rape when O was conceived. O is not a legal US citizen either by birth or by place of birth. Much of this is, of course, lost on the legal system.
If you really want to play with the big boys learn to swim in the deep water.


114 posted on 01/04/2013 2:55:27 PM PST by Louis Foxwell (Better the devil we can destroy than the Judas we must tolerate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: ednoonan7
Mr. (or Ms.) Con-man...

Seriously? "Man" too subtle a hint for ya'?

Could this be said of you as well, that you’re “a traveling circus clown doing absolutely nothing to advance conservatism?”

Nope.

Please explain what you have done today to promote Conservatism today?

NOT flying around the country pretending to be a civil rights attorney, comparing myself to Thurgood Marshall, and then blaming a massive conspiracy when it turns out I'm just a crazy cat lady dentist/monumentally incompetent lawyer.

115 posted on 01/04/2013 4:10:43 PM PST by Tex-Con-Man (<-------currently working through post-election anger issues.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food; Las Vegas Ron
I'm not defending Obama. I'm defending the integrity of what is considered part of the "conservative movement." I think we have enough red meat on taxes, pro-life and liberty. We don't need to put fealty to crackpot conspiracy theories on the list. It makes us lose credibility.

Which means we are a usurped country, and no judges or Congressmen or Senators want to touch it either. We are in uncharted territory where the rule of law means not one damned thing. There is a remedy which no one would choose; but it will happen eventually if none of the prostitutes - ahem, I mean politicians and judges, do anything to remedy the lawless regime.

116 posted on 01/04/2013 4:29:48 PM PST by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory; the anti-mahdi
"the law does not recognize this third form of citizen."

Wrong.

Even Barry's State Department recognizes "native-born," "natural-born" and "naturalized" citizens. All three are citizens, but all three are distinct types of citizens, mentioned separately.

Interpretation 324.2 Reacquisition of citizenship lost by marriage.

....

(3) Nationality Act of 1940; Immigration and Nationality Act . (i) Applicability . The 1936 statute, as amended, was repealed by the Nationality Act of October 14, 1940, which, in turn, was superseded by the current statute; however citizenship restored under the 1936 Act, and the right to take the oath of allegiance thereunder before a naturalization court [edit: a naturalized citizen], were not affected by the later enactments. 37/

Moreover, there were included in section 317(b) of the Nationality Act of 1940, and in current section 324 almost identical provisions providing for the restoration of citizenship to women who would have been repatriated by the 1936 Act, as amended, had their marriages terminated prior to January 13, 1941, or, lacking that factor, had maintained continuous United States residence since that date of the marriage.

Termination of the marriage to an alien continued to be a requirement of the Nationality Act of 1940 and the present law but, under both statutes, the event must have occurred on or after January 13, 1941.

The repatriation provisions of these two most recent enactments also apply to a native- and natural-born citizen woman who expatriated herself by marriage to an alien racially ineligible to citizenship, a category of expatriate not covered by the earlier 1936 legislation.

...

The words "shall be deemed to be a citizen of the United States to the same extent as though her marriage to said alien had taken place on or after September 22, 1922", as they appeared in the 1936 and 1940 statutes, are prospective and restore the status of native-born or natural-born citizen (whichever existed prior to the loss) as of the date citizenship was reacquired.

...

The effect of naturalization under the above statutes was not to erase the previous period of alienage, but to restore the person to the status if naturalized, native, or natural-born citizen, as determined by her status prior to loss

http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45077/0-0-0-48575.html
117 posted on 01/04/2013 4:34:34 PM PST by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Hi lj!

Happy New Year FRiend!


118 posted on 01/04/2013 4:47:38 PM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Medicine is the keystone in the arch of socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: ednoonan7

What this whole fiasco needs is:
1. A plan
2. Organization
3. Responsible, dedicated, competent, interactive, collaborative supporting membership.
Then “DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME”!!!!!!!


119 posted on 01/04/2013 4:56:08 PM PST by Huskerfan44 (Huskerfan44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BrandtMichaels

I have only one talking point: Barack Hussein Obama has already been president for one term and will be sworn in for another term in about 6 weeks.

This is a fact.

Now, the allegation is that this fact is due to a huge fraud perpetrated by... who, exactly? The Illuminati? Space aliens? It’s the Cylons, isn’t it!

It must be someone really powerful because not even Mitt Romney will hire a lawyer to expose this supposedly obvious fraud. Did Romney run out of money? Is the Illuminati holding Anne hostage? Was Tagg revealing too much when he said he dad didn’t really want to be president? If it’s that easy to prove that BHO isn’t eligible to be president then Romney would give it a shot.

Am I supposed to believe that he’s in on the conspiracy, or is it that he can’t afford a lawyer to pursue the case? Maybe we could solicit donations.

There were nearly a dozen Republican candidates running at the start of 2012 and not a single one of them pursued this. Why?

I all seriousness, I would LOVE to hear the answer to any of these questions.


120 posted on 01/04/2013 4:57:03 PM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
Since one is not considered a citizen until reaching the age of consent it is not possible to transfer citizenship to a child.

Dude, someone pulled that out of their backside. People under the "age of consent" (whatever that is) have citizenship. If they have a parent who is an American, they have American citizenship. Period.

121 posted on 01/04/2013 5:00:28 PM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
I'm not defending Obama. I'm defending the integrity of what is considered part of the "conservative movement." I think we have enough red meat on taxes, pro-life and liberty. We don't need to put fealty to crackpot conspiracy theories on the list. It makes us lose credibility.

I couldn't agree more.

Orly has shown that she's quite content to shoot holes in the conservative movement, and the Constitution, if she might give Obama a tiny scratch in the process. I'm not.

I actually think she's a Dem plant meant to make conservatives look bad. Based on her courtroom track record , that's about the only thing she's actually capable of doing.
122 posted on 01/04/2013 5:22:22 PM PST by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

As late as 2007 Obama was claiming to be Kenyan born. Hillary was the first to ‘drop the ball’ so to speak when she saw the complicity and corruption of the msm and backed away from the chance to challenge. Amazing how you suspect so little of the Obama fraud - far surpassing that of Kerry - so what’s your opinion of the swift boat vets?

BTW ‘talking points’ represent spinning the truth - the primary weapon of msm/dem/lib prevaricators, but then I repeat myself.


123 posted on 01/04/2013 5:27:30 PM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: highball
I can't read these threads any more. My heart aches too much.

That we have a likely usurper in the White House, who forged birth documents, fails e-verify, is using another man's social security, has likely lied about graduating from Columbia, and half of the voters still continue to elect him....well...it is just too much.

It helps to be Christian knowing that those who have enabled this travesty, as well as Obama himself, will stand before the Lord is comforting.

124 posted on 01/04/2013 5:29:39 PM PST by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

View:
AGENDA
Grinding America Down
vimeo.com & / & 52009124


125 posted on 01/04/2013 5:47:50 PM PST by Huskerfan44 (Huskerfan44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: BrandtMichaels

The Swift Boat Vets were just reminding everyone of something John Kerry did to himself in public. It’s a matter of public record that he lied about what happened in Vietnam.

I doesn’t matter where Obama was born. There is no question that his mother was an American citizen. That made him an American citizen at birth, and therefore eligible for the presidency.

So Hillary “dropped the ball.” Then McCain. Then Romney? What about the RNC? What about other candidates? Why didn’t Sarah Palin get involved. Is she okay with having a “usurper” in the oval office instead of her running mate? Is Sarah in on the conspiracy, too? I noticed that your chronology of ball-dropping stopped at Hillary Clinton. Please continue and explain how every other one of Obama’s opponents passed up this golden opportunity to take him down.


126 posted on 01/04/2013 6:09:05 PM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

Again, you are shootijng with blanks. Citizenship does not exist until the age of consent.


127 posted on 01/04/2013 7:14:26 PM PST by Louis Foxwell (Better the devil we can destroy than the Judas we must tolerate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

Again, you are shooting with blanks. Citizenship does not exist until the age of consent.


128 posted on 01/04/2013 7:14:32 PM PST by Louis Foxwell (Better the devil we can destroy than the Judas we must tolerate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

I’ve been reading between the lines and finding many hidden truths on the internet since the late 1990’s. It’s really not that hard to see where the msm truths end and the lies and cover-ups begin if one just pays a little attention and applies some much needed critical thinking.

Jeesh, some sheeple just never read, listen, learn, discover, share, inquire nor consider - it’s like only the established authorities in the media, schools, & gov can be trusted ehh? /s

I won’t be answering anymore of your questions either since it is so apparently a dead end and closed mind...


129 posted on 01/04/2013 8:08:37 PM PST by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
I doesn’t matter where Obama was born. There is no question that his mother was an American citizen. That made him an American citizen at birth, and therefore eligible for the presidency.

This is simply incorrect. The Supreme Court recognized that those persons born to British fathers who adhered to British loyalty were natural-born subjects of Great Britain. IOW, the mother's citizenship is legally irrelevant in terms of natural citizenship. Second, the Supreme Court said you could be either British or a U.S. Citizen, by treaty, but you can't be both. Again, this is in terms of natural-born citizenship. The only thing that could make Obama a citizen is the 14th amendment, but the court said the 14th amendment DOES not define natural-born citizens. Further, statutory law places several requirements on the children born abroad of U.S. citizen mothers before the child can be recognized as a U.S. citizens. What you believe about just being born to a citizen mother simply is not true.

130 posted on 01/04/2013 8:59:03 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
"Now, the allegation is that this fact is due to a huge fraud perpetrated by... who, exactly? The Illuminati? Space aliens? It’s the Cylons, isn’t it!"

Argumentum Ad Ridiculum - Last but not least is the weapon of the loser and that is argumentum ad ridiculum or in plain English appeal to mockery and horse laugh. This of course has no intellectual value and serves only as a feel good factor for the loser.

You lose.

131 posted on 01/04/2013 10:40:23 PM PST by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
Nobody said anything about "before birth."

A baby is born. What country is it a citizen of? No country? The country of one or both parents?

If your mother was an American citizen, you were born an American citizen. Your mom didn't have to fill out any paperwork or anything. You were a citizen at the time of birth.

Seriously, this isn't difficult stuff here. ========================================================= If born abroad, Obama was not even a US citizen at birth. Why? According to the US law in effect in 1961, Obama's mother was too young to confer her US citizenship to her son. Law required that US citizen parent of a baby born abroad had to be a US resident for at least 5 years after the age of 14.

132 posted on 01/05/2013 2:00:37 AM PST by nosf40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue; nosf40; edge919; BrandtMichaels
Smokeyblue: You lose.

In the make-believe world with citizenship laws that don't exist and Supreme Court rulings that never happened, I lose.

In the real world, where people actually have to prove things, Obama is still president.

None of you guys can explain why the RNC or any other prominent Republican will launch a serious challenge on this slum-dunk winning issue. Mitt Romney just spent half a billion dollars trying to win the presidency. Please explain why he doesn't have a team of the best conservative lawyers in the country in Washington right now fighting to prove he lost due to fraud.

OK, maybe Romney's a big loser, but what about Sarah Palin? Again: Sarah Palin has built her career taking on corruption, even when it wasn't what the GOP-e wanted her to do. This is a woman who would have been VP is it weren't for Obama's supposed fraudulent presidency. She might even be president now. Despite so much on the line both personally and patriotically, Sarah Palin hasn't even lifted a finger. Is she a big loser, too? Come on guys, clear this up for me, since you're so full of information.

Silence is consent, guys. The deafening silence on this issue means, "Yeah, OK, we accept Obama as a legitimate candidate." Why? Could it possibly be because he is? If he isn't you have a lot of explaining to do.

I'm going to take your collective silence on this question (which I've repeated several times) to mean that you think Sarah Palin is in on the fraud, in which case... well... I'll keep it civil and just say I think you should be ashamed of your position.

133 posted on 01/05/2013 5:45:31 AM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
This is a woman who would have been VP is it weren't for Obama's supposed fraudulent presidency. Romney and his people backstabbing her and floating "Diva" stories right before the election.
134 posted on 01/05/2013 5:52:38 AM PST by Sirius Lee (Get your hair clippers, Patriots! The Vichy Republicans asked for it. 2014!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Sirius Lee
This is a woman who would have been VP is it weren't for Obama's supposed fraudulent presidency. Romney and his people backstabbing her and floating "Diva" stories right before the election.

Now that is believable. It also reinforces the question of why a campaign that would be willing to tear down Sarah Palin for false things wouldn't be willing to tear down Barack Obama for (supposedly) true things.

135 posted on 01/05/2013 6:41:24 AM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

Of course your arguement is non-sensical.

Just because crime X occurs and group A, B or C do nothing about it does not negate the occurence of the crime.

Falsely conflating the two issues is a distraction of YOUR own silence and support for Obama. You OWN Obama. He’s all YOURS.

But ....

Palin did drop a lot in my estimation when she said nothing about Lt. Col. Lakin being sent to prison over the issue.

RNC is a fund-raising organization for the same pigs at the same trough.

And Romney only fights conservatives.


136 posted on 01/05/2013 9:56:08 AM PST by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue
Just because crime X occurs and group A, B or C do nothing about it does not negate the occurence of the crime.

Yes, but if group A, B or C are direct victims of that crime and they don't even claim that crime X occurred, then it seriously calls into question the claim that crime X occurred.

Palin did drop a lot in my estimation when she said nothing about Lt. Col. Lakin being sent to prison over the issue.

What about when she lost an election to someone who wasn't eligible and failed to do anything about it? What's your estimation of that? My estimation is that Palin is a common-sense conservative who has no time for any of this birther nonsense. I believe that she's bright enough to understand that Obama was an eligible candidate. Apparently, you, like the MSM, think she's stupid.

OK, so you've admitted that you don't think much of Palin or Romney. I'm going to guess that you'd be equally dismissive of McCain. What about Newt Gingrich? What about Rick Santorum? Michele Bachmann? Are they are RINOs who only fight conservatives? Or have they "dropped" in your estimation, too? Who did stand up for LTC Lakin? It seems like there's more conservatives on your fecal roster than the average DUmmie.

So that's my final reason for rejecting the birther crowd: I don't want to have to smear people like Sarah Palin because they don't buy into a ridiculous conspiracy theory.

You OWN Obama. He’s all YOURS.

Is that the new rule? When you recognize that an opposition candidate is eligible you OWN him? So I I guess OWNed Clinton, too.

I gave money to conservative candidates, including members of congress who will act as a firewall to Obama's policies. I could have done more, but because I wasn't running around the country like a clown inventing ridiculous legal claims, I now OWN Obama.

Meanwhile, you're on a conservative forum, bad mouthing conservatives and sewing division. I'm not the one who has to defend his actions here.

137 posted on 01/05/2013 10:37:00 AM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All
What about when she lost an election to someone who wasn't eligible and failed to do anything about it? What's your estimation of that? My estimation is that Palin is a common-sense conservative who has no time for any of this birther nonsense. I believe that she's bright enough to understand that Obama was an eligible candidate. Apparently, you, like the MSM, think she's stupid.

Funny how you like to focus on those not involved in the crime and their lack of action instead of focusing on YOUR CRIMINAL BUDDY OBAMA and his actions.

My opinion of Palin is irrelevant and would take up too much of my time to post fully about it.

Apparently, you, like the MSM, think she's stupid.

Reductio ad absurdum

Argumentum ad ridiculum

You lose. Again.

OK, so you've admitted that you don't think much of Palin or Romney. I'm going to guess that you'd be equally dismissive of McCain. What about Newt Gingrich? What about Rick Santorum? Michele Bachmann? Are they are RINOs who only fight conservatives? Or have they "dropped" in your estimation, too? Who did stand up for LTC Lakin? It seems like there's more conservatives on your fecal roster than the average DUmmie.

Again, what groups A,B, or C do or do not do has no bearing on the fact that crime X occurred.

You spend a lot of time putting YOUR WORDS in other peoples mouths.

And yes, you deserve everything the Usurper gives you since you support him.

138 posted on 01/05/2013 11:06:26 AM PST by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
Citizenship does not exist until the age of consent.

I thought I'd read all the citizenship arguments here, but this is a new one. Are you claiming that 16-year-olds are not citizens, no matter where they were born or who their parents were? And that since they can't transfer citizenship they don't have, all the children of teenage parents in this country are not citizens? If Bristol Palin's son had been born two months earlier, he would not have been an American citizen, much less a natural born one? Do they suddenly become citizens when their parents reach the age of consent (whatever that is--does it vary by state?), or are they never citizens unless they get naturalized?

Do you have any support at all for this idea?

139 posted on 01/05/2013 11:24:27 AM PST by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel; Ed Noonan
Apparently you fellows did not get the memo.

The Hawaiian Department of Health has replaced the Supreme Court of the United States. It they to whom one must now direct appeals of any lower court decision in regard to the citizenship status of one Barack Hussein Obama Jr. (or II), or indeed candidates in general.

This is because the SCOTUS has been far too busy to concern itself with the minor legal matter of the constitutional eligibility issue in regard to Presidential Candidates.

Now in regard to this Sheriff Joe fellow: he has gone ahead and developed evidence that that the Social Security, Selective Service, and Birth records of the present WH recumbent are faulty, more than likely ... gasp ... fraudulent! Bravo and multi-kudos for this fearless chap and so what?

Sheriffs are elected county officials empowered to investigate crimes, arrest any alleged perpetrators, and remit them for trial to the local District Attorney ... and that's all folks! (Well that's all except for confiscating private property, or evicting deadbeats when so directed by higher authority.)

IOW, Sheriff Joe, praise and protect him Jesus, has the goods but nowhere to sell them and there's no one to buy them. This judge therefore ridiculed Orly because he can.

In re Orly: Observing her OJT as an Attorney has been painful indeed (and she is getting better at it) ... but that's the way it goes in 21st C America: you need a lawyer to contest the obvious ineligibilty of a gay foreigner to serve as POTUS? You go to a Dentist. Perhaps because watching the cowardice and misfeasance of the courts and elected officials is as painful as root canal sans novocaine?

It's been enough to drive a really skilled Lawyer like Mario Apuzzo back to handling DUI and Wills and Trust. It even drove the redoubtable Attorney Leo Donofrio back to rock and roll music and professional poker playing. Instead of the SCOTUS reading his masterful amicus brief to the corn pone Georgia Supreme Court, he gets to join Sheriff Joe on the "So What?" squad. BTW, do read that document:
www.scribd.com › Research › Law
cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/tag/amicus-curiae-brief/

All it would have taken to crush the Mombasa MF would have been one man (or woman) an AG in any state to merely exercise their constitutional authority and remove him from any ballot. To fight that move, if he so desired, Kid Kenya would than have to sue ... becoming the PLAINTIFF. Then, no matter what, this would have gone to the SCOTUS in a form they could not ignore ... and to the MSM in a story they could not cover up. What the hell? Apparently according to the American voting public, The Soetoro boy is just as much a natural born citizen as Marco Rubio

140 posted on 01/05/2013 11:29:21 AM PST by Kenny Bunk (Say, what the hell happened to Reggie Love? Who's in the playroom with Barry now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

Your argument here is called circular logic. “Because Obama hasn’t been challenged by politicians, then he must be legitimate.” It’s a logical fallacy. Also, this has been addressed several times, and Obama apologists ignore that it has been addressed. Politicians are politicians whether they are Republican or Democrat and some issues give the appearance of being toxic, no matter who brings it up. This is one of those issues because Obama’s supporters have made it toxic by accusing anyone of questioning Obama’s legitimacy as racist. And there are a lot of dumb Obama supporters who buy into this more than they do the idea of “free healthcare.” Politicians don’t want to lose potential voters from the other side of the political aisle. If they think an issue will lose voters for them, they will try to stay as neutral as possible on that issue. Second, they don’t want something like this to come back and bite them if they decide to run their own questionable candidate later.


141 posted on 01/05/2013 11:32:55 AM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: edge919; Mr. Know It All; butterdezillion
Why should we fight about this on FR?

The plain facts of the matter are that doubt exists:
(1) as to the constitutional eligibility of the candidate.
(2) as to the place and circumstances of his birth
(3)as to his actual identity (after all, he was removed from the Illinois Bar because of an "identity" issue, among others.)

It is a logical error to combine "Constitutional Eligibility" with "Place of Birth." Team Obama has spent many millions to make it so, but we need not believe it.

Until the SCOTUS actually spells out what a "Natural Born Citizen" is (or indeed what "citizens" are) one party's views are as valuable as another's. As a practical matter, one party is flying on AF 1 and going to Hawaii, but from a logical POV, that really doesn't change matters.

In regard to Sheriff Joe's evidence, it deserves a look, at the very least. However, he is a county official. If his own county or state won't look, that is over.

The only thing that would have worked here is if one (1) state official had reacted to the very real doubts and removed Obama from his state's ballot.

The doubt exists. That does not make the issue a "conspiracy."

142 posted on 01/05/2013 11:52:36 AM PST by Kenny Bunk (Say, what the hell happened to Reggie Love? Who's in the playroom with Barry now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

We have legal confirmation that Obama has no legally-established birth facts. There is no way that he could ever qualify without legally-established birth facts. For the first time, Obama is the one who has the legal burden of proof. We need to capitalize on that.

At this point we KNOW he doesn’t qualify; we have a legal document certifying it. If that’s not enough to get a response within the system, then the system has just acknowledged that the Constitution can never be enforced. If that is so, we have no Constitution or rule of law, and the only way to get either of those things is through extra-legal means. Is that really what the Congress-critters and courts want to tell us? They better think long and hard on that one....


143 posted on 01/05/2013 12:03:19 PM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: edge919
Politicians are politicians whether they are Republican or Democrat and some issues give the appearance of being toxic, no matter who brings it up. This is one of those issues because Obama’s supporters have made it toxic by accusing anyone of questioning Obama’s legitimacy as racist.

Let me get this straight.

Everyone knows that Obama shouldn't have been able to become president in 2008, including Sarah Palin, who would have been VP if Obama had been disqualified. After having the election stolen from her, rather than running out and hiring an army of lawyers, she sat around for four years watching an illegal president destroy the country. The reason why Governor Palin hasn't stood up for truth or justice is that she is worried about being called racist. Even she's been called much worse, and, in fact, liberals have mercilessly smeared her family and even her infant child, the threat of being called a racist is apparently enough to bully her into silence. Of course this is because she's a "politician" who is worried about "votes" even though she hasn't run for anything since 2008.

Did I miss something? Is that what I'm supposed to believe?

Here's what I'm going to continue to believe: Sarah Palin, a conservative known for being outspoken hasn't brought up the eligibility issues because it's a non-issue. While Obama's election may have been a tragedy, it wasn't a crime and she's not going to pretend it was because she understands what's going on in this country. In fact, I think she was the only potential 2012 candidate who saw a Republican defeat in the cards. Sarah Palin said that Steeleman could be McCaskill and if people had listened to her, we'd have another conservative in a Senate seat.

When asked about the issue in August, Palin suggested that Trump would use his money to settle the issue (which he did not for some reason). Her position? Obama was born in Hawaii. At no time did she suggest that Obama wasn't eligible. I tend to take her at her word. Do you?

144 posted on 01/05/2013 1:22:04 PM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical

What are the prerogatives of citizenship?
Do children have any specific rights of citizenship? They have no rights in court, no ownership rights, are not able to work, cannot open a bank account, cannot marry, cannot serve in the military and on and on. By law children are wards. They have no rights of citizenship. They are not recognized as citizens until they reach an age of consent. This varies state to state but is generally reecognized as 18.
Technically a child born of a child can never achieve citizenship because they are not born of a citizen. This hole in the law is routinely ignored as impractical. It is nevertheless the case that for the highest office in the land there should be no shadow on citizenship. Obama’s citizenship is not clouded. It is nonexistent.


145 posted on 01/05/2013 2:14:44 PM PST by Louis Foxwell (Better the devil we can destroy than the Judas we must tolerate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
Do children have any specific rights of citizenship? They have no rights in court, no ownership rights, are not able to work, cannot open a bank account, cannot marry, cannot serve in the military and on and on.

So what? That doesn't mean they're not citizens. Gay people cannot marry in most places and until recently couldn't serve in the military--that doesn't mean they aren't citizens. And what do you mean by "no ownership rights"? My son's Xbox isn't really his, even though he bought it with his own money?

Technically a child born of a child can never achieve citizenship because they are not born of a citizen.

Like I said, do you have any support in law or precedence for that idea?

146 posted on 01/05/2013 3:54:45 PM PST by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: edge919; Mr. Know It All

“doesn’t matter where Obama was born. There is no question that his mother was an American citizen.”

Edge919 is correct. Obama’s citizenship, if born in another country, would be governed by the 1952 US Nationality Act (McCarron-Walters Act).


CHAPTER 1 – NATIONALITY AT BIRTH AND BY COLLECTIVE NATURALIZATION

NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH

Sec. 301 (a) (7) A person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such a person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years;


Under this statute, Obama’s mother would have been too young to pass on citizenship. Although in this case it applies to Obama’s mother, the code actually doesn’t distingush between the sex of the parents. So a citizen father could not pass on citizenship if he didn’t meet the residency requirement

BTW this section would not apply to Senator Cruz as his mother grew up in the US and she was over the age of nineteen when he was born in Canada. So he was automatically a citizen at birth. Section 301 (a) (1) would apply to Senators Rubio and Santorum and Governor Jindal as they were all born in the US even though both parents were not citizens. They would all be considered natural born.


147 posted on 01/05/2013 4:43:11 PM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: ednoonan7

“THE MATTER HAD ALREADY BEEN CERTIFIED BY THE HAWAIIAN HEALTH DIRECTOR.”

Was he talking about the verifications sent to the different states or something else?


148 posted on 01/05/2013 4:56:55 PM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Zoltan

Thanks for the citation, but I’m aware of this law.

It doesn’t apply because Obama was born in the United States.


149 posted on 01/05/2013 5:34:28 PM PST by Mr. Know It All
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Know It All

The citation is merely to clear up the point that it does matter where Obama was born.

And I agree, he was born in Hawaii.


150 posted on 01/05/2013 7:38:24 PM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-187 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