Posted on 12/29/2008 8:34:26 PM PST by STARWISE
In what appears to be a strange twist, Phil Berg’s injunction, which asked the SCOTUS to stay the Electoral College Vote on December 15 or stay the counting of the votes on January 8, has been scheduled for a SCOTUS conference on Friday, January 16. This is in addition to the SCOTUS conference scheduled for January 9, which will take up Berg’s petition for certiorari.
It is difficult to determine what is going on in the minds of the Justices. Berg thinks that his certiorari petition may have been scheduled for conference after the Electoral College votes are actually counted because it is not until after the votes are counted that Obama is officially the President-Elect.
There are several theories flying around concerning the January 16 injunction conference. Jeff Berg at America ’s Right thinks that allowing a moot proceeding to be heard could be a tactic to prevent other such proceedings to come before the court.
On the other hand, Tom Waite, writing at Berg’s website, believes that the SCOTUS has very cleverly scheduled the petition for certiorari after the counting of the Electoral College votes because Berg will have standing at that point. Waite feels that the scheduling of the second conference on January 16 is a very clever way of boxing Obama in.
He likens it to a game of chess. If Obama does not produce the requested documentation on the 9th, then the SCOTUS can retroactively cancel the results of theElectoral College.
To add further intrigue to the situation, Obama is vacationing in Hawaii , where his friend and advisor, Valerie Jarrett, will be meeting with the governor.
And Rahm Emanuel, his chief of staff, is said to be vacationing in Africa with no word on where. Would it be a surprise to find him in Kenya , where Obama’s family has been silenced and where there very possibly is another birth certificate?
This is reading like a soap opera folks. Pass the popcorn, please.
http://www.americasright.com/
http://www.obamacrimes.com/
###
Over at Obama Crimes.com, I was reading through the last few pages of comments (there are over 7,000!!) and wanted to share the following ones so that readers will be up to date on what is happening over at the Supreme Court re: the Berg vs. Obama case. If the commenter is correct in what he has written, we might just see justice in this case, after all!
Ok—Now I see the big picture! Part 1 written by Tom Waite, December 24, 2008
In my previous analysis of the Berg v. Obama Supreme Court case, I said that the Supreme Court Justices were very sly by scheduling a January 9th conference date in order to discuss Berg’s Writ of Certiorari. Because just one day earlier, congress is to open up the Electoral College’s sealed votes from each state, count the votes and declare a presidential winner.
But now there is a new development, which seems very perplexing at first but I believe I can shed light on this news and reinterpret it as a sign of political chess.
The new development is that on December 18, 2008 Berg filed an injunction (to stay the congressional electoral vote count on January 8, 2009 until Barack Obama proves his qualifications, i.e. that he was born in U.S.A.) and he submitted it to Justice Antonin Scalia.
Now the very perplexing news is that this injunction has been granted a conference date of January 16, 2009! I know—you’re all rubbing your eyes in disbelief and also when you put into context that the inauguration is on the 20th of January, I have no doubt that you’re saying, what the F...?
Whenever I try to type a website on my comments, I never get posted on this blog, so I’ll creatively refer you to the following website, type in three ‘W’s’ and then a dot and then type ‘americasright’ then a dot and finally type ‘com’.
Read the story ‘Berg’s Application for Injunction Curiously Moves On at Supreme Court’ under Tuesday, December 23, 2008. Jeff Schreiber (the person running this blog), is a law student and he can’t fathom the reasoning behind the Supreme Court’s decision to set a date to discuss Berg’s injunction that is well after the time congress will have counted the Electoral College’s votes.
In doing so, Jeff feels this conference on January 16, 2009 to discuss Berg’s injunction will be a moot issue.
However, I see it differently, the Justices of the Supreme Court aren’t sequestered in some castle. The Justices know exactly what the issues are and are constantly being bombarded with similar legal applications to be considered regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility for president.
As I’ve mentioned in a previous post, if the Justices wanted to dismiss Berg’s Writ of Certiorari they could have but they deliberately chose to discuss it 24 hours after congress officially counts the Electoral College’s votes; reason being Berg’s issue of standing will now be valid!
Once Obama official wins the national vote (via the counting of Electoral College’s votes), Berg’s issue of harm being done to him by Obama now becomes legally valid it is no longer theoretical; thus Berg does have legal standing!
~~Speculations, tribulations, whatisgoingon ... PING!
I would like very much to believe that the theory of the SCOTUS deliberately scheduling this conference is to actually set things up so that Berg has standing.
But on the 16th of January? FOUR freakin’ days before Comrade 0bama is supposed to take the Oath of Office?
Picture this: the SCOTUS announces that due to either:
a.) the data contained on 0bama’s original ‘vault’ copy of his birth certificate held under seal by the Governor of Hawaii establishes that he is NOT ‘natural born’ and is ineligible to serve as POTUS,
or
b.) due to 0bama’s failure to produce documentation establishing that he is ‘natural born’, that he cannot take the Oath of Office as provided for under the Constitution.
The 0bamunists will be rioting in the streets from coast to coast. Believe that. It’ll make the riots of ‘68 following the assassination of MLK look like a Sunday School picnic.
Very interesting plot thickner Ping
"There are several theories flying around ...This is reading like a soap opera folks.
I know ... it sounds too wacky tinfoilish, yet ....
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
I have previously stated that the proper time to test the 'qualifications' of the President-elect is after he becomes the President-elect and before 'the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President.' Obama doesn't become President-elect until the EVs are actually counted, fancy podiums notwithstanding. Up to then he is merely the President-presumptive or some such. Hopefully, this is what the Court has in mind. I don't agree with the specifics of Berg's suit, but if it gets the SC to examine the situation and define a remedy, I won't complain.
There is an interesting comment in the feedback at your link, asserting that only 140 to 150 electoral votes had been received/submitted/whatever the proper term would be, as of the “deadline” of December 24, and that such “lateness” is a rather exceptional thing.
Can anyone shed further light upon this contention?
Thanks, Oorang.
Ping.
Here is a possible scenario:
Barak Obama comes out on January 9th after the Electoral College votes are counted in Congress says he found out he was born in Kenya. No one could blame the man for not knowing precisely where he was born. Although I was present at the time, I do not recall my birth and no one expects that Barak Obama does either. So, he just says he “discovered” was born in Kenya.
Then, according to the 20th Amendment, the “President elect shall have failed to qualify” and “the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified.” Joe Biden is set to be sworn in as acting President.
But wait!
Congress swings into ACTION!!! Hoo-rah. They immediately vote by 2/3rds majority to amend the Constitution and repeal the requirement that the President be a “natural born citizen” (something the leftist & RINO elites have been wanting to do for years). The state legislatures are called into immediate emergency sessions by their Governors and 3/5’s of them ratify the amendment.
All of this is done before January 20th and Barak Obama becomes the President, right on time. Mighty Mouse has saved the day.
Are you laughing? I give this more than a slight chance of actually happening.
No cause for concern, mk. The US Constitution is a “living, breathing instrument” (haven’t you heard?) and the justices interpret it to mean what they think it means—something like the Mad Hatter in “Alice in Wonderland”: `When I use a word it means exactly what I intend it to mean, and nothing more.’.
Even if Article Two requires that the US president be a “natural born citizen” by that method of prudent construction no one is made cranky by the application of its literal terms.
So in other words Dice, it’s gonna come up snake eyes, right?
oops, ROSWELL, not ‘rosewell’, but does anyone really care?
Many thanks for the update, LucyT.
Save the Constitution Ping.
American citizens evidently have no right to know if Obama has a long form birth certificate, was adopted in Indonesia and renounced his American citizenship, traveled on a foreign passport, registered for the draft, or applied to college a a foreign citizen. Somehow I think our Founding Father would feel differently.
If Congress amends, then don’t 3 forths have to ratify, and if so it cannot apply to this election, but a future one.
So we will have an OBambi vs. Arnie showdown in 2012?
Where is the vault birth certificate stored? In Honolulu, on Oahu? I do hope no burglary or mischief took place under cover of darkness. I do hope that Lingle saw to it that duplicates were made and safely stored just in case such mischief was planned.
Funny thing, Obama seemed to be just fine having his expensive vacation home in the dark.
http://www.kitv.com/news/18366981/detail.html
"HONOLULU -- Meanwhile, city officials said power was restored to President-elect Barack Obama's Kailua beach vacation compound before 7 a.m. on Saturday.
"The $9 million estate was cloaked in darkness on Friday night, just as everyone else. You could just see some flashlights around the compound.
"Three generators had already been installed in the vacation home and HECO set up another generator in the neighborhood in case it was needed, Mayor Mufi Hannemann said." [...]
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.