The Concept of Standing Used by Attorneys and Judges is a Canard

Multiple nationwide lawsuits against Obama citing his ineligibility were dismissed because of lack of standing. None were dismissed by judges who heard, understood or read the charges and evidence against Obama. With the thump of their gavels, they refused to uphold their oaths of office and dismissed citizen’s lawsuits questioning Obama’s right to be president under our U.S. Constitution because of their lack of standing.

It appears from the judges and attorneys who used standing as a reason to deny or dismiss lawsuits, that absolutely no one has legal standing or the right to question Obama’s qualifications to hold office. Some state that no one can take Obama to task except the Attorney General or Congress. We the People have no standing, so the complicit cowardly judges say. We can only wonder if they have all been threatened or bribed by those in the Obama administration. (Recall historically that judges were bullied or bribed during the tyrants Hitler and Stalin’s reigns, as were judges in other despotic countries. This is not a new phenomenon, but are tactics often used by totalitarian regimes. Within our own cities, i.e., Chicago are known for judges being bribed.)

You can keep on denying the obvious, but it doesn’t make you right.

First, evidence of fraud has been documented and proved in all 3 of the BCs that Obama has provided to date. You may not like the proof, but it exists. In addition, it does not trump the June 27, 2004 edition of the Sunday Standard. The Sunday Standard was an English language Sri Lankan weekly newspaper whose June 27, 2004 edition contained an article titled “Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate” described his initial run for the US Senate. This is an article that Obama has never denied. Also, there is the jacket bio on one of Obama’s first books that describe him as “born in Kenya”; again, a description that Obama has never refuted or denied. In additioin, here is but a small sampling of the articles and videos that disprove your contention that the LFBC Obama ppsted at whitehouse.gov was not fraudulent:

“Arpaio: Obama birth record ‘definitely fraudulent’

Critics: Obama’s Latest Long-Form Birth Certificate Is a Fake …Update: More Expert Opinion
Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, April 27, 2011

WND Exclusive
From A to Z: What’s wrong with Obama’s birth certificate?
Examine for yourself mounting evidence that president’s document isn’t genuine
Published: 05/13/2011
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2011/05/296881/#ZqHQOEPiJ0pPX5Of.99

President Barack Obama Posted A Fraudulent Birth Certificate On The White House Blog
Conclusive proof that the President’s long-form birth certificate is a fake

Howard Coble Congress, Obama birth certificate fraudulent, Major General Paul Vallely, 10 CIA Agents say Obama birth certificate forgery

Obama Fraudulent Certificate of Live Birth
July 5 , 2011

April 12, 2012
Do-It-Yourself Proof of the Obama Birth Certificate Fraud
By Giuseppe Gori

FreeRepublic
Obama Birth Certificate Fraud — video
self ^ | 04/27/2011 | self Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 3:13:11 PM by Two Kids’ Dad
I know this has been posted before but here’s my video on the fake long-form released earlier today. Feel free to share if you’d like.”

Secondly, I didn’t say that a court has ever overturned an election on the basis that someone didn’t like the outcome, I said that that is what drives the initial court challenge to be filed. There is always a legal reason listed as the cause of the action but, the initial driver is because the plaintiff didn’t like the outcome. If you’re going to misquote me, at least try to misquote me correctly.

And, yes, there have been a number of hearings held about a whole lot of things. But very few of them have had to do with Obama’s eligibility. Obama hasn’t necessarily won these hearings, the judge either denied the plaintiff’s standing to bring the action, or didn’t allow the plaintiff to fully present their evidence before denying their standing in the matter. And, please, don’t put words in my mouth. I said NOTHING about corrupt judges. I said that the issue is a political hot potato for them.

And, because of the political implications, so far, no DA or AG is willing to take a criminal case to court. They are well of the Chicago thugocracy tactics that Obama and his staffers and advisors employ and are not willing to walk through that particular section of h$ll . . . . . even in the name of justice. It isn’t that they don’t agree with the facts that have been proven, they aren’t willing to risk their careers, their lives or their families.

Those things don’t make Obama right and they don’t make the “birthers” wrong. They just equate to a stalemate . . . . . . for now.

A) I didn’t say that there is a conspiracy afoot with very DS and the Congress, etc. What I am doing is giving them the benefit of the doubt because, for the Congress, at least, after the Clinton impeachment that went nowhere because of partisan lines, n Obama impeachment would be nothing more than a replay.

B) You may dismiss the Sri Lankan paper if you please, but what about the bio on one of his books? What about Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s examination of the fraudulent LFBC? What about the grandmother who claimed she witnessed Obama’s birth in Kenya, then mysteriously “died” before his first inauguration? What about the Kenyan Foreign Minister who said that “Kenya is proud that a native son was elected President of the U.S.?

You can call me a nut and insane and all the rest of those things. You’re only proving that you don’t want to see what is right in front of you. I have provided overwhelming evidence from a variety sources that support my contention. You have provided a lot of hot air.

Say “hello” to the other ostriches with THEIR heads buried in the sand beside you.

""""It isn’t possible to argue with a true conspiracy nut......."""

When you resort to name calling, you substantially diminish your position. However, let me take an opportunity..... I think I can speak for most of us "birthers" in that we are very ready to admit that we have been wrong and are even willing to suffer the humiliation of being labeled conspiracy nuts into perpetuity, IF Obama would simply release documents that you and I have presented, without objection, several times in our lives...... To quote another eloquent poster. "After all for such an important position as the president of the most powerful nation in the world, surely a detailed resume is in order."

Can you disagree with that? Maybe.... I think you disagree with almost everything we say.

Actually, in the end I predict you and others like you will assume the title of ""conspiratorial nuts"" WHY?... Because you and others are faithful followers in the "Church of Obama" You believe things are true based on faith alone. All relevant documents that could easily prove us wrong, have been SEALED or forged.

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.