Left to right: Robert O'Brien, Afghan Attorney General Abdul Jabar Sabit, and Judge David Carter at the Attorney General’s Office in Kabul.
Posted on 09/07/2009 6:09:15 AM PDT by Free America52
The Justice Department is urging a federal court to toss out a lawsuit in which prominent birthers' attorney Orly Taitz is challenging President Barack Obama's Constitutional qualifications to be president.
In a motion filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Santa Ana, Calif., government lawyers did not directly rebut the conspiracy theory Taitz propounds that Obama was not born in Hawaii as he claims and as asserted by Hawaiian officials as well as contemporary newspaper birth notices. Instead, the federal attorneys argued that the suit is inherently flawed because such disputes can't be resolved in court and because the dozens of plaintiffs can't show they are directly injured by Obama's presence in office.
"It is clear, from the text of the Constitution, and the relevant statutory law implementing the Constitution’s textual commitments, that challenges to the qualifications of a candidate for President can, in the first instance, be presented to the voting public before the election, and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in the Congress," Assistant United States Attorneys Roger West and David DeJute wrote. "Therefore, challenges such as those purportedly raised in this case are committed, under the Constitution, to the electors, and to the Legislative branch."
The birthers' suit claims that Obama is a citizen of Indonesia and "possibly still citizen of Kenya, usurping the position of the President of the United States of America and the Commander-in-Chief.”
Lieutenant Jason Freese and some other plaintiffs in the case claim they have a real injury because they are serving in the military commander by Obama, the alleged usurper. However, West and DeJute say that argument is too speculative.
"The injuries alleged by Plaintiff Freese and the other military Plaintiffs herein, are not particularized as to them, but, rather, would be shared by all members of the military and is an inadequate basis on which to establish standing," the government lawyers wrote.
Another plaintiff in the suit, Alan Keyes, is a three-time, longshot presidential candidate who ran most recently in 2008. Yet another is Gail Lightfoot, an ultra-longshot vice presidential candidate in 2008. The DOJ argues that they were not directly aggrieved by Obama's election because they never had a mathematical chance of winning.
"The [lawsuit] does not allege, nor could it allege, that any of these Plaintiffs were even on the ballot in enough states in the year 2008 to gain the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the Presidential election," the motion states.
The Justice Department brief takes a few shots at the wackiness of the birthers, accusing them of trafficking in "innuendo" and advancing "a variety of vaguely-defined claims purportedly related to a hodgepodge of constitutional provisions, civil and criminal statutes, and the Freedom of Information Act."
Those arguments notwithstanding, the DOJ lawyers were pretty kind to the birthers and to Taitz, since the filings in the case are replete with spelling errors, among others. Taitz submitted another purported foreign birth certificate for Obama last week in a filing labeled, "Kenian Hospital Birth Certificate for Barack Obama."
The case is set for a hearing Tuesday morning before Judge David Carter. There's a strong chance the session will devolve into something of a sideshow since a couple of plaintiffs in the case are now in a dispute with Taitz and have sought to bring in a different attorney to represent them in the case.
No, the suit names Barack Hussein Obama as the defendant, no AKA. And since it was filed after he became President then the Justice Department handles the defense.
(*sigh*) What the Justice Department is saying by moving to dismiss is that there are no merits, there is no case, there is no defendant with standing to sue, so the matter should be dismissed without a trial. I'm at a loss as to why people find that so hard to understand.
Left to right: Robert O'Brien, Afghan Attorney General Abdul Jabar Sabit, and Judge David Carter at the Attorney General’s Office in Kabul.
Yeees. and don't you succinctly hit the nail on the head. No one has touched that document and having the authority or responsibility to verify it's authenticity, done so.
More over, many of us are concerned and want to know why he wasted time producing a document that is inconsistent with what we know a Birth Certificate looks like.
The best part and even more confusing is why he didn't release any of the three Birth Certificates we know already existed before 2007.
His kindergarten records and the BC, that should be there, have mysteriously disappeared.
The BC he used to get into college, apply for loans and most definitely used for his passport. That wasn't available?
Why couldn't he just present the one he found among his mother's belongings upon her death.
Those were most certainly BC’s and not a COLB. There is no reason to create confusion but, for the fact he is hiding something. That something will be discovered, though and this is a long process.
It would have been nice to get a hold of it before the election but I think most thought we were going to end up with Hillary.
If this is of so little value to you why bother posting? I will tell you why. You need some entertainment.
Fine. Hang around we need some entertainment. But, really, lay off the personal swipes. They are unbecoming of your intellect
The subjects will do anything to get into the master’s good graces. They are pathetic mewling cowards and are best ignored.
She was part of the null and void's distribution on Reply 65 which I was responding to. That's the only reason why I included her. If she's upset then I apologize.
I understand what you are saying, I think.
But if a prosecutor or plaintiff uses the law to achieve an intentional result, are you arguing they have failed to morally use the tool of law to effect a change or outcome?
Obama now claims that those birth certificates were destroyed in a house fire thus preventing him from submitting them to the public and requiring him to obtain a new COLB from Hawaii.
How convenient!
That’s all right, just go tell her.
NS POSTED :I don't know why Obama won't release his birth certificate. I suspect it's all political, but there really isn't anything I can do to make him because there isn't a law requiring it. I'm not willing to ignore or rewrite the long-established procedures governing legal standing just so Taitz can make an ass of herself in open court, because the law is written for the very reason that it should be hard to sue someone.
Before I address that paragraph, I will point out that NS thinks there is no standing because no one has been harmed. Do we not have the right to a fair election process? If the election is a fraud are we not all deprived of that right. Is that not injury to all who voted. You see, NS just doesn't want to see something so clearly in fornt of him because he would have to admit that he's been wrong all these months. People like you who agree with every word just encourage him and join in his; "we can't do anything" campaign.
The first two sentences are clearly in error. They assume that the articles of the constitution were just written as philosophy and guidelines because there is notheing NS can think of to enforce it. Here's a hint. The constitution requires the candidates for president to be "natural born." Now think real hard and see if you can come up with what evidence would some one submit to prove they meet that qualification. Many of us think the best evidence is the birth certificate. Therefore those who place candidates on ballots, verify elections and the electoral college vote, administer oaths of office, and hear judicial cases, have the authority to REQUIRE he birth certificate to be presented. The fact that they don't is just gross negligence and failure of the oaths they took to uphold the constitution.
Lastly, these points have ben presented to NS on numerous occasions but he doesn't want to change and loose face. This is your opportunity to step up and redeem yourself and join those who want the constitution upheld and the truth about our highest public official to be made public.
Because he was born here. And the 14th Amendment and federal law both state that anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen from birth. Since the Constitution only identifies two types of citizenship - natural-born and naturalized - then if you're not one you are the other. He's not naturalized so that narrows things down, doesn't it? And if the Constitution is 'liberal theory' then that doesn't say much for conservatives, does it? Should be the other way around.
I see y’all have discovered the “joys” of arguing with nonsequitur.
The thing to keep in mind is what wintertime said:
No matter how this turns out, obama is damaged.
Of course, if the truth really is provable that he’s nonNBC, this would be the greatest constitutional crisis since perhaps the civil war. So, knowing that Obama is damaged is paltry recompense.
*Sigh* I’m not take your word for it. It’s still an active case. And according to some sources, the judge is going to allow this case to go forward on its merits, which may include discovery to the detriment of Obama’s faux persona.
If you check, Obama was Vetted by Howard Dean, and Nancy Pelosi.
The DNC admits their Credential Committee’s Report failed to address the issues of Barack Hussein Obama’s ineligibility to serve as President of the United States.
The DNC admits Howard Dean, Chair Person has and had knowledge Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya and ineligible to serve as the President of the United States.
***
Also in the link above..
Nancy Pelosi certified Obama:
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/nancy-pelosi-certified-obama-as-legally-qualified-to-serve-under-the-provisions-of-the-us-constitution/
Finally, it is said that Factcheck.org is the only organization that Vetted Obama, with what is now known to be a fake COLB
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=106526
But also, the Electoral College action has mooted the "ticket" argument. At the point SCOTUS agrees any President is ineligible to hold the office, they become unable to perform their duties and the 25th Amendment applies. If the VP and Cabinet refuse to act, then we must rely upon Congress to Impeach. Didn't say it was gonna be easy but it would be legal. IMHO, that is.
It is unusual that someone will go through so many contortions and distortions to deny the effort of those who merely want the truth to be publicized. What is your agenda and what is more important than the truth?
Oh yes, years ago.
The fire was in 1972. Did his BC from kindergarten get vaporized then? What was he doing with that file then? Doubt he had it.
He went to Pakistan in 1982. He would have needed a BC then. So they vaporized one, of 1972, wouldn't have been of help.
The one he found among his mother's belongings, was that the resurrected one of 1972?
Not being sarcastic to you just writing sarcastically.
You're really not very good at this, are you?
I read this to mean that you believed that no one could possibly have standing until he's president.
You would read wrong.
I suspect (judging from some of the posts I've seen on this thread) I'm not the only one...
Oh from what I've read I'll flat guarantee that.
I did jump in today because he posted many paragraphs and some one inexplicably said they agreed with every word. It is unimaginable, so I had to provide that person a way to retract such a bewildering statement.
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.