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.
“(*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.”
What is so hard to understand is the fact that someone could assume the office of president with no qualifications to be there and our legal system offers no way to address this. To say that everyone who has tried so far has no legal standing is to say that citizens of the US ultimately have no control over what our government does. No legal standing? Every American should be recognized as having legal standing to question the government. Every single American is harmed if a usurper is in the WH. In fact, every single American is harmed as long as the question of eligibility lingers. A president “for all the people” would recognize that and try to assure even those who didn’t vote for him that he’s sensitive to their doubts and concerns. But beyond that, it’s outside the frame of reference of most Americans to think that we have no “standing” in terms of the law. Just my opinion, of course.
Dad say the Kenyan Counsel has the power to confirm the BC.
Yes. And Taitz lists as defendants other members of the executive branch. The DOJ is obligated to act. Since the case is directly related to Obama’s duties as POTUS, the DOJ is obligated to act.
You must have missed this part from Article two:
" No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
The fourteenth amendment did not erase the "natural born" citizen requirement, nor did it attempt to redefine it. In fact, it's still in there. Why must you lie to make your point? It automatically shows your position to be worthless and dishonest.
1) Responding to the them repeatedly bumps the thread to the top with **my** message for all to read, and it sinks and buries their message.
2) They serve as a backboard against which conservatives can sharpen, simplify, and condense the conservative message.
3) A troll's posts give conservatives and opportunity to share conservative talking points with conservatives.
4) Most often the troll is an idiot and their logical fallacies are plainly out there for all to see.
5) And...Sometimes the troll gets mad enough to start calling names and using profanity ( a natural state for all Useful Idiot communists) and makes **them** look bad.
So....The trick is to not taking them at all personally. Your posts help other conservatives, and it wastes the paid-professional troll's time and money, and gives **you** an opportunity to get **your** message out there.
Sometimes, when they get absolutely **furious** with me, I laugh and remind them that I don't give a twit about their opionions. I am here to share ideas with conservatives and find them very useful for doing exactly that. They get even more sputteringly enraged after I tell them that. :-)
Trolls are **great**great** fun!
I agree this issue must be heard and decided or the current Constitutional Crisis will escalate.
We the people don’t need to fire a shot, No Justice No taxes. We have a legitimate question that needs to be resolved and if the government doesn’t work, “they” have broken the social contract. Lets see them spend more money they don’t have.
Either the government returns to the Constitution or we will have a Civil War, between the liberal leeches who are trying to steal more of the money from the producing people.
Congress and the President are too stupid to realize, we are already at the tipping point, and those that produce will always win over those that are dependent on the producers. If the producers quit working or cut back 25% tax revenues will drop, no money for socialist programs and China will quit lending us money. Watch how fast Congress finds out what angry mobs are then. Starve the Beast.
We are already slaves to taxes, but they can’t make us work to create income and pay more taxes. No income means Congress will have to implement the Fair Tax or some other tax other than income tax.
From Federalist #68:
“Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one querter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union? “
This would seem to indicate that their meaning of Natural Born Citizen to be one without any foreign allegiance.
NO. Not if their actions are because they are negligent or incompetant. It’s affirmative only if the duties of their office are in question, not if their own actions are in question. If their personal actions are in question, they must pay their own way.
IMO It is not the duties of their office, but their own lack of action that is being challenged; therefore, they should provide their own personal counsel.
Ask yourself, what are the duties of the office and did they fulfill that duty?
And since that is the case, the damage/injury is not unique to the individual plaintiff. Legal standing requires that the damages/injury be unique to the plaintiff.
I think Obama found a loophole with regard to standing. We have to find another way.
...check this out:
From ObamaCrimes.com
Kenyan Consul General Served With Subpoena.....
Sorry, but there is nothing on Obama
Crimes to show a valid subpoena has been served that I can find.
“We have to find another way.”
Class action law suit?
Thanks for the clarification on the standing issue. I didn’t realize it had the “unique” element. So that makes sense.
How do they even have an obligation under the law to take action if it is not as a duty of their offices? Hillary Clinton, private citizen, has no legal obligation to take action regarding Obama's eligibility. Same for Gates. Same for Biden.
Not at all. Fraud is most certainly a "high crime or misdemeanor". The alleged perpetrator of such fraud could be impeached in the House and tried and convicted in the Senate. Which, happens to be the only Constitutional remedy for removing a sitting president - fraudulent or otherwise.
I haven’t considered a class action. I’ll give it some thought.
Ask author2
From ObamaCrimes.com Kenyan Consul General Served With Subpoena
I think this could be the beginning of the downfall. Of course serving the Consul General doesn’t mean someone in Kenya can’t purge the records but at least something is happening. Email message follows here:
THIS WILL HOPEFULLY BE THE END OF OBAMA “ISSUE”...Dan Smith,NY
PAUL ANDREW MITCHELL HAS BEEN WITH THIS FROM THE START. Please read AFFADAVIT & DECLARATION by Lucas Daniel Smith Hat Tip to Paul Mitchell .......
Please Forward this out... In a message dated 9/5/2009 8:23:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, supremelawfirm@gmail.com writes:
Is it now time formally to serve a SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE?
, http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/Keny ... bpoena.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... ucasSmith/ http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith01.png http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith02.png http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... mith03.jpg
— Sincerely yours, /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/p ... eneral.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice Declaration under Penalty of Perjury: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1746.html
10,159 posted on Sunday, September 06, 2009 3:24:02 PM by Author2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10155 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
There is nothing there, its baloney, did you find it?
Did the cease to act because of receiving an appointment or position? Did they benefit because of their lack of action?
“Clinton was investigated by the DOJ. How could the DOJ be prosecutor and defense attorney?”
That is why “Special Independent Prosecutors” are appointed in cases like Clinton.
Huh? Special independent prosecutors still work for the DOJ.
bump
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.