Posted on 09/07/2009 6:09:15 AM PDT by Free America52
The arrogant disregard for equal protection under the law is becoming a hallmark of this affirmative action bastard-in-chief's administration. He searches out fellow commies to hire into his White House (it used to belong to we the people, but no more), and surrounds himself with ex-cons and black nationalist thugs. And his DOJ tells a federal judge to drop the case because the plaintiffs are not big enough to chllenge his lowness? HAH! Arrogant prick Holder thinks Barry's already emperor!
Why is the DOJ weighing in on this so called “non issue”?
I'm guessing it's because they want to live?
At least one pass. I screwed up and failed to make proofread one word. My mistake.
I support Orly but spend 2 minutes running spell check on your court filings.
I find this development utterly breathtaking in its arrogance.
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM124_birthersdismissbrf.html
It will be interesting to see if all the 0-bots show up to gloat over this "victory".
It ain't over 0-bots...
The DOJ (a clearly political agency) is now telling judges what to do in their courtrooms, regarding a man that appointed the HEAD of the agency itself??? Talk about a conflict of interest!
If anything this only proves that Orly’s case has them scared. They CANNOT let this go to trial because then she would have the right to discovery, and that is what Obama has spent over $1 MILLION dollars to prevent (based on payments to the law firms representing him in these case(s) — notice there is still more than one case pending in our courts on this issue...).
They are still trying the “no standing” argument. However, what is clear is that both Keyes, and Lightfoot who were candidates WERE injured by Obama’s campaign (as was McCain). And, indeed, EVERY CITIZEN in this country has been damaged if the fraud on the part of Obama is proven...
If the fraud is ultimately proven then it is more properly called treason, rather than fraud — and there will be MANY people besides just Obama who would fall in the aftermath.
actions speak louder than words
Non-Sequitur ~ That pretty much sums it up. One would hope that would change before the 2012 election.
Says one of the people who said we couldn't sue until after the inauguration.
Now he's trying to convince us to wait just a few more years.
What will he be saying after the "fairest most open election in American history" reinserts the pretender?
I know: "Let's wait until he tries to run for a third term in 2016."
His rice-bowl is about to get broken and his true destroy America goals are about to be frustrated.
Non-Sequitur? Your fear is palpable.
He does have private attorneys representing him (at least 2 different firms, and an estimated cost of over $1 million dollars spent) which makes the involvement of the DOJ even more conspicuous, IMHO...
A HUGE conflict of interest seeing as Obama appointed the head of the agency and these lawsuits name Obama himself. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of the DOJ commenting on ANY case like this before — but I’m not one who watches the courts a whole lot. I’ve learned a lot about the procedures in our system (esp. SCOTUS) over the last year or so...
I do agree that ORLY should have someone proofread some of her filings. Mistakes in gender assignment, spelling, etc... will damage the case(s) themselves by greatly reducing her credibility in the eyes of the law (judges, attorneys, etc...). Rather odd for an attorney not to have a good legal secretary working for her, IMO. Then again, according to many she is working alone, and paying for these things out of her own pocket.
” The DOJ argues that they were not directly aggrieved by Obama’s election because they never had a mathematical chance of winning.”
This kind of sounds like they’re either grasping at straws or think a simple rebuttle is all they need to get it thrown out. They put as much language in there as possuble..and hope that something will avoid proving citizenship. (Which is baffling)
And can you point out where I said that?
What will he be saying after the "fairest most open election in American history" reinserts the pretender?
And whatever I do say, I hope I'm quoted accurately. Something you're not doing a very good job of doing so far.
Yep.We've made tremendous progress in the past year.
The cycle of a new idea:
Ignore it.
Ridicule it.
Fight it.
Then insist it's obvious and you believed it all along...
Boy, emotions have put logic on the back burner today! My goodness.
I’ll argue with you, FRiend.
Oops
rebuttle = rebuttal
|
> Because the plaintiff lacks the standing to sue. Same reason why
Judicial power, as contradistinguished from the power of the laws, has no existence. Courts are the mere instruments of the law, and can will nothing. When they are said to exercise a discretion, it is a mere legal discretion, a discretion to be exercised in discerning the course prescribed by law; and, when that is discerned, it is the duty of the court to follow it. Judicial power is never exercised for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the judge, always for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the legislature; or, in other words, to the will of the law. -- Chief Justice John Marshall The Verdict is still out on Judge Carter on "standing", Non-Seq. More likely than not, at least ONE of the 50-plus plaintiffs have that standing, in this post-inaugural case. He's given Orly "tips" on filing issues — I can't see why he wouldn't again. Judge Carter is sharp and will stay within his judicial guidelines. Additionally, we'll have to see if the merits outweigh any pre-trial blunders and nagging post-election questions of Mr. Obama's eligibility questions. Judge Carter's interest in this case is apparent, while granting Orly significant latitude for no apparent reason. As we know, what tagged Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton was not the deed, but the cover-up of the deed. If there's a hint of that here — especially now from any perceived tampering from Obama's Justice Dept — that alone might give the judge enough judicial justification (and just plain old curiosity) to authorize discovery to see what's REALLY going on here. |
IMHO, there is only one plausible answer to that question... His attorneys even admitted such in the Berg lawsuit arguments — there is something supposedly on those long-form records that is “embarrassing” to Obama, and they argued it would cause him harm to release the records... I’m thinking the “harm” it would cause is that his whole house of cards would come tumbling down... ESPECIALLY if us, “birthers” were eventually proven correct. Can you just imagine that? So many people eating crow at that point! Well, I can wish for it at least! LOL
This lady kept Daley out of jail for years with a staff of 250.
This is right up her alley.
She is probably advancing a few of her less important arguments against Taitz and saving the good stuff for last since she realizes we won't give up. Just a guess on my part.
Who is paying the private attorneys? Soros? Pro-bono for special favors? Orly needs to at least run spell check. I would think some local attorney is around that she trusts who would read her filings and donate their time. I think she is paranoid about the filings plus that Russian/chechen stubbornness. Running spell check takes a minute. Maybe running grammar checker after that.
Think that through another step or two:
Biden will need a Veep.
Who better "qualified" than the democrat runner up?
A person who never officially conceded (conceited?) the race?
Who more logical and "appropriate" than
Hillary Rodham Clinton?
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.