Posted on 01/07/2009 5:39:12 PM PST by patriotgal1787
Tonight from attorney Orly Taitz:
01.07.09. Good news,
Chief Justice John Roberts agreed to hear my case Lightfoot v Bowen, challenging eligibility for presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. He distributed the case to the full conference of the Supreme Court.
The timing of this decision by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, is absolutely remarkable.
On January 7, one day before the January 8 vote by Congress and Senate, whether to approve or object to the electoral vote of Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, as president of the United States, Chief Justice Roberts is sending a message to them:
(Excerpt) Read more at radiopatriot.blogspot.com ...
Saying that Hawaii officials have verified that he was born in Hawaii is false. All Hawaiian officials have said is that a BC for Obama is on file in Hawaii. It is a fact that Hawaii allows someone born in another country (Kenya for example) to register that birth in Hawaii and such a BC will indicate a foreign birth.
Are your referring to his reputation as a rich, drug addicted, elitist? Yes ... you are correct.
A consensus is for things poorly knowable, not something so easy to demonstrate. Either he was or he was not. A certified copy, provided directly to a court, either upon their order or at the direction of The Body Surfer, would settle the matter one way or the other.
Well they are probably folks working the blogs from Chicago. Probably signed on to the blog after the election.
Woebama
Since Nov 9, 2008
And SisterK might be a Troll. A transparent troll at that.
SisterK
Since Dec 20, 2008
This whole thread stinks of Trolls.
The Supreme Court Website says it is.
“Saying that Hawaii officials have verified that he was born in Hawaii is false. All Hawaiian officials have said is that a BC for Obama is on file in Hawaii. It is a fact that Hawaii allows someone born in another country (Kenya for example) to register that birth in Hawaii and such a BC will indicate a foreign birth.”
1. I am confused: How could Pelosi---in good conscience---sign a Hawaii "Official Certification of Nomination" where she says that Obama and Biden "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution", if she really had no valid and legal proof?
2. That is, what documents did Pelosi personally look at and touch that proved to her that Obama was "legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution"?
3. For instance, did Pelosi look at Obama's long form Hawaii birth certificate---the one with the doctor and hospital names on it?
4. To me, the only way that Pelosi could absolutely know for sure that Obama was "legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution" is if she had seen and touched first hand a copy of Obama's long form Hawaii birth certificate---the one with the doctor and hospital names on it.
5. And if Pelosi has indeed seen and touched a copy of Obama's long form Hawaii birth certificate---the one with the doctor and hospital names on it---then I wonder why Pelosi has not shared the copy of Obama's long form Hawaii birth certificate with the rest of the world and help put this Obama eligibility mess to rest once and for all.
6. So, I ask this of Pelosi: How did you personally know that Obama was "legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution" when you signed the "Official Certification of Nomination" for the state of Hawaii?
7. Pelosi, I have one final thought: Did you commit perjury when you signed that " Official Certification of Nomination" for Hawaii, when, in reality, you had no proof whatsover that Obama was "legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution"?
Dr. Orly Taitz, suit even exceeds Burg in delusional moonbattery nonsense.
The short form Obama gave as proof (on the internet only) is possibly a forgery. He has failed to provide even the document he posted to any court to support his claim that he was born in Hawaii. Lawsuits challenging his citizenship have request a certified vault copy of his BC, he has failed to provide it. What is he hiding?
Now that is funny. No court has even looked at the Certification of Live Birth. If and when they do, it will be a paper copy, with a for real raised seal, and it will be examined by at least one "document examiner", who will be able to tell if it's real, or Photoshop. My bet is on Photoshop.
At the bottom of every Certification of Live Birth issued by the state of Hawaii it says: “This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.” HRS(Hawaii Revised Statutes)338-18(b), 338-19.
It also says, in much larger letters:
ANY ALTERATIONS INVALIDATE THIS CERTIFICATE
Most of the images have been altered, at minimum by blacking out the file number, but there appear to be other alterations as well. In fact the whole thing appears to be a creation of Photoshop or some other imagine manipulation software.
There is no federal law or state law which requires any additional proof of birth other than that. The US Constititution does not speak of short form versus long form birth certificates.
Nor is there anything about birth certificates at all.
There is no case law invalidating a state’s right to issue or accept a short form certification.
It just so happens that the US State Department will not accept Short Form/abstract version Birth Certificates from some states for purposes of issuing a passport. They don't contain enough information to verify citizenship, let alone Natural Born citizenship. (Hawaii's is, AFAIK not one of those not acceptable to prove *citizenship*, unless the date registered is more than year from the date of birth)
If the state of Hawaii issues and accepts the short form, so will the federal government.
Well the state of Hawaii will not accept the short form for purposes of its Hawaiian Lands Program for the same reason the State Department does not accept some states' short form BC, it does contain enough information.
But in any event, no court has even seen a real, certified, paper copy of the Certification, let alone the Certificate that should agree with the information on it.
That seems to be a distinct possibility. There are hundreds of billions of unaccounted for bailout dollars roaming around now.
Just how much would a Congress cost, anyway?
My one and only post this day....
First, why do any of you even acknowledge the idiots (i guess you can call ‘em trolls too) that waste your time with dumba$$ questions? They know the arguments and have been on other sites before asking the same stuff. When they have nothing to respond to, they will eventually get back to their Cheerios.
Second, our politicians are out for themselves - with rare exceptions. Same with the talk radio gang. I know it’s irrational but, it appears to be true. To paraphrase...
“When you have eliminated everything impossible, that which remains - no matter how improbable - is the answer”
Third, any rational person will acknowledge that there is a significant dispute regarding Mr. Obama’s original birth credentials. To relegate this question to a lesser status in favor of a future discussion of “issues” is, on the surface, foolish. One does not worry about future oil changes when one has a flat tire on one’s car.
Forth, we must trust the supreme court to fulfill their charter. It is their judgement with respect to timing of actions. NO ONE on Freerepublic knows more about supreme court latitude or procedures than the justices themselves. Therefore, it is disingenuous to denegrigate either their timing or their actions. However, it is axiomatic that if the (our) supreme court is inoperable, than the rule of law in this country is shot. Riots may take place in either case. Selective disrespect for law - on both large and small scale - is pretty much inevitable.
And last,
those that wish to diss the constitution have no place posting. The land we stand on is under the constitution’s controlling authority. If you don’t like that simple rule, then leave, don’t come back and keep your ignorant pie hole shut. There are those of us that are pigs. And as the saying goes, ya can’t teach a pig ta sing. It doesn’t result in a song and it angers the pig.
Nite all.
God be with you and yours.
And you and yours as well, FRiend.
We post back at the twits to polish our arguments, vent our spleens, and generally repeat the things we know. Consider it practice, catharsis, and study, if you will.
There are those, to paraphrase Shakespeare, who 'would not serve God if the Devil bid them', and we have dealt with that mindset before.
I won't second guess the SCOTUS, as long as action is forthcoming. That they have not completely and summarily dismissed all of the cases (without conference) is interesting enough.
For now, I will trust the loyalty to the Constitution of the United States which these justices ostensibly posess.
As for the Congress and anyone considered a news celebrity, certainly job security, future lucre, and possibly, in the case of the Congress, pure graft are factors, no matter how large or small they may be. Unfortunately, I must note that considerably less than 535 billion dollars would likely buy a majority, if not nearly the Congress entire, at least on some issues, and would secure for the individuals who got away with being the recipients of such payment a comfortable living most anywhere else on the planet if not here, for some time, if not their lifetime (however long or short) and for their posterity as well.
Considerably more is milling about somewhere, unaccounted for, but on our tab.
As for the talk show hosts and such, at a minimum they must pay lip service to their fans' worldview, else they would be shunned.
BOOM CHAKA LAKA!!
Go back to DU
Why? Do they have threads as amusing as these over there?
This is worth repeating.
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.