Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Barnett v. Obama: Important Discovery Available Now According To Judge Carter’s Order 9.17.09
naturalborncitizen ^ | 9/17/2009 | rxsid

Posted on 09/17/2009 10:25:29 PM PDT by rxsid

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last
To: El Gato

My point was, just because higher officials up the ladder fail to find the fraud doesn’t make the fraud legitimate especially when the fraud can then be dealt with at lower level point of fraud being carried out. The DOJ appears on the face of it to be arguing that fraud at the state election board level is somehow exempt from prosecution because the fraud was not seen at points beyond when the initial fraud was carried out. It’s the same flawed ‘no controlling legal authority’ bilge lawless liberals always want to be enforced and the obama defenders at FR are playing the gambit hot and heavy right now, with moderator protection.


61 posted on 09/18/2009 9:28:08 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Dems, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

here may be the video for 2004 election. I can’t get it to play.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/06/electoral.vote.1718/index.html


62 posted on 09/18/2009 9:32:14 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
Yes, there were objections in 2005. All in regard to Ohio, IIRC. I watched it back then and remember thinking how insane those people were. I just saw a pick where supports had signs sporting a map of Ohio saying something along the lines of "Investigate all 88"
63 posted on 09/18/2009 9:34:20 PM PDT by Just A Nobody (Better Dead than RED! NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

it seems the objection was raised after Ohio did their thing..not at the end.

I guess Cheney was suppose to ask at the end of it if there were any objections. So when it came time to do the vote again after the objections.. did he ask at the end?

So to see how it is suppose to go you would have to go back to Clinton vote when there were no objections.


64 posted on 09/18/2009 9:42:59 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
I couldn't get the vid to work either, but saw this from the article:

If one member of each body of Congress objects, congressional rules require that lawmakers return to their chambers to vote on the merits.

A simple majority vote in each chamber would overturn the challenge -- something that should be easily achieved in the GOP-controlled Congress.

65 posted on 09/18/2009 9:44:16 PM PDT by Just A Nobody (Better Dead than RED! NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

here is partial transcript with Gore..
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0101/06/se.01.html

After Arkansas he says

“GORE: Is there objection? Hearing none, the chair now hands to the gentleman from California and the other tellers the certificate of the electors for president... “

We need transcripts. I suck at trying to find the transcripts of this stuff. I would like to see how others have done it at the end...which is where people are claiming Cheney didn’t do it.

Maybe he did it after every state like Gore did here.


66 posted on 09/18/2009 9:53:34 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Here is a detailed account of the 2005 certification, but have not found a video yet.
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2005/01/66194

It’s late here and I’m beat. Will try again tomorrow.


67 posted on 09/18/2009 10:22:13 PM PDT by Just A Nobody (Better Dead than RED! NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

obumpa


68 posted on 09/19/2009 1:41:46 AM PDT by Dajjal (Obama is an Ericksonian NLP hypnotist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

skimming through 2008 vote..Cheney didnt ask for Objections like Gore was doing in that video clip. So apparently at no time did he ask for objections.

If someone wants to sit through that whole video you may see a clearer view of the man who later raised his hand to make sure the identification is correct.

Given that someone was definitely raising is hand, (it wasn’t a scratch or a clap )..there is cause to look into this further.

He raised his hand..he was not recognized... at no time did Cheney ask for objections...it doesn’t follow the Constitutional requirements.

Grounds for a lawsuit and discovery.

God help us..please have someone competent advising Taitz on this one.

Did Cheney do it on purpose..or did he just slip up due to old age or he didn’t know he was suppose to do it ...who knows....I am sure there is a script to follow...

...but he didn’t follow the Constitutional requirement.


69 posted on 09/19/2009 7:16:40 AM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

*


70 posted on 09/19/2009 8:12:44 AM PDT by Harold Hill (I always think there's a band, kid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
Grounds for a lawsuit and discovery.

Agreed! However, is it not time for other lawyers to step up to the plate? Why must Orly take on the entire load with nothing but snipping going on at her heels?

VP Cheney is no dummy, I don't care how old he is!
...but he didn’t follow the Constitutional requirement.

No, he didn't...WHY?

Have you seen this article? It may answer a few of your questions...or may cause more to be asked.

Do YOU Fear Obama?

Also, do a search on Raila Odinga and his tactics.

71 posted on 09/19/2009 9:25:28 AM PDT by Just A Nobody ( (Better Dead than RED! NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

Apparently, several lawyers have tried to help Taitz and it has been a disaster. Sometimes I wonder if she is a plant. Hopefully someone will get this that other attorney on the case.

How is it that Donofrio, a lawyer, did not know that interrogatories can’t be sent to non parties???????????

Those people who still refuse to accept that he is very likely wrong about Obama’s british citizenship should keep that fact in mind.


72 posted on 09/19/2009 11:52:39 AM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

Connection with the omitted certification of eligibility on the DNC statement of candidates to the State Attorney Generals?

I am not legally trained, but this thing stinks all over.

Makes me wonder if some of the wild conspiracy theories have validity. (the ones about being blackmailed into submission with in place nukes- I know insanity)

The pieces simply do not fit. Do Not Fit.

No Background
No Records
No History
No Accountability

How can this BE?


73 posted on 09/19/2009 3:23:50 PM PDT by Texas Fossil (Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may. -Sam Houston)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson