Replies

I concede the point that Serrano did ask the question about if he could run for president after I gave the transcripts a look over as none of the videos that I’ve seen have him saying it previously. However, you have to be a whacked-out Obot troll not to believe that Justice Thomas speaking for the court as in “We” are “evading” the issue and, he is not going on record for likely reasons that come to mind because of possible Obama eligibility cases that could be ruled upon in the near future.

We can take it from the dismissal orders of courts just one level down from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals, and then down to lower state and federal district courts all across the nation and in more than seventy cases, the judiciary does not believe that it is their responsibility or duty to invalidate a general election, determine the qualifications of candidates or certainly nowhere in the Constitution is the judicial branch given the power to remove a sitting president. Those are all duties assigned to the legislative branch.
The more conservative, originalist and strict constructionist a judge, the less likely they are to invent powers not expressly given to them by the Constitution.

“This is one of several such suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by Constitution. See U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”—Chief US District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth in dismissing the Quo Warranto claim in “Taitz v Obama”—April 14, 2010

The appropriate way to challenge Obama’s eligibility to be president nearly two years after the certification of his electoral college votes and his swearing in is by attacking the validity of his Hawaii birth documents. That is best accomplished via a Grand Jury investigation, subpoenaeing his original birth documents and having them examined by experts with testimony taken under Oath.

If there is anything deficient, fraudulent or altered in Obama’s original birth documents, he can be indicted and if there is an indictment, even without a conviction, it is highly likely that a bill of impeachment would be drawn up by the House of Representatives. Civil suits do not result in findings of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The Bill of Impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon which forced his resignation and the Bill of Impeachment against William Jefferson Clinton were both charging perjury and obstruction of justice.

When plaintiffs filing complaints about any legal issue lose sixty-nine separate times in courts in all different types of jurisdictions by having their lawsuits dismissed for “lack of standing” and “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted,” its obviously time for a change of legal strategy.

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”—Albert Einstein

We can take it from the dismissal orders of courts just one level down from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals, and then down to lower state and federal district courts all across the nation and in more than seventy cases, the judiciary does not believe that it is their responsibility or duty to invalidate a general election,determine the qualifications of candidates or certainly nowhere in the Constitution is the judicial branch given the power to remove a sitting president. Those are all duties assigned to the legislative branch.

NO, we do not take court dismissals by legal procedures and by not going to court on the merits of the cases against Obama as belief of the courts. You don't know what the judiciary really believes. The judiciary are sworn to uphold the law and not Obama's election. They lack courage for a variety of reasons. Being kowtowed by a liberal press into inaction and that inaction by those who are in power is not going to make Obama a legitimate president. Time is not on your side troll.

The more conservative, originalist and strict constructionist a judge, the less likely they are to invent powers not expressly given to them by the Constitution.

Yes. You're not making any clear point here... Having courage by taking the path where the sheep do not go is much harder to do.

Judge Lamberth is not closed to an Quo Warranto case against Obama. Obama can still be prosecuted under the Quo Warranto writ.

No election can override the US Constitution. Electoral college voters are highly partisan lot... and the swearing in of Obama was fumbled. Gee how did that happen? It was so simple. There is no validity to Obama's COLB. Hawaii has refused to say it is genuine. The Obama mouth piece Robert "Bagdad Bob" Gibbs called it as advertisement. Oh now, the Obama administration are distancing themselves to their forgery. When people have the courage to step forward against your pal Obama, he will be going down as the biggest con in history.