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

To: bluecat6

No judge....right, to get to that you need to get to discovery phase. Most cases were DOA...yes, the proper venue for any filed after November 4, 2008 is via Quo Warranto in DC...know all about it...Berg’s case was file before then though....and that worries many....

The House? Come on. No one in office in Washington in 2008 will touch this thus without pressure or a trigger event. There is no upside to this for even the Repubs.

And yet. It does change those words.

“No person except a natural born Citizen...shall be eligible to the Office of President;...”

If English is not a first language here is a key - the word SHALL means it is not optional, it does not expire, it is an imperative.

The art of cloaking and deception is obviously coveted by many in the current administration, as it was in 1972.

Names come to mind like Haldeman, Mitchell, Ehrlichman, Hunt, Dean...

Maybe people in the current administration should remember this. Nixon did not spend a day in jail. It is the enablers that go to jail.


“Taitz v Obama” sought quo warranto at the proper time and in the proper court, the US District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiff even “judge shopped” for her preferred judge to hear the case, a Reagan appointee, the Chief Judge of the US District Court, Royce C. Lamberth.

Judge Lamberth summarily dismissed the quo warranto claim for lack of standing.

This is not 2008, the year is 2011 and it doesn’t take much intestinal fortitude to simply issue a subpoena for Obama’s birth records, particularly since Obama’s fellow Democrat buddy, Neal Abercrombie is the new Governor of Hawaii and has said that he wants to find a way to release that document. A congressinal subpoena is a good way to accomplish what Governor Abercrombie is trying to accomplish on a state level.


233 posted on 01/18/2011 5:44:21 PM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies ]


To: jamese777


“Taitz v Obama” sought quo warranto at the proper time and in the proper court, the US District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiff even “judge shopped” for her preferred judge to hear the case, a Reagan appointee, the Chief Judge of the US District Court, Royce C. Lamberth.

Judge Lamberth summarily dismissed the quo warranto claim for lack of standing.


To overcome the standing issue she probably needed a US Attorney to sue on behalf of the People of the United Sates which can show a direct injury from the illegal action.


250 posted on 01/19/2011 6:42:10 AM PST by Hotlanta Mike (TeaNami)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies ]

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