Posted on 02/17/2011 1:04:49 PM PST by rxsid
"Stunner! Supremes to give eligibility case another look
Challenge to Obama getting 2nd conference before court
In a stunning move, the U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled another "conference" on a legal challenge to Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office, but officials there are not answering questions about whether two justices given their jobs by Obama will participate.
The court has confirmed that it has distributed a petition for rehearing in the case brought by attorney John Hemenway on behalf of retired Col. Gregory Hollister and it will be the subject of a conference on March 4.
It was in January that the court denied, without comment, a request for a hearing on the arguments. But the attorney at the time had submitted a motion for Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, who were given their jobs by Obama, to recuse.
Should Obama ultimately be shown to have been ineligible for the office, his actions, including his appointments, at least would be open to challenge and question.
At the time, the Supreme Court acknowledged the "motion for recusal" but it changed it on official docketing pages to a "request." And it reportedly failed to respond to the motion.
..."
From: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=264897
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
“If Obama were found to be ineligible, it would shake our country to it’s core”
It may take just that. We cannot just sweep this under the rug. All wrongs must be corrected, otherwise we are no longer a Republic.
Peace at what cost?
Looks like we’re going to have violence just because the unions don’t like the idea of state governments being willing to hire some of the vast number of unemployed who would be willing to work for a lot less and save the taxpayers some money.
What do we do, just appease the rent-a-mobs because they will terrorize us if we don’t?
There is no way to appease terrorists. If you give them an inch they will take a mile. The best thing to do is to let them know right away that they will NOT be able to terrorize you. As long as you’ve got them in your country you’re going to have to have the battle sometime, so it may as well be BEFORE they destroy the entire nation financially.
Starting with Biden, then Pelosi, and on down the list. But as with Benedict Arnold, they'll never be brought to justice for their treasonous deeds.
I don’t intend on giving up, but remember more than 1/2 of all voters in the last Presidential Election voted for 0bama. Some of those people are unhinged loons.
Will you line up to gun down those people?
Do you want the Police or Military to gun them down?
Do you want massive riots burning businesses and car like in Paris or Egypt? Rape Gangs feeling like they deserve to riot?
I want 0Bama Gone...But I don’t want any of that to happen either. It is that simple.
The best solution 2 years in, is NOT having everything become UNCERTAIN. We needed this ruling BEFORE Obozo was elected. Now that he is in, we have a delicate balance. What the result will be is still up in the air. What I want is not important anymore.
What is important is how it all plays out.
How things are put right matters.
How proof is shown matters.
The people that will riot don’t care about the Constitution or the rule of law, they have proven it.
What we do in response is important too.
What would you do when they riot? You make the call, lets see what the answer is... Government Executions? Mass Internment into Camps? Kill women and children because they were lead astray by a mob of lefties?
WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
If there are violent riots the National Guard should be called in. Those would only likely happen in the larger cities. A military friend of mine told me before the election that the military can easily handle riots.
The way I envision things going is:
1) One or more states enact an eligibility bill and Obama decides not to run, in which case American presidential politics goes back to normal. Or
2) No states pass an eligbility bill because the legislators and/or governor are threatened by the Soros thugs. Obama runs for POTUS. Then at least one state puts the issue before the actual voters who don’t care what the media thinks of them and who can’t all be threatened by Soros’ thugs. The voters approve a ballot initiative giving legal standing to any registered voter to challenge the eligibility of any candidate on their ballot. Whether or not Obama wins the Presidential election, his eligibility is challenged in court and the records, including the transaction logs which show the whole story of where those records came from, what has been done to them, when they have been accessed, etc are subpoenaed and this thing breaks open with legal proof that Obama, Pelosi, Fukino, etc are guilty of felonies. At that point arrests will be made and the Republican candidate will automatically become the POTUS.
I don’t expect SCOTUS to take up Obama’s eligibility at this point. I expect that Sotomayor and Kagan will violate ethics and refuse to recuse themselves. The media and Congress will let them get away with it. They will take this up when they are absolutely forced to do so, and if that happens in the process of an election like it should have been done in 2008 the whole media template for why riots would be justified would be blown to shreds.
Congress is right to be working on undoing the damage from Obama’s evil, unconstitutional reign. WE are the ones who need to be making sure the process is RIGHT in 2012 so we can correct the loopholes and criminality that destroyed the 2008 election and the Constitution. Right now is when we need to be getting together the connections and processes we will need in order to pass ballot initiatives if necessary.
I think you are spot on.
SCOTUS will not act.
2012 will be different since a few states have already enacted a law that says you can’t be on the ballot without a Birth Certificate.
Many people that bought the hopey dopery changery will not be fooled again.
Even Soros can’t buy everyone.
Only thing to worry about is Congress, it is filled with jelly spines, Liberals, Democrats, and weak kneed Republicans, and very few Conservatives.
If the next election goes as well as the last one, we should have more of the Conservatives and less of the rest.
1) Obama’s birth certificate showing a Hawaiian birth is on file with the State. That is an inescapable fact that has yet to be disproven, therefore
2) Given that a person can only be born in a single location, any “birth certificate” showing otherwise is a fraud.
“I think riots would become the normal here....”
They’ll happen regardless...
Have any states actually enacted eligibility bills? I didn’t think any have at this point.
I just read a post about the House approving an amendment to defund Obamacare, and an amendment being proposed that would defund the DOJ fight against Arizona’s immigration law.
Maybe our Congress-critters have found some inner strength.
WO4TG, you’re not comprehending. The HDOH has indirectly confirmed that they have no legally valid BC for Obama. The online COLB’s are all forgeries. Abercrombie has also said there is no birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii.
That means that if he’s been using a birth certificate his entire life, it’s from someplace else.
Please comprehend that.
Yeah...because zero is an usuper to begin with the election would not have been legal...so Biden wouldn’t be a legal VP.
Actually, it has yet to be proven. That he was allegedly born in HI is hearsay, alluded to (while not under oath) via a press conference and talk radio show, and via a jpeg of an alleged short form on the WWW.
Until a court of law subpoena's a copy of the original (or amended) long form...his true birth location (and age, and father/mother, etc) remains unverified.
You are correct, not yet!
Looks like so far in the Last Week news is about these;
Nebraska has one coming
Montana may try again
Texas on Tuesday filed a bill
Arizona may try again
Connecticut may have one on deck
Missouri has a Bill To Committee HB 283
I think one may make it at least, and this is just what I could find.
That is complete and utter nonsense. “while not under oath”, why does someone need to be under oath to make a statement of pure fact? The fact is that the birth cerificate is on file with the State. The fact is that the Birthers like to treat this as a criminal or civil issue, even though they’ve been laughed out of every court they’ve went to (and wasn’t one of the head Birthers even fined for brining this nonsense before the court?), but they refuse to submit one scintilla of evidence that supports their claims or even their standing to bring a case.
“Until a court of law subpoena’s a copy of the original (or amended) long form...his true birth location (and age, and father/mother, etc) remains unverified.” Just like about every other president in the history of the country.
Finally, I find it laughably absurd that the statement of the officials in charge of the vital records is dismissed as “hearsay”, when the Birthers glom on to every single out-of-context or butchered remark made by Michelle Obama, the Kenyan ambassador, or even a Hollywood reporter (!) to further their cause.
This will be my last response to any Birther who has registered since 2008, because I’m pretty tired of dealing with trolls.
Abercrombie is unable to view the birth certificate, and please comprehend this, because he does not have the authority to. No governor has the right to snoop around the Bureau of Vital Records looking for anyone’s birth cerificate.
Please also comprehend this, the wishing of a Birther does not make the COLB inauthentic and no matter how many times you lie, it does not make it true.
Please also comprehend that the state health director said, ““Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
Please also comprehend that I will not respond to you any further.
Wow. I’m a troll now. lol.
Lingle said she had her HDOH director look at the BC. If Lingle could do it, so could Abercrombie.
The “state policies and procedures” Fukino referred to allow legally non-valid birth certificates to be stored there just like legally valid ones. And the HDOH has indicated that they cannot disclose the LEGAL STATUS of a particular birth record. IOW, the “original birth certificate” that they have on record could be a kleenex with “I was born here. Barack Obama” and we would never know except through indirect confirmations such as the ones in which the HDOH revealed that Obama’s BC was amended in 2006 and is thus not legally valid.
At this point the HDOH Director has the authority - and indeed the legal DUTY - to disclose whatever they have for Obama, because
1) Fukino’s announcement makes the records on which she based her announcement public, and they MUST be disclosed to anyone who asks to see them.
2) Because Obama claims to have published his COLB, anything on his COLB is public and can be disclosed - which eliminates the excuse the HDOH has tried to use for not disclosing the records.
3) If there is a “scintilla of public interest”, it trumps privacy concerns.
4) According to HDOH Administrative Rules and UIPA, the HDOH is required to disclose to anybody who asks for it a non-certified copy of any abbreviated certificate (COLB).
Those are FIVE legal reasons why Abercrombie could have confirmed AND SEEN any birth certificate or vital record they have for Obama in Hawaii. All his investigation was able to find was something “actually written down” in the State Archive - which is either not a HDOH record at all (in which case the HDOH has NOTHING for Obama at all and has lied, lied, lied in everything they have said), OR is one of the 2 kinds of records authorized to be stored in the State Archive: a 75-year-old Certification of Hawaiian Birth or a registration of foreign birth (neither of which are legally valid for proving a Hawaii birth at this point).
I comprehend that you will not respond any further, and that is fine. It wasn’t as if you were hearing any of the facts I’ve presented anyway. But I’ll put these out there anyway, because there may be some people out there who DO care about the facts.
BTW, the first 3 reasons I gave for why Obama’s records are REQUIRED to be disclosed are all affirmed by the OIP in 2003, in OIP Opinion Letter 03-16 at http://hawaii.gov/oip/opinionletters/opinion%2003-16.pdf , snarkily explained at http://obamasgarden.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/coach-june-s-jones-iii-hes-more-important-to-the-american-public-than-barrack-whats-his-name/
Those points have already been clarified by the open records watchdog group in Hawaii’s government. This is established policy, and Hawaii’s AG knows it full well. The reason he’s not telling us that is because he wants to hide the fact that Abercrombie’s “investigation” - which he told Mike Evans included legal measures (he called it a search warrant but more likely to be some kind of investigative subpoena by his investigative committee) allowing him to search the hospitals - came up showing AT BEST a registration of foreign birth in the State Archive, which would at least be a legally valid document but would refute the claim of a Hawaii birth.
Because the politician in the picture above told you so?
Because the politician in the picture above told you so?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Or, is it because this politician, recently stated that "It was actually written, I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down,"
Really?
You don’t have a clue. Yes a person can only be born in one place. Ever hear of Birth Certificate Fraud? Which certificate is fraudulent, the first shown or the second, or the third. Sheesh are you on drugs?
You’re not only uninformed, illinformed, and totally wrong, you’re rude to call people trolls who are extremely diligent and talented researchers. And indisputably on our side. Not sure about which side you’re on, though.
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.