ping
To which Scalia replied what?
Of interest?
Almost more frightening than fascinating. I don’t fancy myself a conspiracy theorist by nature, but this whole eligibility question is getting to be just plain weird, IMO.
Keep the heat on it, though. It’s a critical Constitutional question that deserves fair and thorough hearing and resolution. If we turn our backs on this issue, then we deserve whatever comes our way...
It’s time to take back the country.
About the citizenship issue, Scalia told a close relative of mine that “if the electorate don’t care, why should we (the Court) get involved?”
BTTT
Good!
Ummmm..., isn’t there a bit of a problem discussing a “case” you have before the very judge who is going to hear it? LOL...
This seems quite odd. It seems less like a *lawyer* and more like a “public relations stunt”... :-)
Ah, Calpernia...so much for that...
ping
“Baxter flu vaccines contaminated with H5N1 - otherwise known as the human form of avian flu, one of the most deadly biological weapons on earth with a 60% kill rate - were received by labs in the Czech Republic, Germany, and Slovenia.
Initially, Baxter attempted to stonewall questions by invoking “trade secrets” and refused to reveal how the vaccines were contaminated with H5N1. After increased pressure they then claimed that pure H5N1 batches were sent by accident.”
Very interesting stuff??? While the Scalia stuff was interesting and encouraging, the bird flu stuff is TERRIFYING!!
3 month incubation period?? How many people were infected with the live avian flu virus?
Wow.
From the SCOTUS web site itself:
"Caution: These electronic orders may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official printed versions. [snip] In case of discrepancies between the print and electronic versions of orders, the print version controls.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/orders/08ordersofthecourt.html
The quest becomes, has anyone verified for a fact that the PRINT version has the identical docketing information? That is, does the print record state that Scalia refered Wrot's case for conference?
File under shameless promotion if you wish, but unpsun’s internet radio show last night was supposed to have Phil Berg on but got basically bumped to tonight for a “glitch”, given Dr. OT’s assertion of other technical problems, I go ahead here. See:
http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/
Monday, March 9, 2009
UPDATE: Eligibility Challengers Phil Berg, Tuesday 8pm ET & Mario Apuzzo, Thr.; Streaming Interviews & Archive
Our carrier, blogtalkradio.com had a rare (I trust) technical glitch and since we were given 15 minutes for “The Awakening,” this Monday, Philip Berg has graciously agreed to be our guest at the same time, tomorrow, this Tuesday, 8pm ET,,,5pm PT. We trust that, unlike Barack Obama, a.k.a., Barry Soetoro, blogtalkradio.com’s problems are behind them.
The Awakening with Hanen & Arlen
3/10/2009 8:00 PM — Streaming Link
[go to site]
Philip Berg will be our guest and we will be discussing Hollister v Soetoro and the arrogant memorandum US District Court Judge James Robertson issued. Also, did Obama’s lawyers really say the original birth certificate could be embarrassing to Obama and the Democratic Party? Why is there so much obstruction in these cases against Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama?
Call-in Number, to listen, or press 1 to ask a question: (646) 727-2652
Its also very interesting that Obama gave up his Law License in 2002 voluntarily! Who, as a Lawyer gives up his/her Law License for No Good Reason? So what could the reason be that ZERO gave up his Law License? Documents show that his ife was literally “Forced” to turn in her License “ in 1994 to put to rest some alleged legal issue.
I am getting a runtime error from the links.
:(
"Chief Justice John Roberts will be in Idaho!
I wonder if Chief Justice Roberts is familiar with that conference? Can anyone in Idaho show up to the University of Idaho and ask why the case wasn't heard?
I need to know when and where Supreme Court Justices give lectures
Help me reach Supreme Court Justices After the meeting with Justice Scalia, I realized that he never heard about my case Lghtfoot v Bowen or any other cases brought to the Supreme Court about Obama's lack of eligibility for presidency. Supreme Court gets some 80,000 cases and hears only about 80. So, they hear only about 0.1% of the cases brought to them. I believe the nefarious clerks that are actually running the show, are advising them about the importance and the strength of the cases, summarize the cases for them. I need to know if the other Justices have a clue about the cases. At the meeting Scalia told that they pick the cases based on importance. At the time they had a conference on my case Lightfoot v Bowen and didn't find eligibility of president to be important, they found litigation on light cigaretes to be important. Either this is a complete insanity, or the clerks have never shown the case to them. The Justices of the Supreme Court travel around the Country all the time and give lectures and sell their books. Please, let me know, when those justices come to your area. Either I will come or you have to demand answers from them: Why didn't they forward from the conference to the open court argument my case Lightfoot v Bowen? or any other cases on this issue? Don 't they think legitimacy of president is as important as litigation on light cigarettes. American citizens deserve a clear answer from them, why didn't they hear the case and what will it take for them to hear the case in open court and subpoena Obama's records. If you have a date and time, call me" [see her site for #]
Ping!!!
Please see my post # 95.
obumpa