Posted on 07/14/2009 6:16:26 AM PDT by real_patriotic_american
Urban Dictionary defines a 'birther' as "A person who believes that Barack Obama has controversy and/or fraud surrounding his birth…"
At last count, at least 17 lawsuits had been filed in 17 different states questioning Barack Obama's status as an American citizen and his right to prop his feet up on the desk in the Oval Office.
One of those lawsuits will now get the chance to see the light of day.
Dr. Orly Taitz, attorney for Alan Keyes in Keyes vs. Obama, announced late this evening that a judge has ruled in favor of Mr Keyes' request for a trial to discover whether or not Obama is an American citizen and, as such, entitled to be President of the United States of America.
Two weeks ago, World Net Daily posted a story outlining the difficulties Taitz encountered in attempting to serve the President with a subpoena. Taitz has filed multiple legal actions around the country alleging Obama does not meet the constitutional requirements to occupy the Oval Office.
Monday's hearing was on a request by Taitz for a default judgment, since she notified the president of the action weeks ago, and his lawyers failed to respond.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter ruled in favor of Taitz and granted the "motion for reconsideration of order to show cause or in the alternative to certify question for appeal.". A trial date will be set and Taitz "will immediately request access to Obama's birth records and other documentation that could determine his eligibility to occupy the Oval Office."
Bottom line? Whether one is a 'birther' or a 'believer,' this case will definitely be worth watching!
Orly knows first hand what an Obama republic would be like.
The real goal of all these Obama eligibility lawsuits is not to throw President Obama out of office before the 2012 presidential elections, although it would be great if just one of these lawsuits unexpectedly caused President Obama to resign.
1. To me, the true goal is to make it so uncomfortable and exhausting for Obama---as he faces lawsuit after lawsuit day after day during the final 3 years of his presidency---that Obama will have no choice but to decline to run for office again in 2012.
2. Myself, I don't have any hope that this judge will help the anti-Obama people in this lawsuit, because I don't see the Los Angeles judge doing anything different than other judges have done before him on this Obama eligibility mess: He will probably find a legal reason for dismissing the lawsuit.
3. But the judge's expected decision in favor of Obama doesn't really matter, because our goal is to keep putting pressure on Obama over and over again about this eligibility issue during the next 3 years right up to the 2012 presidential primaries and further.
4. Guess what. When Obama runs for office in the 2011-2012 right up to the Democratic Convention in 2012, he will have to run just like any other candidate who runs for President of the United States, that is, he will not have special treatment just because he happens to be President of the United States.
5.He will no doubt face question after question about where he was born and about why he won't release his college records.
6. But this second time around will much different for the community organizer-state senator than the first time he ran for president in 2008.
7. That is, he won't get a free pass as to his eligibility status.
8. For instance, there is a good chance that Obama will have to face even more and more court challenges to his eligibility status during the campaign of 2012.
9. But this time during the 2011-2012 campaign, Obama could be so EXHAUSTED from facing today's lawsuits day after day, he might NOT have any stomach or energy left to face more eligibility lawsuits if he decides to run again.
10. And if I am not mistaken, it will be Obama the private citizen who will have to fight those many eligibility lawsuits that Obama will no doubt face if he decides to run in the 2011-2012 primaries.
Again, fighting such lawsuits could cost Obama million, although I bet Obama would receive financial help from his rich democratic party friends.
11. My point is this: I believe that the Los Angeles judge will find some legal reason why he will dismiss the Obama eligibility lawsuit like the other judges before him have done.
12. But it doesn't matter, because our real objective is to keep putting pressure on Obama day after day with new lawsuits during Obama's first term over the next 3 years so that Obama will not have the energy, the finances, nor the stomach to face even more eligibility lawsuits and questions about where he was born and about his college records.
13. If I were Obama, I would be a little frightened by the thought that I will have to fight numerous lawsuits over and over again during the 2012 presidential again that question my eligibility to be President of the United States.
14. And remember, the eligibility lawsuits of the 2012 presidential campaign will be much more sophisticated than the lawsuits of today, because the lawsuits of 2012 will have learned from the mistakes of the eligibility lawsuits that will be filed during Obama's presidency of 2009-2012.
15. Again, I expect the Los Angeles judge to quickly dismiss this lawsuit like other judges have dismissed Obama eligibility lawsuits in the past.
Posted very early this AM or late last night
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2292023/posts
Opponents of Barack Obama’s presidency claim small court victory
Los Angeles Times ^ | 7/13/09 | Tami Abdollah
Posted on Monday, July 13, 2009 11:49:46 PM by Smokeyblue
Supporters of a case that disputes the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s presidency claimed a small victory today when U.S. District Judge David O. Carter told them to fix their paperwork and that he would listen to “the merits” of their case. But others present for the hearing Monday at the federal courthouse in Santa Ana stressed that the case remains a long way from ever getting a full airing in court and may never get to that point.
The case, Alan Keyes, et al. v Barack H. Obama, et al. was filed on Inauguration Day and is one of a raft of suits alleging Obama is ineligible to be president because he is not a “natural born citizen.” Such claims have fared badly in court to date. In December, for example, the Supreme Court dismissed without comment a case challenging Obama’s right to take the oath of office.
Perhaps because of that history, Orly Taitz, the lawyer who filed the current suit, was greatly cheered by Monday’s hearing. “He’s very determined to hear the case on the merits,” Taitz said, referring to the judge. “He stated, the country needs to know if Mr. Obama is legitimate, if he can legitimately stay in the White House.”
That’s not quite the way Asst. U.S. Atty. David DeJute heard the judge’s comments. Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, said that “the judge did make a bunch of comments about having the matter correctly and thoroughly aired, once and if they got to the merits of the actual lawsuit, which was not the subject of today’s discussion.”
The key word is “if,” Mrozek stressed. “We’re literally at procedural grounds at this point in time,” he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
I really don’t know. My first thought would be that disqualifying the president would void the whole election including the vice president and the office should belong to McCain but who knows? Maybe a real constitutional expert could say what should happen but that is no guarantee of what actually would happen.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter ruled in favor of Taitz and granted the "motion for reconsideration of order to show cause or in the alternative to certify question for appeal.".
I don’t support lies on either side.
I also don’t support using the courts for anything but legal questions.
Fraud and legal loops holes can’t be fixed or addressed when garbage is being hurled aimlessly at the walls to churn the system.
What does this mean? People are posting this Orly note saying the judge is promising a trial?? Judges never promise that.
I am all for it but we need accurate info. I see notes that ed Hale claims he has the Kenyan BC. Other people say Berg has it. I am in full support let’s just make sure we know what is going on. I think it may get out because the economy is getting worse and he is a joke/disaster.
Normally paralegals etc who deliver official documents get signatures for proof of delivery. I don’t understand why that happened. (Certifiable, uncontestable proof)
BTTT!
Bump!
bUMp
http://defendourfreedoms.net/2009/02/10/white-house-refused-to-be-served-pleadings.aspx
White House Refused to be Served Pleadings
ZOT!
Ok, I remember that now. I think there was a communication failure between the volunteer and the atty. Thanks...
Even a glance of the docket shows it was addressing proper service. That is procedural, not merit of the case.
I also don’t support using the courts for anything but legal questions.
Fraud and legal loops holes can’t be fixed or addressed when garbage is being hurled aimlessly at the walls to churn the system.
*****
This is mirse. I'm sorry, but I don't understand your statement above.
Could you please explain in more detail what you are saying. Thanks.
Read that before and again this morning....Cal is this in any way an obstruction of justice?
Yes I know.....Just posting to you what was posted last night, so you would know what was happening.
Don’t know. When we started on these threads, you were our legal expert because you have been around it all you life. Now I only am familiar with what has hit me in the face. And even then I don’t know all the nuances.
No, I was clear enough.
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.