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!
Correct. That was the service yesterday’s (an appeal) case was about. Proper procedure of that service.
Dad has been catching up on his recreational reading, just got his “eyes done” Gave him the material posted last night and his comment was....Well it looking like a least one case is making a little progress”
Was particularly interested in the comment that the judge might want Orley’s case on paper, apparently could decide without witnesses/ going to open court.
Would be able to tell more if we could down load paper work, but appently none were given....just papers given to the Fed Attorneys that “happened to be present”....In effect “serving” bHo, which she had tried but was unsuccessful in doing, because of the antics of bHo’s people....SInce this was not Orley intent, it seems that the judge took control and solved the problem for her.
A poster over at World Net Daily found Hawaii government information from way back in 1961 in which Hawaii explained how it classified race and ethnic groups.
Below is an excerpt from that Hawaii government information.
I'm not sure what it means, but the classification of "African" as is found on the Obama Hawaii birth certificate that we see on the internet is NOT found in the Hawaii government classification.
*****
Race and color
Births in the United States in 1961 are classified for vital statistics into white, Negro, American Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Aleut, Eskimo, Hawaiian and Part-Hawaiian (combined), and "other nonwhite."
The category "white" includes, in addition to persons reported as "white," those reported as Mexican or Puerto Rican. With one exception, a reported mixture of Negro with any other race is included in the Negro group; other mixed parentage is classified according to the race of the nonwhite parent and mixtures of nonwhite races to the race of the father.
The exception refers to a mixture of Hawaiian and any other race, which is classified as Part-Hawaiian.
In most tables a less detailed classification of "white" and "nonwhite" is used.
Completeness of birth registration in 1961 for "white" births is estimated to be 99.3 percent and for "nonwhite" births, 96.6 percent.
The most recent figures for other groups are from the 1950 test which indicated registration completeness at that time to be 85.1 percent for American Indians and 97.4 percent for ''other races," chiefly Chinese and Japanese.
Both figures are probably higher for 1961, but more precise estimates are not available.
A comparison of the race designation in matched sets of birth certificates and census records from the 1950 registration completeness'test indicates very high agreement for white persons and Negroes. There were, however, substantially fewer American Indians recorded on birth records than on census records.
It will be interesting to see what happens now that he has been served.
Yes it will be considering to what lengths they went to keep the serving from happening....
I thought it was interesting that the federal attorneys just happened to be present....
BTW BC stories are now up on Drudge and in USA today.
I appreciate all the time and effort everyone is investing in this. Thanks to you and all for the continued postings and pings. Whether we are birthers or not, we have a right to know why he is too afraid to show the certificate in court. Let it happen, and the consequences happen.
So is the left freaking out yet this morning over te news? :>
I did see that. Did you see the Modern Ghana yesterday?
http://www.modernghana.com/news/226379/1/history-beckons-as-prez-obama-arrives-tomorrow.html
History Beckons - As Prez Obama Arrives Tomorrow
4th paragraph down.
From a report on this issue last night:
"While no attorneys appeared on Obama’s behalf, several members of the U.S. Attorney’s office in California were in attendance, and sought to intervene on behalf of Obama over his actions before becoming president.
The judge ordered them to accept service of the lawsuit immediately and then continued the case to an unannounced date.
Taitz told WND, “For first time, we have a judge who’s listening.” Multiple WND calls to various branches of the U.S. attorney’s offices in California did not generate any response.”
(end snip)
Who sent the US Attorneys in California to the hearing? Obama..Holder? I have a feeling all hell is about to break lose on this. May God protect Dr. Taitz and her family and all of the patriots standing up for the truth!
And then, from a poster on that thread:
1. There will be a trial. WOW, if true, that explains WHY "Fight the Smears" and Obama's other birth information is being wiped off the internet. It was probably ordered by White House lawyers, sensing LAST week that the judge might go down this path. I called Archive.org last week about WHY "Fight the Smears" is no longer archived. At first, she asked if I was the owner (I should have said "yes" ...). Then the lady I spoke with said the owners seem to have asked for the website to be removed the first day, then implanted robots in their HTML code to remove it from Archive.org.
For Ghana, Obama's visit will be a celebration of another milestone in African history as it hosts the first-ever African-American President on this presidential visit to the continent of his birth.
Have similar questions...Why were they there? The judge certainly took advantage of their presence by serving them with the papers.
That was not the reason SCOTUS hasn't heard one of the cases.
Since the President has already provided proof of citizenship to the courts, and the Supreme Court has affirmed that certification
Oh? When did that happen and where is your proof?
Any one who has not done so might gain some benefit from reading my comment in response to doug at "Federal Judge to hear Obama Birth Certificate on the Merits!" Tuesday, July 14, 2009 7:00:27 AM · 322 of 368
In reading the general Free Republic commentary, there are some things everyone needs to understand again. These are technical legal questions and there are specific rules governing legal proceedings in any court which must be complied with or you don't get your case heard on the merits.
It isn't magic; it isn't luck; usually the bias of the judge only kicks in when your lawyer has screwed up so badly that the judge knows you can't successfully appeal what he has done.
All lawyers are not the same; all lawyers don't have the same degree of experience and background to manage the same level of complexity in these kinds of cases nor to exercise the same level of detailed precise care in preparing and filing pleadings or getting cases served and filed properly.
All of the (Obama Citizenship) cases I have seen involve some element of the kind of technical imprecision that keeps these cases from being heard on the merits. To some degree, even the current cases which have a better level of access to factual material (because people involved in earlier cases have done a great deal of work) where counsel is learning from the mistakes of prior parties, still are defective.
And the docket doesn't always disclose what has happened in the technical sense. I don't have time to go looking for original court documents although I could probably get some of them. But as to the Keyes Santa Ana case, a couple of additional things have appeared to me that I did not point out in the earlier post.
This case was originally commenced as an action against Obama prior to his inauguration as President on the theory that he was a private citizen--you just get him served properly and you get him in court.
Whether he really did not understand that the case was pending or not, he had a reasonable position that he had not been properly served and thus that the case was not properly pending against him. And that is what Judge Carter originally ruled.
Again, a fairly simple screw up by counsel--shouldn't have happened; but, as the WND article pointed out, probably, the case wasn't properly served and once he gets in office as President, you can't sue him that way and get him into court on some reasonable schedule.
On the motion for rehearing, Judge Carter says, "OK, well you have this whine about not getting a hearing on the merits--maybe you serve the US Attorney and proceed on the merits on the theory that he improperly holds office".
Now you get to the entire series of technical problems involved in sueing the President of the United States while he is in office and I tend to doubt that you are likely to overcome the objections that will appear before his term is over.
Now I want to expound further on the other Thursday Case, Cook, which is apparently also Orly Taitz's case and I will do that separately addressed to Lucy and she can post it where she deems it appropriate to do so.
There is some merit to John Mirse's comment to which this is incidentally directed. But the real initial point is that if you had done a decent job of dealing with the technical legal, you might well have been successful. If you can't get your legal work done correctly, focus on the fact that this guy is not really the President may well have the result of limiting his ability to inact damaging legislation.
Thanks, David.
Ping to an important comment at #94.
.
I’ve noticed that too, many cases having technical issues. Problem is, there are more people like me that don’t understand them to see them and not enough people like you to explain them.
The extent of your post—some lENGTHY planning to express the points to the length of fifteen points, with separate groupings(!)—all rests upon a specious premise. You have tried to imply that all the parties suing this affirmative action figure liar are part of a cabal seeking to make his pres__ency impotent. Anyone following the many and varied cases sees your initial premise is false, thus we are left to concluded that your fifteen points are a carefully arranged defense of a specious premise ... very astroturfish, N00b.
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." ]]
Here is the text as posted at your link on 2/10/09:
[[White House Refused to be Served Pleadings
Today, my volunteer tried to serve the Pres. Obama the pleadings from Keyes v. Obama. The guard would not grant her entry to the White House, which is fine. But the guard wouldn't sign for the pleadings either. But, it didn't end there either. Either the guard or Secret Service threatened her also.
In the end, we had her serve Obama's copy of the pleadings to the Justice Department. But wanted all to know the type of transparency we have here.
Posted by Defend Our Freedoms at 2/10/2009 11:40 AM ]]
Thanks again for the cogent post, Lady.
It is interesting to note that this bastard in the Oval Office has to have professional liars slug sliming on the internet, to protect his fraudulency. But then again, this is what rule by a criminal enterprise is all about, voters.
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.