No comparison. Obama is not an American.
Posted on 09/08/2009 12:21:47 PM PDT by neverbluffer
I cant find any news at all?
Does anybody know how things are progressing?
The court said in Jones V Bush that only candidates would have standing, and it is a good reason. I don’t want the courts overturning elections.
The courts won’t be overturning an election, they will only decide eligibility which Congress failed to do. Just because someone snuck by Congress doesn’t mean they don’t have to answer elswhere. Checks and balances (on a corrupt government) are in place for a reason.
“Well if voters dont have standing to contest eligibility, the government doesn’t have standing to make us pay taxes. No taxation without (real & honest) representation.”
I agree!!!!
I’m not sure. Probably about 1:30 I think is what the person on that blog I was on said. Pacific time that is. The judge had alot on his plate today. I might check by later for more info if I can find it!
P.S.
We have learned that the communist (they call themselves “Democrats, liberals, or progressives”) don’t pay taxes. Hence, the government has depended on us conservative fools to keep the crooked government afloat over the years on 15 April. Let them float this crooked government for a change.
Saw a hit piece against even with no facts yet!
In their Motion to dismiss, DOJ appears to have lied about Keyes standing, first denying it, then saying that even if he had standing, he wasn’t injured by Obama because he never would have gotten 270 electoral votes!
TABLE OF CONTENTS
III. ARGUMENT
1. This Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction Of
This Action
A. Plaintiffs Lack Standing Herein
1. No Plaintiff Can Show The Required
Concrete, Traceable Injury-in-Fact
To Provide Standing Herein
With respect to Alan Keyes, and Gail Lightfoot, it is alleged that they “appeared on the California ballot as candidates for President or Vice President in the 2008 National Presidential elections . . .”
None of the Plaintiffs alleged to have “unique political
standing” has suffered anything remotely resembling the required “injury-in-fact,” traceable to Defendants’ conduct, to vest them with standing in this case.
Plaintiffs do not make clear the precise nature of their “unique political” injury, but to the extent that they are alleging that President Obama’s actions interfered with their prospects for successful election, such an injury is not a result of the actions of the Defendants. The FAC
does not allege, nor could it allege, that any of these Plaintiffs were even on the ballot in enough states in the year 2008 to gain the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the Presidential election. Accordingly, the “unique[ly] political” Plaintiffs cannot establish standing on this basis.
My Seizethecarp analysis:
I am not an attorney, but I had to research legal ethics to file a complaint with the TX bar against my ex-wife’s attorney (went nowhere, of course).
The above argument by the DOJ in claiming that Keyes in particular lacks standing strikes me as being beyond “zealous advocacy” and crossing over into “intentionally misleading the tribunal”, which can be sanctioned by the judge and the bar.
DOJ seems to me to be flat out lying when they say “…to the extent that they are alleging that President Obama’s actions interfered with their prospects for successful election, such an injury is not a result of the actions of the Defendants.”
If plaintiffs can show that Obama knew or should have known that he was not an NBC at birth as a result of his stipulated dual citizenship at birth, or that he was born in Kenya, or that he dropped his US citizenship to obtain either a Kenyan or Indonesian passport and failed to re-nationalize, Keyes, at the very least would be injured by Obamas actions of knowingly being on the ballot while being ineligible to be president.
Most damning is when DOJ says “The FAC does not allege, nor could it allege, that any of these Plaintiffs were even on the ballot in enough states in the year 2008 to gain the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the Presidential election.” This seems to be an outright admission of Keyes’ standing, but it is couched in an attempt to claim that somehow Keyes’ standing doesn’t exist because Keyes wasn’t on the ballot in enough states!
We will see more hit pieces as this case continues.
My theory on standing is that we have the right to have an honest election. Abridgement of that right by fraud injures every (at least 49%)voter because the right was denied. This we would all have standing.
No comparison. Obama is not an American.
I have a more theoretical kind of question about standing. Suppose, after all the various suits have been brought and dismissed based on lack of standing, it has been shown that no one has standing except members of the current administration. Wouldn’t you think, as a matter of principle, that any member of the voting public (Ie: a registered, citizen voter) would have to be allowed standing to avoid the preposterous outcome where there is obviously a serious challenge to the capacity of the president to serve, but no one to bring it?
Too logical. Of course, I agree. Some judge somewhere will hear on the facts, as the judge in Santa Ana has threatened. Maybe the military officers who receive orders from the CIC will be found to have standing, if they’re not all court martialed first.
I see you are not aware of the difference between a hospital birth certificate and a government birth certificate! Oh and try WND's updated info...NS once again you FAIL and are a joke. Get up to speed before you put your foot in your mouth ..again...
yes. different bc. in both cases, the burder of
proof is on pRES_ _ENT Obama and Hawaii.
Wouldn't the burden of proof lie with Smith since he's claiming the document is authentic?
Donna, I called the Associated Press in Los Angeles and they weren’t even aware of the story. I told them about it and told them there were servicemen and servicewomen as plaintiffs with Dr. Taitz. I then told them that the judge, David Carter, was a former Marine. Hope this helps and birthers get a fair shake and something positive started on Obama alleged coverup of all his records.
Oh, AP knows about the case alright. There aren’t any caves in Los Angeles deep enough for them to hide from it. Their claim of ignorance is an attempt to cover their backsides. The major news services won’t admit the suit is even going on until Obambi is dargged kicking and screaming out of the White House. Even then they’ll claim “racism” was behind the whole movement.
“dargged” = ‘dragged’. Orly isn’t the only one who needs a proofreader.
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.