Posted on 11/10/2008 8:27:51 PM PST by virgin
NEW JERSEY VOTER VS. OBAMA AND McCAIN ON "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" STATUS NOW BEFORE US SUPREME COURT - DONOFRIO v. WELLS - STANDING NOT CHALLENGED IN LOWER COURTS - OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE NOT MAIN ISSUE
(Excerpt) Read more at democratic-disaster.com ...
I was going to attempt to reply, but can not articulate my response any better than conservativegramma.
That might not be what you were hoping for, but that's my professional judgment, based on having handled about four dozen election law cases, including in the Supreme Court.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article, "President Obama: How Bad Will It Be?"
The Declaration, the Constitution, parts of the Federalist, and America's Owner's Manual, here.
Dean is stepping down from his position as head of the DNC? Wonder if it has any thing to do with being named in Berg’s law suit or this NJ suit.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2129476/posts
Any suggestions about what we can do?
We never did find out why the passport office was breached at the beginning of the campaign.
John / Billybob
I have a bad feeling this freeper virgin (poster of this thread) saw the 'pending' listed with the supreme court and assumed it was Donofrio's. I think he saw the pending for Berg and confused the two.
IOW, I'm getting depressed as I see our options running out.
Cynthia McKinney. She’s the Green Party nominee. Do a quick FR search for her, and you’ll find out everything that you need to know. :-)
In most cases, the Court denies Emergency Relief without the other side (in my case, California) having to reply at all. If the Court thinks there MIGHT be some merit to the Emergency Relief, it requires the other side to respond to the Petition on an accelerated basis.
The Court did that in my case. California then filed its required response. The Court considered both pleadings on the papers (there was no hearing), and then ruled for California.
Exactly that can, and most likely will, happen in the Berg case, going forward from now. In short, the response being filed by Obama need only say why the Berg Petition should be dismissed, no more than that.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article, "President Obama: How Bad Will It Be?"
The Declaration, the Constitution, parts of the Federalist, and America's Owner's Manual, here.
Wanna bet?
You are trading short term convenience for long term trouble. If a person and his backers know that they broke the law to get something and everyone around them are unwilling to act, it will encourage that person and his backers to break even more laws in the future to get other things. Allowing BO and his allies to break one part of the US Constitution will only encourage them to break the other parts. Once that happens we no longer have a Republic anymore.
Rather than a scorched earth setting that you all are proposing, and a give-and-take that I suggested, do you guys (or anyone else) see a way to simultaneously uphold the Constitution, while fending off the possible results from doing just that?
Mind you, I think that this is all a moot exercise. I'll be very surprised if the SCOTUS bothers to hear the case. That's the worst possible choice for all sides, IMHO, but I doubt that they're going to ask for my opinion.
You mean like making a mockery of our voting rights by the ACORN voter registration fraud program?
I completely understand your point. I'm just looking for a way to have my cake and eat it too, I guess.
It seems that we're faced with Hobson's choice.
1. The SCOTUS does nothing (IMHO, the most likely outcome). This action gives tacit approval to Obama's actions, thus encouraging more of the same (like you posted). Flip side is that Obama serves under a cloud with conservatives, particularly if the documentation in question is ever "leaked" - see the "Selected not Elected" liberal mantra that Pres. Bush is still dealing with, 8 years later, at the end of his term, and even after he was legitimately elected with no SCOTUS intervention in '04.
2. The Supreme Court rules to uphold the Constitution (the right decision, IMHO) and America deals with the Societal Fallout resulting from it.
3. The Supreme Court rules NOT to uphold the Constitution (the wrong decision, IMHO, but I put nothing past them) and America deals with the Societal and Legal Fallout resulting from it.
4. The Supreme Court finds some middle ground, or some way to uphold the law while mitigating the end results. (the least likely decision, IMHO, but potentially the safest).
We'll see.
Thank you so much for the information!
As time goes on I find it very difficult to be able to say or think “everything will be OK”. It is clear that we 57 million Americans must continue to fight to protect America from total destruction during the next four years!
Whatever happens I will continue to fight against Socialism and will continue to pray for our country!
It was what I expected.
I wonder what their primary motive is?
1. Protecting the constitution.
2. Preferring another candidate.
3. Both.
4. Other.
I searched my own soul on this awhile back when it was floated that Arnie might like a shot at POTUS. While he's never been a particular favorite, I did like his speech at the RNC in 2003? and might prefer him to certain other candidates depending.
No way would I have wanted to allow him to be POTUS because the constitutional requirements must stay in place first and foremost. They are there for a good reason.
If we make any exceptions and open that door, anyone or anything could happen in the future which isn't looking so good as it is.
Please ping me when you hear anything about a SC decision or any other progress made in getting to the truth! Thank you so much!
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.