Posted on 01/28/2009 6:17:15 AM PST by dascallie
OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL What did president tell Supreme Court?
Lawyer in eligibility case seeks records of secret discussions
Posted: January 27, 2009 9:47 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily
A lawyer whose case challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office was denied a hearing in the U.S. Supreme Court says she will demand records of a meeting between the justices and the president.
California lawyer Orly Taitz, who has several cases pending over the issue of Obama's status as a "natural born" citizen, told WND she will take action soon.
Her case was the most recent on which the Supreme Court held a "conference," an off-the-record discussion at which justices discuss whether to take a case. Taitz told WND the justices decided Jan. 23 to deny her case a hearing on its merits.
The result was the same for previous cases brought by Philip Berg, whose information is on his ObamaCrimes.com website, as well as Cort Wrotnowski.
Like Berg's cases, Taitz said hers now reverts to the lower court, where it was pending when her emergency appeals were submitted to the Supreme Court.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I’ve been using mlo longer than she’s been Michelle Obama. :-)
everyone’s birth certificate is sealed, except to themselves and certain relatives, try getting G.W. Bush’s birth certificate from Mass. and see how far you get
We don't have to, President Bush's Birth certificate was part of his Military records and since he signed his form 180 and opened not only his officers service record book as well as his military medical dental and pay records to the press, everything in it is public knowledge.
touche!
Some voted in 3 States. Not exactly legal.
Find one post where I've "boosted" Obama.
Debate the issues, not the posters.
No. "And now it’s obvious you aren’t serious. You are claiming it hasnt been released because no news orginization ASKED for it? Is that really your position?"
No. You claimed Obama refused to let the press see it. I asked you to cite an instance of it.
"You must have some other, some emotional, reason for defending Obama at this point."
I'm defending the truth, not Obama. Whether I like Obama being president or not (I don't), doesn't affect whether these birther fantasies are true. They aren't. Can you address the issues?
Silly question. More than likely when and if a court asks him to.
That doesn't make it a "Coup d'etat".
It wouldn't be the first questionable election, and it isn't the end of the Republic. Whatever damage he does, he'll still be up for election again in four years.
Proves? In what sense? In a legal case, no. A court would require the actual document. But he could hardly order a certified copy be sent to every American could he? For the public it is posted online.
"It is telling, however, that he would not submit that same document to any court in response to any of these cases."
Has any court asked for it? Have any of these cases even been heard?
"Does it bother you that presidential candidates are not vetted for constitutional eligibility?"
I'm not sure that there weren't ANY jurisdictions that failed to do so, but to the extent that they don't, yes it bothers me. I would like to see laws passed enforcing the constitutional requirements.
Not silly at all. An honest person or an honest president, would have presented it to a court without being asked to do so, especially if about 30 court cases around nation have been filed against your presidential legitimacy.
None of these cases have made it to the point it would be necessary to produce anything. I don't see your point.
You: “After all, Hillary never made an issue out of Obama’s citizenship in the primaries; McCain never made an issue out of it in the general election; and neither VP Cheney nor any single member of the House or Senate raised a single objection to the certification of the electoral votes”
BUT look at how hard it is to get actual proof. If Hillary and McCain suspected, but had no proof, they’d be laughed off the stage. Without the proof, they couldn’t dare bring it up.
I think you have it backwards. In a political campaign, either Hillary or McCain could have said, "why don't you clear up all doubts and disclose your birth certificate?" Once Obama is sworn in, a court won't touch any of these cases without crystal-clear evidence of fraud. They are not going to subpoena documents based on "we don't know if there's been a fraud or not."
I’m glad to hear that you have a problem with candidates not showing their birth certificates in order to get on the ballot.
I’m also glad to hear that you agree that Obama’s mailing a likeness of his abstracted B.C. was for show only, a meaningless, empty gesture. I cannot imagine why you are talking about him mailing a copy of it to every American. More obfuscation, perhaps?
With apologies up front, is that a real photo of the event under discussion?
I’ll thank you to keep your insults to yourself. I have engaged in no obfuscation. You just don’t like what I’m saying. Stick to the issues.
You don’t think your implication that I (or whomever) want him to mail that document to every American was an insult? Don’t expect to twist someone’s words with impunity.
No, it wasn't an insult, by any stretch. It is pointing out a logical consequence of the position being taken.
I don’t agree that that is the logical extension of anything that anyone has said on this board. It was an attempt to paint those concerned about this issue as unreasonable. I was not trying to insult you in my reply, but I was offended by that comment.
I would be just as concerned if McCain had won and refused to voluntarily submit documents, especially if he were e-mailing a document to web sites.
You said the birth certificate posted on the internet proves nothing. In fact, in the original paper form, it proves the facts of birth that are on it. It would be accepted in any court. So the only logical reason to say it proves nothing is because it is a scanned image on the internet.
But how else would it be made available to anyone, which was the point of putting it on the internet? Which was my point.
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.