Posted on 01/31/2009 12:29:20 AM PST by Red Steel
OTHER LAWSUITS HAVE FAILED, BUT THIS ONE WON'T! The worst part about the American judicial system is when judges dismiss claims based on lack of standing or lack of jurisdiction. Claims that are not in the correct court or which do not have the correct cause of action, should be re-directed, not dismissed!
Other lawsuits seeking Barack Hussein Obama's original long form birth certificate were either filed in the wrong court or filed with the wrong cause of action; that didn't mean there was no valid claim.
There are divorce courts, and family courts and probate courts and tax courts and criminal courts and civil courts and county courts and state courts and federal courts; how is a person to know which court to go to? Getting the right cause of action is just as tricky as getting the right court.
There needs to be a new system, file one claim in one court, then let court specialists sift it out to the right jurisdiction and for the right legal cause of action for standing. That would make a lot of new jobs, and save a lot of wasted money filing in the wrong jurisdiction for the wrong cause of action resulting in loss of standing. CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA FOR FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS THAT HE ALLEGEDLY HAS A DUTY TO PROVIDE VOTERS BECAUSE HIS "CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH" SHOWS THIS LEGAL NOTICE IN TINY PRINT IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER, "[HRS 338-13(b), 338-19].
Ms. Cris Ericson, registered voter and resident of the State of Vermont, believes that President Barack Hussein Obama has a legal DUTY to provide voters with material facts that he is currently allegedly fraudulently concealing.
Ms. Ericson believes that the legal DUTY is required by the legal notice on his "Certification of Live Birth" which, in the lower right hand corner, in tiny fine print, states: [HRS 338-13(b), 33819].
Ms. Ericson is hoping to find an attorney licensed to practice law in federal courts to file a class action lawsuit, PRO BONO, on behalf of herself and other registered voters who want to know, and who need to know, and who allegedly have a legal right to know if the legal notice is based on material facts that would reveal that President Barack Hussein Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen, and may reveal that President Barack Hussein Obama is a naturalized citizen. Ms. Cris Ericson believes that the material facts that the legal notice represents may provide legal cause of action to allegedly prove continuing fraud in a fiduciary capacity against taxpayers and voters by President Barack Hussein Obama, former Vice President Dick Cheney, and each and every member of the United States Congress.
Was it fraud against taxpayers and voters for each and every member of the United States Congress on January 8, 2009 to vote without first issuing a subpoena for Barack Hussein Obama's original long form birth certificate? Was the Congressional certification of Electoral College Votes on January 8, 2009 an act of conspiracy to defraud voters and taxpayers
because former Vice President Dick Cheney asked for members of Congress to vote without informed consent, and this resulted in an alleged possible conspiracy to issue forth certified votes as fraudulent conveyances? 0its officers under 28 USCS Section 1491 Claims against the United States. http://ucfc.uscourts.gov Federal Claims Court http://uscode.house.gov/searchcriteria.shmtl Online law library
28 USCS Section 1491 Claims against United States The United States Claims Court (United States Court of Federal Claims) shall have jurisdiction to render judgment upon any calim against the United States founded either upon the Constitution or any Act of Congress or any regulation of an executive department, or upon any express or implied contract with the United States. (2) To provide an entire remedy and dto complete the relief afforded by the judgment, the Court may, as an incident of and collateral to any such judgement, issue orders directing restoration to office or position, placement in appropriate duty or retirement status, and correction of applicable records, and such orders may be issued to any appropriate official of the United States. In any case within its jurisdiction, the Court shall have the power to remand appropriate matters to any administrative or executive body or official with such direction as it may deem proper and just.
"Court of Federal Claims is Article I Court of limited jurisdiction created by Congress as forum where private parties could sue government for non-tort money claims, where claims would otherwise be barred by sovereign immunity." Slovacek v United States (1998) 40 Fed Cl 828, 98-1 USTC 50397, 81 AFTR 2d 98-1859. "Congress created Court of Federal Claims to afford individuals forum to bring specific claims against government; while placing jurisdictional limits upon Court, Congress did not intend those jurisdictional limits to be manipulated to prevent claimant from recovering compensation against government." Davis v United States (1996) 35 Fed Cl 392. "Jurisdiction under 28 USCS Section 1491 applies only to contracts either express or implied in fact, not implied in law, where (1) agreement implied in fact is founded upon meeting of minds, which, although not embodied in express contract, is inferred from conduct of parties showing their tacit understanding, while (2) by contrast, agreement implied in law is fiction of law where promise is imputed to perform legal duty." Hercules Inc. v United States (1996, US) 134 L Ed 2d 47, 116 S Ct 981, 96 CDOS 1403, 96 Daily Journal DAR 2395, 40 CCF 76894, 9 FLW Fed S 442.
In President Barack Hussein Obama's "Certification of Live Birth" you can see, in the lower right hand corner, the legal notice: [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19] and then please go to http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov and on the right hand click on Hawaii Revised Statutes. HRS 338-19 is a birth certificate issued as a "copy" relying on documents that were too old to be used, and or otherwise in such condition that they could not be used. The statute is contradictory because if the documents were too old or in too poor a condition to be used to certify, then why did the State of Hawaii issue a "copy" that was based on possibly non-legible material? It makes no common sense. The Statute is contradictory, overly vague, overly broad and therefore unconstitutional.
HRS 338-13(b) is subject to the requirements of HRS 338-16, HRS 338-17 and HRS 338-18. These are for birth certificates that are issued one year or more after birth, and for certificates that have been altered, and/or both. This set of statutes also gives a party legal standing to request a judicial determination of the validity of the birth certificate because it was issued one year or more after birth and/or altered. "Court of Federal Claims lacks jurisdiction to hear claims against States or their Agencies except where States or their Agencies acted as agents of United States." Hassan v United States (1998) 41 Fed CL 149.
Clearly, the State of Hawaii and the Agency of the Department of Health of Hawaii, have acted as agents of the United States Congress, former Vice President Dick Cheney and President Barack Hussein Obama because the Governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, sealed President Barack Hussein Obama's original long form birth certificate and all underlying information upon which the "Certification of Live Birth" was issued. The "Certification of Live Birth" is just a "short form" certificate with none of the information that a regular "long form birth certificate" has. "Plaintiff's federal tort claim against government is not dismissed prior to discovery on grounds that discretionary function exception of 28 USCS Section 2680(a) applied, because factual issues and evidence to support those issues are not presently known to plaintiff, and dismissal of action prior to discovery would be premature and unduly harsh." Fanoele v United States (1995, DC Kan) 898 F Supp 822.
(1) The United States Congress failed to do their duty to obtain any long form birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama before certifying the Electoral College Votes.
(2) Former Vice President Dick Cheney failed to do his duty to ask for objections to the Electoral College vote.
(3) President Barack Hussein Obama has failed to do his duty to release the information upon which statutes HRS 338-13(b) {which is subject to the requirements of 338-16, 338-17, 338-18} and 338-19 were legally required to be noticed on his "Certification of Live Birth".
(4) All of the Judges and Justices in State and Federal Courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States, where previous plaintiffs have tried various motions to compel material facts and subpoena Barack Hussein Obama's original long form birth certificate, have denied all such actions, and therefore, the legal jurisdiction and the legal standing rests with the United States Court of Federal Claims; either that or the Judges and Justices are in conspiracy to conceal material facts from voters and taxpayers.
(5) The Hawaii "Certification of Live Birth" of Barack Hussein Obama was issued one year or more after he was born, and/or altered. We, the people, need to know why. The "Certification of Live Birth" also gives a legal notice: (Rev. 11/01) which is absolute proof that Barack Hussein Obama received this "Certification of Live Birth" after he was already 40 years old. What took him so long? Why did he receive this "Certification of Live Birth" which was issued when he was 40 years old, or older, after September 11, 2001, the Terrorist Attack on the United States of America? Where was he living during the Terrorist Attack on the United States of America and why did he need to get a "Certification of Live Birth" after the attack, and how much was it altered from the original long form birth certificate?
WE, the PEOPLE, NEED TO KNOW! Hawaii has different standards for evidence than Federal Rules of Evidence.
"District Court did not abuse its discretion in applying Federal Rules of Evidence rather than Hawaii Health Department Rules in finding results of intoxilizer test admissible under public records and reports exception to hearsay rule of Rule 803(6)(8)." United States v De Water (1998, CA9 HAWAII) 846 F2d 528, 25 Fed Rules Evid Serv 748.
President Barack Hussein Obama now needs to be held to the standards of Federal Rules of Evidence because he now holds the Office of the President of the United States of America, and his "Certification of Live Birth" should now be required to be determined if it can, or can not, withstand federal scrutiny.
Ms. Cris Ericson would like to encourage voters and taxpayers to join her in a Class Action Lawsuit to subpoena the material facts, the original long form birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama in the United States Court of Federal Claims. She needs a Pro Bono attorney.
Ms. Cris Ericson http://crisericson.com 879 Church Street, Chester, Vermont 05143-9375 (802)875-4038 Please send a certified return receipt letter. Thank you and God Bless America!
Getting away with it is. They did cite all sorts of case law to back up their position, so maybe they will.
The thing that confuses me is this: The photos on factcheck appear to me to at least show a genuine Hawaiian certification document. (I don't buy the forgery arguments.) But why wouldn't Obama's lawyers be given a copy of it. Perhaps they would have to show it to the judge in open court to make their point, whereas they are hoping to arrange a dismissal without a hearing.
Didn’t Obama already do that when he said he’d spread the wealth around? Obama is a Socialist!
Just show us the original long form Birth Certificate.
Then, the drama will vaporize, or.......
Thanks!!
I agree! When someone hides something- they have something to hide. Note the amount of legal fees Obama has paid to keep his original birth certificate hidden.
Thank you, LJ. Certain posters just bring out the beast in me, you know what I mean?
Yes it will, allcaps notwithstanding.
If that class action lawsuit was able to get at least 200,000 names on it, it would have standing. A mass mailing with the facts surrounding the bc issue would need to be sent to all registered Republicans. They could join the suit, or not.
“Hammer me if you will, ban me if you will, but these lawsuits are ridiculous. They are meritless and we need to keep our eye on the ball if we are to regain the majority.”
I can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Rocky: "But that trick never works."
Bullwinkle: "This time for sure!"
If such a mass mailing were to be undertaken, I think it would be beneficial to include the PUMAs, whom I believe were 25% of the usual dem vote.
Not. 338-19 says that they may issue *copies*, the Certification is not a copy, it's an abstract from the original. 338-16 says that birth certificates issued one year or more late have to be clearly marked "late" or "altered". Note that Obama's COLB is not so marked and again the author has omitted this important fact.
The context makes it clear that by "Birth Certificates" they mean the original Certificate of Live Birth, not the abstract prepared from it.
§338-13 is the one that lets them make the Certification:
338-13 Certified copies.
(a) Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof.
(b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.
(c) Copies may be made by photography, dry copy reproduction, typing, computer printout or other process approved by the director of health. [L 1949, c 327, §17; RL 1955, §57-16; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-13; am L 1978, c 49, §1]
BTW, this section also indicates that the Department must, upon request, provide a certified *copy* of any such documents, which is different than "the contents of any part thereof", which is what the Certification is, a copy of part of the contents of the original document.
Gee, another one where the seal is easily visible, that makes around 8 think, the 9th, Obama’s is the lone standout where the seal is not easily visible or visible at all.
All Hell will Break Loose and then the SHTF.
Yes, that is technically correct. But I think what is probably going on is the following:
1. The Department of Health is interpreting the law to mean that they can issue the certification and call it a copy. They are mixing up the two concepts and getting away with it.
2. This is not right because there is additional information on the original certificates, but most likely hardly anyone ever calls them on this and probably no one has previously filed court cases over this issue. The vast majority of applicants probably take their "certification" and go on their merry way.
3. An additional reason that I think this is true is that there does not appear to be any method on the DOH website to order a "vault copy". The only option openly provided is to order the certification, but the DOH website calls this a "certified copy". Note that the fees requested are exactly as provided for in HRS 338-14.5
4. According to HRS 338-13(a), the DOH is supposed to provide to the applicant upon request information from any part of a certificate, but it appears that one must have to make some special arrangement to do this and they don't make it easy to find out how. HRS 338-14 (and 338-14.5) appears to provide the authorization to establish fees for certified copies and searches, but there is nothing in there about a specific fee for a vault copy.
5. Of course Obama would not have any problem getting past this bureaucracy if he really wanted to request a vault copy.
Austrailia News gets it...”Call to Protect the Republic”
Australian News | 1/30/09 | Zach Jones
Posted on 01/30/2009 5:43:42 AM PST by Sorry screen name in use
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2174882/posts
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.