Posted on 01/11/2010 12:47:03 PM PST by Red Steel
It is my best guess that Obama’s attorneys figured that once Judge Carter dismissed it was over… far from it! Orly has come back with a strong offense. For sure the Justice Department (Obama, et al) is doing its best to stop Judge Carter from approving the transfer to Judge Lamberth in Washington DC. Orly filed a nice response to their opposition.
Below are some highlighted excerpts from the filing:
Orly has pointed out that Judge Carter promised to hear the case on its merits. The Justice Department defending Obama conned the Judge into dismissing and used the excuse of “jurisdiction” claiming only Quo Warranto can be brought in Washington DC.
Orly said, “fine, let’s move the case.” She is asking Judge Carter to move the case to Judge Lamberth’s court in DC. This would serve to best expedite the case, including discovery.
Orly is making sure that Judge Carter is aware of the fact that the Justice Department and Eric Holder have been stalling for many months now. An original Quo Warranto was filed in Judge Taylor’s Washington DC court (he has since retired.. couldn’t stand the heat in my opinion).. that was back in March, 2009. The Justice Department has done everyting in its power to stall, hide, ignore the case..
Orly is telling the Judge that the longer he waits to allow “we the people” to seek justice in court the more damage that Obama does to our Country. The Justice Department is basically defending a Usuper in office.. the entire system appears to be corrupt.. of course, Eric Holder is simply a puppet for Obama.
We hope and pray that Judge Carter allows this case to be transferred.. Obama will have a much tougher time getting the case dismissed in Washington DC if Carter allows the transfer.. Any kind of ruling against Obama will set a precedent that could literally force the Court into action.
Shame he’s gotten mixed up with that nut, Taitz.
And for me, that's always been the #1 issue. It's been a part of my tagline for quite some time now.
The trolls that irritate me are those who pretend to be conservative and then go on to **repeatedly** use DOJ talking points no matter the **hundreds**of times these points are **clearly** refuted.
Huh? How'd he get mixed up with Taitz?
Flak, target, etc.
Plink, plink, plink goes the nutlessgunner from the dark little corner.
The trolls that irritate me are those who pretend to be conservative and then go on to **repeatedly** use DOJ talking points no matter the **hundreds**of times these points are **clearly** refuted.
Hey, if you don't like my thinking and don't agree with it, I can understand that. I mean, people don't agree with each other, and a "board" is the place where all get to voice what they think as opposed to what someone else thinks.
But, to say that someone is not conservative because they don't agree with you is another matter and that's a very narrow definition subject to only your own whims and decisions... LOL...
Now, let me say for something which you're saying is "clearly refuted" -- then why are people having so much trouble with the fact of Obama being in office and not being able to get him out of office.
In other words, if something is so clear, so unmistakeable, and so impossible to understand any other way -- then Obama should have never gotten into office. But, the fact that he did get into office and the fact that even Vice President Cheney, President Bush and Johnn McCain and Sarah Palin -- did not challenge on these issues when they all had the authority and standing and ability to do so -- tells me that it's probably you who is not understanding the issue correctly.
I was visiting your mom.
Let us then sing the new tune: BHO...hmmmm...hmmmm...hmmmm!!!
And for me, that's always been the #1 issue. It's been a part of my tagline for quite some time now.
Yeah, and as far as I can see, that's the only issue that is left to resolve.
And I'm not saying it's not a legitimate issue for the Supreme Court to decide. They should. And I would go with their decision (even though I don't know what it would be... :-)...).
I just don't think they are going to decide it -- and if they do, I don't think it's going to be decided by the time Obama goes the length of his term in office. But, if they do -- and no matter how they decide it -- it will be fine by me.
And one more thing... if the Supreme Court were to decide it before Obama gets to run for his next election -- I would be more than happy about it.
Star,
The good Hawaii doctor has no training in Constitutional Law, and is therefore completely unqualified to render such a judgment.
The only certainty we can take from her statement is that she has seen some record of Obamas on file.
The Hospital’s attorneys would never certify as to his “natural born” status, except possibly under duress.
The typical MO for this issue has been to obfuscate with native-born, naturalized and native citizen.
By his own admission, his father was not a citizen; therefore, Obama being a natural born citizen is an impossibility.
Unfortunately here, the facts are not clear, and all documents that would sort the issue out have been under lock and key.
Finding out if Obama has “clear title” to the Presidency is necessary, as much as some would like for this issue to just go away.
Two outcomes from a possible quo warranto:
1. He is found not to have been born in HI, then case closed easily. He is ineligble and removed from office.
2. If found to have been born in HI, then legal question is much more complex. The DC District Court would have to opine on the definition of a natural born citizen.
Through separation of powers the judicial brach can make such a determination, but cannot remove a sitting President. Only Congress can remove a sitting President.
Then you continue to not care about the office being usurped. Others will continue the fight.
Well, the definition of whether it is usurped or not, is what the Supreme Court decision would be all about. It could come out that the Supreme Court decision may decide that it was not usurped -- by way of how they decide the natural born citizen status.
You're assuming that they are going to decide the way you think. They may not. And that's the nature of the Supreme Court.
But, as I said in a post just before this, I would be more than happy for the Supreme Court to decide this matter of the natural born status of a candidate in regards to his parents citizenship -- before the next election comes around that Obama would probably run in.
However when I say that I don't think it's going to happen, that's not an indication of what I would prefer (no, because I would like to see a Supreme Court decision on the matter, the day after tomorrow... LOL...). No, this only indicates what I see is happening and from what I see, you're not going to be getting that Supreme Court decision any time soon.
Again, making an evaluation from what I see happening in real life -- is not the same thing as saying that I prefer this to happen. You're confusing the two...
However, it is not a surprise that you were working for another ticket who was/is not meeting the NBC requirements???
Except for the VP candidate.
It depends on what is agreed upon.
The good Hawaii doctor has no training in Constitutional Law, and is therefore completely unqualified to render such a judgment.
You're making an assumption that the State of Hawaii would make an official pronouncement like that, affecting the nation -- without running it through qualified lawyers that the State of Hawaii has to look at those very issues... :-)
I'm not making that assumption...
Two outcomes from a possible quo warranto:
1. He is found not to have been born in HI, then case closed easily. He is ineligble and removed from office.
2. If found to have been born in HI, then legal question is much more complex. The DC District Court would have to opine on the definition of a natural born citizen.
The #1 point wouldn't be the case, since the State of Hawaii has already said he was born there. That presumes (and it's a good presumption, I think) that the records indicate that and that the State of Hawaii is not going to lie about where he was born.
The #2 point is the only one that is relevant, as far as I can see now and the only place it's going to be decided, once and for all and finally -- is with the Supreme Court.
When we get a Supreme Court decision on the matter, then we'll know it's "settled law" and there's not more discussion on the matter.
You are a mother clucker, ain'tcha? =_0
Bawk, bawk, bawk, bawk, bawk...
It depends on what is agreed upon.
In any case, it's clear that there were people who were in a position to know the facts of Obama's qualifications and were in a position to do something about it, if they saw that the facts indicated that something needed to be done.
Now, since no one along a very long chain of people who all had the ability and position to do something about it, including Vice President Cheney and President Bush -- tells me one of two things...
They were "all" involved in a grand conspiracy to usher Obama in office -- or -- they did not see it the way you do that he was not qualified under the Constitution.
Since I don't think that President Bush and Vice President Cheney was involved in a grand conspiracy to usher Obama into office (LOL...) -- I will take it that they did not see it as the Constitutional problem that you are saying it is.
Why in the world would you think that I was thinking of you. You certainly puts yourself on a goddess pedestal. No, you are far toooooo nutty for me, and let me repeat that, TOOOOO NUTTY, and for a lot of others here as well!!!
Considering what you think on the matter, it's not a bad position to be in -- to be considered "too nutty" by you.... LOL...
However, it is not a surprise that you were working for another ticket who was/is not meeting the NBC requirements???
Ahhh..., I see...
You're one of those who thinks that neither candidate who was running for President of the United States -- neither the Republicans nor the Democrats -- was qualified to be President of the United States, per the Constitutional requirements...
Ummm..., I'm sorry, but that's just too nutty for me... :-)
Wow! What an expert. Show us the way. What is your plan? What have you done so far to follow your own advice? I’ll bet zero. But old Orly there keeps slugging it out. She is doing it against all odds and you have done nothing. Again, what have you done to follow your own advice?
And does anyone truly believe that in the million-to-one chance SCOTUS takes such a case, they'll render a decision that declares the sitting president, a man popularly elected by 69 million voters, ineligible for the office that he was previously sworn into by the Chief Justice himself in a ruling that relegates millions of Americans to the status of 2nd class citizens?
C'mon, really? Who honestly sees this happening?
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.