Replies

Ah, I see you are using the typical OBOT tactic to steer the thread off course by attacking the messenger and not discussing the specific arguments put forward in Joseph DeMaio’s three part critique of the linguistic trickery in the C&K 2015 paper about the meaning of the nbC term in our U.S. Constitution. And your buddies in linguistic crime here are engaging in name calling and character assassination. OBOTs tag-teamwork at their finest.

As to my treatment before the courts, it is an obvious example of early law-fare threats at its finest. Deflections by the courts like lack of standing, political question, or frivolous filings, etc., instead of taking on the issue and determining in the federal court system the true meaning and original intent of the nbC term in the presidential eligibility clause. And we see that law-fare and courts doing dirty deeds instead of their constitutional duty in full action against Donald Trump these days in even more obvious use.

The Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al case was the first totally “ripe” case since Obama was now the “President Elect” having skated by the hurdles of the Electoral College and action by Congress to protect the Constitution from an ineligible usurper being put in the highest office, and had not yet been sworn in at the time it was filed.

By the way, you did not report that Atty Mario Apuzzo (now deceased) challenged the 3rd Circuit on their threat of damages in an extensive and thorough answer to the court as to why the appeal was not frivolous and by his requesting a public hearing on their threats to prove they were wrong, per his rights under the rules of the court, and the 3rd Circuit judges quietly backed off dropped that idea of theirs to sanction him. The courts did not want any light on the issue from a public hearing on the various issues in play. Thus, Atty Apuzzo was not sanctioned. The 3rd Circuit ducked on that law-fare attempt of theirs to scare off Atty Apuzzo. It did not work.

And from there as you OBOTs know so we were on to the U.S. Supreme Court, who under the compromised leadership of Chief Justice Roberts as the history of my and other cases brought on the nbC issue, it has evaded the issue. Justice Thomas told us that in a Congressional hearing. From top to bottom the federal court system used every tactic at their disposal to not take a case and try it on the merits. Why? Because they new the answer. And Obama was not constitutionally a natural born Citizen of the United States and the courts were afraid to take him on as both major political parties were in on the fix to abrogate the nbC term in the 2008 election cycle. See: https://www.calameo.com/books/0058410031629810ae268

Readers can see the various filings in my federal lawsuit here, including the Supreme Court filing: https://www.scribd.com/document/61221761/Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-DOC-00-Table-of-Contents-for-2nd-Amended-Complaint

But as we have learned by the process, the fix was in at all levels of the courts in our nation to abrogate the original intent, meaning, and the WHY of the nbC term in the presidential eligibility clause. See: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/naturalborncitizen/TheWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyandHowofNBC-WhitePaper.pdf

And we got the Usurper in Chief, Barack Hussein Obama with his Marxist, Islamic, anti-American “Dreams From My Father” agenda who then proceeded to implement his destruction of our constitutional republic. And Team Obama continues in that process via his 3rd term behind the curtains controlling Biden and Harris.

So continue to attack the messenger here as you likely will continue to do instead of addressing the specifics arguments made by Joseph DeMaio’s critique and writings about the linguistic trickery used by Clements and Katyal in their 2015 paper. Or did all you OBOTs not even read the three part analysis and critique? Probably not, imo.

As to my treatment before the courts, it is an obvious example of early law-fare threats at its finest.

This was in 2010, before anyone had ever heard of lawfare. On the merits, it was complete, total birther bullcrap and no court would buy what you tried to sell. It is as big a load of crap repeated now, as it was then. The birther argument did not fail 381 times in a row because of some judicial lawfare, it failed 381 times because the litigation was ridiculous.

By the way, you did not report that Atty Mario Apuzzo (now deceased) challenged the 3rd Circuit on their threat of damages in an extensive and thorough answer to the court as to why the appeal was not frivolous and by his requesting a public hearing on their threats to prove they were wrong, per his rights under the rules of the court, and the 3rd Circuit judges quietly backed off dropped that idea of theirs to sanction him. The courts did not want any light on the issue from a public hearing on the various issues in play. Thus, Atty Apuzzo was not sanctioned. The 3rd Circuit ducked on that law-fare attempt of theirs to scare off Atty Apuzzo. It did not work.

What a load of crap. The 3rd Circuit said the Orlyesque 95-page pile of fish wrap contained, "inter alia, numerous statements directed to the merits of this Court's opinion which the Court finds unpersuasive. His request that the Court reconsider its opinion is denied." And it concluded, "based on Apuzzo's explanation of his efforts to research the applicable law on standing, we hereby discharge the Order to Show Cause." Apuzzo pleaded he tried really hard, and the Court chose not to fine him for his frivolous filing that was inaccurate on the law, not for his lack of trying, but for his inability to get it right despite trying. His failed efforts on the merits were still unpersuasive.

And Obama was not constitutionally a natural born Citizen of the United States and the courts were afraid to take him on as both major political parties were in on the fix to abrogate the nbC term in the 2008 election cycle.

And 381 times the courts across the fruited plain ruled upon birther blather and found it worthless.

And from there as you OBOTs know so we were on to the U.S. Supreme Court, who under the compromised leadership of Chief Justice Roberts as the history of my and other cases brought on the nbC issue, it has evaded the issue. Justice Thomas told us that in a Congressional hearing. From top to bottom the federal court system used every tactic at their disposal to not take a case and try it on the merits. Why? Because they new the answer. And Obama was not constitutionally a natural born Citizen of the United States and the courts were afraid to take him on as both major political parties were in on the fix to abrogate the nbC term in the 2008 election cycle. See:
https://www.calameo.com/books/0058410031629810ae268

Now there is a citation to authority if ever I saw one. Another pile of crap by yourself. That link indicating it is a book is real good work for a blogpost that fits nicely on five pages. It is barely readable at the provided link. It is better at puzo1.

By your lunatic nonsense, President Arthur was not a natural born citizen. There have been plenty of opportunities for the false birther blather requirement of two citizen parents to have been invoked. There is no American century in which a candidate without two citizen parents did not run for President or Vice-President. None has ever been disqualified based on birther blather.

Chester Arthur, 1881, Republican Vice President and later President. Arthur was born to an British subject, Irish citizen father.
Charles Evans Hughes, 1916 Republican nominee, lost to Democrat Woodrow Wilson. Hughes' father was a British subject who never became a U.S. citizen.
Barack Obama, 2009, 2013 Democrat President. Born to a Kenyan father. Determined by court to be a natural born citizen.
Ted Cruz, 2016 Republican candidate. Born in Canada to a Cuban father. Determined by court to be a natural born citizen of the United States.
Bobby Jindal, 2016, Republican candidate, born in the United States to two Indian parents.
Marco Rubio, 2016, Republican candidate, born in the United States to two Cuban parents.
Kamala Harris, 2020, Democrat Vice President. Born in the United States to two foreign nationals.
Nimrata "Nikki" Haley, 2024 Republican candidate, born in the United States to two foreign nationals.
Vivek Ramaswamy, 2024 Republican candidate, born in the United States to two foreign nationals.

You forgot to give a citation to the transcript of Justice Thomas telling you whatever in a congressional hearing. A hearing on what? When? Maybe a link to the Congressional Record.

Kerchner v. Obama, 669 F. Supp. 2d 477 (D.N.J. 2009) aff’d, 612 F.3d 204 (3d Cir. 2010), cert. denied, 131 S. Ct. 663 (2010).

Kerchner v. Obama, No. 85 MD 2012 (Pa. Commw. Ct., Mar. 2, 2012) (dismissing complaint challenging Obama’s eligibility to be on 2012 ballot)

You never had a case taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court. You had one case where cert was denied.