Posted on 03/25/2009 4:01:24 AM PDT by Man50D
The U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Justice Department today confirmed that documentation challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to be president has arrived and soon will be evaluated.
Confirmation came from DefendOurFreedoms.us, the foundation through which California attorney Orly Taitz has been working on a number of cases that raise questions over Obama's birth location, and therefore his qualifications to be president under the Constitution's demand that the office be occupied only by a "natural born" citizen.
According to the blog , Taitz was informed by Karen Thornton of the Department of Justice that all of the case documents and filings have arrived and have been forwarded to the Office of Solicitor General Elena Kagan, including three dossiers and the Quo Warranto case.
"Coincidently, after Dr. Taitz called me with that update, she received another call from Officer Giaccino at the Supreme Court," the posting said. "Officer Giaccino stated both pleadings have been received and being analyzed now."
The report from the Supreme Court also said the documents that Taitz hand-delivered to Chief Justice John Roberts at his appearance at the University of Idaho a little over a week ago also were at the Supreme Court.
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
I did read it. As I recall, it was nothing more than a post on Taitz' blog that was trying to read into some vague comments (by Scalia, right?).
That’s why I think it’s getting legs now... JMHO of course.
My only question would be, then (and it IS rhetorical) why would a conservative be on the 0-team side of this issue.
I can see having an attitude of “wait and see” etc. But to actively be on the “you’re all a bunch of idiots” side - and be a conservative? Doesn’t make sense. Especially with more and more info coming out.
Oh, please.
Orly is merely showing her ignorance of how the Supreme Court works. As I pointed out at the time her cases were calendared for conference before the Supreme Court-- and got flamed for doing so-- the fact that a case is listed for conference doesn't mean it actually gets discussed. Every case filed with the Supreme Court gets listed for conference. That means dozens and dozens of cases are listed for conference on the same day. (Check the Supreme Court's on-line docket and you will see.) Before the conference, each Justice circulates a list (not made public) of which cases they want to discuss. Any case not put on the "discuss list" by any Justice is never discussed and is denied automatically, even though it was listed for conference.
So it is no wonder that Justices don't seem to remember Orly's cases-- all were denied without a single recorded dissent, which means they most likely were not discussed. (Again, I pointed this out on FR at the time, and got flamed for saying so.) So when Orly is making wild claims that the Justices' signatures were forged on the orders denying her cases, just because they don't remember those cases, she is only hurting her credibility with the Court for her next filing.
Your answer proves that you are ill-informed, yet making pronouncements anyway.
Carry on, then!
But it's completely outside the realm of reality. I doubt very seriously that the Supreme Court's Clerk of Courts is destroying filings, and there's simply no evidence to support this.
It's an absurd accusation. Do you seriously contend that the Clerk of Courts for the United States Supreme Court is taking filings, destroying these filings, and then posting made-up information on the Supreme Court's docket to fool the public? Are you kidding?
afraid of civil unrest
No idea. It is just a webpage with the Dossier. Try copying it and pasting it into a fresh browser.
::smooches:: Waves. How’s Danny doing? Did he like my cartoon?
Despite the rhetorical question, the answer is because there is no legal merit to the claim. It's not a conservative/liberal issue. It's a legal one, and these cases are junk, brought, in large part, by lawyers that can't be taken seriously.
Look: if there were merit to these cases, don't you think the RNC would be funding them and they'd get actual, good lawyers, like, say, Ken Starr or Ted Olson to argue?
Instead, these cases are brought by people that write on blogs about how the FBI is sending black helicopters to Washington to prevent him from filing a brief.
I agree... and the msm would collapse... all in all a great solution.
LLS
I’m not the one making the accusations here, I’m merely discussing. It seems you are convinced that “things like this couldn’t happen in the U.S.”. All I’m saying is that stranger things have happened in History, and it would be ridiculous to completely dismiss out of hand the testimony of others which is why I have called for an INVESTIGATION.
There is definitely circumstantial evidence that something of this sort may have occurred, and it’s not just Taitz stating these things, either... Again, an investigation into these issues are warranted.
I’m curious though... While I struggle with trying not to hate the COMMUNIST Obama, if his records proved all of these questions ridiculous as those opposed to the suits argue, then I’d accept it and fight Obama on the OTHER parts of the Constitution he’s violated thus far...
Likewise, if an investigation shows absolutely NO impropriety within the clerk’s office then fine, I would accept that also.
Why is it then that people such as yourself are so completely CONVINCED WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE that YOU are the ones who are right about ALL of these things?
It seems that maybe some of us are completely wrong about Obama supporters, and others urging us to “support him”, and calling us crazy for daring to even DISCUSS these issues. Perhaps they are not ignorant — perhaps they are simply blinded by incredulity.
And he is filled with great wrath.
I’m not attributing THE anti-Christ level of credit to 0bama, but he is AN anti-Christ, for sure.
The bible is filled with types pointing to the archetype of Jesus Christ,
there’s no reason that there couldn’t be a “type” anti-Christ preceding THE archetype anti-Christ. (1 John 4)
Look, let’s just go zero-sum:
Why are we still having to discuss this?
Why did FR consummate Rathergate but can’t get 0 to shut us down? By showing a real BC?
Because he is KEEPING THIS ALIVE for his own reasons.
Agreed.
Then they are eunuchs who should get out of the way.
I disagree. The RNC chose Steele who is IMO a duplicitous RINO. I loathe the RNC. They (in the main) care more about being DC and political insiders than the Constitution and what’s happening to this country. I scorn them. Plus Ken Starr did a fat lot of good.
The political insiders’ game is nauseasting and I don’t think there are very many Rs in DC who have courage, integrity or a sound Constitutional outlook. They are minimally better than Dems. Just because the RNC isn’t backing this means nothing in my book. Nothing at all.
thats great, but will they confirm reading thru it, investigating it, and thinking seriously about it?
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.